How about this draft day trade with Minny?

[MattMan]

I think PG's are overrated and I don't think you need a good point guard to win a championship.

You look at the Championship teams or Dynasty teams and PG's were not the focal point on those teams. The Big guys or the wing players were. If the PG is the 3rd option that is fine. But not the first or second.

Thank you, couldn't agree more.

The rise of the run-n-gun PG era has brought teams from the bottom/mid level of the league into title contention, but it's the front court that brings the trophy.

Please, don't say Rondo is in the same mix as DWill, Rose and Paul, because he's not. He's a phenom in the sense he's one of the best passing PG's in the league. He knows how to feed the beasts in the paint, and that brings you titles. Not the last second 3 point heroics.

 

[Twin Towers]

I actually agree with this. Favors in his 2nd year won't be hindered by the presence of Millsap. In fact, I think that they compliment each other nicely....for now. If Favors wants to work on his mid-range game, Millsap would be a great help to him.

The other thing is, we already made it through the painful part of his contract (thanks to the Blazers) and as of right now, he's one of the best bang for the buck PF in the game right now. It would make more sense to trade Big Al (which I don't think we should do yet either) than it would Millsap.

I disagree fully. How many prospects do we have to go through before we realize that guys don't develop on the bench. They develop with experience. Guys like Millsap and Matthews were NBA ready and already understood the basics.
Guys like Favors, Fesenko, Miles etc. Who came in early and didn't have much EXPERIENCE as others need more playing time. Expecting them to develop just as fast playing 15 minutes a night is joke.
That is why the Jazz have never developed prospects. We waste them away. And if you think all young players are the same than you need to study basketball more. Not all young players are the same. I hope somebody understands that someday in the Jazz organization. Sloan had a horrible philosophy that was old school. It worked back when nobody came out early but it isn't the same as it used to be. It hasn't been for 10 years.
Favors needs 30 minutes a night next year. And if we keep Millsap that will not happen. He will get 20.

If you wanna learn how to go swimming and Michael Phelps is teaching you everything he knows about how to win races practicing in a pool you still wont' develop as fast as learning what you need and applying it in REAL RACES. And slowing down his experience will only hurt Favors and the Jazz's future.

P.S: That was directed toward everyone in general. Not you MattMan

 

[Twin Towers]

Thank you, couldn't agree more.

The rise of the run-n-gun PG era has brought teams from the bottom/mid level of the league into title contention, but it's the front court that brings the trophy.

Please, don't say Rondo is in the same mix as DWill, Rose and Paul, because he's not. He's a phenom in the sense he's one of the best passing PG's in the league. He knows how to feed the beasts in the paint, and that brings you titles. Not the last second 3 point heroics.

I think the Celtics would be better if Rondo didn't touch the ball so much. If Pierce and Allen and Garnett touched it more like they did when they won a championship than they would be a better team. I am not saying Rondo is a bad player at all. I think Rondo is awesome. But I think Rondo dominates the ball too much.
When defense tightens up in the playoffs and you have 1 guy who sets up 50-70 percent of the offense than you are easier to stop. Balance wins championships.

 

[The Midnight]

If Williams goes first than I would NOT make the trade that I listed above. I think PG's are overrated and I don't think you need a good point guard to win a championship.

Well that's not necessarily true.

Spurs won 3 championships (2003, 2005, 2007) with: Duncan, Ginobili and Parker. (Parker being the Finals MVP in 2007)

So that's: PF, SG and PG.

We have: Favors (PF), Hayward (SG), ......... (PG)

So I would argue that, if Favors, Hayward and Irving can develop together and live up to their potential, IMO, it is possible to build a Championship team that way.

Note: I still think that we should take Kanter at #3. But if there is a way to swing Irving our way, I'd go with that with a slight edge.

 

[Twin Towers]

Well that's not necessarily true.

Spurs won 3 championships (2003, 2005, 2007) with: Duncan, Ginobili and Parker. (Parker being the Finals MVP in 2007)

So that's: PF, SG and PG.

We have: Favors (PF), Hayward (SG), ......... (PG)

So I would argue that, if Favors, Hayward and Irving can develop together and live up to their potential, IMO, it is possible to build a Championship team that way.

Note: I still think that we should take Kanter at #3. But if there is a way to swing Irving our way, I'd go with that with a slight edge.

Parker had a great finals but Duncan and Ginobili got them to that point more so than Parker did IMO. I am just saying we should not build around the PG position.

If you look at those 3 players. And you had to take 1 of them off the team. Who would you take off? This is of course during the 2003 to 2007 years?

Most people will say take Parker off that team. If the Jazz draft irving we will build around him. I promise you that.

 

[The Midnight]

Parker had a great finals but Duncan and Ginobili got them to that point more so than Parker did IMO. I am just saying we should not build around the PG position.

If you look at those 3 players. And you had to take 1 of them off the team. Who would you take off? This is of course during the 2003 to 2007 years?

Most people will say take Parker off that team. If the Jazz draft irving we will build around him. I promise you that.

So you think that by drafting Irving we'll get rid of either Favors of Hayward?

I don't think that's likely. It's more likely we'll build around Favors, Hayward and Irving as a trio, and add players around that.

 

[Twin Towers]

So you think that by drafting Irving we'll get rid of either Favors of Hayward?

I don't think that's likely. It's more likely we'll build around Favors, Hayward and Irving as a trio, and add players around that.

No my point to saying getting rid of parker was saying he wasn't as valuable as Duncan or Ginolbi.

I don't think we will get rid of Favors or Hayward.

My point is if we draft Irving I think our offense will run through Irving 50-70 percent of the time just like it did with Stockton and Williams. Which kills us during the playoffs and against contenders.

Don't get me wrong I like Irving. I think he is a complete point guard. Not an amazing athlete but does everything really well and he is patient which is more important than athleticism IMO. That stutter step is what good point guards do. But I am afraid Irving will get the ball twice as much as Hayward and we will turn Hayward into a role player rather than a prominent part of the offense?
Is that making sense? Just looking at the history of the Jazz's offense.

 

[The Midnight]

My point is if we draft Irving I think our offense will run through Irving 50-70 percent of the time just like it did with Stockton and Williams. Which kills us during the playoffs and against contenders.

Don't get me wrong I like Irving. I think he is a complete point guard. Not an amazing athlete but does everything really well and he is patient which is more important than athleticism IMO. That stutter step is what good point guards do. But I am afraid Irving will get the ball twice as much as Hayward and we will turn Hayward into a role player rather than a prominent part of the offense?
Is that making sense? Just looking at the history of the Jazz's offense.

Yeah I hear what you're saying.

But I think you've got to then give the coaching staff some credit and let them do their job.

Irving is an above average shooter at PG and Hayward is an above average passer at SG IMO.

Don't you think they'll run plays that involve Hayward a lot more as the ball handler but still utilising Irving's shooting ability?

BPA is what we keep hearing and I think if we get Irving at #2, you'd have to take him.

 

[Twin Towers]

Yeah I hear what you're saying.

But I think you've got to then give the coaching staff some credit and let them do their job.

Irving is an above average shooter at PG and Hayward is an above average passer at SG IMO.

Don't you think they'll run plays that involve Hayward a lot more as the ball handler but still utilising Irving's shooting ability?

BPA is what we keep hearing and I think if we get Irving at #2, you'd have to take him.

But I can't give the coaching credit for something they have NEVER done. Nothing in the Jazz history shows we will put the ball in the wing players hands more. The only time we did was the year we had AK and Arroyo. Which was by default.
I know the players have the ability to make it happen. I have total faith that Irving would accept that role but I don't have faith in the coaching staff. There was rumors about Corbin putting the ball in Hayward's hands more next year but its tough to say it if will. Odds are it won't.

I honestly don't think Irving is more valuable to a team than Kanter is. Kanter provides more for a playoff team than Irving does in my opinion. Both players would come off the bench if they were drafted today anyways.
But also I only want the PG to be able to score 10-12 points per game average 5 or 6 assists and shoot a high percentage. Set the offense up to run the play but not be the only playmaker on the team. Finding guys who can average those stats and play decent defense are easy to find compared to quality big men or quality wing players.

 

[BENTLEY]

I like the direction this thread has taken. But still, it's hard to pass on a talent like Irving. But I don't think the Jazz will have to. The choice will be between Williams and Kanter.

 

[Twin Towers]

I like the direction this thread has taken. But still, it's hard to pass on a talent like Irving. But I don't think the Jazz will have to. The choice will be between Williams and Kanter.

Agreed. Irving won't fall past 2. Which actually is what I want. I prefer Williams and Kanter over Irving so hopefully Jazz do not trade up unless its to get Williams.

 

[BENTLEY]

I was actually pretty thrilled to only get the 3rd pick. I could be wrong, but I think Kanter may be the plum of this year's draft. But since there's some question about that I probably couldn't bring myself to pass on the other 2.