If we get a superstar in the 2014 draft...

Discussion in 'Utah Jazz' started by Tom Pitt, Oct 16, 2013.

  1. Tom Pitt

    Tom Pitt Well-Known Member

    656
    83
    78
    Jul 18, 2013
    I was just listening to Locke's comments when he was on the big show and the segment ended with him saying that if we get a superstar in next years draft and you have Gordon Hayward as your #2 option, Derrick Favors as your Tyson Chandler and Burks as your off the bench scorer, you get really good really fast. He did not include Enes Kanter, but i did not really think too much about that. But truth be told, there is no way we are going to be able to keep the core 4 intact if we landed a #1 option in next years draft. just do the math. Favors will be close to what Larry Sanders got in salary which is around 11 million a year. Hayward will merit at least 10 million (At least). Kanter will likely prove to be around 12-14 million a year, and Burks... Hell, the way Burks is going, he might get up to 10 million. And then, If trey proves to be as good as some of us basketball romantics think he is going to be, he'll be a 8-9 million dollar player. that would put us around 52 million for 5 players. Now, if we land Wiggins, Jabari Parker, Dante Exum, Randle, or someone else who becomes superstar worthy, that means we have to get rid of of one or two of our core guys. This is of course unfortunate. Kind of makes you wish that the millers were both as rich and as crazy as the Russian Dude, Mr. P.

    So, My question is, if we have to get rid of a player, to make room for a superstar level contract, who do you think we should get rid of?

    Who I think the Jazz would get rid of: I think it would be Burks and Kanter but only if Favors proves to be a consistent defensive force you can build an elite or very good defense around. If we could get by with only getting rid of one of them, I think the organization would choose trading away Kanter because his contracts would be much more than Alec's contract.

    Who I might get rid of: If Favors proves to be a non threat on the offensive end, I might actually choose Parting ways with Favors (and Alec if we had too) and Plugging in Gobert (He would be ready by then.) I think this makes great sense as long as Gobert can guard the pick and roll effectively (of course, if Gobert proved to be pretty good and his play demanded a 10 million-ish contract, this would only be a temporary fix).

    The Wild Card Idea: Trade Hayward. If he gets a 10-12 million dollar deal, there is a logical argument here. I would not do this, but if it happened I believe I could make sense out if it. Hayward fits into the culture of our organization too much so I can't see this ever happening.

    Who would you see as the player we should trade away?
     
  2. Gameface

    Gameface All-Jazzfanz First Team! Contributor 2018 Award Winner

    24,270
    6,581
    428
    May 25, 2010
    I hope this season exposes who the right player to lose will be.
     
  3. Doublea

    Doublea Well-Known Member

    6,899
    303
    83
    Apr 8, 2013
    I can't really say right now, they are all on a equal playing field for me. This year will probably tell us.
     
  4. Tom Pitt

    Tom Pitt Well-Known Member

    656
    83
    78
    Jul 18, 2013
    I hope so too and if there is one player who gets exposed, my money is on Favors. I hope not though. Like Favors a lot.
     
  5. Stoked

    Stoked Well-Known Member Contributor 2018 Award Winner

    38,965
    5,554
    388
    Dec 13, 2011
    If the salaries blow up like you think they will then that means that the players have blown up. If landing a superstar in the draft happens the Jazz may just be willing to go into luxury tax as they did a couple years ago. If the Jazz can field a legitimate contender they are likely to go somewhat into the tax.

    As far as honoring your scenario. I think it depends on which players have blown up and who exactly is drafted.

    If it is Randle then of course you look at Favors and Kanter.

    If you land Wiggins or Parker you look at Hayward and Burks.

    If you land Exum or Harrison you look at Burke and Burks.

    Keep in mind that Burke and Gobert will still have a couple years under the rookie contract. That makes them unlikely to get the axe.
     
  6. [size/HUGE] fixed [/size]

    [size/HUGE] fixed [/size] Well-Known Member

    3,522
    238
    63
    May 28, 2013
    I'm betting that one of the c5 is gone on the next draft day.
     
  7. Tom Pitt

    Tom Pitt Well-Known Member

    656
    83
    78
    Jul 18, 2013
    Nice observation
     
  8. Stoked

    Stoked Well-Known Member Contributor 2018 Award Winner

    38,965
    5,554
    388
    Dec 13, 2011
    Depending on how they do or do not progress this season and what other teams are offering I think this is a reasonable bet.
     
  9. BTP

    BTP Well-Known Member

    4,814
    238
    113
    Jun 7, 2013
    One question about trade/salary cap gurus:

    May 20th 2014 is the date when the lottery balls determine the first 3 draft picks.
    By trade rules you can only trade players that have at least 1 more season on the books after the trade deadline. So May 21st when the Jazz know when they'll pick and have best and worst cast scenarios they can start to initiate draft night trades. Since they have to issue the qualifying offer before June 30th, this basically counts as an additional year and not a player option right? So could they move Favors/Hayward in a draft night trade or are only Kanter/Burks/Burke the players they can offer?
    I'm not sure. If none knows I'll ask in a future Larry Coon chat on hoopsworld.
     
  10. franklin

    franklin Well-Known Member

    17,577
    2,003
    228
    Jul 20, 2010
    If the Jazz land Wiggins then they should trade Hayward and the other draft picks for Rondo, then try to land a big name free agent to seal the deal.
     
  11. Stoked

    Stoked Well-Known Member Contributor 2018 Award Winner

    38,965
    5,554
    388
    Dec 13, 2011
    Do you think it is financial feasible to have Rondo, another big name FA, wiggins and the other core members?
     
  12. [size/HUGE] fixed [/size]

    [size/HUGE] fixed [/size] Well-Known Member

    3,522
    238
    63
    May 28, 2013
    This Rondo talk is

    zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
     
  13. green

    green Well-Known Member

    8,477
    498
    168
    May 27, 2010
    I don't think you trade Hayward. I think he is very undervalued and you could get him for market value or maybe even below (unlike George, who Indy overpaid for).

    It comes down to Kanter or Favors. One of those two will be gone. Especially if Gobert pans out.

    I'm higher on Kanter than I am on Favors, but if you get Wiggins or Randle or another superstar, AND you can get Favors cheaper, I like Favors overall better. Defensive big, could play P&R, doesn't mind taking a backseat and just collecting a paycheck.
     
  14. green

    green Well-Known Member

    8,477
    498
    168
    May 27, 2010
    Could you imagine moving Kanter for Rondo, sitting Rondo this year and then trotting out this lineup:

    Rondo - Burke
    Hayward - Burks
    Wiggins - Williams/Rush/Jefferson
    Favors
    Gobert

    That team is really, really, freaking amazingly good in 2-3 years.
     
  15. franklin

    franklin Well-Known Member

    17,577
    2,003
    228
    Jul 20, 2010
    Favors $12
    Rondo $12
    Wiggins $4.6
    Burks $3
    Kanter $5.7
    Evans $1.8
    Govert $1.1

    That's why Hayward would have to go. No money.

    My preference would be to see Favors, Dirk (who will sign with a contender for much less than market value), Wiggins, X, Rondo, and trade Kanter, Burks, and Burke for a stud X.

    I am franklin, and armchair gm'ing ain't easy.
     
  16. Thee jazz fan

    Thee jazz fan Well-Known Member

    22,317
    2,827
    263
    Dec 27, 2010
    If we get Wiggins don't we need to put a shooter next to him? That is why we need to keep Hayward. In this case Burks needs to go. Don't Wiggins and Burks have basically the same strengths? Slashers, and guys that get to the line except that Wiggins is way better, and Hayward can do everything Burks can do. Yes, Burks is better a better slasher then Hayward, but Hayward is a better passer shooter, and gets to the line very well. At one point last year while Hayward was coming off the bench, he got to the ft line the third most out of all bench players in the league. Think Hayward compliments Wiggins better then Burks, and since Burke is a scoring pg wouldn't it be better to have Hayward with this unit.

    As much as I hate to say it, if Gobert can develop his defense, then we probably need to let Favors go. Wiggins to me has potential as a perimeter defender, Hayward can defend, which makes the need for Favors less important unless he finds his offensive game.
     
  17. Dr. Jones

    Dr. Jones In pursuit of #9 Contributor

    62,297
    3,045
    263
    Jun 23, 2010
    Defenses would pack it in big time. Not enough perimeter play on that lineup.
     
  18. Dr. Jones

    Dr. Jones In pursuit of #9 Contributor

    62,297
    3,045
    263
    Jun 23, 2010
    Great posts in this thread, btw.
     
  19. Batman

    Batman Well-Known Member

    1,705
    98
    98
    Mar 8, 2013
    Frankie, I think Hayward would complement a player like Wiggins quite well. I think you keep him and depart with Kanter or Favors who will have bigger contracts than Hayward. Kanter will demand a 12-14 million dollar deal when his rookie contract is up. Also, I would stay away from Rondo. Think Burke will be better for the Jazz team and organization in that he'll likely be cheaper yet good enough to start for a contending team. Oh yeah, And as far as Dirk goes, I don't see him coming to Utah. He has said two times that I know of that he Hates Salt Lake City.
     
  20. Stoked

    Stoked Well-Known Member Contributor 2018 Award Winner

    38,965
    5,554
    388
    Dec 13, 2011
    You don't think that Hayward and Rush on the perimeter would stretch the floor? Or is a third shooter, while always welcome, needed?
     

Share This Page