Lowry anybody?

[Hotdog]

I hope!
But this is precisely what I'm driving at. The Jazz don't necessarily have to look at traditional PG's for the answer. And, in fact, the replacement for Burke - if he doesn't improve - just might be Alec Burks. Burks MIGHT be able to survive guarding back-up PG's. I do not think he has the defensive ability to stay with most of the starting PG's in the league.

From my angle, Burks looks pretty dreadful on defense. I wouldn't count on him being the answer. But I agree with the idea.

I'd actually be down for putting Hayward at the point to guard point guards. He's pretty good at it. Not sure if that has negative consequences somewhere else though. But I'm not against going against the norm and doing something different.

Exum has shown good defensive ability, so he's probably the answer if he can be adequate enough on offense.

 

[Hotdog]

All I know is that I added GVC's numbers 3 separate times and I got 577. But does that one game really matter? It's a difference of 0.1 games when averaged out.

Haha. Good one.

That's what this is all about. GVC made an error in his posting of numbers? (I'm too lazy to check right now)

 

[karl malone]

That's like 1st grade ****

Not trying to get involved in an online fight, just find this funny since counting is literally 1st grade ****.

Anyway, re: the trade. Definitely something to consider if Toronto would be willing to do it. The reason it has to at least be considered, imo, is because the team has clearly shown it is ready to legitimately compete & because Hayward can opt out in 2 years. Personally, I would only do so if we also intended to trade Exum for another player that could start at either the 2 or 3, as I feel like since Exum has already been made the starting PG, it would be counterproductive to his development to put him back on the bench. Imo, we need to either "go for it" over the next two years or continue developing our core. I think it makes most sense to continue developing Exum as our starting PG as he likely holds more value by attempting to get him to reach his potential than anything we would receive in return in a trade. Also, the 2nd half of this season proved that we can still be competitive without getting ideal production from our PG position, which should improve next year. I would only do the trade if we are unable to move up in the draft & I also think Lowry's age has to be taken into consideration as we have a young core that is still improving while Lowry has likely peaked. Ultimately, I would only do it under the right circumstances: being able to acquire an all-star caliber 5th starter to play alongside Lowry, Hayward, Favors, & Gobert as well as being unable to move up for 1 of Russell, Mudiay, Hezonja, Winslow, or Johnson. We should compete for a playoff spot regardless of what off-season moves we make, no need to take short cuts. We should only trade significant assets for a young player with all-star potential, who can develop along with our core over the next 5+ years.

 

[gregbroncs]

All I know is that I added GVC's numbers 3 separate times and I got 577. But does that one game really matter? It's a difference of 0.1 games when averaged out.

No it doesn't matter. Funny I also added it up 3 times and came up with the same as GVC at 576. Either way we are both just being stubborn . I almost didn't make that last post I'll let it go now.

 

[green]

Quick question:

Has SA ever brought in an overpriced vet on a three year deal, whose only potential is to get worse?

Didn't think so.

So why would Lindsey and Snyder, who were groomed in that system, do something that may get you an extra 5 wins next year but then have Lowry's production drop every year after?

Doesn't make sense to me.

Plus he can't shoot and doesn't have the length to defend multiple positions.

There is nothing Lowry does that fits in with Lindsey's plan.

This move is the definition of skipping steps.

 

[Hotdog]

Not trying to get involved in an online fight, just find this funny since counting is literally 1st grade ****.

Anyway, re: the trade. Definitely something to consider if Toronto would be willing to do it. The reason it has to at least be considered, imo, is because the team has clearly shown it is ready to legitimately compete & because Hayward can opt out in 2 years. Personally, I would only do so if we also intended to trade Exum for another player that could start at either the 2 or 3, as I feel like since Exum has already been made the starting PG, it would be counterproductive to his development to put him back on the bench. Imo, we need to either "go for it" over the next two years or continue developing our core. I think it makes most sense to continue developing Exum as our starting PG as he likely holds more value by attempting to get him to reach his potential than anything we would receive in return in a trade. Also, the 2nd half of this season proved that we can still be competitive without getting ideal production from our PG position, which should improve next year. I would only do the trade if we are unable to move up in the draft & I also think Lowry's age has to be taken into consideration as we have a young core that is still improving while Lowry has likely peaked. Ultimately, I would only do it under the right circumstances: being able to acquire an all-star caliber 5th starter to play alongside Lowry, Hayward, Favors, & Gobert as well as being unable to move up for 1 of Russell, Mudiay, Hezonja, Winslow, or Johnson. We should compete for a playoff spot regardless of what off-season moves we make, no need to take short cuts. We should only trade significant assets for a young player with all-star potential, who can develop along with our core over the next 5+ years.

I was looking at basketball reference.com. The 08-09 season is listed 3 times because Lowry played for two different teams. Twice to show both teams, and a 3rd to show the total. I counted quickly without looking at the years to see the separation in teams played for. I didn't make a mistake in counting. I made a mistake in being lazy and not checking the years as I counted.

Thanks though.

 

[karl malone]

I was looking at basketball reference.com. The 08-09 season is listed 3 times because Lowry played for two different teams. Twice to show both teams, and a 3rd to show the total. I counted quickly without looking at the years to see the separation in teams played for. I didn't make a mistake in counting. I made a mistake in being lazy and not checking the years as I counted.

Thanks though.

You're welcome. Understandable mistake, just found the comment ironic. Wasn't trying to offend tho, I apologize if I did.

 

[Stifle Tower]

This move is the definition of skipping steps.

Not only skipping steps, but tripping on one and falling down face-first on the pavement.

 

[stitches]

I honestly fail to see how a top 10 PG in the league, all-star, 29 year old on 12M salary in a skyrocketing salary cap market is an "overpriced vet". This is crazy talk. I understand and to some extent I agree with the fit objections, I also would say that the concerns for Exum's development could be another deal-breaker, but lets keep it reasonable and not try to go overboard in the attempts to convince ourselves how horrible of a player Lowry is and will be one or two years into his contract. None of you really know if his production will suffer, neither do I, nor do I pretend to know. He just had his best two seasons, why would you expect his production to suddenly drop significantly when he comes to Utah? 31 year old(how old he will be for the majority of the last year of his contract) is not a death sentence for PGs, especially for ones that don't rely on crazy athleticism.

And since I haven't given you my opinion on the trade as proposed in the RealGM forums - I am not 100% sold on it, but I think the value is more than fair and I find it very intriguing. I think if Toronto comes to DL with that offer, him and the FO will definitely have to consider it.

If I don't do it, it won't be because of the value and it won't be because of concerns about Lowry's production, it will be mainly about Exum's development, our defensive schemes that made us a leading defense in the league once Dante and Gobert started, it would also be about concerns about Lowry's temper.

 

[Hotdog]

I honestly fail to see how a top 10 PG in the league, all-star, 29 year old on 12M salary in a skyrocketing salary cap market is an "overpriced vet". This is crazy talk. I understand and to some extent I agree with the fit objections, I also would say that the concerns for Exum's development could be another deal-breaker, but lets keep it reasonable and not try to go overboard in the attempts to convince ourselves how horrible of a player Lowry is and will be one or two years into his contract. None of you really know if his production will suffer, neither do I, nor do I pretend to know. He just had his best two seasons, why would you expect his production to suddenly drop significantly when he comes to Utah? 31 year old(how old he will be for the majority of the last year of his contract) is not a death sentence for PGs, especially for ones that don't rely on crazy athleticism.

And since I haven't given you my opinion on the trade as proposed in the RealGM forums - I am not 100% sold on it, but I think the value is more than fair and I find it very intriguing. I think if Toronto comes to DL with that offer, him and the FO will definitely have to consider it.

If I don't do it, it won't be because of the value and it won't be because of concerns about Lowry's production, it will be mainly about Exum's development, our defensive schemes that made us a leading defense in the league once Dante and Gobert started, it would also be about concerns about Lowry's temper.

Nobody is saying Lowry is complete garbage. It when you take into account all the factors, it doesn't make sense. That's includes Exum's development. Get off the fence and take a side.

Besides what is it that everyone complains about Burke? It's his shooting efficiency. Lowry is 41% for Career. Where is the upside in taking a huge risk for him? 12 million is still 12 million and nice chuck of the cap evenwhen it goes up. Trey Burke is still young on a rookie deal, and can improve. 1st rounders are still 1st rounders.

Add everything up and it doesn't make sense for us.

Is Lowry A nice player despite his shooting inefficiency? Ya, but he's not worth it.

This is a pretty easy open and shut decision on this idea. It's pretty obvious when you think about it.

 

[DeliveryBoy]

Quick question:

Has SA ever brought in an overpriced vet on a three year deal, whose only potential is to get worse?

.

Richard Jefferson.

 

[stitches]

Nobody is saying Lowry is complete garbage. It when you take into account all the factors, it doesn't make sense. That's includes Exum's development. Get off the fence and take a side.

Besides what is it that everyone complains about Burke? It's his shooting efficiency. Lowry is 41% for Career. Where is the upside in taking a huge risk for him? 12 million is still 12 million and nice chuck of the cap evenwhen it goes up. Trey Burke is still young on a rookie deal, and can improve. 1st rounders are still 1st rounders.

Add everything up and it doesn't make sense for us.

Is Lowry A nice player despite his shooting inefficiency? Ya, but he's not worth it.

This is a pretty easy open and shut decision on this idea. It's pretty obvious when you think about it.

FG% is rarely a good indicator of shooting efficiency(to be fair I've been guilty of using this one, too). His career TS% is 55%, which is well above average for the league. This year when he has struggled when he had no help for most of the season, he's still at 53% TS%. Just as a comparison - Trey's is at 46%. That's a huge difference.

So yah, Lowry has got a pretty good shooting efficiency AND to that he adds 7 assists, 5 rebs and 1.5 steals per game...

I think I'm leaning towards a yes to that deal to be fair, especially since we would be getting one of the better stretch 4 players in the league in that trade to add to our biggest need - quality PG.