Move On From Hayward?

[Stoked]

I really want to see what this Jazz team is capable of when healthy. Add to it this year instead of redoing it? Hard choices.

The Jazz either need to build on this team or go hard on redoing it. No half measures.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I disagree. I think losing Hayward and adding #12, #3, and a free agent to go with exum, hood, mack, favors, Gobert, burks, lyles is a playoff team. I think #3, #12, and bazemore/batum or whatever is enough to replace Hayward. Plus I think Gobert, lyles, and hood at a minimum get better next year than they were this past year. (Probably a few others)
I think quin is a good developmental coach so he would get a lot out of #3 and #12 also. He has a good track record of using and developing young players well. (Hood, gobert, lyles, even exum)

I don't think we should trade Hayward but I do understand those that say he may not be worth the megamax he will get. The core problems I have are:

1- a rookie will not make up for his production... Rookies just don't help you win.

2- free agency is a really dicey proposition especially this year. The time for a move on from Hayward move was last years free agency when you had a shot to get a guy that could be Hayward insurance at a cheaper price. I'd have a hard time moving our best and most consistent player (remember the guy plays almost every game every year and logs a ton of minutes) for a rookie and free agent X.

If we move Hayward it will more likely be for pieces... So say 4 quarters for a dollar. In my eye if we did a deal like this I'm only moving Hayward if the team overpays so 5 or 6 quarters for the dollar.

If Boston wants him my starting price is #3 and the Bkn pick next year.

Another scenario I could see is a three team deal that goes like this:

Boston out: Bradley, #3, #16. In: Hayward
Sacramento out: Gay, #8 In: Burke Bradley #12
Utah out: Hayward, #12 In: #3, #8, #16 Gay

I realize Boston is paying a pretty steep price but the team that gets the best player has to pay the biggest tax.

3 I take Murray... 8 whatever player is left from the 3-8 tier. 16 Korkmaz if he's there and leave him in Europe... If not look for another guy or a trade back to acquire guys we can leave in Europe.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I really want to see what this Jazz team is capable of when healthy. Add to it this year instead of redoing it? Hard choices.

The Jazz either need to build on this team or go hard on redoing it. No half measures.

Agree here. If we move Hayward you may as well go all in and move favors too... Or change the team name to the Utah Treadmills.

 

[fishonjazz]

1- a rookie will not make up for his production... Rookies just don't help you win.

I think Hayward leaving would create an ideal spot for minutes on a team with lots of money and a chance to be good for many years (due to the young talent on the jazz) and so we would have a better than normal shot at landing a good free agent. Plus the #3 AND the #12. That is what I think replaces hayward. Not just #3.

Also, I think lyles helped us win last year and exum and hood both helped us win the year before. Agree to Disagree.

If we move Hayward it will more likely be for pieces... So say 4 quarters for a dollar. In my eye if we did a deal like this I'm only moving Hayward if the team overpays so 5 or 6 quarters for the dollar.

If Boston wants him my starting price is #3 and the Bkn pick next year.

Another scenario I could see is a three team deal that goes like this:

Boston out: Bradley, #3, #16. In: Hayward
Sacramento out: Gay, #8 In: Burke Bradley #12
Utah out: Hayward, #12 In: #3, #8, #16 Gay

I realize Boston is paying a pretty steep price but the team that gets the best player has to pay the biggest tax.

3 I take Murray... 8 whatever player is left from the 3-8 tier. 16 Korkmaz if he's there and leave him in Europe... If not look for another guy or a trade back to acquire guys we can leave in Europe.

I love all of this and agree that generally the team that gets the top asset wins the trade.
The jazz should definitely try to get all they can.

Good post overall. I agree with a lot of it.

 

[fishonjazz]

I really want to see what this Jazz team is capable of when healthy. Add to it this year instead of redoing it? Hard choices.

The Jazz either need to build on this team or go hard on redoing it. No half measures.

I think that they can trade Hayward and still maintain their current level if play while also creating a possibility for a higher ceiling in the future.

I think replacing Hayward with a good free agent and 2 lottery picks doesn't hurt us much at all.
Then you factor in hood and burks stepping up in Haywards absence (like they have in the past when hayward has been injured) plus lyles, gobert and exum all taking another step up in development.

I think I'm probably in the minority but I believe losing Hayward and replacing him with bazemore and two lottery picks doesn't make us much worse, if at all worse.

 

[Stoked]

I think that they can trade Hayward and still maintain their current level if play while also creating a possibility for a higher ceiling in the future.

I think replacing Hayward with a good free agent and 2 lottery picks doesn't hurt us much at all.
Then you factor in hood and burks stepping up in Haywards absence (like they have in the past when hayward has been injured) plus lyles, gobert and exum all taking another step up in development.

I think I'm probably in the minority but I believe losing Hayward and replacing him with bazemore and two lottery picks doesn't make us much worse, if at all worse.

But does it make us better. Get better or go all in on a tank,

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I think Hayward leaving would create an ideal spot for minutes on a team with lots of money and a chance to be good for many years (due to the young talent on the jazz) and so we would have a better than normal shot at landing a good free agent. Plus the #3 AND the #12. That is what I think replaces hayward. Not just #3.

Also, I think lyles helped us win last year and exum and hood both helped us win the year before. Agree to Disagree.

I love all of this and agree that generally the team that gets the top asset wins the trade.
The jazz should definitely try to get all they can.

Good post overall. I agree with a lot of it.

I think Lyles helped us win some individual games but overall was probably a net negative. His RPM was pretty terrible, but most rookies are rated low by that metric. I just think there is so much going on the court in NBA that we don't see the small mistakes that they make that can really hurt a team. I really like Lyles and he exceeded all of my expectations.

I wouldn't want to wait for FA to find the Hayward replacement. I think we are an attractive FA market to some guys but I just don't think there are enough guys out there and there are so many teams with space.

If you can tell me we get Rudy Gay plus #3 plus a kicker then I can see the idea being successful if you hit on the pick. I do think Boston would be very motivated to get a player of Hayward caliber before FA happens because then it makes them a more attractive FA destination. Veteran players really don't care about draft assets and rookies... they care about what the roster looks like now.

 

[Thee Jazz Fan]

I disagree. I think losing Hayward and adding #12, #3, and a free agent to go with exum, hood, mack, favors, Gobert, burks, lyles is a playoff team. I think #3, #12, and bazemore/batum or whatever is enough to replace Hayward. Plus I think Gobert, lyles, and hood at a minimum get better next year than they were this past year. (Probably a few others)
I think quin is a good developmental coach so he would get a lot out of #3 and #12 also. He has a good track record of using and developing young players well. (Hood, gobert, lyles, even exum)

I'm going to go ahead and disagree with this, because there is no guarantee that number three and number 12 will be anywhere near as good as Hayward, and that's not even to say that they will be flops. If Exum ends up being good as that summer league game would suggest then you want Hayward. He is a sure thing as our number two and I'm still not convinced that he's not the number one still.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

When we say number one or two we are talking about scoring options right?

Would anyone have said that Curry could be a "number one" on a championship team 3 years ago? What about a number one on a dynastic team that is setting NBA records and may win 2,3,4 championships while defeating individual HoF guys like Durant, Lebron, etc.

I don't think Hayward is this good but I do think the idea of a ball movement based offense with position variance and shooting is potentially more viable than acquiring a superstar and feeding off of him.

As I watched the playoffs I've become a little more optimistic about our long term prospects because of this and the fact that you can get away with murder in the playoffs. All year I watched favors and Hayward get clobbered while Rudy would get fouls called for slight hand contact. If those touch fouls... Like the ones harden gets all year that magically disappear in the playoffs, don't get called then I think we may be suited very well for the playoffs if we ever get there.

 

[fishonjazz]

But does it make us better. Get better or go all in on a tank,

Maybe. Impossible to know. Just maxing Hayward doesn't make us better though. It makes us the same, just with a bigger salary.

 

[fishonjazz]

Would anyone have said that Curry could be a "number one" on a championship team 3 years ago?

Yes. He was averaging 23 points and 7 assists per game on 45% from three.
Had yet to appear in an all star game though.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Yes. He was averaging 23 points and 7 assists per game on 45% from three.
Had yet to appear in an all star game though.

Could make a case sure, but I'm not sure it was obvious. The guy was snubbed from the AS game that year?

I just think it might be a bit rash to trade Hayward for #3... If someone bowls me over for the guy then sure. I'm less concerned that he's not a guy that is a true #1 option... whatever that means. I think position variance/flexibility, shooting, and balance may be more important in the future and he offers a lot of that. Iso-ball, dominant alpha scoring is becoming less and less effective imo. Curry is so amazing to me because he does everything within the normal flow of the offense. Never see him just decide to go and get his.

The amount of unpredictability of the GS offense is part of the reason it's so hard to stop. The clear out and give it to one guy the last two minutes of the game is so much easier to plan for... I'm not sure if that is what people mean by we need a true #1... I think that is what I am getting at.