What's new

Per DL, Jazz will be "very active" in free agency. = The results

The General Manager of the Utah Jazz mentioned in June, speaking on the behalf of the entire Utah Jazz organization, the Utah Jazz would be "very active" in the free agency. Now I am not here to to bad-mouth anyone, only speak the truth and facts as it comes out. The words "very active" actually scared me when I heard them because I thought, compared to what? That of the past? What does very active mean to DL? To me it meant going after big name free agents even though we probably didn't have a chance in the world at signing them. Even if we ended up with nothing, but we tried to land the big names, that is something I was ok with, because we would've been at least trying something. What I didn't know is that "very active" meant an attempt to sign anybody that we possibly could regardless of talent, age or desire to win.
What's sad is we succeeded our biggest free agent signing that we've had in years. That isn't the sad part, the sad part is, we signed 35 year old Joe Johnson. Not a bad signing, but when told we would be "very active" this isn't quite what I had in mind. The words "very active" don't exactly paint the picture of an arthritic NBA great that once was nearly over a half decade ago. In past years one would say that we have been more active in letting talent walk or negotiating trades to which talent is traded or walks onto other teams without taking another player back in exchange. (See Kanter, Burke) I am not a fan of either but you can't tell me that we couldn't have tried to get something for Kanter and have been successful. And Burke traded was the right idea, but in exchange for a 2nd round pick?
Let me guess, "what about Hill?" has got to be coming up next. Hill a great player, no doubt about it. Imagine what he could be on our team if we acquired him prior to his decline. Would've been a really good acquisition. We needed age on our team, no doubt about it, but again, thought we would go in a little harder than we did.
But what about the trade for Boris Diaw? = either way you look at it, we were willing to shed a 2nd round pick for a grey haired, overweight, old man. Very active? Based on what? Very active in the free agency is something that we couldn't do, and active in the trade market is something that obviously isn't up our alley. And that's fine, but come out and say it. DL needs to say, because of lack of interest from other NBA players throughout the league, we have realized that we won't accomplish much more than what you think we will from year to year. Don't get your hopes up, I wouldn't. Not trying to be negative, but I will be realistic, which is what I see and hear from the Jazz organization.

I don't really think your points are valid. You want DL to go after someone else in FA, but who could we have signed without jeopardizing our ability to resign our core players? A lot of fans make the point you just made; but it's a logical fallacy. You are by default inferring the Jazz could have signed Kevin Durant or LeBron had they tried hard enough, but they didn't want to try hard enough so it didn't happen.

And George Hill's decline? What are you talking about? His usage rate dropped because the pacers signed a ball dominant guard in Ellis and Paul George came back, so naturally his stats dropped, but he was still and elite defender and still a very efficient offensive guard. I don't understand where you get that Hill has suddenly declined.
 
You try so hard to find fault. Pretty telling that took even you a week to come up with this trash.
 
It has to be clear that a team could be "very active" and not sign anyone at all. Being very active does not mean doing things that are not in the best long term interest of the team. It does mean aggressively exploring options. The same is true for working trades and trying to change position in the draft. Sometimes you work every option you can find and still stay put. I am more than comfortable with how active the Jazz FO is and has been. At times I might make different decisions but that is why they get paid the big bucks.
 
The General Manager of the Utah Jazz mentioned in June, speaking on the behalf of the entire Utah Jazz organization, the Utah Jazz would be "very active" in the free agency. Now I am not here to to bad-mouth anyone, only speak the truth and facts as it comes out. The words "very active" actually scared me when I heard them because I thought, compared to what? That of the past? What does very active mean to DL? To me it meant going after big name free agents even though we probably didn't have a chance in the world at signing them. Even if we ended up with nothing, but we tried to land the big names, that is something I was ok with, because we would've been at least trying something. What I didn't know is that "very active" meant an attempt to sign anybody that we possibly could regardless of talent, age or desire to win.
What's sad is we succeeded our biggest free agent signing that we've had in years. That isn't the sad part, the sad part is, we signed 35 year old Joe Johnson. Not a bad signing, but when told we would be "very active" this isn't quite what I had in mind. The words "very active" don't exactly paint the picture of an arthritic NBA great that once was nearly over a half decade ago. In past years one would say that we have been more active in letting talent walk or negotiating trades to which talent is traded or walks onto other teams without taking another player back in exchange. (See Kanter, Burke) I am not a fan of either but you can't tell me that we couldn't have tried to get something for Kanter and have been successful. And Burke traded was the right idea, but in exchange for a 2nd round pick?
Let me guess, "what about Hill?" has got to be coming up next. Hill a great player, no doubt about it. Imagine what he could be on our team if we acquired him prior to his decline. Would've been a really good acquisition. We needed age on our team, no doubt about it, but again, thought we would go in a little harder than we did.
But what about the trade for Boris Diaw? = either way you look at it, we were willing to shed a 2nd round pick for a grey haired, overweight, old man. Very active? Based on what? Very active in the free agency is something that we couldn't do, and active in the trade market is something that obviously isn't up our alley. And that's fine, but come out and say it. DL needs to say, because of lack of interest from other NBA players throughout the league, we have realized that we won't accomplish much more than what you think we will from year to year. Don't get your hopes up, I wouldn't. Not trying to be negative, but I will be realistic, which is what I see and hear from the Jazz organization.

Hi. Can I ask how long you have been a Jazz fan? Also, how old are you?
 
Outside of landing a superstar, this was about as good of a (realistic) off-season that could've/should've been expected. With a young core already in place & on the brink of taking that next step, there wasn't a need to add long-term pieces (although hopefully Hill will be more than just a one year rental).

What there was a need for, however, was depth (in the event of more injuries) & experience (to show our young core how to translate talent into success). Hill, J.Johnson, & Diaw not only provide those qualities (as well as the ability to provide offense when the team is enduring a scoring drought), but are great fits (on & off the court) that won't hamper our future financial flexibility when it comes to retaining our young players.

Unless the expectation was that of a blockbuster trade or the signing of a marquee FA, I'm not sure how this off-season could've been any more of a success. Regardless of how this upcoming season plays out, the FO has put this team in the position to have sustained long-term success (which is all you can really ask for) beginning this year.
 
You know what? Your right. I am the first to admit when I'm wrong. I was being negative, and we were in need of veteran leadership. Sometimes my desire to see the Jazz succeed can translate over to the negative way of seeing things. Success is a process that isn't given over night and I should be more open minded about our season before drawing conclusions. I don't agree with many of the decisions of our front office, to the point where I'm quick to assume the worst. Let's see what happens.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using JazzFanz mobile app

Holy crap, this must be a first here. a poster acknowledges the flaw of their own OP.
 
This. I'd love to see us draft a legit big next year or sign one so that we have a scary Gobert/Favors/Diaw/4th monster big/Lyles rotation. But I'm talking a banger. The Dubs are ultra thin up front methinks and to get one more banger to be able to get Draymond Green or whoever their other bigs are, into foul trouble, would turn the tables.
Missed this post. Think it's a great idea to get one more big, physical guy to team up with the current players. Preferrably, this player would be an enforcer who can just physically manhandle opponents and soften them up for Gobert and Favors.
 
Back
Top