Report: #5, Favors, Burks for Cavs' #1 pick

Discussion in 'Utah Jazz' started by ONE LOVE, Jun 23, 2014.

Yay or Nay?

  1. Yay

    68 vote(s)
    56.7%
  2. Nay

    52 vote(s)
    43.3%
  1. ONE LOVE

    ONE LOVE #Baby_Talk Staff Member

    42,571
    2,234
    263
    Aug 17, 2010
    Yay or Nay?

     
  2. Saint Cy of JFC

    Saint Cy of JFC Well-Known Member

    80,274
    8,031
    393
    May 27, 2010
    Yay, but would be sad to see Favors go. He hasn't progressed as fast as anyone would like, but he has managed to get better every year and I think he will continue to do so.
     
    b_line likes this.
  3. Ben10

    Ben10 Well-Known Member

    2,723
    135
    113
    Jun 7, 2010
    Nay. I know we have to swing for the fences here but that just seems like to much


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  4. dipship31

    dipship31 Well-Known Member

    3,446
    694
    168
    May 26, 2010
    Sucks that it would have to be Favors AND Burks, but again we need to swing for the fence so I say do it.
     
  5. ONE LOVE

    ONE LOVE #Baby_Talk Staff Member

    42,571
    2,234
    263
    Aug 17, 2010
    I'll also say "Yay".



    We can always pick another "Burks" with the #23 pick - this draft is loaded and DEEP.
     
  6. Doublea

    Doublea Well-Known Member

    6,899
    303
    83
    Apr 8, 2013
    Replace Burks with picks (either #23, GSW 2017, or future first) and I'd say yay.
     
  7. spycam1

    spycam1 Well-Known Member

    17,307
    1,703
    228
    May 18, 2011
    I'd rather do this, too. But I'll say yay either way. We need a true franchise player.
     
  8. Markusj

    Markusj Member

    118
    10
    18
    Dec 27, 2010
    Yep. If you believe Wiggins is going to be a top 10 player in the league (which I do), then you do this trade in a heartbeat.
     
  9. spycam1

    spycam1 Well-Known Member

    17,307
    1,703
    228
    May 18, 2011
    And to think we could have just intentionally lost a couple more games...
     
    franklin likes this.
  10. ONE LOVE

    ONE LOVE #Baby_Talk Staff Member

    42,571
    2,234
    263
    Aug 17, 2010
    Cavs don't need more mediocre picks. They need someone who can help them now. Burks can come off the bench and give them 14pts tomorrow if they needed him to.



    Besides, I'd rather pick someone fresh with our #23 anyway... I don't like the thought of 'paying' for Burks.
     
  11. QuinSnydersHair

    QuinSnydersHair Well-Known Member

    5,285
    371
    168
    Feb 11, 2013
    Losing two key players from last year's squad in this trade proposal, I fear we wouldn't want to lose a third and would overpay in a match to keep Hayward.
     
  12. dipship31

    dipship31 Well-Known Member

    3,446
    694
    168
    May 26, 2010
    That's what I'm starting to lean towards.
     
  13. spycam1

    spycam1 Well-Known Member

    17,307
    1,703
    228
    May 18, 2011
    I feel ya. But I honestly don't know how much we're going to have to pay Burks.
     
  14. dipship31

    dipship31 Well-Known Member

    3,446
    694
    168
    May 26, 2010
    Trading Burks pretty much guarantees we'll match whatever Hayward gets.
     
  15. QuinSnydersHair

    QuinSnydersHair Well-Known Member

    5,285
    371
    168
    Feb 11, 2013
    I'd rather keep Burks at 7M per than Hayward at 11M per.
     
  16. ONE LOVE

    ONE LOVE #Baby_Talk Staff Member

    42,571
    2,234
    263
    Aug 17, 2010
    I'm fine with that. With Wiggins - Burks suddenly become redundant.



    I like Hayward-Wiggins much better than Burks-Wiggins pairing.
     
    Markusj likes this.
  17. ONE LOVE

    ONE LOVE #Baby_Talk Staff Member

    42,571
    2,234
    263
    Aug 17, 2010
    This is true also.


    But remember how Wes was paid like $5m per and we let him walk? He's much better/complete than Burks even at that stage.
     
  18. Avery

    Avery Well-Known Member

    2,981
    1,012
    193
    May 26, 2010
    So sick of these 'reports' and 'sources'. I will sig bet anybody that we move up no higher than #5.
     
  19. dipship31

    dipship31 Well-Known Member

    3,446
    694
    168
    May 26, 2010
    Agreed 100% and sounds like the max deal Hayward could get would expire the same time we'd need to extend Wiggins. I'd be all for rolling like this:

    Burke
    Hayward
    Wiggins
    Tomic
    Kanter/Gobert
     
  20. Litany

    Litany Well-Known Member

    1,577
    121
    113
    Jan 21, 2012
    I've thought about this but I just don't think there is any way in hell we would have been worse than Milwaukee or Philly. They were dumpster fires. Only way we could have is if we had just had fake injuries for all of our starters. Not happening.

    It would have been harder to be in sixers spot right now after Embiid news.

    Cavs got lucky and it sucks ***. They're using that leverage now as we would have In a traded down.
     

Share This Page