What's new
By:
Filters

Rumor: Favors and Hayward for D'angello Russell and the #2 pick?

Would you trade Hayward and Favors for Russell and Ingram/Simmons?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 13 36.1%

  • No! I want the playoffs next year, and am fine with never winning a championship.

    Votes: 23 63.9%
  • Total voters
    36
Hayward, Favors, Russell, #2 (Ingram)

How would you rank their value?
IE: Which has the most value to the least?
 
Cunning Linguist said:
We'll share it back and forth just like two chicks who took some dude's *** in their mouths and swap. Minus the kissing and tongue action of course.
Click to expand...
Well if anything ever deserved :^O then it was this post.
:^O
 
Jazz4ever said:
1. Ok you're wrong, I'll explain why. It's not that a team of 5 Hayward level players wouldn't be contenders, it's the salary cap simply will never allow it. Just when the core hits their primes (27+), one or two would be lost to rival teams maxing them. We will see this in a year when Hayward is offered 30+. At this point you're screwed, because you're probably still over the cap or near it, and have no ways to improve. Thus, a treadmill is born. You need that max superstar who actually out earns his contract, it's a huge advantage.

2. As a GM having to make a hard call on that though, the answer would be no.

3. correct
Click to expand...
Answer me this. Has a team with no top ten players ever won a chip?

Answer me this. Is Ingram a sure thing?

Answer me this. What happens if Ingram turns out to suck?
fishonjazz said:
Well if anything ever deserved :^O then it was this post.
:^O
Click to expand...

Can someone give me advice on how to get a restraining order?
 
The defense and rebounding might be there, but to be a contender these days, you've got to have defense, rebounding, plus 2 30-pt scorers. Right now, the Jazz don't have even 1 30-pt scorer.
Click to expand...

disagree...Jazz can have 2 >>>>30 pt scorers in Hayward and Favors if they shot 30 shots a game like Durant and Westbrook
 
fishonjazz said:
I probably do it.
We still need to hit that homerun.
Russell and ingram have a better chance of being homeruns than hayward or favors do. (Hayward and favors are triples)

Maybe russell and ingram won't be homeruns either but maybe they will be
Click to expand...

I <3 you fish but this is your worst post ever. I would neg you if you weren't fish.
 
fishonjazz said:
I probably do it.
We still need to hit that homerun.
Russell and ingram have a better chance of being homeruns than hayward or favors do. (Hayward and favors are triples)

Maybe russell and ingram won't be homeruns either but maybe they will be
Click to expand...

Terrible analogy tho.
 
Russell is poo. Eff that.

Ingram or Simmons? Not convinved.

For everyone thinking Simmons is the next stud, how's his defense? Serial?
 
BENTLEY said:
Hayward, Favors, Russell, #2 (Ingram)

How would you rank their value?
IE: Which has the most value to the least?
Click to expand...
I would rank it #2 > hayward >/=favors >/= russell.
If that makes sense
 
The main decision that the Jazz need to make is whether they think they can retain Hayward and if they want to max both him and Favors. If they decide they don't want to max both of them, now isn't a bad time to move one of them.
 
If we're going to set back the clock, I'd consider Favors to Boston for #3 and either Jae Crowder or Kelly Olynyk. I'd probably take Jamal Murray at #3, but would look at all the other guys.
 
concrete feet Russel?

guy is lost in the sauce.

also hes aweful for the locker room. Hayward and Favors will be leaders if they aren't already.
 
As much as I would hate to see either of Hayward/Favors in a Lakers uniform, I would do that trade. While I don't blame people for being reluctant to extend this rebuild any longer, the team currently appears to be on track to become playoff regulars but not legitimate championship contenders.

As a small market team that is unable to attract high-end FA's, with a roster that is currently too talented to end up with a top draft pick, this type of trade is likely our best shot at acquiring that necessary superstar. Even if Russell & Ingram/Simmons are unlikely to ever develop in top 10 players, this deal would likely give us a high pick in a supposedly loaded draft class as well.

A core of Exum, Russell, Burks, Hood, Ingram/Simmons, Lyles, Gobert, #12, & a top 5 draft pick in 2017 is young, cheap, controllable, & extremely talented. While it's certainly a risk, I like the chances of competing for a title with that roster much more than I do with our current team. Especially when you factor in the potential of losing Hayward next year & Favors the following year.

I want to see this team return to it's winning ways as soon as possible, but if a few more losing seasons is the difference between making the playoffs & competing for a championship, I'll gladly wait for as long as necessary.
 
Poll options should be created without forcing voters to chose something they would not actually declare. In this one's case, just make it "no" and leave the rest out. I don't think trading two most valuable assets for unknown have to mean championship chance and vice versa.
 
King Cy said:
Russell isnt close to Hayward or Favors.
Click to expand...
I agree that favors and hayward ate much better players currently. But when I factor in potential, and to a lesser extent salary, I think russell is close in value as an asset to them.

I also think hayward and favors are currently much better players than whoever the #2 pick is. But again, when I factor in potential things change a bit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top