What's new
By:

The Official June Trade Idea

ONE LOVE said:
????? If Utah had the #8 pick, and you were the GM, would you take 2 seconds to drop to #12?
Click to expand...

Exactly... Start thinking of it from their perspective.... Two seconds is not getting it done. The difference between 8 and 12 is closer to two firsts. To get in the 6-8 range I'd give up our pick next year and either the OKC pick or GSW pick.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
Exactly... Start thinking of it from their perspective.... Two seconds is not getting it done. The difference between 8 and 12 is closer to two firsts. To get in the 6-8 range I'd give up our pick next year and either the OKC pick or GSW pick.
Click to expand...
I'd rather give Burke vs. another first round pick. I'm expecting the Jazz to hoard their assets and try to make a big move in 2016/2017. That's two years from now with this roster, and decisions will have to be made about how much to pay Hayward, Favors and Gobert moving forward. If they aren't as close to competing as they hope, I can see one of those guys (likely Hayward) as being the premiere piece in a major trade for an All-Star caliber player.

In ascending order, I think the Jazz assets are valued OKC future pick(because of lottery protections), Trey Burke (PG with starting experience heading into his 3rd season on a rookie contract), Jazz 2016 1st (with some protections in what is expected to be a weaker draft), GSW 2017 (expected late pick in a strong draft), Jazz 2017 (possible lottery pick in a strong draft), Jazz 2012 #12 pick (current lottery pick in 3rd tier of a stronger-than-expected draft.)

I think Burke still has more value than Jazz fans assign him. NBA GMs tend to overvalue veterans. A lot. Regardless, two 1st round value assets should be able to get somebody to consider moving. My preference would be to trade the two assets that will have the least value between now and the 2016 trade deadline - and in my mind, those are Trey Burke and the 2016 pick. I'm actually okay with keeping the 2nd round picks and looking for an opportunity to use them on draft and stash players or packaging them with cash to move back up in the 1st round like they did with Gobert. Somebody will fall. Jimmy Butler. Draymond Green. Rudy Gobert. Rodney Hood. Etc. Knowing who that guy is and having the resources to go get him is always a good plan.
 
fishonjazz said:
no chance of being lottery. We will be too good at that point

Huh? 2012?
Click to expand...
Typing on my phone. Meant the 2015 pick. Didn't notice I hit the wrong button. And, while I agree that the Jazz are an ascending team, their recent history suggests lottery. Don't de-value your assets until you HAVE to.
 
Ellis269 said:
I'd rather give Burke vs. another first round pick. I'm expecting the Jazz to hoard their assets and try to make a big move in 2016/2017. That's two years from now with this roster, and decisions will have to be made about how much to pay Hayward, Favors and Gobert moving forward. If they aren't as close to competing as they hope, I can see one of those guys (likely Hayward) as being the premiere piece in a major trade for an All-Star caliber player.

In ascending order, I think the Jazz assets are valued OKC future pick(because of lottery protections), Trey Burke (PG with starting experience heading into his 3rd season on a rookie contract), Jazz 2016 1st (with some protections in what is expected to be a weaker draft), GSW 2017 (expected late pick in a strong draft), Jazz 2017 (possible lottery pick in a strong draft), Jazz 2012 #12 pick (current lottery pick in 3rd tier of a stronger-than-expected draft.)

I think Burke still has more value than Jazz fans assign him. NBA GMs tend to overvalue veterans. A lot. Regardless, two 1st round value assets should be able to get somebody to consider moving. My preference would be to trade the two assets that will have the least value between now and the 2016 trade deadline - and in my mind, those are Trey Burke and the 2016 pick. I'm actually okay with keeping the 2nd round picks and looking for an opportunity to use them on draft and stash players or packaging them with cash to move back up in the 1st round like they did with Gobert. Somebody will fall. Jimmy Butler. Draymond Green. Rudy Gobert. Rodney Hood. Etc. Knowing who that guy is and having the resources to go get him is always a good plan.
Click to expand...

I pretty much agree with you, but would swap our 2016 pick and the GSW pick in value.

I don't think we will make a big move though in the acquire a vet type of mold. I think using 2 or 3 picks to get a blue chipper in the draft might be our way of making a big move. We have established young guys or great prospects at every position so bringing in a vet might be awkward. I guess we could make a move to go from a good player to a great player (like trading Favors for Love... I actually wouldn't do that but couldn't think of a good example right now). It might be cheaper to get a great talent, although more risky, by moving up the draft for someone.

If there isn't someone we like then we can certainly keep hoarding the assets and have flexibility. Maybe we like the Gobert model and keep the picks and hope to hit on them even though chances are low. We could go a hundred different directions it is a fun time to be a Jazz fan.
 
Jazz4ever said:
Stanley is too short to even guard the bigger SFs in this league, let alone PFs. So no...that's not "where the league is going", at least if you want to win.
Click to expand...

Johnson is built like a tank and he's only like 19. Plus, his wing span is almost identical to LeBron's and he's 2 inches shorter. I will concede that his standing reach is 4 inches shorter than LeBron's. Didn't Barkley, at 6'6 (same as Johnson) dominate at the 4 position being a big beefy 4. Johnson is gonna be huge. He already looks like a full grown man.
 
Batman said:
Johnson is built like a tank and he's only like 19. Plus, his wing span is almost identical to LeBron's and he's 2 inches shorter. I will concede that his standing reach is 4 inches shorter than LeBron's. Didn't Barkley, at 6'6 (same as Johnson) dominate at the 4 position being a big beefy 4. Johnson is gonna be huge. He already looks like a full grown man.
Click to expand...

He's Ron Artest without the crazy... I think he will be big enough to play against 4s fairly consistently. I don't think you want him guarding guys like Aldridge and Duncan though. I don't think there are many guys who would make us pay. Griffin isn't huge and I'd rather guard him with a quicker guy and have Gobert/Favors waiting for him at the rim.
 
I just looked at the list of PFs with the highest PERs in the NBA... the only guys I think I'd be really concerned about are Davis, Aldridge, Duncan, and Griffin if he decided he was going to be a post player again... he operates a lot out of pick and roll and shoots a lot more from the perimeter now.
 
I like Johnson & would be very happy if he dropped to #12, but I wouldn't give up much more than our pick + (1 of) Burke/GSW 1st/OKC 1st to move up for him. The only players in this draft that I would trade significant assets in order to move up for are Russell, Towns, Hezonja, or Mudiay. Hezonja is likely the only realistic target out of that group & I would probably be willing to trade #12/Burks or #12/Burke/GSW 1st/OKC 1st for him. #12/Burks may be a bit of an overpay, but I don't view Burks as a good fit in the starting lineup, & think both Hezonja & Hood are better fits alongside Exum/Hayward/Favors/Gobert with whoever doesn't win the last starting spot as an ideal 6th man scoring spark off of the bench. This is likely our last opportunity to acquire an elite talent & Hezonja has some of the best offensive potential in this draft. I hope we swing for the fences & do what it takes to move up for him, even if that means trading Burks (who I like, but don't see as a great fit for this roster/system).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top