This could be the worst Utah Jazz team we've ever seen.

[♪alt13]

We have players that are getting minutes way beyond what they should. The jazz are basically playing 4 on 5 sometimes 3 on 5. You can't expect our young core to overcome that.(the FO doesn't) The crap franchises that you are trying to compare us to are constantly overpaying players and making poor trades(often their future draft picks).

The jazz have 2 first rounders in 2014 and 2015. They have money to spend. They have a core of bigs. Seems to me that the jazz shouldn't build a well rounded team until they have a true franchise player. When we do get that guy you can bet that the jazz FO will move fast to plug the holes.

 

[The Norm]

I think he is auditioning for GVCs "**** on my lawn" thread.

Why don't you actually post something with substance? I realize it's hard to defend the Jazz nowadays, but if you aren't capable of it, resorting to trolling seems like a childish alternative.

 

[Stoked]

Why don't you actually post something with substance? I realize it's hard to defend the Jazz nowadays, but if you aren't capable of it, resorting to trolling seems like a childish alternative.

Glad you are so well versed in trolling 101.

 

[Stifle Tower]

Utah's FO has been extremely questionable ever since Larry Miller died - they're just lucky enough to have a fanbase that's willing to make excuses for them over and over.

And drafting Barnes had little to do with GSW's launch into contender status. I can't believe I even have to point that out.

Actually, Utah's FO has been incredibly stable. The goal has been to always make the playoffs. Utah really has never had a rebuilding cycle after losing their stars like Chicago, Boston, New York or even the Lakers did. How many losing seasons did Sloan have, even after John, Karl and Horny retired? Jazz just reloaded with FA's (Boozer, Okur). Then they tried to reload again with Deron as the cornerstone by bringing in Jefferson to replace Carlos. They almost did it again by retaining Millsap, Mo, Foye and Carroll. But Lindsey convinced them otherwise. Finally, the Jazz are taking a real shot at building a championship team (i.e. getting a superstar in the draft) and some are now blasting them for it? This is the same thing SA did (Duncan). It's the same thing the Lakers did in acquiring Kobe. It's the same model OKC followed to get Durant and Westbrook. Sorry, Utah doesn't have the market prestige to get a Big3 demanding to be traded there, or have a Garnett or Carmelo demand a trade to the team. We're seeing some growing pains, yes. But I'll bet our record would be .500 had Lindsey just gone out and acquired a better bench instead of spending 20M+ on Jefferson, Rush and Biedrins. But is that what we really want? Do we want the Jazz to contend for the 8th seed and draft 14th? This is the very FIRST time the Jazz have truly rebuilt the team with young players since the days of John and Karl. And the GSW model? They drafted Thompson, then tanked to get Barnes and made a couple of trades. I'd say we're on that path: we've drafted our young studs, are tanking to get a star and can EASILY sign or trade for a starter and/or key sub in the off-season.

 

[LogGrad98]

I hate it when people compare us to OKC. For every OKC there are a dozen Washington Wizards or Charlotte Bobcats who get in the lottery for multiple seasons and don't have every single one of their draft picks end up being superstars. And the Jazz haven't exactly shown a knack for drafting superstars - our core has four players drafted in the top 10 and I think it's safe to say at this point that not a one of them is superstar material.

Hard to draft a superstar when you don't get picks inside the top 3. The one top 3 pick we had we spent on basically an all-star who couldn't get along with our coach.

And really it is hard to draft a superstar at all. How many legit superstars have there ever been in NBA history? Maybe the 50 they named as the top 50 with a few supplanted by more recent players? And how many draft picks have there been in NBA history? Several thousand, say maybe 3000 to round it out and being too lazy to google right now. So 50 out of 3000, or 1.7%. So the odds of picking a superstar AT ALL are incredibly slim. And as you pick later in the draft, even starting at the 5th pick, those odds change drastically. So after the top 5 the odds have to be somewhere in the .01% range, which is where we have picked every single year save one over the past 25+ seasons. Yet it is obviously the front office fault we haven't found the 1 in a million player over those years and then had the assets and positioning to trade into the right spot to draft said 1 in a million player. Stupid front office!

 

[LunaticWolf]

Hard to draft a superstar when you don't get picks inside the top 3. The one top 3 pick we had we spent on basically an all-star who couldn't get along with our coach.

And really it is hard to draft a superstar at all. How many legit superstars have there ever been in NBA history? Maybe the 50 they named as the top 50 with a few supplanted by more recent players? And how many draft picks have there been in NBA history? Several thousand, say maybe 3000 to round it out and being too lazy to google right now. So 50 out of 3000, or 1.7%. So the odds of picking a superstar AT ALL are incredibly slim. And as you pick later in the draft, even starting at the 5th pick, those odds change drastically. So after the top 5 the odds have to be somewhere in the .01% range, which is where we have picked every single year save one over the past 25+ seasons. Yet it is obviously the front office fault we haven't found the 1 in a million player over those years and then had the assets and positioning to trade into the right spot to draft said 1 in a million player. Stupid front office!

Don't you know? We already have 4 superstar players, but we stunted their growth by playing them off the bench.

You give players minutes, and they magically become superstars, that's how this works.

 

[jjscap]

NBA is too tough this year. Look at the Western Conference.. All teams except Jazz and Suns can make the playoffs. And that Suns can beat many teams too.

 

[Stifle Tower]

Hard to draft a superstar when you don't get picks inside the top 3. The one top 3 pick we had we spent on basically an all-star who couldn't get along with our coach.

And really it is hard to draft a superstar at all. How many legit superstars have there ever been in NBA history? Maybe the 50 they named as the top 50 with a few supplanted by more recent players? And how many draft picks have there been in NBA history? Several thousand, say maybe 3000 to round it out and being too lazy to google right now. So 50 out of 3000, or 1.7%. So the odds of picking a superstar AT ALL are incredibly slim. And as you pick later in the draft, even starting at the 5th pick, those odds change drastically. So after the top 5 the odds have to be somewhere in the .01% range, which is where we have picked every single year save one over the past 25+ seasons. Yet it is obviously the front office fault we haven't found the 1 in a million player over those years and then had the assets and positioning to trade into the right spot to draft said 1 in a million player. Stupid front office!

Yes, which is why picking in the top-5 in what is recognized by every expert as one of the best draft class in the last 20+ years is so important. Yes, I certainly agree Wiggins or Parker or Randle or Exum, etc. could turn out to be busts. But the Jazz have a much, much higher percentage of hitting on at LEAST a quality starter than in other years. And Utah, unlike Washington, Charlotte, etc. has done a pretty good job evaluating talent. OK, we drafted Hayward instead of George. BUST there, right? I'd say Kanter and Favors are on their way to becoming pretty good bigs, perhaps even all-stars some day. And Burks is showing some pretty good talent for a late-lottery pick. Please elaborate, NORM, on what superstars (except George) the Jazz missed out on with those picks. Well, delete Favors since he was acquired in a trade.

 

[framer]

Next year isn't going to be a rose garden either. Fully one third to one half of the team should be first or second year players. The difference is that next year I would expect ALL of our players to actually belong in the league. Right now we have about seven guys that should actually be playing in the NBA, and not all of those seven are available right now due to injury. It makes it pretty tough for the few remaining that actually are players. When you have a capable starting point and a backup pg that will not embarrass himself, Hayward and the bigs should really take off. They certainly aren't going to regress from what they are doing now. When I see Kanter nearing 20 and 10, I smile because that will pretty much be his floor. Those guys are difficult to get and if you can pair someone like that with a 15 and 10 defensive specialist along with even a slightly above average rest of the team, you are pretty much a lock for the playoffs. Give that team someone like Wiggins and a glue guy like Hayward, you are a contender, as long as the coaching comes along or is upgraded. If we get a top 5 pick this year, it will be really hard to screw it up. Now is the perfect time to have the bottom fall out with injuries and roster trash, I hope we pile up a bunch of close losses before Burke comes back, because once the jazz have someone that can run an offense without turning the ball over, we aren't going to lose to the Bostons of the world, especially at home.

 

[Stifle Tower]

^IAWTP. Jazz may very well end up with another lottery pick next season, but likely in the 10-14 range. My guess is that Utah fights for a playoff spot. Whether they make it or not may very well depend on what direction Lindsey takes. If there's an opportunity to take on salary for additional 1st's, he could do a mini version of the GS deal. IINM, he'll have about $15M or so available after accounting for the raise for Hayward and the lottery pick slots. Or he could go after a good veteran (or two). The latter strategy probably puts Utah in the playoffs.

 

[fufo]

Hayward is averaging 19-6-5. Burks is definitely good and enjoyable to watch. Enes is almost 19-9 per game. No problem with Favors.


So?

Do we have really have to win games?
You see the young core's production.
Talent is there. Plus, it's impossible to make playoffs in West for us. Yes we're 0-5 and I'm not upset. As long as the young guns play well. All we need is focusing on near future including the draft.

One last, We should watch this team with a healthy Trey before killing them.

 

[The Midnight]

Hayward is averaging 19-6-5. Burks is definitely good and enjoyable to watch. Enes is almost 19-9 per game. No problem with Favors.


So?

Do we have really have to win games?
You see the young core's production.
Talent is there. Plus, it's impossible to make playoffs in West for us. Yes we're 0-5 and I'm not upset. As long as the young guns play well. All we need is focusing on near future including the draft.

One last, We should watch this team with a healthy Trey before killing them.

Nice post.


But the Rep'd you're getting from me is for your username.

#FuFo!!!