What's new
By:

which 2 players of the core4 would you consider untouchable

Which 2 do you consider untouchable

  • Total voters
    47
Would you guys be interested in a Al S&T plus Burks for Rondo? Is that even allowed?

How about Al and Burks for MKG? - I don't think I like this one either. I think Burks will be better than MKG and Hayward already is better.

Or Al and Burks for Collison? - I don't think I like that one.
 
green said:
I think you CAN keep all four right now. Hayward and Favors are up for extensions this summer. Neither is getting the max this summer. If you can get Favors for 4 years 10 per, and Hayward 4 years 12-13 per, then that means you can still sign TWO max players. Burks will NEVER be a max guy, so let's say he gets 10 per. That equals 35 million for three players, not including Kanter. Now, I believe that Kanter WILL be a max guy, so he gets 15 million. That means you now have four players at 50 million. That still leaves you 15 million to fill in the gaps. That is a dang good team.

The question now becomes, what is more valuable? A very, very good pg, or Hayward/Burks?

I don't know the answer to that. Probably depends on who your coach is.

That being said, I bet money that Favors is resigned for around 10, Hayward gets around 12, and Kanter gets the max next summer. I also bet anything that the Jazz try to move Burks for a superstar/really high draft pick.

Now, IF Favors gets resigned for 12+ a year, I completely change my tune on Favors. I would then try to trade him for a superstar. For a guy with no offensive game, 14+ is too much. He can be an elite defender, but he will hurt the Jazz overall at that cost.
Click to expand...

If they give Hayward $12-13M per, they may as well plan to sell the team. That would be a horrific signing.
 
YB85 said:
If they give Hayward $12-13M per, they may as well plan to sell the team. That would be a horrific signing.
Click to expand...

Players that score 14 pts per game:

Thaddeus Young - 8-9.7 million
Wesley Matthews - 6.5-7.2 million
Garnett - 12 million
Millsap - 7.2 million
Teague - Rookie deal
Batum - 10-12 million
Reddick - 6 million, FA after this year
Hill - 8 million

So the range is 7-12 million. Hayward is better overall than Young. Young makes 9.7 million as his max. That is probably Hayward's starting number.

Wes Matthews was a risky signing when it was made, Hayward is more of a proven commodity. Again, this is about the same floor as Young: 9 million.

Garnett and Millsap are bad examples, due to their positions.

Batum is an excellent comparison. He recently received 10 million to start, it ends up around 12.

Reddick is rumored to get a deal at 5 years, 40 million, or 8 million per year.

Soooo....yes, 12-13 is high for Hayward. A 4 year, 45 million dollar deal is completely plausible. That would give Hayward 10, 11, 11.5, 12. I bet anything that is where he ends up. Maybe a little less because the Jazz are getting to him early.

As for Favors, I bet he gets around the same.
 
I went with Favors and Hayward, though I definitely want to keep Kanter, as well. If we can hold onto the three and surround them with the right players, we'll be a good team.
 
kabenac said:
I went with Favors and Hayward, though I definitely want to keep Kanter, as well. If we can hold onto the three and surround them with the right players, we'll be a good team.
Click to expand...

I think if you have Kanter and Hayward and Hayward is your third best player (no Favors on the team), you are competing for titles. If you have Kanter, Favors and Hayward, and Favors and Hayward are your third/fourth best players, you are winning titles.

The key is, the Jazz need to find that #2 guy (or #1 if he can be better than Kanter).
 
GVC said:
None of them are untouchable. Not even close.
Click to expand...

Not a true untouchable like Lebron, Durant, and all that.... but we have nobody like that nor have we ever.
Instead of your textbook untouchable definition, we can soften it for our use and go with a realistic "untouchable" I would think.

I don't see us getting anyone better for any of the 4 at this point. If magic did happen and we could, I would always go for the best chance to get our team a championship... but that's not going to happen.
 
green said:
I think if you have Kanter and Hayward and Hayward is your third best player (no Favors on the team), you are competing for titles. If you have Kanter, Favors and Hayward, and Favors and Hayward are your third/fourth best players, you are winning titles.

The key is, the Jazz need to find that #2 guy (or #1 if he can be better than Kanter).
Click to expand...

Whoa whoa! I think we need to take the rose colored glasses off with this Kanter thing. Yes he has improved and he is a stud. In fact he's my favorite player. But he has yet to be a starter and go against the top centers in this league on a nightly basis. I can remember many of us were criticizing his game a mere 6 months ago. Now we act like he is the best player money can buy. IMO he needs to work on the defensive side of the ball. His PnR defense is suspect, and there are many times I notice him out of place on rotations. But with that said, him and Favors are the 2 we need to build around.
 
JazzSpazz said:
Not a true untouchable like Lebron, Durant, and all that.... but we have nobody like that nor have we ever.
Instead of your textbook untouchable definition, we can soften it for our use and go with a realistic "untouchable" I would think.

I don't see us getting anyone better for any of the 4 at this point. If magic did happen and we could, I would always go for the best chance to get our team a championship... but that's not going to happen.
Click to expand...

Burks isn't even in the conversation, in my opinion. I wouldn't be shocked at all if he was a piece in a trade package this summer. Don't get me wrong, I like Burks, but in NBA value, he's part of a package offer right now rather than being the center piece of a deal. The other three would surprise me. If I was making the decisions, it would take a mind-blowing offer to get Favors or Kanter. Hayward to a lesser extent.
 
MoTown16 said:
^^^
Seriously,
I'd put it at 3...Favors, Kanter and Hayward.
For all his offensive struggles, Favors is a fantastic defender. I think he and Kanter complement each other very well. Hayward drives me nuts with his inconsistency, but he's incredibly versatile and gets to the line, even when he's struggling from outside. I'm less sold on Burks, but he could be the answer as a combo guard.

What I'm really hoping for is a different coach. Give the C4 a chance to play and show what they can do within a legitimate, NBA offensive and defensive system. And give them all 30 mins/per. Then we can really see what kind of players they are.
Click to expand...

I could not say it better myself. All your posts are this good? ;)

1. Let Milsap and Big Al walk away.
2. Absorb some salary or do something else to move up in the draft.
3. Complete the missing pieces.
4. Sign SVG who is an extremely good coach at developing and utilizing players.

Also DMC should be considered a part of this core. Of course not as a starter but as the energy guy coming off the bench.
 
Kanter #1 for me.
segundo guy; either Hayward or Favors (I voted for Favors in the poll but have my doubts)
All that said, it would not surprise me a tad, if Burks makes a quantum leap and becomes the best of this pack,tho.
He has what it takes.
so keep'em all if you can.
 
I will be royally pissed if they package any of the core 4 in a trade. Fans have made an emotional investment in these 4 players and the Jazz FO trade them at their peril.
 
Ellipse said:
I will be royally pissed if they package any of the core 4 in a trade. Fans have made an emotional investment in these 4 players and the Jazz FO trade them at their peril.
Click to expand...

Well... trading Burks right now while he has high value might not be a bad idea. If he ends up sucking next season, it would suck. I do think Burks will be good, don't get me wrong, but he needs some work. Essentially, If trading Burks means we get a stud PG like trey Burke or something of that nature, i say go for it, because we need a PG more than a SG who can play some PG
 
Batman said:
Well... trading Burks right now while he has high value might not be a bad idea. If he ends up sucking next season, it would suck. I do think Burks will be good, don't get me wrong, but he needs some work. Essentially, If trading Burks means we get a stud PG like trey Burke or something of that nature, i say go for it, because we need a PG more than a SG who can play some PG
Click to expand...

Yes. Burks' stock is VERY high. If the right deal comes along, trade him.
 
I don't get it. It's Favors and Kanter and it's not even close. It's beyond me how some people can argue differently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top