Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 4 of 32 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 473
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    1,353
    I listened to all the scenario's that David Locke had and I REALLY like the idea of trading Exum for Bledsoe. Exum could be a stud, but I honestly think keeping Bledsoe is a better idea for us. He's only 27 and a super stud at the PG. He's also got a 15 million a year salary for the next few years. To me you pull the trigger on that right away. I thought they might like the idea of taking Hood away as well. And I personally would like to give Hood and trades better than giving Exum. I think Hood is a very excellent player, but we have so many players that play his position we don't really need him.

    But the Suns liked the trade of Exum + Burks for Bledsoe, just straight up. The money worked, and the Suns liked the age of Exum with the rest of the team. Oh Bledsoe would be so awesome.

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    1,294
    Quote Originally Posted by Firefistus View Post
    I listened to all the scenario's that David Locke had and I REALLY like the idea of trading Exum for Bledsoe. Exum could be a stud, but I honestly think keeping Bledsoe is a better idea for us. He's only 27 and a super stud at the PG. He's also got a 15 million a year salary for the next few years. To me you pull the trigger on that right away. I thought they might like the idea of taking Hood away as well. And I personally would like to give Hood and trades better than giving Exum. I think Hood is a very excellent player, but we have so many players that play his position we don't really need him.

    But the Suns liked the trade of Exum + Burks for Bledsoe, just straight up. The money worked, and the Suns liked the age of Exum with the rest of the team. Oh Bledsoe would be so awesome.
    I like Bledsoe. I would be super excited if we were able to trade for him. I wish we could find a way to make it happen though without including Exum or Hood. The value for Hood and Exum is both low, Hood because of injuries, and Exum because this was his year to ease back into the NBA after a major injury. Bledsoe's value is some of the highest it has been because he was able to stay relatively healthy for a year finally (though he still got shut down). I don't think we will get fair trade value.

    Secondly, the Jazz like to switch on all screen's, Bledsoe is on the shorter side and his elite athleticism has decreased because of his past injuries. So I have my concerns about his fit in our defensive scheme.

    Lastly, I don't think Bledsoe is as efficient as we need him to be. He is more about high volume and we play with the slowest pace in the NBA. Averaged 3.4 TO this year. 33% from 3. 44% total FG %.

    I think he adds a different dimension to the team. I think he provides some good experience, very good competitor, etc. If we could acquire him using cap space and picks, I would be down for that. The suns were also interested in Favors, that would be the most ideal, Favors and a 1st for Bledsoe, and i think that is a fair trade. Both are youngerish players who have had some injury concerns. Suns could use a solid starting center and Jazz could use a solid starting PG. So lets go Favors for Bledsoe and I will be a happy camper .

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1
    Hey guys new to the forum, but I have been thinking quite a bit about this, as I am thinking that keeping Hayward is at 50/50 right now. I think we need to show him we are gonna win NOW! So here is my thoughts, I like the idea of getting bledsoe if you can swing that, but I'm not opposed to keeping Hill at the right price (under 15 per). Also you could go after Shawn Livingston, Milos Teodosic, point guard is the one I still am having a hard time with.
    But here is the big move, let's go get Jimmy Butler! You make that move and I think Hayward stays! Your gonna have to give up quite a bit, but it's a win now move. Chicago is in rebuild mode and so your gonna have to give up some valuable assets which sucks, but I think you if you traded off 2 to 3 first rounders (which we have 2 this year and next) Rodney Hood (which I don't love, but you have to have a sweetner) and possibly a Trey Lyles or Exum. I think you could land Butler.
    So if you go into Free angency with Butler, Gobert, Johnson, possibly Bledsoe, I think you might have enough to entice Hayward and Ingles to stay. I know it's a lot to give up, but it shows Hayward your commited to winning, and if we don't take a chance and Hayward leaves, I don't know how many years that sets us back but it's not good.
    Last edited by steeljazz; 06-05-2017 at 02:14 AM.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    1,353
    I was asking over in the Bulls forums about a Butler trade with our young bucks to kick off the rebuild. And they didn't seem to be interested in any of our young guns. They seemed to think that they could get a better deal from Boston. Not sure Boston is going to offer more, but the Bulls didn't seemed intrigued by that deal. You know what would be the same money for a trade for Butler though.

    Hood, Exum, Lyles, Neto, Diaw. = 16.8 Million, which is Butlers salary.

    Add 2 firsts and I personally don't see how you can't accept that deal. It's better than anything you could get with Boston. Boston isn't going to give them their nets picks, and you KNOW that's what the Bulls want.

    Would that be worth the money though? You MIGHT be able to get away without trading exum on that deal and use him as a straight trade for Bledsoe. OR if you have Butler, you just might be able to sign Hill for less money to try and crack the Warriors. If Hill commands 20+ million than we won't be able to do that of course. But if we get Butler we don't need Hood. Especially with Ingles.

    In a perfect world the Bulls accept our offer because it's the best one they get, and our offer is
    Hood, Lyles, Neto, Diaw and our 2 firsts this year. We sign Hill for 18 million. Sign Hayward for Max, sign Ingles for 7 and sign someone like Deron Williams for salary minimum.
    Last edited by Firefistus; 06-05-2017 at 04:34 PM.

  5. #50
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    822
    I like Bledsoe, but he is a backup plan if Hill wants too much cash.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,770
    The Bulls aren't going to trade Butler for 2 late 1sts which are basically worthless and a bunch of garbage from our bench. If you trade a guy like Butler you have to get a guy who is at least possibly capable of becoming an all-star. And none of the guys mentioned in that trade scenario fit that bill and late 1st rd picks certainly don't end up as all-star players very frequently. I just don't think we get a player of Butler's quality with what's being discussed.

    I really don't see a lot of ways for us to really improve this off-season unless it's from within/health. And if we don't resign Hayward we're ****ed anyways. Then you just let Hill walk, trade Favors for whatever you can get for him and let the young guys play and go back to the drawing board.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    nowhere
    Posts
    8,716
    it's hayward or back to the drawing board. i'm with jazznc about the bulls balking at the rags for riches trade idea. seems pretty ridiculous. i'm not sold on any of our young guys except hood. exum might be an ok 2 guard, but we're up the creek developing from within pg-wise if hill leaves. our team was a few injuries shy of home court this year, based on how well we played when healthy and gutting out a 1st round victory, and that's with an unconventional roster. if hayward leaves we have to rebuild, i don't see a viable way to salvage this off-season. it's either blow up the team or build on the strides we made last season.
    HAWKS '13 ,'1 4, & '15 PREMIERS


    "I ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti...ffftt ffftt ffftt!"


    "of course tom 'jan' brady would whine about a rule change."
    -chipurmunki


  8. #53
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    1,353
    I agree about the Bulls, but honestly, they aren't going to get a 1st round pick from the Celtics, and they can't offer a better deal than we do without giving that up. Which everyone in the world knows isn't happening. Who's going to offer a better deal for him? I guess Portland could offer some pieces, but all their players are way overpaid. 76ers aren't letting go of Okafor without a kings ransom.

    I think the main problem here is the teams that suck don't want to trade the players that aren't playing despite them being REALLY good without massive deals.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    822
    Dennis said our focus was to retain our guys, and for good reason. I get that it's fun to throw out wild ideas on PSD, but when we come back to earth we have to realize some harsh truths.

    1. The Warriors are still young and should dominate us for another 4+ years. Kevin Durrant is only 28, Curry is only 29. Draymond is 27. In comparison Hayward is 27.

    2. The Jazz are too good to get decent draft picks for a while and have never attracted top free agents. Our best resources are our current players. Develop them to be solid contributors or develop them to be traded. The problem is our tradable assets we have in Exum, Hood, and Favors all have a low value right now.

    3. Like it or not retaining Hill, Hayward, and Ingles is a huge win for this team. So what if we are not taking a jump forward this offseason, at least we are not taking a giant jump backwards.

    4. Without Hayward we are so dead. No Hayward =no Hill. I'm sure we would try to salvage the team by trading for a Eric Bledsoe, overpaying a Gallinari, or taking a risk on a Rudy Gay, but we all know these moves only lead to a 40 something win season, a mediocre playoff run, and a mediocre draft pick. Unfortunately with the current NBA rules if your not the Warriors then you may want to be just like Philly. It sucks, but it's the truth. If all we do is keep Hayward on this team we should be happy.

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    1,294
    I think our young players are being under-valued because they had some injuries and played in a complex system that does not highlight athleticism. Our older players who have great experience looked great in our system, but our young players who are more likely to make mistakes and rely more on athleticism did not produce as well.

    Once they learn the system better and mature a bit, they are going to look incredible (IMO). Young building teams have longer leashes for their young players, allowing them to make mistakes and grow. On our team this year, our young players were pulled, especially late in the season, whenever they made mistakes. I think they are better than their stats last year indicate and I think a healthy off-season for our young players will make a huge difference. I am really excited to see the growth our young players will make.

    I don't think it is going to make our team better selling low and buying high on players. To be successful over the long run, you need to buy low and sell high. Spurs are fantastic at this. The Knicks are horrible at this. The Jazz should not trade away every player that fans think did not have a good year and trade them for players who had the best year of their career.

  11. #56
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    822
    Quote Originally Posted by Raupie View Post
    I think our young players are being under-valued because they had some injuries and played in a complex system that does not highlight athleticism. Our older players who have great experience looked great in our system, but our young players who are more likely to make mistakes and rely more on athleticism did not produce as well.

    Once they learn the system better and mature a bit, they are going to look incredible (IMO). Young building teams have longer leashes for their young players, allowing them to make mistakes and grow. On our team this year, our young players were pulled, especially late in the season, whenever they made mistakes. I think they are better than their stats last year indicate and I think a healthy off-season for our young players will make a huge difference. I am really excited to see the growth our young players will make.

    I don't think it is going to make our team better selling low and buying high on players. To be successful over the long run, you need to buy low and sell high. Spurs are fantastic at this. The Knicks are horrible at this. The Jazz should not trade away every player that fans think did not have a good year and trade them for players who had the best year of their career.
    Solid points Raupie. I expect one of Exum, Hood, or Favors to have a great year next year. Not just a better year, I mean a surprisingly good year where we are glad we didn't trade him and then we extend them. With the crazy money they are throwing out right now these guys should be motivated to the max.

    After watching the NBA Finals I'm ready to be more patient with Exum and Hood. They have struggled, but they have great length, the one thing that teams need to even come close to disrupting the Warriors. We may as well be patient because nobody is even close to beating them in a series.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    822
    Favors growing injury history is reason enough not to resign him. I think last season was just an anomaly and he will bounce back next year. My real concern with Favors is he is just soft. He is as intimidating as a box of kittens. Seriously, I wonder about his lack of effort/motivation sometimes. Is he injured, is he out of shape, are the coaches telling him to pace himself, or did he cash in and his heart is not fully invested? I don't know, but something was off last year. There are times he uses his athleticism and explodes to the basket and looks so good. I often say to my TV "where has that been" in an annoyed tone. This guy is only one year removed from being a solid NBA starter we thought was a pillar of our future. He is now in an impossible situation to stay. If he can play like he did 2 seasons ago he will likely price himself off our team. If he has another bad year he is probably gone. Either way I don't see him as a part of our future unless he bounces back in a big way, and then takes another discount to stay. Not likely considering the 300+ million we will have already invested in the frontcourt. From a salary cap standpoint only, with the money Hayward and Rudy will get our PF position needs to be cheap.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    1,353
    Favors is strong as hell when he's healthy. He had problems in the off-season that carried over into the season according to the front office. They said they expect him to be fully healthy this next season. They also said they didn't expect him to play most the season when the season started because of his injury.

    Once again, they didn't reveal what the problem was, just said he wasn't right this season. Hopefully he'll be healthy all season next year.

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    nowhere
    Posts
    8,716
    if it's his back though...
    HAWKS '13 ,'1 4, & '15 PREMIERS


    "I ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti...ffftt ffftt ffftt!"


    "of course tom 'jan' brady would whine about a rule change."
    -chipurmunki


  15. #60
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    822
    Quote Originally Posted by Firefistus View Post
    Favors is strong as hell when he's healthy. He had problems in the off-season that carried over into the season according to the front office. They said they expect him to be fully healthy this next season. They also said they didn't expect him to play most the season when the season started because of his injury.

    Once again, they didn't reveal what the problem was, just said he wasn't right this season. Hopefully he'll be healthy all season next year.
    Love the positive attitude, but it's much more likely that Favors best days are behind him. I think the team is moving on. They are worried about his back, knee, and lack of aggressiveness. We are working out a lot of stretch 4's for the draft. Favors and Gobert are not the best match. Writing is on the wall.

Page 4 of 32 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •