The state of the Utah Jazz.

outerspacefan wrote:

Overall it looks like the Jazz are going to have to decide if this is the time to construct the base of a solid deep playoff team. All data available scream that this is not the an off-season you can count on to be a foundational one.

I don't think Jazz should bring back neither Mo, Al or Paul. If it was my call I would do everything in my power to get Burke or Schroeder and KCP and then go from ther. Burke seems to me to be the real deal of this draft, I see the german youngster like Jennings but with a smart brain, and I think KCP could be the ultimate 2.

That could be a phenomenal player.
I'd like to see Utah give up players/assets/$$ and their picks at 14 and 46 and grab Burke then Larkin at 21, or Shroeder if by chance still available.

Anyone have this?? Curious how the ESPN Gods view our young but talented team....

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/FuturePowerRankings-1-130530/1-5

Mutangclan wrote:

Anyone have this?? Curious how the ESPN Gods view our young but talented team....

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/FuturePowerRankings-1-130530/1-5

Quote :

10. Utah Jazz | Future Power Rating: 665
PLAYERS MANAGEMENT MONEY MARKET DRAFT
326 (13th) - 118 (12th) - 129 (7th) - 26 (25th) - 66 (8th)

The Jazz peaked in the last edition of FPR, rising all the way to fourth, largely on the strength of a very favorable salary cap situation. While that situation remains positive, it looks a little less favorable to our larger panel this time than it did nine months ago -- several teams have moved ahead of Utah in cap space.

Utah drops two spots in Players given the uncertain futures of Paul Millsap, Al Jefferson and Mo Williams, who can all leave this summer. Derrick Favors, Gordon Hayward and Enes Kanter provide hope, as do two more first-round picks (Nos. 14 and 21) in the upcoming draft.

The front office remains a strong suit, with long-time basketball operations chief Kevin O'Connor still in house and giving over the GM reins to the well-regarded Dennis Lindsey, formerly of the Spurs. The panel has less faith in coach Tyrone Corbin, however.

With a core of interesting young players, multiple draft picks and cap space, the Jazz remain a top-10 team in our rankings and look well positioned to succeed for the rest of the decade.

-- Chad Ford
(Previous rank: 4)

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/FuturePowerRankings-2-130530/6-10

Mutangclan wrote:

outerspacefan wrote:

Overall it looks like the Jazz are going to have to decide if this is the time to construct the base of a solid deep playoff team. All data available scream that this is not the an off-season you can count on to be a foundational one.

I don't think Jazz should bring back neither Mo, Al or Paul. If it was my call I would do everything in my power to get Burke or Schroeder and KCP and then go from ther. Burke seems to me to be the real deal of this draft, I see the german youngster like Jennings but with a smart brain, and I think KCP could be the ultimate 2.

That could be a phenomenal player.
I'd like to see Utah give up players/assets/$$ and their picks at 14 and 46 and grab Burke then Larkin at 21, or Shroeder if by chance still available.

Some research into Schroeder gives multiple "Rondo with a shot" comparisons. Defense and passing first, ridiculous hands, handle, wingspan, athleticism. That's a nice consolation prize if we can't move up for Burke.

Matter of fact, with Larkin and Schroeder, I've gone from thinking the Jazz "PG Draft Gamble" is more like a "PG Draft Sure Thing". I see four FOUR! PGs that would qualify as our "PG of the future" and there's NO WAY they're all gone at 14.

Matter of fact, I'm starting to think they're so good (Burke, C-W, Larkin, Schroeder) that it would be a mistake to consider taking two of them at 14-21, which I think a couple of people have mentioned possibly doing. I like the idea of getting one of those guys at 14 then the best available big at 21.

Trollificus wrote:

Mutangclan wrote:

outerspacefan wrote:

Overall it looks like the Jazz are going to have to decide if this is the time to construct the base of a solid deep playoff team. All data available scream that this is not the an off-season you can count on to be a foundational one.

I don't think Jazz should bring back neither Mo, Al or Paul. If it was my call I would do everything in my power to get Burke or Schroeder and KCP and then go from ther. Burke seems to me to be the real deal of this draft, I see the german youngster like Jennings but with a smart brain, and I think KCP could be the ultimate 2.

That could be a phenomenal player.
I'd like to see Utah give up players/assets/$$ and their picks at 14 and 46 and grab Burke then Larkin at 21, or Shroeder if by chance still available.

Some research into Schroeder gives multiple "Rondo with a shot" comparisons. Defense and passing first, ridiculous hands, handle, wingspan, athleticism. That's a nice consolation prize if we can't move up for Burke.

Matter of fact, with Larkin and Schroeder, I've gone from thinking the Jazz "PG Draft Gamble" is more like a "PG Draft Sure Thing". I see four FOUR! PGs that would qualify as our "PG of the future" and there's NO WAY they're all gone at 14.

Matter of fact, I'm starting to think they're so good (Burke, C-W, Larkin, Schroeder) that it would be a mistake to consider taking two of them at 14-21, which I think a couple of people have mentioned possibly doing. I like the idea of getting one of those guys at 14 then the best available big at 21.

Now with Marv out we need a player to help at his spot. And i think there's a couple good ones we can get. Could take a risk one would still be on the board at 21?

Trollificus wrote:

Mutangclan wrote:

outerspacefan wrote:

Overall it looks like the Jazz are going to have to decide if this is the time to construct the base of a solid deep playoff team. All data available scream that this is not the an off-season you can count on to be a foundational one.

I don't think Jazz should bring back neither Mo, Al or Paul. If it was my call I would do everything in my power to get Burke or Schroeder and KCP and then go from ther. Burke seems to me to be the real deal of this draft, I see the german youngster like Jennings but with a smart brain, and I think KCP could be the ultimate 2.

That could be a phenomenal player.
I'd like to see Utah give up players/assets/$$ and their picks at 14 and 46 and grab Burke then Larkin at 21, or Shroeder if by chance still available.

Some research into Schroeder gives multiple "Rondo with a shot" comparisons. Defense and passing first, ridiculous hands, handle, wingspan, athleticism. That's a nice consolation prize if we can't move up for Burke.

Matter of fact, with Larkin and Schroeder, I've gone from thinking the Jazz "PG Draft Gamble" is more like a "PG Draft Sure Thing". I see four FOUR! PGs that would qualify as our "PG of the future" and there's NO WAY they're all gone at 14.

Matter of fact, I'm starting to think they're so good (Burke, C-W, Larkin, Schroeder) that it would be a mistake to consider taking two of them at 14-21, which I think a couple of people have mentioned possibly doing. I like the idea of getting one of those guys at 14 then the best available big at 21.

That was me, take two. And I think at 21, Larkin WILL be the best player available. Whichever PG Dallas takes, we'll take the other, then Larkin.

dongibby wrote:

ptaz66 wrote:

First, thanks for sharing Richardale. I too liked the article. It was a bit long to quote, so I elected to just add my thoughts.

As for the Jazz I think they should re-sign Mo Williams, something I'm aware may at first cause many folks to wonder if I bumbed my head before posting. Here's why I say this however. Our expectations of Mo was he would be an upgrade over Harris. He started slow, started getting it together, got injured, came back and finally had a few games at the end of the season where he looked something like what we expected from the beginning. Its important to remember however, we were comparing Mo first year with that of Harris in his second.

If we parallel this with D-Will he played little due to injury after the trade was made, then had what may have been the worst year of his career, followed by a pretty good season this last year. I would like to see if Mo can start where he left off, then get better in his second year as we've seen so many other players, Harris included, do when playing for the Jazz.

Then, we re-sign Milsap or Jefferson, whichever one has the least trade value. The other one we use our Bird Rights to do a sign and trade with, getting the most value in return. We've argued and debated which of these two is the better player. I view them as sixes, so the best one to trade is the one we can get the most for. I don't think either of them are capable of leading a team to a Championship, but the are both solid players and a Championship Team needs stars and solid complementary players.

Then, we look to make some solid moves in the draft.

We let Mo run with the young guns, let them get the experience and opportunity to grow like many of us feel they can, then, use our cap space to add the missing pieces next year.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to get CP3 and go from there as many have suggested. However, I simply don't view this as a real likely scenario.

If Mo Williams was not always injured then I would be OK with the Jazz resigning him but the fact to the matter is he has been on the injured list for the majority of time the last 3 to 4 season's the Jazz needs a PG that is going to be on the floor running the team not spending all of his time on the injured list.

It looks like the Jazz are going to have to spend some money this summer just to get the team to the league minimumso let's hope they can find the kind free agent they say their looking for because they are going to have to bring someone in be it Jefferson, Milsap or another free agent that money has to be spent one way or the other.

In my mind there are injuries, then there are injuries. Take Boozer for example. If he had a hang nail he'd be out for two weeks and four manicures to fix it. Mo, on the other hand, like Marvin and Kanter now, had a legitimate injury requiring surgery. He came back and played in a minimum amount of time. I think in Utah because of John Stockton and Karl Malone playing injury free for so many years, we've become a little jaded in regards to injuries.

In reality injuries happen, just ask Rondo, Rose, Westbrook, D Williams, Rubio, and yes, Mo, who have all had injuries and missed games, in the last couple of years. These are all tough players who have or will do what is needed to rehab and return. Don't get me wrong. I don't think Mo is our guard of the future and would love to sign one better. However, until this happens he did enough last year to bring him back. Plus, he'd make one of the best back-ups in the league if we were to sign him, then bring in someone better. We've got the money to do this.

ptaz66 wrote:

In my mind there are injuries, then there are injuries. Take Boozer for example. If he had a hang nail he'd be out for two weeks and four manicures to fix it. Mo, on the other hand, like Marvin and Kanter now, had a legitimate injury requiring surgery. He came back and played in a minimum amount of time. I think in Utah because of John Stockton and Karl Malone playing injury free for so many years, we've become a little jaded in regards to injuries.

In reality injuries happen, just ask Rondo, Rose, Westbrook, D Williams, Rubio, and yes, Mo, who have all had injuries and missed games, in the last couple of years. These are all tough players who have or will do what is needed to rehab and return. Don't get me wrong. I don't think Mo is our guard of the future and would love to sign one better. However, until this happens he did enough last year to bring him back. Plus, he'd make one of the best back-ups in the league if we were to sign him, then bring in someone better. We've got the money to do this.

Yea, I still like Mo. Problem is, and Magnus in your words "it's not a matter of if, but when" Mo gets injured and misses significant time. Right as he was signed, I was all hopeful and Magnus came in with that gem that I personally just wanted to ignore and think of the glorious playoffs we were going to go strolling into. But, Magnus was absolutely right. Mo just so happens to be one of those guys who gets injured and misses serious time. The dreaded IP word.......injury prone. Seems to me it's always the smaller body part injuries too, thumb, wrist...

It'd be pretty sweet to have Mo as our backup PG, not off the bench scorer but backup PG. He could thrive there.

Mutangclan wrote:

ptaz66 wrote:

In my mind there are injuries, then there are injuries. Take Boozer for example. If he had a hang nail he'd be out for two weeks and four manicures to fix it. Mo, on the other hand, like Marvin and Kanter now, had a legitimate injury requiring surgery. He came back and played in a minimum amount of time. I think in Utah because of John Stockton and Karl Malone playing injury free for so many years, we've become a little jaded in regards to injuries.

In reality injuries happen, just ask Rondo, Rose, Westbrook, D Williams, Rubio, and yes, Mo, who have all had injuries and missed games, in the last couple of years. These are all tough players who have or will do what is needed to rehab and return. Don't get me wrong. I don't think Mo is our guard of the future and would love to sign one better. However, until this happens he did enough last year to bring him back. Plus, he'd make one of the best back-ups in the league if we were to sign him, then bring in someone better. We've got the money to do this.

Yea, I still like Mo. Problem is, and Magnus in your words "it's not a matter of if, but when" Mo gets injured and misses significant time. Right as he was signed, I was all hopeful and Magnus came in with that gem that I personally just wanted to ignore and think of the glorious playoffs we were going to go strolling into. But, Magnus was absolutely right. Mo just so happens to be one of those guys who gets injured and misses serious time. The dreaded IP word.......injury prone. Seems to me it's always the smaller body part injuries too, thumb, wrist...

It'd be pretty sweet to have Mo as our backup PG, not off the bench scorer but backup PG. He could thrive there.

INJURE PRONE that say's everything that need's to be said about Mo IMO, as a back-up I guess he would be OK but I don't see him signing with the Jazz as a back-up I really don't. Maybe Mo at a bargain price the Jazz sign him then but I think they would be better off looking at one of the free agents PG this summer over him.

Thought this was interesting from Chad Ford....

@chadfordinsider wrote:

Re-draft top five in 2010: 1. Paul George 2. John Wall 3. Greg Monroe 4. Derrick Favors 5. Gordon Hayward

Not sure I agree with George being #1, I'd probably still go with Wall.

Everybody is super high on George right now, but I'm seeing the second coming of Andre Igoudala. Not that that is a bad thing, Iggy is a great player, but if he's the best you got you're probably not a contender. The key to the Pacers run this post season has been the re-emergence of Roy Hibbert, not Paul George.

I thought it was interesting that he has Favors and Hayward in the Top 5 over guys like Demarcus Cousins, Larry Sanders, Ed Davis, Patrick Patterson, and Grevis Vasquez.

I don't dissagree, I'd absolutely take Favors and Hayward over any of those guys, but I'm surprised to see a guy like Ford put that out there.

TheMagnus wrote:

Thought this was interesting from Chad Ford....

@chadfordinsider wrote:

Re-draft top five in 2010: 1. Paul George 2. John Wall 3. Greg Monroe 4. Derrick Favors 5. Gordon Hayward

Next year you could see D fav at 1# after the Mailman is done! Yes i think he can be that good. Kid has some fire he just needs the right people around to throw a little gas on him! Most improved and DFPOTY. Karl lites the fuse and jerry throws on the gas? Corbin gets out of the way, lol BOOM!!!!

TheMagnus wrote:

Thought this was interesting from Chad Ford....

@chadfordinsider wrote:

Re-draft top five in 2010: 1. Paul George 2. John Wall 3. Greg Monroe 4. Derrick Favors 5. Gordon Hayward

Not sure I agree with George being #1, I'd probably still go with Wall.

Everybody is super high on George right now, but I'm seeing the second coming of Andre Igoudala. Not that that is a bad thing, Iggy is a great player, but if he's the best you got you're probably not a contender. The key to the Pacers run this post season has been the re-emergence of Roy Hibbert, not Paul George.

I thought it was interesting that he has Favors and Hayward in the Top 5 over guys like Demarcus Cousins, Larry Sanders, Ed Davis, Patrick Patterson, and Grevis Vasquez.

I don't dissagree, I'd absolutely take Favors and Hayward over any of those guys, but I'm surprised to see a guy like Ford put that out there.

Yea me too, they usually dont acknowledge our type of guys. But, I dont see George as Iggy, that guy can shoot already. Watching this series(and it's the first series of actually watched w/o Utah in it in forever), George literally does it all. I'd absolutely say he was #1 in that draft, and right now you'd have to say he's approaching superstar level. The difference? Dude plays in Indiana instead of NY etc.
Now, if the Pacers win tonight? Whoa.....

I'd say the key to this series is a bunch of guys that all try to play tough Defense (key word TRY, not DO) and most importantly Vogel puts a balanced team out there. They all do things they help themselves and their teammates.

If Frank Vogel coached the Jazz with the same exact philosophies, we would have been in the playoffs easily.

dongibby wrote:

Mutangclan wrote:

ptaz66 wrote:

In my mind there are injuries, then there are injuries. Take Boozer for example. If he had a hang nail he'd be out for two weeks and four manicures to fix it. Mo, on the other hand, like Marvin and Kanter now, had a legitimate injury requiring surgery. He came back and played in a minimum amount of time. I think in Utah because of John Stockton and Karl Malone playing injury free for so many years, we've become a little jaded in regards to injuries.

In reality injuries happen, just ask Rondo, Rose, Westbrook, D Williams, Rubio, and yes, Mo, who have all had injuries and missed games, in the last couple of years. These are all tough players who have or will do what is needed to rehab and return. Don't get me wrong. I don't think Mo is our guard of the future and would love to sign one better. However, until this happens he did enough last year to bring him back. Plus, he'd make one of the best back-ups in the league if we were to sign him, then bring in someone better. We've got the money to do this.

Yea, I still like Mo. Problem is, and Magnus in your words "it's not a matter of if, but when" Mo gets injured and misses significant time. Right as he was signed, I was all hopeful and Magnus came in with that gem that I personally just wanted to ignore and think of the glorious playoffs we were going to go strolling into. But, Magnus was absolutely right. Mo just so happens to be one of those guys who gets injured and misses serious time. The dreaded IP word.......injury prone. Seems to me it's always the smaller body part injuries too, thumb, wrist...

It'd be pretty sweet to have Mo as our backup PG, not off the bench scorer but backup PG. He could thrive there.

INJURE PRONE that say's everything that need's to be said about Mo IMO, as a back-up I guess he would be OK but I don't see him signing with the Jazz as a back-up I really don't. Maybe Mo at a bargain price the Jazz sign him then but I think they would be better off looking at one of the free agents PG this summer over him.

As I look at the free agents, there's CP3 who nobody really believes will come to Utah. Then, there are two Restricted Free Agents in Teague and Jennings, who would be decent starters. After those three you find a group of guys where MO fits in who would ideally be really good back-ups. Being basketball is a team sport where players consistently improve by staying and playing together for multiple years, I'm a fan of staying the course, unless there is an obvious upgrade out there. This year unfortunately there appears to be only three albeit, unlikely options.

I think both of our thoughts on this have validity. I think its the proverbial two sides of the coin. Which side comes up won't be determined until the season is over. I wish we had more options.

ptaz66 wrote:

dongibby wrote:

Mutangclan wrote:

ptaz66 wrote:

In my mind there are injuries, then there are injuries. Take Boozer for example. If he had a hang nail he'd be out for two weeks and four manicures to fix it. Mo, on the other hand, like Marvin and Kanter now, had a legitimate injury requiring surgery. He came back and played in a minimum amount of time. I think in Utah because of John Stockton and Karl Malone playing injury free for so many years, we've become a little jaded in regards to injuries.

In reality injuries happen, just ask Rondo, Rose, Westbrook, D Williams, Rubio, and yes, Mo, who have all had injuries and missed games, in the last couple of years. These are all tough players who have or will do what is needed to rehab and return. Don't get me wrong. I don't think Mo is our guard of the future and would love to sign one better. However, until this happens he did enough last year to bring him back. Plus, he'd make one of the best back-ups in the league if we were to sign him, then bring in someone better. We've got the money to do this.

Yea, I still like Mo. Problem is, and Magnus in your words "it's not a matter of if, but when" Mo gets injured and misses significant time. Right as he was signed, I was all hopeful and Magnus came in with that gem that I personally just wanted to ignore and think of the glorious playoffs we were going to go strolling into. But, Magnus was absolutely right. Mo just so happens to be one of those guys who gets injured and misses serious time. The dreaded IP word.......injury prone. Seems to me it's always the smaller body part injuries too, thumb, wrist...

It'd be pretty sweet to have Mo as our backup PG, not off the bench scorer but backup PG. He could thrive there.

INJURE PRONE that say's everything that need's to be said about Mo IMO, as a back-up I guess he would be OK but I don't see him signing with the Jazz as a back-up I really don't. Maybe Mo at a bargain price the Jazz sign him then but I think they would be better off looking at one of the free agents PG this summer over him.

As I look at the free agents, there's CP3 who nobody really believes will come to Utah. Then, there are two Restricted Free Agents in Teague and Jennings, who would be decent starters. After those three you find a group of guys where MO fits in who would ideally be really good back-ups. Being basketball is a team sport where players consistently improve by staying and playing together for multiple years, I'm a fan of staying the course, unless there is an obvious upgrade out there. This year unfortunately there appears to be only three albeit, unlikely options.

I think both of our thoughts on this have validity. I think its the proverbial two sides of the coin. Which side comes up won't be determined until the season is over. I wish we had more options.

I think Jose Calderon, Jarrett Jack & Beno Udrih are all guy's that team's could sign as a starting PG, Calderon and Jack have shown that they both are starting caliber players without a doubt where as Udrih is not a guy that is going to put a lot of point on the board but know's how to get a team into their offense and can't pass the ball and get it where it needs to be for a player to be in scoring position. I think a guy like Udrih would be a good teacher if the Jazz land a PG in the draft and would not get upset if he get's overtaken in the process.

I also think a guy like J.J Redick could step in and be a starting PG he is an all-around player and I think fit's into what a Jazz player is suppose to be all about, a few other guys I think could be nice as a back-up that is Jerryd Bayless he played pretty well last season after being traded to the Grizz and was a big part of them going as deep into the playoffs as they went. I have already talked about Monta Ellis as a back-up if he really is wanting to play for a winning team (like it has been stated) then he is going to have to be willing to take on a different role, now if that end's up being on a team like OKC, Grizz or any of the other team's that are title contenders that remains to be seen but the Jazz should at least take a shot at him and see where he really is standing.

dongibby wrote:

ptaz66 wrote:

dongibby wrote:

Mutangclan wrote:

ptaz66 wrote:

In my mind there are injuries, then there are injuries. Take Boozer for example. If he had a hang nail he'd be out for two weeks and four manicures to fix it. Mo, on the other hand, like Marvin and Kanter now, had a legitimate injury requiring surgery. He came back and played in a minimum amount of time. I think in Utah because of John Stockton and Karl Malone playing injury free for so many years, we've become a little jaded in regards to injuries.

In reality injuries happen, just ask Rondo, Rose, Westbrook, D Williams, Rubio, and yes, Mo, who have all had injuries and missed games, in the last couple of years. These are all tough players who have or will do what is needed to rehab and return. Don't get me wrong. I don't think Mo is our guard of the future and would love to sign one better. However, until this happens he did enough last year to bring him back. Plus, he'd make one of the best back-ups in the league if we were to sign him, then bring in someone better. We've got the money to do this.

Yea, I still like Mo. Problem is, and Magnus in your words "it's not a matter of if, but when" Mo gets injured and misses significant time. Right as he was signed, I was all hopeful and Magnus came in with that gem that I personally just wanted to ignore and think of the glorious playoffs we were going to go strolling into. But, Magnus was absolutely right. Mo just so happens to be one of those guys who gets injured and misses serious time. The dreaded IP word.......injury prone. Seems to me it's always the smaller body part injuries too, thumb, wrist...

It'd be pretty sweet to have Mo as our backup PG, not off the bench scorer but backup PG. He could thrive there.

INJURE PRONE that say's everything that need's to be said about Mo IMO, as a back-up I guess he would be OK but I don't see him signing with the Jazz as a back-up I really don't. Maybe Mo at a bargain price the Jazz sign him then but I think they would be better off looking at one of the free agents PG this summer over him.

As I look at the free agents, there's CP3 who nobody really believes will come to Utah. Then, there are two Restricted Free Agents in Teague and Jennings, who would be decent starters. After those three you find a group of guys where MO fits in who would ideally be really good back-ups. Being basketball is a team sport where players consistently improve by staying and playing together for multiple years, I'm a fan of staying the course, unless there is an obvious upgrade out there. This year unfortunately there appears to be only three albeit, unlikely options.

I think both of our thoughts on this have validity. I think its the proverbial two sides of the coin. Which side comes up won't be determined until the season is over. I wish we had more options.

I think Jose Calderon, Jarrett Jack & Beno Udrih are all guy's that team's could sign as a starting PG, Calderon and Jack have shown that they both are starting caliber players without a doubt where as Udrih is not a guy that is going to put a lot of point on the board but know's how to get a team into their offense and can't pass the ball and get it where it needs to be for a player to be in scoring position. I think a guy like Udrih would be a good teacher if the Jazz land a PG in the draft and would not get upset if he get's overtaken in the process.

I also think a guy like J.J Redick could step in and be a starting PG he is an all-around player and I think fit's into what a Jazz player is suppose to be all about, a few other guys I think could be nice as a back-up that is Jerryd Bayless he played pretty well last season after being traded to the Grizz and was a big part of them going as deep into the playoffs as they went. I have already talked about Monta Ellis as a back-up if he really is wanting to play for a winning team (like it has been stated) then he is going to have to be willing to take on a different role, now if that end's up being on a team like OKC, Grizz or any of the other team's that are title contenders that remains to be seen but the Jazz should at least take a shot at him and see where he really is standing.

Here are some assessements which echo my sentiments:

Jose Calderon: Grantland’s Bill Simmons loves to discuss the basketball version of baseball’s designated hitter concept: players who are still capable of producing at a high level offensively but because of their defensive limitations teams would likely prefer to hide them on the defensive end, if possible. Know this: Jose Calderon would be a great designated hitter. Good grief, just look at that shot chart! The Spanish native is wonderful in the half-court setting, expertly passing the ball, rarely turning it over, and an absolutely lethal spot-up shooter opponents do not dare leave open. On the other end of the floor, however, the 31-year-old just does not have the lateral quickness to keep up with or stay in front of the league’s legion of lightning quick point guards. That could obviously be problematic if Calderon is your starting point guard. But in a reserve role on the right team, Calderon can be the type of player that could play a pivotal role on a club looking to make a deep playoff run.

Jarrett Jack: Jarrett Jack was a godsend for Golden State this year, providing them with the off-the-dribble playmaking they needed to spark both their bench and their small-ball lineups. Jack’s game is unorthodox in this all-efficiency-everything age, as exemplified by his affinity for midrange attempts and long twos. What makes him unique, however, is his ability to hit those shots at a high rate. He’s more of a combo guard than a pure point and his pick-and-roll defense can be head-scratching on occasion, but Jack was massively important to the Warriors’ playoff run and, should he be allowed to reprise that sort of reserve role either back in the Bay Area or elsewhere, there’s no reason to think he can’t deliver similar dividends once again.

Beno Udrih: Udrih, who turns 31 in July, has often been disregarded as yet another blank, boring point guard, but he’s a decent NBA player with a good shooting touch. The pull-up jumper, in particular, is his darling — for better or worse, in sickness and in health, for as long as he and his jumper shall live. As a result of that commitment, 63 percent of Udrih’s field-goal attempts this season came either from mid-range or just inside the paint (but outside the restricted area). That’s fine as long as he continues to convert those shots at such a sound rate (he made 44.6 percent of those attempts overall while splitting time with Milwaukee and Orlando), but Udrih’s pull-up style tends not to draw the defensive attention necessary to enable quick feeds or earn free-throw attempts. Essentially, he’s a quality scoring option off the dribble without any of the tangential benefits of driving — a reality that makes him fairly valuable but pretty clearly limited.

Mo Williams: The 30-year-old was decent as a starter during an injury-plagued season for Utah but the harsh reality of today’s NBA is that ‘decent’ point guard play just isn’t going to be good enough to hang on to a starting job for long – there are just too many talented players at the position, both currently and coming up through the ranks, for teams to stick with the status quo when they’re only receiving average production. Williams can still provide valuable spacing with his shooting ability and he’s a – here comes that word again – decent enough passer, but his deficiencies in other areas (notably turnovers, board work and defense) make him a much better option when assuming a more limited role.

All four of these guys are decent, but as the author points out decent isn't good enough. The only reason I advocate for Mo is the learning curve. Average or decent point guards tend to struggle their first year with a team. Harris did it, Mo struggeld out of the gate etc. I'm not enamored with Mo as the starter, but I expect he'll improve a little this year, whereas a the other guys mentioned will face the first year learning curve, not be any better, are not the long term answer, and in the end will probably leave us having the same conversation next season as we look to find someone good enough to be the long term answer.

ptaz66 wrote:

All four of these guys are decent, but as the author points out decent isn't good enough. The only reason I advocate for Mo is the learning curve. Average or decent point guards tend to struggle their first year with a team. Harris did it, Mo struggeld out of the gate etc. I'm not enamored with Mo as the starter, but I expect he'll improve a little this year, whereas a the other guys mentioned will face the first year learning curve, not be any better, are not the long term answer, and in the end will probably leave us having the same conversation next season as we look to find someone good enough to be the long term answer.

Yea pretty much agree. But here is what I'm thinking now. Last year I expected everyone to struggle, take awhile to get going, and Mo definitely never got into the flow. But now realistically, with the new starters and other teammates, I guess we have to expect Mo to struggle again right? Ugh. Hoping we get Shroeder AND, he's good enough to look at as our future. So time isn't wasted with all our youth.

Mutangclan wrote:

ptaz66 wrote:

All four of these guys are decent, but as the author points out decent isn't good enough. The only reason I advocate for Mo is the learning curve. Average or decent point guards tend to struggle their first year with a team. Harris did it, Mo struggeld out of the gate etc. I'm not enamored with Mo as the starter, but I expect he'll improve a little this year, whereas a the other guys mentioned will face the first year learning curve, not be any better, are not the long term answer, and in the end will probably leave us having the same conversation next season as we look to find someone good enough to be the long term answer.

Yea pretty much agree. But here is what I'm thinking now. Last year I expected everyone to struggle, take awhile to get going, and Mo definitely never got into the flow. But now realistically, with the new starters and other teammates, I guess we have to expect Mo to struggle again right? Ugh. Hoping we get Shroeder AND, he's good enough to look at as our future. So time isn't wasted with all our youth.

That would be the ideal situation drafting a PG that can step right in and be the starter and from what a lot of people are saying Dennis Schroeder could very well be that type of player, I would not have any problem at all if the Jazz was to run with the Young guys this coming season NONE WHAT SO EVER I think it is time that the Jazz take's the next step in the rebuilding process let the Young's Gun's run with the team and let things fall where they may Win, Lose or Draw.

So who here is going to play the guy with the vendetta against the front office next season when the Jazz pass up on Schroeder with the first pick in favor of some big, tall, slow, lumbering white guy who has "a ton of potential" but is a "project" that "just needs work to refine his offensive game"?

thejazzkickazz wrote:

So who here is going to play the guy with the vendetta against the front office next season when the Jazz pass up on Schroeder with the first pick in favor of some big, tall, slow, lumbering white guy who has "a ton of potential" but is a "project" that "just needs work to refine his offensive game"?

Ohh, I think we already have a couple guys lined up for a Front Office Vendetta, but I doubt it's over draft picks. At the slightest hint of trouble the Fire Ty crowd is going to drown out any minor discontent over draft choices.

But lets pretend like that won't happen...

...working on it...almost there...whew. That was tougher than I thought it would be. Now, what were we talking about?

TheMagnus wrote:

thejazzkickazz wrote:

So who here is going to play the guy with the vendetta against the front office next season when the Jazz pass up on Schroeder with the first pick in favor of some big, tall, slow, lumbering white guy who has "a ton of potential" but is a "project" that "just needs work to refine his offensive game"?

Ohh, I think we already have a couple guys lined up for a Front Office Vendetta, but I doubt it's over draft picks. At the slightest hint of trouble the Fire Ty crowd is going to drown out any minor discontent over draft choices.

But lets pretend like that won't happen...

...working on it...almost there...whew. That was tougher than I thought it would be. Now, what were we talking about?

Luckily, as a card carrying member of the FTCC, I think the chances one of our draft picks are either Schroeder, Larkin or Kabongo or even Burke, are at about 85%. All of which have potential to be starting quality PGs. So we should be ok.

ptaz66 wrote:

Here are some assessements which echo my sentiments:

Jose Calderon: Grantland’s Bill Simmons loves to discuss the basketball version of baseball’s designated hitter concept: players who are still capable of producing at a high level offensively but because of their defensive limitations teams would likely prefer to hide them on the defensive end, if possible. Know this: Jose Calderon would be a great designated hitter. Good grief, just look at that shot chart! The Spanish native is wonderful in the half-court setting, expertly passing the ball, rarely turning it over, and an absolutely lethal spot-up shooter opponents do not dare leave open. On the other end of the floor, however, the 31-year-old just does not have the lateral quickness to keep up with or stay in front of the league’s legion of lightning quick point guards. That could obviously be problematic if Calderon is your starting point guard. But in a reserve role on the right team, Calderon can be the type of player that could play a pivotal role on a club looking to make a deep playoff run.

Jarrett Jack: Jarrett Jack was a godsend for Golden State this year, providing them with the off-the-dribble playmaking they needed to spark both their bench and their small-ball lineups. Jack’s game is unorthodox in this all-efficiency-everything age, as exemplified by his affinity for midrange attempts and long twos. What makes him unique, however, is his ability to hit those shots at a high rate. He’s more of a combo guard than a pure point and his pick-and-roll defense can be head-scratching on occasion, but Jack was massively important to the Warriors’ playoff run and, should he be allowed to reprise that sort of reserve role either back in the Bay Area or elsewhere, there’s no reason to think he can’t deliver similar dividends once again.

Beno Udrih: Udrih, who turns 31 in July, has often been disregarded as yet another blank, boring point guard, but he’s a decent NBA player with a good shooting touch. The pull-up jumper, in particular, is his darling — for better or worse, in sickness and in health, for as long as he and his jumper shall live. As a result of that commitment, 63 percent of Udrih’s field-goal attempts this season came either from mid-range or just inside the paint (but outside the restricted area). That’s fine as long as he continues to convert those shots at such a sound rate (he made 44.6 percent of those attempts overall while splitting time with Milwaukee and Orlando), but Udrih’s pull-up style tends not to draw the defensive attention necessary to enable quick feeds or earn free-throw attempts. Essentially, he’s a quality scoring option off the dribble without any of the tangential benefits of driving — a reality that makes him fairly valuable but pretty clearly limited.

Mo Williams: The 30-year-old was decent as a starter during an injury-plagued season for Utah but the harsh reality of today’s NBA is that ‘decent’ point guard play just isn’t going to be good enough to hang on to a starting job for long – there are just too many talented players at the position, both currently and coming up through the ranks, for teams to stick with the status quo when they’re only receiving average production. Williams can still provide valuable spacing with his shooting ability and he’s a – here comes that word again – decent enough passer, but his deficiencies in other areas (notably turnovers, board work and defense) make him a much better option when assuming a more limited role.

All four of these guys are decent, but as the author points out decent isn't good enough. The only reason I advocate for Mo is the learning curve. Average or decent point guards tend to struggle their first year with a team. Harris did it, Mo struggeld out of the gate etc. I'm not enamored with Mo as the starter, but I expect he'll improve a little this year, whereas a the other guys mentioned will face the first year learning curve, not be any better, are not the long term answer, and in the end will probably leave us having the same conversation next season as we look to find someone good enough to be the long term answer.

Wait. We've got a couple of decent first round picks. I hope we aren't looking at higher ones in the near future. Our roster is now LITTERED with high picks (opposite the Jazz of the Stockton/Malone era, who had NO high draft choices on their teams)...if we can't get Chris Paul (and we can't), let's go with Schroeder/Larkin, either or both. They sound like the highest upside players we are likely to see where we draft for the forseeable future-either one could end up a top-tier starter, the limitations/downside of both players are more speculative than their obvious virtues. Why go with mediocrity like Teague or Jennings, who have proven and seemingly insurmountable limitations??

What I'm saying is, STRIKE NOW! Our "long-term answer at PG" is right freakin' there: The mini-Tony Parker or the Rondo-lite. I think both of them are going to be better by far than the Mo/Jose/Jennings/Teague/Udrih group.

The only reasons EITHER of them are going to last till 14 is a) the presence of more 'famous' PGs in Burk and Carter-Williams and b) the fact that most of the teams picking 1-13 don't need a PG. (also the "objections" noted below)

I keep seeing mock drafts, perhaps somewhat dated, that show Shcroeder available at 14 and Larkin lasting till 21. I don't think Larkin's going to drop that far, frankly. But if Shcroeder's gone, I'd want the Jazz to pick Larkin at 14 and take the best big/wing available at 21. These guys are THAT good. I keep hearing scouts, GMs, coaches quoted (anonymously, for the most part) as saying one or the other is "Better than Burk or MC-W." and "Top 5 except he (didn't play D1) (is too short)." Neither of those objections are especially relevant.

PG is the ONE position the Jazz can dramatically improve themselves in this draft, and coincedentally, it's a position of need. They need to jump on it. We whiffed last year when we couldn't trade up to get semi-local kid Lilliard last year, let's not get to strike three.

Oh, and one last consideration. It is a FACT that the Jazz will have money they HAVE to spend. There are better FA options elsewhere than PG this year. It just all fits together, man.

thejazzkickazz wrote:

So who here is going to play the guy with the vendetta against the front office next season when the Jazz pass up on Schroeder with the first pick in favor of some big, tall, slow, lumbering white guy who has "a ton of potential" but is a "project" that "just needs work to refine his offensive game"?

Plumlee or Zeller? Not so "slow and lumbering" actually. Both tested quite athletic in the combine, as did "project" Steve Adams...who's only a project because he's from New Zealand and spent his formative years in the U-16 Wombat Strangling League or Junior (Non-Lethal) Rugby.

I like all three of these guys (and Len), but NOT AS MUCH AS LARKIN AND SCHROEDER. I started looking at this years' draft after following the college season not at all, and with expectations tempered by the omnipresent "This is a bad draft" mantra. And I'd never even heard of either of these kids.

Probably because I hadn't, I sought out a little more info, and I sincerely hope our FO has done the same because these are two gems. Two draft day steals, ready and waiting.

I think I like Larkin even more than Schroeder. He's like a more athletic, faster, Chris Paul. (And I don't think the 1 inch difference in height separates "Chris Paul" from "too short to play") He's exhibited passing skills, has a sick handle, is a great shooter (including that apparently non-patented Tony Parker pullup-and-pop 10-15 footer), is faster than anybody else and has shown maturity and leadership skills. Oh, and that 'balance' thing. "Too short"? Whatever.

As for "too short to defend NBA PGs"...how many of the current crop of NBA PGs will post somebody up? That number is awful close to 0, so that's a non-issue. He might get passed over (literally) once in a while, but he's going to be disruptive and 'stay in front of his man' as well as any larger player. I just don't think the defense issue IS an issue.

And with Schroeder, it seems like, instead of saying "We should rank this guy higher", people are saying "What is the reason this guy isn't ranked higher?" and trying to come up with something. These 'reasons' are sometimes clearly contrived, as in "He didn't excel in the Grerman League last year." ummm...yeah, he did., or "He needs to work on his shooting." Sorry, confusing him with Rondo-shot 47% and 85% from the line., or "Needs to learn to facilitate." I dunno about this, although he has been described as a "pass first" PG. Maybe he doesn't pass in a sufficiently facilitatory manner or something. Anyway, fast, quick, great motor, great wingspan, huge hands, loves to play D...if he isn't Rondo (and he isn't), he's sure starting out with the raw material...and that's something rare. Geez, a strong defending PG...what would that be like?

Haven't read much about his personality or anything, but his sport of choice as a kid was...skateboarding. I'm pretty sure the path from "German skate punk" to "NBA point guard" is relatively untrodden.

Amen brother, say it again. I'm with you 100%.

Although now, it seems Larkin is creeping up, and I think it's less likely we have Schroeder and Larkin both available at 14 and 21. So I'd like to get one, today I lean toward Schroeder actually, though it was Larkin yesterday.
If we grab one of them at 14, I'm not sure who else I'd want at 21 if the other is gone. But if it's a big, I love Kabongo late at 46. What a perfect risk for a young team.

ps) I also like Don's idea (from Monday) of picking up Reddick. He's become a good, smart, disciplined player-good shooter, and he had excellent assist numbers while he was with Orlando last year. A good bench contributor. Also, Kyle Freakin' Korver! He would come back in a minute (I think), and he was solid with Atlanta when healthy last year.

Mutangclan wrote:

Amen brother, say it again. I'm with you 100%.

Although now, it seems Larkin is creeping up, and I think it's less likely we have Schroeder and Larkin both available at 14 and 21. So I'd like to get one, today I lean toward Schroeder actually, though it was Larkin yesterday.
If we grab one of them at 14, I'm not sure who else I'd want at 21 if the other is gone. But if it's a big, I love Kabongo late at 46. What a perfect risk for a young team.

I know that the Jazz need a PG but if Zeller is at 14 I don't know that they walk away from that and look to get the PG they need at 21 but I think if Schoreder is there they take him for sure. If there is a big like Plumlee, Kelly Olynyk, Rudy Gobert or Gorgui Dieng at 21 then they pick one and then picking up Kabongo with the 46th pick would be a very good draft for the Jazz IMO.