Best free agents of 2013

MTJazz wrote:

Mutangclan wrote:

Drool.

I truly could care less about Bayless, Collison and Jennings though. I'd be more depressed than excited with those 3 brought on board. Gerald Henderson, Gary Neal, Mozgov and Splitter would be great additions, with only Gerald as a possible starter hopefully.
Adding Iggy or Josh Smith would put us right in the middle of the playoffs next year.

Hmmm. The "Go Big or Go Home" strategy? I will be shocked, (but pleasantly) if the Jazz FO rolls this way. In another thread I waxed bored-Monday philosophic on the "Hold Your Cards Go Slow" approach, which is actually what I think the Jazz are gonna do. They are plotting 2-4 years out, not next season in my opinion. But who wouldn't want CP3 hitting GH on the break, or barring that 'cause everyone is covered, pulling up for the short J-and-one? Dreams are good.

Sure, of course you're probably right. Jazz mo is never go big. BUT, in our Jazz lifetimes, we've never had this kind of money and assets. And also have a real need. It's definitely more likely than ever.

Only thing I'd disagree with though, is the 2-4 years out. I think they see the OKC and Pacers etc, who while young are now threatening in the playoffs. I think the real goal is to make noise NEXT season in the playoffs, but also mostly have the pieces in place to start the push. I dont think Jazz will go crazy and over pay, so if thats the only option to them, then no dice, and I think there will be yet ANOTHER wait "till next season" for us.

There's got to be a like 3 players the FO already has in mind to target too, so thats something to think about.

Dennis Schroeder looks to be the best defensive point guard in the draft. He's just all over the ball like a Rondo, but needs grooming on his shot. With his quicks he can get to rim and dish, but isn't really proven yet- being from Germany. He's slated, according to the mock draft I've looked at, as being picked before Utahs 14th pick. Interestingly, the mock draft shows the Jazz picking two sg's as their first two choices... which won't happen imo. Mock drafts are just speculation anyway- unless there's clear-cut talent above the rest. This years draft talent looks underwhelming. I can't see any bigs that're better now, or have more potential than Favors and Kanter ... but I'm just going off youtube and draft analysis of what the so called experts say are their strengths and shortcomings.

Calderon:

Do it. Unless we get a top 3 pick, or Chris Paul is somehow miraculously swayed, this is our dude. His assist ratio is the highest in the league for point guards who average more than 29 minutes per game. His true shooting percentage is the highest at his position, and his turnover ratio is right up there with the NBA's best.

We get a rookie like Kabongo or some other POSSIBLE stud, and he can backup our starter, Jose, for the next two years at least. Calderon is exactly what this team needs. We have 4 other scorers and defenders, but look at that, Calderon is a sniper out deep too. Perfect.

And hey, say we dont get a rookie worth his salt this draft. We still have Jose who absolutely can lead this team for the next 3 years at an elite level.

Man, I'm ready for the draft. Maybe we strike lottery gold, and everything gets crazy. But more than likely, we'll pick at 14. So maybe we luck out with Kabongo. That wouldn't be too bad, but I think he, or any other PG we end up with will absolutely need some seasoning.

If Utah goes after a vet PG, who do you guys want of these, the top 5? And, would you want Mo over any of them.

Calderon/Unrestricted
Jack/Unrestricted
Jennings/Restricted
Teague/Restricted
MoWill/Unrestricted

Personally, I really dont want Jennings, though he may be most talented. I like Jack, but I'd take Teague. First it was going to be Calderon but I didn't even realize that even in that offense in ATL, Teague avg'd the same assists as Calderon. Jose will probably come cheaper, which I wouldn't mind. But Teague could actually be considered the franchise PG. With that though, I dont think ATL lets him go.

SO!! I want steady, court leader, pass first for our scorers Calderon for the next 4 years or so. Though really, if Utah actually for once made a splash, and got any of those 4, I'd be ecstatic.

No Mo no mo from this group.

Mutangclan wrote:

Man, I'm ready for the draft. Maybe we strike lottery gold, and everything gets crazy. But more than likely, we'll pick at 14. So maybe we luck out with Kabongo. That wouldn't be too bad, but I think he, or any other PG we end up with will absolutely need some seasoning.

If Utah goes after a vet PG, who do you guys want of these, the top 5? And, would you want Mo over any of them.

Calderon/Unrestricted
Jack/Unrestricted
Jennings/Restricted
Teague/Restricted
MoWill/Unrestricted

Personally, I really dont want Jennings, though he may be most talented. I like Jack, but I'd take Teague. First it was going to be Calderon but I didn't even realize that even in that offense in ATL, Teague avg'd the same assists as Calderon. Jose will probably come cheaper, which I wouldn't mind. But Teague could actually be considered the franchise PG. With that though, I dont think ATL lets him go.

SO!! I want steady, court leader, pass first for our scorers Calderon for the next 4 years or so. Though really, if Utah actually for once made a splash, and got any of those 4, I'd be ecstatic.

No Mo no mo from this group.

I like Calderon just fine, but I'm still all over making a run at Tyreke Evans first and foremost. Is he a "pure point"? Nah. But he is a good distributor, and coupled up with a Gordon and/or Alec, would be just fine.

zero24gravity wrote:

Mutangclan wrote:

Man, I'm ready for the draft. Maybe we strike lottery gold, and everything gets crazy. But more than likely, we'll pick at 14. So maybe we luck out with Kabongo. That wouldn't be too bad, but I think he, or any other PG we end up with will absolutely need some seasoning.

If Utah goes after a vet PG, who do you guys want of these, the top 5? And, would you want Mo over any of them.

Calderon/Unrestricted
Jack/Unrestricted
Jennings/Restricted
Teague/Restricted
MoWill/Unrestricted

Personally, I really dont want Jennings, though he may be most talented. I like Jack, but I'd take Teague. First it was going to be Calderon but I didn't even realize that even in that offense in ATL, Teague avg'd the same assists as Calderon. Jose will probably come cheaper, which I wouldn't mind. But Teague could actually be considered the franchise PG. With that though, I dont think ATL lets him go.

SO!! I want steady, court leader, pass first for our scorers Calderon for the next 4 years or so. Though really, if Utah actually for once made a splash, and got any of those 4, I'd be ecstatic.

No Mo no mo from this group.

I like Calderon just fine, but I'm still all over making a run at Tyreke Evans first and foremost. Is he a "pure point"? Nah. But he is a good distributor, and coupled up with a Gordon and/or Alec, would be just fine.

I'm trying to think of an example of the last time there was a successful team with a starting PG, that was ball dominant, that wasn't really a point.....

Mutangclan wrote:

I'm trying to think of an example of the last time there was a successful team with a starting PG, that was ball dominant, that wasn't really a point.....

I hear you, but the overall feeling is that the Jazz would be best suited building the team as a collective of well fitting puzzle peices (Denver, Memphis), as opposed to the superstar model. Just having a group of guys that fit well together, play hard defense & have specialty players who can get a certain job done, is the way the team is probably going to have to roll. A community approach of facilitating & getting everyone involved by having 2 or 3 guys who can pass the ball on the floor together is a model I can get behind.

zero24gravity wrote:

Mutangclan wrote:

I'm trying to think of an example of the last time there was a successful team with a starting PG, that was ball dominant, that wasn't really a point.....

I hear you, but the overall feeling is that the Jazz would be best suited building the team as a collective of well fitting puzzle peices (Denver, Memphis), as opposed to the superstar model. Just having a group of guys that fit well together, play hard defense & have specialty players who can get a certain job done, is the way the team is probably going to have to roll. A community approach of facilitating & getting everyone involved by having 2 or 3 guys who can pass the ball on the floor together is a model I can get behind.

Yea, sure I agree. As it is now, at best we have 4 Scottie Pippens on the team, and we're just looking for a 5th, and I like that idea. But teams that are built like that have Ty Lawson and Mike Conley or the old Pistons we've mentioned had Billups. 3 very much point oriented PG's.
I'm more inclined to think Tyreke need to play the 2 guard, kind of be a Joe Dumars with 1 and 2 guard skills, but still needs a guy to play the point. I really dont think Tyreke can play the 1 on this team. Maybe another, but not this one. We need a PG.

And I really can't think of any successful team ever that had a ball dominant PG that wasn't really a PG. Can you think of anyone?

Mutangclan wrote:

zero24gravity wrote:

Mutangclan wrote:

I'm trying to think of an example of the last time there was a successful team with a starting PG, that was ball dominant, that wasn't really a point.....

I hear you, but the overall feeling is that the Jazz would be best suited building the team as a collective of well fitting puzzle peices (Denver, Memphis), as opposed to the superstar model. Just having a group of guys that fit well together, play hard defense & have specialty players who can get a certain job done, is the way the team is probably going to have to roll. A community approach of facilitating & getting everyone involved by having 2 or 3 guys who can pass the ball on the floor together is a model I can get behind.

Yea, sure I agree. As it is now, at best we have 4 Scottie Pippens on the team, and we're just looking for a 5th, and I like that idea. But teams that are built like that have Ty Lawson and Mike Conley or the old Pistons we've mentioned had Billups. 3 very much point oriented PG's.
I'm more inclined to think Tyreke need to play the 2 guard, kind of be a Joe Dumars with 1 and 2 guard skills, but still needs a guy to play the point. I really dont think Tyreke can play the 1 on this team. Maybe another, but not this one. We need a PG.

And I really can't think of any successful team ever that had a ball dominant PG that wasn't really a PG. Can you think of anyone?

I've also said that keeping a guy like Mo to be the "point" (but really more of a spot up shooter, with Evans & Gordon handling the ball) and having Evans the SG spot would be great.

Q: a ball dominant PG that wasn't really a PG?
A: Kobe. He handles the ball way more than the "point" (until this year w/ Nash) on all his teams in terms of setting up the offense.

zero24gravity wrote:

Q: a ball dominant PG that wasn't really a PG?
A: Kobe. He handles the ball way more than the "point" (until this year w/ Nash) on all his teams in terms of setting up the offense.

Dominant yes, but Kobe was never a point guard and he always played with a PG. Not really the same thing since Kobe started at and played the 2 his entire career. Not to mention, you can't quite make a comparison with one of the greatest of all time, unless Tyreke was in that convo.

You're saying Tyreke start at the 1 tho, right? Thats my thought against it.

Mutangclan wrote:

zero24gravity wrote:

Q: a ball dominant PG that wasn't really a PG?
A: Kobe. He handles the ball way more than the "point" (until this year w/ Nash) on all his teams in terms of setting up the offense.

Dominant yes, but Kobe was never a point guard and he always played with a PG. Not really the same thing since Kobe started at and played the 2 his entire career. Not to mention, you can't quite make a comparison with one of the greatest of all time, unless Tyreke was in that convo.

You're saying Tyreke start at the 1 tho, right? Thats my thought against it.

Well, at the SG spot may be best, and would give the team more flexibilty about the style of point-man they need, since they wouldn't have to be a "true" PG if you had a good passing SG like Evans i.e. Mo). However, if there was nothing available other than a late 1st round rookie to turn the reins over to, and Evans was signed .... I'd be fine with him being the point in the short term. I don't think he's really a PG, I just think he gives amazing flexibility to the roster around him since he really can play 3 positions, inlcuding the point.

zero24gravity wrote:

Mutangclan wrote:

zero24gravity wrote:

Q: a ball dominant PG that wasn't really a PG?
A: Kobe. He handles the ball way more than the "point" (until this year w/ Nash) on all his teams in terms of setting up the offense.

Dominant yes, but Kobe was never a point guard and he always played with a PG. Not really the same thing since Kobe started at and played the 2 his entire career. Not to mention, you can't quite make a comparison with one of the greatest of all time, unless Tyreke was in that convo.

You're saying Tyreke start at the 1 tho, right? Thats my thought against it.

Well, at the SG spot may be best, and would give the team more flexibilty about the style of point-man they need, since they wouldn't have to be a "true" PG if you had a good passing SG like Evans i.e. Mo). However, if there was nothing available other than a late 1st round rookie to turn the reins over to, and Evans was signed .... I'd be fine with him being the point in the short term. I don't think he's really a PG, I just think he gives amazing flexibility to the roster around him since he really can play 3 positions, inlcuding the point.

Yea, agree with the first part and your last. He is flexible out there. Though I think I'd actually rather have Mo Williams than Tyreke though at the point.

Mutangclan wrote:

zero24gravity wrote:

Mutangclan wrote:

zero24gravity wrote:

Q: a ball dominant PG that wasn't really a PG?
A: Kobe. He handles the ball way more than the "point" (until this year w/ Nash) on all his teams in terms of setting up the offense.

Dominant yes, but Kobe was never a point guard and he always played with a PG. Not really the same thing since Kobe started at and played the 2 his entire career. Not to mention, you can't quite make a comparison with one of the greatest of all time, unless Tyreke was in that convo.

You're saying Tyreke start at the 1 tho, right? Thats my thought against it.

Well, at the SG spot may be best, and would give the team more flexibilty about the style of point-man they need, since they wouldn't have to be a "true" PG if you had a good passing SG like Evans i.e. Mo). However, if there was nothing available other than a late 1st round rookie to turn the reins over to, and Evans was signed .... I'd be fine with him being the point in the short term. I don't think he's really a PG, I just think he gives amazing flexibility to the roster around him since he really can play 3 positions, inlcuding the point.

Yea, agree with the first part and your last. He is flexible out there. Though I think I'd actually rather have Mo Williams than Tyreke though at the point.

As a guard combo, those two would play off of each other very well. Tyreke can drive & kick. Mo can spot up and not be soley responsible for setting up the offense. One of my major issues (outside of the injuries) with Mo is he looks to shoot too much. Playing off the ball a bit more would be good for him. Truth is, the only way I really want Mo back is if he is either in a 6th man role, or if there is a player (like Evans) out there that can take the ball out of Williams' hands a bit more.

I'd love to play tyrek at point gordy at the two Dc or MW at the 3 Favor @ Kanter. Sign MO and Foye and bring in JJ hicks cheap. Larkin at 21st and best player at 14th on board and second round. I want a big that can shoot lights out. Oh wait that'll be Kanter! OK i want a big to play top five D! Wait a minute thats Favors? OK i want a big that can do both that can go with those two. What about that Durant kid? KD here would spell many rings!

Andray Blatche mite be a good third big and i bet he'd come pretty cheap.

Andray Blatche mite be a good third big and i bet he'd come pretty cheap.

Blatche displayed a much more refined skill set, cutting back on inefficient jump shots and doing more damage inside, in his first season with Brooklyn.

Spin: Blatche shot a career-best 51.2 percent from the field and appeared in all 82 of the Nets' games (starting eight). Blatche earned a reputation as a bit of a head case during his seven years with the Wizards, but appears to have matured this season, as he accepted his bench role (19.0 minutes per game) and revived his career. Still just 26 years old, Blatche will be an unrestricted free agent this offseason, but he indicated he'd like to remain a Net. Since he was amnestied by the Wizards last offseason, Washington still owes him over $15 million over the next two years, and any contract he signs will detract from that total. Should Brooklyn opt to bring him back next season, Blatche would likely continue to back up All-Star Brook Lopez. However, given his improvement this season, a middling franchise in need of an athletic big man may give him a chance to start.

zero24gravity wrote:

Mutangclan wrote:

zero24gravity wrote:

Mutangclan wrote:

zero24gravity wrote:

Q: a ball dominant PG that wasn't really a PG?
A: Kobe. He handles the ball way more than the "point" (until this year w/ Nash) on all his teams in terms of setting up the offense.

Dominant yes, but Kobe was never a point guard and he always played with a PG. Not really the same thing since Kobe started at and played the 2 his entire career. Not to mention, you can't quite make a comparison with one of the greatest of all time, unless Tyreke was in that convo.

You're saying Tyreke start at the 1 tho, right? Thats my thought against it.

Well, at the SG spot may be best, and would give the team more flexibilty about the style of point-man they need, since they wouldn't have to be a "true" PG if you had a good passing SG like Evans i.e. Mo). However, if there was nothing available other than a late 1st round rookie to turn the reins over to, and Evans was signed .... I'd be fine with him being the point in the short term. I don't think he's really a PG, I just think he gives amazing flexibility to the roster around him since he really can play 3 positions, inlcuding the point.

Yea, agree with the first part and your last. He is flexible out there. Though I think I'd actually rather have Mo Williams than Tyreke though at the point.

As a guard combo, those two would play off of each other very well. Tyreke can drive & kick. Mo can spot up and not be soley responsible for setting up the offense. One of my major issues (outside of the injuries) with Mo is he looks to shoot too much. Playing off the ball a bit more would be good for him. Truth is, the only way I really want Mo back is if he is either in a 6th man role, or if there is a player (like Evans) out there that can take the ball out of Williams' hands a bit more.

I could see that. But then what about Burks? And Gordo is better at the 2 than 3, Foye is the best 3pt shooter of all of them.......hmmmm. I think thats why I lean so much to having a solid PG brought in.
And more than all that is that Gordo and Tyreke essentially do the same thing, except Gordo is a better outside shooter.

What I think it comes down to is this who would you want to play the SG position for the Jazz T Evens or G Hayward ? because that is where both of these guys play their best, I myself would take Hayward. I think if we are going to look at a guy that plays SG for the most part and move him to the PG then I would look at Monta Ellis the guy can play both positions at a very high level and is looking for a team that is a winning origination to be a part of going forward and I think the Jazz could be that team. The guy is an all-star and a leader just the kind of things the Jazz are in need of I think if the Jazz are going to take a shot at a big time free agent this is the guy.

Richardale wrote:

Andray Blatche mite be a good third big and i bet he'd come pretty cheap.

Blatche displayed a much more refined skill set, cutting back on inefficient jump shots and doing more damage inside, in his first season with Brooklyn.

Spin: Blatche shot a career-best 51.2 percent from the field and appeared in all 82 of the Nets' games (starting eight). Blatche earned a reputation as a bit of a head case during his seven years with the Wizards, but appears to have matured this season, as he accepted his bench role (19.0 minutes per game) and revived his career. Still just 26 years old, Blatche will be an unrestricted free agent this offseason, but he indicated he'd like to remain a Net. Since he was amnestied by the Wizards last offseason, Washington still owes him over $15 million over the next two years, and any contract he signs will detract from that total. Should Brooklyn opt to bring him back next season, Blatche would likely continue to back up All-Star Brook Lopez. However, given his improvement this season, a middling franchise in need of an athletic big man may give him a chance to start.

I would love to see the Jazz land Blatche I think the Kid is going to be a big time player in this league sooner or latter and I think it will be sooner. He would help make the Jazz have a very good 3 man rotation in the paint that I think would be able to compete against any team in the NBA.

zero24gravity wrote:

As a guard combo, those two would play off of each other very well. Tyreke can drive & kick. Mo can spot up and not be soley responsible for setting up the offense. One of my major issues (outside of the injuries) with Mo is he looks to shoot too much. Playing off the ball a bit more would be good for him. Truth is, the only way I really want Mo back is if he is either in a 6th man role, or if there is a player (like Evans) out there that can take the ball out of Williams' hands a bit more.

Here you go buddy:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1640259-utah-jazz-top-free-agent-target-at-every-position

also some interesting articles:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1640535-2013-nba-mock-draft-full-1st-round-predictions-with-potential-trades/page/15

http://bleacherreport.com/tb/daq52?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=utah-jazz

Mutangclan wrote:

zero24gravity wrote:

As a guard combo, those two would play off of each other very well. Tyreke can drive & kick. Mo can spot up and not be soley responsible for setting up the offense. One of my major issues (outside of the injuries) with Mo is he looks to shoot too much. Playing off the ball a bit more would be good for him. Truth is, the only way I really want Mo back is if he is either in a 6th man role, or if there is a player (like Evans) out there that can take the ball out of Williams' hands a bit more.

Here you go buddy:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1640259-utah-jazz-top-free-agent-target-at-every-position

also some interesting articles:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1640535-2013-nba-mock-draft-full-1st-round-predictions-with-potential-trades/page/15

http://bleacherreport.com/tb/daq52?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=utah-jazz

I like Dennis S and i think he'll be there at 21. Would be happy with him or Larkin at 21 should be a nice player on board at 14.

Richardale wrote:

Mutangclan wrote:

zero24gravity wrote:

As a guard combo, those two would play off of each other very well. Tyreke can drive & kick. Mo can spot up and not be soley responsible for setting up the offense. One of my major issues (outside of the injuries) with Mo is he looks to shoot too much. Playing off the ball a bit more would be good for him. Truth is, the only way I really want Mo back is if he is either in a 6th man role, or if there is a player (like Evans) out there that can take the ball out of Williams' hands a bit more.

Here you go buddy:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1640259-utah-jazz-top-free-agent-target-at-every-position

also some interesting articles:

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1640535-2013-nba-mock-draft-full-1st-round-predictions-with-potential-trades/page/15

http://bleacherreport.com/tb/daq52?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=utah-jazz

I like Dennis S and i think he'll be there at 21. Would be happy with him or Larkin at 21 should be a nice player on board at 14.

The german youngster will climb up more than one draftboard as draft day approaches...

Mutangclan wrote:

http://bleacherreport.com/tb/daq52?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=utah-jazz

That's the way it is. And I think Lindsey was broght aboard to get the rebuilding job done. As I said before fellas... go get some Zen stuff and enjoy the ride all the way bottom up...

After all... wasn't it what a great deal of Jazzz fans have been asking for?

outerspacefan wrote:

Mutangclan wrote:

http://bleacherreport.com/tb/daq52?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=utah-jazz

That's the way it is. And I think Lindsey was broght aboard to get the rebuilding job done. As I said before fellas... go get some Zen stuff and enjoy the ride all the way bottom up...

After all... wasn't it what a great deal of Jazzz fans have been asking for?

Yep, you tank you win, you win you lose. Win Win if you ask me!

Okay dong, I'm going to tell you why signing Monta Ellis would be possibly the worst move the jazz could make. 1. He is the same thing as Big Al, but he shoots a much much worse percentage, he had a couple great years of shooting, but has been a solid 40-42 percent forthe last few years, which is terrible for your go to scorer.
2. He play worse D than Big Al, it is just at a less key position. He gambles every single chance he gets, that is why his steals numbers are alway good. He a worse facilitator than tyreke, shoots a worse percentage, takes shots that make you scratch your head consistently, he gets outmatched by most SGs in the league.
3. The guy is not a good leader and I have no idea where you came up with that one. He has played on good teams and never lead them anywhere. The warriors got better wen he left and started playing with more passion, hustle, and D. There is a reason a disfunctional franchise like golden state got rid of him, so why would our smart, penny pinching, transitioning to a defensive team playing organization even think about signing a god awful player like Ellis
The reason I want Tyreke Evans is because he is the only player on the FA market that can and will consistently penetrate the defense, while playing good defense himself, while having the potential to be a superstar in this league.
I don't think the jazz should play anyone that doesn't do their fair part on defense, if you play great team defense and have someone who can penetrate the opposing teams defense, then the offense will come from defense, you will win games and go to the playoffs, simple as that. Because defense is consistent, offense isn't, that's why we sucked last year, we had to many people that play offense without playing D and guess what, when those guys weren't hitting shots, we lost games, because the other team was always hitting shots, because those guys played consistently bad D and inconsistent offense, and I don't know why some of he people on here keep mentioning getting guysthat follow this formula of bad D and inconsistent O.
This is all just speculation and opinion on my part, except for the evaluation of Monta Ellis, that guy is just a cancer.