Zach Lowe mentions possibility of Utah blowing it up at deadline

[hwangjini_1]

I think I would trade the Nets pick for Favors or Hayward if it was top two or top 3 protected. I doubt anyone outside of Ingram, Simmons or potentially Bender will be better than either of those two.

I see a deal like this as being considerably more likely in the offseason though.

just curious, but how exactly does this work? i mean, if the nets draft pick falls to #3 let's say, then what? you cant roll it over to next year like your own picks. what is plan B for utah should the 2016 net pick not work out?

[BudweiserCeltic]

I think I would trade the Nets pick for Favors or Hayward if it was top two or top 3 protected. I doubt anyone outside of Ingram, Simmons or potentially Bender will be better than either of those two.

I see a deal like this as being considerably more likely in the offseason though.

just curious, but how exactly does this work? i mean, if the nets draft pick falls to #3 let's say, then what? you cant roll it over to next year like your own picks. what is plan B for utah should the 2016 net pick not work out?

That's for Boston and Utah to negotiate.

[PhoSita]

Sign me up for Favors or Hayward.


Heck, I'd use pretty much all our picks if it got us both of those guys.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Not sure why Utah would want to blow it up. Plenty of cap space coming up, their whole core, save Burks, are on team friendly contracts.

I'm not buying what Lowe is selling until I actually see it with my own eyes.

If Utah wants to commit the mistake of blowing it up, then come to papa.

Utah has at least seven players 25 or younger it might consider part of its core. That core hasn't produced a single winning season, but each member of it is appealing enough that Utah won't be able to afford all of them once their next contracts kick in. Hayward can already hit free agency after next season, just as the cap skyrockets to a record $108 million, and he'll demand a max contract. Gobert can start extension talks after this season, and if he finishes strong, he will enter negotiations confident a max offer awaits on the other end. Favors and Hood are further from free agency, but the Jazz have to project mammoth raises for both -- and possibly a third max deal for Favors, meaning three players that have won basically nothing could suck up 85 percent of Utah's cap. They have a chasm at point guard that Exum might not be ready to fill. Utah's payroll could crack $120 million before factoring in any outside free agents, ritzy territory for a small-market franchise with little history of paying the luxury tax.

Utah's fans might have a hard time digesting another step back in the name of patience, but what exactly would the Jazz be stepping back from? A sub.-500 team with only one stretch of prolonged winning on its resume?

The section of the article explaining his reasoning.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/14647616/the-jazz-hope-enough-money-their-rebuilding-plan-work

Well sure, at some point they'll hit a wall and will have to make some tough decisions. That seems very premature to me. The right play is to work through this Summer and see what you can acquire, then see if they can get on a winning track with that group. After that, time to decide who stays and who goes.

Blowing it up at this juncture, while your players are still on manageable contracts which will allow you to grow as an organization, seems a bit foolish in my opinion.

On the other hand, as much as I think it's premature to do so, if they think they'll lose some of these players for nothing after next season, then I can see the argument as to why trading now might be a good idea since the players still have a lot of value on the market. After that they simply become one / half year rentals, and those might not fetch a whole lot.

I guess I can see a bit of that argument and would understand it, but seems like you have a decent collection of young players at hand, I think you have to make a stand right now and try to build something from it, else you'll be in a perpetual standstill.

[Quetzalcoatl]

Ben Simmons > Favors and Ingram > Hayward.  I'll trade them the third pick or later in the offseason, but I'd let the season play out first

[Moranis]

I think I would trade the Nets pick for Favors or Hayward if it was top two or top 3 protected. I doubt anyone outside of Ingram, Simmons or potentially Bender will be better than either of those two.

I see a deal like this as being considerably more likely in the offseason though.

just curious, but how exactly does this work? i mean, if the nets draft pick falls to #3 let's say, then what? you cant roll it over to next year like your own picks. what is plan B for utah should the 2016 net pick not work out?

That's for Boston and Utah to negotiate.

I would guess something like 2017 BOS (with the BKN swap rights) and 2018 BKN

[oldtype]

I wouldn't give up this year's Nets pick for any one of Gobert, Favors, and Hayward, and I don't think Utah would accept any other deal.

Maybe on draft night if it landed somewhere around 4-6, but again, in that case Utah probably isn't interested.

[Who]

I wouldn't give up this year's Nets pick for any one of Gobert, Favors, and Hayward, and I don't think Utah would accept any other deal.

Maybe on draft night if it landed somewhere around 4-6, but again, in that case Utah probably isn't interested.

I'd give up a non-top 2 pick for Gobert.

[jambr380]

I think I would trade the Nets pick for Favors or Hayward if it was top two or top 3 protected. I doubt anyone outside of Ingram, Simmons or potentially Bender will be better than either of those two.

I see a deal like this as being considerably more likely in the offseason though.

just curious, but how exactly does this work? i mean, if the nets draft pick falls to #3 let's say, then what? you cant roll it over to next year like your own picks. what is plan B for utah should the 2016 net pick not work out?

That's for Boston and Utah to negotiate.

I would guess something like 2017 BOS (with the BKN swap rights) and 2018 BKN

For Favors OR Hayward?? If we are trading two of our BKN picks, I would want both, especially since Hayward can bolt after next season.

As the article points out, Utah has done nothing with these two guys as their main 'core' - even in the disappointing West; why would we expect anything different here? I like Utah's farm system, just as I do Orlando, Milwaukee, and Minnesota, but I have some concern if we are trading multiple BKN picks.

[Evantime34]

I think I would trade the Nets pick for Favors or Hayward if it was top two or top 3 protected. I doubt anyone outside of Ingram, Simmons or potentially Bender will be better than either of those two.

I see a deal like this as being considerably more likely in the offseason though.

just curious, but how exactly does this work? i mean, if the nets draft pick falls to #3 let's say, then what? you cant roll it over to next year like your own picks. what is plan B for utah should the 2016 net pick not work out?

We could transfer the swap rights in 2017 to Utah, give them our pick and Dallas' pick this year if the Nets pick doesn't convey or give them the 2018 pick. I'm sure with so many assets the C's could come up with a deal that makes sense for both sides if the picks don't convey.

[jambr380]

I wouldn't give up this year's Nets pick for any one of Gobert, Favors, and Hayward, and I don't think Utah would accept any other deal.

Maybe on draft night if it landed somewhere around 4-6, but again, in that case Utah probably isn't interested.

How could Utah not be interested in having a four-year cost-controlled high lottery pick for one of three players they are likely to lose for nothing when they don't re-sign them all for super-max contracts?

Throw in a guy like Young or Rozier they would have even more to build on. Utah isn't exactly in the driver's seat unless their team begins performing markedly better.

[Ilikesports17]

As far as I know you cant put protection on traded picks.
Even if you own multiple years of picks from a team.

[Donoghus]

Gobert's the only guy I'd have real interest in.

[Who]

Favors has only played 27 of 44 games.
Gobert has only played 24 of 44 games.

That is why they are where they are in the standings. Their record would be much much better if those two guys hadn't of missed so games.

And all this with one of the worst starting backcourts in the league.

Hayward, Favors and Gobert are keepers. It beggars belief that Utah would blow it up and move one of those players. They are the foundation to a very good Utah team. Now they gotta go out and fix that backcourt.

[ssspence]

There's zero chance Ainge is trading the Nets pick before the trade deadline, short of a godfather offer from another team that makes us a contender right now. They're not trading it for Hayward or Favors alone -- not until they know it's not the #1 pick. So I think you have at look at other assets if we're talking about this 'bold move' possibility from Utah for either one of them.

That said, I agree their two most likely moves are Hayward and Favors. Would you trade Marcus Smart for Hayward? Or Favors? I suspect Ainge would trade Smart for one of them -- both are excellent players -- there's some logic to either deal for both sides. But is one of them enough to move the needle, and give up on Marcus this early? Meanwhile, are the Jazz going to settle for just Smart for either?

That said, what about a deal for both? If the Celtics offered Utah: Smart, the Nets 2016 pick, the 2016 Dallas pick, Minny's 2016 or 2017 2nd, Memphis' 2018 1st, Amir Johnson and David Lee, for Favors, Hayward, and Withey, who says no?