boston is better for the present and future, basketball wise. Utah is the loyalty choice. Miami is the "fuck it I'm rich and I want to live like a king" choice.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
NBA Offseason 2017 |OT| Only Big Ballers Allowed *please pay $495 to be a Big Baller
- Thread starter Jarate
- Start date
Cornbread78
Member
I disagree. Until Boston trades some assets into current quality players, their roster is not better than Utah. Gobert is better than anyone on the Celtics.
In a few years, when their high draft picks develop, Boston will probably be better. But for the next 2 seasons, Utah is more promising. Also, considering he's likely to sign a 3 year deal, looking to the future is not as exciting a proposition.
sf2fanatic
Member
Glad to see TJ Leaf balling it.
I already miss him at UCLA.
I already miss him at UCLA.
Vault Dweller 111
Member
Better chance at a conference final (that's the end goal?) with Utah than the Heat.
I'm always right
How is Utah more promising right now? I feel like you're comparing Utah with Hayward vs Boston without. If you take Hayward off the Jazz that team is not good in what is now one of the toughest conferences in NBA history. The Celtics without Hayward were the 1 seed last year.
Lost in all the lonzo ball hype is the fact that UCLA had a great bunch of NBA level guys to pair him up with.
Vault Dweller 111
Member
How many players that got them the one seed will be on the team in 2-3 years when they are hoping to be competing for a title though?
sf2fanatic
Member
Yes. Jrue's brother almost declared but instead came back one more year
I mean...that's hard to say about most teams in the league. But the team has young players, draft picks, and cap flexibility so I'm not sure this argument works against the Celtics.
The Heat will have Dragic and Whiteside, the Jazz will have Gobert, the Celtics will have Brown, Tatum, Horford, plus whatever they do with the rest of the picks they have.
If you compare both rosters without Hayward the Jazz are better IMO.
Gobert would be the best player on either team. Jazz have 2 quality big men (Gobert, Favors), Celtics have 1 (Horford). Jazz have 3 wings that are better than Crowder (Ingles, Hood and Johnson). Exum is still intriguing as a young prospect and they have another guard they got in the lottery. They also have Rubio, who is a really solid point guard.
The Celtics best 3 guards could all be gone by next year (Thomas, Bradley, Smart).
Again, Brown and Tatum and their picks next year are all intriguing, but they're years away from being significant difference makers.
Boston with Hayward is definitely better than Utah with Hayward. They won more games without him than Utah did with him.
Utah, as currently constructed, isn't sniffing a conference final given the current state of the West. Boston, with Hayward, is a clear favorite for the conference final and next man up for the Finals if Cleveland declines or blows it up. If he is basing his decision on winning only then it's not a difficult choice.
CassidyIzABeast
Member
Yes the teams do look very similar when you minimize all of Boston's advantages. You'd be hard pressed to find one person that agrees with you that the Jazz without Hayward are better than the Celtics right now.
Roster wise they're about the same, the difference is that Utah is in the West and Boston is not. That said, if winning championships are your goal, then either way you're dealing with GSW. Boston's potential exists in Tatum + Brown being good and being able to be played together and with Hayward (also a SF). After next year, 4 of your 6 best players (assuming Bradley and Smart get paid) play the same position, SF (Tatum, Brown, Hayward, Crowder). Assuming you rock Horford as your 5 and IT as your 1, I don't know if you can play 3 of those guys at the same time.
That said, if LeBron sticks around for 3-4 years and CLE gets Melo + Wade on the Cavs without losing Love (aka, buyouts)...I'm not sure the East is terribly much better for trying to get to the championship. I wonder whether a CLE team rocking TT / Love, LeBron, Carmelo, Wade, and Irving could take on GSW. That's a pretty nasty six man rotation.
Vault Dweller 111
Member
Jazz (with Hayward) are a really good team with nowhere to go but up.
They can give a good matchup to any West team except GS.
They can give a good matchup to any West team except GS.
That's not the argument I'm making. Obviously the Jazz will become an average team if Hayward leaves. They have constructed their roster around him. I'm merely stating that Utah has more talent around Hayward than Boston would have.
Ninja Scooter
Member
It seems impossible for any of us to know what really is and isn't a better situation for a guy like Heyward (it's his life, so it goes beyond just what team is better) which makes this entire argument seem silly.
Boston's long-term strengths are all hypothetical. By the time their young players are ready to contribute, IT and Hofford will be long gone (or past their primes). So it's a gamble if Brown, Tatum, and their future draft picks will be good. We have no idea.
Utah is more of a sure thing. We aren't talking about upside or hypotheticals. The players on their roster are good now and are young enough to still be good in 4-5 years. That's a big advantage over Boston.
Utah is more of a sure thing. We aren't talking about upside or hypotheticals. The players on their roster are good now and are young enough to still be good in 4-5 years. That's a big advantage over Boston.
Suns are waiving Barbosa. We gone be shampionship again?
Also, I hope someday I can be as cool being as uncool as Klay.
Also, I hope someday I can be as cool being as uncool as Klay.
I disagree. You can't just use wins as the measurement. Firstly because Utah had a ton of injuries, if they had been as healthy as Boston was, they would have won more games. Secondly, playing in the Western Conference means you're consistently playing better teams, so Utah's 51 wins is more impressive than Boston's 53 anyway.
The conference finals isn't the goal though. Just because Boston has a bettter shot at the conference finals doesn't mean they have a better chance of winning it all. They would still have to beat 2 elite teams 4 out of 7. Utah would probably have to beat 3 elite teams 4 out of 7. You need to be a fantastic team to get through either of those paths.
We aren't discussing what is better for him and his family, because we can't possibly know that. But we can discuss what makes the most sense from a basketball stand point. Don't see why that's silly. If you don't like talking about basketball, why are you here?
Ninja Scooter
Member
What is the massive gap between Utah and Boston basketball wise? The problem is that these teams don't exist in vacuums. A player like Heyward can't just think "Which team will be better next year?" You can't account for things like injuries, regression, progression, ect...Keep in mind that these guys are elite athletes. A guy like Heyward who is being wined and dined as a top of the line free agent, there has to be even a little bit of confidence, to the point where he might think either team he goes to will be better, because of him.
Take Hayward off of Utah, give them all the health in the world, and stick that team in the East. They're not winning 53 games.
Vault Dweller 111
Member
Boo
Ninja Scooter
Member
i imagine it's a 1 + 1 deal so they can max his ass out next offseason?
SerAardvark
Member
Yeah, second year is a player option. He did take about $9.5 million less than he could have this year though (at least based on the Amick tweet I saw).
beat
Member
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/07/...s-taking-even-less-money-than-we-all-thought/
I thought it was a smart tradeoff for him to forgo a few million to make sure they re-sign Iguodala and Livingston. Forgoing any more would be stupid because I don't think it will help roster construction any more and saving luxury tax is not really his problem. Not when the Warriors are skyrocketing in value and about to add PSLs and they haven't even dipped into selling the jersey ad patch yet.
CassidyIzABeast
Member
Remaining pool of free agents
Its pretty much Gordon Hayward standing on a cliff edge
Its pretty much Gordon Hayward standing on a cliff edge
Vault Dweller 111
Member
Trust the analytics.
I never said there was a "massive" gap between the two. I think Utah has more current talent than Boston does. They have more size, depth and talent at the small forward, power forward and center positions. Boston has an advantage at the guard spots but their top 3 guys are all going to be free agents. Utah just added Rubio who is signed for at least 2 more seasons.
Maybe Tatum and Brown become better than any of the Utah wings, but that's a what if and a few years down the line.
And to your comment about variables, of course you can't account for injuries and progression/regression, but a player can look at a roster and make a general prediction about its value. LeBron could look at D-Wade and Bosh and know they were going to be good. Hayward can look at the Jazz roster and know they have the best young center in basketball, one of the best/if not the best passers in Rubio, and a deep team that overcame injuries last year to still be borderline elite.
Ninja Scooter
Member
I think we are agreeing. I don't think there is that much difference between Bos and Utah, and in the short term, Utah might be better. I've never been the biggest Rubio fan, but I think on that team, his creation and playmaking will be a huge asset compared to last year (no knock to Hill).
Andre Roberson would be a near-max player if he could hit even 35% of his 3s. I wonder how the Thunder would look if they signed George Hill instead of Roberson. Slight downgrade on defense, huge upgrade on offense. They'd be even more formidable. Not sure it could work financially, though.
"You take less than the max, and I'll see what I can do about Thunderstruck 2."
Again that comment is meaningless because it ignores the idea of roster construction. The Jazz have built their roster around Hayward. If you take him off the team, of course they would struggle some. But give them a few years to build around Gobert and replace Hayward with someone decent, and they would approach 53 wins again.
CassidyIzABeast
Member
KD out here taking paycuts to save rich ass Lacob money and shit.
OfficerRaichu15
Member
KD deal means RIP league for another two years.
Good I'm glad I have an ally because I'm pretty sure Bread disagrees.
I get the hesitation on Rubio, his shooting is an issue. But this Jazz team can make up for his lack of shooting with the likes of Hood, Ingles, Johnson, and Hayward (if he stays). And Minnesota was an excellent offensive team last year despite his shooting woes.
I also think people will start to notice Rubio's defense now that he'll actually be on a good defensive team.
panthapanda
Member
Hawks didn't even offer Millsap a contract.
Wow, way to show you care about your players FO. You sign Howard to terrible contract and then ship him off for peanuts (he just didn't fit the team so i'm cool with the trade), let your two best players walk in the past 2 years, and our GMs are apparently closet racists.
Way to go. I thought when the new ownership came in, we were looking at greener pastures but you guys have been just as bad.
Sigh.
Wow, way to show you care about your players FO. You sign Howard to terrible contract and then ship him off for peanuts (he just didn't fit the team so i'm cool with the trade), let your two best players walk in the past 2 years, and our GMs are apparently closet racists.
Way to go. I thought when the new ownership came in, we were looking at greener pastures but you guys have been just as bad.
Sigh.
i3allistic
Member
KD aint tripping, heavily involved in tech startups ...and his boss is one of the major players in tech ...
Cornbread78
Member
That was going to be the case, but I wonder if the NBAPA will have anything to say.
BlackGhost
Banned
darkside31337
Tomodachi wa Mahou
Honestly, Adam Silver would be more justified to say no to this for basketball reasons than Stern was when he blew up the CP3 trade.