Author Topic: Avery Bradley for Dante Exum straight up.  (Read 16444 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Avery Bradley for Dante Exum straight up.
« Reply #30 on: August 06, 2015, 11:35:50 AM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
Avery Bradley, Jared Sullinger and the 2016 Boston 1st for Derrick Favors and Rodney Hood
I like the principle players being swapped but the draft pick (and who's giving it) may be up for some negotiation.  Favors is a binkie of mine. 
Favors>Sully
AB>Hood
The question is Favors that much better than Sully than AB is better than Hood to justify the C's first rounder next year.  I don't think so -- maybe a future first that's not projected to be as high.  (I think the C's are in the lottery but this deal may be enough to cement a low playoff seed).

as for the original proposal of AB for Exum --> if Exum were healthy, of course, but no way would it even be conceivable.  As for current health, wouldn't do the deal primarily because even when healthy Exum hasn't looked like a world beater and a worse shooter and defender than AB AND I'm extremely hesitant to trade for a player who'll miss at least a year with injury.

Re: Avery Bradley for Dante Exum straight up.
« Reply #31 on: August 06, 2015, 11:52:19 AM »

Offline Ilikesports17

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8595
  • Tommy Points: 842
Avery Bradley, Jared Sullinger and the 2016 Boston 1st for Derrick Favors and Rodney Hood
I like the principle players being swapped but the draft pick (and who's giving it) may be up for some negotiation.  Favors is a binkie of mine. 
Favors>Sully
AB>Hood
The question is Favors that much better than Sully than AB is better than Hood to justify the C's first rounder next year.  I don't think so -- maybe a future first that's not projected to be as high.  (I think the C's are in the lottery but this deal may be enough to cement a low playoff seed).

as for the original proposal of AB for Exum --> if Exum were healthy, of course, but no way would it even be conceivable.  As for current health, wouldn't do the deal primarily because even when healthy Exum hasn't looked like a world beater and a worse shooter and defender than AB AND I'm extremely hesitant to trade for a player who'll miss at least a year with injury.
I disagree. Jazz wouldnt do it even with the Boston '16
Quote from: George W. Bush
Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions.

Re: Avery Bradley for Dante Exum straight up.
« Reply #32 on: August 06, 2015, 11:54:46 AM »

Offline saltlover

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12490
  • Tommy Points: 2619
Bradley and Rozier would you make that trade. I wouldn't if I'm Danny. Exum is Overrated.

Exum is not overrated.  I'd do that in a heartbeat were I Danny.  I'd bet Exum gets you Nerlens.

Seriously, how do you not know Exum is not overrated? I sincerely doubt you've seen much of his play at all. He was on the court for fewer than 2,000 minutes last year. He averaged 5 points, 2.5 assists and 1.5 rebounds (per 36 of 8/4/3) last season. Every metric isn't kind - ORtg, DRtg, VORP, Win shares, etc. He mainly rode the bench in international play. I think he may have played in 1 summer league game this offseason (though I could be wrong on that).

So what have you seen that tells you that Exum is a stud and would net you a 21 year old big man who averaged 13/10 after the All-Star game last year and who is a true rim protector? Because on the face of it, that's a laughable statement.

Here's the question: do you think that the Jazz win more games last year if Exum doesn't play?  Supposedly he has a negative VORP, which means the average minimum-salary PG would have been a better option last year.  Say Phil Pressey -- if the Jazz played Phil Pressey 1800 minutes instead of Dante Exum, do you really think the Jazz win more basketball games?  I personally don't.  It's a counter-factual, and you can't prove things one way or another, but there is some evidence. 

For starters, Exum has been said to be a very good defender, and is not so good on offense.  Accordingly, the Jazz are in fact better on offense when he's off the court, and better on defense when he's on.  However, the defense far outweighs offense, and the Jazz perform about 5 points better with Exum on the floor, and outscore opponents by 3 points with Exum.  Now, you might say that difference is due to Rudy Gobert, and sure enough, Exum played more minutes with Gobert than any other player.  However, the Jazz only outscored opponents by 1 point with Exum and Gobert on the floor at the same time.  So it's not just Gobert.  Still, quantifying defense is hard, but it does stand to reason that having two plus defenders with limited offensive capability at the same time might not be as synergistic.  The opposite would be Exum playing with Kanter.  And sure enough, the Exum-Kanter combo made the Jazz 4.3 points better.  We can imagine Exum's strong perimeter defense made Kanter less exposed, while Kanter's strong interior scoring gave the weak-offenses Exum an outlet.  Furthermore, we can attribute some of the success of this lineup to Exum and not Kanter, as Kanter's team performed better with Exum also on the floor than with any other teammate he played with all year, Thunder or Jazz.

Is it proof that Exum is amazing? No, I'm not saying it is, nor am I really saying he is.  But I am saying that Exum's defense has reportedly been worth having on the floor, and that some numbers bear this out.  Furthermore, the ore-draft scouring reports said his length and quickness would make him an asset defensively, while he was still looking for a consistent shot and learning how to be a playmaker.

In other words, after having been drafted fifth, and making the jump from Austrlian high school basketball to the NBA, Exum largely met preseason expectations.  Now, losing a year to an ACL injury may put him behind on the development curve, but it is at the same time either wrong or indicative of incorrect expectations to say that Exum has been a failure after his first year.  Being able to keep his head above water, and contribute positively to his team, while making the jump in competition levels at ten age he did certainly holds promise for his future.

Re: Avery Bradley for Dante Exum straight up.
« Reply #33 on: August 06, 2015, 12:00:24 PM »

Offline Ilikesports17

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8595
  • Tommy Points: 842
It doesnt make sense to trade Exum. He is young, has potential, but right no his value is at an all time low coming off of an eh rookie season and an ACL tear. For the Jazz, he is key. They have a really nice young nucleus but I dont see any superstar types. Hayward Gobert and Favors all project, for me, anywhere from plus starters to midlevel stars. Exum despite the injury still has the physical and athletic skillset to become a star who can tie the talented squad together and vault it to legit contention.

Im sure Hinkie has made a phone call as injured 20 year old point gaurd with star potential is exactly what Hinkie wants.

Back to the point of the thread. Is there a history of players being traded while on long term injuries. It just doesnt seem to make sense and from my recollection it never happens. I even remember playing a basketball video game and whenever I tried to trade for an injured player Id get a message saying that "the [team] doesnt want to trade [player] right now as he is rehabbing an injury"
Quote from: George W. Bush
Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions.

Re: Avery Bradley for Dante Exum straight up.
« Reply #34 on: August 06, 2015, 12:04:52 PM »

Offline Ilikesports17

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8595
  • Tommy Points: 842
Bradley and Rozier would you make that trade. I wouldn't if I'm Danny. Exum is Overrated.

Exum is not overrated.  I'd do that in a heartbeat were I Danny.  I'd bet Exum gets you Nerlens.

Seriously, how do you not know Exum is not overrated? I sincerely doubt you've seen much of his play at all. He was on the court for fewer than 2,000 minutes last year. He averaged 5 points, 2.5 assists and 1.5 rebounds (per 36 of 8/4/3) last season. Every metric isn't kind - ORtg, DRtg, VORP, Win shares, etc. He mainly rode the bench in international play. I think he may have played in 1 summer league game this offseason (though I could be wrong on that).

So what have you seen that tells you that Exum is a stud and would net you a 21 year old big man who averaged 13/10 after the All-Star game last year and who is a true rim protector? Because on the face of it, that's a laughable statement.

Here's the question: do you think that the Jazz win more games last year if Exum doesn't play?  Supposedly he has a negative VORP, which means the average minimum-salary PG would have been a better option last year.  Say Phil Pressey -- if the Jazz played Phil Pressey 1800 minutes instead of Dante Exum, do you really think the Jazz win more basketball games?  I personally don't.  It's a counter-factual, and you can't prove things one way or another, but there is some evidence. 

For starters, Exum has been said to be a very good defender, and is not so good on offense.  Accordingly, the Jazz are in fact better on offense when he's off the court, and better on defense when he's on.  However, the defense far outweighs offense, and the Jazz perform about 5 points better with Exum on the floor, and outscore opponents by 3 points with Exum.  Now, you might say that difference is due to Rudy Gobert, and sure enough, Exum played more minutes with Gobert than any other player.  However, the Jazz only outscored opponents by 1 point with Exum and Gobert on the floor at the same time.  So it's not just Gobert.  Still, quantifying defense is hard, but it does stand to reason that having two plus defenders with limited offensive capability at the same time might not be as synergistic.  The opposite would be Exum playing with Kanter.  And sure enough, the Exum-Kanter combo made the Jazz 4.3 points better.  We can imagine Exum's strong perimeter defense made Kanter less exposed, while Kanter's strong interior scoring gave the weak-offenses Exum an outlet.  Furthermore, we can attribute some of the success of this lineup to Exum and not Kanter, as Kanter's team performed better with Exum also on the floor than with any other teammate he played with all year, Thunder or Jazz.

Is it proof that Exum is amazing? No, I'm not saying it is, nor am I really saying he is.  But I am saying that Exum's defense has reportedly been worth having on the floor, and that some numbers bear this out.  Furthermore, the ore-draft scouring reports said his length and quickness would make him an asset defensively, while he was still looking for a consistent shot and learning how to be a playmaker.

In other words, after having been drafted fifth, and making the jump from Austrlian high school basketball to the NBA, Exum largely met preseason expectations.  Now, losing a year to an ACL injury may put him behind on the development curve, but it is at the same time either wrong or indicative of incorrect expectations to say that Exum has been a failure after his first year.  Being able to keep his head above water, and contribute positively to his team, while making the jump in competition levels at ten age he did certainly holds promise for his future.
You are correct.

He came in as a project, I dont think his first year has suggested that he cannot reach his ceiling but it also has done nothing to suggest he is more likely to reach that ceiling than when his name was called. prior to that injury Id say he hsa just about the same value he did when he was picked. Then he tore his ACL during an incredibly important time of growth and learning. This more or less torpedoes his trade stock but not his value to the Jazz, or his ability to reach his potential(although these also take a hit)
Quote from: George W. Bush
Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions.

Re: Avery Bradley for Dante Exum straight up.
« Reply #35 on: August 06, 2015, 01:34:36 PM »

Offline Granath

  • NCE
  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2154
  • Tommy Points: 567
Here's the question: do you think that the Jazz win more games last year if Exum doesn't play?  Supposedly he has a negative VORP, which means the average minimum-salary PG would have been a better option last year.  Say Phil Pressey -- if the Jazz played Phil Pressey 1800 minutes instead of Dante Exum, do you really think the Jazz win more basketball games?  I personally don't.  It's a counter-factual, and you can't prove things one way or another, but there is some evidence. 

Talk about changing the goalposts. Exum goes from being worth more than Noel to be compared to Phil Pressey.

In fact, I don't think there's any evidence to suggest the Jazz win fewer ballgames with Pressey versus Exum. I'm reasonably sure that Exum > Pressey, but the stats don't really bear that out and face it, Pressey is a scrub.

Quote
For starters, Exum has been said to be a very good defender, and is not so good on offense.  Accordingly, the Jazz are in fact better on offense when he's off the court, and better on defense when he's on.  However, the defense far outweighs offense, and the Jazz perform about 5 points better with Exum on the floor, and outscore opponents by 3 points with Exum.  Now, you might say that difference is due to Rudy Gobert, and sure enough, Exum played more minutes with Gobert than any other player.  However, the Jazz only outscored opponents by 1 point with Exum and Gobert on the floor at the same time.  So it's not just Gobert.  Still, quantifying defense is hard, but it does stand to reason that having two plus defenders with limited offensive capability at the same time might not be as synergistic.  The opposite would be Exum playing with Kanter.  And sure enough, the Exum-Kanter combo made the Jazz 4.3 points better.  We can imagine Exum's strong perimeter defense made Kanter less exposed, while Kanter's strong interior scoring gave the weak-offenses Exum an outlet.  Furthermore, we can attribute some of the success of this lineup to Exum and not Kanter, as Kanter's team performed better with Exum also on the floor than with any other teammate he played with all year, Thunder or Jazz.

This is the same kind of analysis people do to try to justify starting Olynyk. Exum and Kanter are playing against 2nd stingers. It's also exceptionally limited in scope and therefore misleading. Are there any general statistics to support Exum performing well last year? No? Then let's move on.

Quote
Is it proof that Exum is amazing? No, I'm not saying it is, nor am I really saying he is.  But I am saying that Exum's defense has reportedly been worth having on the floor, and that some numbers bear this out. 

They don't. Next!

Quote
Furthermore, the ore-draft scouring reports said his length and quickness would make him an asset defensively, while he was still looking for a consistent shot and learning how to be a playmaker.

In other words, after having been drafted fifth, and making the jump from Austrlian high school basketball to the NBA, Exum largely met preseason expectations.  Now, losing a year to an ACL injury may put him behind on the development curve, but it is at the same time either wrong or indicative of incorrect expectations to say that Exum has been a failure after his first year.  Being able to keep his head above water, and contribute positively to his team, while making the jump in competition levels at ten age he did certainly holds promise for his future.

I don't see how Exum met expectations. He plays PG. The next two guys who play the same position who were drafted after him - Marcus Smart and  Elfrid Payton - grossly outplayed him. Can you imagine Exum being traded straight up for either of them? Nobody in their right mind would make that deal. So either Smart/Payton greatly exceeded expectations or Exum's expectations were exceptionally low. Would I call him a bust? No, because I don't believe in calling any player after 1 year a bust. But I still think he's a massively unknown factor who did not greatly distinguish himself last year on the court. "Promise" is a good word, but there are hosts of guys in the NBA with promise. Now take that unproven "promise" and add in a torn ACL. That doesn't look all that promising anymore.

Claims that he's more valuable than Noel? That's absurd.

Now as for the original deal of Bradley for Exum...I don't think either team makes that deal. Utah doesn't want to give up on Exum that quickly and Bradley doesn't help them move that team forward much. But I'm not so sure Danny does that deal either. Not because the value isn't there but because of what it does to the team. Exum can't play for a year. It sends a signal that this year is a waste and that's not the case - the Celtics young guys really HAVE to take a step forward this year if they're going to attract good FAs in 2016. Bradley is a relatively young leader who has an established role on a very young team. He's about the only backcourt guy who has proven he can be a 3-and-D player. As such, I don't see that being the deal that Danny makes if he's going to move Bradley because while he may eventually gain a little in Exum, he may lose a lot (team motivation, development, leadership, free agents, etc.) in the meanwhile.
Jaylen Brown will be an All Star in the next 5 years.

Re: Avery Bradley for Dante Exum straight up.
« Reply #36 on: August 06, 2015, 01:43:38 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
Avery Bradley, Jared Sullinger and the 2016 Boston 1st for Derrick Favors and Rodney Hood
I like the principle players being swapped but the draft pick (and who's giving it) may be up for some negotiation.  Favors is a binkie of mine. 
Favors>Sully
AB>Hood
The question is Favors that much better than Sully than AB is better than Hood to justify the C's first rounder next year.  I don't think so -- maybe a future first that's not projected to be as high.  (I think the C's are in the lottery but this deal may be enough to cement a low playoff seed).

as for the original proposal of AB for Exum --> if Exum were healthy, of course, but no way would it even be conceivable.  As for current health, wouldn't do the deal primarily because even when healthy Exum hasn't looked like a world beater and a worse shooter and defender than AB AND I'm extremely hesitant to trade for a player who'll miss at least a year with injury.
I disagree. Jazz wouldnt do it even with the Boston '16
Perhaps, I do like Favors a lot and would think he'd cost quite a bit so I'm trying to curb my bias on what I think his value is.  if both team are sure the pick would be in the 20's, I agree the Jazz may not do it but I'm not sure that just that move gets the C's that far up the standings.  Still need a wing that can score.

Re: Avery Bradley for Dante Exum straight up.
« Reply #37 on: August 06, 2015, 01:50:16 PM »

Offline BDeCosta26

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1314
  • Tommy Points: 232
Avery Bradley, Jared Sullinger and the 2016 Boston 1st for Derrick Favors and Rodney Hood
I like the principle players being swapped but the draft pick (and who's giving it) may be up for some negotiation.  Favors is a binkie of mine. 
Favors>Sully
AB>Hood
The question is Favors that much better than Sully than AB is better than Hood to justify the C's first rounder next year.  I don't think so -- maybe a future first that's not projected to be as high.  (I think the C's are in the lottery but this deal may be enough to cement a low playoff seed).

as for the original proposal of AB for Exum --> if Exum were healthy, of course, but no way would it even be conceivable.  As for current health, wouldn't do the deal primarily because even when healthy Exum hasn't looked like a world beater and a worse shooter and defender than AB AND I'm extremely hesitant to trade for a player who'll miss at least a year with injury.
I disagree. Jazz wouldnt do it even with the Boston '16

Why not? Not saying your wrong, just saying that that's a pretty fair deal for both sides.

The Jazz are looking to compete now, and they should be. They played really well after the ASG last season and that team is really coming together. But they have a lot of offensive problems. They lack spacing just about everywhere. Favors is not the ideal big to put next to Gobert, and they don't even have a real stretch big on the roster. Sullinger (Or KO, for that matter.) would be a perfect match with that team. Sullinger is the kinda guy the Jazz could bite on because not only does he fit their offense but he's only like 23, he is still under team-control through RFA, and he clearly has the potential to be an 18-10 guy, fringe all-star kinda guy if he stays in shape. If your losing Favors, you want a guy who fits what you wanna do on offense better AND is young enough to fit your time-line but also talented enough to be an impact player.

With Bradley (whom the Jazz have had a rumored interest in) the Jazz get just the kind of piece they need to take the next step. Utah has a bunch of capable ball-handlers, but they're lacking an off-guard who can shoot AND play lock-down D. Bradley does both of those things very well. He's a pretty significant improvement over Hood (Who I really like, and whom I think has a decent future) both in the short and possibly long term. Bradley's only 24, he still has room to improve and would help both their offense and defense improve.

In total value, I'd say Favors/Hood is slightly more valuable than Bradley/Sullinger in a vacuum. But that's where the 1st rounder comes in. If you make that trade, our own 1st is likely in the 14-20 range, which is a pretty decent throw in. Besides, they don't play in a vaccum. I think making a trade like that makes both teams better, and the pieces fit better. For us, though some might think that's too much to give up, I say not only do we already have too many players in general, but finding a "star" while not tanking isn't easy, so you have to be creative. I for one think that Favors is a still developing player with real star potential if he's in the right situation. Combing a few of our assets for a chance at a young guy you believe can be a star but hasn't reached that level yet (like say, Harrison Barnes) is a smart way to find one.

What do you think it would take? Include James Young in that deal maybe? Someone else? More picks, or a better one? (I wouldn't put the Brooklyn pick on the table). What would you give up for those two?

Re: Avery Bradley for Dante Exum straight up.
« Reply #38 on: August 06, 2015, 02:22:03 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
The Jazz are looking to compete now, and they should be.

I am not sure there is proof to back up this statement, although I believe that you feel they should be trying to make a playoff run.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: Avery Bradley for Dante Exum straight up.
« Reply #39 on: August 06, 2015, 03:36:54 PM »

Offline BDeCosta26

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1314
  • Tommy Points: 232
The Jazz are looking to compete now, and they should be.

I am not sure there is proof to back up this statement, although I believe that you feel they should be trying to make a playoff run.

Did you watch them at all after the ASG? They were probably the best 2nd half team in the West not named Golden State and one of the best in the league, just like us they were something like 20-10 over the last 30 or something. If they were in the East they almost surely woulda made the playoffs. And I'd think we both agree they have better young talent overall than we do.

It's not just me that thinks that. On yesterday's Lowe Post, Lowe and Elhassan go into an extended conversation about the Jazz, going into a number of interesting things. For one, Lowe mentions how so many people (GM's, Coaches, players) came up to him at summer league and said "The Jazz are my sleeper playoff team" that he started telling people they're not a sleeper. He expects them to get in there as a 7th or 8th seed. Elhassan agreed. They had the number one defense in the league post-Kanter when Gobert became a starter, and Hayward seemed to elevate his game after his big contract, which is huge for them. Lowe also mentions that Exum was the only high draft-pick they got on their own. Favors came in a trade, Kanter was picked with a Nets pick, Hayward with a Knicks pick. Before the 2013-14 season, they had those Al Jefferson/Millsap teams that fought for 8th seeds. They're not a team that normally goes full tank mode for multiple seasons.

Now obviously, they believe Exum is a large part of building a winner going forward and his injury hurts. But he wasn't very important to the success they had last year. That group is trending up and there's good reason to be excited if your a Jazz fan. I'm certainly not the only one who expects them to be competitive this season, and since they're bringing the band back (With expected improvement to playoff-level) you would have to figure their front office feels the same.

I'm not sure why a team full of guys under 27 who finished the season as well as anyone, has legit high-end young talent, a very good coach/culture and who's players (And FO, if the rumors of their interest in bringing back Millsap are true, and lack of backwards moves) fully expect to push for the playoffs would for some reason start going backwards, or why "you believe that I believe it" as if it's some kind of crazy notion no one else believes?

Re: Avery Bradley for Dante Exum straight up.
« Reply #40 on: August 06, 2015, 03:55:21 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
So Zach Lowe said so, basically? That's not too bad, you could do way worse.

Interestingly, the only way you could say that Utah had the best defense in the league would be if you took opponents points per game as the only metric involved in it. The Jazz also played at the slowest pace in the league, which limits points on both sides of the board, but of course we won't mention that. The fact that they consistently stick to being a middling team that would rather fight for the playoffs than alienate their loyal mormons does not indicate 'trending up' in the slightest.

They're cut from the same cloth they've always been cut from -- they're going to hope that one of their draft picks hits and that they can pair him with a big who is passable as they scrape towards a seasonal record in the high forties. They'll cap out at, arguably, 50 wins in one season, and there will be much wailing when their new point guard of the future eventually bails. If that's 'competing', then sure.

Also, they have a very good coach? are you one of those people that was clamoring for Stevens to win COTY too?
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: Avery Bradley for Dante Exum straight up.
« Reply #41 on: August 06, 2015, 04:45:50 PM »

Offline LooseCannon

  • NCE
  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11833
  • Tommy Points: 950
So Zach Lowe said so, basically? That's not too bad, you could do way worse.

Interestingly, the only way you could say that Utah had the best defense in the league would be if you took opponents points per game as the only metric involved in it. The Jazz also played at the slowest pace in the league, which limits points on both sides of the board, but of course we won't mention that. The fact that they consistently stick to being a middling team that would rather fight for the playoffs than alienate their loyal mormons does not indicate 'trending up' in the slightest.

Defensive rating adjusts for pace.  The Jazz had a team defensive rating of 99.0 (or 99 points allowed per 100 possessions) after the All-Star break.  (The break coincides with when Kanter was traded and the claim is that the Jazz had the best defense after that point in the season.)  They had a defensive rating of 109.6 before the ASB.  I don't know who led the NBA in post-ASB defensive rating, but since the Warriors 101.4 lead the league for the entire season, it is possible that 99.0 lead the league over a fraction of the season.
"The worst thing that ever happened in sports was sports radio, and the internet is sports radio on steroids with lower IQs.” -- Brian Burke, former Toronto Maple Leafs senior adviser, at the 2013 MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference

Re: Avery Bradley for Dante Exum straight up.
« Reply #42 on: August 06, 2015, 04:51:02 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
if anyone could hunt that down, by the way (a ranked list of NBA team's DRTG after the ASB) that would be fantastic. I couldn't find it on an admittedly quick perusal.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: Avery Bradley for Dante Exum straight up.
« Reply #43 on: August 06, 2015, 05:43:15 PM »

Offline GC003332

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 804
  • Tommy Points: 62
if anyone could hunt that down, by the way (a ranked list of NBA team's DRTG after the ASB) that would be fantastic. I couldn't find it on an admittedly quick perusal.
http://stats.nba.com/league/team/#!/advanced/?Season=2014-15&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&SeasonSegment=Post%20All-Star&sort=DEF_RATING&dir=-1

Re: Avery Bradley for Dante Exum straight up.
« Reply #44 on: August 06, 2015, 05:55:48 PM »

Offline Endless Paradise

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2853
  • Tommy Points: 182
I don't believe Utah is looking to win now at all and I echo D.o.s.' assertion that there's nothing you can really point to that would suggest as much. I think they're very much following the Bucks' trend of looking to build something very strong and sustainable over the long term, even at the expense of immediate success and potentially experiencing short-term regressions (see: Milwaukee having the balls to trade Knight and risk their playoff run last season).

The front office hasn't been aggressive at all about fortifying their team, so I'm very much so convinced they're content with letting their young core continue to figure things out this next year, even if it means another non-playoff season.