What's new
By:

Gobert for Sacramento's #8 and baggage.

AlaskanAssassin said:
Why the heck would Sacramento give up all of that just for Gobert? I'm not even sure Gobert could fetch a late 1st round pick this year. That's not a reflection of his potential, but rather his perceived value. Most of my "NBA Fan" friends who are not Jazz fans don't even know who he is.
Click to expand...

Because you HAVE to give something back. The people on the Kings board would do the trade I outlined exactly for Tyson Chandler at 13 million at age 31. They want a Defensive center badly, especially one that doesn't require any offensive touches. Gobert is a throw in, albeit one that might have value for Sacramento. Remember when Pau's younger brother was a throw in?
 
green said:
Framer's biggest problem is believing Gobert is valuable. He's not. If Sacramento would trade us the #8 pick, we would have to send something proven back, and the only things close to proven we have are Favors and Hayward and Hayward can't be traded. I don't trade either of those for #8.

The next question becomes, are Burks or Kanter valuable enough for the 8th pick.

Would you trade a top 10 pick for two bench guys who don't play defense in a deep draft? Neither do I.

So, the only way we have any shot at #8 is if Sacramento desperately needs cap space. Then it would take Burks, Kanter and taking back deals (Terry, Landry and Williams).

So, your next problem is, what FA out there does Sacramento covet, and covet enough to get rid of two valuable vets, who are great locker room guys, something Sacramento has been sorely lacking?

In other words, it probably ain't happening.
Click to expand...

Sac fans want rid of Williams, Terry and Landry in the worst way. I think if they could get Smart or Gordon with the 8, they would keep it, but if they aren't there, then the pick loses most of its luster for them. They covet defense that doesn't shoot the ball. I'm not saying Gobert is the answer for them, but it is closer than Burke, Burks, or Kanter. We can throw in the #23 or next year's pick, but I would protect it. I don't actually think the #8 pick is worth any of our core straight up, let alone taking a bunch of junk for the favor. The talent drops off steep at #7, unless somebody reaches.
 
Cyrone Torbin said:
I'm sure the best player the Kings can get with the 8th pick is Gobert, that makes sense.
Click to expand...

Gobert and whoever you would buy with your 16 million in new found cap space. If they wanted to be dicks they could offer Hayward the max a month later and it becomes Gobert + Hayward for the 8th. Next time I'll write it in crayon for the imagination impaired. . .
 
#8 and Kanter and #23


Been saying this. Still saying this. Kanter can stretch the floor while DeMarcus goes to work down low.
 
framer said:
Gobert and whoever you would buy with your 16 million in new found cap space. If they wanted to be dicks they could offer Hayward the max a month later and it becomes Gobert + Hayward for the 8th. Next time I'll write it in crayon for the imagination impaired. . .
Click to expand...

If the best the Jazz can get with all of that cap space is renting it to another bottom feeder that doesn't even need the help, what is Sacramento going to do with it?
 
NUMBERICA said:
If the best the Jazz can get with all of that cap space is renting it to another bottom feeder that doesn't even need the help, what is Sacramento going to do with it?
Click to expand...

Overpay someone. It's not like Sacramento is Milwaukee. Pick your guy and pay 20% more than anyone else will and he is yours. Jazz don't have a star so they are just acquiring assets until they can turn those assets into a star. Sacramento believes that they have their star so they need to surround him with good players while he is still under contract.
 
ncoloradojazz said:
So the kings will trade top 10 pick for an unproven second rounder. HAHAHA. Epic Fail
Click to expand...

See what I mean about the crayons. . . No, you are trading the #8 pick for the chance to add a max level contract to Cousins and Gay. Gobert is like the tattoo in the box of Cracker Jacks. Not essential, but fun.
 
framer said:
See what I mean about the crayons. . . No, you are trading the #8 pick for the chance to add a max level contract to Cousins and Gay. Gobert is like the tattoo in the box of Cracker Jacks. Not essential, but fun.
Click to expand...

I don't have the time to check, but answer me this, are we the only team out there that can absorb all the bad contracts from the Kings? Can't another team do this exact same trade and swap Gobert for say a vet 3rd big?
 
Hotttnickkk said:
I don't have the time to check, but answer me this, are we the only team out there that can absorb all the bad contracts from the Kings? Can't another team do this exact same trade and swap Gobert for say a vet 3rd big?
Click to expand...

The Bobcats are projected to have $13-19M, Philadelphia at around $25M, Phoenix Suns are projected at around $20M and Wizards reportedly can have at least about $18M.

These are from a quick search around. But the question is, whether to spend that cap space for a free agent or, to make other teams to be able to build cap space for a free agent.

Edit: Of course, there are also Lakers with good amount of space but they need lots of players too. Besides them, Cavs and Magic can go over $20M as well if they let Deng and Hawes go and if Magic cuts Nelson.
 
Enes CanTear You Apart said:
The Bobcats are projected to have $13-19M, Philadelphia at around $25M, Phoenix Suns are projected at around $20M and Wizards reportedly can have at least about $18M.

These are from a quick search around. But the question is, whether to spend that cap space for a free agent or, to make other teams to be able to build cap space for a free agent.

Edit: Of course, there are also Lakers with good amount of space but they need lots of players too. Besides them, Cavs and Magic can go over $20M as well if they let Deng and Hawes go and if Magic cuts Nelson.
Click to expand...

So... how does that make the Jazz unique in its bid for SAC's #8 pick?
 
So there are about 6 teams that COULD do it, but most of those teams are going to want to buy some free agents on their own rather than free up space for Sacramento. Of the teams listed only Philly and Orlando aren't in the playoff hunt in some way, and they are both in the East so the playoffs aren't that far away no matter how bad you are now. The trick is that you can't decide to help Sacramento AFTER you strike out in free agency. You need to make the decision before the draft.
Philly already has two decent draft picks, they don't need a third.
Orlando is probably the only other team that would or could give the Kings cap relief.
Additionally there could be a third team involved that could send the jazz a vet in exchange for the 8 pick. That way the Kings get cap relief, the jazz get a proven player, and the third team gets Randall who the Jazz don't really need. Derrick Williams could be sent to them if they wanted him too.
 
FWIW, I don't think this trade could be consummated until after the July moratorium, when the Jazz's free agents actually become free agents and the cap has been announced. The Kings would have to make the pick at #8, hoping the Jazz would keep their end of the bargain. This, and the value the Kings would be getting, make this highly unlikely.
 
GVC said:
FWIW, I don't think this trade could be consummated until after the July moratorium, when the Jazz's free agents actually become free agents and the cap has been announced. The Kings would have to make the pick at #8, hoping the Jazz would keep their end of the bargain. This, and the value the Kings would be getting, make this highly unlikely.
Click to expand...

That is a very astute point, although since none of the players involved are free agents I don't see why the contract couldn't be completed before the draft even if the players aren't shipped until July 1st. That has happened before. The Kings would just select for the Jazz (or third team) on draft day. If I were the Kings, I would hold my signature off until pick 7 to make sure that Gordon or Smart don't slip. Those are two players that make sense for them. But can you imagine what being able to add somebody like Jameer Nelson (who could come pretty cheap) plus a near max contract would do for that team? They need to go get some vets that have actually won a few games to turn the culture of that team around.
 
Stoked said:
True, but Williams has not hurt. But this idea that "vets = bad" is foolish. If the vet is not as talented then they are reserves. Point is that a few vets can help this team, Jazz will need a steady hand. Just need a coach that will use them right.
Click to expand...

While that is true, the reality is that the Jazz haven't for the most part brought in those types of vets. There have been way too many Palacio, Tinsley, Watson, Bell, etc. While most vets have survived in the NBA due to being good teammates not all of them are good influences i.e. Ameachi, Bell, and assuming this is part of the problem. Just having vets simply to have vets has been the down fall of the Jazz. You need productive players regardless of experience. Beside the fact that both Favors and Gordon are vets since they will be entering their second contracts this year.

I am not against playing or having veterans but they need to be better than our young guys if they are going to get minutes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top