What's new
By:

If we can't get Nash, what about Billups?

Even though he played for Denver I have always been a fan of Billups. He is exactly the kind of leader Utah needs. Plus he has been there (that dreaded experience...)

The problem I have is that I think he is mostly done. Combine that injury with his age (35) and I think he is mostly done. I'd give him 2 years tops...
 
No.

And why?

Why would we waste PT and money on a guy who:

A. Doesn't make us a contender for the short-term
B. Won't be in the league when our young players are in their primes

right now the Jazz need to either: Make a run RIGHT NOW. Trade get vets do whatever to win a championship right now (which they probably aren't ready for). Or build for the long-term. Which is what most of us have been clamoring about for 2 years now. Build around Favors, Hayward, Burks, Kanter... Get more talent. Develop it. And in 2-3 years move into championship contention.
 
The Thriller said:
No.

And why?

Why would we waste PT and money on a guy who:

A. Doesn't make us a contender for the short-term
B. Won't be in the league when our young players are in their primes

right now the Jazz need to either: Make a run RIGHT NOW. Trade get vets do whatever to win a championship right now (which they probably aren't ready for). Or build for the long-term. Which is what most of us have been clamoring about for 2 years now. Build around Favors, Hayward, Burks, Kanter... Get more talent. Develop it. And in 2-3 years move into championship contention.
Click to expand...

I would be on board for Billups the same reason as I would be for Nash (granted Nash is clearly better). If we get that young PG (Lillard/Marshall) and need a veteran leader to mentor them for 1-2 years.

In a situation like that (especially if Big Al is the piece we move to do so) I think the Jazz would stun alot of people and be way ahead of schedule.
 
The Thriller said:
No.

And why?

Why would we waste PT and money on a guy who:

A. Doesn't make us a contender for the short-term
B. Won't be in the league when our young players are in their primes

right now the Jazz need to either: Make a run RIGHT NOW. Trade get vets do whatever to win a championship right now (which they probably aren't ready for). Or build for the long-term. Which is what most of us have been clamoring about for 2 years now. Build around Favors, Hayward, Burks, Kanter... Get more talent. Develop it. And in 2-3 years move into championship contention.
Click to expand...

I agree but I think moving this franchise in the right direction will have a positive impact on the development of our youth. Adding veteran leadership like Billups, Nash or Miller will provide our youth with a figure to look up towards and help them better understand the game of basketball. Look at Sacremento, Wizards and other teams that have all the youth and potential in the world but zero leadership.
 
Stoked said:
I would be on board for Billups the same reason as I would be for Nash (granted Nash is clearly better). If we get that young PG (Lillard/Marshall) and need a veteran leader to mentor them for 1-2 years.

In a situation like that (especially if Big Al is the piece we move to do so) I think the Jazz would stun alot of people and be way ahead of schedule.
Click to expand...

We already have Watson and harris under contract for next year. Right? Unless we could trade one or two of them, going after Nash or somehow trading for Billups just isn't possible.

We also don't have a draft pick in the first round (so we won't have Lillard or Marshall). I know you were merely saying if.

But it's not happening.

And I'm still not so certain that it would be worth it. The money that Nash and Billups would need to be paid is insane.
 
utahjazz107 said:
I agree but I think moving this franchise in the right direction will have a positive impact on the development of our youth. Adding veteran leadership like Billups, Nash or Miller will provide our youth with a figure to look up towards and help them better understand the game of basketball. Look at Sacremento, Wizards and other teams that have all the youth and potential in the world but zero leadership.
Click to expand...

And look at the zero leadership that Fisher and Perkins provided the Thunder. Fisher at this stage of his career is very limited, just like Billups.

Billups has a very limited game. Averaging the fewest numbers in nearly 10 years. And will only be more limited with this injury.

Nash? Still has some game left. But

A. Wants to win a championship. We aren't ready.
B. Will and should command a lot more money than what we have.
C. We'll have to find a way to get rid of Harris and/or Watson.
D. Find a way into the lotto to draft that young PG.

Again, fun to talk about. But it ain't happenin
 
The Thriller said:
We already have Watson and harris under contract for next year. Right? Unless we could trade one or two of them, going after Nash or somehow trading for Billups just isn't possible.

We also don't have a draft pick in the first round (so we won't have Lillard or Marshall). I know you were merely saying if.

But it's probably happening.

And I'm still not so certain that it would be worth it. The money that Nash and Billups would need to be paid is insane.
Click to expand...

That is the main difference here. I agree that movement would need to be made. I do not see Harris as anything other then a stopgap measure at best.

If a chance comes to upgrade the PG or SF position in a dramatic way then it should be taken. As you mentioned these are all hypotheticals but that is a large part of what any discussion is. Take your topic and it is full of ifs and maybes.
 
The Thriller said:
And look at the zero leadership that Fisher and Perkins provided the Thunder. Fisher at this stage of his career is very limited, just like Billups.

Billups has a very limited game. Averaging the fewest numbers in nearly 10 years. And will only be more limited with this injury.

Nash? Still has some game left. But

A. Wants to win a championship. We aren't ready.
B. Will and should command a lot more money than what we have.
C. We'll have to find a way to get rid of Harris and/or Watson.
D. Find a way into the lotto to draft that young PG.

Again, fun to talk about. But it ain't happenin
Click to expand...

I think that is just false. I think Fisher and especially Perkins have been very good for the Thunder. Experience is not the end all be all but to pretend it is not valuable is just as asinine as pretending it is useless.
 
If we were just missing one cog in the wheel and this was the missing piece that we needed to go the distance, yes. But we are rebuilding and we need to build a foundation of players that are going to be here a while.
 
Stoked said:
I think that is just false. I think Fisher and especially Perkins have been very good for the Thunder. Experience is not the end all be all but to pretend it is not valuable is just as asinine as pretending it is useless.
Click to expand...

Of course it isn't useless.

But think this through. Billups came into the league when? 97? Coming off one of his worst seasons in 10 years? Add into account one of thee worst injuries one can suffer in sports?

Billups is done. I think it's asinine to think otherwise. No thanks.

Nash? I think he still has some game left. But his price tag will be far too great. Plus, all those other reasons like... You know... we already have two PGs (one of them is expensive) under contract currently... And we don't have a draft pick in the lotto to pickup that young PG of the future who will be mentored by x-veteran...

Feel free to disagree but I guess we'll have to agree to disagree once again stoked. keep living in la la land.
 
Billups is way better than Perkins and Fisher...not to mention a way better leader and just as clutch as Fisher. He's also a free agent so we wouldn't have to trade for him.

People have been saying Billups is done since he was traded to the Nuggets. When the Pistons traded Billups, they went downhill. When the Knicks let him go, they went downhill and really have no leader. Not to mention, the Clippers were WAY better than Billups played
 
The Thriller said:
Fixed.

This isn't the 2004 version of Billups that you think you're getting.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying we should offer him a lot of money, I think we should at least workout him and see where his game is at. He could easily be an upgrade over Harris and we wouldn't have to overpay for a PG like Dragic..

A 2 year 8-10 million dollar contract would be good if he was up to par in his health.

He provides us with a GOOD temporary solution to our PG problem which is better than the other options since Lillard and Marshall both have question marks, while other free agents are going to be overpaid. Billups could be a steal and then we could draft a PG with the GS pick next year
 
The Thriller said:
Of course it isn't useless.

But think this through. Billups came into the league when? 97? Coming off one of his worst seasons in 10 years? Add into account one of thee worst injuries one can suffer in sports?

Billups is done. I think it's asinine to think otherwise. No thanks.

Nash? I think he still has some game left. But his price tag will be far too great. Plus, all those other reasons like... You know... we already have two PGs (one of them is expensive) under contract currently... And we don't have a draft pick in the lotto to pickup that young PG of the future who will be mentored by x-veteran...

Feel free to disagree but I guess we'll have to agree to disagree once again stoked. keep living in la la land.
Click to expand...

Suck a fatty.

I already said that I'd do Billups one year at most. That was taken on the premise that Billups comes back from his injury at or close to 100% and then for 1-2 years tops. Even then only if it was to mentor a PG of the future that we have landed.

That is a far different cry then "****...let's sign him right now and ignore all the rammifications and roster fallout from that..." Keep ignoring what is really being said you jeton.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top