What's new
By:

If You Could Take Back One Transaction in Jazz History...

1) Magic - That was a stupid rule on the NBA's part and again shows the Laker's luck; Utah should have had the foresight that they were getting a Top 2 pick and that is better than an old Gail Goodrich
2) Wilkins - I always heard that this was done for financial reasons to save the franchise from bankruptcy
3) Wesley Matthews - I blame them not matching Matthews on the troubles that led to the loss of Sloan and Williams.
 
On a smaller scale the Gordon Girikec (cant remember how to spell that) trade that cost us a pick. What a sour note he was. Kinda like Bell is now I guess.
 
Hi everyone. Im a long time forum lurker, but i finally decided to post something.

I would say the first contract they gave to Jerry Sloan. His brand of smashmouth, foul-them-till-it-hurts basketball wasted the best years of Stockton and Malone and alienated Deron Williams from the get-go. I will always contend that Jerry Sloan did vastly more harm than good for the Jazz.

A close second was passing on Tony Parker in favor of Raul Lopez for financial reasons. Not only did it rob the Jazz of a great heir to the Stockton legacy, but it probably delivered 3 titles to one of our biggest rivals.
 
For me it has to be rony seikaly not showing up after we traded Greg foster and Chris Morris for him from new jersey!
 
I was going to say the Matthews not matching but Goodrich has to be #1 followed closely but Wilkins.

Have to add signing raja the second time around.

Not getting magette
 
Not getting brian William aka bison dele. If nothing to have kept him away from the bulls. Honestly that would have probably tipped the scales for the jazz.
 
bordelais7 said:
Spending all of my $5 on hot dogs on "Dollar Dog Night" at the Salt Palace when I was 10. Car ride home was unbearable. Alas, hindsight is 20/20.
Click to expand...

Bordy bringing it like usual. Repped
 
Signing Carlos Boozer. We already had AK as our PF and had just signed Okur, and then we threw more money at a guy who played AK's position, if only half the time (i.e. offence only) - and that was before he started getting "injured"! Meanwhile we had Harpring playing at SF our backcourt consisted of cheap players like Giricek, Bell, McLeod, Arroyo and a washed-up Eisely. And IIRR, the financial squeeze that Boozer's contract created meant we had to let Mo Williams walk. We should have taken that cap space and used it on a top wing player, not another big, and kept Mo.
 
Two firsts for Jefferson. I'll admit I was a fan of the trade when it happened. I like Jefferson, just not worth two first round picks, and now standing in Favors way, of course that's hindsight as we still had Deron.

I've been wondering what this team would look like had we not traded for Al. Who would we have taken with the Memphis pick at #12 in 09, and would we have made the playoffs this last year with out Al?
 
Thee jazz fan said:
Two firsts for Jefferson. I'll admit I was a fan of the trade when it happened. I like Jefferson, just not worth two first round picks, and now standing in Favors way, of course that's hindsight as we still had Deron.

I've been wondering what this team would look like had we not traded for Al. Who would we have taken with the Memphis pick at #12 in 09, and would we have made the playoffs this last year with out Al?
Click to expand...

I see where you are going with this, but to me there are to many what ifs to really determine if this was a bad trade!
 
As someone already mentioned, the Wilkins trade was done for financial reasons. If I recall correctly, the cash part was somewhere in the range of a cool million and saved the Jazz for a time. In fact, this might have been the one transaction I would never want to take back as the team would've probably moved without the money.
 
Easy answer. The Ostertag deal. Imagine if we paid him half, then added a fre agent such as Bruce Bowen, Rick Fox, Greg Anthony, Brain Grant, Bison Dele, John Barry, or Bo Outlaw.

The Jazz were already contenders. Adding one of the above players may have been the difference from two losses to Chicago and three straight titles.

Duncan doesn't win one so early, Robinson may have retired without a title, and Malone wins three and goes down as the greatest PF ever...all because of Ostertag.
 
green said:
Easy answer. The Ostertag deal. Imagine if we paid him half, then added a fre agent such as Bruce Bowen, Rick Fox, Greg Anthony, Brain Grant, Bison Dele, John Barry, or Bo Outlaw.

The Jazz were already contenders. Adding one of the above players may have been the difference from two losses to Chicago and three straight titles.

Duncan doesn't win one so early, Robinson may have retired without a title, and Malone wins three and goes down as the greatest PF ever...all because of Ostertag.
Click to expand...

How much was Tags contract?
 
The problem with the Ostertag's deal is that he was getting paid more than Karl at the time. SO it pissed off Karl and Ostertag started tanking and stopped working hard. Similar to AK and his deal.

I was against giving 2 first round picks in the AJ deal and got a lot of slack for my opinion. I liked AJ but I thought it was a reactionary deal to replace Boozer and not a long tern deal that would be a piece of the championship puzzle for the Jazz.

Signing both Harping and Okur to extension's were bone head decisions because Harp was already having major leg issues and there was no reason to jump the gun on Okur's extension. I know no one could predict his injury but he was having other injury issues and his age should have been a factor when considering the extension. Basically, the Jazz bid against themselves without really seeking a true market value. On the other hand, they got burned with the Wes Matthews deal so sometimes you win and sometimes you lose.

The Jazz have sometimes taken loyalty over common sense. The Harping and Okur extensions and the Ostertag and AK major contracts were examples of thinking with your heart instead of your head.
 
JimLes said:
As someone already mentioned, the Wilkins trade was done for financial reasons. If I recall correctly, the cash part was somewhere in the range of a cool million and saved the Jazz for a time. In fact, this might have been the one transaction I would never want to take back as the team would've probably moved without the money.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm pretty sure I read that Larry Miller said without the cash from that trade he could not have kept the Jazz afloat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top