I like this deal. but only if it means harris is moved for something else. Mo seems to be a better fit with this team, makes about the same as harris, and also expires at the same time. what i would not like to see is harris and mo both still on the roster because you know that Corbin would play both together and limit burks minutes.
Jazz May Be A Part of 3-Team Deal w/ Clippers
- Thread starter Saint Cy of JFC
- Start date
It is an odd trade, but I like it for Utah. Not sure why the Clippers are trading for Odom versus waiting until Dallas buys him out for a little over two million ($2.4m), which they 100% will do if they can't trade him. Then, the Clippers could just sign Odom for the mini-mid for two seasons and save themselves $5 million. There are only 3 or 4 teams that Odom will sign with as a free agent if he is bought out and Clippers are in the Top 2. Others are Lakers, Heat, and maybe Knicks or Nets.
Gyp Rosetti
Banned
I'm still waiting for someone, anyone to answer this. I like Mo, but at 8.5M, for a year when we already have Harris, not so much. So why do this? We better get two 2nds or a 1st out of this. Minimally.
Ron Boone
Member
I'm not an expert on all this CBA/Contract crap; but I think they need to get it done by Friday to make it all work so Dallas can clear cap space to try and sign D-Will.
I think it's because they don't want to commit to a longer contract that a free agent would want this summer. This gives us a big upgrade at the very least while not impacting our situation past this year. Also brings up the possibility of bringing him back on a cheaper contract as a 6th man type player.
Gyp Rosetti
Banned
Big upgrade? Cheaper contract for a 6th man? Go back to playing with clay.
theNBAnerd
Well-Known Member
agreed that utah has to receive some kind of additional compensation here. we're doing both teams a favor, and all we get in return is one year of a 30-year-old point guard who is a borderline starter in this league? nah, there's got to be draft picks or something thrown in for utah.
also, to those thinking about what this trade means to tinsley, watson or lillard/marshall, don't worry. they're not making this trade in order to have devin and mo on the same team. this deal means something has to be in place (or at least be on the table) for harris. and harris should definitely net you more than a late first. if george hill straight up netted #15 for the spurs, devin is good enough to get you somewhere in the late lotto.
also, to those thinking about what this trade means to tinsley, watson or lillard/marshall, don't worry. they're not making this trade in order to have devin and mo on the same team. this deal means something has to be in place (or at least be on the table) for harris. and harris should definitely net you more than a late first. if george hill straight up netted #15 for the spurs, devin is good enough to get you somewhere in the late lotto.
jazzfan1971
Well-Known Member
Maybe we follow up this with Harris for Beans and #7? Makes sense to me.
utahjazz107
Active Member
I'm interested in the other teams who wanted Mo. If the only team who was willing to take Mo was the Jazz then it's going to be a hell of a lot harder to deal Harris
theNBAnerd
Well-Known Member
that's what i'm thinking... not specifically, but generally. bringing mo in doesn't make sense if you have devin on the roster.
mo < devin overall, but you're still not going to bring a guy in for 10M to play 15 minutes off the bench.... at least not unless you're being compensated heavily for doing so.
Gyp Rosetti
Banned
We don't have to use the TPE. An asset? We're never able to deal any of expirings, guys we knew we didn't want back like Boozer and AK. Who the **** is gonna take Mo on prior to the deadline at that price tag? Hell, within the CBA framework, we'd have to take on decent salary back too. Decent salary that probably wouldn't be expiring. Improves our outside shooting I'll give ya but at this price tag when we already have Harris. I want nothing to do with it unless we get a 1st or two 2nds back.
theNBAnerd
Well-Known Member
harris is also generally regarded as being much better than mo.
I think it's reasonable to say that Mo Williams is a big upgrade over Earl Watson. If you move Harris, he's a better three point shooter and probably a better fit.
He would almost certainly be more likely to re-sign following the season if we trade for him, and it won't be close to 8m/yr. I don't know what you expect to get for nothing, but if we are able to move Harris this becomes a great move, IMO.
A few things:
- We saw this coming days ago when the Odom rumors started. The rumor was that the Lakers wanted Mo Williams, but I couldn't see the Clippers wanting to trade with the Lakers.
- If Williams opts out of his final year, it means he wants a longer-term deal for greater financial security.
- Getting Williams, who is 29 and on the last year of his deal, does not mean we are no longer looking for a young PG.
- We saw this coming days ago when the Odom rumors started. The rumor was that the Lakers wanted Mo Williams, but I couldn't see the Clippers wanting to trade with the Lakers.
- If Williams opts out of his final year, it means he wants a longer-term deal for greater financial security.
- Getting Williams, who is 29 and on the last year of his deal, does not mean we are no longer looking for a young PG.
theNBAnerd
Well-Known Member
so if it's the TPE for mo and the 17th pick, and then harris and a future first for something in the 8-12 range, how about that?
theNBAnerd
Well-Known Member
truth. getting mo doesn't mean the end of marshall/lillard... it means the end of harris.
utahjazz107
Active Member
Says who? I'd take Mo over Harris anyday
Gyp Rosetti
Banned
Over Harris I mean. He's not a big upgrade over Harris.