What's new
By:

Kings willing to deal Stauskas

Thee jazz fan said:
Please help me understand why we waist valuable assets for Stauskas. We already have Burks Hayward Hood and X locked up. Hood will also be a marksman from 3 and has greater phisical attributes with good handles with more potential on defense and is longer and quicker. We need to consentrate more on getting a true stretch4 or a 3&D wing.
Click to expand...

I'm not sold on the need for a stretch 4 anymore. We have our C and PF and I want them to play big minutes. We need wings who can hit the 3. Burks, Hayward, and Hood make up 3 of the 4 wing slots that we need unless you figure Slow Joe should be playing 20+ minutes as a fixture in the future. . .
 
Thee jazz fan said:
Please help me understand why we waist valuable assets for Stauskas. We already have Burks Hayward Hood and X locked up. Hood will also be a marksman from 3 and has greater phisical attributes with good handles with more potential on defense and is longer and quicker. We need to consentrate more on getting a true stretch4 or a 3&D wing.
Click to expand...
Because we don't have Hayward "locked up." In just two more seasons he's going to opt out. He'll be an UFA. There is NO guarantee he returns (or doesn't demand too much). Also no guarantee Hood develops into a consistent 3PT shooter. He's struggled this season. And he's been injury prone. He could continue to have the plantar issue throughout his career.

Stauskas might not be the best trade option, but I'm leaning towards getting back something for Kanter now. Hayward, Favors and Gobert are going to be $20M players. Sign or match a 4yr deal for Enes and that contract overlaps the new deals for Hayward and Gobert for two years and a new deal for Favors by 1 season. Even with a higher cap/tax, that potentially puts Utah in the luxury tax for those two seasons. Millers might be willing to go one season, but not two. Yes, I know, we could keep him and trade him in a couple of years. But there are cheaper options to play behind Favors and Gobert (guys like Booker, our 2015 pick, etc.).

Plus, if we get back a player on a rookie deal, it opens up a good chunk of cap space (no QO for Enes). WE can go get another player like Booker. I'd strongly consider the Stauskas deal, just based on the fact this draft has a ton of bigs. Heck, I'd even consider Utah drafting WCS over someone like Prozingis or Turner. That means Favors can play PF full-time. Gobert/WCS and Favors/Booker. Damn!
 
framer said:
I'm not sold on the need for a stretch 4 anymore. We have our C and PF and I want them to play big minutes. We need wings who can hit the 3. Burks, Hayward, and Hood make up 3 of the 4 wing slots that we need unless you figure Slow Joe should be playing 20+ minutes as a fixture in the future. . .
Click to expand...

I'm not sold on Kanter bing in the future plans, and we've seen the trio of Favors, Kanter, and Gobert get 30 minutes each. A stretch4 like Anderson would be great for the jazz.

If we have one more slot to fill on the wing. It needs to be a Carroll type 3&D player who knows his role on the team. I'm fine getting another Stauskas type player, but I don't think we need to use a valuable asset like Kanter to get a guy like that. We have needs in other area's.

Personally I'd prefer a 3&D type.
 
Stifle Tower said:
Because we don't have Hayward "locked up." In just two more seasons he's going to opt out. He'll be an UFA. There is NO guarantee he returns (or doesn't demand too much). Also no guarantee Hood develops into a consistent 3PT shooter. He's struggled this season. And he's been injury prone. He could continue to have the plantar issue throughout his career.

Stauskas might not be the best trade option, but I'm leaning towards getting back something for Kanter now. Hayward, Favors and Gobert are going to be $20M players. Sign or match a 4yr deal for Enes and that contract overlaps the new deals for Hayward and Gobert for two years and a new deal for Favors by 1 season. Even with a higher cap/tax, that potentially puts Utah in the luxury tax for those two seasons. Millers might be willing to go one season, but not two. Yes, I know, we could keep him and trade him in a couple of years. But there are cheaper options to play behind Favors and Gobert (guys like Booker, our 2015 pick, etc.).
Click to expand...

Why do you have to get something back for Kanter? His 6-7 million salary off the books will be a huge down payment to a free agent that can actually help this team. Taking on salary, even 2 million, doesn't accomplish anything if that player isn't worthy of minutes. And there is a good chance Stauskas will never be worthy.
 
Stifle Tower said:
Because we don't have Hayward "locked up." In just two more seasons he's going to opt out. He'll be an UFA. There is NO guarantee he returns (or doesn't demand too much). Also no guarantee Hood develops into a consistent 3PT shooter. He's struggled this season. And he's been injury prone. He could continue to have the plantar issue throughout his career.

Stauskas might not be the best trade option, but I'm leaning towards getting back something for Kanter now. Hayward, Favors and Gobert are going to be $20M players. Sign or match a 4yr deal for Enes and that contract overlaps the new deals for Hayward and Gobert for two years and a new deal for Favors by 1 season. Even with a higher cap/tax, that potentially puts Utah in the luxury tax for those two seasons. Millers might be willing to go one season, but not two. Yes, I know, we could keep him and trade him in a couple of years. But there are cheaper options to play behind Favors and Gobert (guys like Booker, our 2015 pick, etc.).

Plus, if we get back a player on a rookie deal, it opens up a good chunk of cap space (no QO for Enes). WE can go get another player like Booker. I'd strongly consider the Stauskas deal, just based on the fact this draft has a ton of bigs. Heck, I'd even consider Utah drafting WCS over someone like Prozingis or Turner. That means Favors can play PF full-time. Gobert/WCS and Favors/Booker. Damn!
Click to expand...
All that is fine but we also need a guy that can defend the perimeter a lot more then we need Stauskas. If we trade Kanter for Stauskas we hurt our longterm perimeter defense
 
L
Thee jazz fan said:
I'm not sold on Kanter bing in the future plans, and we've seen the trio of Favors, Kanter, and Gobert get 30 minutes each. A stretch4 like Anderson would be great for the jazz.

If we have one more slot to fill on the wing. It needs to be a Carroll type 3&D player who knows his role on the team. I'm fine getting another Stauskas type player, but I don't think we need to use a valuable asset like Kanter to get a guy like that. We have needs in other area's.

Personally I'd prefer a 3&D type.
Click to expand...
What's interesting is that you call Kanter a valuable asset. He is not. You get stauskas and you reset the clock on evaluating a talented player.
 
Kanter is a valuable asset for another month. After that he is just a player waiting on getting overpaid.

I will say that there is a decent chance Kanter doesn't get any great offers and we can re-sign him for relatively cheap. I would be happy with Kanter for 8 million a year.
 
Cy said:
Kanter is a valuable asset for another month. After that he is just a player waiting on getting overpaid.

I will say that there is a decent chance Kanter doesn't get any great offers and we can re-sign him for relatively cheap. I would be happy with Kanter for 8 million a year.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty much done with Kanter being on this team. Even at 8 million a year. He just doesn't look like player that contributes to winning basketball.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Stifle Tower said:
Because we don't have Hayward "locked up." In just two more seasons he's going to opt out. He'll be an UFA. There is NO guarantee he returns (or doesn't demand too much). Also no guarantee Hood develops into a consistent 3PT shooter. He's struggled this season. And he's been injury prone. He could continue to have the plantar issue throughout his career.

Stauskas might not be the best trade option, but I'm leaning towards getting back something for Kanter now. Hayward, Favors and Gobert are going to be $20M players. Sign or match a 4yr deal for Enes and that contract overlaps the new deals for Hayward and Gobert for two years and a new deal for Favors by 1 season. Even with a higher cap/tax, that potentially puts Utah in the luxury tax for those two seasons. Millers might be willing to go one season, but not two. Yes, I know, we could keep him and trade him in a couple of years. But there are cheaper options to play behind Favors and Gobert (guys like Booker, our 2015 pick, etc.).

Plus, if we get back a player on a rookie deal, it opens up a good chunk of cap space (no QO for Enes). WE can go get another player like Booker. I'd strongly consider the Stauskas deal, just based on the fact this draft has a ton of bigs. Heck, I'd even consider Utah drafting WCS over someone like Prozingis or Turner. That means Favors can play PF full-time. Gobert/WCS and Favors/Booker. Damn!
Click to expand...


Good to see you finally coming around. I was gonna respond to one of your posts with this same information.

Rudy will get his max right when the cap goes up. He'll be making 20+ mil and Hayward, and Favors. But even before that, we run the risk of going into the luxury tax if we pay Kanter a lot. Or its gonna mean that we can't sign anyone good because Kanter's salary will take up all our available cap space.

I think everyone keeps forgetting that even though the cap goes, so are salaries. It will only be a year or two that Kanter's salary will be affordable. Then it's a burden, and he'll have to be traded anyways. So it's either now or later. I think now he is more tradable than later. If, he's even tradable later. Anything can happen. He might get injured. He might not improve etc..


I don't think the Millers are gonna be willing to do the luxury tax thing til we are true contenders. Even then still maybe not.
 
Thee jazz fan said:
All that is fine but we also need a guy that can defend the perimeter a lot more then we need Stauskas. If we trade Kanter for Stauskas we hurt our longterm perimeter defense
Click to expand...

That's why I said Stauskas may not be the guy. But if there's a real concern about keeping Kanter, then at least get an asset. So trade him for a pick and an expiring if you don't want an extra contract. Personally, I'd take a top-10 pick like Stauskas. Shooters are extremely valuable. You could bring him in and split the minutes between him and Hood (sorry, Elijah). Either one can be an asset in another trade down the road. Makes much more sense than Kanter getting a deal for $10M+ and the Jazz then deciding not to match.

Perhaps if it weren't for the number of bigs in the draft, I might be inclined to say keep Kanter. Then again, that very fact might decrease his trade value...unless a team is desperate to do "something," which it appears is the current state of the Kings.
 
I think someone is going to pay Kanter....in the neighborhood of $10M - $11M/year. Too many teams in the east could use him. Quite frankly, he'd also look pretty awesome on the Spurs if he replaced Splitter.

If the Jazz didn't already have both Favors and Gobert, they wouldn't even think of trading him right now.
 
Well the last time we traded for a high lottery selection in their 1st year, in a year they were considered "bust", it worked out pretty well. (Trading for Favors)

Maybe we could do the same with Stauskus, but by just giving up Kanter.
 
Cy said:
Well the last time we traded for a high lottery selection in their 1st year, in a year they were considered "bust", it worked out pretty well. (Trading for Favors)

Maybe we could do the same with Stauskus, but by just giving up Kanter.
Click to expand...

Calling Favors a 'bust' when he was virtually the youngest guy in the league with the Nets is a bit of a stretch. The Nets were trying to recruit superstars and win now. They bricked trying to get Carmello and KOC sold them on DWill. Favors was oozing with potential. I'm not sure Stauskas is.
 
Only things I will give Kanter over Splitter is shooting and rebounding.

Everything else is Splitter though, especially defense and passing.
 
Cy said:
Well the last time we traded for a high lottery selection in their 1st year, in a year they were considered "bust", it worked out pretty well. (Trading for Favors)

Maybe we could do the same with Stauskus, but by just giving up Kanter.
Click to expand...

Big men develop differently I guess :/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top