What's new
By:

Re-sign Kanter or sign Draymond Green?

Kanter or Green

  • Kanter

    Votes: 25 62.5%

  • Green

    Votes: 14 35.0%

  • Neither

    Votes: 1 2.5%
  • Total voters
    40
orangello said:
So what is too much?
Click to expand...
No clue, considering what Burks got. Wouldn't care to go any over 10 per. That's probably around what he'll get. Probably would have to push that to get him to join a losing team in Utah.
 
LazyD said:
No clue, considering what Burks got. Wouldn't care to go any over 10 per. That's probably around what he'll get. Probably would have to push that to get him to join a losing team in Utah.
Click to expand...
I was thinking the same thing.

Honestly for me the Burks contract is looking worse and worse.
 
Green will be restricted, so even if we somehow convinced him to sign in Utah, GS could still match if they really wanted to keep him. However, they are going to be into the tax next year with the salary they already have committed. A big raise for Green would put them way over. I don't know how willing their owner is to pay the tax, but if they want to avoid it, there may be an opportunity to steal a player like Green.
 
QuinSnydersHair said:
^
Think feline.

Yeah, some cool gifts. A new set of golf clubs, with bag, from my father. Not sure who I'll golf with but still cool.

MsSerp gave me deodorant, toothpaste and razor blades on my stocking. I think she's trying to tell me my hygiene needs improving.
Click to expand...
I'd golf with ya
 
Offer him the max.


The first time I saw Rudy play live was his rookie season against the GSW. Things got a little chippy between Rudy & Bogut and Rudy & Green.

If Rudy has an expectation of retaining Kanter, then the Jazz should keep Kanter. If Rudy desires Green as a teammate, then the Jazz should offer him an absurd contract, or offer GS Kanter in some sort of overly complicated sign and trade.
 
freakazoid said:
Green will be restricted, so even if we somehow convinced him to sign in Utah, GS could still match if they really wanted to keep him. However, they are going to be into the tax next year with the salary they already have committed. A big raise for Green would put them way over. I don't know how willing their owner is to pay the tax, but if they want to avoid it, there may be an opportunity to steal a player like Green.
Click to expand...

Don't they need to reup Harrison Barnes too?
 
Seriously though, why the hell did we give away Millsap if we want Green?

Maybe... If Green gets lucky, he will be 1/2 the player Millsap is.
 
Crocodile Dante said:
sweet another robin to no batman. just what we need
Click to expand...

Who do you suggest getting then? He's at 12.4 ppg at 44.3%/34.1%/74.0% with 8.0 rebounds, 3.3 assists, 1.3 blocks, 1.3 steals. In the Spurs offense, they want selfless players with elite iq's and an elite ability to pass and/or shoot. He basically has all that. And we don't want to sign him? Oh yeah, and according to everyone on the team, he's the heart and soul of it.

I won't ignore the fact that he has two elite shooters around him but we wouldn't need him to be the second or third option here either.

I know Kanter is becoming very intriguing offensively and shows better effort on defense but this doesn't change the fact that he's a major liability on defense and does virtually nothing outside of scoring.
 
freakazoid said:
Green will be restricted, so even if we somehow convinced him to sign in Utah, GS could still match if they really wanted to keep him. However, they are going to be into the tax next year with the salary they already have committed. A big raise for Green would put them way over. I don't know how willing their owner is to pay the tax, but if they want to avoid it, there may be an opportunity to steal a player like Green.
Click to expand...
A front loaded contract would probably make the tax hit way too high for them.
 
QuinSnydersHair said:
44.3%/34.1%/74.0%


In the Spurs offense, they want selfless players with elite iq's and an elite ability to pass and/or shoot.
Click to expand...

Do those percentages contradict the idea of having players who can shoot in a spurs offense. (Keep in mind that those numbers probably go down without the splash bros)
 
fishonjazz said:
Do those percentages contradict the idea of having players who can shoot in a spurs offense. (Keep in mind that those numbers probably go down without the splash bros)
Click to expand...

I don't think so. Let's be honest. Look at Parker's numbers. Ginobili's. They've not exactly shot lights out for their careers. Manu's a career 45/36.9/83.1. Parker's 49.5/32.2/75.3. Green to me would be a great stretch 4. The problem is having Favors at the 5 then. I'm not sure how I feel but most here seem to think Favors is better at the 4 and they may be right.
 
I love the idea of having Exum-?-Hayward-Green in the starting five. The passing and shooting (Exum has shocked me at his solid spot up shooting) could be sick. Maybe we get Mudiay to round that out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top