Hotdog
Well-Known Member
Too bad your facts are all jacked up.
they paid two firsts, a 2nd, and Koufus for Al. Its hardly nothing.
How many productive players have the jazz lost for nothing in return?
- Thread starter [size/HUGE] fixed [/size]
- Start date
Too bad your facts are all jacked up.
they paid two firsts, a 2nd, and Koufus for Al. Its hardly nothing.
Ellipse
Well-Known Member
LOL If you say so.
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
Actually, this is a good example of retaining value. The Jazz got Jefferson for Boozer's trade exception and Koufos and a future first (IIRC). This was a deal KOC was working on with Kahn at the previous deadline. Reportedly, Kahn wanted an additional first and KOC was able to go out and get one.
It was also a valiant effort to retain Deron. Didn't work, of course, as Williams remained noncommittal. So we flipped Boozer for Jefferson, flipped Millsap and Jefferson for Biedrins, RJ and Rush (and picks). Moved Deron for Harris, Favors and picks. Then moved Harris for Marvin. The only failure I see is letting Matthews go. But by almost universal agreement by media and GM's; that was an outrageous contract. It had to be, though. The poison pill that Portland KNEW Utah would not swallow was to go into the luxury tax. Matthews had an ok rookie season. He wasn't worth $9M+ to keep.
I have no doubt Millsap was shopped, as was Jefferson. In fact, I remember a report the year before that the Jazz were trying to get a draft pick for Paul but there were no takers. I'm sure DL would love to trade RJ, MW, Biedrins or Rush. It ain't that easy. Who is available? What contract do we want to take on? Can contenders free up $7.5M or $11M to trade for Jefferson or Williams?
And if the Jazz keep "retaining value" by assuming equal salaries, how do they free up money to give to Favors, Hayward, Burks, Kanter, etc. Eventually some contracts HAVE to be allowed to expire to free up money to pay players as they come off their rookie deals.
1. Milsap was an expiring contract, and he was entering unrestricted free agency. The team that traded for him wasn't guaranteed he'd re-sign, and Sap was likely to be one-season rental, if that.
2. Al was also expiring, and whoever got him was renting him. The Spurs apparently inquired, but low-balled.
3. Yeah, Matthews was an asset worth keeping, even to trade later on.
vegas
Well-Known Member
Tell me what moves you would like to undo to have somebody back? I know we could be in hypothetical land dreaming about what we think was on the table. If you are talking about specific offers, then be specific, and we can discuss those unconfirmed scenarios. The Jazz have been pretty aggressive stockpiling picks to the point they traded their franchise player. If there were GS type trades available for Sap or Al with expiring bad contracts, they would have happened.
Wes Mathews is the only player on the list I would change. There rest are leading their teams nowhere. Even Wes is part of the Blazers supporting cast.
Hawks .500, Hornicats .400--Exactly the opposite of where I want my team to be.
Wes Mathews is the only player on the list I would change. There rest are leading their teams nowhere. Even Wes is part of the Blazers supporting cast.
Hawks .500, Hornicats .400--Exactly the opposite of where I want my team to be.
Darkwing Duck
Well-Known Member
Yeah, a team isn't giving up multiple picks for a three month rental. Especially at today's 90% min cap, no team can take on a Millsap without trading a player along with an asset. Jazz weren't willing to take on money for this year, so the trading candidates would have been really low. Also, Jazz strategy last year was pretty obvious. Try to win as much as we can and have zero liabilities in the summer.
Matthews was a meh decision in the long run. He was good for the Jazz but given the production, wasn't worth the contract. He's improved and exceeding what I would have projected, making himself worth the contract, but he's not enough of a needle mover to make a difference in the long term. Did Philadelphia lament the Jazz signing Matt Harpring to his deal where he outplayed the contract?
Matthews was a meh decision in the long run. He was good for the Jazz but given the production, wasn't worth the contract. He's improved and exceeding what I would have projected, making himself worth the contract, but he's not enough of a needle mover to make a difference in the long term. Did Philadelphia lament the Jazz signing Matt Harpring to his deal where he outplayed the contract?
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
I dont get it. Why argue about something you clearly have no clue what the facts are?
Are you trolling, or just dumb?
Do me favor, go look up what was involved in the trade, post a link, & then we can discuss why you were wrong.
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
I said they should have done it when they still had two years left.
thanks for reading the whole post.
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
By saying, that if there was an offer on the table for Millsap or Jefferson, then the Jazz would have taken it, then you are saying you know what goes on behind doors. Its no different than what Im saying. In fact your living in a lot more fantasy than me.
Question for everyone that always getd side stepped because none of Jazz management apologists want to answer it.
If Al had no value to be traded, then why did the Jazz trade 2 first round picks, Kosta Koufus(another 1st round pick), and a 2nd round pick for him? Doesnt make sense. Unless you admit the Jazz(KOC) arent good at trading.
Darkwing Duck
Well-Known Member
Jazz made the playoffs in that fabled Jazz suck have to trade everyone window you're talking about...
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
The truth is, the Jazz just didnt have it in them to be shipping in and out players. Probably still dont and wont. Part of it is tied to there ethics and business practices. Good or bad its the truth. They felt they owed Al and Paul something and werent going to use them as assets. They were never were listening to any offers unless they were over the top. They certainly weren't shopping them hard. They would have been easy pieces to move. Now its the same with Marvin and Jefferson. No way in hell they are even thinking about it. Then plan to just play this out. I'd bet ya anything.
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
You are right. We were so good that year. No reason to blow it up at all.
Darkwing Duck
Well-Known Member
What teams freely switch out their best players and are successful?
Jazz need to freely switch out Favors then. All we need is one year to see he isn't elite defensively enough to cover his mediocre offense, so we need new best players in the revolving door policy.
Darkwing Duck
Well-Known Member
Every team that doesn't make the conference finals should blow up the team. True story.
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
That's just it...they AREN'T easy pieces to move. How do you trade someone earning $14M to a contender? Contenders are generally over the cap so salaries have to match. And not many contenders have $14 or even $8M in a salary that they necessarily want to dump. They're trying to ADD a player to get better, not make a lateral move. So if they have an asset they want to move, it's generally a broken down vet with multiple years left on a contract. Is that worth a lousy pick in the late 20's? Much better off just saving the cap space and getting a FA in the summer market.
Jazz could have easily used that method to sign guys like Millsap, Carroll, etc. But the time is right to go with the new players, add a lottery pick (even if it closer to 10 than 5) and THEN STILL have cap space for a very good FA or two up to $15M or so. That's where the Jazz will be sitting this summer due to Lindsey's savvy moves to rid Utah of long-term commitments.
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
The Jazz never should have traded for Al Jefferson. No matter what was going on with the team. It was a terrible trade.
Instead of doing what they did. They should have kept Mathews, kept Koufus, or work on some other trade, and kept the two firsts. Oh, and they should have Drafted Paul George. They reached for Hayward. A lot of people thought George was gonna be good.
So instead of all that mess, our core would have been Dwill, Mathews, Paul George, Millsap, and some serviceable center.
That was my exact thinking during that whole process. I wanted all those players playing for the team. Instead the Jazz got all retarded and did a bunch of stupid ****.
Who knows, maybe everything would have been a lot different with Dwill too. That team could have been pretty damn good.
But ya, its done. Whatever. After trading for Big Al, I knew the Dwill trade had to be done. Wasnt even mad about that. Where we are now I like, but it could get really screwed up if they dont follow through with the tank. On record about that.
Instead of doing what they did. They should have kept Mathews, kept Koufus, or work on some other trade, and kept the two firsts. Oh, and they should have Drafted Paul George. They reached for Hayward. A lot of people thought George was gonna be good.
So instead of all that mess, our core would have been Dwill, Mathews, Paul George, Millsap, and some serviceable center.
That was my exact thinking during that whole process. I wanted all those players playing for the team. Instead the Jazz got all retarded and did a bunch of stupid ****.
Who knows, maybe everything would have been a lot different with Dwill too. That team could have been pretty damn good.
But ya, its done. Whatever. After trading for Big Al, I knew the Dwill trade had to be done. Wasnt even mad about that. Where we are now I like, but it could get really screwed up if they dont follow through with the tank. On record about that.
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
I dont know of any other team that has a conscience about trading players.
Jazz do. True story
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
Every team should blow up their team with Al Jefferson on it.
True Story.
awaiting reps..........
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
I know its not easy, but its not impossible.
Using Al as the example doesn't tell the whole story. Millsap was on a great deal and is beloved around the league.
I swear to god I could have delt the **** out of Millsap.
Lets not give credit to GM's just because they are GM's. I think its clear that their are plenty of GM's in the league in way over their head. Or would you defend every GM? Do you think its possible you might have homer blinders on? Just saying.