Jazz wanted Alex Abrines in Kanter trade?

[silesian]

Wow. With just two posts in this thread Andy makes jazzfanz feel 200 times smarter.

So you are saying we are 0.5% as smart as Andy? Thanks, that's a pretty nice complement.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Elaborate what it "netted us". The ~$4 million thrown away on Pleiss? The two-second rounders jettisoned to be free of another ~3 million owed to him? The ~$10 million (I don't have the exact figure) spent on Kendrick Perkins' buyout? Grant Jerrett's salary?

Until and unless one of the assets amounts to a positive, the trade was complete trash. It's okay to call a spade a spade. And yes, of course Kanter is a turd and there's a net positive to being rid of him. Still doesn't mean it was good asset management (especially since the Jazz bungled Kanter from the beginning). You can explain why the Jazz weren't interested in Jackson, and you can even be right to a degree. But we're talking about a trade that right now the Jazz have LOST assets/resources on, so you'll have to forgive those that see the player Jackson is and can plainly see how the Jazz biffed it. Doesn't mean they always do, doesn't mean critics are haters. On the contrary, if you can't acknowledge that the whole situation was ****ed to death garbage, you're a shameless homer.

The belief that you have got to get value for every asset is completely wrong. Sometimes the best decision is to cut your losses. The Kanter trade was a perfect example. Turn the page.

 

[addictionary]

Just gonna sig my own post from now on and maybe post less to make room for quality stuff.