What's new
By:

Interesting trade idea from Locke

baka98

baka98

Well-Known Member
Philly trades: #2 pick and Brand
Utah trades: #9 and AK+no offer to Booze

Would you do it?

Very intriguing IMO. I would say yes. You don't get the chance at the #2 very often.
Make it happen Greg!
 
You have to do it if you're Utah. Brand at 3 is better than Boozer at 6. We will not get a better offer for AK.
 
I'd do it, but would Philly? I don't like Brand's contract and it would likely make us a worse team next year, but it would probably be worth it to get Gordon Haywa...I mean, Derrick Favors.
 
Brand's contract is very terrible. But if the plan was to get Favors, I could sign off on it. Anyone else and I could not.
 
He's only about 2 weeks late to the party, but yeah, I pull the **** out of that ****.

And I'd see if NJ would trade Lopez for #2 straight up (since the need for Lopez might be lesser when they draft Favors and/or Cousins and already having Yi) then.

Also, did anyone see Favors' combine interview? Seems disinterested and/or slow upstairs to me. Not a good sign that we should draft him with #2 to me. Cousins is a piece of **** but at least he was engaged.
 
That deal comes with a MASS amount of trepidation about Brand. I don't remember him being smooth enough athletically to run the pick and roll well. And he's no center either, much in the way Boozer was, so getting Favors along with it means there are three PF on the roster. That won't help against the Lakers.

And I have trouble thinking that Philadelphia gives up the 2 for two years of financial relief.
 
Darkwing Duck said:
That deal comes with a MASS amount of trepidation about Brand. I don't remember him being smooth enough athletically to run the pick and roll well. And he's no center either, much in the way Boozer was, so getting Favors along with it means there are three PF on the roster. That won't help against the Lakers.

And I have trouble thinking that Philadelphia gives up the 2 for two years of financial relief.
Click to expand...

Brand's contract is 3 more years at $16, $17, then $18 mil.

I'm torn on this one. On one hand Brand is the epitome of injury prone, on the other, he's still a better defender than Boozer. If it would mean picking up Favors, I would probably do it. I think there were a lot of different things going on in Philly to contribute to his drop in production.
 
Elton Brand? Ugh.

If you think we've seen bitching about AK's contract over the years I cannot imagine what this place would be like about Elton. The reality is that AK was a better player than Brand last season. He's making $18 million three years from now and he's 31 now.

Furthermore it means that we will for sure not re-sign Boozer.

The trade really looks like this:

Utah gets: The marginal difference between Greg Monroe (assumed #9 pick) and Evan Turner (assumed #2 pick), the marginal difference between Elton Brand and AK + discounted probability that Boozer re-signs (I believe this is net-negative for the Jazz), and acquire $36 million in cap liability over the next three seasons.

Philly gets: $36 million in cap liability off the books, the marginal difference between AK and Brand (I believe net-positve), and only at the cost of the marginal difference between the quality of play at the #9 pick vs. the #2 pick.

Horrible idea for the Jazz. Short-sighted moves.
 
It's not a marginal difference between the #9 and #2. #2 is almost a lock to be an All-Star. #9 is a total wild card.
 
There's a severe drop-off after #5 (or possibly #6), having the ability to choose between Turner, Favors, Cousins, or Johnson is a lot better than whatever disinterested, distracted, project, undersized, or unathletic guy that's left at #9. Especially if the Jazz really are looking to use #9 for that-dude-that-looks-like-his-mom-but-hotter.
 
The Brand contract is truly, truly terrible. But there are 2 upsides. One, you almost certainly trade Millsap who should net a decent return. Two, the pick might be more valuable in trade than selecting Favors/Turner/Cousins. That said, I really can't imagine paying Brand for 3 years. I'd probably rather find a way to trade up to get Davis and live with that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top