What's new
By:

How many productive players have the jazz lost for nothing in return?

ya'll can go back through the threads I've created if you need proof that I've engaged in more nuanced discussions related to this topic. I know we've made moves in order to have future cap flexibility, gain future assets, etc. Makes sense.

That said, it also makes sense to look at assets from other angles. Out-going... In-coming... How good are we at retaining known value?* That's the suggestion here. I, for one, started scrambling for new angles when I realized we probably aren't bringing in anybody but role players with that cap space + we lost some very good talent at the prospect of a high draft pick (another plan that seems to be........).

*you don't RETAIN known value when you dump talent for cap space and picks. That doesn't mean that going for money and picks is a bad idea... but what is that evaluated against?
 
I think you can go through the list of these player decisions and see the logic behind most of them. With any move the front office makes there is an opportunity cost.

The Jazz reportedly did try to trade Millsap and probably Jefferson too. However, they didn't want to take back salary or another player that might interfere with the development of the other talent on the team. Every player has to be looked at for his value and for the cost of his deal. Saying these people left for nothing in return isn't really true, since there are always new players and free agents available to fill a roster spot. Most GMs would rather have Gordon Hayward than Wes Matthews, let alone at a lower price through this season, so whatever moves led to that upgrade would be considered worthwhile moves.

This year, the Jazz are giving more minutes to the young guys, tanking the season to get another lottery talent, and preserving cap space. In the meantime, they picked up a couple first-round picks from Golden State so the Warriors could field a team that's no better than last year's. Not a bad move. At least it's on strategy. Because the Jazz let Millsap and Al Jeffs walk, they'll have developed Favors and Kanter more, and they'll get another stud in the draft. You can't draw conclusions on those decisions until the Jazz make those picks, but it's likely that the talent the Jazz will bring back is better overall than AlSap, who couldn't get past the first round, if that. Millsap may be leading the Atlanta Hawks right now, but if the Hawks were in the Western Conference they probably wouldn't make the playoffs.
 
[size/HUGE] fixed [/size];764605 said:
ya'll can go back through the threads I've created if you need proof that I've engaged in more nuanced discussions related to this topic. I know we've made moves in order to have future cap flexibility, gain future assets, etc. Makes sense.

That said, it also makes sense to look at assets from other angles. Out-going... In-coming... How good are we at retaining known value?* That's the suggestion here. I, for one, started scrambling for new angles when I realized we probably aren't bringing in anybody but role players with that cap space + we lost some very good talent at the prospect of a high draft pick (another plan that seems to be........).

*you don't RETAIN known value when you dump talent for cap space and picks. That doesn't mean that going for money and picks is a bad idea... but what is that evaluated against?
Click to expand...

The only hope a small-market team has for really contending by is drafting a star. The odds of getting a star are much higher in the lottery. The Jazz gave up being a middling team for a shot at adding another stud. The players that the Jazz gave up all had their limitations---Sap can't guard length, Al can't guard the pick-and-roll, DeMarre Carroll can't create much offense, etc. etc.
 
Now I was never an Al Jefferson hater, but: The Jazz picked him up for nothing, used him for two years, and then exchanged him for a couple of GSW picks. I see that as buying a used car, driving it for a couple of years, and then selling it for more than you paid.
 
framer said:
Ok, Hack, go ahead and tell me what deals that were available that were better than capspace. I understand that the Jazz are tightlipped, but we can infer from other deals that took place what the market was at the time.
1. The Boozer for Jefferson move was sideways, and we had to make that move to keep Deron happy. Boozer wasn't coming back and almost nobody wanted him back at that point. The fact we were able to even go sideways on that was a miracle.
2. Demarre Carroll? Seriously? The guy is on his 5th Team in 4 years. We picked him up off the waiver wire. What value was there to be had for him? He is the same age as Marvin who is a better player and was under contract. We are having a hard time trading Marvin, who, as I mentioned, is a better player. If you loved Carroll he was a free agent, you could wait then sign him.
3. Millsap. Damn fine player. Knowing what you know now would you have traded him and Burks (or Kanter) for an Eric Bledsoe in a contract year + non expiring Junk? That was the offer. We have a good point and Burks who I like better and we have a couple more years of before we have to pay him. Made the right move. This left the option open for the Golden State fleece.
4. Jefferson. The only option I was aware of was from Boston and they wanted Burks as well and didn't really have much to give us (Rondo wasn't coming, that was a Jazzfanz pipe dream.) Made the right move. This left the option open for the Golden State fleece.
5. Korver. Didn't want anymore after his refusal to actually play basketball at the end of the season. Suspect all possible trading partners felt the same.
6. Matthews. Made the wrong call here, although up until this year, Matthews has been kind of "meh." He would be giving us his best season when we are trying to tank. If we really love him we will have enough cap to sign him in 2015.
7. Kirilenko, needed that sweet, sweet capspace freedom. Absolutely take that off the books.
8. Shandon Anderson. Yep should have paid that guy with a large contract, right?. Didn't trade him because we really wanted to keep him, just not at a Cadillac price.
9. Inconsequential PG that facilitated the Harpring trade. Got rid of Matt Harpring.
10. Howard Eisley. This one stung. Solid backup that we should have done a better job of keeping. I think he wanted to be here bet we nickeled and dimed him.
Click to expand...

I hate the argument that I dont know what deals were in place. Ya, you didnt either, and neither did anyone else here. Its all speculation.


I think you went overboard with your assumptions. I dont care about half those people on those lists. My biggest gripes are as follows...

1. Not getting something for Millsap. I guarantee that a pick or two could have been had for a borderline allstar on a great contract.

2. Al Jefferson, same thing, only he was getting paid more. But still on a short deal.

3. Letting Mathews walk. It was a mistake. Period. They could have found a way to avoid the tax.


Ya, we got something eventually for Millsap and Jefferson because of cap space, but the same could have happened plus we could have traded them. Just shop for deals with the same length, but players that arent wanted.

The Jazz drug their feet on Millsap and Jefferson. Plain and simple. They kept trying to make it work, even though it was clear with two years left on their deals that they needed to be moved. They didnt play well together, we sucked, and we had two 3rd overall picks that were bigs we just obtained. Its freaking retarded that they held on to those two til the end. Its was obvious to everyone. And I dont want to hear that they weren't tradeable. Thats complete nonsense. We paid two 1st's for AL didn't we? Well does that make KOC dumb then for paying that price for a guy who isnt tradeable? Either way, its dumb what they did. They wasted two years trying to make that nonsense work. And Millsap was certainly tradeable.
 
Ellipse said:
Now I was never an Al Jefferson hater, but: The Jazz picked him up for nothing, used him for two years, and then exchanged him for a couple of GSW picks. I see that as buying a used car, driving it for a couple of years, and then selling it for more than you paid.
Click to expand...

Too bad your facts are all jacked up.

they paid two firsts, a 2nd, and Koufus for Al. Its hardly nothing.
 
Ellipse said:
Now I was never an Al Jefferson hater, but: The Jazz picked him up for nothing, used him for two years, and then exchanged him for a couple of GSW picks. I see that as buying a used car, driving it for a couple of years, and then selling it for more than you paid.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Hack said:
1. Not getting something for Millsap. I guarantee that a pick or two could have been had for a borderline allstar on a great contract.

2. Al Jefferson, same thing, only he was getting paid more. But still on a short deal.

3. Letting Mathews walk. It was a mistake. Period. They could have found a way to avoid the tax.
Click to expand...


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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top