Are there any Kanter apologists left? What are they saying?
- Thread starter NAOS
- Start date
Yet the Hawks are one of the best teams in the NBA with Sap as their PF. I have no idea how accurate this site is, but on defensive ratings it has Milsap 3rd in defensive rating and 4th in defensive win shares https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2015_leaders.html. Can't find a lot of other sites that show individual defensive rating, but I don't think you'd argue any of the other top 10 are among the best in the league.
I don't think anyone is really arguing that they didn't get market value (at least thats not what I'm arguing). They just had to sell way low. His abilities as a player > return on the trade. Thats what happens when you sell low, you get less value.
addictionary
Well-Known Member
And timing and season and demanding roster gaps and those sort of things tend to affect that market price, demand quite a lot, so I think in this case people are emphasizing the timing of the trade more than Jazz front office blowing it up in bargaining. I agree with the ones who say that the Jazz should have traded Kanter before he asked for trade. I also agree with people that the Jazz should have kept him and wait for the offseason to make a move. But I think they found the motivation of Rudy Gobert too important to tolerate keeping Kanter at home. Because if Kanter was still in Jazz uniform, they would have needed to keep playing him to keep his value up. Enes was performing well lately in Jazz uniform. I think the Jazz didn't want to gamble any more on him and were stoked about Rudy's emergence and wanted to leave this story behind. So value is a relative thing, you are definitely right. We can go around and say that the FO could have made a deal with Milwaukee Bucks so the Jazz could get a few good pieces. But it's not a fault that they didn't act too hardballs on the trade. It was a choice. To me at least.
I'd love to see Ibaka shove him in the back and tell him where he needs to be on defense.
NAOS
Well-Known Member
The jazz didn't get value for a player who didn't exist?
Srs, braugh, pass me whatever you're smoking.
framer
Well-Known Member
I think if Kanter had been drafted at #14, nobody would care about the drama. Getting a top 3 NBA center (easily next year) makes fools like Kanter expendable no matter where they were drafted. You just don't screw with a player top 5 at his position, and retaining Kanter would have required screwing with Gobert. I just can't imagine Kanter EVER playing in the clutch like Favors did last night. He is a great bench player that refuses to recognize he is a bench player. You don't keep guys like that around, let alone at 15 million a year. The fact we got ANY assets out of him is cool. How many assets did the Nuggets get for trading Gobert?
illyasova
Active Member
Most Turkish fans are still here to root Kanterless jazz. Some just do not write posts so often even though they follow forums regularly just like me. Honestly; OKC is the team to root for us too to see them in the playoffs and have a chance to see Kanter out there.
Kanter's trade is win win situation for both of sides which has been surprising me. I was guessing Kanter's trade due to team chemistry, his cost to the team but was not expecting this overall performance of Gobert. Jazz is happy to have perfect duo of Gobert-Favors, Kanter is happy to have better playoff team and covering more news for the paycheck in the offseason.
Yep. Obviously it would have been nice to get more back for him, but it's pretty clear at this point that moving him was correct. Hard to complain too much when Gobert is playing like he is.
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
I was a huge proponent of the trade. Once he made the demand, that was it.
That said, I would have LOVED to have Kanter as our third big. He's a very good offensive player. He's fully capable of putting up close to 20/10 as a starter playing 36 mins. But he was a) never going to accept coming off the bench and b) was going to demand a max contract (or close to it).
There is no doubt Rudy is a franchise player. His elite defense changes every game. We've seen so many bigs get frustrated...from Duncan to Aldridge to Gasol. Even with just a rudimentary offensive game, Gobert is already the Jazz player you have to build around. You add to that the attitude he brings, which others feed off of - he's the franchise player we were always hoping to have some day (and a superstar if he can develop an offensive game out to the FT line).
With Kanter/Favors we were hoping the defense would be adequate. And the big drawback is it usually left Favors as the primary inside defender. Kanter is going to put up pretty good numbers wherever he goes. He's like Big Al in that respect. But we went from good to great at the 5. And the change allows Favors to be at the 4. Kanter at $10M off the bench would have been great for the team. Kanter at $16M just doesn't fit.
That said, I would have LOVED to have Kanter as our third big. He's a very good offensive player. He's fully capable of putting up close to 20/10 as a starter playing 36 mins. But he was a) never going to accept coming off the bench and b) was going to demand a max contract (or close to it).
There is no doubt Rudy is a franchise player. His elite defense changes every game. We've seen so many bigs get frustrated...from Duncan to Aldridge to Gasol. Even with just a rudimentary offensive game, Gobert is already the Jazz player you have to build around. You add to that the attitude he brings, which others feed off of - he's the franchise player we were always hoping to have some day (and a superstar if he can develop an offensive game out to the FT line).
With Kanter/Favors we were hoping the defense would be adequate. And the big drawback is it usually left Favors as the primary inside defender. Kanter is going to put up pretty good numbers wherever he goes. He's like Big Al in that respect. But we went from good to great at the 5. And the change allows Favors to be at the 4. Kanter at $10M off the bench would have been great for the team. Kanter at $16M just doesn't fit.
You clearly lack reading comprehension.