[size/HUGE] boobs [/size]
Banned
Or Quincy Lewis? Potential, intelligence and work ethic, not just potential.
This is what I am trying to say!!! We need player who can work hard and perform. Not only potential or we will become Charlotte Bobcats.
Or Quincy Lewis? Potential, intelligence and work ethic, not just potential.
Your posts become harder to decode every day. The one above is little more than random words jumbled with a picture. I literally have no clue what point you're trying to make.
[size/HUGE] boobs [/size];881622 said:Guys, should we have re-signed Mr Millsap two years back?
NO, we should NOT have kept him..or AL....we should have got rid of them a year sooner actually, if you are using hindsight..
How can you say hindsight is 20/20 then make a wrong choice again?
I LOVE Millsap. My old name (GlassEater) and avatar was a tribute to Paul for his rebounding skills. I know why he wasn't traded; the Millers and KOC really wanted to keep him on the team. A rotation of Millsap, Kanter and Favors at the 4/5 would have been pretty good. Hayward, Burks, Williams and Carroll at the 2/3. And Burke and ? at PG. Utah is contending for the playoffs. But then what?
That was precisely Lindsey's argument. Millsap would have been re-signed for about $10M/per (two teams bidding on him instead of taking a low offer from Atlanta). Utah either juts misses the playoffs or barely makes them. So a pick in the 13-18 range. Add a player like Ennis or Young? No Exum, no Hood. And Millsap takes up a higher salary slot, so Utah has Favors, Millsap, Hayward and can likely re-sign just one of Burks, Kanter or Gobert moving forward. Oh yeah, and no basis for DL getting rid of Corbin. So Utah is stuck with Ty and a team that is likely in contention for a 7th/8th seed for the next 4-5 years until a rebuild has to be done.
You'd think there were good teams with worse players on expiring deals willing to give up at least some second round picks for the upgrade and Bird rights to Paul or Al. The Jazz would still have had the cap space to make the GS trade in that case. So no, the Jazz did not "basically" trade Al and Paul for the GS picks.
Of course, the Paul and/or Al could have been retained or sign-and-traded if that GS trade didn't materialize. Missing out on acquiring additional assets in a rebuild and miscalculating the market for Gordo's services are somewhat understandable in isolation. It's a little troubling that DL made both of these mistakes.
You'd think there were good teams with worse players on expiring deals willing to give up at least some second round picks for the upgrade and Bird rights to Paul or Al. The Jazz would still have had the cap space to make the GS trade in that case. So no, the Jazz did not "basically" trade Al and Paul for the GS picks.
Of course, the Paul and/or Al could have been retained or sign-and-traded if that GS trade didn't materialize. Missing out on acquiring additional assets in a rebuild and miscalculating the market for Gordo's services are somewhat understandable in isolation. It's a little troubling that DL made both of these mistakes.
1. 2nd round picks are better than nothing.Because the Jazz need 3 or 4 more second round picks. . . The point was that is we traded AL and Paul than we had to take salary back, which would have made the Golden State Deal undoable. Was there anyone that was going to give us two unprotected firsts for Al and Paul?
I haven't looked back at team needs, contracts, potential contention, etc., but is it that outrageous to think that a team would be willing to give up a lesser player on an expiring deal and a second round pick for Paul or Al?Neither player got anything longer than a 3 year deal but some team wanted them for their bird rights?
I just don't buy this notion that people were knocking the jazz door down to give is assets for them.
1. 2nd round picks are better than nothing.
2. If you re-read my post, you'll notice I said "worse players on expiring deals". Those deals may not have been available, sure, but they could have been traded for lesser players on expiring deals, which wouldn't have affected the GS trade at all.
You are 100% correct, sir. Paul and DeMarre both expected offers from Utah. And there were articles about the divide in the FO over Millsap. I think the "reload" philosophy of KOC was very much on the table. The decision to let Big AL go had been made, but the Jazz could have proceeded with a Favors/Millsap/Kanter rotation. And then gone after a vet PG to likely play in front of Burke until Trey was ready to run the team. During the first week of FA, the Jazz were linked to several players before they decided to go full rebuild.I actually think that up until Golden State foolishly offered us 2 unprotected firsts, and 3 second rounders, keeping Paul was on the table. I'd have to go back and check the timing, but I believe doing that deal officially slammed the door on Paul. I have to think that with the emotions that Jazz ownership has shown, letting Paul go was very, very hard. I can respect and forgive that in them.
You make it sound like DL is playing Utah Jazz Diplomacy and is not playing for a draw.