Does Kanter show Jazz made mistake in these playoffs ......

[franklin]

If Kanter had decided to take the Jazz qualifying offer this season to become unrestricted free agent next season, we would have been in the playoffs now, probably with the 5th seed.

I think he will step up his game in the playoffs. Some players play better when the game matters most, I think he could be one of them.
Funny how some Jazz fans are always trying to belittle his performances.

Hayward had a good season but he showed he couldn't carry his team to the playoffs. Where was Hayward against the Clippers and Dallas in crucial games?

I also want to point out, once again, that we would be in the playoffs if we took Reggie Jackson or traded for Isaiah Thomas for the bag of peanuts that Phoenix got for him.

 

[MTS]

While we're out here beating dead horses, how about that time the Jazz drafted Deron Williams ahead of Chris Paul? Sickening, eh?

 

[karl malone]

You explain in detail how he bullied his way out of here, at an inopportune juncture to return assets for him..

but preface it with 'nothing they can do' and 'didn;t make a mistake'.. you sound like an enabler to me..

He was going to be be restricted.. His qualifying offer still would've been like a $9,000,000 salary..

I'd say If we were GM's and you thought that way about Kanter, and I was a GM that wanted to add him, that'd you'd be just the dude I'd be looking to negotiate with..

He's a pro athlete, not a drug addict. He should'nt need an intervention in order to convince him to want to play in Utah. I didn't say there was nothing they could do, obviously they had the option of holding on to him. I stand by my statement that they didn't make a mistake by trading him however.

-He was a potential distraction & disruption to the team's development

-Trading him opened up playing time for Gobert without the overlying controversy

-Holding onto him for an additional half year wouldn't have increased his trade value

-Holding onto him & matching on a max contract creates the potential of getting stuck with a player that you don't want on a contract that could affect your ability to re-sign other players

I agree that a GM should always do what is best for the team, regardless of the player, but I don't see any potential upside (in this specific situation) to holding on to a disgruntled player who had no future with the team & little to no chance of increasing his trade value any longer than necessary. Especially when doing so could delay/disrupt the progression of the team as well as Gobert, who clearly had (& still has) a future with this team.

 

[silesian]

Kanter's Drpm is last among all nba centers. That is playing against second stringers. And he'd move us from 9 seed to 5 seed. I need to find out what you guys are smoking. Or are you only looking at his offensive stats. Against second string.

 

[GVC]

Kanter's Drpm is last among all nba centers. That is playing against second stringers.

RPM controls for quality of opponents; your second sentence is unnecessary/irrelevant.

 

[addictionary]

RPM controls for quality of opponents; your second sentence is unnecessary/irrelevant.

I didn't know that. Thanks for the info.

 

[tleikheen]

I didn't say there was nothing they could do, obviously they had the option of holding on to him. I stand by my statement that they didn't make a mistake by trading him however.

Kanter was a 22 yr old kid from a foreign land,yet he can command the Jazz front ofc what he wants......Even 22 yr old American kids can't tell a professional basketball team what they want and get what they want......

-Trading him opened up playing time for Gobert without the overlying controversy

Gobert was going to get the starting Center position anyways and OKC has proven they can make Kanter into the 1st option of the 2nd unit ,Jazz didn't even try.Remember ,their was enough minutes for Gobert,Favors and Kanter.Gobert and Favors both getting hurt and costing the Jazz Wins and Kanter shooting 58 FG% and 40%(3's)and 80%FT really emphasized Jazz acted prematurely.

I agree that a GM should always do what is best for the team, regardless of the player, but I don't see any potential upside (in this specific situation) to holding on to a disgruntled player who had no future with the team & little to no chance of increasing his trade value any longer than necessary. Especially when doing so could delay/disrupt the progression of the team as well as Gobert, who clearly had (& still has) a future with this team.

Money ,winning and being wanted in a clearly defined role would have easily made a 22 yr old kid feel alot better.....Funny that OKC has shown what Utah could have done.Now the Jazz after a year of a lot of fans here calling the Jazz bench awful,repeatedly losing close winnable games has to watch Kanter emerge in the playoffs for a arch rival.Man the butthurt men(fans) here will get smaller and smaller as the rest of the basketball world talks about how Kanter got had by OKC for basically nothing.

 

[MTS]

Has a Kanter fan ever addressed either of these two points?

1) The Jazz got significantly better directly after trading Kanter.
2) Paying max money to a backup center would be stupid.

Just curious.

 

[Stifle Tower]

I think this is a great question that you asked. We are all entitled to an opinion and it looks like a lot of fanz are sour towards Kanter. Being not only a fan but a basketball realist, I think the separation of Kanter had its ups and downs. Leading up to his depart from Utah it was well documented that he did not want to play for Utah. We could have shopped him and taken the highest bidder, however we chose to not shop him and trade him for scrap in the closing minutes. I think that he was a valuable enough of an asset to gain something for his exchange. I 100% agree that he needed to go. But if I think of what would the very successful organizations in the NBA do given the same scenario, I could not see them dealing him away for nothing valuable in return. Those little things are what separates good organizations from great organizations. You wouldn't give away a $20 dollar bill away to someone for nothing in exchange just because it was uglier and more weathered than the rest of the bills in your wallet, would you? Well then why trade away a valuable asset for nothing in return?

So you don't think Lindsey contacted every team in the league to ask if they wanted to trade for Kanter? I'm 99.9% sure he did. I also know - because Lindsey said so - that Kanter was being shopped as early as December.

DL took the best deal that was offered. Even before the PUBLIC trade demand, teams were aware he was a poor defender. Remember what RJ said as he was leaving, that Kanter didn't think defense was important. And we were all down on Jefferson for criticizing Enes.

Enes wanted to start; his agent said he was the best player of his generation. There was simply no way he would have stayed. Had the Jazz matched an offer; he would have been making trade demands every few days.

 

[silesian]

RPM controls for quality of opponents; your second sentence is unnecessary/irrelevant.

Great point, thanks.

 

[karl malone]

Kanter was a 22 yr old kid from a foreign land,yet he can command the Jazz front ofc what he wants......Even 22 yr old American kids can't tell a professional basketball team what they want and get what they want...... Gobert was going to get the starting Center position anyways and OKC has proven they can make Kanter into the 1st option of the 2nd unit ,Jazz didn't even try.Remember ,their was enough minutes for Gobert,Favors and Kanter.Gobert and Favors both getting hurt and costing the Jazz Wins and Kanter shooting 58 FG% and 40%(3's)and 80%FT really emphasized Jazz acted prematurely.
Money ,winning and being wanted in a clearly defined role would have easily made a 22 yr old kid feel alot better.....Funny that OKC has shown what Utah could have done.Now the Jazz after a year of a lot of fans here calling the Jazz bench awful,repeatedly losing close winnable games has to watch Kanter emerge in the playoffs for a arch rival.Man the butthurt men(fans) here will get smaller and smaller as the rest of the basketball world talks about how Kanter got had by OKC for basically nothing.

-Kanter's nationality had nothing to do with it. He demanded a trade after it was clear that his time in Utah was coming to an end & he was subsequently traded.

-Yes, Gobert was on track to be the starter. Yes, there was enough PT for all 3. Yes, OKC has gotten Kanter to accept a role of off the bench. No, we don't know if he was willing to do that here or if it would've worked/disrupted chemistry/etc.

-Yes, OKC got the better of that trade. Yes, having a player of Kanter's caliber on the bench would have helped immensely. No, that doesn't mean they made the wrong decision.

I wish things would've worked out differently but it was clear (at least to me) that it was in the team's best interest to move on from a player who clearly had no future here & even admitted that he gave less than full effort during his tenure in Utah.

 

[addictionary]

Has a Kanter fan ever addressed either of these two points?

1) The Jazz got significantly better directly after trading Kanter.
2) Paying max money to a backup center would be stupid.

Just curious.

I did. Every time I wrote about it. And some annoying homer comments I got back from some people but I said it back then and I say it now. What he did was ****ting on the table he ate on but he is a lot better than that now, he acts more mature, he apologizes for the ones he disrespected and actually playing really great so I'm happy for him and the Jazz as the way things turned out. He is not a max player. But he keeps reaching to that spot by the time we speak. That last Dallas game, I don't recall many games he played actually really good D like that. Active feet. He is learning.