What's new
By:

George Karl is not super impressed with our roster moves

fishonjazz said:
He was not an all star last year? That's a travesty

Edit: just looked it up. No all star game for big al.
Click to expand...

Better than All-Star. All NBA 3rd team. Jefferson > Millsap and Booker basically = Millsap anyway. Early this year with the small sample size Booker >>>> Millsap. I don't miss Millsap even a little bit.
 
^My bad, GVC. You're right, Jefferson was a snub and Millsap was the all-star. for some reason I was thinking AJ had been a replacement on the team. I don;t even watch the AS game anymore as I find it boring as ****. Should have checked my facts.

Also, thanks for the correction on the salaries. That was $1m/yr, so for comparison, $4M over the life of Favors' contract (although I realize Al's contract expires sooner), not 4M per year.

1. I disagree with your statement that Al and Paul could have been dumped without taking on bad contracts. They were on the market for two years. It's not easy to trade huge salaries when you almost always have to take something back to make the trade work. KOC and DL repeatedly said they didn't want to take on long-term salaries. I think we can safely assume the only deals offered may have been for guys who had 2 or more years left. And that's a bad contract unless the player is a near all-star.

2. The Jazz WERE major players in 2013. Did they land Iggy or Mayo or someone else like that? No. But there were rumors about Mayo, they were negotiating with (or at least talking to) Millsap's agent until the GS deal went down. I think it was after seeing the exorbitant contracts being tossed around DL decided value wasn't there. But they did spend half their cap on FA's. I'd classify that as being a player. Maybe they didn't spend it on the big name players you may have wanted, but they were major players in free agency, acquiring assets and facilitating some moves by others.

3. Yes, you can argue the picks weren't a good return. But would bringing in a guy like Rip Hamilton + a 2nd have been better? The Jazz wanted financial freedom. They got that. They also wanted to rebuild. The 3 players they received didn't really improve the team, which I would say was a HUGE consideration in making the deal. They got to the floor, picked up additional picks, and ensured they'd have a good chance at a top-5 pick. Get veterans for Paul and/or Al who had multiple years left and I think the Jazz are looking at a pick in the 13-14 range at best (assuming they miss the playoffs) or a pick around 18th (if they make the playoffs).

4. C'mon, this is really revisionist history. Perhaps you suggested the Jazz should just give in to Gordon's demands and pay him $48M. If so, I apologize. I remember most saying his value was around $8M (if not lower). We all misjudged Charlotte giving him that offer. Gordon got lucky. The Jazz thought it would be more like what happened to Bledsoe in Phoenix, where no one stepped forward because they knew Phoenix would match. Kudos to Gordon. And yes, shame on Dennis Lindsey for not getting a notarized affidavit from Charlotte stating their intention to overpay for Hayward.
 
Last edited:
seattlejazzfan said:
Better than All-Star. All NBA 3rd team. Jefferson > Millsap and Booker basically = Millsap anyway. Early this year with the small sample size Booker >>>> Millsap. I don't miss Millsap even a little bit.
Click to expand...

LOL. Try watching a Hawks game, bru.
 
Are people still making excuses for when they said in rabid tones that Kanter was better than Jefferson and Favors better than Millsap?
 
Jazz with Jefferson and Millsap would be just an average playoff team.
Bobcats and Hawks are also just average with Jefferson and Millsap.
Jazz made some calculated moves to attempt to jump to next level.
Had to take the risk.
 
Stifle Tower said:
3. Yes, you can argue the picks weren't a good return. But would bringing in a guy like Rip Hamilton + a 2nd have been better? The Jazz wanted financial freedom. They got that. They also wanted to rebuild. The 3 players they received didn't really improve the team, which I would say was a HUGE consideration in making the deal. They got to the floor, picked up additional picks, and ensured they'd have a good chance at a top-5 pick. Get veterans for Paul and/or Al who had multiple years left and I think the Jazz are looking at a pick in the 13-14 range at best (assuming they miss the playoffs) or a pick around 18th (if they make the playoffs).
Click to expand...
I simply don't buy that there weren't teams out there that were willing to give up better assets than 2 late 1st for Paul and/or Al. I'd guess there were teams with big enough expiring contracts that would have been open to making a deal, but I haven't looked at rosters/salaries. I see no reason to take DL at his word here. Even for non-contenders Paul and Al's Bird rights may have been valuable.

Stifle Tower said:
4. C'mon, this is really revisionist history. Perhaps you suggested the Jazz should just give in to Gordon's demands and pay him $48M. If so, I apologize. I remember most saying his value was around $8M (if not lower). We all misjudged Charlotte giving him that offer. Gordon got lucky. The Jazz thought it would be more like what happened to Bledsoe in Phoenix, where no one stepped forward because they knew Phoenix would match. Kudos to Gordon. And yes, shame on Dennis Lindsey for not getting a notarized affidavit from Charlotte stating their intention to overpay for Hayward.
Click to expand...
It represents a trend. DL has been conservative/reactionary when it comes to decisions about his own players.
 
it was the right decision to clear them both out. Gave us an idea of what we had with our young talent.

By mid-season, we'll know what we have with Kanter. Favors is a huge asset for this team-- wouldn't trade him for Millsap, no way in hell. Dude is 23 and he's only beginning to scrape the surface of his potential.

Trade Kanter if he sucks, see how Booker does, and go for Millsap if the Booker experiment proves to be meh.

If Booker provides an awesome role as 3rd big next to Gobert and Favors, then save money to either go after an all-star PG if our PG prospects bust, or move one of Hayward or Burks, and sign an all-star calibre SF.

Man. We actually have so much depth on this team. We are literally one player taking 'the next step' away from being a playoff team. Hopefully it's Exum. Him being an all-star, with Favors, Hayward, Burks, and Gobert to round things off? Top 6 seed WCF.
 
GVC said:
I simply don't buy that there weren't teams out there that were willing to give up better assets than 2 late 1st for Paul and/or Al. I'd guess there were teams with big enough expiring contracts that would have been open to making a deal, but I haven't looked at rosters/salaries. I see no reason to take DL at his word here. Even for non-contenders Paul and Al's Bird rights may have been valuable.

It represents a trend. DL has been conservative/reactionary when it comes to decisions about his own players.
Click to expand...

I actually did look at all 29 other teams and what contracts would fit (and tried several on the ESPN trade machine). There were only a couple of viable options which were discussed in depth on this board. And most came down to why would the other team even consider it? Al and Paul's Bird rights weren't valuable. Those didn't come into play in their new contracts. Sorry, but there just weren't contracts to match. I may go back and see if I still have the list I posted.

DL is conservative? Now I'm laughing. The conservative model, which was espoused by KOC and Greg Miller was to re-sign Millsap, DMC and Foye (I think Mo and Big AL had played themselves out of consideration) and compete for the playoffs as the 7th/8th seed. DL has been the polar opposite, arguing for a rebuild "without skipping steps." DL has been aggressive in re-signing Favors and Burks ahead of free agency. Gordon felt like it would be better to test the market. I GUARANTEE you Lindsey would have been RIPPED TO SHREDS had Hayward signed a deal last October for 4/$48M. 99% of people (apparently excluding you) would have said the Jazz were overpaying a slow, weak, poor-shooting, 4th option who hadn't shown he could be any kind of a team leader. So he goes out, has an even worse season and Charlotte offers him the max. You'd have to be either Marty McFly or the Charlotte GM to see that coming.
 
I didn't want Millsap to leave. He was one of my favorite players but I also wanted the rebuild to start and that wasn't going to happen with Paul and Al here. I don't think either wanted to be part of a rebuild. I just thought the Jazz should have started the rebuild earlier and traded Millsap or AJ prior to their last year when they had more value. Without them leaving the Jazz had no chance of getting a top 5 pick, in my opinion getting Exum and Hood makes up for not getting anything for them. The cap space also allows us to keep more of our young players.
 
GVC said:
I simply don't buy that there weren't teams out there that were willing to give up better assets than 2 late 1st for Paul and/or Al. I'd guess there were teams with big enough expiring contracts that would have been open to making a deal, but I haven't looked at rosters/salaries. I see no reason to take DL at his word here. Even for non-contenders Paul and Al's Bird rights may have been valuable.

It represents a trend. DL has been conservative/reactionary when it comes to decisions about his own players.
Click to expand...

I see where you are going with this, and while I do not disagree outright, I have to assume that we had those types of discussions and they simply did not bear fruit. I think that is more reasonable than assuming that the entire year, and more, before the contracts expired DL was doing nothing at all to move them for some gain. To me is says he tried and nothing was coming back that was worth whatever they might have been asked to give up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top