What's new
By:
Filters

Jazz after both Knight and Kanter

Twin Towers said:
I offered trades involving Millsap for the 5th pick and I was criticized. Now Millsap and the 12th pick for the 5th is not bad?

Millsap & 12th pick >>>>>> Knight and Kleiza

I don't like the trade. If Derozon was in place of Kleiza than I would say yes. But Kleiza shot 29 percent from 3. And 33 for his career. Not good. I don't want him. And the Raptors won't give up Derozon. We need something more than just Knight for Millsap and the 12th pick.
Click to expand...

Alright, but then I would argue:

Millsap + 12th pick = Knight + Kleiza + TOR's future first round

Throw a future first round pick in there and I'd say YES THANK YOU.
 
Dwill_PwnasaurasRex said:
Also, is this really worth the influx of UK fans to the board? We have all seen how annoying PKM is. Do we want more PKM's to join the site? It's something we need to seriously consider.
Click to expand...
I'm no fan of UK, but they have some great fans who are good friends of mine and I'd love for them to become fans of the Jazz. If they ended up chasing you off in the process, that would be a bonus.
 
Hotttnickkk said:
I'd definitely do it and whoever it is either Millsap or Harris is fine by me - throw Bell in there as well if it's Harris.

Millsap

I really like him, but our future Trio has to be Jefferson, Favors and Kanter + 1 tall pesky back up Center. I hear everyone's argument about his character and his work ethic and how this would rub off the young players. But talent & size wins in this league and I don't think we can afford him any longer. Besides, the new guys we have (i.e., Hayward and Evans) already show a lot of character and work ethic which makes Millsap's intangibles a bit redundant IMO. You know Knight & Kanter are gonna hit the gym hard as well from pre-draft reports.

Harris

There's little doubt we should swap him for a younger version any chance we get. He is on the downward path in this career (losing his speed and leap) and he doesn't provide that veteran leadership that we need. For that why not just get Earl back for 2 more years to tutor Knight? I don't think he has a long future here IMO.

Are we going to be too young?

Yes and no. We can sign Earl (PG), we have Bell (SG - OK he's not the best, but he does provide the verteran cool head that we sometimes need), Miles (SF), Jefferson (PF/C).

Plus we'll have either Harris or Millsap as well (say we only trade 1).

So no, I think there's enough veteran leadership there.
Click to expand...

Though we may have to become friends in the future, I will still want to chop your head off for unnecessary use of the bold font function.
 
Ha! This won't happen.

#12 and Millsap or Al for Knight at #5? Sounds like Bleacher Report's solid journalism.

Millsap alone is worth at least the #5 in next years draft, with no picks traded from the Jazz.

Favors the Raptors too much.
 
Hotttnickkk said:
Alright, but then I would argue:

Millsap + 12th pick = Knight + Kleiza + TOR's future first round

Throw a future first round pick in there and I'd say YES THANK YOU.
Click to expand...

I want Millsap traded probably more than most on this board. And I actually like Millsap. But Millsap is better than Knight. And our 12th pick is better than Kleiza.

So that is my problem. Raptors first round draft pick would be nice but i am sure it would be like top 8 protected or something like that. That would be worth it I guess. I honestly don't like Kleiza though. I would rather than Sony Weems than him. But contract's probably wouldn't match up.
 
Twin Towers said:
I want Millsap traded probably more than most on this board. And I actually like Millsap. But Millsap is better than Knight. And our 12th pick is better than Kleiza.

So that is my problem. Raptors first round draft pick would be nice but i am sure it would be like top 8 protected or something like that. That would be worth it I guess. I honestly don't like Kleiza though. I would rather than Sony Weems than him. But contract's probably wouldn't match up.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Toronto's gonna suck again next year - guaranteed. Plus next year's draft gonna be loaded. What if we can get a stud SF next year?

If I was KOC it would be hard for me to say no to that actually...
 
MrBlue said:
That is not a terrible trade for either team is it? 12 and Millsap for 5 seems okay to me. Seems like a great trade for the Jazz. Even though I think that Millsap is the one big we have that fits with all of the other bigs on the team. You can play him with Jefferson or Favors and he compliments both of them. I don't know if a Favors/Jefferson tandem would be very effective offensively.
Click to expand...

Sap doesn't compliment Big Al in my eyes. They are too much alike. Both need the ball, both can't or won't defend, both are undersized.
Two offensive players don't compliment each other well. One needs to be the defender, the interior defensive force, neither are.

Sap and Favors are a better pair.
 
Revolution 9 said:
Sap doesn't compliment Big Al in my eyes. They are too much alike. Both need the ball, both can't or won't defend, both are undersized.
Two offensive players don't compliment each other well. One needs to be the defender, the interior defensive force, neither are.

Sap and Favors are a better pair.
Click to expand...


I agree with all but the last part. I think Jefferson and Favors are a better pair. Millsap makes the lineup still undersized. Favors and Jefferson is a good long lineup with a defender and an offensive player. Sap and Favors is definitely better than Sap and Jefferson who don't compliment each other at all on the floor.
 
shadler said:
https://bleacherreport.com/articles...valiers-choice-could-spark-jazz-raptors-trade
Click to expand...

If this happens, you can all thank Margo for tipping you off on 5/25:

margodydek said:
Not sure if I explained it right, but here's an example. Not sure if Toronto got a TPE for Bosh, but say they did. We trade #12 and Al to them for the #5. We get Kanter or DWill at #3 and at #5 we take Knight or Walker. Does anyone have KOC's digits? I think I'm on to something here.
Click to expand...
 
vslice02 said:
The concept of having your top 5-7 guys be young players under 25 may look good on paper but has never worked.
Establish your core for the future (Favors, Hayward, #3 pick, potentially '12 GS Pick) and if you have a couple guys in their early 30's after them that's fine.
Click to expand...

THANK YOU FOR SAYING THIS!!!!

I'd consider this trade if the outgoing piece was Harris and we were getting a player better than Kleiza. This is a fat NO as it is currently drawn-up.
 
I don't know if its some psychological coping strategy I've developed as a result of all the change with the Jazz organization, but I just don't see the Jazz trading Millsap. He's exactly the type of veteran you want as the foundation for a core of young guys: crafty, hard-working, stable.

Also, I don't see the Jazz giving up Jefferson and #12 for Brandon Knight and bloody Kleiza. That is way too little. If I were calling the shots I'd be shopping Al, but I'd be expecting to get much more of a sure thing at the wing, e.g. Granger, K. Martin, Paul George (more potential in the latter, but I'd pull the **** out of that trigger). But, again, my gut is telling me that Al isn't going anywhere this offseason. My hope is he at least learns to develop a solid two-man game with the primary ball handler (instead of his blackhole style) and his rebounding fundamentals improve. I'd also like the coaches to distribute his minutes differently than they did last year: I'd like to see 30-50% of his minutes going against the opposing teams' second units. This would allow the Jazz greater control of the tempo and would require less ground-breaking changes from Al. If these things could happen, then I'll make my peace with his staying.

As for Harris, well, I don't see Toronto giving up the rights to Knight for Harris + #12. And, yeah, I'd be shopping the hell out of Harris. A deal with Portland would be sweet.
 
vslice02 said:
The concept of having your top 5-7 guys be young players under 25 may look good on paper but has never worked.
Establish your core for the future (Favors, Hayward, #3 pick, potentially '12 GS Pick) and if you have a couple guys in their early 30's after them that's fine.
Click to expand...


See OKC!

I would rather trade Harris and keep Millsap for our 6th man. If Millsap squawks about coming off the bench then we can trade him for a veteran SG/PG/SF. Watson said he wants to come back and he said he wanted to come off the bench. He can mentor Knight.
 
Here's what they're saying over at the Raptors board:

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=1120781&start=15
It's about what Utah give up. Even Raja Bell, would go along way on improving this team.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't do it just for Bell, but his value for us would be floor stretching and def and toughness. He can hit open threes, or has shown the ability too, and he's doesn't take plays off, and he doesn't take crap. IMO, for little money, and playing time requests, he'd add a lot of "stuff" we need. That's why I'd say he'd improve our team.
Click to expand...

My plan is we just trade Bell for the #5 straight across. If that's not enough we'll throw in Tomic and maybe CJ Miles and they'll throw in next year's pick unprotected. Deal?
 
infection said:
Here's what they're saying over at the Raptors board:

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=1120781&start=15



My plan is we just trade Bell for the #5 straight across. If that's not enough we'll throw in Tomic and maybe CJ Miles and they'll throw in next year's pick unprotected. Deal?
Click to expand...

I like this idea, but it brings up a question that I've had for a while. Are we able to trade away next year's first as an unprotected pick? As of right now the TWolves own our pick, but it's lottery protected, right? So technically we're not able to trade it away until after the lottery, right?

For instance we can't trade it away saying if we're in the lottery than team x gets our pick, but if we're not in the lottery than Minnesota gets it, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top