Locke reported that the Jazz wanted a different Euro (not Tibor) but they did not have leverage in the deal. He said the Thunder are bringing this player over this year. So I presume this is Alex Abrines, who the Thunder just signed to a 3 year deal for ~$6 million per year.
Jazz wanted Alex Abrines in Kanter trade?
- Thread starter silesian
- Start date
andylarsen
Well-Known Member
FWIW, it was Abrines. We reported it on SCH at the time.
Abrines is a better prospect than Tibor, to be sure, but OKC was basically the only team interested in Kanter. The Jazz wanted something in return, as they knew they weren't going to sign him that offseason.
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
wutup Andy
Thanks, enjoy reading/ listening to your stuff. I must have missed the announcement at the time. I wonder why David was circumspect about providing Abrines' name since you had already made it public?
Kyoto
Well-Known Member
Well, I'm still happy with the trade. We got better for dumping him for some German peanuts.
andylarsen
Well-Known Member
Eh, they had no leverage, but neither did the Thunder with Reggie Jackson. It's not like they got back a ton for him either. I suspect OKC would have done a straight Jackson for Kanter swap. I do know the Jazz were never particularly interested in Jackson, as they felt Jackson's lack of shooting wouldn't work long-term next to Favors and Gobert. They knew Jackson would want big money too (5 years, $80M)
That's turned out to be a little bit of a mistake because Jackson figured out how to shoot. Back then, he was shooting 27% from 3 and shot 21% and 23% in two seasons before that. They weren't confident that he'd be worth whatever he'd get in FA. The other weird thing about Jackson is that his defensive numbers was and are kind of disappointing, both in OKC and now in DET. He's not a big liability, but less of an impact player than you'd hope for. And of course, there's the Exum thing. Jackson was awful in OKC's locker room, and what if Exum got good and deserved to play over him? It might have gotten ugly.
But let's say they made the trade. They're almost certainly in the playoffs last year, so that's good. They don't have to trade a 1st for Hill (who I think is in the same tier, probably, and IMO Hill's a better fit. But I also suspect IND does a Jackson/Hill swap. We're now on hypotheticals of hypotheticals.), but don't get one back from OKC in the trade. And you have whatever Jackson is worth in this market, which is probably something positive, even at $16M annually.
Anyway, not grabbing Jackson was probably a mistake in hindsight. But I get why DL made the decision he did, and I probably would have done the same then too.
andylarsen
Well-Known Member
P.S.: The real missed opportunity in that deadline was Isaiah Thomas.
framer
Well-Known Member
Are we certain that the Suns wanted anything to do with Kanter though? It appears that they have finally decided that it is probably best if big guys play defense. Sending him Eastern Division was also probably a goal.
Miggs
Well-Known Member
You don't say hi to Dala?
Then why did they trade Reggie Jackson? Did the Thunder sign someone from the Pistons to a max deal?
The only thing that makes sense is the Jazz didn't pursue it at all, or they even suggested bringing in the Pistons.
The Jazz Wonderbra
Well-Known Member
Trading for Reggie Jackson would have been a perfectly horizontal move.
The problem is that we didn't want to sign an expensive contract for a disgruntled, ball hog, low team chemistry, no defense, me-first player. We weren't going to sign Enes Kanter. Reggie Jackson was equally disgruntled, low defense (perhaps not equally, but close), ball hog (needs the ball in his hands to be effective), me-first player who was going to require a large contract.
Sure, on paper, Kanter for Jackson looks like a lot more value than Kanter for a 1st round pick and a German long Bratwurst with Gingerpubes on it (Pleiss). But, it would have been horizontal since we would be in the same position. The trade we did netted us something for Kanter. PS. Kanter STILL doesn't have value. OKC wanted to trade him all summer, but couldn't.
The problem is that we didn't want to sign an expensive contract for a disgruntled, ball hog, low team chemistry, no defense, me-first player. We weren't going to sign Enes Kanter. Reggie Jackson was equally disgruntled, low defense (perhaps not equally, but close), ball hog (needs the ball in his hands to be effective), me-first player who was going to require a large contract.
Sure, on paper, Kanter for Jackson looks like a lot more value than Kanter for a 1st round pick and a German long Bratwurst with Gingerpubes on it (Pleiss). But, it would have been horizontal since we would be in the same position. The trade we did netted us something for Kanter. PS. Kanter STILL doesn't have value. OKC wanted to trade him all summer, but couldn't.
Last edited: