One Brow said:
oldtimer said:
I know he got Jefferson, but really that was a Minnesota gift as they were just trying to dump his contract. Any GM in the league could have and would have completed the Jefferson trade.
To get that trade, O'Connor had to convince Chicago to use a sign-and-trade and sign Boozer for more money than Chicago could have signed as otherwise. Do you tink it's easy to persuade a GM to sign a player for more money?
Um, according to the following article, "Boozer’s deal with the Bulls still remains the same from a numbers standpoint. The contract is still worth five years and $80 million." This statement implies IMHO that Boozer and Chicago did it as a favor (and in the Bulls' case, for a measly protected second-round pick) and that the trade exception didn't significantly impact how much Boozer got salarywise.
https://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/jazz/49897200-87/jazz-boozer-trade-exception.html.csp
Probably partly a farewell goodwill gesture from C-Booz's camp to the Jazz (which they might have requested to the Bulls) for Utah paying him five years of big money in exchange for slow-healing injuries and transient defense. Oh, and a few yells and clutch wins.
oldtimer said:
Imagine if we had signed Mathews instead of Bell, signed Fess for Cheap, drafted Anyone from 10-15 or Fields (personally I still like Larry Sanders), and signed Jefferson.
We would be a worse team, overall.
. . . unless Utah had drafted Davis (49% FG; Hoopsworld honorable mention rookie watch), Xavier Henry (low FG% yet former HH honorable mention; 16 starts), Larry Sanders (near-40% FG yet nearly 3 BP30 and major upside), and maybe Paul George (piss-poor FG yet higher rate of points, RBs, assists and steals relative to Hayward) :|.
Not giving up on Gordo yet, and Utah needed a wing more than a big if Fes and the likes of Elson were likely available, but to claim that Elder Hayward is a better choice than many of the players who came after him is yet to be determined, 4th quarter vs. the Pesky Timberwolves (and putzy Wolves, too) notwithstanding.
Given that Bell has been the first or second weakest link in the starting lineup (depending on where you rate AJ's lazy box-outs and help defense), a claim that an Bell--who is only now getting his rhythm and conditioning back--is a bit far-fetched. Matthews would've been twice as expensive, even at 4 million, but it's not tough to speculate that a twentysomething Matthews > thirtysomething Bell. I do agree that it's easy for Wes to say that he
would've signed for less, now that he didn't.
Given that Fes's signing to a multi-year deal wouldn't affect whether the Jazz were better or worse this year (given that he signed anyway), this aspect is neutral right now (unless the extra cost of the multi-year deal or the Matthews signing would've precluded Utah from signing someone else, but that wasn't part of your argument, and most of the rest of the squad was filled with minimum-salary players anyway).
. It is also possible that the Jazz helped to set his price and were part of the negotiations, offering a lower but still substantial amount. But any part of the negotiations wasn't necessary.