Popovich praises the Jazz

[Hantlers]

I think your question would be easier to answer if you asked if we traded Kanter at the right time. The answer is absolutely not. Because of that we ended up taking far less than may have been available if we were proactive and shopped him earlier. However given the timing I am sure DL took whatever the best deal on the table was.

I get what you're saying, but the question did we get as much as could, it's did we get as much as we should have. I'm sure DL did take the best offer, but that doesn't mean we got as much as we should have.

 

[The Midnight]

A couple of points.
.
I'm dubious of the "demand a trade" significantly changes the market for a player. the reason is that if there are suitable bidders, the demand will set the price. Consider if Gobert was to demand a trade, how many teams would inquire? There would be a lot of demand creating a bidding war. T.
.
The next point is that Kanter at the beginning of the year was atrocious D. His value was LOWER then than it is now (or 3 weeks ago.) This cast a serious amount of doubt on him.
.
Next, the trading period is hardly active until the last week of trade deadline. This is a natural human tendency to wait it out and then all of sudden, the market opens and like the game of Pit, everyone starts yelling "2,2,2" Expecting good trade offers early for Kanter is simply not realistic.
.
And finally, the notion that the "Jazz should not have waited until Kanter asked for a trade" is also using 20/20 hindsight. There could have been reasonable discussions with Ergul to that point about the Jazz being willing to look around and Enes could have broken his promise to keep his mouth shut. The reason this seems plausible to me is because DL said and evidence is plentiful that trading doesn't start until 11th hour of the last week of the trade deadline - and because that is so obvious, then the Jazz made a business bet that Kanter would keep shut.
.
So really, I don't think there is any real reason how the Jazz could have trade him earlier for any better deal.

Good post.

 

[b_line]

I get what you're saying, but the question did we get as much as could, it's did we get as much as we should have. I'm sure DL did take the best offer, but that doesn't mean we got as much as we should have.

What about this question, did we give kanter every chance to prove that he was a long term piece of the Jazz puzzle? If all he needed was time, then we gave him plenty. He was probably mismanaged in his first two years.

There is more to the question you are asking. At this point in his contract and with his attitude, kanter was not worth more than what the Jazz got. A year ago, maybe. But he was probably worth more to the Jazz at that point than a couple of late first round picks. It was unclear that he didn't fit in with this team.

 

[Stifle Tower]

A year ago, maybe. But he was probably worth more to the Jazz at that point than a couple of late first round picks. It was unclear that he didn't fit in with this team.

And the Jazz had NO idea Gobert would blow up and be their center of the future. Why would you even THINK about trading Kanter at last year's deadline or even during the summer?

 

[The Midnight]

And the Jazz had NO idea Gobert would blow up and be their center of the future. Why would you even THINK about trading Kanter at last year's deadline or even during the summer?

Exactly - I'm surprise DL was so candid about his convo with Greg Miller about this exact subject.

 

[Coach Ellis]

I think okc definitely won the trade and kanter is worth more than we got. (I know you were asking triple k but I just wanted to chime in)

I personally would not have traded him for what they got back, but what's done is done. As I see it, there's 3 ways that the Jazz win this trade. . .

#1.) If OKC fails to win a championship with Kanter as a key factor. Kanter and Waiters are both mercenaries brought in to put the Thunder over the top. Anything short of that and they lose the trade. Especially since it's been addition by subtraction for the Jazz. OKC took on a lot of risk with Kanter. Risk that he'll leave as a RFA and they get nothing back. Risk that he'll tie up their cap space with the QO and then leave the year after for nothing. Risk that signing him long-term could alienate KD (since both might be UFAs together in 2016. And risk that they make a long-term commitment to him (at a considerable investment) and he struggles again with injuries and/or ineffectiveness. The payoff looks good now, but they still took on a lot of risk.

#2.) If the Jazz use the cap space provided by trading Kanter to acquire a key player via free agency or trade this offseason. Ultimately, trading Kanter moves Gobert into the starting lineup and creates some cap flexibility right before the salary cap jumps. The Jazz win this trade if they utilize that flexibility to acquire a player that's better for them than Kanter would be.

#3.) If the Jazz turn one or more of the assets acquired into a better player than Kanter. 2017 is supposed to be loaded, and the Jazz will have other assets to utilize as well. If the pick from the Thunder gets used on a player that has more value to the Jazz than Kanter would have, then they win the trade - especially if OKC never wins a chamionship with him on the roster. Before you denigrate the value of that non-lottery pick, I'd just like to point out that Rudy Gobert, Dennis Schroeder, Giannis Antetokounmpo, Draymond Green, Khris Middleton, Jimmy Butler, Nikola Mirotic, Kenneth Faried and Kawhi Leonard were all recently drafted after pick #14.

So, to recap. . . as I see it. . .

OKC wins the trade if they win a championship and then guess right on how to handle Kanter moving forward this offseason (or next if he takes the QO), and the Jazz win the trade if anybody but OKC wins the championship this year, plus if the Jazz utilize the cap space well this offseason OR if they turn the pick into a valuable contributor or star player down the road. Like I said, I probably would have kept him vs. what they got back, but this debate is a long way from being decided.

Ideal situation for the Jazz would be to have the Thunder play well enough to make the playoffs, but fail to win the championship (likely conveying the pick in 2017) AND watch Kanter leave on a massive RFA offer that the thunder can't afford to match with KD and Westbrook both having FA coming up, AND have the Jazz utilize the cap space to make a big acquisition this offseason to complement Gobert, Favors, Hayward, Burks and Exum, AND have the Jazz nail a homerun on the pick when they actually use it.

 

[zman1527]

I personally would not have traded him for what they got back, but what's done is done. As I see it, there's 3 ways that the Jazz win this trade. . .

#1.) If OKC fails to win a championship with Kanter as a key factor. Kanter and Waiters are both mercenaries brought in to put the Thunder over the top. Anything short of that and they lose the trade. Especially since it's been addition by subtraction for the Jazz. OKC took on a lot of risk with Kanter. Risk that he'll leave as a RFA and they get nothing back. Risk that he'll tie up their cap space with the QO and then leave the year after for nothing. Risk that signing him long-term could alienate KD (since both might be UFAs together in 2016. And risk that they make a long-term commitment to him (at a considerable investment) and he struggles again with injuries and/or ineffectiveness. The payoff looks good now, but they still took on a lot of risk.

#2.) If the Jazz use the cap space provided by trading Kanter to acquire a key player via free agency or trade this offseason. Ultimately, trading Kanter moves Gobert into the starting lineup and creates some cap flexibility right before the salary cap jumps. The Jazz win this trade if they utilize that flexibility to acquire a player that's better for them than Kanter would be.

#3.) If the Jazz turn one or more of the assets acquired into a better player than Kanter. 2017 is supposed to be loaded, and the Jazz will have other assets to utilize as well. If the pick from the Thunder gets used on a player that has more value to the Jazz than Kanter would have, then they win the trade - especially if OKC never wins a chamionship with him on the roster. Before you denigrate the value of that non-lottery pick, I'd just like to point out that Rudy Gobert, Dennis Schroeder, Giannis Antetokounmpo, Draymond Green, Khris Middleton, Jimmy Butler, Nikola Mirotic, Kenneth Faried and Kawhi Leonard were all recently drafted after pick #14.

So, to recap. . . as I see it. . .

OKC wins the trade if they win a championship and then guess right on how to handle Kanter moving forward this offseason (or next if he takes the QO), and the Jazz win the trade if anybody but OKC wins the championship this year, plus if the Jazz utilize the cap space well this offseason OR if they turn the pick into a valuable contributor or star player down the road. Like I said, I probably would have kept him vs. what they got back, but this debate is a long way from being decided.

Ideal situation for the Jazz would be to have the Thunder play well enough to make the playoffs, but fail to win the championship (likely conveying the pick in 2017) AND watch Kanter leave on a massive RFA offer that the thunder can't afford to match with KD and Westbrook both having FA coming up, AND have the Jazz utilize the cap space to make a big acquisition this offseason to complement Gobert, Favors, Hayward, Burks and Exum, AND have the Jazz nail a homerun on the pick when they actually use it.

#4. If the Jazz become a better team simply by not having to play Kanter. Check.

 

[Stoked]

Ellis I see no reason why both teams can't win. Thunder are better off and the Jazz use the space to land a highly valued free agent and the Jazz meet OKC in the playoffs next year.

Both teams will be winners in this trade IMO.