Would you do this trade
- Thread starter Park Bites
- Start date
Really? You wouldnt do this trade because we would have to keep our 3rd string PG who doesnt play on? Wow.
Hell yeah, Id do this trade in a heart beat. Problem, Indiana wont though. They want to build around the core of Collison,Hibbert, and Granger.
No, we can't do this trade in the same way that we can't go out for steak tonight because we won't be able to afford ramen tomorrow.
gregbroncs
Well-Known Member
You just missed the point. Having those player's guarantee's that the team is in the tax zone and I'm not sure that this team is willing to be long term luxury tax payer's. The luxury tax is a real hindrance to a small market team like the Jazz. Also I disagree that having 3 really good player's and no bench is the way to win it all. The outlook would be pretty good in the short term but if they never get any height because of the salary restrictions having all of your money tied up in those 6 players and still not having enough height to be real competitors. So in the end the Jazz would be paying a lot more money long term for a team that is not really any better off than they would be just resigning Ak to a more reasonable contract next off season.
Granger is an incredible player, Indiana shouldn't and won't do this
There is absolutely no way Indiana does this. If Indy just wanted to dump salary, they could get in touch with an under-the-cap team or with a big enough TPE to help them get their 24 ppg scorer off their hands. Just no way.
This is part of the AK delusion -- that the Jazz could get an All-Star-caliber (even East) player using his expiring. The Jazz could maybe get a role player or two to make them a bit better but a young All-Star-caliber player at around his prime? Time to get real.
This is part of the AK delusion -- that the Jazz could get an All-Star-caliber (even East) player using his expiring. The Jazz could maybe get a role player or two to make them a bit better but a young All-Star-caliber player at around his prime? Time to get real.
You underestimate Andrei's value to this team. He might get a 5x5 this year. Besides, in games where Andrei makes big plays that help us win, we've never lost a single game.
gregbroncs
Well-Known Member
LOL Here's your sign.
Gyp Rosetti
Banned
Yogi Berra?
Yes, perhaps, but we're paying the tax this year. This deal only extends that one year. Obviously they don't want to pay the tax, but I have a hard time thinking they wouldn't eat another year of tax to pick up someone of Granger's caliber, as it would generate more excitement about the team, make us much more competitive, and get us further in the playoffs (all bringing in more cash).
Having three all-star caliber players, accompanied by very good role players like Millsap, Okur (yes, I know he's old and coming off injury but his game was never based off atheltic availability and he's at worst a solid role player), and Miles. That's a far cry away from "no bench". Look at our bench now; it's not like we've got dynamite guys adding 10 wins to our season.
I think we've become so fixated on height that we can't see anything in the periphery. Jefferson and Millsap will each play, at minimum, 32 minutes per game. This leaves us 32 minutes available between the 4 and 5. Factor in Memo and he will get at least 20 minutes. While everyone on here can argue about whether or not that is appropriate, the fact remains that most all of the minutes will go to those three guys and one of those three guys is guaranteed to be on the bench closing games, as presently constituted. How likely is it that Sloan sits 2/3 of those guys to close games? So what are we left with? We're left with an ad for a backup 4 or 5 who will play 12-18 minutes and likely will not close any games. Would we honestly turn down an all-star who plays 35 mpg so that we can keep the possibility available that we can pick up a 12-18 minute back up?
Look, I'd love a defensive big guy as much as anyone else, but this isn't football where there are separate teams for offense and defense, and it's not hockey where you can sub-out during live action. If a defensive big is on the floor, it's because Millsap or Jefferson is not, in conjunction with Okur on the bench... and I don't think we're bringing in a good enough defender to sit those guys for any extended period of time. I sometimes feel like if we were to land circa-1990s Jordan on a max deal, everyone would be upset about how it's going to have a financial strangle on the team and that we don't need Jordan against the Lakers, we need Louis Amundson.
Hitman
Well-Known Member
I said No. Granger's scoring stats are inflated by the fact he's the best player on a bad team, who plays 36 minutes a game and takes nearly 25% of his team's shots (way more than the #2 option, Troy Murphy), mostly from outside (7 three-point attempts per game). He is a poor rebounder and passer. Put him on a more balanced squad, like the Jazz, and he won't get as many shots and won't be an elite scorer any more. There is a chance that he might become a more efficient scorer as part of the more balanced Jazz offense and with D-Will passing him the ball, but I just can't see him being a good fit.
Jefferson/Millsap at PF/C will work against many teams and that’s fine if all the Jazz want is the good ol’ nice regular season and early playoffs exit. If the Jazz want to compete against elite teams like the Lakers, the Jazz still need a defensive big.
With the current lineup, Sloan will definitely close a Lakers game with Jefferson/Millsap at C/PF against Bynum/Gasol or Gasol/Odom. And we’ll get groundhog day results. Jefferson may be an improvement defensively over Boozer but there are few who wouldn’t be. Sap sure works hard but he will still be undersized.
An active defensive big like Varejao or similar could take on Gasol while Jefferson bodies up on Bynum, or Jefferson could guard Gasol while somebody like Varejao harasses Odom. Yes, that could mean Sap will be out in some stretches but the point is to win games. Or, that would mean Sap sliding over to SF in some situations as he can probably handle a strong but not overly quick player like Artest while Jefferson and the defensive big take on LA’s 7-footers.
Wow, what’s this continuing talk about having to defend why the Jazz shouldn’t turn down an offer for an All-Star like Granger? The point is the Jazz won’t have to turn down Granger because there is absolutely no way Indy would make such an offer. If it needs to be spelled out -- in terms of current play (a big 24ppg scorer vs above-average role player), potential, and what other teams have to offer (cap space, TPE), honestly, it’s just not happening. Dare propose this on an Indy board and you'll just get laughed off.
If you think in those exaggerated terms, chances aren’t good you’ll ever realize how impossible this scenario is and also could explain why some fans like you remain deluded that AK could actually get the Jazz a young All-Star.