RealGM

I think that this makes some sense. We all know that Sloan loved Mo as part of the Jazz. He was quoted as saying that letting him go was one of the bigger mistakes he's made in basketball. We also know that he hates Andrei Kirilenko.

Kirilenko ended this year in disappointing fashion yet again, and has a Redd-esque contract (3 years, huge money). My guess is that they look to move him. looking at their team they need depth, essentially everywhere, but certainly at the PG slot.

It also just so happens that Hammond is used to having a long, defensive minded SF much like Kirilenko.

So.....

Mo and Mason or Mo and Gadz (they also need a backup C in the worst way) both look like they'll work after Mo's BYC expires.

What is Utah going to do with Mo Williams? They already have Deron Williams and they have Ronnie Brewer to play SG, who brings defense Mo couldn't dream about. Their lineup is Deron, Brewer, AK, Boozer, Okur. There's no room for him unless you're going to pay him top dollar to be a 6th man, which is what the Bucks would like to do but Harris screwed that up so the Jazz wouldn't take him for that either.

No chance in hell Utah would ever do this trade, sorry.

Yes, that's the idea to get an elite 6th man.

Follow-Up trades.....

Say we can get Kirilenko for Mo/Mason.

Bogut/Gadzuric for Sam Dalembert

Yi/CV/7th pick/Simmons for Elton Brand


Sessions - Ivey
Redd - Bell
Kirilenko -
Brand - Ruffin
Dalembert -

A20 point scorer in the backcourt, and 20/10 guy upfront. Surrounded by guys who play defense, protect the rim, and rebound.

We'd need to use our 2nd rounder on a contributor and make a wise signing (scorer off the bench and backup C) with the BAE and MLE. Also consider bringing Ersan back.

How badly does everyone want to see a decent defensive team out there?

I don't know if you're trying to antagonize tonight or what, but obviously no one in their right mind is trading Bogut for Dalembert. Lets remember Bogut became a pretty solid defender this year and is light years better than Dalembert on offense.

LUKE23 wrote:I don't know if you're trying to antagonize tonight or what, but obviously no one in their right mind is trading Bogut for Dalembert. Lets remember Bogut became a pretty solid defender this year and is light years better than Dalembert on offense.

i'd keep bogut but do everything else if bogut was cool with being the 3rd option. i don't know if he would be though

jerrod wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



i'd keep bogut but do everything else if bogut was cool with being the 3rd option. i don't know if he would be though

He's been the 3rd and lots of times the 4th option his entire career here, so he's already been as cool as anyone with his skills could be about the situation.

Anyone that recommends a bogut for dalembert trade is insane.

Not sure I'd want two low IQ guys in my starting 5. Pass.

Damlembert has owned Bogut pretty much every time they've met.

Anyway, The point of that trade was rather than paying Bogut 12 million per year for 5 years, we could pat Dalembert 11 million to give more of what we need (defense and rebounding) while being effective offensively by finishing strong at the hole, in transition, and actually making his FTs. The main point however, is that Gadz's 7 million disappears to help allow us to have 3 max and 1 near max player. Even so, how many points would Bogut score next to Brand and Redd? 12? 14? Given the option of posting Brand or Bogut, I'm posting Brand 10 times of 10. Dalembert could give you those same 12 points just off of garbage hustle plays.


It's funny that the people who bitch about our defense desperately want to keep Bogut because he's a superior offensive player. Just the going mentality I guess.

midranger wrote:Damlembert has owned Bogut pretty much every time they've met.

Anyway, The point of that trade was rather than paying Bogut 12 million per year for 5 years, we could pat Dalembert 11 million to give more of what we need (defense and rebounding) while being effective offensively by finishing strong at the hole, in transition, and actually making his FTs. The main point however, is that Gadz's 7 million disappears to help allow us to have 3 max and 1 near max player. Even so, how many points would Bogut score next to Brand and Redd? 12? 14? Given the option of posting Brand or Bogut, I'm posting Brand 10 times of 10. Dalembert could give you those same 12 points just off of garbage hustle plays.


It's funny that the people who bitch about our defense desperately want to keep Bogut because he's a superior offensive player. Just the going mentality I guess.

i didn't factor in salaries (stupidly) so bogut would have to go to facilitate the salaries of the other guys

Kirilenko will step away from his computer for a few nights in the playoffs and all will be well in Utah for another offseason.

midranger wrote:Damlembert has owned Bogut pretty much every time they've met.

Anyway, The point of that trade was rather than paying Bogut 12 million per year for 5 years, we could pat Dalembert 11 million to give more of what we need (defense and rebounding) while being effective offensively by finishing strong at the hole, in transition, and actually making his FTs. The main point however, is that Gadz's 7 million disappears to help allow us to have 3 max and 1 near max player. Even so, how many points would Bogut score next to Brand and Redd? 12? 14? Given the option of posting Brand or Bogut, I'm posting Brand 10 times of 10. Dalembert could give you those same 12 points just off of garbage hustle plays.


It's funny that the people who bitch about our defense desperately want to keep Bogut because he's a superior offensive player. Just the going mentality I guess.

I hope you're honestly not using $1M as evidence of something, for one.

For two, Bogut is clearly the superior overall player to Dalembert, and is emerging as a very viable offensive threat, while Dalembert can only score off garbage/putbacks. Dalembert is a better shotblocker, but Bogut is nearing 2 bpg level and is a better postional defender.

Obviously no one in their right mind would trade Bogut for Dalembert.

The salaries and the fit. With Brand, we wouldn't need another guy demanding the ball down low (which Bogut will assured do given his lockeroom antics), but we will always need defense and rebounding (two things Dalembert does better). Paying 8 million less for a better fit.

Being able to pass well for a guy your size (key words there, "guy your size"), and the ability to get dunks does NOT equal a good offensive player. While it COULD, you know, if you had a jumpshot, and could hit free throws.

how many years does dalembert have left?

It's not 1 million, it's 8.

jerrod wrote:how many years does dalembert have left?

3.

He would end with Redd and Kirilenko.

midranger wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



3.

He would end with Redd and Kirilenko.

that would be an interesting time

midranger wrote:Damlembert has owned Bogut pretty much every time they've met.

Anyway, The point of that trade was rather than paying Bogut 12 million per year for 5 years, we could pat Dalembert 11 million to give more of what we need (defense and rebounding) while being effective offensively by finishing strong at the hole, in transition, and actually making his FTs. The main point however, is that Gadz's 7 million disappears to help allow us to have 3 max and 1 near max player. Even so, how many points would Bogut score next to Brand and Redd? 12? 14? Given the option of posting Brand or Bogut, I'm posting Brand 10 times of 10. Dalembert could give you those same 12 points just off of garbage hustle plays.


It's funny that the people who bitch about our defense desperately want to keep Bogut because he's a superior offensive player. Just the going mentality I guess.

Bogut averaged 14 and 13 last season against the sixers at 60% FG. So yeah you're wrong. Dalembert is dumb as a post , only scores off hustle plays and cant pass at all. All for about the same price as Bogut. He also has peaked while Bogut is still improving. But I guess this is a waste of time as you know all of this and are just doing this to start arguments.