Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
Moderators: Inigo Montoya, FJS
Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
-
- Banned User
- Posts: 79
- And1: 3
- Joined: Jul 05, 2013
Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
@daldridgetnt: Source says the Warriors are sending Andris Biedrins, Richard Jefferson to the Jazz. Checking on what they're getting back.
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
- Inigo Montoya
- Forum Mod - Jazz
- Posts: 17,043
- And1: 8,319
- Joined: May 31, 2012
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
[tweet]https://twitter.com/WojYahooNBA/status/353240237759143938[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/WojYahooNBA/status/353241772052324352[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/WojYahooNBA/status/353241772052324352[/tweet]
Draft Nate Wolters - FAILED
Keep Nate Wolters - FAILED

Keep Nate Wolters - FAILED

KqWIN wrote:Why are we talking about Middleton, Harris, and Porter?
The real decision the Jazz FO is making is between Continuity, Cap Flexibility, and Cash Considerations.
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
- spoonhoops
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 760
- And1: 8
- Joined: Apr 02, 2010
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
Iggy going to GS for 4/48
Jazz_Man_86 on Favors:
"He is not Dwight Howard. He's max is 20 + 13 + 2 = is this a supers tats? No."
Dwight 2011-2012 - 20.6 Points - 14.5 Rebounds - 2.1 Blocks
"He is not Dwight Howard. He's max is 20 + 13 + 2 = is this a supers tats? No."
Dwight 2011-2012 - 20.6 Points - 14.5 Rebounds - 2.1 Blocks
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
- spoonhoops
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 760
- And1: 8
- Joined: Apr 02, 2010
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
We have to be getting Barnes.
Jazz_Man_86 on Favors:
"He is not Dwight Howard. He's max is 20 + 13 + 2 = is this a supers tats? No."
Dwight 2011-2012 - 20.6 Points - 14.5 Rebounds - 2.1 Blocks
"He is not Dwight Howard. He's max is 20 + 13 + 2 = is this a supers tats? No."
Dwight 2011-2012 - 20.6 Points - 14.5 Rebounds - 2.1 Blocks
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
-
- Veteran
- Posts: 2,738
- And1: 1
- Joined: Jul 18, 2007
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
Utah definitely not getting Barnes. lol, maybe the lakers
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
-
- Banned User
- Posts: 473
- And1: 218
- Joined: Nov 13, 2012
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
It's a salary dump. We're getting expirings for essentially nothing.
W/e.
W/e.
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
-
- Sophomore
- Posts: 125
- And1: 7
- Joined: Jul 06, 2012
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
There better be more the Jazz are getting back, otherwise this is stupid deal. 

Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
- d-will8
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 923
- And1: 8
- Joined: Oct 07, 2006
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
Why are making a deal for two veteran scrubs that allows a future conference rival to sign Iguodala? We better be getting something else too. Otherwise this makes zero sense.
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
- The59Sound
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,363
- And1: 917
- Joined: Jul 01, 2010
-
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
We're obviously getting something else in return... but if it's just one first round pick, I'll be pretty disappointed.
R-DAWG wrote:Look guys, no matter what happens we know Fegan is a man of his word and Dwight Howard doesn't change his mind once he makes a decision.
The Quantifiable Connection: An Interstellar fan site.
http://www.quantifiableconnection.com
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
- Inigo Montoya
- Forum Mod - Jazz
- Posts: 17,043
- And1: 8,319
- Joined: May 31, 2012
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
[tweet]https://twitter.com/WojYahooNBA/status/353243106805690371[/tweet]
Draft Nate Wolters - FAILED
Keep Nate Wolters - FAILED

Keep Nate Wolters - FAILED

KqWIN wrote:Why are we talking about Middleton, Harris, and Porter?
The real decision the Jazz FO is making is between Continuity, Cap Flexibility, and Cash Considerations.
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
- spoonhoops
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 760
- And1: 8
- Joined: Apr 02, 2010
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
No way Barnes goes to Lakers
Jazz_Man_86 on Favors:
"He is not Dwight Howard. He's max is 20 + 13 + 2 = is this a supers tats? No."
Dwight 2011-2012 - 20.6 Points - 14.5 Rebounds - 2.1 Blocks
"He is not Dwight Howard. He's max is 20 + 13 + 2 = is this a supers tats? No."
Dwight 2011-2012 - 20.6 Points - 14.5 Rebounds - 2.1 Blocks
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,506
- And1: 959
- Joined: Aug 12, 2008
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
some type of compensation has to be coming back. the trade just broke.
I like my prospects the same way I like my women... foreign- pickIBL
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
- Jazzfan154
- Sophomore
- Posts: 154
- And1: 49
- Joined: Jun 23, 2013
-
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
We better get Barnes.
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
- Inigo Montoya
- Forum Mod - Jazz
- Posts: 17,043
- And1: 8,319
- Joined: May 31, 2012
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
d-will8 wrote:Why are making a deal for two veteran scrubs that allows a future conference rival to sign Iguodala? We better be getting something else too. Otherwise this makes zero sense.
that's actually good.
1.they are vets who can show the young guys the ropes.
2. they are scrubs, so they won't start over our young players and accept a role off the bench.
3. they are both expiring contracts, so they'll free up 20M of cap space at the end of the year.
4. the jazz got role players without committing to long term salaries and didn't give away stupid contracts.
5. we must be getting something of value as well. TBD what this is.
6. now that the GSW signed iggy, it is possible barnes will be moved. and since the GSW pulled out of the D12 race, we might be the ones getting barnes.
Draft Nate Wolters - FAILED
Keep Nate Wolters - FAILED

Keep Nate Wolters - FAILED

KqWIN wrote:Why are we talking about Middleton, Harris, and Porter?
The real decision the Jazz FO is making is between Continuity, Cap Flexibility, and Cash Considerations.
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
-
- Banned User
- Posts: 79
- And1: 3
- Joined: Jul 05, 2013
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
Warriors not pursuing Howard anymore, also I think Barnes or Klay is going to Utah, they still don't have enough for Iggy with Biedrins and Jefferson gone
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
- The59Sound
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,363
- And1: 917
- Joined: Jul 01, 2010
-
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
Inigo Montoya wrote:d-will8 wrote:Why are making a deal for two veteran scrubs that allows a future conference rival to sign Iguodala? We better be getting something else too. Otherwise this makes zero sense.
that's actually good.
1.they are vets who can show the young guys the ropes.
2. they are scrubs, so they won't start over our young players and accept a role off the bench.
3. they are both expiring contracts, so they'll free up 20M of cap space at the end of the year.
4. the jazz got role players without committing to long term salaries and didn't give away stupid contracts.
5. we must be getting something of value as well. TBD what this is.
6. now that the GSW signed iggy, it is possible barnes will be moved. and since the GSW pulled out of the D12 race, we might be the ones getting barnes.
This all makes good sense to me.
R-DAWG wrote:Look guys, no matter what happens we know Fegan is a man of his word and Dwight Howard doesn't change his mind once he makes a decision.
The Quantifiable Connection: An Interstellar fan site.
http://www.quantifiableconnection.com
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
- spoonhoops
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 760
- And1: 8
- Joined: Apr 02, 2010
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
The59Sound wrote:Inigo Montoya wrote:d-will8 wrote:Why are making a deal for two veteran scrubs that allows a future conference rival to sign Iguodala? We better be getting something else too. Otherwise this makes zero sense.
that's actually good.
1.they are vets who can show the young guys the ropes.
2. they are scrubs, so they won't start over our young players and accept a role off the bench.
3. they are both expiring contracts, so they'll free up 20M of cap space at the end of the year.
4. the jazz got role players without committing to long term salaries and didn't give away stupid contracts.
5. we must be getting something of value as well. TBD what this is.
6. now that the GSW signed iggy, it is possible barnes will be moved. and since the GSW pulled out of the D12 race, we might be the ones getting barnes.
This all makes good sense to me.
This is also why we don't want Bogut. Look, I really like Bogut and think he could do well with the Jazz, but we don't need an extra 5 wins next season because of Bogut. If we exceed expectations next year I want it to be because of our core group.
Jazz_Man_86 on Favors:
"He is not Dwight Howard. He's max is 20 + 13 + 2 = is this a supers tats? No."
Dwight 2011-2012 - 20.6 Points - 14.5 Rebounds - 2.1 Blocks
"He is not Dwight Howard. He's max is 20 + 13 + 2 = is this a supers tats? No."
Dwight 2011-2012 - 20.6 Points - 14.5 Rebounds - 2.1 Blocks
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
- d-will8
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 923
- And1: 8
- Joined: Oct 07, 2006
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
Inigo Montoya wrote:d-will8 wrote:Why are making a deal for two veteran scrubs that allows a future conference rival to sign Iguodala? We better be getting something else too. Otherwise this makes zero sense.
that's actually good.
1.they are vets who can show the young guys the ropes.
2. they are scrubs, so they won't start over our young players and accept a role off the bench.
3. they are both expiring contracts, so they'll free up 20M of cap space at the end of the year.
4. the jazz got role players without committing to long term salaries and didn't give away stupid contracts.
5. we must be getting something of value as well. TBD what this is.
6. now that the GSW signed iggy, it is possible barnes will be moved. and since the GSW pulled out of the D12 race, we might be the ones getting barnes.
I agree with some of what you're saying, but I think it's yet to be determined whether this move is good. I agree that it could be good to have some vets who can show the young guys the ropes. I do not agree, however, that the fact that RJ and Biedrins are scrubs necessarily means they won't start over young players. The sting from memories of Josh Howard, Raja Bell, Randy Foye, etc. is still too fresh for me to believe that. Also, considering we would have had the 20M in cap space regardless of whether we made this trade, I don't think that really makes this a good trade.
I won't hate this trade if we get something else in return, but, unless that something is Barnes or Thompson (and I don't think it will be), I won't love or even like the trade either. It just doesn't add much to or team. Sure, we get some vets, but we could get better vets for a lot cheaper.
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
- Inigo Montoya
- Forum Mod - Jazz
- Posts: 17,043
- And1: 8,319
- Joined: May 31, 2012
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
spoonhoops wrote:This is also why we don't want Bogut. Look, I really like Bogut and think he could do well with the Jazz, but we don't need an extra 5 wins next season because of Bogut. If we exceed expectations next year I want it to be because of our core group.
well, he does get injured. a lot. and he might come off the bench. so he may not give you 5 extra wins.
Draft Nate Wolters - FAILED
Keep Nate Wolters - FAILED

Keep Nate Wolters - FAILED

KqWIN wrote:Why are we talking about Middleton, Harris, and Porter?
The real decision the Jazz FO is making is between Continuity, Cap Flexibility, and Cash Considerations.
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
- d-will8
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 923
- And1: 8
- Joined: Oct 07, 2006
Re: Trade between Utah and GS agreed on
But, having said all of that, I should wait to see what else we're getting before criticizing the trade. My tune might change.