RealGM

Is there any indication of how pressed the Jazz are to free up cap space? If so, your best bet is to send Boozer to OKC for Chucky Atkins' $3.48 million contract, which can be bought out for $800,000. Also, Damien Wilkins has a low buyout figure and a $3.3 million cap figure. The Thunder MIGHT sweeten the deal even more with their own 2010 first rounder, but in order for that to happen, the deal would have to go down as a sign and trade.

In terms of clearing cap space, you aren't going to find a better trade partner than OKC, and there is no way you will get a player on the order of Beasley/Green/Aldridge in return for Boozer, so your best bet may be to clear up the space for 2010 in exchange for a sign and trade.

Thoughts?

We aren't in a serious meltdown. We will get some decent value for the Boozer.

I would do OKC's 2010 1st round pick + Chucky Atkins for Boozer in a heartbeat. That may not be the best deal for the 2009-2010 Utah Jazz, but it's the best deal for the 2010+ Jazz.

I agree that the trade makes sense for both parties (provided that Boozer would agree to a sign and trade). Therein lies the wildcard....

Boozer can't agree to a sign and trade. He is not a free agent, thus he can't sign a new contract until next year.

Xanthis wrote:Boozer can't agree to a sign and trade. He is not a free agent, thus he can't sign a new contract until next year.

Okur has sign a new contract...right..?

There is a difference between an extension and a sign and trade. Boozer could be traded and then possibly agree to an extension.

I Like the Boozer and Fess for Collison trade. It saves the jazz about 7 million. The jazz would have Milsap and Collison at Power forward. If the jazz could buy out Harping then they could even get under luxury tax.

Well, Boozer's agent is insisting any extention will start at $14 mill--still interested? The Jazz will note that all you are wiling to offer for Boozer is cap space, Atkins, and MAYBE a 1st and weigh it against what else they can get.