utah and warriors trade:

ARisYourDaddy · Post #1 » by **ARisYourDaddy** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 4:47 pm

Jazz fans I come in peace so please don't bash me! Would you guys consider trading Boozer for the expiring contracts of Claxton, Bell and George as well as a unprotected 2010? Which should be a top 5 pick!

Post #2 » by **loserX** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 5:54 pm

Probably not. The only piece of value there is a pick, and its value is volatile...it could get considerably worse if Boozer gets there and keeps beasting. I'd only consider it if our season really went in the tank.

Post #3 » by **jazzfan1971** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 6:50 pm

Hell yeah I would. I wouldn't need a second to think about moving a guy we may lose for nothing for expirings and a top pick next year.

In a second.

UTJazzFan_Echo1 · Post #4 » by **UTJazzFan_Echo1** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 8:27 pm

How about you throw in one of your young talents and you got yourself a deal.

Paper Face · Post #5 » by **Paper Face** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 9:04 pm

Why not throw in Turiaf? The Jazz need a rotation player to come back in any Boozer trade.

seejaydeja · Post #6 » by **seejaydeja** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 9:18 pm

Where do the Jazz sign?

carrottop12 · Post #7 » by **carrottop12** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 9:29 pm

Absolutely. Jazz get another top 5 pick in the upcoming draft, and get a lot of help with expiring contracts.

Jazz do this in a heartbeat.

Soul Patch · Post #8 » by **Soul Patch** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 10:25 pm

I'd do it in a heart beat. Two good picks in a a deep deep draft.

Post #9 » by **StocktonShorts** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 10:32 pm

Bat wrote:Absolutely. Jazz get another top 5 pick in the upcoming draft, and get a lot of help with expiring contracts.

Jazz do this in a heartbeat.

How does trading Boozer for a bunch of crappy expiring contracts "help"? Boozer is already an expiring contract. Basically this trade says:

"Screw this year, let's make a cap-neutral trade of Boozer for a Top 10 pick."

That may be worth it, but to say it helps because the incoming contract are expiring isn't accurate.

carrottop12 · Post #10 » by **carrottop12** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 10:38 pm

As opposed to taking on a crappy player with a big contract.

Soul Patch · Post #11 » by **Soul Patch** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 10:52 pm

I'd take those expirings over say, Maggette, any day of the week.

Post #12 » by **StocktonShorts** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 10:53 pm

Soul Patch wrote:I'd take those expirings over say, Maggette, any day of the week.

Sure. But saying this deal is better than another horrible hypothetical Boozer trade doesn't say much.

Soul Patch · Post #13 » by **Soul Patch** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 11:01 pm

That unprotected pick from a team like the Warriors changes things.

carrottop12 · Post #14 » by **carrottop12** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 11:16 pm

Soul Patch wrote:That unprotected pick from a team like the Warriors changes things.

Especially in this draft, especially with the Knicks pick.

Having to top 6 picks is great.

Soul Patch · Post #15 » by **Soul Patch** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 11:25 pm

Bat, you forgot the Knicks are taking 'ship this year.

Post #16 » by **StocktonShorts** » Sun Dec 13, 2009 11:31 pm

Soul Patch wrote:Bat, you forgot the Knicks are taking 'ship this year.

It's almost a given now that they've signed Bender.

oaktownwarriors87 · Post #17 » by **oaktownwarriors87** » Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:41 am

As a Jazz fan, I would do it right at the trade deadline. Knicks are on fire, but they are in an easy part of this years shedual. The Warriors pick would give the Jazz a great chance at Turner AND Aldrich.

As a Warriors fan I say HELL NO!

old rem · Post #18 » by **old rem** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:53 pm

Soul Patch wrote:That unprotected pick from a team like the Warriors changes things.

It sure would...but...

I can't see any purpose in GSW giving a likely top 10 to rent Boozer,who either bolts or is an overpaid, injury risk big who's light on D. Booz would be a bad fit even if GSw was okay with outbidding everyone else and keeping him.

UTJazzFan_Echo1 · Post #19 » by **UTJazzFan_Echo1** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 6:42 pm

How about a deal built around Boozer for Randolph? Looks like you guys are willing to trade him...the NY pick would not be included no matter how badly you want it to be. We are trading a 20/10 all star power forward for unproven young talent so I don't see why the NY pick would need to be included; especially if we threw in someone else like Korver, Kosta or Price.

drivewayball · Post #20 » by **drivewayball** » Wed Dec 16, 2009 6:56 pm

The Warriors don't give up their top asset, their draft pick, for a player rental that won't mean a thing to the outcome of their season. Maybe they would consider taking Okur for their expirings. That's about it.

I would rather trade Kirilenko and Okur, along with the Knicks pick, to NJ for expirings and Brook Lopez. Lopez is number 17 in efficiency in the NBA. Boozer is 6 and Williams is 11. With that triumphirate (you resign Boozer) and a supporting cast of Miles, Mathews, Millsap, Price and Fesenko, you have the makings of a really strong team for the next five years. I didn't include Maynor in that list because I may have to add him to the package for Lopez. Okur, Kirilenko and D. Harris would be the top Nets at this time, but two very high draft picks this summer would change all that.