OFFICIAL: Maynor and Harpring to OKC for bupkis

JDubJazz · Post #1 » by **JDubJazz** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:30 pm

OFFICIAL: Jazz trade Maynor and Harpring to OKC for a foreign prospect. Basically they moved Maynor in order to dump Harpring's salary and save $$$. TERRIBLE MOVE. We now know that any time the Jazz talk about making "basketball moves" they are outright lying. Giving away a promising prospect to a division rival just to save $$$ shows the Jazz are not interested in winning.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,51 ... 47,00.html

Post #2 » by **DelaneyRudd** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:43 pm

It's not a foreign prospect. It's a draft right for the sake of the CBA. There better be another deal coming.

kebzach · Post #3 » by **kebzach** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:45 pm

"basketball moves" get easily trumped by $ 15M luxury tax penalties.

JDubJazz · Post #4 » by **JDubJazz** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:47 pm

DelaneyRudd wrote:It's not a foreign prospect. It's a draft right for the sake of the CBA. There better be another deal coming.

I agree. Unless this is making space for another move, this is unacceptable. The Jazz do have to sign another player because they are at 12 now and the NBA requires at least 13.

JDubJazz · Post #5 » by **JDubJazz** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:48 pm

kebzach wrote:"basketball moves" get easily trumped by $ 15M luxury tax penalties.

not disagreeing, but the Jazz have claimed that they wouldn't make strictly salary moves. Basically they lied through their teeth.

TexJazz · Post #6 » by **TexJazz** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:48 pm

DelaneyRudd wrote:It's not a foreign prospect. It's a draft right for the sake of the CBA. There better be another deal coming.

Damn Right there better be another deal on its way, because if there isnt KOC is a freeking idiot. Give up a bright young pg prospect just for a salary dump. If this is the case its clear they have no intention to better the team cause losing Maynor made our team worse.

Post #7 » by **DelaneyRudd** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:50 pm

They could have sold a non-NY draft pick instead!

Neon Black · Post #8 » by **Neon Black** » Wed Dec 23, 2009 12:11 am

WHAT THE ****

The Sheik · Post #9 » by **The Sheik** » Wed Dec 23, 2009 12:15 am

DelaneyRudd wrote:They could have sold a non-NY draft pick instead!

They cannot. We cannot until we convey the pick we owe Minnesota.

Soul Patch · Post #10 » by **Soul Patch** » Wed Dec 23, 2009 12:17 am

I'm going to hold off from judging this too harshly until I see the follow up move/signing.

Post #11 » by **DelaneyRudd** » Wed Dec 23, 2009 12:18 am

Soul Patch wrote:I'm going to hold off from judging this too harshly until I see the follow up move/signing.

There will be none. Maybe shipping out Korver who's contract would put them under the tax.

Post #12 » by **loserX** » Wed Dec 23, 2009 12:18 am

Emotionally I'm not happy with it because I liked Maynor...but rationally I know this is the way the world works. The organization saved a buttload of money by trading an injured guy and a backup who would never have gotten more than ~10MPG as long as Deron was around. (We also get a trade exception that we can use to acquire other players for up to a calendar year.) I'm not THAT upset about it.

Soul Patch · Post #13 » by **Soul Patch** » Wed Dec 23, 2009 12:19 am

DelaneyRudd wrote:
Soul Patch wrote:I'm going to hold off from judging this too harshly until I see the follow up move/signing.

There will be none. Maybe shipping out Korver who's contract would put them under the tax.

There has to be something, we're a player short of the league minimum.

kebzach · Post #14 » by **kebzach** » Wed Dec 23, 2009 12:21 am

JDubJazz wrote:
kebzach wrote:"basketball moves" get easily trumped by $ 15M luxury tax penalties.

not disagreeing, but the Jazz have claimed that they wouldn't make strictly salary moves. Basically they lied through their teeth.

Then they never should have claimed that. Any small-market team that wasn't going to win more than 50-55 games this year, but who was going to pay an 8-figure luxury tax, would have made this same move.

Nothing wrong with winning 50-55 games, but odds are that won't be enough to go to the WCF or the NBA finals. So at the end of the day, the Jazz would just be stuck with the luxury tax bill.

The move had to be made.

Sloanfeld · Post #15 » by **Sloanfeld** » Wed Dec 23, 2009 12:22 am

loserX wrote:Emotionally I'm not happy with it because I liked Maynor...but rationally I know this is the way the world works. The organization saved a buttload of money by trading an injured guy and a backup who would never have gotten more than ~10MPG as long as Deron was around. (We also get a trade exception that we can use to acquire other players for up to a calendar year.) I'm not THAT upset about it.

I agree. Now with the $15M or so we save (proably less considering that insurance covers 80% of Harps' contract, so that makes it like $10M or so), we can use it to hopefully pay Lebron in the offseason.

And by Lebron, I really mean Boozer.

kerplunk · Post #16 » by **kerplunk** » Wed Dec 23, 2009 12:32 am

Im surprised. Wow.

Neon Black · Post #17 » by **Neon Black** » Wed Dec 23, 2009 12:47 am

whoever they sign better be worth it.

carrottop12 · Post #18 » by **carrottop12** » Wed Dec 23, 2009 12:50 am

I hate this move.

But if you look at it this way, Harpring was never going to play again, and the Jazz were going to pay 14 million dollars for Eric Maynor to play for them this year.

Gets thats alright to get rid of him in that case.

hoops4life · Post #19 » by **hoops4life** » Wed Dec 23, 2009 12:54 am

JDubJazz wrote:
kebzach wrote:"basketball moves" get easily trumped by $ 15M luxury tax penalties.

not disagreeing, but the Jazz have claimed that they wouldn't make strictly salary moves. Basically they lied through their teeth.

This has to be the first time that is every happened... Maybe they said that so other teams would stop low balling them.

kebzach · Post #20 » by **kebzach** » Wed Dec 23, 2009 12:56 am

http://nba.fanhouse.com/2009/12/22/jazz ... o-thunder/