Chi/Por/Utah deal brewing per 1280

Ralphb07 · Post #1 » by **Ralphb07** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 5:27 pm

"Source" tells me that Jazz R trying 4 a 3 way w/ Port and Chi to send Booze to CHI and PG Heinrich to Port so Blazers don't offer Millsap

http://twitter.com/1280TheZone

How reliable are they?

Post #2 » by **StocktonShorts** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 5:35 pm

Who knows. Maybe they read it here.

majortripps69 · Post #3 » by **majortripps69** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 6:07 pm

HappyProle wrote:Who knows. Maybe they read it here.

My thoughts exactly...

qman · Post #4 » by **qman** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 6:16 pm

This trade makes sense to me.

Portland gets better and only give up cap space and Outlaw.

Chicago gets a post presence in Boozer at the Price of Thomas and Hinrich.

Utah gets Outlaw and Thomas. They turn an unpopular player into two young good players.

JazzJuice · Post #5 » by **JazzJuice** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 6:40 pm

I'll keep my fingers crossed

sendai91 · Post #6 » by **sendai91** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 7:23 pm

Sounds good to me. In essence, we're trading Boozer for Thomas, Outlaw and the ability to resign Millsap. We definitely downgrade offensively, but we're stronger defensively and save some $. What's not to like? I'd even be OK with throwing in the rights to Tomic or Suton or even CJ if pressed really hard...

ChronicKerr · Post #7 » by **ChronicKerr** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 7:25 pm

Throw in Suton and it's a done deal!

sendai91 · Post #8 » by **sendai91** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 7:40 pm

ChronicKerr wrote:Throw in Suton and it's a done deal!

Sold! Let's get this done..

seejaydeja · Post #9 » by **seejaydeja** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 7:57 pm

**** man, I'm on this. I love Outlaw and TT, combo them with Sap and we got a nice young front court

polskikrol3 · Post #10 » by **polskikrol3** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 8:00 pm

If this deal has any truth to it at all I hope that it happens. I more perfect scenario could not be dreamed up for the Jazz. To get Outlaw and Thomas at the expense of Boozer is nice and saves cash. Then Hopefully 'Sap falls in line too.

It sounds too good to be true though so I don't think there is much validity to it in the long run.

HolyToledo · Post #11 » by **HolyToledo** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 8:00 pm

terrible deal for Chicago; O.K. deal for Portland and Jazz make out like thieves.

Xanthis · Post #12 » by **Xanthis** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 8:04 pm

HolyToledo wrote:terrible deal for Chicago; O.K. deal for Portland and Jazz make out like thieves.

Chicago has wanted Boozer all along. They hope to be able to coax him into a longer deal past this year and they don't seem too high on TT.

sendai91 · Post #13 » by **sendai91** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 8:12 pm

I could see why Chicago would want more than a one-year Boozer rental. The plus for the Bulls is that they now have one of the three or four best offensive pf's in the game. I don't think that it's hyperbole to suggest that they would have beat the Celtics last year with Boozer in the lineup and would have competed with the Magic or Cavs with the additional firepower. Plus, the Bulls have the decision to have the inside track with Boozer next year if they like him or the financial freedom to the tune of $12 million to play with in the free agent market next year if they don't. Does Chicago have any interest in CJ Miles or Suton or a future first (after 2010, when it may be conveyed to Minnesota.)

GM_JAMES · Post #14 » by **GM_JAMES** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 8:16 pm

Hey As a Bulls fan I am all for this deal, But I have a question that doesn't seem to be on anyone's mind. Why would Portland make a deal that would stop them from signing Milsap by allowing Utah to match thier offer? Doesn't really make since.

HolyToledo · Post #15 » by **HolyToledo** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 8:20 pm

http://www.1080thefan.com/pages/2901628.php

reporting different 3 way trade where Jazz get Salmons for Boozer. Im ok with that.

DByrne86 · Post #16 » by **DByrne86** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 8:23 pm

polskikrol3 wrote:If this deal has any truth to it at all I hope that it happens. I more perfect scenario could not be dreamed up for the Jazz.

I can dream of one. It's called re-sign Millsap and trade Boozer for Hamilton. I like the idea of trading Boozer, I don't like the idea of replacing him with three backup forwards when there are more glaring holes that need to be patched.

Post #17 » by **StocktonShorts** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 8:24 pm

GM_JAMES wrote:Hey As a Bulls fan I am all for this deal, But I have a question that doesn't seem to be on anyone's mind. Why would Portland make a deal that would stop them from signing Milsap by allowing Utah to match thier offer? Doesn't really make since.

Because Portland wants a PG more than they want another frontcourt player.

polskikrol3 · Post #18 » by **polskikrol3** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 8:25 pm

HolyToledo wrote:http://www.1080thefan.com/pages/2901628.php

reporting different 3 way trade where Jazz get Salmons for Boozer. Im ok with that.

Who does POR give up in this trade? Doesnt make any sense to me.

DByrne86 · Post #19 » by **DByrne86** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 8:25 pm

HolyToledo wrote:http://www.1080thefan.com/pages/2901628.php

reporting different 3 way trade where Jazz get Salmons for Boozer. Im ok with that.

I would be ok with that too although I don't know if he would be a good fit with Sloan. He addresses the same issues that Hamilton would address so it makes sense from that standpoint.

DByrne86 · Post #20 » by **DByrne86** » Thu Jul 9, 2009 8:26 pm

I forgot to mention that I don't think there's any way that the Bulls give up Salmons so it's probably not going to happen that way.