Does this trade make sense for Utah?

[schneiderjazz]

Wallace is younger, cheaper, and better than AK and signed for years, I hope you guys see that.
Gomes is significantly better than Korver, I hope you guys see that too.
Lee is younger and healthier than Boozer, Boozer the better defensive player. Boozer at his best is better but Lee should improve marginally next year and is paid much less.

Yes, we see it. That's why most of us would be OK trading Boozer for him.
I'd rank Gomez and Korver on the same level.
I haven't seen much of Lee but if he's worse than Boozer defensively, this is an easier no than I thought.

You keep talking about salary, but you won't have Boozer and Korver next year where as you'll have Lee on a declining contract, Gomes on a non-guaranted contract, and Wallace next year. All 3 of those guys are worth every dollar they are paid, which makes them easy to trade. They are solid players, and if you decide you don't want Lee next year you can move him for someone else.

OK. It makes sense. Although I think we have a very good chance of re-signing Korver and we can always try to sign-and-trade Boozer.

You are talking about having more money next year in contracts, but you have more good players signed for that money. You can't compare Lee to Boozer next year unless you resign Boozer. That alone makes up the difference. You don't have any cap space next year, so Boozer and the MLE would be all you could sign. If you matched Boozer and an equivilant SF to Lee and Gomes next year, you wouldn't have any savings.

How about comparing Lee to the Knicks' pick? It could land us a better player than both Boozer and Lee with a much better contract for 4 years. Plus, we already have Millsap. Lee is basically the same player as Sap. We don't need Lee.

Also, Gomes would only count 1 mil against you cap if you buy him out. But you wouldn't want to though, he's a solid 3 point shooter, a solid defender at SF, a solid post player, and a very high character guy. We love him in Minny. Gomes has a lot of value in a trade both because you can cut him and because he's worth his paycheck. If a team needs 3 million more in cap space, you might get a call and a good deal for him.

Why do you wanna trade a guy who's so great to take back Curry and AK? Is it because you value the NY 2010 pick highly? Well, so do we.

Jeffries, of course, sucks. I got nothing for that one. He's just an add on that you have to take and hold for a year. He's a good defensive player, but not worth the money he's paid. But his dead money is all you would have.

Agree. Jeffries is a 7 million dead weight.

Basically, what we're trying to tell you is that:
We don't want or need Lee. He's a nice player, but we already have Millsap.
We're not giving up the NY pick, especially if it is for just saving money. We might be willing to part with it if it makes us contenders. The trade you suggested doesn't.
We, Jazz fans, don't care if the Jazz pay the tax this year. It will only be for 1 year. It's not like we're screwed for the next 5 years. So, if you come in here, trying to buy our players cheap to save the franchise money, you'll likely hear a no.

[Narf]

We, Jazz fans, don't care if the Jazz pay the tax this year. It will only be for 1 year. It's not like we're screwed for the next 5 years. So, if you come in here, trying to buy our players cheap to save the franchise money, you'll likely hear a no.

I conceded that amigo. You guys said this wasn't best for your team, and I believe you. Utah nixes the deal.

The reason I liked this trade is because the Wolves are getting what they want (NY's pick while making the Knicks a much worse team). NY gets what they want (cap space next year). And Utah, I thought, gets what they want (an influx of young talent this year and the ability to maintain that talent while under the luxury tax next year...plus a ton of money).

With Mike D as head coach, NY could piss you off royally by being the 8th playoff team in the east this year and you could come in 2nd in the division while paying 25 mil in luxury taxes. That's a hard pill to swallow. Take away David Lee and Al Harrington and replace them with a stack of expirings that nobody wants + SGs that can't all play together at the same time and let's see NY win 20 games. That's what this deal does for the Wolves. I honestly think the Knicks are about the 8th worst team in the NBA next year if they are left alone.

Just for fun, I will argue with you about Gomes vs Korver though. Gomes shot 37.2% from 3, Korver shot 38.6% from 3, clearly this is what Korver does better (he's a 40% shooter usually).
Gomes is a better rebounder, and above average for a SF.
Gomes is an above average defensive player, Korver below average.
Gomes is an effective post up player and can shift to PF (granted, he is not as effective against the bigger, stronger PFs). This allows him to compliment the team both as an inside and an outside player depending on who's on the floor. Korver is the same height, but could never make that shift.
Gomes is 27, Korver is 28.
Don't know how good Korver is at passing, Gomes is solid (but not spectacular).

The Wolves do not want to trade Gomes. There has been debates about whether or not we should trade Gomes for an expiring + a 1st round pick from a team like Dallas or Phoenix, and most Wolves fans actually said no. They'd rather rebuild with Gomes than get more cap space in 2010 + another 1st rounder. But to make this mega deal happen, we need to trade him so that you have good value back. In exchange we'd get AK47, who is similar in value to Gomes but paid way more. Clearly AK is better defensively, so overall he has more value as that is harder to find. But maybe I'm wrong, I don't know Utah's players as well as some others. I thought Boozer was a decent defensive player and got mocked for it.

Meh, that's why they make message boards I guess. Thanks for the debate guys, you've been a pleasure to talk to.

[David Ginola 14]

The NY first pick must be untouchable....

[shrink]

If Utah were that worried about the tax, we could have

1) let Miles walk last year
2) let Fesenko walk this year
3) let Millsap walk this year
4) sold our draft pick
5) let Okur walk next year.

.....

Everything the Jazz has done shows that we are willing to pay in order to keep guys we like.

I agree with the second part, but I don't think the evidence shows that Utah is immune from lux concerns. I think Utah did the right thing spending money on its younger core, but I imagine they wouldn't have been too upset if Boozer had opted out this year, rather than have him on the books to pay double. I should say that I'm not a fan of this deal per se, but if a team is saving $30 million dollars, that's a huge number.

Now I don't know Korver as well as you guys, but I can't believe he's worth over $10 mil to you this year. Harpring is certainly not worth double, and I think if Utah has on-court ambitions this year, a deal moving Harpring to MIN for some future asset makes sense for both teams, improves the Jazz financially and putting some of his $6.5 mil into on-court production.

[loserX]

If Utah were that worried about the tax, we could have

1) let Miles walk last year
2) let Fesenko walk this year
3) let Millsap walk this year
4) sold our draft pick
5) let Okur walk next year.

.....

Everything the Jazz has done shows that we are willing to pay in order to keep guys we like.

I agree with the second part, but I don't think the evidence shows that Utah is immune from lux concerns. I think Utah did the right thing spending money on its younger core, but I imagine they wouldn't have been too upset if Boozer had opted out this year, rather than have him on the books to pay double.

Oh, the Jazz would absolutely have liked it if Boozer walked. But we had a chance to trade him for crap in order to save money (Tim Thomas) and turned it down. Unless we can make him disappear altogether, we want a decent return for him.

Now I don't know Korver as well as you guys, but I can't believe he's worth over $10 mil to you this year. Harpring is certainly not worth double, and I think if Utah has on-court ambitions this year, a deal moving Harpring to MIN for some future asset makes sense for both teams, improves the Jazz financially and putting some of his $6.5 mil into on-court production.

I think if the Jazz could save some money, they'd probably consider it. Adding assets into the pot? Not so sure. A team wants Korver for free? Maybe. A team wants Korver and demands a draft pick to take him away? Don't think so. We could have used the Maynor pick for that and didn't do it.

As for Harpring, we have no idea whether he'll even play next year. If he retires, he can't be traded anyway.