the year KOC ruined the Jazz

[The59Sound]

The Millers have become extremely wealthy from this franchise since the 80's. Paying the tax for one year is not that big of deal for the Jazz and they have on many occasions have said so, right? You do know this...

Also, from my previous post, does it make sense to sign marginal players Watson and Elson and then move a significant piece in AK just to make a good 'business' decision as you claim?

I really don't think that you have thought this through as an adult should. It seems to me that you simply assume that the Jazz HAVE to be under the tax for some reason. Why is that? Why do you support a move that compromises a team (by your won admisison) and contradicts this organization from doing what they have repeatedly claimed they would do?

To top it off, you call me a child in fantasy land. Can you possibly be any more ignorant?

Wow. Just... wow. You've really lost your marbles.

First of all, the team has said it would be willing to pay the tax for a year (which it did last year), but it's clear it would not be a cavalier decision. Larry often indicated his resistance when he was still owner. Again, they're trying to run a business; winning a title is secondary. They want to field a good, competitive team, and spend only what they have to do it. I accept that reality, even though I'd be thrilled if they broke the bank.

With respect to Elson and Watson, your argument here isn't very logical, considering how little money they're making. It's not a choice between them and AK; AK is making more than 17 million dollars!

You're so angry all the time, and on almost any topic. As I indicated before, I want to keep AK; I hope KOC and the Millers decide to do so. But if they don't? Well, they want to make money and I'm not so blinded by inconsolable rage and fandom to want their blood for it.

[DelaneyRudd]

Winning a title is not secondary, though keeping economically flexible helps those means. Winning a title helps those means more so. So far the attitude has been to make the financial moves when the value of the savings far outweigh the value of the contracts or players. The two actual trades done where they lose salary actually do that.

[ColdBlue]

First of all, the team has said it would be willing to pay the tax for a year (which it did last year), but it's clear it would not be a cavalier decision.

So your response is that the Jazz won't make a cavalier decision? For real?

What decision are you referring to? Signing AK 5 years ago? Come on.

Look, there is no cavalier decision here. The Jazz have stated they will go into the tax, for the right piece, and the what 5-6 million for Watson and Elson (not sure what it will be but it wont be more than that) is just about what I would consider to be a non-cavalier decision on par with what the Millers are willing to do. I don't think the Jazz would sign these guys and dump AK especially when you have Sudiata and possibly Fes for 1-2 million. To do so would be a completely stupid from a basketball sense and a financial sense. Watson is pretty solid, yes, but the difference between Price and Watson is nowhere near the difference between AK and Diaw.

The hypothetical didn't happen. It probably was just a dumb rumor that got you hook line and sinker, and you are embarrased that you supported such a stupid thing in the first place. It's ok... no need to finagle.

Also, the reason I'm so angry lately is because this forum has gone downhill lately and there are too many posers here. It's like there has been a shift towards stupid.

[Fido]

If a move to ship AK for players + cost savings happens, I'm okay with it. They have a bunch of trade exceptions and would pick up another in the rumored scenarios. None of them are useful right now because they are so far over the cap I don't see them using them. But if they get down below the salary cap, I could see them taking someone on to give someone else cap relief and bolster the team for the playoffs.

I think it is important to look at any potential move in the context of what it allows in addition to specifically what the single move accomplishes. But that is just my 2 cents.

[DelaneyRudd]

The difference between AK and Diaw is not as large.

AK- 11.9 ppg, 4.6 rbd, 4.6 ast, 1.2 blk, 1.4 stl, 58 games/29 min
BD- 11.3 ppg, 5.2 rbd, 4 ast, .7 blk, .7 stl, 82 games/35 min

That's not a huge gap by any stretch of the imagination. Not a big enough one to throw yourself off a cliff.

[The59Sound]

Winning a title is not secondary, though keeping economically flexible helps those means. Winning a title helps those means more so. So far the attitude has been to make the financial moves when the value of the savings far outweigh the value of the contracts or players. The two actual trades done where they lose salary actually do that.

The Millers aren't running this business for the love of the game, as nice as that would be to believe. Of course winning a title is secondary.

[The59Sound]

First of all, the team has said it would be willing to pay the tax for a year (which it did last year), but it's clear it would not be a cavalier decision.

So your response is that the Jazz won't make a cavalier decision? For real?

What decision are you referring to? Signing AK 5 years ago? Come on.

Look, there is no cavalier decision here. The Jazz have stated they will go into the tax, for the right piece, and the what 5-6 million for Watson and Elson (not sure what it will be but it wont be more than that) is just about what I would consider to be a non-cavalier decision on par with what the Millers are willing to do. I don't think the Jazz would sign these guys and dump AK especially when you have Sudiata and possibly Fes for 1-2 million. To do so would be a completely stupid from a basketball sense and a financial sense. Watson is pretty solid, yes, but the difference between Price and Watson is nowhere near the difference between AK and Diaw.

The hypothetical didn't happen. It probably was just a dumb rumor that got you hook line and sinker, and you are embarrased that you supported such a stupid thing in the first place. It's ok... no need to finagle.

Also, the reason I'm so angry lately is because this forum has gone downhill lately and there are too many posers here. It's like there has been a shift towards stupid.

Wow, look, I can do those too.

The team's late owner, Larry H. Miller, used to say the franchise would never be a taxpayer, then later modified that to say, essentially, that the Jazz would consider paying if they were on the brink of winning an NBA championship and doing so might push them over the top.

The latest comments by Greg Miller, who previously would not commit to paying the tax, seem to echo his late father's sentiments.

"It's not something we want to do long-term, and it's not something we'd like to try to make a habit of. ... Based on today's circumstances, it would just be a one-year deal."

Greg already said this summer that he didn't think we really had a chance at the title this year, but that it may be necessary to get into the tax a little. Now, let's connect the dots. We're not going to compete for a title, but will be way over the cap. Diaw was an attractive solution to them, because while less-talented than AK, his production is actually better (comparable stats, but many less DNPs) and he takes the team out of penalty territory. It's not a hard riddle to solve.

As for "finagling," I have no need. I said in about 3,000 different places that I didn't like the trade basketball-wise, and I'm happy it's not likely to go through. I stand by my belief that it would have made financial sense for the Millers from a business standpoint. That's pretty undeniable.

As for your anger "lately..." I lurked on the board as far back as the Deron draft. Trust me, you've always been bitter, whiny, and unpleasant.

[DelaneyRudd]

Winning a title is not secondary, though keeping economically flexible helps those means. Winning a title helps those means more so. So far the attitude has been to make the financial moves when the value of the savings far outweigh the value of the contracts or players. The two actual trades done where they lose salary actually do that.

The Millers aren't running this business for the love of the game, as nice as that would be to believe. Of course winning a title is secondary.

They aren't in it to make loads of money. It's a zero sum game. Yes, they are wealthy, but they aren't billionaires with a ton of liquidity. Most of the wealth is in the businesses, and it would derelict of any CEO to put a business that employs thousand's money into the vanity of sports. The economic goal of the Jazz is to be self sufficient.

[ColdBlue]

Greg already said this summer that he didn't think we really had a chance at the title this year, but that it may be necessary to get into the tax a little. Now, let's connect the dots. We're not going to compete for a title, but will be way over the cap.

Wait... are you saying that the Jazz are going to take this year off and not seriously contend? Dude, this is the same exact argument as 'cavalier' just with different words.

When the Jazz upgraded Price with Watson, that really clued me into where the Jazz are going. Now I'm thinking Watson could be what 5 million a year? You just don't do that unless you are trying to compete.

Regardless, this discussion is stupid. It's a hypothetical bad trade that never happened.

Now let me get to the insults:

As far as me being bitter... true. I am. I haven't always been, actually I was feeling really good about this team a couple years ago.

Whiny... nope. I don't whine. You sound like the pansy whining type. I call it as it is... and I'm not 'cavalier' about it and I back it up with more than red herring.

Unpleasant... hopefully. I'm not here to hold hands with guys who like the 59th sound and have a meterosexual cyber persona, but if you are legit I will give you respect. You are not legit.

[Fido]

Wow...this thread has sure gone downhill. Get a room you two....

[ColdBlue]

They aren't in it to make loads of money. It's a zero sum game. Yes, they are wealthy, but they aren't billionaires with a ton of liquidity. Most of the wealth is in the businesses, and it would derelict of any CEO to put a business that employs thousand's money into the vanity of sports. The economic goal of the Jazz is to be self sufficient.

I think they have aquired enough wealth already to be self sufficient. The days of where this franchise was on the brink are in the past. Any money grabbing moves JUST to save money and not use for future assets would be in pretty poor taste.

I think that Greg has enough sense to see that we have a pretty damned good team and compromising it just to save a fraction of the payroll could backfire into years of having a sub-par team and that is the real threat of the franchise becoming fragile.