Poll: AK traded by deadline?

Post #1 » by **StocktonShorts** » Mon Jan 3, 2011 11:16 pm

Do you think AK is likely to be traded by the deadline?

Montanajazz · Post #2 » by **Montanajazz** » Mon Jan 3, 2011 11:49 pm

The answer will be yes if the Sloan inserts Hayward into the starting rotation any time soon!

erudite23 · Post #3 » by **erudite23** » Mon Jan 3, 2011 11:50 pm

Not gonna happen. I don't think people realize how valuable AK's defense is to this team. Trading him isn't the answer unless we get an equally talented defender in return who can also hit from range. Since those are few and far between, I'm gonna say probably not, but possible.

Montanajazz · Post #4 » by **Montanajazz** » Mon Jan 3, 2011 11:51 pm

In fact trade Kirlinko for another forward and cap space and resign Jeffers from D league!!!

Fido · Post #5 » by **Fido** » Mon Jan 3, 2011 11:55 pm

I said possible but not likely as I still see great value in the salary cap relief AK's expiring contract will bring in terms of flexibility next year.

Post #6 » by **DelaneyRudd** » Tue Jan 4, 2011 12:18 am

Possible but not likely is the answer to all of life's biggest questions.

carrottop12 · Post #7 » by **carrottop12** » Tue Jan 4, 2011 12:30 am

I voted likely.

The Jazz have shown they will make cost cutting moves, even if it means lowering the talent of the team.

They got rid of Brewer for a draft pick, they dumped Maynor and Harpring for nothing to cut money, we also passed on Matthews in order to save the 7 million it would have cost to bring him back.

We almost moved him to our main rival in what would have been an obvious downgrade in talent just before the season started to save money.

But now all of a sudden his defense is too valuable? Not likely. The Jazz are looking to cut money, and he's the best candidate. I say he's gone.

Post #8 » by **StocktonShorts** » Tue Jan 4, 2011 12:43 am

Bat wrote:I voted likely.

The Jazz have shown they will make cost cutting moves, even if it means lowering the talent of the team.

They got rid of Brewer for a draft pick, they dumped Maynor and Harpring for nothing to cut money, we also passed on Matthews in order to save the 7 million it would have cost to bring him back.

We almost moved him to our main rival in what would have been an obvious downgrade in talent just before the season started to save money.

But now all of a sudden his defense is too valuable? Not likely. The Jazz are looking to cut money, and he's the best candidate. I say he's gone.

My thoughts exactly, except I voted nearly guaranteed.

Post #9 » by **DelaneyRudd** » Tue Jan 4, 2011 1:01 am

Nearly guaranteed is way too strong considering 2 teams have to agree to a deal.

Post #10 » by **StocktonShorts** » Tue Jan 4, 2011 1:08 am

DelaneyRudd wrote:Nearly guaranteed is way too strong considering 2 teams have to agree to a deal.

Quite true, but I think there are going to be enough big salary trades going on that it will be easy for the Jazz to insert themselves into one of them.

Post #11 » by **StocktonShorts** » Tue Jan 4, 2011 1:15 am

Fido wrote:I said possible but not likely as I still see great value in the salary cap relief AK's expiring contract will bring in terms of flexibility next year.

If you see that value then you're (most likely) wrong.

Between DWill, Jefferson, Okur, Millsap, Miles, Bell, Hayward and Evans the Jazz are already committed to roughly $60M in salary next year.

The cap this year is $58M.

While it's true that we don't know what the cap will be like next year, it seems unlikely that the Jazz will have a ton of flexibility. If they do have flexibility it will be because of drastic changes to the CBA and not a direct result of AK's expiring contract.

erudite23 · Post #12 » by **erudite23** » Tue Jan 4, 2011 1:19 am

Bat wrote:I voted likely.

The Jazz have shown they will make cost cutting moves, even if it means lowering the talent of the team.

They got rid of Brewer for a draft pick, they dumped Maynor and Harpring for nothing to cut money, we also passed on Matthews in order to save the 7 million it would have cost to bring him back.

We almost moved him to our main rival in what would have been an obvious downgrade in talent just before the season started to save money.

But now all of a sudden his defense is too valuable? Not likely. The Jazz are looking to cut money, and he's the best candidate. I say he's gone.

If you can't see the difference between AK and those guys, I don't know what to tell you. None of those players were central to what the Jazz do as a team. AK is. Harpring was finished. Brewer was a decent player, but was expendable and the Grizzlies gave us a great price for him. Matthews was an undrafted rookie who had shown some ability, but didn't look to be worthy of a 30m dollar contract and would have been caught up in the glut of guards on the roster. Maynor was the price we had to pay to get 10m in savings.

The Jazz have shown that they will make modest moves to cut costs, but not at the expense of the ability to win. AK is important to the team. We will only move him if it gives us a better chance to win, or if it provides a massive amount of savings without hurting our chances of winning. Moving AK would be a significant departure from any of those moves. I don't see it, especially with him coming off the books after this year.

Efernand · Post #13 » by **Efernand** » Tue Jan 4, 2011 1:39 am

Its funny, people are getting on the Hayward train after 3 games as fast as they were looking to get off it in the first week of the season. Some months from now the Jazz will be in the playoffs and I'm mighty sure they are gonna need AK if they want to go anywhere. Doubt AK gets traded, plenty of teams with big expirings around, his contract is not as valuable as it might have been in another year.

Post #14 » by **StocktonShorts** » Tue Jan 4, 2011 1:48 am

Efernand wrote:Its funny, people are getting on the Hayward train after 3 games as fast as they were looking to get off it in the first week of the season. Some months from now the Jazz will be in the playoffs and I'm mighty sure they are gonna need AK if they want to go anywhere. Doubt AK gets traded, plenty of teams with big expirings around, his contract is not as valuable as it might have been in another year.

I think the Jazz would be looking to dump AK regardless of Hayward's ability to contribute. I just don't believe the Millers are willing to lose so much money in luxury tax this year.

outerspacefella · Post #15 » by **outerspacefella** » Tue Jan 4, 2011 1:50 am

If AK is traded it won't have anything to do with Hayward performance.
Roster's still not ready to compete for it all, AK had excellent games and fairly mediocre to bad ones as well. His salary is giant compared to his contributions, and that has been the case for several seasons now, killing Jazz flexibility for quite some years.
Jazz will not hesitate to trade him for the right assets.

Batu7 · Post #16 » by **Batu7** » Tue Jan 4, 2011 2:43 am

I voted likely, but I hope not.

HammerDunk · Post #17 » by **HammerDunk** » Tue Jan 4, 2011 5:40 am

If he keeps playing like he did tonight, there's no way I would trade him.

MeestR · Post #18 » by **MeestR** » Tue Jan 4, 2011 5:47 am

theoretically, it "is possible, but not likely," that deron is traded by the deadline. if the offer is good enough, the front office would be fools not to consider it.

but i have a feeling this is the team we are gonna have come playoff time. there just seems to me more reasons to keep the team together than to find even more pieces to fit in.

Post #19 » by **StocktonShorts** » Tue Jan 4, 2011 6:03 am

HammerDunk wrote:If he keeps playing like he did tonight, there's no way I would trade him.

I'm not asking if you would trade him. I'm asking if you think the Millers will trade him.

HammerDunk · Post #20 » by **HammerDunk** » Tue Jan 4, 2011 6:26 am

I honestly think they most likely won't trade him, unless they plan on signing him right back next season. AK will retire a Jazzman.

How likely is it that AK is traded by the deadline?