Question from a Jazz fan & Trade

blackham9258 · Post #1 » by **blackham9258** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 3:45 am

Many on the Jazz board believe that Minny will take Kanter, leaving us to get Derrick Williams. If you could have one player in this draft would it be Williams or Kanter if we were willing to trade out of the pick, and what would you be willing to give up?

We have been kicking around that if Brandon Knight slipped to you, we might be willing to give you Williams or Kanter if you gave up next years #1 unprotected and this years #18. Its a risk sure, but we Jazz fans no what happens to a point guard in his sophomore year and you guys are in for a treat this year as Wall will take a major step forward. It is likely you guys will contend for a playoff spot next year and or end up somewhere between 6-12. Sure we have the upside of getting the lottery to go our way but you guys get your future PF or C.

Thoughts?

Wizardspride · Post #2 » by **Wizardspride** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 4:02 am

Most of us would prefer Kanter and I'd be willing to give you number 18 and a next years 1st rounder top 3 protected.

blackham9258 · Post #3 » by **blackham9258** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 4:07 am

We may want to dump Raja on you as well. As far as the top 3 protected that is probably reasonable, but perhaps our management would insist on it. Perhaps though if it did end up top three we would have the right to swap picks with you... you guys getting our GSW picks or something.

TGW · Post #4 » by **TGW** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 4:21 am

Wait, wait, wait. You want the Wiz to give up their #6 this year, the #18, and next years unprotected #1 pick to move up THREE SPOTS?

:laugh:

Goddamn, do you want John Wall while you're at it?

Wizardspride · Post #5 » by **Wizardspride** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 4:23 am

TGW wrote:Wait, wait, wait. You want the Wiz to give up their #6 this year, the #18, and next years unprotected #1 pick to move up THREE SPOTS?

Goddamn, do you want John Wall while you're at it?

No.

#18 this year and our 1st next year.

Chocolate City Jordanaire · Post #6 » by **Chocolate City Jordanaire** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 4:30 am

If the Wizards ended up with the 3rd and the 6th pick this year, I might just about faint on draft day.

Ed Wood · Post #7 » by **Ed Wood** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 4:33 am

That's almost certainly not what he meant, even if it was technically what he posted because he specifically mentioned Brandon Knight falling to the sixth pick, which would be irrelevant if it wasn't involved in the trade at all. I'd probably be up for the trade the way it's stated, but not the way it's intended. If the sixth this year is involved nothing from a future draft will be, if next year's first is the sixth this year is not available.

And personally I'd take Williams if I had my choice at three.

TGW · Post #8 » by **TGW** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 4:55 am

Wizardspride wrote:
TGW wrote:Wait, wait, wait. You want the Wiz to give up their #6 this year, the #18, and next years unprotected #1 pick to move up THREE SPOTS?

Goddamn, do you want John Wall while you're at it?

No.

#18 this year and our 1st next year.

Well then, what does Brandon Knight falling to us have to do with anything? It sounds like he's saying if if Knight falls to the Wiz, then they'd be willing to part with Williams or Kanter if the Wiz were willing to give up the #18 and next years pick.

blackham9258 · Post #9 » by **blackham9258** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 4:55 am

Jazz dropped two spots the year we got Deron Williams, and instead of picking #4 we ended up at #6 like you guys this year. We then had to give up 3 picks to move up three spots.

Portland took Martell Webster and two other players over two years (Linas Kleiz & Sergio Rodriguez). How did trading down out of #3 work for Portland? We got the best player, and although we traded him, we made out like bandits by getting an All NBA PG.

Trading down usually doesn't work out for the team trading down, but it is possible that if Jazz management feel that Knight is there guy and he is available at 6 we might be willing to trade down.

In this scenario Portland got terrible value by trading down, another boneheaded decision by Portland at the top of the draft. That is our risk in trading down. By getting your future 1st, we have the possibility of not getting totally worked. You have to give up a lot to get a lot. Derrick Williams and Kanter could end up being allstars, and your pick next year could be out of the lottery.

Ed Wood · Post #10 » by **Ed Wood** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 5:01 am

While past trades are not entirely irrelevant this is not a courtroom and precedent is not going to have much influence over what we consider attractive and unattractive in a trade.

And frankly it does nothing for your case to illustrate the risk involved in Utah's part of the trade. I don't care about that happens to Utah as a result of this trade. Based entirely on my own view of this draft and of the best interests of Washington as an organization it is an either or proposition, the sixth this year or a future pick, not both. I would not be surprised or perturbed if that offer was refused, but it appears to be the consensus here.

TGW · Post #11 » by **TGW** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 5:08 am

blackham9258 wrote:Jazz dropped two spots the year we got Deron Williams, and instead of picking #4 we ended up at #6 like you guys this year. We then had to give up 3 picks to move up three spots.

Portland took Martell Webster and two other players over two years (Linas Kleiz & Sergio Rodriguez). How did trading down out of #3 work for Portland? We got the best player, and although we traded him, we made out like bandits by getting an All NBA PG.

Trading down usually doesn't work out for the team trading down, but it is possible that if Jazz management feel that Knight is there guy and he is available at 6 we might be willing to trade down.

In this scenario Portland got terrible value by trading down, another boneheaded decision by Portland at the top of the draft. That is our risk in trading down. By getting your future 1st, we have the possibility of not getting totally worked. You have to give up a lot to get a lot. Derrick Williams and Kanter could end up being allstars, and your pick next year could be out of the lottery.

Except as Ed Wood says, we don't care about your risk because we are risking a ton ourselves by mortgaging several picks for an unknown entity. And we don't care what happened to Portland either -- the only question is if its worth trading multiple picks to trade up 3 spots on our end, and in this case the answer is HELL NO. If you want next years pick protected, and the #18, that is fine. There's no way in hell you'd get what you're asking.

Now if you want the #6, cough up Milsap and the #12 and we can talk.

blackham9258 · Post #12 » by **blackham9258** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 5:11 am

I am a little surprised that you guys think so little of your next years prospects. Perhaps the deal for your pick next year would need to be #1 protected or at least it would be a swap with one of our two picks next year, but you don't move up into the top 3 of a 3 player draft without giving up anything significant.... and the #18 is nothing significant... especially in this draft.

Ed Wood · Post #13 » by **Ed Wood** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 5:28 am

Were you a car salesmen the pitch "you're going to be loaded so there's no good reason you shouldn't be a big spender right now" would not move much merchandise. The 18 alone might not be enough to prompt a move, Washington does have a number of young (if not very good) players as well. If not, well we'll just pick six, there isn't a great deal of urgency on this end to do this deal. And to use your own logic, if Utah would prefer to take a player available with the sixth pick regardless, well, what sort of incentive do you need to draft the player you want (you see, it's silly, that argument)?

And if you knew the draft-conscious crowd here you'd know that wars have been fought and won with less than what may well be around at 18.

blackham9258 · Post #14 » by **blackham9258** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 5:40 am

Just a thought guys it will be interesting to see what happens this draft. I just know that this draft really shrunk on potential with Barnes, Sullinger, P Jones and T Jones dropped out of it. It would have been 6 or 7 deep if they declared, but alas teams drafting 5-14 will struggle to find stars. Good luck to you all. I love your team and will be watching your progress next year.

Wizardspride · Post #15 » by **Wizardspride** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 12:51 pm

TGW wrote:
Wizardspride wrote:
TGW wrote:Wait, wait, wait. You want the Wiz to give up their #6 this year, the #18, and next years unprotected #1 pick to move up THREE SPOTS?

Goddamn, do you want John Wall while you're at it?

No.

#18 this year and our 1st next year.

Well then, what does Brandon Knight falling to us have to do with anything? It sounds like he's saying if if Knight falls to the Wiz, then they'd be willing to part with Williams or Kanter if the Wiz were willing to give up the #18 and next years pick.

My bad. You're right.

Post #16 » by **Rafael122** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 1:01 pm

I'd give up next year's pick if it were lottery protected, sure. But not top 3 protected. Are you kidding me?

Post #17 » by **Ruzious** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 1:25 pm

blackham, what would you think about the 6th pick plus next year's top 7 protected plus your choice of Booker or Seraphin?

Wizardspride · Post #18 » by **Wizardspride** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 2:28 pm

Deleted Post.

queridiculo · Post #19 » by **queridiculo** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 3:36 pm

You'd have to be high to trade 6 + 18, plus a top three protected pick on 2012 for the rights to Kanter/Williams.

Given that this team will likely be lottery bound for at least two more season, the only way I add another future first rounder is if it's lottery protected for exactly that time frame.

The 2012 could very well end up being one of the deepest drafts in quite some time, and depending on how the CBA shakes out 2013 might even be a bigger boon.

This draft may well be one of the weakest in recent years, and while there are some intriguing prospects, there isn't anybody I'd mortgage this franchises future over.

theboomking · Post #20 » by **theboomking** » Mon Jun 6, 2011 3:52 pm

I'd probably trade #6, #18 and a top 3 protected pick next year. IMO, unless we win a top 3 pick through the lotto, we aren't going to pick in the top 8 picks next year. Even if that is all it accomplishes, adding Williams gives us a very tradeable set of commodities in Williams, Crawford and McGee, should a superstar caliber player, like Dwight, become available via trade.

In my view, if we can trade our picks this year and next for Williams, we'll have the 2nd or 3rd overall pick, and an excellent prospect. If not, I think we're likely to have the 6th and 18th picks this year, and the 8th to 10th pick next year. That is likely to be a lot of replaceable talent.

All that being said, I still may like Kanter better than Williams.