Would we do AL for Jamison/1st

blackham9258 · Post #1 » by **blackham9258** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 5:31 am

Al Jefferson for Jamison/#1 protected first.

Would we do this. The pick would likely end up 6-10, but with say the #8 of GSW and our own, we could have: #'s 6, 8, & 12.... Should be enough to move up to #3 or #4?

babyjax13 · Post #2 » by **babyjax13** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 5:42 am

That's pretty intriguing. If it's a deadline deal and we're going no where (most likely) then, sure!

UTJazzFan_Echo1 · Post #3 » by **UTJazzFan_Echo1** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 5:48 am

Honestly, that's terrible value for Jefferson. I would want at least 2 first round picks with little to no protection.

BJSmiles · Post #4 » by **BJSmiles** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 5:54 am

I would do it.

Matt007b · Post #5 » by **Matt007b** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 6:18 am

To force Corbin to play Kanter.. go after a backup center and play a Jazz style offense with Milsap/Favors/Kanter constantly on the court?

I like it.. I'm not sure if it's the correct value but I like the idea...

Gothapotamus · Post #6 » by **Gothapotamus** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 3:44 pm

UTJazzFan_Echo1 wrote:Honestly, that's terrible value for Jefferson. I would want at least 2 first round picks with little to no protection.

Are you kidding me? AT LEAST 2 first round picks with little to no protection? Over value much? Jamison has proven he's a capable player, he's an expiring contract, and he can do something that others can't... Shoot the 3 ball. I think he would be an intriguing prospect. I think it puts the Jazz in a good spot financially and allows time for Kanter to start and hopefully become what we are all hoping for. Jamison can play the 3 and the 4 so he can help fill minutes at the 4. The Jazz would presumably need to pick up another 5 but hey, Fess is still available!

If the Jazz could somehow include Harris along with have the Cavs include Sessions, I wouldn't hate that.

Hoops Addict · Post #7 » by **Hoops Addict** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 4:23 pm

Decent deal....if we want to dump Jefferson....and get a pick. I would value a Clevland 1st highly.

Would Cleveland do it? I bet they would want it top 10 protected.

d-will8 · Post #8 » by **d-will8** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 4:45 pm

UTJazzFan_Echo1 wrote:Honestly, that's terrible value for Jefferson. I would want at least 2 first round picks with little to no protection.

I'd take a top ten pick and an expiring contract for Al in a second. I think you might be a little bit delusional about how much value Al has. We're not going to do better than that (or even that well). Honestly, I feel like that'd be an awful deal for Cleveland. They'd lose cap flexibility and a top ten pick for a guy who's not likely to make them anything more than a fringe playoff team (sounds familiar somehow).

SLC Biz · Post #9 » by **SLC Biz** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 5:02 pm

UTJazzFan_Echo1 wrote:Honestly, that's terrible value for Jefferson. I would want at least 2 first round picks with little to no protection.

Oh God...

UTJazzFan_Echo1 · Post #10 » by **UTJazzFan_Echo1** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 5:35 pm

Are you guys kidding me? Do you really undervalue Jefferson THAT much? This deal is essentially a protected 1st round pick for Jefferson... I mean... really? You honestly think that's a good deal for a borderline all-star big man? Give me a break....

You realize that Jefferson is one of the only guys in the entire NBA to average 17+ ppg. and 9+ rpg. over the last few seasons? The other guys to average those numbers... all of them have been all-stars. Also, his career shooting % is 50% and his career free throw % is 70% so the I don't even want to hear the "but he's so inefficient!" argument. AJ was one of the top 3 C's in the entire league last season coming out of the all-star break and that wasn't just some fluke. Even now, AJ is trending upwards in his production and efficiency and I fully expect him to continue to do so.

You guys undervalue Jefferson waaaaaaaaaaaaaay too much. He's not someone you should sell low on, especially with this team considering he's our best player. Hell, we paid more for him than this deal is offering and we got him when he was coming off a major knee injury; his value has only increased since he came here to Utah.

It's an absolute joke if you want to dump Jefferson for (essentially) a protected first round pick. I understand that you guys want to give the young guys more playing time but that doesn't mean you just gift Jefferson away to someone. I hope you realize how terrible we would be if we made this deal... we wouldn't just be bad, we'd probably be one of the bottom 4 or 5 teams in the league bad. This deal does us absolutely no good other than clearing Jefferson out so a young guy can step in and take his spot and sending us on a trajectory for the bottom of the league (which isn't a good thing). If we're going to make a deal that makes us THAT bad, then yes, I want at least two first round picks with little to no protection because God knows that we're going to need all the assets we can get to get back to winning.

If you're going to make this deal, replace AJ with Millsap; that makes a million x's more sense.

DeadlyTreeStump · Post #11 » by **DeadlyTreeStump** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 6:12 pm

A lot of people have been saying the Jazz is not investing enough in winning now OR rebuilding (the classic eternal 8th/9th seed situation). While I disagree with that (I think we're doing a pretty good job at rebuilding the team), this take would take one strategy to the extreme while completely giving up on the other, and I think it could make sense.

As for Cleveland, they're obviously in rebuilding mode, and the trade does not make any sense at all. It's just not gonna happen.

phrizzo · Post #12 » by **phrizzo** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 8:21 pm

i would really love to get ramon sessions for what it's worth.

Gothapotamus · Post #13 » by **Gothapotamus** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 8:40 pm

@ Echo1

So you trade a player who has averaged 16 and 9 for a player that has averaged 19 and 8, and you think it's a "dump"? No one is saying that Jamison is "the answer" but there are major benefits as well. Namely that the Jazz have a large expiring contract, allowing them some additional spending and flexibility. They allow Kanter and Favors more minutes to become what everyone is banking on them becoming, THE CORNERSTONE OF THE FRANCHISE, along with pick up another pick. You get a guy who can score, shoot the 3 and play the 3 or the 4.

Do you truly believe that Jefferson is THAT indispensable? What do you suppose the outlook is like with or without the trade? $15M could go an awful long way this off season, as could additional picks.

SoCalJazzFan · Post #14 » by **SoCalJazzFan** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 9:00 pm

The Jazz have 5 guys on the roster right now with less than 2 yrs experience. There is a good chance they will have an opportunity to add two more first rounders to the team next year. How many guys under 22 can the Jazz have and still expect to win this decade?

If the Jazz trade AJ, it better be for someone (PG or wing) that will be with the team for a while and make an impact, in my opinion.

UTJazzFan_Echo1 · Post #15 » by **UTJazzFan_Echo1** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 9:48 pm

I'm not saying AJ is "indispensable", I'm trying to say that by trading him away for a guy like Jamison (who almost retired last year BTW) and another first round pick (protected at that) isn't going to help us now, or down the road. Sure, it opens up some PT for the young guys but at what cost?

I'm very much on the side of things that SoCal is saying; if we're trading away our best player and the current cornerstone of our offense, we better be getting something back that fills a need such as a PG or a dynamic scoring wing who can help us now and in the future.

What need is Jamison going to fill? Is he going to help us down the road? Sure, his expiring is nice but what are going to do with the money? Who are we going to sign in FA next year that's going to make a big difference with this team (more so than Jefferson)?

It's like the proposed KG Celtics trade, mostly everyone on here said no to it basically because we have no need for an expiring contract right now. Do any of us really see us making the big moves in FA next year? Expiring's will be nice/needed a couple years down the road when we need to resign all our youth but not so much right now.

I just really believe that if you're going to move Jefferson, it better be for something really good, and I just don't see a protected 1st rounder and an expiring as something really good.

Getjazz · Post #16 » by **Getjazz** » Wed Feb 22, 2012 9:53 pm

Ditto^^^^ If Big Al or Millsap is traded it needs to be for a PG who can be the man for this team for the next 4-7 yrs...

d-will8 · Post #17 » by **d-will8** » Thu Feb 23, 2012 12:08 am

Echo:

I agree that trading Al would make us worse now (though not by all that much if we picked up somebody like Jamison in return), but how the hell does getting a top ten pick from the Cavs, more playing time for Favors and Kanter and a better draft pick (as a result of being worse) not help us down the road? I understand the argument that we'd have too many young guys on our team, but, in my mind, that's a better problem to have than the one we have now with Al on the roster (where we're not playing two number #3 picks that we traded a top 10-15 player for or contending in the present). The draft is our best shot at getting a superstar and, even if that doesn't pan out, cheap young pieces are always good trading assets.

Of course I'd like to get more for Al, but what team is going to give us more? You say Al's efficient because he shoots over 50% from the field and over 70% from the line, but pretty much every advanced stat contradicts you. That doesn't mean Al's a bad player, but the fact that he's an inefficient scorer is a problem considering that--despite his improvements in other areas--you'd have a hard time convincing anybody he's above average at anything else, except for rebounding, which he's good but not great at.

Maybe I've just gotten way too down on Al, but I just don't see why anybody would trade anything of value, much less two unprotected picks (for reference's sake, neither Melo, Deron nor CP3 brought in two unprotected picks) for him. I don't see him on a winning team, at least not as a primary piece. Though he's played better than Millsap lately, I'd much, much rather trade him than Millsap. Both have been miscast as primary options, but Millsap projects as a much more valuable and well-rounded role player. That being said, Millsap probably has a lot more value.

Ming Kong! · Post #18 » by **Ming Kong!** » Thu Feb 23, 2012 5:50 pm

Hoops Addict wrote:Decent deal....if we want to dump Jefferson....and get a pick. I would value a Clevland 1st highly.

Would Cleveland do it? I bet they would want it top 10 protected.

Top 10 protected? What's the use of trading for it then? By next year with a core of Irving/Thompson/Big Al they could be in the playoffs in the weak east. This year is the only year that the pick could hold some real value. I'd give them at best top 3 protected, but no more. Right now, they have the 9th worst record in the NBA, so top 10 protection basically makes the pick unattainable. Our GS + CLE picks could help us a lot, maybe even climb up the lottery to get a game changer. Still I wouldn't mind getting a PG from a team in need of a big. Who the hell is going to give up a top 10 PG for Big Al? MAYBE we could fool GS into trading Ellis for Big Al. 19.1ppg 9.4rpg 1.6bpg looks like an awesome center to the rest of the league, so I think we could fool a team that doesn't really watch him and know his true impact to a team.