Monroe for Kanter?

[eLo]

Kanter is untouchable from this team , mark my words he will be 1 team all nba in 2 seasons

[Inigo Montoya]

yes, i think monroe fits the jazz very well. he'll fit even better if sloan was coaching and not corbin. but i see more potential in kanter.

Am I the only one who doesn't know wth this means? It seems to be the popular buzz phrase that SOMEBODY inserts into at least every thread...

it means that sloan would know how to utilize a good passing big man better than corbin. you don't agree?

[erudite23]

On pure value, I think this trade tilts heavily in our favor. Monroe is already a high level starting big in the NBA who still has a good amount of untapped potential. Kanter is an unproven backup who has played less than 2500 minutes of NBA basketball.

But the Jazz don't need the bump that would come immediately from having Monroe. What we are looking for is a home run, and being bad right now is actually good for us considering the talent-rich draft coming next season. So while this is plenty value and a very generous "offer".....its still not something the Jazz look to do. And I think everyone is fed up with poor defensive teams. Kanter has been surprisingly effective defending the pick and roll and shows the ability to be a strong one on one defender. Having a big who is a liability on defense just makes life really hard. I think pretty much everyone in Jazz nation has had enough of that for a few decades.

[Inigo Montoya]

there is no question that monroe is more "proven" than kanter. on the other hand, he didn't have much competition for his spot ever since he came into the league, and also only played for a losing team. kanter on the other hand, has one year less in the NBA, had to play behind fringe allstar players (millsap last year, and al last year and this year), fight for minutes with another former 3rd pick, and play for a coach who heavily relies on vets in a better conference and in a better team. had kanter played for the pistons, or even for the jazz the same amount of minutes monroe got, i think he'd post very similar numbers if not better. their year 1+2 per 36 stats are almost identical.

[eLo]

On pure value, I think this trade tilts heavily in our favor. Monroe is already a high level starting big in the NBA who still has a good amount of untapped potential. Kanter is an unproven backup who has played less than 2500 minutes of NBA basketball.

But the Jazz don't need the bump that would come immediately from having Monroe. What we are looking for is a home run, and being bad right now is actually good for us considering the talent-rich draft coming next season. So while this is plenty value and a very generous "offer".....its still not something the Jazz look to do. And I think everyone is fed up with poor defensive teams. Kanter has been surprisingly effective defending the pick and roll and shows the ability to be a strong one on one defender. Having a big who is a liability on defense just makes life really hard. I think pretty much everyone in Jazz nation has had enough of that for a few decades.

already solid in def, with post moves that probably 99,9% bigs in curent nba dont have how any one could trade this, Monroe is ok but he is not as good as Kanter can be right away in 13/14 season, plus he is quite soft lousy defender

[jazzfan1971]

I take it and run.

[Fido]

yes, i think monroe fits the jazz very well. he'll fit even better if sloan was coaching and not corbin. but i see more potential in kanter.

Am I the only one who doesn't know wth this means? It seems to be the popular buzz phrase that SOMEBODY inserts into at least every thread...

it means that sloan would know how to utilize a good passing big man better than corbin. you don't agree?

Let me flip the argument. Has Corbin had a "good passing big man" to utilize? If not, how would you know what he would do with one?

It just feels like people pile on with comments like this with no justification other than their opinion that Corbin sucks at everything. I guess to be fair though, yes a hall-of-fame coach would probably be better than a guy in his 1st head coaching job at just about everything.

[StocktonShorts]

I guess to be fair though, yes a hall-of-fame coach would probably be better than a guy in his 1st head coaching job at just about everything.

To be fair, Corbin's a better dresser than Sloan, even if his pocket squares are sometimes unruly.

[Inigo Montoya]

Let me flip the argument. Has Corbin had a "good passing big man" to utilize? If not, how would you know what he would do with one?

doesn't matter. corbin showed he doesn't utilize the skills of the players on his roster well enough. he may not had a great passing big man, but he had plenty of players with their own standout skills that went underutilized, and it hurt the team. it is covered at length at other threads, so i won't rehash.

It just feels like people pile on with comments like this with no justification other than their opinion that Corbin sucks at everything.

he doesn't suck at everything. but i don't see how the issue of how well your coach uses his players and their skills is not relevant to whether or not it will be a good idea to trade for certain players.

I guess to be fair though, yes a hall-of-fame coach would probably be better than a guy in his 1st head coaching job at just about everything.

well, you said it yourself. so why is keeping corbin a good move?

[Fido]

I guess to be fair though, yes a hall-of-fame coach would probably be better than a guy in his 1st head coaching job at just about everything.

well, you said it yourself. so why is keeping corbin a good move?

This thread isn't about keeping Corbin or not. It is about Monroe for Kanter. Let's not muddle the question at hand. To say you wouldn't bring in a guy who would fit because the coach wouldn't use his talents right is silly. If the coach is given talent to win and doesn't he won't stay employed. You always try and put the best talent you can on the floor if you are a team of any reputation regardless of who the coach is or how adept he is at his job in my opinion.

[Inigo Montoya]

This thread isn't about keeping Corbin or not. It is about Monroe for Kanter.

well, i already answered that issue with my first post of the thread, and it had nothing to do with corbin.

Let's not muddle the question at hand. To say you wouldn't bring in a guy who would fit because the coach wouldn't use his talents right is silly. If the coach is given talent to win and doesn't he won't stay employed.

that's the whole point. corbin did a bad job and is still employed. i don't see the point of keeping a coach who is clearly not the long term solution, just so he will further prove he's not the right guy. just so we could say that he paid the price for not doing a good job when he is eventually let go. why waste time of the core players development?

You always try and put the best talent you can on the floor if you are a team of any reputation regardless of who the coach is or how adept he is at his job in my opinion.

in theory, i agree with you. but in reality, this concept is more complicated and really doesn't work that well.