Jazz will deal Al Jefferson or Paul Millsap before trade deadline
 

The Utah Jazz will have some interesting decisions to make this summer. And they involve whether or not to keep the team�s two best players.

Al Jefferson and Paul Millsap are both legitimate starting frontcourt players, each with a unique skill set that would have tremendous value for a multitude of NBA teams. There are questions about fit within a given system, as well as a fit within a team�s current salary cap situation. But both of these guys can play, and would by highly valued on the free agent market.

This, in a nutshell, is the issue facing the Jazz.

Both Jefferson and Millsap will be unrestricted free agents after this season. With the Jazz having young big men on the roster it believes can develop into legitimate assets of their own, it�s unlikely that they would be willing to spend to keep both players in Utah beyond this season.

From Marc Stein of ESPN.com:

It�s a working assumption in front offices all over the league that the Jazz will trade Jefferson or Millsap for a front-line point guard at some point in the next 10 weeks. For two reasons.

1. Jefferson and Millsap will be free agents in July, meaning Utah risks losing both without compensation if they�re still on the roster beyond Feb. 21.

2. Derrick Favors and Enes Kanter are the undeniable power players of the future in Utah, even though Jefferson is one of only five players this season averaging 17 and 10 � along with Dwight Howard, David Lee, Kevin Love and Zach Randolph � and despite Millsap�s status as the most productive forward from the 2006 draft not named LaMarcus Aldridge.

There will be plenty of teams lined up to talk trade for both of these players.

Whether or not Utah finds a deal it likes, however, will depend on its internal definition of �front-line point guard,� of which there simply aren�t very many in the league at all, let alone ones teams are willing to part with.

Jefferson is at the end of a deal paying him $15 million this season, while Millsap will earn roughly half that in the final year of his contract. Dollars won�t be the only factor in deciding which player to keep, though, as the offers that will come in will likely be tied to a specific player, rather than being an either/or proposition.

If the Jazz are dead set on moving one of these two before they both hit free agency, they�ll likely be open to dealing either one equally � the player that�s valued the most by other teams will be the one sent out of town, if in fact that�s what the long-term plan in Utah dictates.

Related link: Lakers snap four-game losing streak with win over Wizards | ProBasketballTalk

Oh boy. I'm expecting this to be a long thread.

I'll go ahead and start:

Trade Bonner or Blair and some other filler players for a double double guy! Because every team will make a trade that benefits my team, and Bonner and Blair really suck but I expect another team to jump at the chance to have them and some D-League players!

If I had to choose either one to go after, I�d go for Milsap. He has the lower salary of the two (Milsap � 8.6 mil; Jefferson -- 15 mil) and we may not have to give up as much to get him in a trade scenario. Milsap, to me, seems more aggressive but Jefferson is good around the basket and low post. Since Milsap is a free agent and if we got him, we could determine, based on performance between now and season�s end, whether we want to pursue him as a free agent. And we would have a foot in the door if Milsap did like his experience here in SA. If we don�t like him, Jefferson might still be available as a free agent and if the asking price is affordable, go after him then.

just wait till they become free agents next summer.

This was a trade I wanted before the season but the team looks good now and it would be to much to make that trade. Spurs are better to get a big for the vet-min when trading is over.

no one wants our bigs and our guards/forwards are hurt

we won't be in this hunt

Good way to tell the truth and end this thread fast Jose! THIS IS THE TRUTH!

Could be very well true, but no one wanted RJ when we got SJax back. So there's always hope. Blair/Bonner for Millsap? I can hope.....right.....lol

Actually, it was Sjax that no one wanted. He whined his way into getting traded because he didn't like Milwaukee or Golden State.

Yeah but no one wanted RJ either.....especially with the contract he had with us....point being is I can always hope! :wink

Actually, You're Wrong Again! Mark Jackson was quoted when they got SJax in the trade that he was looking forward to coaching him. Also SJax was GS bound by plane if they didn't want him.........why was he on a plane to the Bay Area? Yes, SJax played in Golden State before but that was when Nelson was still there.

So why did they trade him for RJ and a pick then? He didn't even suit up for Golden State. And of course Mark Jackson is going to talk like a coach. He's not going to say anything negative about him, particularly when that player is known to have a bad attitude when he's not happy.

What ever became of the Antonio McDyess comeback?

Thanks for including the first round pick for me lol. That's the reason why they did it not because they were ridding themselves of a horrible team cancer. They wanted extra draft picks and at the time of the trade they were projected to have no picks at all due to the conditional status of them. Which later changed to their favor. Jackson said those things with the mindset he was going to be there and touched on the fact of SJax being on playoff teams and being a champion. Also the GS front office admitted they were not acquiring him to flip him but teams called. Yes, I used the word "teams". All those are facts not just a coach or front office "talking" lol. Yeah his attitude is so bad here and was horrible in his first stint here......lol. Whatever. Please just man up and admit you were wrong. Want a fact check??.........it's on the net for anyone to see or you could've just watched NBATV during the trade deadline time frame to gain the correct information on this trade. Stick to the facts and don't just put your words on here like gospel. People don't always agree with me on here but they know I don't put garbage out to include huge lies like yourself at times.

I didn't say anything that wasn't fact. He was a cancer in Milwaukee and got himself traded to Golden State, who then didn't even give him time to get a sandwich and sent him to SA. Then you start quoting Marc Jackson and the FO, like they are going to say anything negative. They got exactly one pick, a conditional pick. Not exactly a coup on their part. Not only that, they traded for that pick and RJ, who everyone here agrees sucks compared to SJax. So again, why would they do that? Try to grow up and keep it civil for once too. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they are out to destroy you.

You said they wanted to dump him and that was not true.(Golden State) Four teams contacted the Warriors for him to include the Spurs. Yes, Sounds like a guy nobody wants.(sarcasm) Of course Milwaukee wanted to get rid of him because he had run-ins with Scott Skiles who by the way is not a player favorite around the league according to player polls posted for the world to see last year. Yes, SJax had problems with Bryon Scott in NJ and once again according to those polls Scott, SVG, and Skiles were at the bottom of same player poll. They are not going to say anything negative but do teams always say something positive? Not all moves are basketball related these days. Also you miss the point on why Milwaukee made the trade it was to get Monta Ellis! They wanted to move Bogut very badly and yes SJax too but the focal point was to acquire Ellis and dump Bogut's horrible contract.(plus he had health issues) I know they got one pick from the Spurs and I was implying they wanted to get multiple picks period not multiple picks from the Spurs which I never stated. The Spurs not only got to dump RJ's contract but acquired a good solid player and they dumped TJ's contract on them to lower their luxury tax bill. The conditional pick was the ONLY reason they did the trade with the Spurs. As far as the rubbish you posted...........You seem to like to attack my posts as history shows. You started the debate with lies about SJax. There was no proof on what you had on your statement. While on my side there was plenty of published evidence that you even seemed to acknowledge as true. YES MAYBE GS thought he had no trade value at first...........but several teams inquired about him so why not listen???? Plus they are/were in rebuild mode why keep SJax if someone is offering something you want like draft picks even if it turned out to be pick #30??? Didn't GS buy a pick during the draft too? The Warriors had a focus on acquiring picks last season that is the crystal clear truth on why they pulled the trigger with the Spurs. Milwaukee's main motive was to move Bogut for Ellis and vice versa. That was published as true and what you typed earlier was complete bull about a player you don't like. I don't mind opinions that disagree with my own but at least be factual about your point/s!:bs

So again, Golden State traded Stephen Jackson for a pick they knew was going to be at the very end of the first round, an expiring contract for a retired player, and a weaker player with a bad contract. Ok, got it Will.

My statement about nobody wanting Sjax was speculation, just like your statement "several teams inquired about him so why not listen?", is also speculation. You don't know what they were thinking. Let's see your sources. The only statement I'll admit was speculation was the one above. Will you admit anything that you've done wrong? I doubt it. My 10 year old won't admit any wrong doing either.

Right on the money on your first paragraph except the pick was lottery protected and nobody knew it would be the last pick. I'm not in the trade room with GS F.O. but it seemed implied their direction was to acquire picks and they themselves admitted that was the goal. I only implied the obvious Mr.Blab. Actually my statement was not speculation and here is a little from SF Gate newspaper and ESPN.com regarding the trades of SJax.

Random tidbits from San Francisco Gate(newspaper):

The Warriors are listening to offers for Jackson,

Warriors sources said Wednesday morning that the team is “leaning toward keeping” Stephen Jackson – the much-maligned swingman who was acquired in the Monta Ellis-Andrew Bogut deal the night before.

Plus, Mark Jackson indicated that he’d like the opportunity to coach the multi-skilled Stephen Jackson.

Random tidbits from ESPN:

Riley, who received inquiries from four teams regarding Jackson. .... ESPN.com: Help | Press

The Warriors were able to deal "Captain Jack" and get a much coveted first-round pick in the process. Golden State had previously agreed to send its first round pick to Utah if it is not in the top seven. The Warriors now will likely be back in the first round. San Antonio's pick is lottery protected, but the Spurs are in second place in the Western Conference so that will probably not be an issue.

In addition Thursday, the Warriors acquired a second-round pick for this June's draft from the Atlanta Hawks for cash considerations in an earlier deal.

So you admit you were wrong now? I've admitted in some very few rare cases that............. I've been wrong on several things and even called out MYSELF on them! Examples saying Danny Green was not an NBA player in the past and wanting to draft Greg Oden over Kevin Durant in 2007. Looking back most people agreed with both of those statements at the time of my statements. I was dead wrong in both cases. But I admitted it already before this so nothing new. So where was I wrong on the above SJax topic??? I will happily admit when I'm wrong and I'm one of the few who actually do on here. Again how are my comments speculation with SF Gate and ESPN typing that news in March 2012?????

:laugh You see it how you see it. Here's a quote from another ESPN article:

"Jackson, meanwhile, hasn't played since Feb. 19, recently sitting out with what the team has described as a hamstring injury. Skiles benched him for a game in January after he missed a shootaround, he was suspended one game by the NBA for verbally abusing an official and his playing time has been limited ever since.

The deal brings the enigmatic "Captain Jack" back to the Bay Area. He helped lead the team's only playoff run since 1994, a surprising trip to the second round in 2007. In October 2009, the disgruntled Golden State star asked to relinquish his captain title during a meeting with Riley and then-Warriors coach Don Nelson. He was traded to Charlotte the next month."

I see it as they really wanted to get rid of Ellis and and wanted Bogut, and took Jackson because of the numbers. "Leaning towards keeping him" isn't exactly an endorsement. They were only going to keep him if they couldn't get rid of him. For all we know, the four teams that were interested could have been teams that wanted someone else on their team and was willing to take Jackson. Bottom line, you aren't the authority on anything in this matter. You are only an authority on your huge ego.

You tell me to grow up but you refuse to man up! The first paragraph has nothing to do with my point on your incorrect "speculation". You admitted yours was B.S. eventually in an indirect way. Thank you I guess. I already exposed Scott Skiles' rep with players league wide. Oh so SJax has had issues..............so did Dennis Rodman and he is where? Hall of Fame enshrined correct? On the second part true as well but did SJax have issues here in his first stint or so far in his second stint besides his harmless tweet? Did he have issues in Atlanta or Phoenix the team who drafted him out of high school? Also to point out he gave up his "C" on his jersey not that he was stripped of it. He didn't want to be there and you never quit at a job before in your life? I'm not saying he is a boy scout by any means but he is/was a champion who earned his ring. His stats have been very good for a former bottom second round pick in 1997. I never proclaimed that GS wanted to get SJax in the trade but they didn't seem to mind pulling the trigger with him included. The Spurs got Matt Bonner and Eric Williams for Rasho in 2006. Toronto wanted to unload Williams so bad they included a fan favorite and a future second rounder to rid themselves of Williams. I even said some trades are not basketball related already in prior posts. The Spurs eventually moved the moody Williams and a second rounder to get Melvin Ely as an insurance policy for their bigs on the bench in 2007. On the authority part which came out of parts unknown ..........WHO DIED AND MADE YOU GOD? I post legit stuff and you post garbage "speculation" that I exposed on here. Ok fine you don't like SJax but like I said before be factual about it. I hate Matt Bonner but I don't make up bull on him on here. Geez grow a set already. YOU WERE WRONG about the SJax comment and my truth laced statements on the subject. Point blank, I backed up my claims.

I admitted speculating, not being wrong. I read the situation differently than you. You are also only speculating based on stuff you read on the internet. Those "sources" you quoted don't make anything you said fact. I'm only speculating, but I believe GS was only going to keep him if they had to. And your little tidbits you found only strengthen that speculation. Not only that, they could be taken more than one way. Much like nobody around here believes a thing CIA Pop says.

My point in bringing up the quote was to show that Jackson and the owner already had a bad history. And that was before Jackson went crazy in Milwaukee. What would make the GS owner believe that Jackson had changed after the Malice at the Palace, firing guns at a club, mutiny at GS the first time, mutiny at Milwaukee, etc?

Either way, you think you are right when you could be wrong. I think you're wrong.

This is one reason I wish Cory Joseph (or James Anderson, for that matter) would've developed faster so we'd have a valuable trade chip.

We are going to have to look at extending Joseph next year and he's still not ready to be an every night player.

You keep saying that GS wanted to deal him the whole time but you stated he was only in the trade for salary numbers not behavior problems. I agree he was placed for that purpose in the bogut deal.(salary) Yeah he pissed off Skiles but the main reason was to work the trade salary wise and you know that's the truth deep down. I know you admitted speculating but you refuse to admit you were wrong. You brought up a comment that I'm never wrong in my eyes but gave two clear examples. Those sources were articles mainly after the fact the trades were done. If you want someone in on the actual trade call.......that's kind of hard to do unless maybe the CIA or FBI knows what the talks were. Gimme a break man. Get real. I posted from credible sources and sites. SF Gate and ESPN don't do yellow journalism. HoopsWorld?? Okay there is a non-credible site there. I almost never visit their site. If I do it's for comedy purposes. FYI the ownership changed between Jackson GS stints. I don't think Jerry West was on board either. I did say I think on the West part........... maybe I'm wrong but the ownership part.........I'm not wrong. It changed. Why isn't SJax socking fans in the stands or shooting guns in the air at a strip club parking lot anymore in SA? Yeah the guy had a troubled past and I'm sure having hot headed Scott Skiles and super critical Larry Brown as your coaches helps the blood boil a little more. I'm not thinking I might be right. I am right. Opinions are like blanks............ everyone has one. Yours falls under that file for sure on this topic at least. If we go by your rules this site should be torn down unless your information comes directly from phone taps and email/cell phone access by NBA coaches/GMs/owners etc. Because I guess that's the proof you want from everyone on here to exclude yourself of course. Please.........:rolleyes

Again, GS saying "they were leaning towards keeping him" (directly from your article), doesn't say they were excited to get him. It means they weren't sure what to do with him. And the fact that they jumped at the chance to trade him for what seems like an unbalanced return (RJ for 3 more years at 10 mil per) just says that they were happy to get rid of him. As far as ownership, fine. Great research. That doesn't mean that erases the past, even the recent past, like a few weeks before he got traded. And for the record, I'm not even complaining about his behavior here. I just think he's overrated, could be a good trade piece this year to bring in someone else.

You have an opinion and I have an opinion. Neither of us are right because we don't know what was said behind closed doors. We are both guessing. I realize that and you don't.

Wasn't this thread supposed to be about Jefferson/Millsap????? I guess I brought up the SJax/RJ part of it.....my bad......lol :laugh

I said they did it for salary purposes mainly already GEEZ! GS getting SJax that is. Never said they targeted to receive him or asked for him. Disagree about the RJ trade view point. They did it for the draft pick alone not because they loved RJ or some frantic trigger finger reaction to move SJax for his past actions with a different regime in GS or anywhere else. I brought up the Eric Williams trade with Rasho as a great example of a basketball plus non basketball trade. Did the Spurs want Williams? Heck no! Is SJax overpayed yes he is. SJax is at this stage of his career but at a reduced salary .......I would take him back next year and Manu too. If they agree to take big cuts. Also I asked several questions and you refused to answer any of them. So much for growing up. SJax is a good trade piece but might be better to clear his salary in the summer and take advantage of this year's playoff run. I realize that with direct quotes from worthy news sources from the actual trade makers and movers after the fact, That it does not matter to you at all unless you post it. So since you didn't witness the moon landing in 1969 and you were not on the moon yourself it didn't count in your book. Maybe that Columbus guy didn't come to America in 1492 because you were not on the ship with him or part of his welcoming party in America. Oh the Titantic sinking in 1912 maybe it didn't go down? I was not on cruise myself. Maybe it was all a bad nightmare and it was a tall tale. Maybe all the history books are full of lies and dreamed theories? I realize you have to be on the phone with GMs for anything to count or you have to witness it live right in front of yourself for it to be true unless you say or type it. That's so lame man. So lame and pathetic.:bs

Actually, it was Sjax that no one wanted.

This was typed by Uwe Blab but maybe it wasn't him because I didn't witness him pressing the keys on his keyboard or cell phone to post this statement. :applause

I'm speculating! lol

Ok, that was funny. But my point is, what the FO and coaches say isn't always truth or is at least half truth. And something that a writer says about a team, like the first round pick being "coveted", isn't always true either, because that is the writers opinion. GS never said they coveted first round picks, unless you can find something that says they did. I'm inferring from statements, using critical thinking and maybe a little skepticism to come to my opinion. You are taking it word for word, which is fine too. Just don't get into business because you'll get burned easily.

I don't think I need to pull an article up on every single point I make or what you even type or anyone else here to be honest. Now if it's under dispute or sounds like total bull than yes back up the post with some proof. Which I did. You seem to knit pick all of my statements for some reason or a third party writer's word usage. So of course, I'm going to take it as an attack because I even acknowledged some of your points as correct (and actually agreed with some of it) while none of mine were valid even with respected proof in your eyes. But somehow I'm compared to a child?lol. I also admitted that I was wrong in the past with examples. But I did that admitting before anyway. Somehow you walk on water and go with "no one wanted SJax" but the Spurs gave up a first rounder to get him. Thought no one wanted him? That's strange to me on your business comment. Where did that come from? Also you are welcome to look up things yourself since you have a HUGE interest on TRYING to prove that I'm wrong or pulling blank out of the air. Be civil and be factual. Like I said before Man up to your posts. Also I understand coaches/GMs/F.O. all lie, cheat and steal especially during draft time. But I also brought up points/comments after the fact the first trade was done and than the second trade with SA was done. That's not speculation anymore. GS didn't want RJ and TJ's contract they wanted that pick. They are rebuilding. Thats so obvious. You can say they didn't want SJax fine because it was all about getting that SA first rounder. They could have done the deal for RJ straight up if they wanted to rid themselves of SJax so bad. They wanted the pick period the end.

Your ego again. I could give three craps about you. You responded to my post first.

When will you stop? You don't know if what you think happened is true, and neither do I. Doesn't matter what the internet says. AGAIN, they took a bad contract, worth more money for longer, and a weaker player just for the conditional draft pick? Do you hear yourself? Let's say they did want that coveted last pick in the 1st round, couldn't they have found a better deal? Were they really that desperate for that end of the round pick? All I'm asking for is a little critical thinking.

And as far as SA wanting Jackson, well, ok you got me there. :rolleyes When I said no one wanted him, once again you took printed text literally. Obviously the Spurs wanted him.

Critical thinking from Will?

I've heard some bizarre internet theories... but really.
Next rumor is real spacing from the dude. Readability? Who needs it? Return keys are for whiners.


Man, I crack me up.

:)

Well you never answer my questions so why answer yours?
And as far as SA wanting Jackson, well, ok you got me there. Obviously the Spurs wanted him.
Good enough for me finally. :yikes
As far as giving a crap or two....... I could care less about you also and your "I'm God" attitude on here. I'm sure you have a wall poster of a sweaty Matt Bonner on your inside bathroom door when you do take a crap.......lol:banana

I got two words for you peter puffer..........

JEREMY LIN

So STFU!:smirk

This post is so long ....... I forgot what we were talking about!

I think I'm God?!?! I don't go around saying I'm right 99% of the time. Just ask me a question, I'll answer it. You haven't asked anything yet. By the way, Bonner insults don't phase me. It seems bad opinions of Stephen Jackson get your panties in bunch though.

I did and you didn't answer! Holy christ! When someone makes a sentence and there is a (?) on the end.......it's a question. Grow a set already. Stop being a little B. Sjax earned his ring in the starting lineup while Bonner earned his buried on the bench. I guess with your handle being "Uwe Blab" you support all crappy white red headed basketball players worldwide. I'm sure you're trying to get black market nude photos of Brian Scalabrine drenched in baby oil. Good luck on your search. :laugh

You're just making yourself look bad. I really feel bad for you right now.

Right on.

Spurs need none of those two (Milsap + Jefferson).

No thank you. Both are too expensive right now for Spurs taste, and don't make sense to our Spurs FO to give up that much for them.

As WILLTHETHRILL said wait until they are free agents.

I feel worse for you. No set!facepalm

Amen

Millsap Trade?
 

I'm like a 4 year old child. At first, I was ready to pass, but now that I see the Rockets want him, I want him too.

I think they should have a player like him with that lineup but who do you trade?

Teams In Play?
 

If the Spurs can get a player for Jackson then they can trade Jax, Neal, DeColo and a pick to Utah for Millsap and Bell.

While I am not necessarily on the trade for them team I still believe we will not get a major player in free agency.... we have tried multiple times and not been successful so far.

So whoever feels we are incomplete and that we need a "level of player" like Smith or Al it will only happen via trade.