What would Utah give for Jimmer? (split)

[VF21]

Does anyone know if Minnesota was one of the teams that showed interest?

I doubt it. I don't see Adelman chomping at the bit, demanding that they get Jimmer Fredette.

 

[ShastaKingsFan]

I doubt it. I don't see Adelman chomping at the bit, demanding that they get Jimmer Fredette.

"Demanding" that they get him? LOL Well we know that's not happening. Someone had mentioned that there were 5 or 6 teams that showed interest. I'm guessing none of them were scrambling with demands?

 

[randymoss1881]

Jimmer, Hayes & Salmons for Favors.

Why do you keep proposing stupid trades like this is 2k and you can override trades

 

[TheBadGuy]

Why do you keep proposing stupid trades like this is 2k and you can override trades

just my idea what' wrong with that, well even if you propose any stupid trade will Pete read it or go with it? of course no, he won't even bother to visit this forum.

 

[The_Jamal]

just my idea what' wrong with that, well even if you propose any stupid trade will Pete read it or go with it? of course no, he won't even bother to visit this forum.

Generally, it's a good idea to post ideas that might have so realm of happening. Perhaps something like Jimmer and Salmons for Marvin Williams+Jeremy Evans. Or Jimmer for a 2nd round pick. I doubt Utah would consider giving up Favors for DeMarcus, much less Jimmer

 

[Kingsfan23]

I doubt Utah would consider giving up Favors for DeMarcus, much less Jimmer

Which is cool, as long as they aren't offered that deal.

 

[Fear the Putin]

If we can get a shot blocker for jimmer, I will bow down to somebody

 

[The_Jamal]

Which is cool, as long as they aren't offered that deal.

Yea no worries there. We just got done making Cousins a 60 mil player and they just got done making Favors a 50 mil player.

 

[dude12]

If we could Jimmer for a 2nd round pick, that would be amazing in my book right now.....I would bow down to someone with that deal.

 

[VF21]

just my idea what' wrong with that, well even if you propose any stupid trade will Pete read it or go with it? of course no, he won't even bother to visit this forum.

What's "wrong" is that we're pretty serious about trade discussions around here. We've even got a thread devoted to tips for posting trade ideas. It's not about whether or not TPTB will see the proposal. It's about whether or not said proposal is even worth talking about. Good trade ideas can lead to incredible discussions. Bad ones just end up being ridiculed.

 

[Cold]

Yes Ive been saying this since Jimmer's rookie year. Maybe if we threw in cash considerations or something for Brandon Rush? But i think that would be a stretch.

I don't think this is a stretch at all. If Rush comes back and plays well and Utah hovers around .500, they will get rid of Rush. He is easily their best perimeter defender and their best 3pt shooter.

Rush on the Kings = FANTASTIC. Reasonable pay, young, fantastic player on both sides of the floor with longggggg arms and great hop with excellent basketball IQ. Consider me a fan.

 

[Tetsujin]

Jimmer for Lebron.


Make it happen, front office.

 

[PurpleHaze]

Jimmer Fredette (among others) need a change of scenery?

http://nba.si.com/2013/11/22/jimmer-fredette-landry-fields-kris-humphries/?eref=sihp

 

[pkballr]

If for some reason we're looking for a defensive 2 (which was seen with our interest in Iman Shumpert), why not go after someone like Alex Burks? His minutes have been inconsistent to date and look to take a nose dive now that Burkes is back. They don't have a real position for him, whether 1 or 2. He also seems to have loss some playing time behind more traditional point guards and is not taking any minutes away from Hayward at the 2. He's in no way a defensive stud, but has that word potential written all over him. Has under performed the past two years but still is young at the age of 22. I'd do a straight player swap.

Why the Jazz: Get's a true scorer and role player to come off the bench as either 1 or 2 and could play off the ball with either Hayward or Burke. Has deep range which is great to have when you have two big bruisers down low in Kanter and Favors to kick out passes too. Also, shaves a year off a contract from a player who they were getting little contribution from.

Why the Kings: They get some more size at the 2 guard position and clears up the log jam at the point. It does create a log jam at the 2 but with Marcus at the bottom of the totem pole here, I don't see it as much of an issue. We also get a player who is younger and could fill the role as a defensive 2-guard with length. If it falls flat, we're no less worse off as production from the two spot this season has been abysmal anyways. We just add another year to test this experiment, or entice another team with the same premonitions of youth and potential with size.

Not a block buster of a move and very similar to the Mbah a Moute - Williams trade, but definitely adds a fair bit more talent within reasonable parameters of what our players are worth. In the end though, keeping Jimmer just seems more reasonable because of his expiring. Though, if the Jazz had to be our trade partners, I could easily see this go down.

 

[t-rex]

Jimmer for Marie Osmond. Put her in the broadcast booth. She would be a major upgrade over Jerry Reynolds. What if we throw in Grant Napear?

 

[Dr. Spaceman]

If for some reason we're looking for a defensive 2 (which was seen with our interest in Iman Shumpert), why not go after someone like Alex Burks? His minutes have been inconsistent to date and look to take a nose dive now that Burkes is back. They don't have a real position for him, whether 1 or 2. He also seems to have loss some playing time behind more traditional point guards and is not taking any minutes away from Hayward at the 2. He's in no way a defensive stud, but has that word potential written all over him. Has under performed the past two years but still is young at the age of 22. I'd do a straight player swap.

Why the Jazz: Get's a true scorer and role player to come off the bench as either 1 or 2 and could play off the ball with either Hayward or Burke. Has deep range which is great to have when you have two big bruisers down low in Kanter and Favors to kick out passes too. Also, shaves a year off a contract from a player who they were getting little contribution from.

Why the Kings: They get some more size at the 2 guard position and clears up the log jam at the point. It does create a log jam at the 2 but with Marcus at the bottom of the totem pole here, I don't see it as much of an issue. We also get a player who is younger and could fill the role as a defensive 2-guard with length. If it falls flat, we're no less worse off as production from the two spot this season has been abysmal anyways. We just add another year to test this experiment, or entice another team with the same premonitions of youth and potential with size.

Not a block buster of a move and very similar to the Mbah a Moute - Williams trade, but definitely adds a fair bit more talent within reasonable parameters of what our players are worth. In the end though, keeping Jimmer just seems more reasonable because of his expiring. Though, if the Jazz had to be our trade partners, I could easily see this go down.

Very interesting move - I like the added size we'd get from a defensive perspective. Although overall, I lean towards giving Jimmer more time to establish himself now that he's gotten a more consistent role as our second SG. Let's see what that move bears out first before thinking about shipping him off right away.

 

[Kingster]

Just give me a draft pick for Jimmer. I can't imagine getting a player of any note in a trade. So give me a high second rounder and I'd be happy as pie.

We need more picks in this draft. Salmons, Thornton, Jimmer, et al just have to get us some more picks.

 

[Hadlowe]

If for some reason we're looking for a defensive 2 (which was seen with our interest in Iman Shumpert), why not go after someone like Alex Burks? His minutes have been inconsistent to date and look to take a nose dive now that Burkes is back. They don't have a real position for him, whether 1 or 2. He also seems to have loss some playing time behind more traditional point guards and is not taking any minutes away from Hayward at the 2. He's in no way a defensive stud, but has that word potential written all over him. Has under performed the past two years but still is young at the age of 22. I'd do a straight player swap.

Why the Jazz: Get's a true scorer and role player to come off the bench as either 1 or 2 and could play off the ball with either Hayward or Burke. Has deep range which is great to have when you have two big bruisers down low in Kanter and Favors to kick out passes too. Also, shaves a year off a contract from a player who they were getting little contribution from.

Why the Kings: They get some more size at the 2 guard position and clears up the log jam at the point. It does create a log jam at the 2 but with Marcus at the bottom of the totem pole here, I don't see it as much of an issue. We also get a player who is younger and could fill the role as a defensive 2-guard with length. If it falls flat, we're no less worse off as production from the two spot this season has been abysmal anyways. We just add another year to test this experiment, or entice another team with the same premonitions of youth and potential with size.

Not a block buster of a move and very similar to the Mbah a Moute - Williams trade, but definitely adds a fair bit more talent within reasonable parameters of what our players are worth. In the end though, keeping Jimmer just seems more reasonable because of his expiring. Though, if the Jazz had to be our trade partners, I could easily see this go down.

I haven't been able to bring myself to watch the Jazz this year. I know that Burks ran the point for them some times after the Mo Williams injury last year and did a halfway decent job of it. My impression of him was that he was a lesser Tyreke. Decent handle, decent athlete. Some defensive acumen but really inconsistent shot and occasionally just doesn't show up to play at all.

 

[Chubbs]

Very interesting move - I like the added size we'd get from a defensive perspective. Although overall, I lean towards giving Jimmer more time to establish himself now that he's gotten a more consistent role as our second SG. Let's see what that move bears out first before thinking about shipping him off right away.

Wait, did I miss the part where jimmer was our 2nd sg? I must have blinked.

I think that was his showcase those few games he played. And maybe more about motivating MT. And sure, if jimmer had blown everyone away, he'd, well, probably would have gone right back to the bench.

He's not a part of the future. The only reason to play him is if a potential trade partner says to PDA, "hey, you keep saying his d and handle are improved. Can we see it?" Then he gets minutes. Pure speculation, but the decision on jimmer has been made as far as him being a king. Nothing left to,establish or a role to develop.

That said, in the spirit of tanking I'm still eventually expecting him to get PT if we are unable to trade him and we already dumped MT. Why not at that point?