<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">According to a Bergen (N.J.) Record report Saturday citing unidentified "sources," New Jersey has offered to trade All-Star Vince Carter to the Jazz for forward Andrei Kirilenko. Jazz basketball boss Kevin O'Connor and Jazz coach Jerry Sloan both have made it abundantly clear they have no plans to deal Kirilenko, an All-Star in 2004. Still, Kirilenko ? who doesn't appear interested in leaving Utah, either ? seemed flattered the Nets supposedly were willing to part with a player of Carter's caliber in an effort to obtain him. "It's hard to comment," he said after missing Saturday's loss to New Orleans/Oklahoma City with a sprained right ankle. "I mean, I always think Vince Carter is a great player. He actually is one of my favorite players. It feels good ? but nobody likes to be traded." O'Connor received multiple trade calls regarding Kirilenko after Jazz owner Larry H. Miller spoke about the forward from Russia during a recent radio appearance.</div> <div align="center">Source</div>
This would be an amazing deal from Utah's perspective. Carter's been gained such a bad reputation over the years for not playing hard enough, for whining and complaining, etc.; when it's all said and done though, he's one of the ten best wings in the NBA. You'd be giving up a little on the defensive end in this deal, but not that much with the way that Kirilenko's productivity on both ends of the floor has dropped off. I know the old adage goes, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," but in my opinion, if you don't improve on the AK47 situation soon, the team's in risk of "breaking." Boozer's having an MVP-like season, Williams is really coming into his own, and Okur is having a career season, but with AK47 playing the way he has been so far, the team just can't continue to playing at the level they've been playing at so far. They need another option offensively to compete with the Mavs, Spurs, and Suns out west. The Jazz could probably also dump Collins' overpayed ass onto the Nets in the process too, because Kirilenko makes about $12 million less than Carter, and they'd need to even up the salaries with a contract like his if a deal were to take place.
How old is carter? I like him, but I just dunno. He needs lots of shots a game. Actually, I don't know. I've never watched a Nets game besides when they play Jazz...... so basically I just see highlights of Carter dunking lol.
<div class="quote_poster">Marbire Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">How old is carter? I like him, but I just dunno. He needs lots of shots a game. Actually, I don't know. I've never watched a Nets game besides when they play Jazz...... so basically I just see highlights of Carter dunking lol.</div> Carter's 30th birthday was actually this past Friday. I can see where you're coming from with him needing a lot of shots, because the guy averages 20 attempts per game on his career, but it's not like he's a hacker - he's very productive, with a +7.8 Roland Rating (compared to a +7.5 for Boozer, +1.4 for Williams, and +0.6 for Kirilenko). He's also averaging a career-high 4.5 apg this season. I think he and Boozer would actually coexist very nicely. It'd be hard for defenses to focus on either one the way they're doing now.
The deal breaker is Carter's ability to opt out of his contract at the end of the year. Personally i dont think he would do that, just because i dont feel he'll recieve as any where near as much money on the free agent market.
<div class="quote_poster">Voodoo Child Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Carter's 30th birthday was actually this past Friday. I can see where you're coming from with him needing a lot of shots, because the guy averages 20 attempts per game on his career, but it's not like he's a hacker - he's very productive, with a +7.8 Roland Rating (compared to a +7.5 for Boozer, +1.4 for Williams, and +0.6 for Kirilenko). He's also averaging a career-high 4.5 apg this season. I think he and Boozer would actually coexist very nicely. It'd be hard for defenses to focus on either one the way they're doing now.</div> Actually Vince's career high in assits per game in a season was 4.8.
Utah already needs more D man, offensively they don't have a problem. Without AK, this team has absolutely no D, that's a disaster. Unless we get someone like Wright in this deal, I don't see Utah doing anything. If Utah does trade Kirilenko, they're going to need a good defensive player or else the trade would be worthless IMO.
Utah has a history of complaining about finances, bringing Vince in would probably sell more tickets, get more TV games, and put the Jazz back in the spotlight. Even though they're winning this year, ESPN (SportsCenter) doesn't spend a lot of time on the Jazz; I think it's several things, including Sloan's system which is slow paced, they are a small market team, nobody on the team is a big personality nor is anybody causing trouble, and finally they don't have a marketable player. Vince would give the Jazz exposure and probably boost revenue, will that lead to wins? Probably not, but I'm not so sure Larry Miller cares if it makes financial sense. Like the Raptors it seems the Nets are willing to give Carter away, I don't know if it's his contract or something else. But considering I'd be cautious to sign Vince this summer to a big contract due to the Nets willingness to give him away, I don't think Vince is looking at more money and will probably stay with the team that has him next year. But there seems to be something wrong, and I think that's why the Jazz and other teams aren't jumping at the chance to make the trade.
If the Jazz could pull off this deal, they should do it. If you put a high scoring, athletic superstar like Vince Carter with Deron Williams, Carlos Boozer and Mehmet Okur under Sloan, you should have a contender. Williams can score, and is one of the best distributors in the league. Boozer is a beast on the boards, and can dominate down low. Okur is a center who stays healthy, rebounds, can knock down three pointers and is emerging as a go to guy in the clutch. They'd be a very high scoring team, and be exceptionally hard to stop defensively with those different scoring options. The Jazz would lose some defense if the deal was to happen, but this season Kirilenko just isn't the same as he has been in the past on both ends. However Carter would also start at shooting guard, which should help with the four 50 point games the Jazz have given up to opposing shooting guards. One reason the Jazz might be put off this deal is the possibility Carter opting out of the contract. If the trade was to happen, and Carter was to opt out, the Jazz would have likely traded a former all star in Kirilenko and a filler for half a season of Vinsanity. Not the greatest deal.
<div class="quote_poster">scorbutic Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Utah has a history of complaining about finances, bringing Vince in would probably sell more tickets, get more TV games, and put the Jazz back in the spotlight. Even though they're winning this year, ESPN (SportsCenter) doesn't spend a lot of time on the Jazz; I think it's several things, including Sloan's system which is slow paced, they are a small market team, nobody on the team is a big personality nor is anybody causing trouble, and finally they don't have a marketable player. Vince would give the Jazz exposure and probably boost revenue, will that lead to wins? Probably not, but I'm not so sure Larry Miller cares if it makes financial sense.</div> Utah has had 8 or 9 straight sell outs, throw us a new idea Utah doesn't need Vince Carter, the guy plays absolutely no defense at all. Our offense is already good, we just need to stay healthy. The only way I consider this trade is if they throw in Antoine Wright or something useful.
<div class="quote_poster">J_Ray Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Utah has had 8 or 9 straight sell outs, throw us a new idea</div> Vince could get the Jazz on national television more often, boost merchandise revenue, and sell many more season tickets. There are many ways for a team to make money and I know owners care more about their bank accounts than if they make the best basketball decision. The Iverson deal has boosted Denver's exposure and whoever gets Carter will get the same result. I agree that trading a young Kirilenko for an aging Carter isn't a good move because they'd be throwing away their future for now; problem is this year they have a lot of competition (Suns, Mavs, Spurs, Lakers), but in 2-3 years some of the young Utah players will be getting into their prime while this year's elite will be getting old.
<div class="quote_poster">scorbutic Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Vince could get the Jazz on national television more often, boost merchandise revenue, and sell many more season tickets. There are many ways for a team to make money and I know owners care more about their bank accounts than if they make the best basketball decision. The Iverson deal has boosted Denver's exposure and whoever gets Carter will get the same result. I agree that trading a young Kirilenko for an aging Carter isn't a good move because they'd be throwing away their future for now; problem is this year they have a lot of competition (Suns, Mavs, Spurs, Lakers), but in 2-3 years some of the young Utah players will be getting into their prime while this year's elite will be getting old.</div> You make absolutely no sense.....first you say he'll get exposure but he's one of those players that are in their prime, if not going downhill, right now. Vince Carter would be worthless here, if we trade Kirilenko, we better get a god damn defender! We already blow on the defensive end, you want us to trade our whole D for more scoring? Why? So the owner can make more money? The owner doesn't care, he's losing 10 million year already, he doesn't care. I enjoys watching basketball and get along with all the players. He's a competitive owner, not someone looking for more money.
<div class="quote_poster">J_Ray Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">you want us to trade our whole D for more scoring?</div> When did I say I wanted the trade to happen? I have no invested interest one way or another what the Jazz or Vince Carter do. I was just reading through this thread and many people were saying the trade won't happen because Utah needs defense, and I was simply making the arguement that Larry Miller may be interested in him because of Vince's marketability. Thus the trade isn't that far-fetched. Larry Miller don't care about losing millions every year? I highly doubt that, if that was the case why is he always pushing for revenue sharing? Nobody likes losing money. As for me not making sense, I don't think you understood what I said. Vince Carter continues to be a fan favorite, he is always a top vote getter in the All-Star voting, even if he's not playing well (or not playing at all). Vince is marketable, his jersey will sell, people will buy tickets to watch him -- so he will make a team money right now, but with or without him the Jazz have a tough road to win the title this year. However in a few years some of the elite players in the West are going to be getting old, thus their teams will probably suffer, at that point Deron Williams, Miles, Milsap, and Brewer will be in their prime, and it's better to have a 28 year old Kirilenko playing with them than a 33 year old Vince Carter. So if I'm saying anything its that the Jazz would probably be better off if they don't do the trade, but IF they do, I can completely understand where they are coming from, the NBA is a business.
