# Kirilenko's Trade Value?



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Does he have any? His contract numbers are:

Andrei Kirilenko 
06-07: $12,338,437
07-08: $13,709,375
08-09: $15,080,312
09-10: $16,451,250
10-11: $17,822,187

He might be one of these untradable players given his contract. I didn't see any support for a Zach for Kirilenko during the trade deadline . . . and guessing there still isn't much support for that. But if Utah is looking to get out of his contract, I think the Blazers should step in. Lafrenz and Webster or something like that. Lafrenz comes off the books for Utah and Portland takes a chance on a rejuvinated AK?

Maybe I'm way off here and AK has much more trade value . . . but I keep looking at that contract wondering who would willing to commit to those numbers . . . 18 mil in 2010, ouch!


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

I'd _love_ to have Kirilenko on this team, presuming:

A. he could be had for something like LaFrentz and Webster; and

B. he wouldn't raise a fuss about coming off the bench and/or could reasonably start at SF.

He'd be great at PF with either Aldridge or Oden at center and Rodriguez running with them. He'd also likely be a great fit when zoning up -- put him at SF with Aldridge and Oden, or heck, even Zach (if he's still on the team) would be pretty well covered between AK and either Aldridge or Oden.

As with any trade, one could only really judge the value of the addition with the balance of what's heading out to make it happen, but again, if they'd part with him for LaFrentz and Webster, and/or picks, and/or cash, I'd do it.


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

Ditto. And be thrilled.

iWatas


----------



## SamOwie (Jun 6, 2007)

Please explain why Utah would trade for another power forward? Thanks...


I just don't get all these ridiculous trade speculations. I understand that we're all excited and looking to converse, but what's with the lack of common sense?


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

SamOwie said:


> Please explain why Utah would trade for another power forward? Thanks...
> 
> 
> I just don't get all these ridiculous trade speculations. I understand that we're all excited and looking to converse, but what's with the lack of common sense?


They wouldn't be, particularly. They'd be trading in hopes that Webster might become a more useful player for them and to rid themselves of AK's contract. LaFrentz is no where near as useful as AK, but would likely be more content in a back-up role so it might help chemistry -- Kirilenko's been publicly unhappy with his reduced role on offense and his reduced minutes in general.

That said, I agree that Utah would have to be pretty desperate to make that move and, if they're really looking to part with him, can almost certainly get a better offer that Portland's likely to give them, unless Utah's excited about a few second round picks.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

Kirelenko sucks. He played very poor this year, he was a winer, and only showed up every other playoff game. Noooo way.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

PorterIn2004 said:


> They wouldn't be, particularly. They'd be trading in hopes that Webster might become a more useful player for them and to rid themselves of AK's contract. LaFrentz is no where near as useful as AK, but would likely be more content in a back-up role so it might help chemistry -- Kirilenko's been publicly unhappy with his reduced role on offense and his reduced minutes in general.
> 
> That said, I agree that Utah would have to be pretty desperate to make that move and, if they're really looking to part with him, can almost certainly get a better offer that Portland's likely to give them, unless Utah's excited about a few second round picks.



That's what I was thinking. The trade value for Utah is getting AK off the books by trading him for an expiring contract and a young prospect. There may be teams who would offer more, but for a player who averaged 8 points and 5 rebounds last year, I don't think there will be a line of GMs trying to aquire him for 15 mil a year.

One idea that seems true is that Jazz are shopping AK . . . and I'm thinking there better be a blue light special if they really want to move him.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

SamOwie said:


> Please explain why Utah would trade for another power forward? Thanks...


I can think of fifty million reasons why...

Ed O.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

i liked the idea of Randolph for Kirilenko before the playoffs, but after watching him in action more I've come to realize how wrong I was. his inability to shoot would be a major problem for our team. defenses are going to pack it in tight with Oden and Aldridge as it is. there just won't be any room for a slasher. 

if we could pick him up for spare parts (Webster and LaFrentz), I might be more interested. even there, though, I wonder if he might be the second coming of Detlef Shrempf on our team. a quality 3/4 foreigner who is never happy about a reduced role, possibly even coming off the bench. 

the difference being that Shrempf cost us very little and was easy to eliminate, while we'd have to commit a lot of salary to AK.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

hasoos said:


> Kirelenko sucks. He played very poor this year, he was a winer, and only showed up every other playoff game. Noooo way.


i think the key is whether he'd be happy or not backing up Aldridge and a clearly inferior player like Udoka. he couldn't start ahead of Aldridge, and we need perimeter shooting too much to bench him for Ime. 

but if you could put Kirilenko in as a reserve, he'd give you a huge defensive presence coming off the bench. whenever we subbed out Oden or Aldridge, we'd still have two great shot blockers in the game. 

even if he only showed up for every other playoff game, so what? that's pretty much what most 6th and 7th men do. you expect consistency from starters. you look for your "x factor" off the bench.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

The thing that has me so excited about potentially adding Kirilenko is the running potential. Even if he's _only_ used as a PF, having him running with _either_ Aldridge or Oden at center, with Rodriguez and pretty much any combination of Roy, Jones, Webster, or whomever else and gloriousness might erupt. Further, that unit would still be pretty decent defensively.

He might not be a starter but I'd think he'd be a significant part of the rotation -- he, Aldridge, and Oden could hold down the 4/5 spots almost by themselves (with guys like Przybilla and Outlaw getting occasional minutes there).


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

mook said:


> i think the key is whether he'd be happy or not backing up Aldridge and a clearly inferior player like Udoka. he couldn't start ahead of Aldridge, and we need perimeter shooting too much to bench him for Ime.
> 
> but if you could put Kirilenko in as a reserve, he'd give you a huge defensive presence coming off the bench. whenever we subbed out Oden or Aldridge, we'd still have two great shot blockers in the game.
> 
> even if he only showed up for every other playoff game, so what? that's pretty much what most 6th and 7th men do. you expect consistency from starters. you look for your "x factor" off the bench.


So you want to pay 12 million plus a year for a reserve who isn't even that good. Remember part of the key to running a successful franchise is not firing a torpedo at the franchise by signing a player to a bad contract. Our best case scenario for trading Zbo is to a good player in return that is actually worth the money, or to get several lesser paid player who are easier to trade, not poison pills. I want the money free'd up, so that when Roy, LA and Oden/Durant are up for re upping their contracts, the money is there.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

I guess I don't worry about whether "the money is there." that's Paul Allen's job, and last I heard he had quite a wad of it. I sincerely doubt he'll have any qualms about signing Roy, Aldridge and Oden to what they are worth when the time comes. he was willing to spend as much on far worse players not very long ago (Miles, Ratliff). 

I don't like the idea anymore of trading Zach for Kirilenko. I do like the idea of trading spare parts for him, though. Webster and LaFrentz qualify as spare parts.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

hasoos said:


> Our best case scenario for trading Zbo is to a good player in return that is actually worth the money, or to get several lesser paid player who are easier to trade, not poison pills.


Just to be clear, since several of us seem confused about this piece, I'm pretty sure that not a single poster in this thread is suggesting the Blazers should trade Zach for Kirilenko. 

From my perspective, the idea would be to move Randolph for a starting SF and move "spare parts" for depth at PF, a.k.a. AK.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

What we know about Kirilenko:

He has a big contract.
He isn't a very good shooter.
He can't/won't play SF.
He whines when things don't go his way.

That is an awful lot of negatives for a defensive specialist who can only really play one position. If he could actually defend multiple positions, it would be a different matter.


----------



## Ed O (Dec 30, 2002)

hasoos said:


> So you want to pay 12 million plus a year for a reserve who isn't even that good. Remember part of the key to running a successful franchise is not firing a torpedo at the franchise by signing a player to a bad contract. Our best case scenario for trading Zbo is to a good player in return that is actually worth the money, or to get several lesser paid player who are easier to trade, not poison pills. I want the money free'd up, so that when Roy, LA and Oden/Durant are up for re upping their contracts, the money is there.


Paying $12m a year for a backup isn't that much worse than paying $6m (an MLE-level player) for a backup. 

Successful franchises pay players what they're worth... Portland was in financial trouble before because the team wasn't winning. The team wasn't winning because the players weren't that good.

I'd move Andrei for spare parts in a heartbeat. I'm *sure* that Allen won't have problems re-signing Roy, LA, and Oden irrespective of the salary structure of the team.

Ed O.


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

Ed O is right. AK is a borderline all-star caliber player who had a bad year last year. He is still young (26), and very good. The odds are that he would be an excellent addition, especially if we can get him for spare parts and his salary. He is a high basketball IQ 15/8 kind of player who plays great D. 

"Became just 4th player in NBA history, and first since 1993-94, to average 15+ points, 8+ rebounds, 4+ assists and 3+ blocks in single season"

iWatas


----------



## blzr610 (May 24, 2006)

Isn't his skill set and body type very similar to Outlaw? Why blow our cap space when we can have the same sort of player for less than the MLE?


----------



## Iwatas (Aug 3, 2003)

Outlaw and Kirilenko are night and day when it comes to basketball IQ. It makes a huge difference. AK is likely to be an all-star again; Outlaw is highly unlikely to ever reach that level.

And trading for AK would not necessarily blow cap space, if we are trading equivalent salaries (like a Magloire or Raef) with shorter durations.

iWatas


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Funny . . . I started the thread, but am now confused.

There seems to be a consensus that AK plays PF. He is 6-9, 225 and listed as a F on Utah's roster. In the box score he is listed in the SF spot. I'm pretty sure he starts with Boozer and Okur. I was thinking AK as a SF . . . or is that the problem and why he is playing so bad?

Anyways, I think Utah can get more than what I mentioned, Lafrenz (expiring contract) and Webster, . . . not much more, but Webster doesn't carry a lot of weight.

Edit: Not a bash on Webster, Blazers shouldn't give up on him, just don't think he has much trade value


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Funny . . . I started the thread, but am now confused.
> 
> There seems to be a consensus that AK plays PF. He is 6-9, 225 and listed as a F on Utah's roster. In the box score he is listed in the SF spot. I'm pretty sure he starts with Boozer and Okur. I was thinking AK as a SF . . . or is that the problem and why he is playing so bad?
> 
> ...


He's an interesting tweener. For several days now I've been trying to come up with a handful of current players most like Pippen defensively, and I'm thinking he's right up there. He's a pretty smart player and might be better at team defense than straight-up man-to-man, though he's certainly good there, too.

That said, he sometimes seems to struggle staying with quicker SFs and he doesn't have the range that some would like from their SFs, though he's certainly better than, say, Ruben Patterson. I think of him as a bit like Marion, though the other side of the coin -- Marion's a SF who plays PF pretty well, particularly when he gets to run in the open court, and Kirilenko's a PF who plays SF pretty well (or at least used to -- hard to say with the injury), particularly when he gets to run in the open court. Both are strong defensively, and both handle the ball pretty well given their size, though neither is a Magic Johnson.

If the Blazers added him, I'd be hesitant to plan on starting him at SF right now, if only because I'd like a bit more range from that position given the rest of the likely starting line-up. But presuming Randolph's moved for a SF, if AK can be brought in for LaFrentz, Webster, picks and the like, he could largely make up for the depth the team would be losing with Zach leaving. And more than that, he's absolutely at his best in a running game -- seeing him playing with Rodriguez would be great.

A nice bonus is that while Zach's the better player of the two, AK's strength is speed and defense -- two things Zach most lacks, and Zach's greatest strengths, half-court scoring and rebounding, will likely be sufficiently covered by Aldridge and Oden in time. It seems like a win-win _if_ Pritchard can make it happen.


----------



## hasoos (Jan 3, 2003)

I completely disagree with you all. I don't believe Kirilenko will ever be an all star again, and will be a bad contract for the rest of his career. I don't want Kirilenko here, that is the wrong direction.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

hasoos said:


> I completely disagree with you all. I don't believe Kirilenko will ever be an all star again, and will be a bad contract for the rest of his career. I don't want Kirilenko here, that is the wrong direction.


just curious--what do you think has changed in Kirilenko that makes him incapable of being an all-star again?


----------



## meru (Jul 2, 2003)

Kirilenko MUST go to the Warriors. You can get some idea of how he would play for them by seeing how well he played AGAINST them. Utah upped the tempo and Kirilenko flourished - he was probably Utah's MVP against the Warriors. I say Adonal Foyle and a re-signed Matt Barnes or Pietrus, both of whom would be good Jerry Sloan-type swingmen.


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

hasoos said:


> I completely disagree with you all. I don't believe Kirilenko will ever be an all star again, and will be a bad contract for the rest of his career. I don't want Kirilenko here, that is the wrong direction.



I understand what you are saying, but that is the reason I started a thread on Kirilenko . . . the only reason the Blazers would have a shot at getting him without using Zach is because of his bad contract. If Allen could swallow the contract, the Blazers won't be under the cap anytime soon anyways. But again, I understand the idea that he isn't worth the contract . . . especially if he can't play SF.

I noticed other fans (haven't come across anything about GMs showing interest) have talked about giving up their high draft pick and an expiring contract for Kirilenko . . . and I think that would be more attractive than any package Ptd puts together.

Interesting side question: Where would Webster be drafted if he was in this year's draft?


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Interesting side question: Where would Webster be drafted if he was in this year's draft?


Let's just say he wouldn't be invited to sit in the Green Room.


----------



## Samuel (Jan 1, 2003)

Portland should hold onto LaFrentz until next season when he's an expiring contract. That's when he'll have the most value.


----------



## NateBishop3 (Jul 22, 2003)

It's amazing how much Kirilenko's value has dropped in one season. This guy used to dominate on defense, and I'm not using that word lightly. He DOMINATED on defense. Very few people can take over on defense like this guy can. I would have loved to have him on our team a couple seasons ago. Right now I'm not sure, not because of his skills but because of his health. I don't want anther Miles on our team. 

If we could get him fro LaFrentz and Dickau, I would call that an acceptable risk and make the move. If he doesn't pan out, oh well. S.P.A.M baby!


----------



## BenDavis503 (Apr 11, 2007)

Kiss_My_Darius said:


> Funny . . . I started the thread, but am now confused.
> 
> There seems to be a consensus that AK plays PF. He is 6-9, 225 and listed as a F on Utah's roster. In the box score he is listed in the SF spot. I'm pretty sure he starts with Boozer and Okur. I was thinking AK as a SF . . . or is that the problem and why he is playing so bad?


Yeah I am no Jazz fan or pay much attention to them... but I could have sworn he was a SF too for all these years lol.


----------



## Fork (Jan 2, 2003)

hasoos said:


> Kirelenko sucks. He played very poor this year, he was a winer, and only showed up every other playoff game. Noooo way.


Just because he played out of position doesn't mean he somehow became less talented.


----------



## dkap (May 13, 2003)

> Became just 4th player in NBA history, and first since 1993-94, to average 15+ points, 8+ rebounds, 4+ assists and 3+ blocks in single season


I hate stats like that. The cutoffs are so arbitrary, it's silly. He fills the box score, let's just leave it at that.

Dan


----------



## Masbee (Dec 31, 2002)

dkap said:


> I hate stats like that. The cutoffs are so arbitrary, it's silly. He fills the box score, let's just leave it at that.
> 
> Dan


I agree. I just have to laugh, because they are CONSTANTLY using these type of nonsensical numbers on the TV broadcasts.

If there is one thing that the NBA TV broadcast do especially poorly it is talk about stats. They do a HORRIBLE job, giving the most attention to the most trivial of stats, and completely ignoring the revolution in NBA player and team statistics.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

Fork said:


> Just because he played out of position doesn't mean he somehow became less talented.


True. Which raises another question: how much truth is there to the rumors that his back and/or knees are giving out? 

If his deterioration is physical, then he is a bad risk. If it was mental (being asked to play on the perimeter full time), that is still a problem - UNLESS he moves to a team that will let him play in the post.


----------



## Oldmangrouch (Feb 11, 2003)

BenDavis503 said:


> Yeah I am no Jazz fan or pay much attention to them... but I could have sworn he was a SF too for all these years lol.


His skinny build fools people.

Offensively, AK47 is a slasher. He is at his best when his team-mates spread the floor and give him lots of room. He doesn't have the back-to-the-basket game of a classic PF, but he also lacks the perimeter shot of a true SF.

Defensively, he is far better close to the basket. Not only is he a better man defender down low, he is also a talented help defender. When he is forced to chase faster players around out on the perimeter, he becomes just ordinary.


----------



## mook (Dec 31, 2002)

Oldmangrouch said:


> His skinny build fools people.
> 
> Offensively, AK47 is a slasher. He is at his best when his team-mates spread the floor and give him lots of room. He doesn't have the back-to-the-basket game of a classic PF, but he also lacks the perimeter shot of a true SF.
> 
> Defensively, he is far better close to the basket. Not only is he a better man defender down low, he is also a talented help defender. When he is forced to chase faster players around out on the perimeter, he becomes just ordinary.


that's a great descriptiong of Kirilenko. 

it's also why he really makes more sense as a bench player than a starter. you need low post scoring from your starting PF, and you need quality perimeter defense and shooting from your starting SF. he can't really fill either role. 

coming off the bench to back up both the 3 and 4 would allow him to focus more on his strengths and really catch teams off guard.


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

Andrei was a very good player, but he's sustained a major injury almost every year of his career. It must be taking a toll on him. 

The Blazers are going to have to pay big bucks to keep the up and coming core together. NO way do you want to add in a 15+ mil per year backup PF.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

Yega1979 said:


> Andrei was a very good player, but he's sustained a major injury almost every year of his career. It must be taking a toll on him.
> 
> The Blazers are going to have to pay big bucks to keep the up and coming core together. NO way do you want to add in a 15+ mil per year backup PF.


You mean like, oh... LaFrentz?


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

PorterIn2004 said:


> You mean like, oh... LaFrentz?


Yes, like Lafrentz only two more years and 38 million more dollars.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

Yega1979 said:


> Yes, like Lafrentz only two more years and 38 million more dollars.


I hear you, Yega, but I still don't think I agree. It'd be interesting to look around the league at the better teams to see what their payrolls look like within the core rotation. I'm thinking it's bad news if/when LaFrentz sees anything beyond garbage minutes -- it means someone's hurt. Kirilenko, though, I'd expect to be getting great production from him at 30ish minutes a game.

Given that it's Allen's money _and_ that most of the starters aren't going to be in the big money range for awhile, it seems to me it'd be worth bringing in AK. Presuming Randoph goes somewhere else for a SF or PG, there're almost certainly going to be plenty of minutes for a back-up PF/SF, and I'm convinced AK can still really play. Maybe you aren't and that's the difference?


----------



## Yega1979 (Mar 22, 2003)

If we can get Kirelenko for basically nothing, like by trading LaFrentz and Dickau for him it would be ok. LaFrentz is going to wallow on our bench doing nothing, while at least Kirlenko could get substantial minutes and be a force on defense.

Imagine Kirlenko, Oden and Aldridge! That would be wicked.

But, I think if Randolph is going to be involved, we should get a more well rounded player that can start at SF for us.


----------



## PorterIn2004 (Jan 1, 2003)

Yega1979 said:


> If we can get Kirelenko for basically nothing, like by trading LaFrentz and Dickau for him it would be ok. LaFrentz is going to wallow on our bench doing nothing, while at least Kirlenko could get substantial minutes and be a force on defense.
> 
> Imagine Kirlenko, Oden and Aldridge! That would be wicked.
> 
> But, I think if Randolph is going to be involved, we should get a more well rounded player that can start at SF for us.


So, er... how much of this thread have you read? Not _once_ has anyone been suggesting Randolph should be involved in a trade for Kirilenko. It's _all_ been based around LaFrentz. :read:


----------



## It's_GO_Time (Oct 13, 2005)

Utah Jazz general manager Kevin O'Connor vowed to be "aggressive" in looking to sign players or make a trade. But the Jazz have payroll considerations with nearly $59 million already committed in player salaries for next season; $65.42 million was the luxury-tax threshold this season. 

The Jazz's greatest need according to O'Connor is to increase the team's length, in particular in the frontcourt. Another is finding a perimeter defender.


Source: Salt Lake Tribune


For what it's worth . . .


----------



## furball (Jul 25, 2004)

Personally, I think playing form Sloan is wearing on the guy. I think he would be a great fit with Portland. Think about a front line of Oden, LA and AK47. Thats 10 blocks a game! I've always thought
Blocked shots was an extremely important stat as long as a guy averages at least 6 reb a game. You would force every team in the league to shoot from outside. I like it better than Jefferson or the Matrix.


----------

