I can’t imagine there is a single person in the world who wants to know what I think about the Giricek/Kyle Korver trade, but I’m going to put it out there anywhere.
I can remember seeing the highlight from Giricek’s first NBA game. In my memory, he dropped 35 on Kobe, but according to Wikipedia it was really 29 against the Grizzle. Still, 29 ain’t a bad debut in the L, regardless of opponent. Five (I think) seasons later, he’s never really found his niche, despite consistently giving you ten points a game off the bench.
Korver is a pure three point specialist, and Jesuit educated at Creighton. In terms of pure skill set, he seems like a good addition to the Jazz, certainly better than Giricek (who has a first name, Gordon) because JERRY SLOAN stopped liking him a while ago.
My problem is that bringing in someone who necessarily has to share minutes with Ronnie Brewer seems like a lose-lose. Brewer is a young gem, a real find. Why keep him on the bench? Why not let him develop?
Does Utah really think they can make a run this year? They have all the pieces in place, but the west is so top-heavy that getting to the finals will be very, very difficult this year. If you’re the Spurs, someone like Korver, who has a very rigid ceiling, might put you over the top. But why bring him in the poor man’s Ashton Kutcher and potentially stunt Brewer’s (and ultimately your squad’s) growth?
Best case scenario, Brewer continues to develop into a great shooting guard, but then you’ve got Korver’s contract and no minutes for him.
(I have no issues with the move on Philly’s end.)