D
Deleted member 848
Guest
Come here Dmo.
We might trade yo *** in a year, but come here anyways
We might trade yo *** in a year, but come here anyways
Rumor: DMo to sign with Jazz if Favors misses extended time
- Thread starter stitches
- Start date
Here we go with some calculations:
Utah has 13.65M in capspace. They can use this money to either give R&E to one or both(more likely one) of Hill and Favors or they can give some part of it to DMo.
Here's the cap situation in case we want to sign DMo(read in clutchfans they are floating 23M for 2 seasons guaranteed number. lets say it's true and the Jazz want to give him 12M in first year and 11M in the second year).
Contracts for 2017-2018:
Derrick Favors : 12M
Joe Johnson: 10.5M
Alec Burks: 11M
Dante Exum: 5M
Trey Lyles: 2.5M
Rudy Gobert: 21M
Rodney Hood: 2.5M
DMo - 11M
------------------------------
75.5M
That's WITHOUT Hayward (possibly around 28M) and Hill(Lets say 20M) and that is without Diaw(7.5 non-guaranteed, Neto 1M non-guaranteed, Joel Bolomboy 1M non-guaranteed, Joe Ingles 2.6M QO, 2 first round picks of about 1M each). I'm not including ANY of them.
If we want to keep Hayward and Hill we would be at 123.5M with 6 more roster spots to fill(or at least 6 more million in salary cap to fill). This would be way over the luxury tax(currently projected at around 122M). This is not happening! The Jazz won't choose DMo over any of our key players(Hill, Hayward, Favors). It just makes no sense at all.
The other option is to give him just 1 year deal, but then again... why would we choose that instead of relieving the money crunch we will have in 2018 by frontloading either Hill or Favors contract? Why would anybody choose 1 year of DMo(whose condition we don't know anything about), over making it much easier to keep our core long-term? Again, it makes no sense.
Utah has 13.65M in capspace. They can use this money to either give R&E to one or both(more likely one) of Hill and Favors or they can give some part of it to DMo.
Here's the cap situation in case we want to sign DMo(read in clutchfans they are floating 23M for 2 seasons guaranteed number. lets say it's true and the Jazz want to give him 12M in first year and 11M in the second year).
Contracts for 2017-2018:
Derrick Favors : 12M
Joe Johnson: 10.5M
Alec Burks: 11M
Dante Exum: 5M
Trey Lyles: 2.5M
Rudy Gobert: 21M
Rodney Hood: 2.5M
DMo - 11M
------------------------------
75.5M
That's WITHOUT Hayward (possibly around 28M) and Hill(Lets say 20M) and that is without Diaw(7.5 non-guaranteed, Neto 1M non-guaranteed, Joel Bolomboy 1M non-guaranteed, Joe Ingles 2.6M QO, 2 first round picks of about 1M each). I'm not including ANY of them.
If we want to keep Hayward and Hill we would be at 123.5M with 6 more roster spots to fill(or at least 6 more million in salary cap to fill). This would be way over the luxury tax(currently projected at around 122M). This is not happening! The Jazz won't choose DMo over any of our key players(Hill, Hayward, Favors). It just makes no sense at all.
The other option is to give him just 1 year deal, but then again... why would we choose that instead of relieving the money crunch we will have in 2018 by frontloading either Hill or Favors contract? Why would anybody choose 1 year of DMo(whose condition we don't know anything about), over making it much easier to keep our core long-term? Again, it makes no sense.
Last edited:
So the reports are DMo and his agent are mad because Houston hasnt agreed to the 6 million incentives that were on the Brooklyn deal. Seems that incentives dont have to be agreed to when you match a deal. It seems like BJ Armstrong is just an awful agent.
Lost_Jazz_Fan
Member
I was hoping we'd go after him this off-season if possible so I'm all for it. He just adds another competent player to an already very good roster. That can only be a good thing in my opinion.
So either his agent doesn't know what's up or was very sure Houston wouldn't match and took the risk with incentives anyways. Right now it looks then like they're trying to bend Houstonso they include incentives or play a waiting game in hopes that they void the sheet and let him return to RFA where they can work out another sheet with Brooklyn that's less likely to get matched.
I wonder if DMo can sue his agent for incompetence.
Unless things have changed very recently, this is just wrong. When a team matches a deal for a RFA, it is literally the exact same deal.
edit: but I haven't been following this. If it wasn't a RFA match, then anything's possible.
Think about how unique incentives could be. If Utah signed a RFA and put in something about reporting to P3 during the offseason, but the player we signed got matched by their original team. What if that team doesnt use P3? It's not like they are going to pay him to go use to a place they dont work with.
Looks like "likely" incentives must be matched, but unlikely ones do not.
https://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q44
Cappy_Smurf
Well-Known Member
Why is this still a discussion? Dude signed a contract already, which was matched by Houston. Dmo and his agent don't have a leg to stand on. Tough ****, you can't sign a contract and then decide you don't like the details afterwards. That's the agent's job to figure out BEFORE you sign. BJ Armstrong sounds like he doesn't know what the hell he's doing, but that isn't going to get Dmo out of his situation. No matter what anyone thinks of Houston's management, nobody twisted Dmo's arm and made him sign a contract he knew could be matched. Suck it up and play basketball, moron.