You're the GM this offseason. What do you do?

[Handlogten's Heros]

Can someone clarify to me what it would mean for another team if they acquire Korver? If they waive and stretch him (because of retirement or whatever) does he only account for $1.2 million on their cap sheet next year? Paging @Handlogten's Heros .

For the record, I am down to roll with him as-is if he is. I think he can easily play another two seasons if he’s handled with care. I think he was over-player this year.

I’m not sure... I would assume all of his money would be picked up if someone claimed him... they’d likely just wait out the waiver process and do a minimum deal.

 

[LoPo]

Yeah only way we remove his current salary is by waiving him which makes him a free agent. Can't use some other team's free agent in a sign and trade and we'd no longer have bird rights.

Basically Favs is either back at $18M or on another team's roster. Maybe he would come back and negotiate a long term deal with us after clearing waivers but that seems like a long shot and would require us to be his only or last solid option of getting a long term deal.

Who is going to give Favors a multiyear deal making $13? Who? The guy is more valuable to us than other teams.

The teams who would love him (Charlotte, Miami, etc) don't have that kind of money. Teams with space like LA, LA, NY, Dallas, aren't gonna burn their space paying him that much on a multiyear deal.


If we waive Favors telling him its because we want to extend him for longer, I think he more likely stays than goes.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[NUMBERICA]

I’m not sure... I would assume all of his money would be picked up if someone claimed him... they’d likely just wait out the waiver process and do a minimum deal.

I wasn’t clear with my language; if we TRADED Korver to another team, do they also have the ability to pay as low as $1.2 million for the season (if they stretched him, obvi)?

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Who is going to give Favors a multiyear deal making $13? Who? The guy is more valuable to us than other teams.

The teams who would love him (Charlotte, Miami, etc) don't have that kind of money. Teams with space like LA, LA, NY, Dallas, aren't gonna burn their space paying him that much on a multiyear deal.


If we waive Favors telling him its because we want to extend him for longer, I think he more likely stays than goes.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app

Dallas could absolutely do that... they don’t have a healthy starting center and Favs would pair well with the Zinger.

Clips too... get Leonard and use leftover space to nab a starting center and keep Gallinari...

Lakers might strike out and throw a good one year offer that is preferable for him... get the starting gig and go on the market when there is lots of money and not a lot of free agents.

Why would favors be more valuable to us? Why? We have a top 3 center who can’t shoot... he might make the least sense for us.

Like if that is such a great bargain for us why would we be the only team that would give it to him? Why? If a guy has no market then why would we make him a ****ing priority?

 

[LoPo]

I wasn’t clear with my language; if we TRADED Korver to another team, do they also have the ability to pay as low as $1.2 million for the season (if they stretched him, obvi)?

I don't believe so.

Another team trades for Korver in order to save much more. For example:

Let's say Detroit trades us John Leuer and their 1st for Korver and our 1st. They would do that to save around $6 million since Leuer is a $9 million contract and Korver is only guaranteed $3.5. They would waive Korver and save the money towards other pursuits.

Not saying we would do that trade; just an example.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I wasn’t clear with my language; if we TRADED Korver to another team, do they also have the ability to pay as low as $1.2 million for the season (if they stretched him, obvi)?

Yes... he counts as 7.5m outgoing salary for us and 3.5m incoming for another team though... so he can be moved but it’s tricky to match salaries. He could provide some cap relief for a team in a slightly uneven trade. Like maybe a Dwight Howard level salary but it is minimal savings.... cuz they could just waive and stretch Howard.

So it isn’t something too valuable... and it’s tricky.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I don't believe so.

Another team trades for Korver in order to save much more. For example:

Let's say Detroit trades us John Leuer and their 1st for Korver and our 1st. They would do that to save around $6 million since Leuer is a $9 million contract and Korver is only guaranteed $3.5. They would waive Korver and save the money towards other pursuits.

Not saying we would do that trade; just an example.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app

See my post above... salaries wouldn’t match cuz Korver only counts as 3.5M to them... an acquirer could waive and stretch him though.

 

[LoPo]

Dallas could absolutely do that... they don’t have a healthy starting center and Favs would pair well with the Zinger.

Clips too... get Leonard and use leftover space to nab a starting center and keep Gallinari...

Lakers might strike out and throw a good one year offer that is preferable for him... get the starting gig and go on the market when there is lots of money and not a lot of free agents.

Why would favors be more valuable to us? Why? We have a top 3 center who can’t shoot... he might make the least sense for us.

Like if that is such a great bargain for us why would we be the only team that would give it to him? Why? If a guy has no market then why would we make him a ****ing priority?

He is that valuable to us because he loves it here and everybody loves him. Most importantly, our 2nd most important player is our center. If he goes down or gets in foul trouble or become irrelevant in a series like this year, we need a high quality alternative.

I don't like spending $13 on a backup C and sometimes PF. However, I see why we would do it. Favors at that number and Gobert at his still combine to make less than Chris Paul. We aren't a team of stars. We are a team of fits. Favors fits and we can rationalize the cost.

If we get Tobias, bye bye Favors. If we can't get a max guy, we gotta bring Favors back.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[LoPo]

See my post above... salaries wouldn’t match cuz Korver only counts as 3.5M to them... an acquirer could waive and stretch him though.

I know you schooled Cy earlier, but I'm pretty sure the value of a non-guarantee deal is that it trades at the top value ($7.5) but only costs the guaranteed amount to the team if waived ($3.5).

Correct me if I'm wrong. Like George Hill - he's only guaranteed $1 million but he got traded as $18 million for Henson and Dellie.

Korver would have to be dealt before the moratorium.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I know you schooled Cy earlier, but I'm pretty sure the value of a non-guarantee deal is that it trades at the top value ($7.5) but only costs the guaranteed amount to the team if waived ($3.5).

Correct me if I'm wrong. Like George Hill - he's only guaranteed $1 million but he got traded as $18 million for Henson and Dellie.

Korver would have to be dealt before the moratorium.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app

You are wrong... Hill was traded at the deadline during the year... trade deadline has past and tax/cap numbers are frozen for the past year now. We are technically not in a new league year (so we have no cap space yet) but you can't trade him at his $7.5M value... we went through this exact thing last year around the draft with Thabo, Jonas, and Epke… I'm not going to go back and litigate it this year.

One contract, JR Smith, has this ability because it was signed under the previous CBA rules.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

He is that valuable to us because he loves it here and everybody loves him. Most importantly, our 2nd most important player is our center. If he goes down or gets in foul trouble or become irrelevant in a series like this year, we need a high quality alternative.

I don't like spending $13 on a backup C and sometimes PF. However, I see why we would do it. Favors at that number and Gobert at his still combine to make less than Chris Paul. We aren't a team of stars. We are a team of fits. Favors fits and we can rationalize the cost.

If we get Tobias, bye bye Favors. If we can't get a max guy, we gotta bring Favors back.

Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app

For most teams if they lose their best or second best player they aren't winning a championship... having a solid backup is great... but one that shares most of the same limitations as your star isn't ideal. I'd rather pay a premium for some variety or flexibility. Say we got Lopez as a backup for $10-12M a year... it still isn't how I'd go about my business. We start two guys that can't shoot or dribble... the contenders are not even playing one of those guys... maybe that's a thing.

If Houston lost Harden they are screwed... Bucks Giannis, Raps Kawhi, Denver Jokic, GS (next year) Steph... all in the same boat. If we lose Rudy to an injury or he's played off the floor Favs aint getting us to a championship... especially if we don't strengthen our current roster weaknesses.

 

[colton]

1) “guaranteed contract” isn’t ambiguous.
2) for the purposes of transactions, whether or not the player is actually paid is virtually irrelevant.

I don't understand either of your points.

1) I have a guaranteed contract at my current job, but if I were to retire they wouldn't pay me. And I found evidence that certainly in previous CBAs, the players who retire were not paid their salaries after that point, even though they had "guaranteed contracts". Again, as mentioned, the current CBA is ambiguous as to whether that's still the policy or if things have changed.

2) The quoted salary cap FAQ specifically states that "Any salary still being paid to retired players" counts against the cap. How is whether or not the player is actually paid virtually irrelevant? That's the entire crux of the matter.

 

[David Stern]

I'd like to see this offseason get really whacky. My fearless offseason prediction: Denver trades a bunch of young talent to LA for LeBron.

 

[colton]

I mean Ginobili and Duncan are retired and still getting paid by the Spurs... nba also has an over 38 rule that prevents teams from giving older guys cap friendly deals that run past when they would be playing to give them more.

My sources are better than Cys which are again his butt

1) Can you link to the Spurs' info?

2) Valid point, might be convincing evidence.

3) I'm not believing Saint Cy either at this point. I'm just looking for the facts.

 

[colton]

I mean Ginobili and Duncan are retired and still getting paid by the Spurs... nba also has an over 38 rule that prevents teams from giving older guys cap friendly deals that run past when they would be playing to give them more.

My sources are better than Cys which are again his butt

Actually, come to think of it Korver is 38 already. Doesn't the over 38 rule mean that the Jazz have ALREADY paid for his next year's cap hit? From https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2018/06/hoops-rumors-glossary-over-38-rule.html
"The Over-38 rule generally takes effect when a free agent signs a long-term contract that extends beyond his 38th birthday. In these cases, the salary in the year(s) after the player turns 38 is considered deferred compensation, and is applied to the years earlier in the contract, when that salary is actually being earned."

So that would imply Korver retiring or not has zero impact on the Jazz's cap situation for next year. Or am I missing something? I don't know much about this rule.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

It's wrong and his source is his butt.

Go look at San Antonio's cap sheet... you will notice Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili are on there this year... weird since they are both retired.

Nah my source was a thread on Reddit so I transfer the L to the owners of that site. I hold no L's.

 

[colton]

Actually, come to think of it Korver is 38 already. Doesn't the over 38 rule mean that the Jazz have ALREADY paid for his next year's cap hit? From https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2018/06/hoops-rumors-glossary-over-38-rule.html
"The Over-38 rule generally takes effect when a free agent signs a long-term contract that extends beyond his 38th birthday. In these cases, the salary in the year(s) after the player turns 38 is considered deferred compensation, and is applied to the years earlier in the contract, when that salary is actually being earned."

So that would imply Korver retiring or not has zero impact on the Jazz's cap situation for next year. Or am I missing something? I don't know much about this rule.

To answer my own question, it looks like the over-38 rule might just apply to 4+ year contracts.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Nah my source was a thread on Reddit so I transfer the L to the owners of that site. I hold no L's.

Whatever justification you need man... I just wouldn't lol and lmao and declare something wrong if you gonna run from it with excuses like I saw it on reddit... ya lost bruh

 

[homeytennis]

I really doubt we will get a big free agent here.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Whatever justification you need man... I just wouldn't lol and lmao and declare something wrong if you gonna run from it with excuses like I saw it on reddit... ya lost bruh

Sorry, you will have to discuss the L with Reddit as I no longer hold it.