Poll: Should the Jazz Match Hayward's $15.75 a year/4 year Contract?

[franklin]

Honestly, you can't blame Hayward for the woes of the Jazz last year. It was one of the most dysfunctional displays of basketball I have ever seen. It reminded me of watching D-league games (unwatchable). It has been established that Hayward is not a #1 option (hopefully Exum is). We all know Hayward can do very well in a good system. If we can't get Parsons, who else do we replace him with? Losing him will be a huge dent in the quality of this team.

If the Jazz believe they can actually replace him for less, then great. Otherwise, re-signing him is a no-brainer.

Hayward was pretty much the only player keeping the Jazz off the hardwood last season. Everyone of the other youth, who were supposed to grow, wildly underachieved expectations.

You are correct in that Hayward will look more like a wizard when he's in a system where players can actually read and react as a group. Favors cannot, Burks cannot, Kanter is pathetic at rotations, and Trey was a rookie. Hayward was essentially relying on veteran Richard Jefferson to keep the slightest semblance of an NBA offense. Jefferson was not a whole lot of help, obviously.

If DL can build a group of competent read-react players around Hayward and Exum then Gordon will surprise everyone with his play. If he cannot then this irrational bitchfest from people who only care about the box scores and advanced stats will continue.

 

[ijazz]

Good post, especially...... Hayward is not a missing piece to championship, nor is he a player to build the team around.

Bingo.

Why give his minutes and development to be a 10-14th place team at best.

Hayward will be gone in 3 or 4 years.

Keep in mind he is probably pissed how he was treated.

He certainly started the season down on the no contract

 

[CALJAZZFAN]

Hayward was pretty much the only player keeping the Jazz off the hardwood last season. Everyone of the other youth, who were supposed to grow, wildly underachieved expectations.

You are correct in that Hayward will look more like a wizard when he's in a system where players can actually read and react as a group. Favors cannot, Burks cannot, Kanter is pathetic at rotations, and Trey was a rookie. Hayward was essentially relying on veteran Richard Jefferson to keep the slightest semblance of an NBA offense. Jefferson was not a whole lot of help, obviously.

If DL can build a group of competent read-react players around Hayward and Exum then Gordon will surprise everyone with his play. If he cannot then this irrational bitchfest from people who only care about the box scores and advanced stats will continue.

Some good points, but he's still good enough for a max deal. $9-10M per year is more in line with what he's worth (taking into account incremental improvement on an ongoing basis).

 

[Tarkanian]

Haywards amazing ability to make everyone else better led us to being one of the worst offensive and defensive teams in the league.


If we really had a max player on our roster last year, i dont think we would have finished with the 4th worsr record. Tank or no tank

finally someone said it.
I was perusing the pages until the last one to write this and fishonjazz, in all his wisdom, put it bluntly.
If Gordo were a MAX player Utah would not have sucked that hard.
He was usually a non-factor to tell the truth.
Someone (=Cyrone me guesses) told about team improvement when he was around.
I call that BS for Jazz were a ****ty team nite in nite out.
Good riddance!

 

[oldtimer]

Voted no. Just dont think he's worth the contract.

 

[Hekate]

Some more votes and we are at Hay's shooting percentage from last year.

 

[Crawlnstall]

So we have three days now to match, is that right?

 

[Coach Ellis]

Interesting thought. However, I've never seen details on how the money is divided among the guys on the roster. Divided evenly? Divided in proportion to their salaries? Other? It may well be that there is a clause saying that moneys given to players that way can't be used to exceed the max.

Here's the only stuff I found on Larry Coon's site:

https://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q15


So again, no details.

Wondered why no team has ever done this yet, and I think I've figured it out. Gotta look to find the supporting links - was on my phone when I looked it up - but essentially, the reason teams ALWAYS spend up to the salary floor is because of revenue sharing. The quick and dirty explanation. . .

Revenue sharing is based on how much teams can make in each individual market. Each team puts approximately 50% of their local revenue into a pool. Then teams get up to the average team salary allocated to them to cover player salary expenses. If you simply don't make as much (like a small market team like the Jazz), the big market teams help subsidize the cost of acquiring players above that 50% threshold. That's essentially what the salary cap # represents. 50% of your revenue, plus subsidizing if you're way below that number. What happens if a team ends up below the 90% salary floor? That money is pooled and distributed among the players on the team based on a formula that I've never come across. The problem is that teams that are below the salary floor threshold DO NOT GET any additional revenue sharing from the tax-paying teams. Two years ago, there were 12 teams that were tax-payers. Since the money from revenue sharing essentially covers the majority of player salaries, going under the salary floor takes the tax payer revenue strait out of the OWNERS pockets. The system is set up to make it so that teams pay up to the floor no matter what, but if they get there on their own, they also can get a check from the tax paying owners that is strait up profit. That's why teams make trades for bad contracts and pay for players that sit the bench. They have to pay the same amount regardless, but if they're on the lower end of the market spectrum, not getting to the floor costs them real money out of their own pockets.

Expect the Jazz to ALWAYS get up to the salary floor. . . even when they're "going lean". There's no reason not to use your cap space efficiently (either by adding free agents or by serving as a cash dump for another team.) That money from revenue sharing gets spent no matter what and if you don't get to the floor, you don't get cash from tax payers.

 

[GVC]

Hayward was pretty much the only player keeping the Jazz off the hardwood last season. Everyone of the other youth, who were supposed to grow, wildly underachieved expectations.

You must be joking.

In what area did Hayward improve? He hung back to grab more rebounds instead of getting out in transition. He was lazier than in previous seasons in halfcourt defense. He couldn't hit a spot-up jumper all ****ing season. He still is hopeless finishing at the rim, especially through contact. He hit more of his mid-range pull-ups as the season progressed, but that's the only area where he showed any progress in-season. I saw no obvious improvements in his game from the end of the 12/13 season to the start of the 13/14 season; he once again looked completely unprepared for the start of the season. What am I missing?

What about Alec? His off-ball play improved a ton between 12/13 and 13/14. As far as I'm concerned that's the biggest, most obvious improvement any of the young players made.

I'm still hoping for a sign-and-trade.

 

[Coach Ellis]

finally someone said it.
I was perusing the pages until the last one to write this and fishonjazz, in all his wisdom, put it bluntly.
If Gordo were a MAX player Utah would not have sucked that hard.
He was usually a non-factor to tell the truth.
Someone (=Cyrone me guesses) told about team improvement when he was around.
I call that BS for Jazz were a ****ty team nite in nite out.
Good riddance!

You mean like how everybody is all planning to throw a MAX contract at Kevin Love because he's always manged have his teams contending for championships. . .

It's a team system. Players, coaches and front office. It's NEVER about one person - for good or bad. The contract overpays him, but saying that the Jazz were bad because of Hayward is the same as attributing the early season losing streak on Enes Kanter. Last time I checked, a whole team is needed to win games.

 

[Stifle Tower]

So we have three days now to match, is that right?

Three days from when the offer is formally submitted, which can't be until tomorrow.

Hey, at least we know we couldn't have acquired Parsons for much cheaper. He has a $45M deal with Mavs that also includes a trade kicker.

 

[fishonjazz]

You mean like how everybody is all planning to throw a MAX contract at Kevin Love because he's always manged have his teams contending for championships. . .

It's a team system. Players, coaches and front office. It's NEVER about one person - for good or bad. The contract overpays him, but saying that the Jazz were bad because of Hayward is the same as attributing the early season losing streak on Enes Kanter. Last time I checked, a whole team is needed to win games.

At least love has stats (not to mention his team was better than 4th worst)

Haywards stats were not very good and his team was the 4th worst in the league

 

[Coach Ellis]

Three days from when the offer is formally submitted, which can't be until tomorrow.

Hey, at least we know we couldn't have acquired Parsons for much cheaper. He has a $45M deal with Mavs that also includes a trade kicker.

I expect that the 4th year players option and trade kicker will end up being standard features for ANY RFA offer sheet moving forward. It works a hell of a lot better to discourage a team from matching than just having the players beg their team to not match the contract.

EDIT - Core4 posts a link in the next post that shows other contracts that have trade kickers in them. Guess it's not that new of a concept after all. . .

 

[Stifle Tower]

I expect that the 4th year players option and trade kicker will end up being standard features for ANY RFA offer sheet moving forward. It works a hell of a lot better to discourage a team from matching than just having the players beg their team to not match the contract. Kind of pissed that the Charlotte Hornets were the first team to figure this out. Haven't come across it in any other RFA offer sheets.

Actually, it's pretty common, which I didn't realize either. Here's a link to a list of players (about 30). And the going rate seems to be 15%.
https://data.shamsports.com/content/pages/data/salaries/tradekickers.jsp

 

[Coach Ellis]

At least love has stats (not to mention his team was better than 4th worst)

Haywards stats were not very good and his team was the 4th worst in the league

Love does have better stats. And even though I'm not a huge fan of his, I also understand that he's clearly a MAX player in the NBA and worth that contract - whereas Gordon Hayward is not (yet and may never be.) But to say that the Jazz wouldn't have been a **** team if they had a player like Love, Hardin, etc. is disingenuous. There's a reason that Love is forcing his way out of Minnesota. It's because since they drafted him, they've finished as the 5th worst team in 2008 (25-58), 2nd worst in 2009 (15-67), the worst in 2010 (17-65), 10th worst in 2011 (*lockout season 26-40), 9th worst in 2012 (31-51) and 13th worst in 2013 (40-42). Granted in the East, they'd have been a playoff team last year, but having a sure-fire All Star player that's going to get a MAX contract hasn't helped the T-Wolves win games at all.

 

[Coach Ellis]

Actually, it's pretty common, which I didn't realize either. Here's a link to a list of players (about 30). And the going rate seems to be 15%.
https://data.shamsports.com/content/pages/data/salaries/tradekickers.jsp

Thanks for posting that. Makes me feel a little bit better. Wow. Makes me wonder what in the hell New Orleans was thinking when they matched on Eric Gordon. Holy crap that was a bad contract for a guy with his injury history.

 

[Diamond77]

I don't like this story that the Jazz have to match the offer regardless! Is Hayward still motivated to play for the Jazz? He looked disinterested in many games last season! Sometimes motivations count more than skills and in addition he is not a real leader!

 

[fishonjazz]

Love does have better stats. And even though I'm not a huge fan of his, I also understand that he's clearly a MAX player in the NBA and worth that contract - whereas Gordon Hayward is not (yet and may never be.) But to say that the Jazz wouldn't have been a sh*t team if they had a player like Love, Hardin, etc. is disingenuous. There's a reason that Love is forcing his way out of Minnesota. It's because since they drafted him, they've finished as the 5th worst team in 2008 (25-58), 2nd worst in 2009 (15-67), the worst in 2010 (17-65), 10th worst in 2011 (*lockout season 26-40), 9th worst in 2012 (31-51) and 13th worst in 2013 (40-42). Granted in the East, they'd have been a playoff team last year, but having a sure-fire All Star player that's going to get a MAX contract hasn't helped the T-Wolves win games at all.

Touche'
Good post

 

[7StraightIsGreat]

I don't like this story that the Jazz have to match the offer regardless! Is Hayward still motivated to play for the Jazz? He looked disinterested in many games last season! Sometimes motivations count more than skills and in addition he is not a real leader!

It's pretty well known that Hayward was not a fan of Corbin for a few different reasons. My guess is that once Utah matches, and Hayward gets into town and gets to know Snyder, you're going to see a much more engaged player.

 

[Tarkanian]

Burks or Favors ::> worthy candidates of a MAX contract in my book.
Hayward has it but also lacks it.
He has all the tools to be great but I suspect he is a bit too timid in psy department.
He has never displayed convincingly that he cares.
Jazz can spend this money for better pieces.
Parsons is a good player.
Luol Deng also.
Francisco Garcia was good at Roxettes this year.
For a quarter of Hayward's price tag, Garcia would provide an acceptable contribution.
Hood is also a very promising talent.

Jazz will probably match but should they really do that?