Kanter`s influence on our salary cap

[Hedda Gambler]

This one is for you retards out there who have nothing better to do than nag about Kanter in every ****ing post.

Going into this off season we will not have any cap space. We could get up to 12,5 million by renouncing Kanter, Booker, Evans, Clarke and Ingles. This would be a really stupid thing to do as both Kanter and Booker could provide us with assets if trades, however small ones. If we traded them for draft picks or players before the deadline, these players and draft picks would count against the cap. Also, to stay in the FA hunt we would have to renounce them quickly and that means making them both free agents before we have the chance to explore what we could get for them. These are all silly moves that no sane FO would make. Enes will be given to QO and Booker will not be waived.

Now, let`s say we extend Enes for 4/48 with the money spread out evenly out front. Yeah, I know that a lot of you are pulling your hair when reading this, but there really is no need. Even with that contract, we would have over 21 million in cap space in the summer of 2016. 21 million - and that includes the salary for a projected 6 pick this year and a 3 year/5 million extension for Ingles.

In the summer of 2017, we could give Gobert the five year max and still have almost 10 million in cap space, even with Enes`s contract. At this time, Kanter would have 2 years/24 million remaining on his contract. Under the current CBO, that would be equivalent to 2 years/16 million. Kanter would be 25 years old and very tradeable. If he does nothing more than keep up his current level, contenders would give us a pick for him. If he turns out to be Biedrins, we could still ship him out by adding some small assets.

In 2018 - still including Enes` contract - we could have Gobert on the 5 year max, give Exum the 4 year max, pay Favors and Hayward 20 million each, Burks his owed 10,5 million and still not be paying the luxury tax. Kanter would 1 have year/7,5 million under the current CBA remaining on his contract and would be very easy to move if that was what we wanted.

Extending Enes Kanter will not ruin our future. It will not even make a real difference when it comes to being able to bid on free agents and certainly will not put us anywhere close to the luxury tax. You can argue all you want, but these are the facts. In two years time, the contracts of Kanter and Burks will be very movable if we should choose to go in another direction.

 

[freakazoid]

K, but how does all that help us win now? Trade Kanter for peanuts and all our problems will be solved.

 

[stitches]

The main question as always will be - can we get somebody better(or a package of several players) for the same money? And while with Gordon the question was really easy to answer - no, because even last year he was easily top 15 SF in the league, with Enes I am not so sure. Pretty much every single advanced metric puts him in the bottom 10 of all C/PF in the league(out of ~170 bigs). In other words - he doesn't help you win. He is a net negative for the team right now. It's pretty easy to see how you can get the 100th best C/PF for less than 12M.

Now you may say that he might improve and that's a possibility, but quite honestly I don't see him improving to the point where he would justify 12M. He could become 20/10 big and still be net negative with high TO count, no assists and no defense. I think paying him 12m/year will be horrible for us and since I feel like there is a real chance that there will be at least one GM stupid and desperate enough to offer him something of that sort, I think that the best scenario for us is to trade him before the trade deadline so we wouldn't lose him for nothing.

Your calculations don't take into account any improvements on our bench. I'd like to think that by 2016 or 2017 we will be good enough that we'd require good enough bench to help us being competitive and contending for playoffs. It surely won't happen with Elliot Williams, Novak, Jeremy Evans, Elijah Millsap...

 

[addictionary]

I'm nearly sure that Quin Snyder and the Jazz front office doesn't see the situation like that. Quin insists on playing Enes regardless of his performance compared to Rudy's. Now Snyder is known for his emphasis on defense. The first thing he said as soon as he came here and saw the picture in the practice was basically anyone who doesn't or cannot play defense is out. Then he justified the action of putting Enes back to starting 5 after the performance of Rudy the Rude that shaked the entire damn league. It's not like Enes is a veteran that has proven that he can contribute consistently and is clutch in hot ball moments, brings in experience, so that Quin puts him right back and leaves him at starting 5 even though the other player which is a legit center for his size and skills performs at an elite level at defense. So I think the reason Quin is creating excuses for playing Enes is he is shopping him.

 

[QuinSnydersHair]

I'm nearly sure that Quin Snyder and the Jazz front office doesn't see the situation like that. Quin insists on playing Enes regardless of his performance compared to Rudy's. Now Snyder is known for his emphasis on defense. The first thing he said as soon as he came here and saw the picture in the practice was basically anyone who doesn't or cannot play defense is out. Then he justified the action of putting Enes back to starting 5 after the performance of Rudy the Rude that shaked the entire damn league. It's not like Enes is a veteran that has proven that he can contribute consistently and is clutch in hot ball moments, brings in experience, so that Quin puts him right back and leaves him at starting 5 even though the other player which is a legit center for his size and skills performs at an elite level at defense. So I think the reason Quin is creating excuses for playing Enes is he is shopping him.

I don't see it this way at all. It's Quin genius at work and win-win-win really.

One, Kanter sucks so we get more balls for the lottery. Two, it gives us a true idea of what we have with Kanter. If we can't see what he can do against the starters of the league, why bother? This "interview" allows us to see who he is. Lastly, while being exposed, he does start and therefore puts up better stats (see last night), thus inflating his value way beyond its' actual worth. Most teams will see through this. Some won't. We just need one not to if we want to trade him before the deadline or in a S&T.

 

[Jazz4ever]

Kanter is gone, we have our two bigs, I feel bad for anyone writing these long winded posts.

 

[enchilada_style]

Your next thread should be titled "Kanters influence on the team" because thats the real issue.

 

[Stifle Tower]

T

Going into this off season we will not have any cap space. We could get up to 12,5 million by renouncing Kanter, Booker, Evans, Clarke and Ingles. This would be a really stupid thing to do as both Kanter and Booker could provide us with assets if trades, however small ones. If we traded them for draft picks or players before the deadline, these players and draft picks would count against the cap. Also, to stay in the FA hunt we would have to renounce them quickly and that means making them both free agents before we have the chance to explore what we could get for them. These are all silly moves that no sane FO would make. Enes will be given to QO and Booker will not be waived.

Now, let`s say we extend Enes for 4/48 with the money spread out evenly out front. Yeah, I know that a lot of you are pulling your hair when reading this, but there really is no need. Even with that contract, we would have over 21 million in cap space in the summer of 2016. 21 million - and that includes the salary for a projected 6 pick this year and a 3 year/5 million extension for Ingles.

In the summer of 2017, we could give Gobert the five year max and still have almost 10 million in cap space, even with Enes`s contract. At this time, Kanter would have 2 years/24 million remaining on his contract. Under the current CBO, that would be equivalent to 2 years/16 million. Kanter would be 25 years old and very tradeable. If he does nothing more than keep up his current level, contenders would give us a pick for him. If he turns out to be Biedrins, we could still ship him out by adding some small assets.

In 2018 - still including Enes` contract - we could have Gobert on the 5 year max, give Exum the 4 year max, pay Favors and Hayward 20 million each, Burks his owed 10,5 million and still not be paying the luxury tax. Kanter would 1 have year/7,5 million under the current CBA remaining on his contract and would be very easy to move if that was what we wanted.

Extending Enes Kanter will not ruin our future. It will not even make a real difference when it comes to being able to bid on free agents and certainly will not put us anywhere close to the luxury tax. You can argue all you want, but these are the facts. In two years time, the contracts of Kanter and Burks will be very movable if we should choose to go in another direction.

I think you have miscalculated on a couple of areas:
1. Yes, you are correct. Making the moves you detailed would leave the Jazz at $53M, which should be $12.5-$15M million under the ap depending on how much it goes up. HOWEVER, Utah ALSO would need to renounce their exceptions, so no MLE except the ro0m MLE which is $2.7M.

2. Isn't the purpise of having that cap to then go out and sign player(s)? You have not put this in your future cap calculations.

So now add in the following in 3 years:

Hayward, Favors and Gobert - $20M/each = $60M
Kanter = $12M
Burks = $10M
Exum, 2015 #1 pick = $3M/each = $6M
Free Agent(s) signed with 2015 cap space = $15M

Thats 8-9 players for a total of $103M. And Utah hasn't even begun to address what Exum or another PG may demand after their rookie contract is up. Retaining Kanter DOES impact the future of the Jazz. The Jazz CAN keep Kanter, but his contract becomes a real problem in years #3 and #4. About the only way to improve the team would be to sign a free agent to a 2 yr contract, then decide which player DOESN'T return in 3 years (or gets traded).

 

[nightmare3983]

Booker won't be a FA so the Jazz can't renounce him.

EDIT: The first place I looked didn't show next year being a team option year for Booker, but Hoopshype says it is.

 

[Hedda Gambler]

2. Isn't the purpise of having that cap to then go out and sign player(s)? You have not put this in your future cap calculations.

So now add in the following in 3 years:

Hayward, Favors and Gobert - $20M/each = $60M
Kanter = $12M
Burks = $10M
Exum, 2015 #1 pick = $3M/each = $6M
Free Agent(s) signed with 2015 cap space = $15M

Thats 8-9 players for a total of $103M. And Utah hasn't even begun to address what Exum or another PG may demand after their rookie contract is up. Retaining Kanter DOES impact the future of the Jazz. The Jazz CAN keep Kanter, but his contract becomes a real problem in years #3 and #4. About the only way to improve the team would be to sign a free agent to a 2 yr contract, then decide which player DOESN'T return in 3 years (or gets traded).

You can`t have it both ways - either you have Kanter for 12 million or a 2015 FA for 15.

All these calculations were in the OP. In 2018-2019 the Salary Cap is estimated to be at 100 million. With Hayward and Favors @ 20, Kanter at 12, Burks at 10,5 Exum at the 4 year max (20 million that year), Gobert at the 5 year max (20 million that year) and the 6th pick from 2015, we`d be at 109 million - only 9 million over the cap and not in luxury territory. And - this all assumes that both Exum and Gobert blow up and get these monster deals and that both Hayward and Favors earn 20 million deals. If they do that, we`ll have far more important things to talk about than salaries.

With the cap standing at 100 million, a 12 million deal will be a nice trade chip. For Kanter to become untradeable by then, he`d have to become Biedrins.

 

[Hotdog]

This one is for youretards out there who have nothing better to do than nag about Kanter in every ****ing post.

Going into this off season we will not have any cap space. We could get up to 12,5 million by renouncing Kanter, Booker, Evans, Clarke and Ingles. This would be a really stupid thing to do as both Kanter and Booker could provide us with assets if trades, however small ones. If we traded them for draft picks or players before the deadline, these players and draft picks would count against the cap. Also, to stay in the FA hunt we would have to renounce them quickly and that means making them both free agents before we have the chance to explore what we could get for them. These are all silly moves that no sane FO would make. Enes will be given to QO and Booker will not be waived.

Now, let`s say we extend Enes for 4/48 with the money spread out evenly out front. Yeah, I know that a lot of you are pulling your hair when reading this, but there really is no need. Even with that contract, we would have over 21 million in cap space in the summer of 2016. 21 million - and that includes the salary for a projected 6 pick this year and a 3 year/5 million extension for Ingles.

In the summer of 2017, we could give Gobert the five year max and still have almost 10 million in cap space, even with Enes`s contract. At this time, Kanter would have 2 years/24 million remaining on his contract. Under the current CBO, that would be equivalent to 2 years/16 million. Kanter would be 25 years old and very tradeable. If he does nothing more than keep up his current level, contenders would give us a pick for him. If he turns out to be Biedrins, we could still ship him out by adding some small assets.

In 2018 - still including Enes` contract - we could have Gobert on the 5 year max, give Exum the 4 year max, pay Favors and Hayward 20 million each, Burks his owed 10,5 million and still not be paying the luxury tax. Kanter would 1 have year/7,5 million under the current CBA remaining on his contract and would be very easy to move if that was what we wanted.

Extending Enes Kanter will not ruin our future. It will not even make a real difference when it comes to being able to bid on free agents and certainly will not put us anywhere close to the luxury tax. You can argue all you want, but these are the facts. In two years time, the contracts of Kanter and Burks will be very movable if we should choose to go in another direction.

Just because we can pay Kanter, doesn't mean we should.


If Kanter is paid 12 million year, how many minutes do you think he will play? It's probably a lot. Do we really want that?

 

[Hotdog]

You can`t have it both ways - either you have Kanter for 12 million or a 2015 FA for 15.

All these calculations were in the OP. In 2018-2019 the Salary Cap is estimated to be at 100 million. With Hayward and Favors @ 20, Kanter at 12, Burks at 10,5 Exum at the 4 year max (20 million that year), Gobert at the 5 year max (20 million that year) and the 6th pick from 2015, we`d be at 109 million - only 9 million over the cap and not in luxury territory. And - this all assumes that both Exum and Gobert blow up and get these monster deals and that both Hayward and Favors earn 20 million deals. If they do that, we`ll have far more important things to talk about than salaries.

With the cap standing at 100 million, a 12 million deal will be a nice trade chip. For Kanter to become untradeable by then, he`d have to become Biedrins.

What about our other draft picks after this summer? They have to be paid too.

Hey, maybe we can just hoard players... Let's never make a trade. That's a great idea.