What's new
By:

Are the Jazz going to trade Rudy?

Saint Cy of JFC said:
Who said it was the exact spot? Maybe he would have been there at 38, who knows? They did it for a reason though and I'm guessing it was because they had a good idea that him or McDaniels would be there and that Hughes/Woodard would be there at 38.
Click to expand...
I think it was a safe assumption and it’s smart to move back. I think they had their two targets and kinda new they could get em.

I’m just worried we go into the season saying we can rely on Hughes or Oni without great evidence and then your options get reallllllyyyy limited during the season.

We are likely in or out of the tax regardless of if we add one more minimum guy. So why scrimp on a couple million extra. One wing injury and we go from thin to kinda ****ed. When you invest 135M why risk the extra. Honestly just cutting NWG and adding someone with 2.5 or 2.7M of the bae would be a wise investment. You still have to do the big deal to get out of the tax and the 1M extra won’t matter then.
 
I mean we are 24 hours away from @LoPo dropping 45 Rudy trades... if that doesn’t give DL enough motivation to get something done I don’t know what will.
 
green said:
No, he "could" pay the bills for a long time. Here is the thing about rich people: They don't like to spend money, nor lose it. It is why they are rich.

He won't dip into his cash much...if at all. If anything, the Jazz's moves have shown this so far.
Click to expand...
Ok. That's basically what I said. And he won't be dipping into his "own" cash at all. That was the point. They will use cash from the Jazz organization to fund any tax payments. The owners don't just write a check from their own bank accounts. It comes from the organization like any other functioning business.

People act like the owners will get out their personal wallet to fund this ****. That's not how it works. It's just that owners with net worth into the billions tend to view this more as a hobby and run it as such, willing to take something of a loss in the business to succeed on the court. Owners with "less" money view this as another business division and would be more risk-averse in how they manage the assets.

But the owners aren't using their personal wealth in these transactions at all. It still comes from the balance sheet of the business.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
Yeah we’ve heard a little more certainty there though. I just think if you can avoid having it linger into camp both sides have incentive to make their final push and get it done. So if it doesn’t it’s because there is something big enough to hold it up. I thought it’d be fairly easy and it’d be 4 for 125-140m but if he wants supermax that’s 4/168 (though they could start high and decline to make it less absurd and say they gave Rudy the “supermax”)
Click to expand...

It could be things other than the dollar number being negotiated. They could be close there but Rudy might not want any incentive bonuses and just want a straight guaranteed deal. There are a hundred points of negotiation in a contract, a lot of it depends on his agent. They might be changing verb tenses and even having meetings discussing what the definition of "is" is.
 
Joncolton said:
It could be things other than the dollar number being negotiated. They could be close there but Rudy might not want any incentive bonuses and just want a straight guaranteed deal. There are a hundred points of negotiation in a contract, a lot of it depends on his agent. They might be changing verb tenses and even having meetings discussing what the definition of "is" is.
Click to expand...
Um. It's

www.merriam-webster.com

Definition of IS

… See the full definition
www.merriam-webster.com www.merriam-webster.com
 
Joncolton said:
It could be things other than the dollar number being negotiated. They could be close there but Rudy might not want any incentive bonuses and just want a straight guaranteed deal. There are a hundred points of negotiation in a contract, a lot of it depends on his agent. They might be changing verb tenses and even having meetings discussing what the definition of "is" is.
Click to expand...
If I'm Rudy, I don't take any incentives. I get my money, from Utah...or I go somewhere I can actually win a title, like Dallas, and get it there. Either way, I'm not working for this money, if I'm Rudy. I already did the work. I'm getting respect with this deal.

And honestly, if I'm Rudy and Utah doesn't give me what I want, I demand a trade. Just end it now and let both sides move on.
 
green said:
If I'm Rudy, I don't take any incentives. I get my money, from Utah...or I go somewhere I can actually win a title, like Dallas, and get it there. Either way, I'm not working for this money, if I'm Rudy. I already did the work. I'm getting respect with this deal.

And honestly, if I'm Rudy and Utah doesn't give me what I want, I demand a trade. Just end it now and let both sides move on.
Click to expand...
Yeah it’s just tough to leave 140M on the table if they decide not to trade you. The injury risk is substantial.

If he won’t take a regular max deal I think they should move him. There has been good and bad things in the relationship but outside of the Covid issue we have really supported him in his development and tailored things to give him maximum impact. He’s done the work too and delivered but his next situation might not be perfectly suited to fit his game. It has some similarities to Hayward looking around and thinking the grass would be greener.

IDK but it feels like something weird is happening.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top