Burks 4 year $42 million extension!
- Thread starter Jazzyy
- Start date
GVC
Well-Known Member
Well, ****. Maybe it's time for a new GM then.
akirac73
Well-Known Member
I personally think $10.5M/year is okay for Burks. He's the only player on the team right now that has the potential to be an All-star. For those that think it's an overpay, I'm not going to argue. But my whole argument why the Jazz should've just let Hayward walk instead of matching that outrageous max contract was to avoid setting a precedent for other players on the team. This is just the collateral damage caused by the Hayward blunder...
If you play on the Jazz, you don't need to be an all-star or even be close to being an all-star to get paid, in fact, you can have a terrible season and still get a big raise. Damn, I wish in the "real world" employers gave raises based on this premise.
If you play on the Jazz, you don't need to be an all-star or even be close to being an all-star to get paid, in fact, you can have a terrible season and still get a big raise. Damn, I wish in the "real world" employers gave raises based on this premise.
Favors, Hayward and Burks are all quality assets that can fit with the future in Utah, along with Gobert and Exum. It's just Hayward who needs to step up to show he's not grossly overpaid. The guy I have a hard time with right now is Trey Burke, who doesn't do anything all that well, and can't be considered even an "average" starter.
Kanter is a guy who should probably be coming off the bench while he (tries to) evolve into whatever it is the coaching staff wants him to be. People are ready to throw him under the bus, but right now he's kind of a rich version of the Tristan Thompson/Nick Collison/Marese Speights guy you bring off the bench.
Kanter is a guy who should probably be coming off the bench while he (tries to) evolve into whatever it is the coaching staff wants him to be. People are ready to throw him under the bus, but right now he's kind of a rich version of the Tristan Thompson/Nick Collison/Marese Speights guy you bring off the bench.
fallenchicken
Well-Known Member
The Rubio contract makes me feel even better about this.
Hantlers
Well-Known Member
You're kinda slow, aren't you?
I think it's a great deal for both sides. 10.5 per seems like a lot, but salaries are going to go up fast if the salary cap goes up like it's expected to. We now have our 3 main players (other than burke, not going to add Kanter yet) at 35 million per year. That leaves over 40 million per year before getting into the luxury tax this year, and will almost certainly be more than that in 3-4 years.
The market for NBA players is a very well understood market. The comparables are all public. (hence the derozan and klay elements in this thread) Hayward's deal is indicative of the market situation and it is not like his deal all of a sudden shed some new light for the Burks team (agents etc). One of the posters in this thread did the math and noted that Burks' contract in "pre-new tv deal money" is $7.5M - which is very reasonable for him.
Also on the 'real world' note... the nba is the real world. It is a business where the very best performers on the planet get the market rate for their services. I have the luxury of being in a market space that has millions of others who do what I do. So that sets the market condition and sets my 'real world.'
And because there are so few who can be significant contributors in a 450 person market, a lot of risk taking occurs on the potential that they might. (Actually the number of persons that are debated as franchise players + significant contributors is maybe 60.) So in the case of Hayward having a bad year and getting a raise... it was a gamble by the Jazz hoping he becomes a 'significant contributor'. You can argue that it is bad bet, but is very much the real world.
Franklin and GVC I have an Honest question for you. Many times you have said that you would rather have Lance Stevenson over Hayward and now Burks. My question is 2 fold. #1 What does he do as a player that would make you want him. And #2 knowing what kind of person he is and knowing this market do you really think there is any way he would have signed here for the amount that he signed for? Plus would you really want a guy with his baggage on a team like we have right now?
I would have liked to have Ariza, But I don't think he comes here right now with the state of were we are in the rebuild with out giving him quite a bit more money than the contract he got.
Again this is an honest 2 part question. I know that after watching him play a lot last year. (really like PG and the Pacers system). I would not want him on this team even at the low contract he got from Cha.
As for this thread. I am in the majority, this is a little bit of an over pay, But really do we know what Burks can be as a player. He really hasn't had the court time given to him for us to judge that completely. He has definitely improved over the years. And the coaches and DL must be seeing that improvement plus what he is doing in practice to give him an extention like this.
I would have liked to have Ariza, But I don't think he comes here right now with the state of were we are in the rebuild with out giving him quite a bit more money than the contract he got.
Again this is an honest 2 part question. I know that after watching him play a lot last year. (really like PG and the Pacers system). I would not want him on this team even at the low contract he got from Cha.
As for this thread. I am in the majority, this is a little bit of an over pay, But really do we know what Burks can be as a player. He really hasn't had the court time given to him for us to judge that completely. He has definitely improved over the years. And the coaches and DL must be seeing that improvement plus what he is doing in practice to give him an extention like this.
Fishsticks
Banned
Jazz should have signed Lebron. This organization is stoopid
gregbroncs
Well-Known Member
I'm not a big fan of the $'s but it's a much more reasonable contract than Hayward got.
.
And I'm not worried about their ability to keep Kanter with this deal. Because frankly I've seen nothing from Kanter so far to suggest he should even be playing in front of Booker or Gobert.
.
And I'm not worried about their ability to keep Kanter with this deal. Because frankly I've seen nothing from Kanter so far to suggest he should even be playing in front of Booker or Gobert.
gregbroncs
Well-Known Member
I agree. The deal Favors got looks better and better for the franchise every time a contract is signed in the league.
I didn't see this posted here. It seems like the contract is backloaded rather than front-loaded:
Here is our salary cap situation explained by slcdunk.com: https://www.slcdunk.com/nba-free-ag...-updated-with-new-alec-burks-contract-details
/cdn2.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/2413072/Utah_Jazz_Roster_Salary_Updated_Burks_Info.0.PNG)
I wonder if we are even going to make the qualifying offer on Kanter? If we do, we won't have any flexibility whatsoever. We'd have 2 million more to spend and that's not taking into account the new rookies we will have to pay(lets say 1 million for second round rookie and, ~3 million for first round rookie), which would send us over the limit.
Here is our salary cap situation explained by slcdunk.com: https://www.slcdunk.com/nba-free-ag...-updated-with-new-alec-burks-contract-details
I wonder if we are even going to make the qualifying offer on Kanter? If we do, we won't have any flexibility whatsoever. We'd have 2 million more to spend and that's not taking into account the new rookies we will have to pay(lets say 1 million for second round rookie and, ~3 million for first round rookie), which would send us over the limit.
framer
Well-Known Member
I didn't see this posted here. It seems like the contract is backloaded rather than front-loaded:
Here is our salary cap situation explained by slcdunk.com: https://www.slcdunk.com/nba-free-ag...-updated-with-new-alec-burks-contract-details
I wonder if we are even going to make the qualifying offer on Kanter? If we do, we won't have any flexibility whatsoever. We'd have 2 million more to spend and that's not taking into account the new rookies we will have to pay(lets say 1 million for second round rookie and, ~3 million for first round rookie), which would send us over the limit.
If you have 2 million in Capspace, you will want to fill that up anyway so you can utilize your mid level exceptions. Being a hair under the cap isn't useful at all. There is another layer between the cap and the luxury tax. Having players on deals that are fair is a flexibility all its own because those players are valuable as trade assets. SO we need to carry every player that we can on a fair contract even if It takes us over the cap.