Burks and the Stretch 5

[Miggs]

Would anyone do this? I believe the way it works is if we cut him and use the stretch 5 provision, we would then pay him the remainder of his contract over the next five years. So he'd count 4.36M or thereabouts for each of the next five seasons.

If a trade doesn't happen, I had liked the idea but I'm now souring on it. That's a decent chunk of change eating into our cap for too long.

So would anyone else do this?

I say see what we have this year, trade him at the first chance we get (for an expiring) and count our blessings.

 

[seattlejazzfan]

I've been saying this for three off seasons of people saying the Jazz should or will trade Burks- forget it. The jazz love this guy. Quin loves Burks. He's a great locker room guy. Teammates love him. The Jazz understand how important it is to have bad asses on the team. Burks is one of two- maybe three now with D-Mitch.

Bottom line, Burks isn't going anywhere.

Sent from my LG-K540 using Tapatalk

 

[Miggs]

You don't keep a good locker room guy who's a badass (I don't think he is at all) but never plays around for 10+M per.

 

[infection]

At first I thought you were suggesting to play him as a stretch 5. But I'd rather just eat the next two years unless having him will cost us Hill or Ingles.

 

[fishonjazz]

You don't keep a good locker room guy who's a badass (I don't think he is at all) but never plays around for 10+M per.

You think if I guy misses time that he will always miss time? The future will always be the same as the past?
Interesting idea/concept

 

[Thee Jazz Fan]

I still think Burks can be our scorer off the bench, and if Hayward leaves he becomes very important to the jazz.

 

[Bodhi]

Who?

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Who?

He is saying we should cut Burks and stretch his contract out, like the Pistons have done for Josh Smith.

It's a terrible idea. You dont want to be stuck paying 4.25 million dollars a year for the next 5 years to a ghost.

 

[Bodhi]

Mine was a sweet dad joke I'm sure no one has done, ever, when it comes to Burks.

 

[Ron Mexico]

If there is a player we are going to lose or a player we can sign that we don't have room for, sure. If not no. I would rather just roll the dice with him and trade him later.

It also doesn't look good for the team to do this. It hurts relationships with agents.

 

[Jaymz]

Don't cut the man out early if he's finally ready to contribute!!

Sent from my SM-G900V using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[Jack Strop]

I still think Burks can be our scorer off the bench, and if Hayward leaves he becomes very important to the jazz.

Agree. And if he can be healthy - at all - his trade value goes from negative (i.e. would have to give up assets to dump his contract) to positive. With cap holds, Jazz really can't move the needle that much by stretching his contract. One more year and then he's an expiring contract. If Hayward re-signs, Burks is expendable. If Hayward leaves, Burks will get 20+ minutes.

 

[Miggs]

You think if I guy misses time that he will always miss time? The future will always be the same as the past?
Interesting idea/concept

I'm not sure if this is a shot at my post and/or logic or at someone else in some other thread but I'll address the statement regardless.

Burks missed 40 games last year. He missed 51 the year before that. And 55 the season before that.

So he's averaged playing just 33 games a year for the last three seasons. That's not a small sample size and needs to be considered. Heck, even in his first three seasons, Burks missed 15 games a year on average.

The guy just can't stay remotely healthy and for that reason (and his salary), I started the thread.

 

[fishonjazz]

I'm not sure if this is a shot at my post and/or logic or at someone else in some other thread but I'll address the statement regardless.

Burks missed 40 games last year. He missed 51 the year before that. And 55 the season before that.

So he's averaged playing just 33 games a year for the last three seasons. That's not a small sample size and needs to be considered. Heck, even in his first three seasons, Burks missed 15 games a year on average.

The guy just can't stay remotely healthy and for that reason (and his salary), I started the thread.

Fwiw those first three years were due to dnp, not injury.

I think seattlejazzfan (the person you responded to when saying burks can't get on the court) was talking about a healthy burks. Which is what I expect to see to start the season.