Burks / Kanter extensions ???
- Thread starter ijazz
- Start date
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
I would be surprised if the Jazz don't at least extend them an offer. I would also be surprised if either of them take that offer given what we all know about the amount of cash teams are going to have available next year, in addition to their likely belief that they are going to have great seasons. Of course, they just saw Gordon get paid after a not so great season. It does seem strange that we haven't heard a single thing.
Sexual Favors
Well-Known Member
We have heard stuff, but appears some us didn't tune it or missed it. In a nutshell, Dennis Lindsey has said he wants to keep both and that he sees them as "longtime Jazz men." Burks told, I think it was Jody, that he would like to have a deal before the season, but that he'll be alright other way. Kanter's response has been he wants to be a Jazz man, but this is in his agents hands, as Kanter's focus right now is preparing for the season.
So, both players want to be here, and Dennis Lindsey wants them, but everyone knows how much money is at stake. A part of me thinks the Jazz should try extremely hard to ink them now, so noone is going rogue for stats this season under a new coach. If the contracts look big now, they will still be deals in the future, but without the circus and distrust from fans concerning the RFA process.
All this new money has created a stalemate, and is extremely important to agents like Kanter's, since Enes is his only client.
So, both players want to be here, and Dennis Lindsey wants them, but everyone knows how much money is at stake. A part of me thinks the Jazz should try extremely hard to ink them now, so noone is going rogue for stats this season under a new coach. If the contracts look big now, they will still be deals in the future, but without the circus and distrust from fans concerning the RFA process.
All this new money has created a stalemate, and is extremely important to agents like Kanter's, since Enes is his only client.
The new TV contract is rumored to increase the salary cap as much as 50% So that puts the salary structure in the following light (you capologists please adjust with more legit numbers).
The existing money strategy, as laid out by David Locke a while ago was 'Pay your stars $40 to $45M. This was your "big three." in the case of miami, it was LBJ, DW, CB all making $17, and thus their star allotment was $51 - on the high end. The remaining was allocated to pay your 2nd and 3rd tier players. The question is will this same theory hold - paying your big three set fraction of the cap - or can there now exist a situation where a 'core4 or core5' (or core6?) can be a strategy?
So $45M increased 50% means about 67. Thus you can pay 5 players around $13M. If you look at Hayward's contract in this perspective he's getting $16 going forward on the new cap dollars and about $11-12M on the old cap valuation - which puts him about right IMO. I think because of human or psychological element, offering to pay EK and AB each about $12M would seem like a lot but it is not in 'new cap $$' Just like Hayward is paid on "new cap $$"
So...
question #0: will the old-cap new/cap $$ even make a difference? (the money just fills in the same partitioning of the money, its just larger bins.)
question #1: is it even possible to think that a Core 5 of very good "near all stars" could be a contender? We have Pistons as the only sample of this. Do you consider the "older duncan & ginobili" spurs this also?
question #2: does the Jazz actually have a enough of a core to do this?
question #3 how do you see paying the core in 'new cap $$'
The existing money strategy, as laid out by David Locke a while ago was 'Pay your stars $40 to $45M. This was your "big three." in the case of miami, it was LBJ, DW, CB all making $17, and thus their star allotment was $51 - on the high end. The remaining was allocated to pay your 2nd and 3rd tier players. The question is will this same theory hold - paying your big three set fraction of the cap - or can there now exist a situation where a 'core4 or core5' (or core6?) can be a strategy?
So $45M increased 50% means about 67. Thus you can pay 5 players around $13M. If you look at Hayward's contract in this perspective he's getting $16 going forward on the new cap dollars and about $11-12M on the old cap valuation - which puts him about right IMO. I think because of human or psychological element, offering to pay EK and AB each about $12M would seem like a lot but it is not in 'new cap $$' Just like Hayward is paid on "new cap $$"
So...
question #0: will the old-cap new/cap $$ even make a difference? (the money just fills in the same partitioning of the money, its just larger bins.)
question #1: is it even possible to think that a Core 5 of very good "near all stars" could be a contender? We have Pistons as the only sample of this. Do you consider the "older duncan & ginobili" spurs this also?
question #2: does the Jazz actually have a enough of a core to do this?
question #3 how do you see paying the core in 'new cap $$'
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
Question #1 yes and yes
#2 yes if our coach is elite
#3 I like what you came up with... burks and kanter around 12 million to go along with haywards contract. Plus favors deal.
I think our core 4 is a solid group of players and trey, gobert, exum, and hood will compliment and round out the team nicely.
ijazz
Well-Known Member
What is interesting is what Cuban wants.
He wants it to work like football. No Max per player so superstars can get MEGA money.
HOWEVER, he also wants to make the guaranteed part of the contract negotiable as well.
If he has any influence that will be interesting.
I think Bball is the only sport with these long fully guaranteed contracts....
In which case it would behoove Burks/Kanter to sign now...
eKep in mind Hayward can walk in 3 years with his player option....that would suck if he became a beast and left that early
He wants it to work like football. No Max per player so superstars can get MEGA money.
HOWEVER, he also wants to make the guaranteed part of the contract negotiable as well.
If he has any influence that will be interesting.
I think Bball is the only sport with these long fully guaranteed contracts....
In which case it would behoove Burks/Kanter to sign now...
eKep in mind Hayward can walk in 3 years with his player option....that would suck if he became a beast and left that early
GVC
Well-Known Member
1. Contracts don't need to be fully guaranteed in the NBA, and some aren't.
2. 4 or 5 year contracts aren't really that long. Contrary to what you posted, the MLB and NHL have longer contracts, with the former generally being fully guaranteed (IIRC). In the NHL, a team must pay 2/3 the remaining value of a contract to buy out a player aged 26+.
3. The stretch provision provides quite a bit of wiggle room for teams that make a mistake by overpaying.
4. Keep in mind, the players have to agree to any changes. It's unlikely that the median NBA player is going to shrug their shoulders, give up guaranteed money, and gladly give up a cap on max contracts (which effectively redistribute revenue to lower caliber players).
GVC
Well-Known Member
0. Margins should get better for owners under the current CBA, so more owners may be willing to dip into the luxury tax. Otherwise, depending on how they phase in the increase in revenues, things should stabilize fairly quickly since NBA contracts are relatively short.
1. 5 near all-stars? Some players who missed the all-star game last season? Cousins, Lowry, Jefferson, Dragic, Drummond, Ibaka, Kawhi, Klay Thompson, Lance Stephenson, Gordo, Parsons, Wes Matthews, Isaiah Thomas, Ty Lawson...A little thin on the wing, but you might be able to construct a championship team with the right timing.
2. The Jazz still need to add talent IMO. The roster as is might be able to make the playoffs in a couple years, but I don't see how the current collection of players ever turns into a 50+ win team.
3. No idea.
GVC
Well-Known Member
Another? The owners locked the players out in both 1998 and 2011.
Jazz4ever
Well-Known Member
It's not necessarily the players who are holding up the talks. We really don't know how DL values either of these guys. Kevin Pelton was telling Locke based on his advanced stat predictions, he would only offer Burks 6-8 million a year. And said he wouldn't offer Kanter anything significant. We just don't know.
My 2 cents on these questions:
0- I think it does make a difference and so there will be a near term window for a 'balanced' (pay wise) team to make some noise. OKC is in a good spot with young "big 2" to keep them and some good, well paid 2nd tier players.
1 - I think the spurs have shown this is possible, (some draft luck prolly still necessary) And the overt imitation by the Jazz, will show that it can be emulated with success.
2 - I think the Jazz are a piece or two away, just from the probabilities. If Gobert breaks out or if Exum breaks out for example, Jazz would have the right pieces.
3. Pay Burks. I don't need any more time to evaluate that. Kanter is still TBD.
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
And he may be right.
I'm still not sold on Kanter. He has to show me something defensively. Also, the emergence of Gobert makes playing Favors some at PF a real possibility. Then the Jazz go with someone like Booker and draft a PF to develop.
I think the priority will be to get Burks signed, but not if the deal is too rich. I'm perfectly ok with Hayward and Hood as the starting wings if Alec doesn't return. However, as noted, Hayward can opt out in 3 years and will likely get offers >$20M. Even with a bigger cap, that's still a lot of money for a guy who isn't a star.
Hotdog
Well-Known Member
I think you have to at least try to get them at a decent bargain. Especially with possibility of the cap increasing. I'd offer both around 8-10 and see if they take it. We don't want to get stuck paying another Hayward deal.
There are more reasons to extend them now, than there is not to imo. I'm never gonna count on saving our cap space for some great free agent. I don't have that kind of faith in our team. I kinda think we should go all in on this homegrown team thing. We have to pay somebody anyways. Might as well bite on some potential. Both Burks and Kanter still have a bunch of potential.
There are more reasons to extend them now, than there is not to imo. I'm never gonna count on saving our cap space for some great free agent. I don't have that kind of faith in our team. I kinda think we should go all in on this homegrown team thing. We have to pay somebody anyways. Might as well bite on some potential. Both Burks and Kanter still have a bunch of potential.
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
^^^
Agree with Hack. You certainly extend an offer to each one. Even if you miss on Kanter (or Burks), a contract in the $8-10M range isn't devastating. It's only for 4 years. I don't see either accepting an offer that low. Unfortunately, Hayward getting a max deal from Charlotte really distorts values.
Agree with Hack. You certainly extend an offer to each one. Even if you miss on Kanter (or Burks), a contract in the $8-10M range isn't devastating. It's only for 4 years. I don't see either accepting an offer that low. Unfortunately, Hayward getting a max deal from Charlotte really distorts values.