Clarkson Likely to Get Extension

[416Klawzz]

My heart wants him to stay but my brain says it is wiser to trade him, it's tough because he loves it here.

 

[Coach Ellis]

My heart wants him to stay but my brain says it is wiser to trade him, it's tough because he loves it here.

I go back and forth, but essentially I think they end up keeping him and getting an extension done.

Ryan Smith loves him. JC really does seem to enjoy being here. Every team needs a guy like JC, very few actually have one. I don’t think a crazy offer is going to come down the line, and the Jazz would be better off trying to keep him after he hits free agency at that point. If anybody else really wants to sign him in free agency, they’d trade for his bird rights ahead of the deadline.

 

[416Klawzz]

I go back and forth, but essentially I think they end up keeping him and getting an extension done.

Ryan Smith loves him. JC really does seem to enjoy being here. Every team needs a guy like JC, very few actually have one. I don’t think a crazy offer is going to come down the line, and the Jazz would be better off trying to keep him after he hits free agency at that point. If anybody else really wants to sign him in free agency, they’d trade for his bird rights ahead of the deadline.

I hope it plays out that way I'm one of the biggest JC fans on here heck I'm the president of his fan club lol but sadly I don't think we have enough money to keep him

 

[candrew]

Clarkson never said he wants to be traded. Don't believe anything Monty says...he's full of ****.

Guys like Monty exist because of the gaping holes in the Utah sports media. All of the beat writers with the exception of Tony Jones are terrified reporting anything that might piss of the Jazz franchise or the players.

 

[LogGrad98]

Guys like Monty exist because of the gaping holes in the Utah sports media. All of the beat writers with the exception of Tony Jones are terrified reporting anything that might piss of the Jazz franchise or the players.

Yes they don't want to lose access to their "sources", and if you piss them off too much, they stop talking to you. Being a sports writer is a balancing act, between calling it like you see it, warts and all, and keeping the sources happy so they keep feeding you info. Hard to always seem impartial in those circumstances.

 

[HermanG]

I want to return to this topic, since we ended up keeping Clarkson and risking him walking for free. I have few theories I wanna run through you guys. But before that, lets look at the timeline.

What has been reported:
- September 29th Tony Jones reported that Clarkson is more likely to get extended than traded
- November 23rd Jake Fisher reported that Jazz wants to keep both Clarkson and Markkanen and are not taking calls about them
- Early December the focus turned more on Markkanen, while extension with Clarkson was still considered as the most likely outcome
- Between Dec 22nd and January 7th there were multiple reports that extension talks were ongoing but that they didnt lead to a deal
- January 16th Clarkson himself said that he hadnt had any extension talks and wasnt aware of any talks by his representatives
- Later in January it became public knowledge that the trade DL untouchables were Lauri, Walker and Ochai... not JC
- There was another report this week that we are open to the possibility of extending Clarkson after the season

If we compare that to the timeline of how we have played, its clear that early season Clarkson was more of an untouchable player who played Hardy's brand of basketball. Then after Lauri emerged as the consensus best player, it started to look more like Clarkson is playing for his next bag. But after the team "annointed" Lauri as the guy based on the film session after which Hardy also started to use the term "#1 guy", Clarkson returned more towards his early season form passing more again.. and has been dangling between the selfish and team ball styles on a per game basis ever since.

Considering we didn't trade Clarkson, I would like for people to say which of the following theories is closer to the truth? I'm personally leaning on #2.

Theory #1 is that organisation and Clarkson are on the same page, and we are confident that we can retain his services and willing to do so.

Theory #2: We are uncertain about him in the team. This essentially means Clarkson is auditioning for the rest of the season and we want to see what brand of basketball he ends up playing. We were not ready to trade him cheap yet, but we also might not want to resign him to starter money at the end of the year.

 

[Release the Kraken]

I want to return to this topic, since we ended up keeping Clarkson and risking him walking for free. I have few theories I wanna run through you guys. But before that, lets look at the timeline.

What has been reported:
- September 29th Tony Jones reported that Clarkson is more likely to get extended than traded
- November 23rd Jake Fisher reported that Jazz wants to keep both Clarkson and Markkanen and are not taking calls about them
- Early December the focus turned more on Markkanen, while extension with Clarkson was still considered as the most likely outcome
- Between Dec 22nd and January 7th there were multiple reports that extension talks were ongoing but that they didnt lead to a deal
- January 16th Clarkson himself said that he hadnt had any extension talks and wasnt aware of any talks by his representatives
- Later in January it became public knowledge that the trade DL untouchables were Lauri, Walker and Ochai... not JC
- There was another report this week that we are open to the possibility of extending Clarkson after the season

If we compare that to the timeline of how we have played, its clear that early season Clarkson was more of an untouchable player who played Hardy's brand of basketball. Then after Lauri emerged as the consensus best player, it started to look more like Clarkson is playing for his next bag. But after the team "annointed" Lauri as the guy based on the film session after which Hardy also started to use the term "#1 guy", Clarkson returned more towards his early season form passing more again.. and has been dangling between the selfish and team ball styles on a per game basis ever since.

Considering we didn't trade Clarkson, I would like for people to say which of the following theories is closer to the truth? I'm personally leaning on #2.

Theory #1 is that organisation and Clarkson are on the same page, and we are confident that we can retain his services and willing to do so.

Theory #2: We are uncertain about him in the team. This essentially means Clarkson is auditioning for the rest of the season and we want to see what brand of basketball he ends up playing. We were not ready to trade him cheap yet, but we also might not want to resign him to starter money at the end of the year.

I’ve read as late as last month that his representation’s target is 18 to 20 and that the Jazz couldn’t make that offer till the end of the season due to cap constraints. I expect to eventually see him resigned in that range.

 

[Tremendous Upside]

I’ve read as late as last month that his representation’s target is 18 to 20 and that the Jazz couldn’t make that offer till the end of the season due to cap constraints. I expect to eventually see him resigned in that range.

That would be an absolute disaster.

 

[Release the Kraken]

That would be an absolute disaster.

I disagree. He’s proven that he’s on the clutch ladder for a reason. He’s made the transition to starter and won more games for us in crunch time than Don ever did. I think mgmt intends to take the training wheels off next season trade our top ten protected in the offseason and compete. With the infusion of talent we got in trades, our window opened sooner than anticipated imo.

 

[HermanG]

I’ve read as late as last month that his representation’s target is 18 to 20 and that the Jazz couldn’t make that offer till the end of the season due to cap constraints. I expect to eventually see him resigned in that range.

I know that. I even referenced the entire press timeline in my post (left out those kinds of details to concise the post).

However the question was, are we certain we are going to keep him or are we still evaluating him?

 

[Agent#00]

My guess is he want to know his market value and decide from there. All about getting paid. Maybe if another team offer a ridiculously large amount he will move. But if it's close he will stay.

Then we trade him for 2 FRP lol

 

[Release the Kraken]

I know that. I even referenced the entire press timeline in my post (left out those kinds of details to concise the post).

However the question was, are we certain we are going to keep him or are we still evaluating him?

I think it’s a done deal.

 

[fishonjazz]

I want to return to this topic, since we ended up keeping Clarkson and risking him walking for free. I have few theories I wanna run through you guys. But before that, lets look at the timeline.

What has been reported:
- September 29th Tony Jones reported that Clarkson is more likely to get extended than traded
- November 23rd Jake Fisher reported that Jazz wants to keep both Clarkson and Markkanen and are not taking calls about them
- Early December the focus turned more on Markkanen, while extension with Clarkson was still considered as the most likely outcome
- Between Dec 22nd and January 7th there were multiple reports that extension talks were ongoing but that they didnt lead to a deal
- January 16th Clarkson himself said that he hadnt had any extension talks and wasnt aware of any talks by his representatives
- Later in January it became public knowledge that the trade DL untouchables were Lauri, Walker and Ochai... not JC
- There was another report this week that we are open to the possibility of extending Clarkson after the season

If we compare that to the timeline of how we have played, its clear that early season Clarkson was more of an untouchable player who played Hardy's brand of basketball. Then after Lauri emerged as the consensus best player, it started to look more like Clarkson is playing for his next bag. But after the team "annointed" Lauri as the guy based on the film session after which Hardy also started to use the term "#1 guy", Clarkson returned more towards his early season form passing more again.. and has been dangling between the selfish and team ball styles on a per game basis ever since.

Considering we didn't trade Clarkson, I would like for people to say which of the following theories is closer to the truth? I'm personally leaning on #2.

Theory #1 is that organisation and Clarkson are on the same page, and we are confident that we can retain his services and willing to do so.

Theory #2: We are uncertain about him in the team. This essentially means Clarkson is auditioning for the rest of the season and we want to see what brand of basketball he ends up playing. We were not ready to trade him cheap yet, but we also might not want to resign him to starter money at the end of the year.

#2
and we should have traded him. I think he had good value.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I know that. I even referenced the entire press timeline in my post (left out those kinds of details to concise the post).

However the question was, are we certain we are going to keep him or are we still evaluating him?

I think everything is fluid on both sides. I don’t think there was a first rounder out there for him so that might be telling as to how much he can get on the open market. If we keep him I hope it’s a 3 year deal at like 50-60M (he’s worth more but may not get it)… I would also have the deal decline in vale year over year.