do NOT bring back George Hill

[jope]

Cool. You know what? He has missed half the season (actually he has played 6 games over half) and still has the 3rd most win shares on the team. He is the team's 3rd best player. I dont see any oppurtunity to add antoher player better than George Hill in the future unless we do some kind of blockbuster deal that let's us keep Hayward/Gobert while getting another All-Star.

Rodney Hood hasn't shown any improvement this year in his ability to stay on the court or be a consistent playmaker. Exum is still more of a prospect than a player. Favors has a more worrying injury rap-sheet and his style of play clearly isnt inline with what Snyder sees as his ideal PF. Those are the players who are up to get paid next. I'd rather keep George Hill over all of them. George Hill gives us the best chance to be a great team. Without George Hill you are praying on Hood and Favors to stop having chronic knee problems and for Exum to actually mature into a NBA PG and not just a perimeter defender who will periodically put on a faux PG hat.

You sign George Hill now and figure it out later. It gives us the best chance to compete next year. Hell next year might be our best chance for this core while we still have a capable Joe Johnson as well as Favors/Exum/Hood all motivated by contract years. If you don't re-sign Hill the Jazz would be lucky to build a better team with the next handful of years and the issue of paying the next contracts will always be present.

well said, and i agree. I am definitely still worried about it, but he is probably our best bet. Still on the fence about whether a worse-than-GH (but better than exum, neto, and mack) point guard playing 75 games is better than a great george hill playing 60 games, but i'd still probably pay hill and hope he stays healthy.

 

[jope]

I'm not terribly excited about the prospect of relying on Exum and Neto next year, but, that might be the best we can do unless we are willing to go into the luxury tax.

We've basically been doing the bolded for half the season already. that said, i'd like to keep hill but it's not the end of the world if we lose him.

 

[framer]

I think IF we were going to resign HIll the time to do so was a renegotiate and extend a few months back. The fact taht we didn't do so then leads me to believe that the two sides are so far apart on value that it will be impossible to resign him to a deal that the Jazz would feel comfortable offering. Further complicating matters is the Jazz salary structure which is ENTIRELY busted if we do sign Hill to a big deal.

I just don't think we can afford to keep him. I'm not terribly excited about the prospect of relying on Exum and Neto next year, but, that might be the best we can do unless we are willing to go into the luxury tax. And going into the tax is something I wouldn't do for this team. So, I don't expect Mrs. Miller to be willing either.

Jazz paid a lotto pick for half a season of George Hill. I think that will look really bad in hindsight. It's looking like either a bad decision that will end up a sunk cost, or DL will have to do some incredible financial gymnastics to keep HIll. I don't think DL has that kind of mojo.

We will see.

Naw, a 4/5 seed from being out of the playoffs is worth a late lottery pick. Playoffs are important. Winning is important.

 

[LogGrad98]

Cool. You know what? He has missed half the season (actually he has played 6 games over half) and still has the 3rd most win shares on the team. He is the team's 3rd best player. I dont see any oppurtunity to add antoher player better than George Hill in the future unless we do some kind of blockbuster deal that let's us keep Hayward/Gobert while getting another All-Star.

Rodney Hood hasn't shown any improvement this year in his ability to stay on the court or be a consistent playmaker. Exum is still more of a prospect than a player. Favors has a more worrying injury rap-sheet and his style of play clearly isnt inline with what Snyder sees as his ideal PF. Those are the players who are up to get paid next. I'd rather keep George Hill over all of them. George Hill gives us the best chance to be a great team. Without George Hill you are praying on Hood and Favors to stop having chronic knee problems and for Exum to actually mature into a NBA PG and not just a perimeter defender who will periodically put on a faux PG hat.

You sign George Hill now and figure it out later. It gives us the best chance to compete next year. Hell next year might be our best chance for this core while we still have a capable Joe Johnson as well as Favors/Exum/Hood all motivated by contract years. If you don't re-sign Hill the Jazz would be lucky to build a better team with the next handful of years and the issue of paying the next contracts will always be present.

3rd best player X half the games = 6th best player at best. Should get the 6th most money. Simple math.

 

[colton]

3rd best player X half the games = 6th best player at best. Should get the 6th most money. Simple math.

That's assuming players 4, 5, and 6 are exactly the same ability as player 3. If they are not, then your math is suspect.

 

[♪alt13]

Aren't the projections only a bit off from what they were last summer? IIRC it was 102 and now it is 101. I don't think that is big enough of a difference to change what Hill will be offered.

 

[Jazz4ever]

I love Hill. Great character guy, smart player, competes, and is our best option at point. That being said, we can't hamstring ourselves paying $20 mil for him, especially when he doesn't outclass our 2nd option commensurate to how big a hole that contract would dig for us. The Joes and Faves are players that can be had for reasonable-by-nba-standards who are the meat on the bones that every team needs to be able to compete. We go for Hill, we lose at least one of others. I'd rather have all 3 and Exum / Neto.

And how can you be so sure of this? Meat and potato players might be pretty high on a GM's list who has nothing but vegetables on his roster.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

That's assuming players 4, 5, and 6 are exactly the same ability as player 3. If they are not, then your math is suspect.

No dude, if Lebron misses half the season then a full season of Joe Ingles is clearly more valuable.

 

[Deleted member 848]

the stage is being set for George Hill dropping 40 tonight and upsetting GSW, and all of JFC jumping back on board.

 

[Thee Jazz Fan]

Dude, teh Jazz tried to extend him. They want him in Utah. Why do you feel like Hill is apathetic towards Utah exactly? Because he got injured?

We kind of got this PG right now who is averaging 17 ppg on the year with 40% 3pt shooting. His name is George Hill and he has been great when healthy. But we are blaming him for getting an injury?

And Rubio isnt a FA, he is under contract for 2 more years until the 2019/2020. And while I like Rubio, he is putting together his first competent run of scoring in his entire career and still remains a questionable 3pt shooter. And our offense is very questionable to work with Rubio's skillset. He needs the ball in his hands a lot and our offense shares a lot of playmaking with the wings. Would Rubio struggle more like he did with LaVine in the lineup? Very likely.

George Hill is the perfect fit. Let's just hope there isnt anyone willing to give him a max contract.

Cy dropping bombs on the haters. Same thing basically happened with Hayward only difference is that Hill isn't restricted, but like Hayward hill is letting the league determine his value.

Chances are no established teams are in dire enough need for a point guard that they are willing to overpay Hill. I doubt he gets what he's looking for and we can still outbid other teams without giving the amount he might want.

I think IF we were going to resign HIll the time to do so was a renegotiate and extend a few months back. The fact taht we didn't do so then leads me to believe that the two sides are so far apart on value that it will be impossible to resign him to a deal that the Jazz would feel comfortable offering. Further complicating matters is the Jazz salary structure which is ENTIRELY busted if we do sign Hill to a big deal.

I just don't think we can afford to keep him. I'm not terribly excited about the prospect of relying on Exum and Neto next year, but, that might be the best we can do unless we are willing to go into the luxury tax. And going into the tax is something I wouldn't do for this team. So, I don't expect Mrs. Miller to be willing either.

Jazz paid a lotto pick for half a season of George Hill. I think that will look really bad in hindsight. It's looking like either a bad decision that will end up a sunk cost, or DL will have to do some incredible financial gymnastics to keep HIll. I don't think DL has that kind of mojo.

We will see.

The jazz didn't extend Hayward a few seasons ago. They tried to get him at a discount, and Hayward chose to bet on himself for the bigger payout. How is that any different from what happened this year with Hill. Jazz tried for a discount while Hill is going to let the market determine his value. This doesn't mean they are far apart. It's good business on both sides

3rd best player X half the games = 6th best player at best. Should get the 6th most money. Simple math.

Well if this isn't the dumbest logic I've ever heard

 

[Thee Jazz Fan]

the stage is being set for George Hill dropping 40 tonight and upsetting GSW, and all of JFC jumping back on board.

I never got off the hill train, and I was against adding a pg in the first place. As far as pg's in General slipping around the age of 31, I don't think that applies to George Hill as he's more of a cerebral player who doesn't drive much and is more of a spot up shooter who doesn't rely on athletic ability as other pg's do. I see him as being in the mold of a Chauncey Billups who played at a high-level well into his mid-30s

 

[Deleted member 5000]

I shall comment post playoffs!