Extensions, baby!

[Jack Strop]

It's more a realization of the fact that if we want a bargain contract on our hands, we have to take chances. The 29 other teams are not going to sit by and let us sign our own free agents for below market value.

This kind of plays into the Hayward situation. I GUARANTEE had Utah signed him for $14M/per, the very same posters who want Dennis' head, who claim the "disrespect" Hayward felt for being low-balled was one of the reasons for him leaving, would have lit up this board with screams of "overpay." They would have called Dennis a fool for giving in to Hayward because no other team would have offered more than $10m/per with Gordon coming off such a bad year.

Washington just did the EXACT SAME THING with Porter. Otto thought he was worth more than what Washington was offering. Washington vowed to match any offer (gee, does that sound familiar)? Porter found someone to give him a max offer sheet (hmm, where have I heard that before?). Does Porter feel outraged? I doubt it. That's why there's something called free agency.

I might try to get Hood signed to an extension. It's dangerous if he remains streaky and can't stay healthy. Exum? That's a good question. I'm just not sure. Rubio may always be a better starter. And he's still young. And at the 2, Jazz now have Mitchell.

 

[♪alt13]

This kind of plays into the Hayward situation. I GUARANTEE had Utah signed him for $14M/per, the very same posters who want Dennis' head, who claim the "disrespect" Hayward felt for being low-balled was one of the reasons for him leaving, would have lit up this board with screams of "overpay." They would have called Dennis a fool for giving in to Hayward because no other team would have offered more than $10m/per with Gordon coming off such a bad year.

Washington just did the EXACT SAME THING wit Porter. Otto thought he was worth more than what Washington was offering. Washington vowed to match any offer (gee, does that sound familiar)? Porter found someone to give him a max offer sheet. Does Porter feel outraged? I doubt it. That's why there's something called free agency.

I might try to get Hood signed to an extension. It's dangerous if he remains streaky and can't stay healthy. Exum? That's a good question. I'm just not sure. Rubio may always be a better starter. And he's still young. And at the 2, Jazz now have Mitchell.

DL gets paid a lot. It was his job to see that the risk was real low to overpay Hayward because the cap was likely to go up a lot. Even after it was clear to everybody that the cap was about to explode(nearly double) DL still was uber conservative. The man himself has admitted he made a mistake. I think it is OK for us JFC to acknowledge it.

 

[Jack Strop]

When is the extension deadline for both?

If we can get that massive trade exception in a sign and trade from Boston then I'd feel good giving them extensions in the same price range that Cy mentioned.
Hood 4/60
Exum 4/40

If we can't get that exception then I would be nervous jumping the gun though. Hood is a career 41% shooter who has only been healthy for one year. Exum is still an unknown. Without Hayward the teams future is a question mark. We have to find a way to put a couple star players around Rudy. As of right now our cap space over the next few years is one of our few ways to do it.

Extend Hood and Exum and there's no cap room. Jazz also start bumping up against the tax. Why do you feel good if we get the trade exception (which I find unlikely, btw)? To use the exception means adding massive salary. Starks and the board may approve paying the tax for 1-2 years, but Utah won't be a repeat offender. I guarantee that.

Case in point: I read GS is at $137M right now with 13 players. With the tax, they will be paying $188M if what I read is accurate. The tax threshold is $121M, IINM. So $16M over nets them a penalty of $51M. That sounds pretty steep to me...wondering if it's true.

By comparison, Jazz would have been at ~$125M had Hayward signed.

 

[♪alt13]

Extend Hood and Exum and there's no cap room. Jazz also start bumping up against the tax. Why do you feel good if we get the trade exception (which I find unlikely, btw)? To use the exception means adding massive salary. Starks and the board may approve paying the tax for 1-2 years, but Utah won't be a repeat offender. I guarantee that.

Case in point: I read GS is at $137M right now with 13 players. With the tax, they will be paying $188M if what I read is accurate. The tax threshold is $121M, IINM. So $16M over nets them a penalty of $51M. That sounds pretty steep to me...wondering if it's true.

By comparison, Jazz would have been at ~$125M had Hayward signed.

I actually think that you either want to be well below the cap or just below the lt. Being at the cap sucks in the same way that being a treadmill team that finishes ninth is. At the cap you have no flexibility but you also have few meaningful contracts to deal. If you are at the cap you are low on at least one of; talent, experience, or depth.

Generally below the cap=good , at the cap=probably bad, above the cap & below the lt=good if improving, above the lt=better be a contender

 

[Jack Strop]

I actually think that you either want to be well below the cap or just below the lt. Being at the cap sucks in the same way that being a treadmill team that finishes ninth is. At the cap you have no flexibility but you also have few meaningful contracts to deal. If you are at the cap you are low on at least one of; talent, experience, or depth.

Generally below the cap=good , at the cap=probably bad, above the cap & below the lt=good if improving, above the lt=better be a contender

Completely agree. Jazz were in decent shape had Hayward remained. They would have been slightly above the tax with Hayward's deal. Contender? Not quite. But a move or two could have brought them just below the tax.

Now they're in that possible limbo area. They have too much committed to sign a high-priced FA, because to do so means getting under the cap. In some ways, they are like the Celtics. Boston has to shed some depth. But Celtics also have some very highly regarded rookies to restock with and future high picks. Utah doesn't, outside of Mitchell.

 

[SCS]

Extend Hood and Exum and there's no cap room. Jazz also start bumping up against the tax. Why do you feel good if we get the trade exception (which I find unlikely, btw)? To use the exception means adding massive salary. Starks and the board may approve paying the tax for 1-2 years, but Utah won't be a repeat offender. I guarantee that.

Case in point: I read GS is at $137M right now with 13 players. With the tax, they will be paying $188M if what I read is accurate. The tax threshold is $121M, IINM. So $16M over nets them a penalty of $51M. That sounds pretty steep to me...wondering if it's true.

By comparison, Jazz would have been at ~$125M had Hayward signed.

That's what I'm saying. If we extend Hood and Exum then we have no cap room. We would be fully reliant upon young guys developing into the players we need at that point. In my opinion we are two impact players away from being in the championship mix. With the exception we are theoretically only one away because it can be flipped in a trade for an all star if we wait for the right opportunity. So I would feel better about paying Hood and Exum in that situation. I think we could develop one all star level talent. Developing two would take a ton of luck.

 

[Cappy_Smurf]

The problem is that letting a soon-to-be RFA`s recent play dictate his value, is lazy work. You have to make a qualified guess as to how good this player will be down the road. By simply judging him by his prior performances, you give up the edge you have of seeing this player every day as part of the team.

I know, and I appreciate all the armchair GMs who have expertise in this area. Fact is, without a crystal ball, it's impossible to know for sure which players will have a steady development, getting better every year, and which ones are at/close to their ceiling. No such thing as a sure thing, and hindsight makes everybody an expert.

All you can do is run the numbers, and then factor in how many teams will have money to spend, how many other FAs might be more desirable, who has needs, etc., etc., etc,...

Yeah, I get it, some fans think FOs should never get a call wrong, but hey are just human, same as you and me.

The funny thing to me, is if Derrick Favors had held out, he would have likely been maxed out as well. Then we'd have a fan base complaining that DL should have just maxed Haywood and should have known not to match Favors, because these people who don't own crystal balls should still have a way to get everything right.

 

[Cappy_Smurf]

This kind of plays into the Hayward situation. I GUARANTEE had Utah signed him for $14M/per, the very same posters who want Dennis' head, who claim the "disrespect" Hayward felt for being low-balled was one of the reasons for him leaving, would have lit up this board with screams of "overpay." They would have called Dennis a fool for giving in to Hayward because no other team would have offered more than $10m/per with Gordon coming off such a bad year..

People around the league were laughing at Charlotte for making that offer, and then at us for matching. Lots of people were predicting that to be a negative value contract. It worked out for us, but it could have easily turned into a Chandler Parsons type contract.

DL played the odds and lost, and because of that, people act like from now on he should bet against the odds. In reality, sometimes you do things the right way and they still don't work out right.

If DL made a mistake, it was misjudging his loyalty to the team. Just from post season interviews, it seemed clear to me Haywood wanted out. DL and Quin had to have known the same thing, and were gambling that Haywood would stay due to the pressure of not wanting to be hated. Hopefully they won't make that mistake again.

 

[♪alt13]

LMAO.

Because it's not like he could play better this year, so let's make statements based on what we saw last year.

Would you rather I made statements based on what I have yet to see?

(Btw I was high on Gobert while many here were still complaining about his hands. That kid showed potential the second he flew into SLC. Even when I squint at Exum he still looks like a turkey necked kid that isn't very good at basketball)

 

[Bawse Dawg]

Do what you think is best but Hoood WILL get a huge deal from someone. If Tim Hardaway get it then Hood will easily. Letting a dude go into RFA gets you a better deal 0% of the time. If you aren't sure about the future of Hood and Exum then fine see what happens, maybe keep one who you'd end up maxing.

Super risky move is to do the extensions right now for the best deal and pray. Could totally cripple us if we give Exum like $12 million and then he still stinks we are screwed.

Decent move is to let them earn it and then midway trough the season re-evaluate. But they will only get more expensive if they are 'earning' extensions.

I think if I could get both for $30 million I'd just do it. **** it. I'm optimistic. If you wait and they earn it then it costs you $10 million extra minimum.

 

[Hedda Gambler]

I know, and I appreciate all the armchair GMs who have expertise in this area. Fact is, without a crystal ball, it's impossible to know for sure which players will have a steady development, getting better every year, and which ones are at/close to their ceiling. No such thing as a sure thing, and hindsight makes everybody an expert.

All you can do is run the numbers, and then factor in how many teams will have money to spend, how many other FAs might be more desirable, who has needs, etc., etc., etc,...

Yeah, I get it, some fans think FOs should never get a call wrong, but hey are just human, same as you and me.

The funny thing to me, is if Derrick Favors had held out, he would have likely been maxed out as well. Then we'd have a fan base complaining that DL should have just maxed Haywood and should have known not to match Favors, because these people who don't own crystal balls should still have a way to get everything right.

I know that making these decisions are hard, but that is why the GMs get paid the big bucks. These guys are around the team and the players all the time and if anyone should be able to make an educated guess about how a player is going to develop, it is the GM`s and coaches of his current team.

That being said, this are obviously huge risks involved here. You have to make the decisions that make the most sense than and there and let whatever happens, happen. If you start getting results oriented, you have already lost.

 

[Coach Ellis]

I'd extend Hood, but probably wait on Dante. Hood is going to get a lot more minutes and opportunities to shine. His shooting is going to be critical on a team lacking outside shooting. He's going to put up numbers even if he struggles. Dante has Rubio in front of him, and while he looks better, I'm not sure anyone is going to see him as such a star player and starting PG that they'll make an offer that would be hard to match. I'm happy if they both get extended, but I'd do Rodney for sure.