So let me get this straight... AK got his contract after posting 16.5pts, 8.1reb, 3.1ast, 1.9 stl, 2.8blk in a season where he was an ALL-Star and the second only player in NBA history to finish in both top 5 steals and blocks and some of you guys called it toxic and overpaid and whatever other names.... Now both Favors and Hayward getting almost same deals yet their numbers are not even close to AK's and you think it is good deals?
AKs got progressively higher and it was for 6 years. The 6 years was the biggest killer.
So let me get this straight... AK got his contract after posting 16.5pts, 8.1reb, 3.1ast, 1.9 stl, 2.8blk in a season where he was an ALL-Star and the second only player in NBA history to finish in both top 5 steals and blocks and some of you guys called it toxic and overpaid and whatever other names.... Now both Favors and Hayward getting almost same deals yet their numbers are not even close to AK's and you think it is good deals?
My point is at least AK had stats to justify it. Favors and Hayward getting theirs purely on potential.
6years 86M.... That's 14m average and ties the franchise up!!
Plus the cap was a lot lower then, so you'd have to rescale things accordingly.
That being said, I don't believe the numbers that are being tossed around here for Hayward. Or, if they are correct, it's clearly a mistake on the Jazz's part.
That's intellectually dishonest. Purely on potential is a rookie. We've seen them produce in minutes they get. Is some on potential? Sure. But not "purely"
.
Richer Cuz a 5 year deal!!
Trying not to freak the fudge out right now.
Do teams not realize that restricted free agency is a thing and acts to dramatically lower prices on players?
This is me as well
If by richer they mean like 5yrs/50 mil I'm down, if they mean richer like 5yrs/65 mil I'm terrified. It's not impossible to live up to, but it's damn close.