What's new
By:

Hayward has agreed to an offer with Hornets

Core4 said:
One article had the Jazz and Hayward "several million apart." I tend to believe that was on a per/basis. If it's just a few million over the life of the deal, you split the difference and call it a day.
Click to expand...

That was what I thought was dumb if true... if it was a few million over the life of the deal you can figure that out.
 
Core4 said:
One article had the Jazz and Hayward "several million apart." I tend to believe that was on a per/basis. If it's just a few million over the life of the deal, you split the difference and call it a day.
Click to expand...

The Jazz could have looked ahead to see who would be on the market this year. It was pretty clear that not many players would be available and any RFAs would get inflated deals. This is not a new concept. I also read the "several million apart". That same article said he wanted more than Favors put less than the max received by Paul George.

So yes, we would have overpaid him last year, but it would have been for a lower amount, probably $13-14M as I posted earlier.

The only way I wouldn't re-sign him is if I knew we had better long-term options for better value. That includes potential salary dumps for picks, etc. I'd be calling every team to see what they may have needs for and make an educated decision.

If nothing else is on my radar, I re-sign him knowing a 23% max hit on the cap won't hamper my ability to keep my team intact, while preserving flexibility to make other moves if necessary. If it was taking up our full cap, it would be a different argument.
 
The way the deal was constructed has to make one believe that Cash Gordon may not even want to be here. Also am afraid that the Jazz believe that Favors deal was so favorable (especially now) that they look at this CG deal as a no brainer and will match. I mean we probably would have lost one of them if the both were UFA's this offseason and I would think they would have paid Favors over Hayward. Now perhaps it has all just balanced out in the Jazz FO minds.
 
l Abach l said:
1)***** Ak’s contract was only 2 years longer. No way Hayward is traded after his third year. His contract was $86/6 years, or 14.3M per year. Hayward’s is $63/4, which is $15.75M per year. Gordon is getting paid more per year than AK was. I want to add that it was only in AK’s 2nd year of the max contract that we made the WCF, so that goes to show how fast a team can change after big signings. AK’s max signing affected the team going forward from that point, with 5 seasons that the Jazz could’ve used that salary cap space for other needs.
2)***** Silly argument. Every player has issues in the NBA. AK’s first 3 seasons he played 82, 80, and 78 games. After he signed the max, he played 69,70,72,67,58, and 64 games. Gordon on the other hand has played 72, 66, and 72 games in his first 3 seasons respectively. Who’s to say he won’t get hurt? Again, lame argument
3)***** And at our time, experts believe Gordon is nowhere NEAR the level of any other max player in the league.*
4)***** And the guy who’d rather play league of legends and starcraft (Platinum league – that takes a very long time reaching that) than work on his game is better?
5)***** Then why did AK look worse after D Will, Boozer, and Company arrive? He was taught by sloan. The system didn’t change. He just NATURALLY became the 4th option and 5th option.* Corbin tried to run the same system as Sloan.
6)***** Again, false. As I stated before, it was the 2nd year of his MAX contract that we went to the WCF. His 3rd and 4th year were prime years for the jazz to contend had we spent money on other players.
7)***** That’s a valid point that it doesn’t have the same impact on the team, however, the salary cap was $43M and then it jumped up $7M the next year to $50M.* The salary cap this last year was $59M and will rise $63M. The salary cap is always changing, but that doesn’t make signing right if the player is getting overpaid.*** https://basketball.realgm.com/nba/info/salary_cap
8)***** The year before AK signed the max, he was averaging 16ppg, 3 blocks, 3 assists, 6 rebounds, and shooting 49% from the field, which is better than what Hayward had his year before he got the max. Both are overrated versatile point forwards who had good stats during their contract years on crappy lottery teams.
Click to expand...

I am not going to respond to everything, but I disagree with a lot of your logic. The main point (which I capitalized) is number 7. The signing won't have the same impact on the team. Extending AK caused us to go over the cap in year 2 of the contract (just under $1M short of the cap in 2004/5). We are in a completely different boat. Maxing Hayward would leave us room for another max contract. So it isn't the same decision.

On another note, I am not a huge fan of Favors (don't think he has much upside), but the Jazz got him for a great price.
 
JAZZGASM said:
I am not going to respond to everything, but I disagree with a lot of your logic. The main point (which I capitalized) is number 7. The signing won't have the same impact on the team. Extending AK caused us to go over the cap in year 2 of the contract (just under $1M short of the cap in 2004/5). We are in a completely different boat. Maxing Hayward would leave us room for another max contract. So it isn't the same decision.

On another note, I am not a huge fan of Favors (don't think he has much upside), but the Jazz got him for a great price.
Click to expand...
Not really. You are forgetting cap holds going forward. I think we have about $12.5M left this year and will be right up against the cap next season.
 
Has it even been confirmed the offer will be 4 year 63 mil?
Reporters are wrong all the time.
Maybe it will be a lower figure.
 
Vermin said:
Also am afraid that the Jazz believe that Favors deal was so favorable (especially now) that they look at this CG deal as a no brainer and will match. I mean we probably would have lost one of them if the both were UFA's this offseason and I would think they would have paid Favors over Hayward. Now perhaps it has all just balanced out in the Jazz FO minds.
Click to expand...

Excellent point, V. Favors' deal in the final year is unbelievably cheap, and maybe they're sending the message that they're not going to waste the flexibility they just created by overpaying.

My only real issue with this is this line of reasoning means signing a **** ton of cheap vets since the potential has a mega-premium atm. I really don't want to hear any more mindless bitching from everyone about the vets.
 
franklin said:
Excellent point, V. Favors' deal in the final year is unbelievably cheap, and maybe they're sending the message that they're not going to waste the flexibility they just created by overpaying.

My only real issue with this is this line of reasoning means signing a **** ton of cheap vets since the potential has a mega-premium atm. I really don't want to hear any more mindless bitching from everyone about the vets.
Click to expand...

Different coach.. onto new bitching.
 
Hey guys, could you tell me more about how we could have gotten Chandler Parsons to Utah for $12 million?

Thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top