Hayward has agreed to an offer with Hornets

[bjunior]

i kind of want the jazz to not match now

hayward and bi al together.. this guys can miss the playoffs next year, even in the east, they deserve each other

 

[The Midnight]

I've been saying this for it feels like 20 years. But if you let him walk--what else are you going to do with the money. Shut up with that false-macho "he doesn't deserve it/he's ungrateful/players these days" horse ****. Seriously, that's the most obnoxious **** Utah fans do. Malone shook Larry upside down until car dealerships fell out--and you better believe the owners see these players as commodities. If it was beneficial to us, we'd trade Hayward. This contract is beneficial to Hayward. He was absolutely right to go looking for it and to sign it.

If you're offended by it, you are a nutcase and should be in a straitjacket.

The only question we should be debating in this thread is: is Hayward the best we can get for the money at this point in time? If not, what else are we going to spend the money on? Are we worried about paying Kanter so we let Hayward walk (the answer to this better be a resounding no). Does it make sense to let this player we've developed walk away for nothing--out of pride that we don't want to pay market price for him?

Is there a better way to spend the money at this point in time? Personally, I don't think there's a better option, at this point in our rebuild. I am not interested in maxing Greg Monroe. I'd much rather max Hayward. I think he's still the best value in our potential market. I think in two years his contract could become trade able.

Ballsy move by the Hornets, I ain't mad. But they're not getting Gordon unless there's some interesting trade to be made here that I don't know about. Resign him. Aged jocks on the forum take a deep breath. Count to goosfraba. It's unfortunate, but matching is likely the best move.

Exactly.


I would rather offer a guy like Greg Monroe the MAX or Parsons around $10-$12m.

 

[fishonjazz]

If he had come out and proved he was a #1 option to the tune of 22 6 and 6 with good percentages, like some were predicting, do you know what he would've been offered? This exact contract. Just doesn't seem right. He was disappointing this year, few deny that. And no one was talking about a max deal last offseason.

Making too much sense here bawse dog

 

[Nate505]

I must admit.... very mike dunleavyesque

I'm on the same side of the fence. His skill set is decent, but nothing amazing that I've seen so far. Though I'll give him the benefit of the doubt with the Ty effect he had to deal with for nearly his entire career.

 

[fishonjazz]

shooting guard that can't really shoot.

Over 35 percent from three. MUCH better than hayward.
Quite a bit better than derozan.

Not bad at all

 

[Twin Towers]

Kanter and Burks are more important to this team then Hayward IMO. Hayward has reached his cap. I don't care if someone is young. He isn't going to be a go to scorer. EVER! but he can average 5 rebounds and 5 assists.
Signing Hayward to this contract is going to stop us from signing Burks and Kanter. This is why its a dumb move.
Its short sided to think about just NOW("At this point and time"). and not the future and our flexibility. Hayward is not going to make or break this team with his game. But with is contract he will. He just had high usage next to a rookie PG and a washed up VET. So he got tons of touches which allows his assists and points to go up.
His touches will go down next year with us because we have more talent and an actual system. And he is going to end up looking like the role player he is. And everyone is going to be calling for his head.
Short term satisfaction is signing him. Long term pain. Just a idiotic move.

 

[8]

Jazz were behind the times. They didn't have any max players, until now! They have entered the club.

The subsequent Hayward blog entries will be epic.

 

[fishonjazz]

what else are you going to do with the money.

After signing hayward we still have enough to max another player..... so by your logic, why not pay jimmer 15 million per? I mean we have the money right? Lets spend it!

 

[Doublea]

Reactions to Haywards contract:

Fans:

 

[NUMBERICA]

Hope the kid can finally buy a ****ing haircut.

 

[fallenchicken]

After signing hayward we still have enough to max another player..... so by your logic, why not pay jimmer 15 million per? I mean we have the money right? Lets spend it!

We could get Jimmer for less than a million!

Come on fish, troll better.

Parsons is interesting but. Is he better than Hayward? Is this a bird in the hand type thing?

 

[gandalfe]

When Andre got his max deal it really put me off, but now I have come to realize that this is the curse of the NBA. I blame it on the agents, they keep telling the players that they are worth more and it fills their heads with delusions. They really should have given him what he wanted in an exception. Now it is probably more with means to try and make it hard to match. And then, even if they match it, it will limit what we can do in the future. We can't come close to max on every up and coming talent that the team gets. Twelve for Favors, max for Hayward, eight to ten for Burks, ten for Trey, eight to ten for Kanter, max for Exum, How much is a 7'2 center with the wingspan of a condor going to demand if he gets as good as we think he can? Hayward is a support player, you don't pay them over ten mil if you expect to go anywhere. Add to that that he has the self confidence of a chinchilla and I am starting to agree, don't match.

You talk about the agent filling Hayward's head with delusions, and yet, here's proof that a max deal is what the market will bear: He got a max deal.

20 years ago, he wouldn't have gotten this much. 10 years ago, he wouldn't have. Hell, maybe even 5 years. But the league is changing. Also, frankly, his versatility is worth a lot to any team.