What's new
By:

Hayward has agreed to an offer with Hornets

jimmy eat jazz said:
A lot of angst might be saved if we all just recognized this simple truth: Being a MAX player in today's market doesn't mean some is a MAX PLAYER, it simply means someone is willing to pay him a maximum salary. In different market conditions, being a MAX player could well have a different meaning. For better or for worse, Hayward entered the market in an offseason where there is a butt load of money available together with slim pickings for quality FAs. His agent anticipated this and advised Hayward correctly. What annoys me is that the Jazz FO didn't anticipate this. If, as some reports indicate, the initial talks broke down because the Jazz wanted to pay $12 million, while Hayward wanted $13 million, then this is on the Jazz FO. They lacked the foresight to anticipate what the market would be (unlike Hayward's agent) and because they got all tightfisted over a relatively paltry amount, they are going to end up paying a lot more, or lose their valued asset. Very short sighted in my opinion. Should have just paid him the extra $1 million per year rather than be penny wise and pound foolish.
Click to expand...

This is the real issue... we bet $4 M against $12 M. This and we wiped Hayward out as an asset during draft time... supposedly Locke hinted that if we could send Hayward and 5 we could have got #1... We should have been able to predict this.

This oversight and the last two trades we've made (the good second rounder in a deep draft for a future second rounder in a few years and the Novak deal) have taken the shine off of DL for me. I still think he's a smart dude, but think he left a lot on the table with these two deals (even though they are small deals).
 
colton said:
All teams do that, for that exact reason. It's the main reason why the waiting period was changed from 7 days to 3 days in the last CBA.
Click to expand...

I'm not reading the full 30 million pages of the thread to find out the deets on the trade kicker.

Can anyone sum up what the trade kicker is and how that impacts the jazz if they match?

Sorry if you've gone over it already.

TIA
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
This is the real issue... we bet $4 M against $12 M. This and we wiped Hayward out as an asset during draft time... supposedly Locke hinted that if we could send Hayward and 5 we could have got #1... We should have been able to predict this.

This oversight and the last two trades we've made (the good second rounder in a deep draft for a future second rounder in a few years and the Novak deal) have taken the shine off of DL for me. I still think he's a smart dude, but think he left a lot on the table with these two deals (even though they are small deals).
Click to expand...
Can you imagine the uproar on this board had Lindsey signed Hayward to a MAX deal last summer. I don't think there was ONE person in favor of doing that. Hindsight is great, isn't it?

As for the 2nd-rounder, "meh." It was going to be a draft and stash. The Euros Lindsey liked were probably off the board already. So we gave up a decent 10th/11th guy on the bench for a similar pick next year. It's not that big a deal. And Novak, you're seriously criticizing Lindsey for not holding out for one more 2nd-rounder (I assume that's your problem with the deal)?
 
Triangle Man said:
I'm not reading the full 30 million pages of the thread to find out the deets on the trade kicker.

Can anyone sum up what the trade kicker is and how that impacts the jazz if they match?

Sorry if you've gone over it already.

TIA
Click to expand...

There are two "toxic" aspects of the contract:
1. A trade kicker simply makes the contract value go up 15% at the time of the trade for the remainder of the contract. For example, if the Jazz were to match on July 11th and trade him on July 12th, the contract would become 4 years/$72.5M.

2. There is a player opt out after year 3. This is very important because a player with 7 years of NBA experience can get much more money than one at 0-6 years. Gordon is limited to 25% of cap space right now, but can get 30% after 7 years. Technically, the max is calculated as a percentage of BRI, so it's closer to maybe 23%/28% of the cap.
 
Core4 said:
Can you imagine the uproar on this board had Lindsey signed Hayward to a MAX deal last summer. I don't think there was ONE person in favor of doing that. Hindsight is great, isn't it?

As for the 2nd-rounder, "meh." It was going to be a draft and stash. The Euros Lindsey liked were probably off the board already. So we gave up a decent 10th/11th guy on the bench for a similar pick next year. It's not that big a deal. And Novak, you're seriously criticizing Lindsey for not holding out for one more 2nd-rounder (I assume that's your problem with the deal)?
Click to expand...

Just felt like we wanted 2nd rounders in the Novak deal when we had turned around and basically given away a really good second rounder a week earlier. Plenty of draft and stash guys left. Both deals we pretty meh... but I just thought he was one of those guys who squeezes as much value as he can out of things. I do think he could have got more from Toronto, would have pushed for a first rounder or no deal. We took on 7 M of salary and got a 2016 second rounder. Boston just took on $8 M and got a better player, Zeller, and a first rounder... just saying.

I would think you of all people would hate the Novak deal... It is the difference price wise between a reasonably signed Hayward and a Maxed out Hayward.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
Just felt like we wanted 2nd rounders in the Novak deal when we had turned around and basically given away a really good second rounder a week earlier. Plenty of draft and stash guys left. Both deals we pretty meh... but I just thought he was one of those guys who squeezes as much value as he can out of things. I do think he could have got more from Toronto, would have pushed for a first rounder or no deal. We took on 7 M of salary and got a 2016 second rounder. Boston just took on $8 M and got a better player, Zeller, and a first rounder... just saying.

I would think you of all people would hate the Novak deal... It is the difference price wise between a reasonably signed Hayward and a Maxed out Hayward.
Click to expand...

Why? It's 3.6M/per for 2 years.
Jazz are either spending that or giving it away as bonuses to other players if they finish below the floor. $3.6M does not preclude them for doing anything else. It doesn't set a bad precedent for upcoming negotiations with Kanter, Burks, Gobert and Burke.

I suggested the Jazz take Thornton two days ago. Jazz should have pursued it. Yes, I agree; Boston got a great deal.
 
Core4 said:
Like Atlanta did for Millsap after the market settled down and they swooped in as one of the only teams left with the cap space to get him.
Click to expand...

So your solution is to just wait everything out and pick up the scraps that no one wanted bad enough?
 
Doublea said:
So did the jazz ever give an offer to hayward?
Click to expand...

During the season yes. There were rumblings that they were preparing an offer for free agency but no word on if it was actually delivered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top