7StraightIsGreat
Well-Known Member
In all of the fallout that has become Gordon's offer sheet with the Hornets, I'm seeing a ton of Jazz fans complain that Hayward is not worth the max, and many others draw a comparison to Kirilenko's bad max deal and how it screwed the Jazz. Not too surprising. Most fans on here go for the easy, low hanging fruit when the decide to bitch about something. A few thoughts:
-I'm sick of hearing that Hayward isn't a "max" player as if there is a standard max for every player in the NBA. The max for guys with more years under their belt like Lebron and Melo is higher than Hayward's "max". Hayward is not good enough to be the face of a franchise, but only a handful of NBA players are, and they make more money than G-Time. (Rookie deals of a few superstars being the only exception)
-When resigning Kirilenko, Utah was bidding against themselves and yet somehow managed to max out AK in money and years. This time around, they let the market dictate Hayward's value, and once the deal is matched, Utah is on the hook for a shorter term.
-Kirilenko's contract ate up 30% of Utah's cap room each year. With the new salary cap #'s coming in today, it looks like year 1 of Hayward's deal will eat up just under 23% of Utah's cap room. And while Hayward's contract has a modest increase each year, it sounds like with new TV money being distributed in 2015, the cap will grow to the point in which there's a better than average chance that the last 2 years of Hayward's contract takes up less than 20% of Utah's cap. Bottom line: The thought that Hayward's deal will handcuff the Jazz as bad as Kirilenko's is a misguided, lazy argument.
-Is Hayward still getting over paid? Absolutely, but it's much more palatable than all of the knee jerk complainers would have you believe. The Parsons offer sheet just reinforced the open market value on Hayward. Lindsay is matching and he is making the absolute right decision. Those who can't stomach that will just have to be content bitching and moaning for the next 4 years.
-I'm sick of hearing that Hayward isn't a "max" player as if there is a standard max for every player in the NBA. The max for guys with more years under their belt like Lebron and Melo is higher than Hayward's "max". Hayward is not good enough to be the face of a franchise, but only a handful of NBA players are, and they make more money than G-Time. (Rookie deals of a few superstars being the only exception)
-When resigning Kirilenko, Utah was bidding against themselves and yet somehow managed to max out AK in money and years. This time around, they let the market dictate Hayward's value, and once the deal is matched, Utah is on the hook for a shorter term.
-Kirilenko's contract ate up 30% of Utah's cap room each year. With the new salary cap #'s coming in today, it looks like year 1 of Hayward's deal will eat up just under 23% of Utah's cap room. And while Hayward's contract has a modest increase each year, it sounds like with new TV money being distributed in 2015, the cap will grow to the point in which there's a better than average chance that the last 2 years of Hayward's contract takes up less than 20% of Utah's cap. Bottom line: The thought that Hayward's deal will handcuff the Jazz as bad as Kirilenko's is a misguided, lazy argument.
-Is Hayward still getting over paid? Absolutely, but it's much more palatable than all of the knee jerk complainers would have you believe. The Parsons offer sheet just reinforced the open market value on Hayward. Lindsay is matching and he is making the absolute right decision. Those who can't stomach that will just have to be content bitching and moaning for the next 4 years.
