John Hollinger Thinks Conley May Opt Out

Saint Cy of JFC

Well-Known Member
theathletic.com/1710471/2020/10/14/hollinger-predicting-all-41-nba-player-and-team-options-for-2020-free-agency/

"(October update) Conley’s option is technically an Early Termination Option (ETO), not a player option – the only one this summer. Functionally, it’s the same thing. Between Conley’s scoring dip in Utah this season and a likely frigid market for veterans of any stripe, there seems virtually no chance that he passes up a number this large for the uncertainty of free agency.

But let me throw one wild card scenario out there: What if the Jazz and Conley agreed to a deal before he opted out, one that would pay him a lower dollar amount over a longer period? The Jazz could theoretically tack on three years and, say, $35-40 million (probably roughly what Conley could do as a 33-year-old free agent in 2021), but average it out over the four years including this coming one. In total, that deal would be four years and roughly $70-75 million, but would halve his 2020-21 cap number to about $17 million.

The Jazz could do a LOT with an extra $17 million below the tax line — it potentially allows them to re-sign Jordan Clarkson with Bird Rights, add another free agent with their full midlevel exception, use their biannual exception, and trade Ed Davis and one of their other fungible contracts for another player … all while staying below the tax. For a Utah team undone in the playoffs by a severe lack of quality depth, this path has to be somewhat tempting.

That makes it a fun scenario to ponder. I’d still bet against it happening, though. Verdict: Yes"
 

whatthe

Well-Known Member
That kind of money available in this market would be a huge boon. Then you could stretch his contract in his last year paying him 3 million a month or trade it. I think he could play backup for a couple of years.
 

Joncolton

Well-Known Member
I would just just rather rip the band aid off, give him the one year and have him hit the bricks. Otherwise, we will be lamenting why we are paying a 37 year-old has-been $17M a year.
They could always still trade him at the deadline, and at that price he becomes a lot more tradeable. With his current price tag, you are limited to teams that are interested in cap space for next season, and you have to venn diagram those with the rosters that have 30 million dollars worth of assets they want to get rid of that the Jazz might be remotely interested in.
 

Handlogten's Heros

Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
They could always still trade him at the deadline, and at that price he becomes a lot more tradeable. With his current price tag, you are limited to teams that are interested in cap space for next season, and you have to venn diagram those with the rosters that have 30 million dollars worth of assets they want to get rid of that the Jazz might be remotely interested in.
Not with that many years.
 

Handlogten's Heros

Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
If he went 3/52 I’d consider it... 4 years is bananas... this really doesn’t really open up any space... just allows us to use exceptions without hitting the tax.
 

Joncolton

Well-Known Member
If you sign him to a 4 year - you are planning on using him as backup PG. Which 17 for a good backup PG is reasonable. John Stockton was still in his prime at 35/36 years old. Now, NO ONE had Stockton-Malone style longevity. But with nutritional supplements of the day and "load management" - I could see Conley being very efficient in a back up role through the age of 37/38 - even one of the best in the NBA.
 

idiot

Well-Known Member
Interesting scenario. though it would take someone more cap savvy than I am to weigh the costs/benefits to the Jazz, both this year and beyond.

By the way, does anyone happen to know when his decision (or other player option scenarios, for that matter) come due in our present situation?
 

Handlogten's Heros

Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
Interesting scenario. though it would take someone more cap savvy than I am to weigh the costs/benefits to the Jazz, both this year and beyond.

By the way, does anyone happen to know when his decision (or other player option scenarios, for that matter) come due in our present situation?
It would kinda screw us up after the next year and it would provide only monetary benefits... we could still use our exceptions and retain JC... just means we’d be in the tax. I don’t know what our exceptions will get us... but I’m guessing it isn’t really meaningful.
 

LogGrad98

Well-Known Member
Contributor
I would just just rather rip the band aid off, give him the one year and have him hit the bricks. Otherwise, we will be lamenting why we are paying a 37 year-old has-been $17M a year.
This. Or, ideally, trade him for a wing or 2, or even a ham sandwich.
 

Handlogten's Heros

Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
This actually does not help us use our exceptions this year unless we plan on signing one year deals... which doesn't net you as good a player or nets you a better player but only for a year until more cap space opens up. This really isn't something we should do.
 

Handlogten's Heros

Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
We honestly should be hunting for what we could get in trade for Mike... Not sure anything great turns up but if you are planning on JC and DM being around long term its not an ideal fit. I am still eyeing Philly and what they do... Wondering how big the premium they will pay to get off of Al Horford's money.
 

FAILED STATE

Well-Known Member
We honestly should be hunting for what we could get in trade for Mike... Not sure anything great turns up but if you are planning on JC and DM being around long term its not an ideal fit. I am still eyeing Philly and what they do... Wondering how big the premium they will pay to get off of Al Horford's money.
This is where I’m at.

The idea of keeping Conley until he’s ~35 years old makes me ****ing sick, tbh.
 

l Abach l

Well-Known Member
If you sign him to a 4 year - you are planning on using him as backup PG. Which 17 for a good backup PG is reasonable. John Stockton was still in his prime at 35/36 years old. Now, NO ONE had Stockton-Malone style longevity. But with nutritional supplements of the day and "load management" - I could see Conley being very efficient in a back up role through the age of 37/38 - even one of the best in the NBA.
Even then Stockton was past his prime by the time he was 35. Players rarely maintain that level of production...
 

Handlogten's Heros

Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
There is also part of this that has to do with the current financial cap stuff. There is a chance that the cap stays the same or stays with the original projection but that the escrow moves from 10% to 25%. Normally the players will get the escrow back at the end of the year but next likely not. So Mike's cap number will be 34m but his actual earnings would be more like 26M. So giving back 17M now is not a full 17M.

Anyway, I don't see it as viable as it just makes the rest of the cap planning murky and provides nothing of real value other than like some payday loan type financing for the owners.
 
Top