Kanter's future extension
- Thread starter b_line
- Start date
b_line
Well-Known Member
Rep'd. Also, I didn't know that burks had played more than kanter. ( even if it is negligible)
![[size/HUGE] fixed [/size]](/data/avatars/m/2/2497.jpg?1511131091){kind=avatar}
[size/HUGE] fixed [/size]
Well-Known Member
IF Kanter earns a max extension
+
IF the jazz land Wiggins or Parker
THEN I'd probably start rooting for a trade involving Hayward (s&t) and Burks for a proven elite player. So, we'd roll with a Big 4.
I'm very happy Lindsey et al didn't cave during the Hay negotiations.
+
IF the jazz land Wiggins or Parker
THEN I'd probably start rooting for a trade involving Hayward (s&t) and Burks for a proven elite player. So, we'd roll with a Big 4.
I'm very happy Lindsey et al didn't cave during the Hay negotiations.
[size/HUGE] fixed [/size];689720 said:
Seriously. Even I'm a bit surprised at the divide in experience/impact between Kanter and Hayward. Definitely not worth what he was asking, especially if teams don't buy his fake numbers (lowest PER since his rookie year [where he spent nearly every game he played in 2010 as a disastrously bad player]).
But Hayward may be able to be retained for reasonable money. Bear in mind that Bledsoe is also an RFA this coming offseason. If Evan Turner continues to play anything like he is right now then he might be in more demand than Hayward.
Last edited:
Randle for Rondo and Jabari at five, mata'usi.
This MAX everyone is obsessed over is two years from taking effect if it ever does and the Jazz are not in cap danger yet. You don't worry about paying a max player, you worry about not having a max-worthy player and Kanter is on track to be worth it. Additionally, you want the Jazz to trade their closest thing to a starting C (because he's strong enough to defend the post and bully) and their only big that can shoot so that Favors would be forced to guard the biggest player on the floor no matter what (which he doesn't want to do)? I'm not even going to go down the road of Kanter also being the only big on this team with the talent to get his own shot in post on top of his floor spreading because Favors has shown significant improvement to his game.
Besides, if Randle can be a perimeter 4, why would you NOT want TWO bigs that can space the floor??? Besides, your post assumes a whole lot of **** that is really not something under the Jazz's control.
Furthermore, the Jazz already have an extra Favors-esque talent on the team in case you wanted to trade him. Let's get stupid:
Burke (if he pans out)/who cares
3&D/3&D
Wiggins/3&D/Randle
Randle/Gobert
Kanter/Gobert
Looks pretty cool on paper to me (intriguing frontline would be Randle, Gobert and Kanter provided that Randle can guard on the perimeter and shoot well enough).
Last edited:
^fwiw.. Randle is much more of a perimeter 4 (shooting and driving) than a hang-around-the-basket 4. There is no doubt about that.
He's a taller, stronger rich man's Milsap. Though that isn't a great comp.. it's one most around here will at least kinda get.
He's a taller, stronger rich man's Milsap. Though that isn't a great comp.. it's one most around here will at least kinda get.
Hayward gets a bit of a pass from me until Trey Burke gets back. Hayward is trying to do more than he's capable of right now. Ultimately, I still see him as a Dan Majerle-type player--play off the ball, spot up, make straight-line drives, etc.
Regarding Kanter, he'll a ~20/10 player with decent instincts on defense and enough size and quickness to guard either frontcourt position. The Jazz are very unlikely to get fair value back for him in a trade.
If we really can draft Julius Randle, we should start all 3 bigs together, play Randle as a big 3 (like a Lamar Odom) and use Kanter to space the floor if need be. Then sub out Kanter or Favors (depending on match-ups and fouls) and let Randle go to work at the 4.
Regarding Kanter, he'll a ~20/10 player with decent instincts on defense and enough size and quickness to guard either frontcourt position. The Jazz are very unlikely to get fair value back for him in a trade.
If we really can draft Julius Randle, we should start all 3 bigs together, play Randle as a big 3 (like a Lamar Odom) and use Kanter to space the floor if need be. Then sub out Kanter or Favors (depending on match-ups and fouls) and let Randle go to work at the 4.
Two rebuttals to people who think that Kanter should not/will not get a max contract.
1) There's no real definition about what a "max player" is. It's extremely nebulous/impossible to firmly delineate. It doesn't necessarily mean that he's the same caliber of player as a Paul George or a Kyrie Irving (though I believe he will be shortly). The fact that they cap payment under the terms of the CBA means that players in the "max" category will automatically be unfairly compensated. If you got rid of the max % of a team's salary that a player could earn, guys like Lebron, Durant, etc. would command (and get) ungodly amounts of money. Conversely, lesser players who are offered max contracts are overpaid when you look at other players earning the same money.
Point being, just because Player X isn't as good as Player Y doesn't mean that they're not both max players.
2) Contracts are not based on past performance. They are based - 100% - on projected future value. The Jazz will pay Kanter max (or near max) money for his predicted performance between ages 23 and 27. Sure - today, at 21 - he might not be worth $14M/per, or whatever the max extension is, I don't know. But Kanter at 25? With more polish and 3-4 years of physical maturity? Dude could be 25-15 every night. That's worth the max, no question.
1) There's no real definition about what a "max player" is. It's extremely nebulous/impossible to firmly delineate. It doesn't necessarily mean that he's the same caliber of player as a Paul George or a Kyrie Irving (though I believe he will be shortly). The fact that they cap payment under the terms of the CBA means that players in the "max" category will automatically be unfairly compensated. If you got rid of the max % of a team's salary that a player could earn, guys like Lebron, Durant, etc. would command (and get) ungodly amounts of money. Conversely, lesser players who are offered max contracts are overpaid when you look at other players earning the same money.
Point being, just because Player X isn't as good as Player Y doesn't mean that they're not both max players.
2) Contracts are not based on past performance. They are based - 100% - on projected future value. The Jazz will pay Kanter max (or near max) money for his predicted performance between ages 23 and 27. Sure - today, at 21 - he might not be worth $14M/per, or whatever the max extension is, I don't know. But Kanter at 25? With more polish and 3-4 years of physical maturity? Dude could be 25-15 every night. That's worth the max, no question.
green
Well-Known Member
I'd want to see him play the rest of the year, but if he continues to struggle around the rim, I'd strongly consider it.
You can also add to these facts that Enes picked up a basketball for the first time in his life only seven years ago. Now he is playing against the likes of Dwight Howard at the highest level.
I didn't see the games but I'm glad he's doing well. Hopefully the Jazz will start to winning as well, as I see from the stats and recaps, all three games were very winnable.
Bawse Dawg
Well-Known Member
We can't possibly keep all of these guys. Even without Hayward. We need to trust Lindsey and accept the fact that some of our favorite players won't be along for the long run.
Favors: $12 million
Kanter is apparently max.
Burke is probably at least Mike Conley money (about $8.5)
I love Burks, but i'm sure he wants to start, and I doubt we get him for less than $8 million, if we are lucky. Unfortunately i'd say Burks has the best chance of being gone. Unless he just really loves the sixth man role. (which I doubt.)
And aren't we all hoping/expecting to get a max player in this draft?
Assuming we become contenders with Wiggins/Randle/Parker I'd say our best window is before that player gets their first contract. After that contract the best you can do is hope we can keep three of these guys.
Edit: But if possible could someone please tell me how it could work? Because I would love for all the guys to stick together, I just don't see it. I think about this way more than I should. Takes some of the fun out of getting excited for the future....
Favors: $12 million
Kanter is apparently max.
Burke is probably at least Mike Conley money (about $8.5)
I love Burks, but i'm sure he wants to start, and I doubt we get him for less than $8 million, if we are lucky. Unfortunately i'd say Burks has the best chance of being gone. Unless he just really loves the sixth man role. (which I doubt.)
And aren't we all hoping/expecting to get a max player in this draft?
Assuming we become contenders with Wiggins/Randle/Parker I'd say our best window is before that player gets their first contract. After that contract the best you can do is hope we can keep three of these guys.
Edit: But if possible could someone please tell me how it could work? Because I would love for all the guys to stick together, I just don't see it. I think about this way more than I should. Takes some of the fun out of getting excited for the future....
Also, don't forget that Kanter is averaging an impressive 2.5 volley ball spiked balls to the face. I'm just kidding of course (numbers are real), and I was happy with his progress in last game. His D needs work.
I see and understand your point, but it is erroneous. If you overpay a player for their production, they essentially become a negative asset and would then be hard to move while also having the most punitive effect on the salary picture. Then the team has to look at trading a net negative asset for something of comparable value unless they get lucky. Overpaying a player (at least in the longterm) can and does have massive roster ramifications even if a team's salary situation looks good for a few foreseeable years.
The only time a team can accept having a net negative asset is a contender that is getting contributions from an overpaid player that still improves them and gives them a better chance for a championship. The Jazz shouldn't be concerned with such a fringe scenario as it has the most minimal upside and tons of downside.
[size/HUGE] fixed [/size]
Well-Known Member
I said earlier that if Kanter is legit max, and if we get Wiggins or Parker in this upcoming draft, then I'd look to trade Hay and Burks for a legit star. That gives us a big4 through Wiggins/parker's rookie deal. Surround these guys with good distributors and defenders and you prolly have a contender.