What's new
By:
Filters

Official Re-Sign Mike Conley Thread

Unless Mike signs for a crazy cheap deal, the tax ramifications are going to be absolutely bonkers if the Jazz retain him.
 
Would you trade Conley for Beal right now?
 
Alright, so here’s how I’d put this:

After this season, Mike will have $210M in career basketball earnings alone. He once had the largest contract in NBA history. When you look at three common things players value, you probably see money, winning (title contention, specifically), and legacy topping the list. You can always argue that human nature always wants more money, don’t neglect the non-monetary value of the other, as one may see the financial cup overflowing while the others sit half-filled.

What does a two-year deal with the Jazz come out to? (I don’t know precisely and won’t speculate, but it’s likely not less than $5M per [being conservative]).

What does a two year deal with LA look like? Well, they’re over the cap, so it’s the MLE, so just shy of $10M/yr. So if you presume a two-year deal with us at half the cost, or anywhere else on MLE, you’re looking at total career basketball earnings difference of about 4% ($230M vs. $220M). That’s assuming he retires after those two years.

So then you have to look at title chances and legacy. The two obviously overlap in a lot of ways. Yes, you may get a title as a ride-along with the Lakers. He could even be a key veteran, but the team will be remembered as LeBron and AD.

So Mike will be 34 by next season, and his years of being a key contributor are more limited. He spent 12 years with another franchise and then made what’s he’s acknowledged as a tough transition last year and the narrative that anyone will remember is that he had a bad year. How much would that weigh on his mind of the potential to burn up another year before getting acclimated and comfortable somewhere? Mike has now adjusted and is playing incredible basketball for a team that a quarter of the way through the season has the best record in the league, with him being a large reason for that.

What I think it really boils down to is if we’re legit. If we fizzle out early in the second round or get bumped in the first round then yes, this is different calculus. But if we win it all, or we’re in the finals, or go to 7 games in a WCF series, then it totally changes the equation when you’re looking at leaving a team that you’re already settled in as a key contributor to jumping to another contender that, while perhaps increasing your odds, introduces a whole host of other variables. What does snagging a championship as a key player in Utah vs. as a clinger-on in LA do for legacy? Maybe Mike doesn’t see it that way. And I’m not saying he has a much larger shot at a title here than in LA, but this scenario is contingent on us proving that we’re right there at the gate. If we’re not at the gate come next summer, then obviously none of this applies.
 
infection said:
Alright, so here’s how I’d put this:

After this season, Mike will have $210M in career basketball earnings alone. He once had the largest contract in NBA history. When you look at three common things players value, you probably see money, winning (title contention, specifically), and legacy topping the list. You can always argue that human nature always wants more money, don’t neglect the non-monetary value of the other, as one may see the financial cup overflowing while the others sit half-filled.

What does a two-year deal with the Jazz come out to? (I don’t know precisely and won’t speculate, but it’s likely not less than $5M per [being conservative]).

What does a two year deal with LA look like? Well, they’re over the cap, so it’s the MLE, so just shy of $10M/yr. So if you presume a two-year deal with us at half the cost, or anywhere else on MLE, you’re looking at total career basketball earnings difference of about 4% ($230M vs. $220M). That’s assuming he retires after those two years.

So then you have to look at title chances and legacy. The two obviously overlap in a lot of ways. Yes, you may get a title as a ride-along with the Lakers. He could even be a key veteran, but the team will be remembered as LeBron and AD.

So Mike will be 34 by next season, and his years of being a key contributor are more limited. He spent 12 years with another franchise and then made what’s he’s acknowledged as a tough transition last year and the narrative that anyone will remember is that he had a bad year. How much would that weigh on his mind of the potential to burn up another year before getting acclimated and comfortable somewhere? Mike has now adjusted and is playing incredible basketball for a team that a quarter of the way through the season has the best record in the league, with him being a large reason for that.

What I think it really boils down to is if we’re legit. If we fizzle out early in the second round or get bumped in the first round then yes, this is different calculus. But if we win it all, or we’re in the finals, or go to 7 games in a WCF series, then it totally changes the equation when you’re looking at leaving a team that you’re already settled in as a key contributor to jumping to another contender that, while perhaps increasing your odds, introduces a whole host of other variables. What does snagging a championship as a key player in Utah vs. as a clinger-on in LA do for legacy? Maybe Mike doesn’t see it that way. And I’m not saying he has a much larger shot at a title here than in LA, but this scenario is contingent on us proving that we’re right there at the gate. If we’re not at the gate come next summer, then obviously none of this applies.
Click to expand...

If Mike were to love it here and he’d take a discount there is still no reason we can’t sell high- trade him for assets and sign him again after the year is over.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
infection said:
Alright, so here’s how I’d put this:

After this season, Mike will have $210M in career basketball earnings alone. He once had the largest contract in NBA history. When you look at three common things players value, you probably see money, winning (title contention, specifically), and legacy topping the list. You can always argue that human nature always wants more money, don’t neglect the non-monetary value of the other, as one may see the financial cup overflowing while the others sit half-filled.

What does a two-year deal with the Jazz come out to? (I don’t know precisely and won’t speculate, but it’s likely not less than $5M per [being conservative]).

What does a two year deal with LA look like? Well, they’re over the cap, so it’s the MLE, so just shy of $10M/yr. So if you presume a two-year deal with us at half the cost, or anywhere else on MLE, you’re looking at total career basketball earnings difference of about 4% ($230M vs. $220M). That’s assuming he retires after those two years.

So then you have to look at title chances and legacy. The two obviously overlap in a lot of ways. Yes, you may get a title as a ride-along with the Lakers. He could even be a key veteran, but the team will be remembered as LeBron and AD.

So Mike will be 34 by next season, and his years of being a key contributor are more limited. He spent 12 years with another franchise and then made what’s he’s acknowledged as a tough transition last year and the narrative that anyone will remember is that he had a bad year. How much would that weigh on his mind of the potential to burn up another year before getting acclimated and comfortable somewhere? Mike has now adjusted and is playing incredible basketball for a team that a quarter of the way through the season has the best record in the league, with him being a large reason for that.

What I think it really boils down to is if we’re legit. If we fizzle out early in the second round or get bumped in the first round then yes, this is different calculus. But if we win it all, or we’re in the finals, or go to 7 games in a WCF series, then it totally changes the equation when you’re looking at leaving a team that you’re already settled in as a key contributor to jumping to another contender that, while perhaps increasing your odds, introduces a whole host of other variables. What does snagging a championship as a key player in Utah vs. as a clinger-on in LA do for legacy? Maybe Mike doesn’t see it that way. And I’m not saying he has a much larger shot at a title here than in LA, but this scenario is contingent on us proving that we’re right there at the gate. If we’re not at the gate come next summer, then obviously none of this applies.
Click to expand...
Okay but the MLE would still be a conservative STARTING point on a next contract. Jazz would have to pay out the *** to try and keep him, realistically, which is why Favors getting traded for little/no returning salary will be a necessary component of retaining Conley, if it happens.
 
Favors is stabilize factor need for defense of second unit.

Conley resign for MLE if he happy with team.
 
Just re-sign him and pay the tax. It's not like Ryan Smith can't afford it.

 
infection said:
Alright, so here’s how I’d put this:

After this season, Mike will have $210M in career basketball earnings alone. He once had the largest contract in NBA history. When you look at three common things players value, you probably see money, winning (title contention, specifically), and legacy topping the list. You can always argue that human nature always wants more money, don’t neglect the non-monetary value of the other, as one may see the financial cup overflowing while the others sit half-filled.

What does a two-year deal with the Jazz come out to? (I don’t know precisely and won’t speculate, but it’s likely not less than $5M per [being conservative]).

What does a two year deal with LA look like? Well, they’re over the cap, so it’s the MLE, so just shy of $10M/yr. So if you presume a two-year deal with us at half the cost, or anywhere else on MLE, you’re looking at total career basketball earnings difference of about 4% ($230M vs. $220M). That’s assuming he retires after those two years.

So then you have to look at title chances and legacy. The two obviously overlap in a lot of ways. Yes, you may get a title as a ride-along with the Lakers. He could even be a key veteran, but the team will be remembered as LeBron and AD.

So Mike will be 34 by next season, and his years of being a key contributor are more limited. He spent 12 years with another franchise and then made what’s he’s acknowledged as a tough transition last year and the narrative that anyone will remember is that he had a bad year. How much would that weigh on his mind of the potential to burn up another year before getting acclimated and comfortable somewhere? Mike has now adjusted and is playing incredible basketball for a team that a quarter of the way through the season has the best record in the league, with him being a large reason for that.

What I think it really boils down to is if we’re legit. If we fizzle out early in the second round or get bumped in the first round then yes, this is different calculus. But if we win it all, or we’re in the finals, or go to 7 games in a WCF series, then it totally changes the equation when you’re looking at leaving a team that you’re already settled in as a key contributor to jumping to another contender that, while perhaps increasing your odds, introduces a whole host of other variables. What does snagging a championship as a key player in Utah vs. as a clinger-on in LA do for legacy? Maybe Mike doesn’t see it that way. And I’m not saying he has a much larger shot at a title here than in LA, but this scenario is contingent on us proving that we’re right there at the gate. If we’re not at the gate come next summer, then obviously none of this applies.
Click to expand...
It is so easy for fans to have this take. But how many players have actually left 10+ million on the table? David West took a pay cut to play with the Warriors, but he was a bench player by then. Conley is a max player right now. To sign a MLE he would have to be extremely loyal (to a team with a fan base that refuses to see a large part of the racism in our society) and somewhat stupid. It would be so refreshing, but don't count on it.

I can't see the Jazz being any better than they are right now in future years. We have 3 max players on the roster. How will this be possible again? Next year Mitchell gets his pay day and we run out of cap space. The window of opportunity is closing. Is a team with 3 max players good enough to beat a team with two top 5 players? I don't know. I guess we'll find out.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top