What's new
By:
Filters

OKC Trade is a glimpse into our future

https://bleacherreport.com/tb/d8P9r?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=nba

Has this been posted yet? (yes, it's br, but it's just them linking another site, so get over it). Apparently the Jazz were one of the teams OKC was having "semi-serious" trade talks with. It says OKC wanted a sure fire talent still in the beginning of their rookie deal, and understandably so. It suggests they may have asked about Favors and Kanter. If so, I'm glad we turned them down. Good to see the FO has a lot of faith in our young core.
 
Next summer will be interesting between extension talks with Favors and Hayward and the free agency of Millsap and Jefferson.
 
spycam1 said:
https://bleacherreport.com/tb/d8P9r?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=nba

Has this been posted yet? (yes, it's br, but it's just them linking another site, so get over it). Apparently the Jazz were one of the teams OKC was having "semi-serious" trade talks with. It says OKC wanted a sure fire talent still in the beginning of their rookie deal, and understandably so. It suggests they may have asked about Favors and Kanter. If so, I'm glad we turned them down. Good to see the FO has a lot of faith in our young core.
Click to expand...
Can you imagine the Thunder getting Kanter or Favors PLUS a pick for Harden, who would then get a MAX deal? I think it was a very short conversation with KOC or Lindsey.
 
We don't currently have a max player, so I can't see how OKC's situation remotely applies to us. They have 2 that they signed and a third they traded to avoid getting to RFA with him. Of our 4 young guys, only Favors threatens to be close to a max player by season's end.

The risk the Jazz face is not bidding against themselves. Only Favors/Hayward will be eligible for extensions, though not RFA's. You only lock them down if it makes sense. Both their agents would likely advise against signing extensions next summer, anyway. So this issue is probably two years away.
 
Sneakers said:
OKC just traded Harden to Houston for KMart, Lamb and draft picks. Couldn't agree on an extension so they shipped him.

This shows the downside to the 'Thunder model'. When you have 4 good young players who all want big money something's got to give.

Navigating the contracts of the core four down the road is the elephant in the room right now.
Click to expand...

Downside? They got a 20 ppg scorer, a talented lottery pick, and 2 1st round picks for a guy they couldn't afford to keep.
 
billyshelby said:
We don't currently have a max player, so I can't see how OKC's situation remotely applies to us. They have 2 that they signed and a third they traded to avoid getting to RFA with him. Of our 4 young guys, only Favors threatens to be close to a max player by season's end.

The risk the Jazz face is not bidding against themselves. Only Favors/Hayward will be eligible for extensions, though not RFA's. You only lock them down if it makes sense. Both their agents would likely advise against signing extensions next summer, anyway. So this issue is probably two years away.
Click to expand...

Their agents will try to get a lot of money out of the Jazz, but they won't automatically advise them to not sign extensions, though obviously the more suitors they have the better.
 
Harden is a lot better than Lin and I don't think you can classify him as a borderline All-Star. He made the Olympic team, so he's a bonafide All-Star. Down the road this could work in the Thunder's favor if Lamb is as good as people here are saying. And they also get to see if Westbrook can really be a distributor. If not, they have other options to fall back on.
 
nightmare3983 said:
Their agents will try to get a lot of money out of the Jazz, but they won't automatically advise them to not sign extensions, though obviously the more suitors they have the better.
Click to expand...

This summer, neither Favors nor Hayward will have any suitors. They won't be RFA's. They can be offered extensions by the Jazz, however. But as I said, the Jazz have to be careful bidding against themselves in that scenario since neither is currently a max player like Harden was.
 
Cyrone Torbin said:
Downside? They got a 20 ppg scorer, a talented lottery pick, and 2 1st round picks for a guy they couldn't afford to keep.
Click to expand...

Well exactly, and sort of. You're right, they got good value for Harden. But the downside is exactly in that, that they couldn't afford to keep Harden.
 
Sneakers said:
Well exactly, and sort of. You're right, they got good value for Harden. But the downside is exactly in that, that they couldn't afford to keep Harden.
Click to expand...

It's interesting, I read somewhere that under the league's revenue sharing system, the Thunder might actually be payers. Seems crazy for a small-market team that gets $15 million per year from their TV deal to be in the payer group with the Lakers who should (conservatively) get $100 million per year from their TV deal.
 
Catchall said:
OKC simply decided that Harden wasn't worth near-max money.
Click to expand...

No they did not. They decided they didn't want to pay ridiculous levels of LT. Signing Harden would have put them in dangers of repeat offender levels. They were looking at $3.50 - $4.25 for every dollar over the top threashold seeing how paying $25+ million in one season while losing revenue sharing would bankrupt the franchise.

Speaking of... LA will have a $100mm salary next season and will probably pay over $60,000,000 to the league.

nightmare3983 said:
It's interesting, I read somewhere that under the league's revenue sharing system, the Thunder might actually be payers. Seems crazy for a small-market team that gets $15 million per year from their TV deal to be in the payer group with the Lakers who should (conservatively) get $100 million per year from their TV deal.
Click to expand...

Add in losing the newly increased portion of that revenue sharing--+$10,000,000.
 
Eenie-Meenie said:
What did I tell you about Harden -- underrated, had 37 pts, 12 assists and 6 boards tonight
Click to expand...

Yeah, but just give Burks 36 minutes and he will go way beyond those numbers. Hah, 37 points and 12 assists. Child's play for a guaranteed HOFer like Burks.

Jazz should have given them anyone on the team to get a young scoring stud like Harden. yes, I would have given them Kanter or Favors along with either Burks or Hayward. Better to one young stud big and one young stud small than two bigs. More versatile. That could have been a core to build around for many years of success, kinda like Stock-Malone.
 
Couldn't disagree more.

The Thunder have 3 franchise guys all who have/could demand the max.

Jazz don't. And anyone who offers someone like Hayward or Favors the max, is an idiot. If someone like Dallas were to offer Favors the max, let him go, let that other team eat that contract, and keep yourself free from any stupid contracts. How much better off would we have been had we never signed AK to the max? Holy cow!

Didn't we learn that the max should only be given to franchise guys (see ak)? Favors, unless he improves drastically in the low post offensively, will never be a franchise guy. He's more of a Serge Ibaka or Theo Ratliff or Marcus Camby type guy. Hayward? Niceeeeee role player, like a Dunleavy or Tayshaun Prince.

Realistically, there are only 2 guys that I see ever demanding the max. Burks and Kanter. Burks, because he has that scoring mentality and ability. He still has a long way to go. Kanter, because I'm not sure we've had a low post scorer like him since Malone. Obviously, he needs to work a lot on his consistency and decision making. But I could see the offense being run through him much more than I could ever see it being run through Favors.

In reality, I don't think anyone on the Jazz will be a franchise type player. We're still looking for that. Maybe Marvin Williams???
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top