K. Then they dumb.
Omnibus Gordon Hayward Thread (To clean up the Board some)
- Thread starter BabyPeterzz
- Start date
K. Then they dumb.
jope
Well-Known Member
hayward is in the 2nd tier of FAs.
If LAL or Miami were to miss out on all the 1st tier guys, i wouldn't be shocked at all to see them pursue hayward.
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
He has?
"Sources" have said the Jazz are likely to match any offer. But the Jazz haven't presented Hayward with a max deal. If they did, it would be a mere formality to sign it.
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
Henderson and a 1st IS laughable. So is including Hairston and garbage.
If Hayward REALLY wants to leave, I'd do it for Vonleh, Henderson and a future #1. Otherwise, I tell Charlotte we'll just match their offer if they give him one.
If Hayward REALLY wants to leave, I'd do it for Vonleh, Henderson and a future #1. Otherwise, I tell Charlotte we'll just match their offer if they give him one.
mellow
Well-Known Member
Add bismack and it's a deal!
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
I especially like how they are adamant about NOT giving up MKG.
Sure, we DEFINITELY want a "shrink SF." What's that, you ask? A player who only shoots 11% on his 3's.
Sure, we DEFINITELY want a "shrink SF." What's that, you ask? A player who only shoots 11% on his 3's.
addictionary
Well-Known Member
No way, because you have probably been in the lobby of those firms before.
I agree with you completely. Seriously, who has the ego here... Hayward or Jazz fans? Newsflash, this DOES happen all the time, the media just does not report on it. The other teams probably want to have a chance to interview Hayward too. It goes both ways.
It's looking more likely that DL has scared teams off a bit. I'm predicting the Jazz sign Hayward for an average of $13.75mm, front loaded so the last year salary of $13mm is equivalent to about $10.3 - $10.7mm under last year's salary cap.
That would be a solid value.
That would be a solid value.
jimmy eat jazz
Well-Known Member
But he has not sat down with management and discussed their vision, the role they see for him, what kind of offense they plan on running, what are the other benefits of joining the team, etc. With such an important decision to make, anyone who does not do good due diligence is, in all honesty, a fool.
mellow
Well-Known Member
Maybe DL is not the only thing scaring teams off. 3-17 against Philly, 1-17 against NOP, 5-23 against Spurs.....
"Hey Gordo, MJ on the phone, how are you? Hey Gordo, before if we decide whether to invest $50MM on you, we'd like to fly you out on our corporate jet, talk to our coach, GM and owners, wine and dine you and show you our facilities"
"Gee, no, Mr Jordan, that is really not a good idea, people might think I am going on a Melo tour and think I might be being kinda stupid. So, you airness, I must respectfully decline."
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
I root for the team more than i root for gordo.
Gordo making less money is good for the team
Therefore i hope he gets as little as possible
akirac73
Well-Known Member
This.
akirac73
Well-Known Member
"Price is what you pay. Value is what you get." - Warren Buffet
That being said, looks like Gtime will be a high price - low value kind of player. I say pass...
Coach Ellis
Well-Known Member
I "liked" both of these posts because they both make sense and I really don't give a crap what Gordon Hayward makes. I'll be happy when they match that contract or negotiate their own with him because I think he's a decent player and the kind of guy you want (as long as he's not your #1 option.)
The case for paying Gordon Hayward the MAX
The case for paying Gordon Hayward the MAX:
Maximum contracts under the 2011 CBA are much less crippling than under the previous deal. First of all, the maximum raises that a player can receive in free agency are 4.5% instead of 7.5%. The Jazz still have the Bird Right option of giving Hayward 7.5%, but the market cannot force them to do so. The 4.5% is not compounding, so there’s a good chance the revenue increases –which are compounding—outpace a 4.5% raise.
Modern Salary Cap History:
During the 16 year period of the 2000 season up to this coming one, the salary cap has increased from $34,000,000 to $63,600,000. That’s 87%, or average annual raises of 3.99%. This is a conservative baseline estimate to use for four reasons*. First, going back to 1990 saw average annual raises of 7.46%. Second, the 2011 CBA significantly reduced the player’s share of Basketball Related Income (BRI) from 57% to 51.15%. This 10.26% reduction in player compensation (57-51.15 / 57) effectively froze the salary cap for a few years until it was fully priced in. If we base the salary cap on the previous CBA, the cap this season would increase from $63.6 million to $70.87 million. Adjusting our annual baseline raise calculation based on this normalized number, we have a 4.7% compound annual salary cap increase. This is not a wonky adjustment as the cap is based on projected revenue increases, and a 4.7% salary increase is a 4.7% increase no matter how large or small a share of that goes to the players.
Third, this 16 year period saw a severe recession reverse revenues from what has otherwise been a constant upward march for 3 straight decades. From the 2009 to 2010 seasons, projected revenue dropped by 1.6% instead of growing at our calculated 4.7%. Adjusting our baseline up again to smooth out this 6.3% differential, we come up with roughly 4.9% annual cap increases.
Fourth, television ratings have been on an upward trend for the league, and the upcoming new TV deal is expected to follow the trend that MLB and NCAA football has experienced. The league is expecting a big boom in revenues from that stream. I’m not going to speculate much here, but widely circulated reports suggest we can add at least another full 1% to our adjusted baseline, if not approach that magical 7% revenue increase area. I’m going to put in a 1% assumption on the increase for our purposes here, as that’s likely very “in the ballpark” of what NBA teams are using in their own baseline, best case, and worst case projections.
5.9%** vs 4.5%:
Because the cap increases are compound and max salary increases are not, the expected increase differential over the final three year period of a Hayward contract is a 13.5% raise for Hayward and a 18.8% raise for the cap. That takes a small, but not meaningless 5.3% sting out of the annual Hayward raises.
Let’s put some numbers on it:
Due to various different calculation adjustments to the 2005 and 2011 CBAs, Hayward is eligible for an estimated maximum first year salary of $14.976 million, and fourth year salary of $16.998 million. Both those numbers are huge in the 2013-2014 season, but they’re not all that bad in the 2017-2018 jackass–on-the-internet-estimated season. Revenue based on 5.9% raises will go up from $63.6 million to 75.53 million, putting Hayward’s pay at roughly 22.49% of the cap. Based on the 2013-2014 cap, that’s equivalent to a salary of $13.2 million. That would have been a very manageable, very tradable contract last season. Give Hayward a few more years of refinement and the Jazz will have no problem getting rid of guy who has given every indication of being a first class teammate and citizen. This is not a Rudy Gay, Andrei Kirilenko, or Hedo Turkoglu situation.
You may not agree with the number, but this is the analysis that NBA front offices are putting on the Hayward question, and the reason he’s going to get a contract that will turn the entire Jazz blogosphere into characters from Space Balls. And I haven't even mentioned the new ability of small market teams to overpay up into the luxury tax. The Jazz, and everyone else, is adding that into their calculations as well.
*5 – Higher salary gives better trading latitude four years down the line. 150% of $17 million can fetch the Jazz a better contract in return than 150% of 13 million.
*6 – The Jazz have to spend the money anyway, and cannot afford to lose assets for nothing. There are no free agents in this class that are attainable by the Jazz who are worth more than Hayward. Plenty of teams have plenty of cap space, and nobody is currently rumored to be offering much in facilitating trades. If anything, the cap spacers are lining up to take guys like Jeremy Lin off your hands (Philly).
*7 – The Jazz need to not improve for a while. The draft is their best shot at bringing in contender talent. A very tradeable contract like Hayward and draft picks is their second best. Might as well maximize the trading latitude if it’s not toxic, and this one is not.
**You may think the projections are hoaky, but the GM’s across the league are considering these calculations into their decisions. Besides, cut them down a couple % and you still have a very serviceable, tradable contract.
The case for paying Gordon Hayward the MAX:
Maximum contracts under the 2011 CBA are much less crippling than under the previous deal. First of all, the maximum raises that a player can receive in free agency are 4.5% instead of 7.5%. The Jazz still have the Bird Right option of giving Hayward 7.5%, but the market cannot force them to do so. The 4.5% is not compounding, so there’s a good chance the revenue increases –which are compounding—outpace a 4.5% raise.
Modern Salary Cap History:
During the 16 year period of the 2000 season up to this coming one, the salary cap has increased from $34,000,000 to $63,600,000. That’s 87%, or average annual raises of 3.99%. This is a conservative baseline estimate to use for four reasons*. First, going back to 1990 saw average annual raises of 7.46%. Second, the 2011 CBA significantly reduced the player’s share of Basketball Related Income (BRI) from 57% to 51.15%. This 10.26% reduction in player compensation (57-51.15 / 57) effectively froze the salary cap for a few years until it was fully priced in. If we base the salary cap on the previous CBA, the cap this season would increase from $63.6 million to $70.87 million. Adjusting our annual baseline raise calculation based on this normalized number, we have a 4.7% compound annual salary cap increase. This is not a wonky adjustment as the cap is based on projected revenue increases, and a 4.7% salary increase is a 4.7% increase no matter how large or small a share of that goes to the players.
Third, this 16 year period saw a severe recession reverse revenues from what has otherwise been a constant upward march for 3 straight decades. From the 2009 to 2010 seasons, projected revenue dropped by 1.6% instead of growing at our calculated 4.7%. Adjusting our baseline up again to smooth out this 6.3% differential, we come up with roughly 4.9% annual cap increases.
Fourth, television ratings have been on an upward trend for the league, and the upcoming new TV deal is expected to follow the trend that MLB and NCAA football has experienced. The league is expecting a big boom in revenues from that stream. I’m not going to speculate much here, but widely circulated reports suggest we can add at least another full 1% to our adjusted baseline, if not approach that magical 7% revenue increase area. I’m going to put in a 1% assumption on the increase for our purposes here, as that’s likely very “in the ballpark” of what NBA teams are using in their own baseline, best case, and worst case projections.
5.9%** vs 4.5%:
Because the cap increases are compound and max salary increases are not, the expected increase differential over the final three year period of a Hayward contract is a 13.5% raise for Hayward and a 18.8% raise for the cap. That takes a small, but not meaningless 5.3% sting out of the annual Hayward raises.
Let’s put some numbers on it:
Due to various different calculation adjustments to the 2005 and 2011 CBAs, Hayward is eligible for an estimated maximum first year salary of $14.976 million, and fourth year salary of $16.998 million. Both those numbers are huge in the 2013-2014 season, but they’re not all that bad in the 2017-2018 jackass–on-the-internet-estimated season. Revenue based on 5.9% raises will go up from $63.6 million to 75.53 million, putting Hayward’s pay at roughly 22.49% of the cap. Based on the 2013-2014 cap, that’s equivalent to a salary of $13.2 million. That would have been a very manageable, very tradable contract last season. Give Hayward a few more years of refinement and the Jazz will have no problem getting rid of guy who has given every indication of being a first class teammate and citizen. This is not a Rudy Gay, Andrei Kirilenko, or Hedo Turkoglu situation.
You may not agree with the number, but this is the analysis that NBA front offices are putting on the Hayward question, and the reason he’s going to get a contract that will turn the entire Jazz blogosphere into characters from Space Balls. And I haven't even mentioned the new ability of small market teams to overpay up into the luxury tax. The Jazz, and everyone else, is adding that into their calculations as well.
*5 – Higher salary gives better trading latitude four years down the line. 150% of $17 million can fetch the Jazz a better contract in return than 150% of 13 million.
*6 – The Jazz have to spend the money anyway, and cannot afford to lose assets for nothing. There are no free agents in this class that are attainable by the Jazz who are worth more than Hayward. Plenty of teams have plenty of cap space, and nobody is currently rumored to be offering much in facilitating trades. If anything, the cap spacers are lining up to take guys like Jeremy Lin off your hands (Philly).
*7 – The Jazz need to not improve for a while. The draft is their best shot at bringing in contender talent. A very tradeable contract like Hayward and draft picks is their second best. Might as well maximize the trading latitude if it’s not toxic, and this one is not.
**You may think the projections are hoaky, but the GM’s across the league are considering these calculations into their decisions. Besides, cut them down a couple % and you still have a very serviceable, tradable contract.
Last edited:
You haven't said why Hayward?
Why not throw the MAX at some other players? Someone like Greg Monroe for example to me is much more deserving than Hayward. You can pair him with Favors, Kanter off the bench. That's a solid 3 man rotation.
Why not throw the MAX at some other players? Someone like Greg Monroe for example to me is much more deserving than Hayward. You can pair him with Favors, Kanter off the bench. That's a solid 3 man rotation.