Poll: Should the Jazz Match Hayward's $15.75 a year/4 year Contract?

[fishonjazz]

People say, "but he was one of five players who averaged 15-5-5.."

Just want to add that those other 5 players averaged more than those numbers.

 

[[size/HUGE] fixed [/size]]

The other thing to keep in mind, that going over the cap won't hurt the Jazz like it has in previous years. The Jazz have always been profitable (except for a couple years paying luxury tax I assume). With the current revenue sharing, the Millers are making a lot more $$$. So it doesn't hurt them as much to pay more for Hayward.

If the cap goes up, but max contracts are the same, the team can keep its core and not worry about luxury tax. I feel like the current team will be able to contend once they develop and jell. Maybe I am too optimistic. I think Hayward is a key piece to this team. Without him, they take a big step backwards.

Paying Hayward this much money is just bad business. I don't need to see the minutiae in the numbers. It's quite apparent already.

 

[fishonjazz]

What?

He is saying that big al, demarre carroll, and paul millsap all played with hayward..... then played without hayward. and were better without him. At least i think thag is what he is saying

 

[fishonjazz]

I guess we shouldn't pay Hayward this year because maybe someone will blow Burks away with a $9,000,000 offer sheet next summer. What a silly stance to take.

Lol. I never said that.

I said we shouldnt max hayward because you should NEVER, no matter the financial situation, max mediocre players.

 

[sirkickyass]

I'm skeptical of the "this contract won't be so bad as the cap rises" argument. It's not like Eric Gordon's deal is getting more palatable as time goes on.

Isn't Luol Deng available at 75% of this cost?

 

[fishonjazz]

Hayward is a system player. He did well at Butler and under Sloan.

Lololol

System player. Did well. These are bot words i use to describe max players

 

[fishonjazz]

Won't the new TV deal or anything else like that will also affect the future signings/market? Wouldn't it be wiser to poach players from as low prices as we could before the TV deal, so we could still have advantage after the deal is on? And we could use that advantage to actually compete with other bidders when hunting free agents or to convince our players to stay, not to overpay someone like Hayward. Why is the rush with overpaying with Hayward?

Smart post right there.

With the new tv deal we will have to pay way more for guys like burke, gobert, exum, etc in the future and that should be taken into consideration.

If haywatd is getting this much under this salary cap then we will probably have to pay a mediocre trey burke 20 million per year in a few years with the higher cap

 

[Deleted member 365]

You are correct in that GH is not worth the max. A question or two for you than.... Assuming DL is not a complete lunatic and is somewhat competent, why do you think he is adamant about matching?

Why do you think that DL wasn't just blowing smoke?

Have you ever played poker?

 

[fishonjazz]

Honestly, you can't blame Hayward for the woes of the Jazz last year.

i agree.
But you also cant claim that he makes everyone else so much better either when he played more minutes than ever before and we were atrocious.

 

[fishonjazz]

Paying Hayward this much money is just bad business. I don't need to see the minutiae in the numbers. It's quite apparent already.

This

 

[fishonjazz]

I'm skeptical of the "this contract won't be so bad as the cap rises" argument. It's not like Eric Gordon's deal is getting more palatable as time goes on.

Isn't Luol Deng available at 75% of this cost?

Yup.

Overpaid is overpaid

 

[stitches]

People forget that the cap space is inflating in the next several years and is expected to reach close to 80 million in 2 years time. So realistically Haywards 16-17 million in the last 2 years of his contract won't be as huge of a burden on the Jazz and we'd only need cap space to resign new players when the new hugely inflated cap space is expected to kick in, thus pretty much eliminating the fears that we won't be able to give Burks, Kanter and Burke nice deals in order to keep them.