What's new
By:
Filters

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

Should They Match?

  • Total voters
    181
  • Poll closed .
HighlandHomie said:
Burks is in no way the same type player as Manu. I love Burks - if someone had a gun to my head and told me to pick my current favorite Jazz-man it'd be him - but he is nowhere close to the creator/defender as vintage Manu. You said it yourself, Hayward is the closest thing to Manu in the league in terms of style of play. Of course Hayward still has tons of work left to get to that level... Even though stats won't reflect it, having an athletic 6-7/6-8 player who can handle, pass, shot and defend is priceless. He's just got find that consistency in all departments...
Click to expand...

But Manu is not a MAX player. He's the 3rd best player on that Spurs team.



That is why we shouldn't pay Hayward MAX.
 
HighlandHomie said:
I've always known the majority of this message board's posters were clueless, but this poll proves it. If you voted 'nope', you haven't watched the Jazz and/or have no understanding of the climate of the NBA.

Hayward has improved each season he's been in the league. He's still young and physically developing (strength being the key to him taking the next step), and offers a pretty special skill-set on both ends for someone with his size/athleticism. The hope is that he fulfills the lofty expectations during this new contract.

It is rare the Jazz can lure max-level free agents (or even close to it), with the exception of Boozer but that was under old CBA.

The bottom line is that for the Jazz to get players of Hayward's caliber (or better), they will need to be drafted by us and retained (no matter the price).

I don't get how a fan base is so ready to see a 24 year old walk following a relatively intriguing start to a career under the worst NBA coach in the modern era (Corbin). It's not a coincidence that Hayward has been involved in the Team USA program either - basketball people drool over him.

Now that he's gonna get his money, regardless if it's in Utah or Charlotte, he has to prove he's worth it.
Click to expand...

Well since you are so smart why do you think it is a good idea to give a third option player max money when he hasn't proven he can be a max caliber player? You draft rookies on potential you don't pay a player a max contract simply because you think he will be one. I understand the NBA culture just fine. I am always amazed how stupid GMs are when they over pay for a player who doesn't deserve it and then a year or two later they are trying to trade the player. It happens a lot more than your scenario.
 
Hotttnickkk said:
But Manu is not a MAX player. He's the 3rd best player on that Spurs team.



That is why we shouldn't pay Hayward MAX.
Click to expand...

Despite not being a consistent knockdown shooter yet, Hayward can facilitate offense in a unique fashion because of his position a la Manu. Though Manu isn't a max-contract guy, he's a 1st ballot HOFer and an All Star...
 
The Pearl said:
The board is entrenched in the closely held belief that the key to building a championship team, in fiscal terms, is contingent upon the concept that contracts should accurately reflect a player's fair market value. The second derivative of this logic is that each team's payroll structure should accurately correlate to each player's talent level in order of importance to the team. In fact, the CBA, as designed, assures that almost no player's talent level accurately reflects their fair market value and that a team's pay structure usually does not correlate well to the talent order.
Click to expand...

Well it is a business and regardless of the CBA (which isn't perfect) you pay too much for your product then you have to raise prices to pay for it. Why don't you ask the Nets owner how it felt to lose $133 million dollars because he didn't manage his finances. People who are so willing to spend money think this is play money. Look in the past to see how a bad contract crippled the Jazz when they tried to add to the roster.
 
HighlandHomie said:
Despite not being a consistent knockdown shooter yet, Hayward can facilitate offense in a unique fashion because of his position a la Manu. Though Manu isn't a max-contract guy, he's a 1st ballot HOFer and an All Star...
Click to expand...

So.. Manu is a HOFer and he isn't MAX...



Hayward is no where near Manu's level, and yet you're willing to pay MAX for him???



How does that work?
 
HighlandHomie said:
Despite not being a consistent knockdown shooter yet, Hayward can facilitate offense in a unique fashion because of his position a la Manu. Though Manu isn't a max-contract guy, he's a 1st ballot HOFer and an All Star...
Click to expand...

Hayward hasn't even come close to making an all-star team and he isn't even close to being Manu. I beg to differ about Manu place on the Spurs that at one point Manu was the best player on the team but he has never been maxed out contract wise. Pop has said on several occasions if we didn't have Manu there would be no championships. People are overrating Hayward and underrating Manu.
 
cowhide said:
Well it is a business and regardless of the CBA (which isn't perfect) you pay too much for your product then you have to raise prices to pay for it. Why don't you ask the Nets owner how it felt to lose $133 million dollars because he didn't manage his finances. People who are so willing to spend money think this is play money. Look in the past to see how a bad contract crippled the Jazz when they tried to add to the roster.
Click to expand...

That is flawed logic and using the Nets is a poor example. The Jazz are not going over the cap to sign Hayward and if they match are still well below the cap, so your assertion that if they max Hayward they will have to raise ticket prices is absurd. Ticket prices will go up and will continue to go up regardless of who gets what and when.
 
Hotttnickkk said:
So.. Manu is a HOFer and he isn't MAX...



Hayward is no where near Manu's level, and yet you're willing to pay MAX for him???



How does that work?
Click to expand...

Because Hayward still has a good chance to greatly improve as soon as this upcoming season. But the main point is that we have to match for the sole purpose we won't be able to spend that money anywhere else. Although that seems like an awful reason to match, it is the reality given the Jazz will never be able to lure a max-level FA. That's the bottom line.
 
Words like "Priceless" and "Invaluable" to describe Hayward are ridiculous...
Valuable I would go for, but Invaluable? No way.

Look at what came to be considered horrible NBA contracts... (https://msn.foxsports.com/south/pho...ble-free-agent-signings-in-nba-history-070114).
Half of them turned out to be horrible due to unforeseen injuries. The other half were teams that greatly overpaid for talent because of the "Fear of losing a core asset".
Those that argue paying max to an average player doesn't hurt a franchise are looking at this deal in isolation. No team can afford to spend max $$ for every average player and survive.
 
Why not offer Parsons 4 year 12 million and call it a day? It isn't just the money that is the issue, but if Hayward gets $16 a year then all the players on the Jazz are going to use that as part of their negotiating tactic. Jazz can't even say Well, Hayward improved so he earned the contract...Nope he is getting a max contract after his worse year. Hayward even admitted that the loss of AJ and Millsap made it more difficult to get his shot off. Now you want to pay him max money even though he isn't a number one option. if DL does this deal it will be AK all over again.

Wait until Hayward starts clanking shots or turning the ball over the pressure will be immense and if this past season is an example on how Hayward can handle the pressure than it could get ugly real fast.
 
HighlandHomie said:
Despite not being a consistent knockdown shooter yet, Hayward can facilitate offense in a unique fashion because of his position a la Manu. Though Manu isn't a max-contract guy, he's a 1st ballot HOFer and an All Star...
Click to expand...

This guy has played DIII ball. He knows.
 
cowhide said:
Why not offer Parsons 4 year 12 million and call it a day? It isn't just the money that is the issue, but if Hayward gets $16 a year then all the players on the Jazz are going to use that as part of their negotiating tactic. Jazz can't even say Well, Hayward improved so he earned the contract...Nope he is getting a max contract after his worse year. Hayward even admitted that the loss of AJ and Millsap made it more difficult to get his shot off. Now you want to pay him max money even though he isn't a number one option. if DL does this deal it will be AK all over again.

Wait until Hayward starts clanking shots or turning the ball over the pressure will be immense and if this past season is an example on how Hayward can handle the pressure than it could get ugly real fast.
Click to expand...

I've got a better one.


S&T Hayward to CHA, with the option of swapping Kanter with Vonleh.


We get a better defender with Vonleh who is a true PF and is a better fit next to Favors.


Burke/Neto
Exum/Burks
Hood/Marvin
Vonleh/Evans
Favors/Gobert


Nice young team going forward.
 
As much as I'd like Vonleh back. I dont think Charlotte will trade him they got so lucky to land that pick in the first place, then they feel like he fell in their laps, they'd definitely push Zeller.

It's said the Hornets havent looked to S+T with the Jazz though.
 
cowhide said:
Hayward hasn't even come close to making an all-star team and he isn't even close to being Manu. I beg to differ about Manu place on the Spurs that at one point Manu was the best player on the team but he has never been maxed out contract wise. Pop has said on several occasions if we didn't have Manu there would be no championships. People are overrating Hayward and underrating Manu.
Click to expand...

To be fair, in all my posts linking the two names I've clearly stated Hayward isn't close to Manu yet. Manu also came to the NBA when he was 25. Hayward turns 25 next season.
 
PointGod_AlecBurks said:
As much as I'd like Vonleh back. I dont think Charlotte will trade him they got so lucky to land that pick in the first place, then they feel like he fell in their laps, they'd definitely push Zeller.
Click to expand...

You'd never know though.



They do get Hayward in return which they wouldn't have otherwise since it's likely we'll match. Zeller played well for them last year. They're definitely in a 'win now' mode and Vonleh is a project.
 
The Pearl said:
That is flawed logic and using the Nets is a poor example. The Jazz are not going over the cap to sign Hayward and if they match are still well below the cap, so your assertion that if they max Hayward they will have to raise ticket prices is absurd. Ticket prices will go up and will continue to go up regardless of who gets what and when.
Click to expand...

Why is the Nets a poor example? Of course they aren't with just Hayward but they have other players to pay and if a year or two they are competing for playoff spots and want to bring in a max player the flexibility changes really fast. You make it sound as though cap space is unlimited. The majority of teams are capped out and thus are having to move players or let them go. Of course ticket prices don't go up when a business has more costs. It never happens that business people pass to their customers new costs. Silly me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top