Reasons to Keep Matthews

[mfree]

The only real downside is that it puts the Jazz so close to the LT that it likely means not acquiring another post player. Remember how mad everybody was about drafting Hayward because the Jazz needed a big guy in the middle?

If you don't match, you have the opportunity to get both a Brewer type, and another post player. If you do match, you are likely done until the deadline.

 

[Hopper]

Also, what are the alternatives? Can someone get Chad Ford's list off ESPN.

Emotions and general principles aside, Harcher, this is the main question. Of all the FA and RFA's out there, Matthews is the only one left who the Jazz have the absolute right to sign if they want to.

Can they pay less? No doubt, but they would probably also get less. How much less, and is still a better overall "deal?" Strictly a matter of judgment.

There are probably guys out there that would require more to sign, but you would still probably get less. It's possible that there are some that you could get for less, but still get as much, or even more, in performance from. Of course money is it's own concern. James may be a better "bargain" even at his high salary, than our second rounder is at his low salary, but that doesn't mean we can get, let alone afford James, so.....

The argument that even second year players who were drafted #1 make less is an irrelevant non sequitur. Many here quickly say it is simply "too much" to pay without demonstrating that they have actually given any real thought to either a cost vs benefit analyis or a careful look at the same with respect to available alternatives. Mebbe somebuddy knows a D-leaguer who's better than Matthews and who would sign cheap, even to a multi-year contract. If so, best tell KOC now, not later, after he becomes a star for another team, and then complain that KOC shoulda got him.

 

[billyshelby]

"15. You can't find guards who give you 9.5/2/1.5 in 25MPG just anywhere. "


John Salmons has a new 5 year $39M contract. His percentages are almost the same over the last couple of years (8 year vet to get there) but averages 2x points (19ish) and plays 38mpg. I don't think that Wes goes to 19ppg in 38min (system doesn't really allow that and its only 13 more mins a game), but he'd proably be at 12-13ppg with 38mpg's and same %'s (effectiveness.) So is John Salmons overpaid at 8/year?

Maybe this is really Millsap all over: At first it was a bit higher than expected, but really, looks to be a fair (or better) $value. I like Wes. Last night I said no way to this contract. But it was late and i couldn't believe the numbers. I could be softening up.

I think BillyShelby can help us understand how he is rated 28th in everything for shooting guards when I see him compared to Salmons looking more worth it. 7.0/year is probably average NBA pay. Billy, If Wes gets 35mpg would he rate as an average NBA wing? He has the efficiency of Salmons yet only 23 years old (Salmons matured after 4 years)

The next measure is how good is his defense really? Bruce Bowen? Raja Bell? ... Ronnie Brewer? He can and will get better than he is today at defense for certain.

Another late night logical conundrum reading all 300 posts last night: Most of us believe he's BETTER than Korver today. Korver got 5/year. Korver's at his peak about after 7ish years in the league. So Wes should be on an upswing - Maybe 7/year isn't so bad??

1. The comparison between Salmons and Matthews goes like this, per 48, relative to all "listed" 2 guards on ESPN:

Wes: Scoring (27th); Rebounding (29th); Assists (28th); Steals (17th); Blocks (28th)
Salmons: Scoring (18th); Rebounding (28th); Assists (19th); Steals (14th); Blocks (20th)

Salmons is better (statistically), but you can argue how significantly better he is.

2. Here's the problem that I think gets too often overlooked. The Bucks have 8 years of data on Salmons. They might be overpaying, they might not, but they know exactly what they're paying for. We only have one year of data on Wes. There's no way to know what he'll continue to do. But he's not worth it at his current production. He's an albatross if he regresses. And thus he HAS to improve if the deal will make sense which is too much of a gamble. Especially when he isn't a good athlete by NBA standards.

 

[Shaggy]

1. The comparison between Salmons and Matthews goes like this, per 48, relative to all "listed" 2 guards on ESPN:

Wes: Scoring (27th); Rebounding (29th); Assists (28th); Steals (17th); Blocks (28th)
Salmons: Scoring (18th); Rebounding (28th); Assists (19th); Steals (14th); Blocks (20th)

Salmons is better (statistically), but you can argue how significantly better he is.

2. Here's the problem that I think gets too often overlooked. The Bucks have 8 years of data on Salmons. They might be overpaying, they might not, but they know exactly what they're paying for. We only have one year of data on Wes. There's no way to know what he'll continue to do. But he's not worth it at his current production. He's an albatross if he regresses. And thus he HAS to improve if the deal will make sense which is too much of a gamble. Especially when he isn't a good athlete by NBA standards.

I'm not accusing you of this but a lot of people here say the Jazz need to take more risks, right? Well this might be the time. The Jazz FO needs to **** or get off the pot. eh?

 

[billyshelby]

I'm not accusing you of this but a lot of people here say the Jazz need to take more risks, right? Well this might be the time. The Jazz FO needs to **** or get off the pot. eh?

Yeah, but poor athleticism likely means a low ceiling. If I'm paying MLE money, I either want a Vet who has proven skills to fill a need, or a guy I project to have a lot of upside. Unlike other people, I think what Wes did last year is about what he'll continue to do. I'm not sold he'll be as good a shooter going forward (he actually shot better as a pro than as a senior in college which has to be pretty rare.) I am sold Wes will continue to improve on D, and will probably post slight improvements over time in most of his ancillary numbers. But he's have to improve a lot to be worth that contract.

 

[Stifle Tower]

2. Here's the problem that I think gets too often overlooked. The Bucks have 8 years of data on Salmons. They might be overpaying, they might not, but they know exactly what they're paying for. We only have one year of data on Wes. There's no way to know what he'll continue to do. But he's not worth it at his current production. He's an albatross if he regresses. And thus he HAS to improve if the deal will make sense which is too much of a gamble. Especially when he isn't a good athlete by NBA standards.

Or to play devil's advocate:
After 8 years, especially after a player reaches his 30's, production generally declines. So Salmons may already be at/very near his peak (he's already 31 yrs. old). On the other hand, Matthews is only 24. And his per game statistics, especially pts/per are misleading. Look at FG%, not points. Give him more shots (he had less than 7/per) and he potentially doubles his scoring average, especially since the offense will be more diverse with Carlos gone. If I'm going to "overpay," I'd much rather take a risk on a player who is likely on an upswing, rather than a player who is likely at the top and could significantly decline.

I agree that having 1 year of data is a gamble. But you also have to look at the character of Matthews. I think it is very unlikely he quits working on his game once he signs the big contract, a la AK47. More likely he continues to work hard. That just seems to be his basic nature. And you can't teach that. It's what makes average players, good and good players, great.

I have to admit I'm torn on this one. I can make a compelling argument to keep Matthews. And I can make just as strong a case to let Portland eat his contract. I know this is a sad thing to say, but I'll be happy when Allen is gone and a new group takes over. Hopefully they won't try to screw over Utah each season.

 

[billyshelby]

I'm definitely not arguing Salmons was worth his deal. In fact, the Hollinger piece on it sums it up best. They overpaid because their cap situation would have made it impossible to get anyone comparable. Additionally, there isn't much point to my mind comparing this contract to that contract. Joe Johnson's deal makes everything sound reasonable.

All the Jazz have to do is figure out how much upside Matthews really has. His numbers and athleticism do not indicate a guy with upside. Normally, this isn't even an issue because he'd be locked down for 3 more years on cheap deals. We'd find out painlessly. In this unique situation, we're being asked to push our chips into the middle and decide right NOW what type of player Wes will be. No way should they take that risk for that money.

 

[Hopper]

As I recall, some posters on this board were insisting that Williams should not be given a contract longer than 3 years, and some, perhaps many, were insisting that he should NEVER be given the max. Probably some of the same ones who now worry because Deron can now opt out of his contract in 2 years.

 

[Stifle Tower]

All the Jazz have to do is figure out how much upside Matthews really has. His numbers and athleticism do not indicate a guy with upside.

How do his numbers indicate no upside?
No one ever improves their scoring average after their rookie season? Matthews won't get more shots? Or if he drops to say, 45% - in the range of Johnson, Bryant, Crawford and Iguodala, that would make him a bust?

Yes, it's very unusual for a SG to average 48%. That puts him ahead of everyone else at his position, including DWade, Allen, Roy and Richardson. So I guess we have to criticize Matthews for working TOO hard. Damn, if he had only shot in the low-40's and 30% on his 3's. Then he'd have "upside."

I'd be thrilled to have a starting SG stay in the 46%-48% range, especially one who also plays decent defense. Give him 12-14 shots per game instead of 7 and he could easily be in the 16-18 pt range per game. And I don't care if he "improves" his shooting one bit. 48%/38%/83% - those are pretty gaudy stats. Oh yeah, but I guess a player who is already at the ripe OLD age of 24 can't improve a bit. He won't get any better at help defense, he won't get any better at learning other SG's tendencies so he can be a better man-to-man defender.

AS I recall, not too many SG's really went off on the Jazz. Certainly not like the days of Derek Fisher. As a ROOKIE, Wesley committed < 2 fouls per game. You know what that tells me? Wesley played pretty good positional defense. He stayed in front of his man, moved his feet and didn't reach. That's phenomenal for a rookie!

I don't care about rebounds. In the Jazz scheme, the guards don't hit the boards, and especially not when you have Boozer and Millsap eating the glass. I don't care about assists. Matthews didn't get a ton of touches. The ball went through the hands of Deron, Boozer and AK. Even steals are misleading. I'd rather have a guard playing straight up than taking chances on jumping the passing lanes and getting beaten.

If he had 3 years of stats, showing minutes/per increasing each year and pts going from 9 to 12 to 14, there's no question he'd get an offer like this and we'd match. It's a risk, sure. But I think the risk is minimal. At worst, he's reached his ceiling and we have a mid-level starter or an expensive backup. At best, we have a starter giving us 16-18 pts., able to hit his 3's consisently and play pesky defense.

 

[Gyp Rosetti]

"15. You can't find guards who give you 9.5/2/1.5 in 25MPG just anywhere. "


John Salmons has a new 5 year $39M contract. His percentages are almost the same over the last couple of years (8 year vet to get there) but averages 2x points (19ish) and plays 38mpg. I don't think that Wes goes to 19ppg in 38min (system doesn't really allow that and its only 13 more mins a game), but he'd proably be at 12-13ppg with 38mpg's and same %'s (effectiveness.) So is John Salmons overpaid at 8/year?

Maybe this is really Millsap all over: At first it was a bit higher than expected, but really, looks to be a fair (or better) $value. I like Wes. Last night I said no way to this contract. But it was late and i couldn't believe the numbers. I could be softening up.

I think BillyShelby can help us understand how he is rated 28th in everything for shooting guards when I see him compared to Salmons looking more worth it. 7.0/year is probably average NBA pay. Billy, If Wes gets 35mpg would he rate as an average NBA wing? He has the efficiency of Salmons yet only 23 years old (Salmons matured after 4 years)

The next measure is how good is his defense really? Bruce Bowen? Raja Bell? ... Ronnie Brewer? He can and will get better than he is today at defense for certain.

Another late night logical conundrum reading all 300 posts last night: Most of us believe he's BETTER than Korver today. Korver got 5/year. Korver's at his peak about after 7ish years in the league. So Wes should be on an upswing - Maybe 7/year isn't so bad??

Good post. I too am starting to warm up to the idea of matching (which I think we'll do anyway), especially since the contract is front-loaded and won't hurt as much going forward.

More food for thought. Though he didn't qualify on nba.com for whatever reason (I'm assuming shot attempts), Matthews' PPS was 1.36 last year. That's higher than Deron Williams. And to put it into perspective, the only 2's or 3's who qualified with a better PPS were Maggs, Pierce, Durant, Lebron, Gerald Wallace, and Ginobili. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying he's better than Williams or these other players or that PPS is some end-all stat. However, 1.36 for a rookie wing is extremely impressive and that's undeniable. Will he remain that efficient with more time and more shots this year? I doubt it. But history tells us that the large majority of players improve over time.

 

[vslice02]

No way the Jazz should match. I'd rather keep Boozer for the next 5 years at $15 mil per than Matthews for the next 5 at the full MLE.
I also agree his upside is limited, and outside the Jazz system I'd be shocked if he matches his production from last year (since feb) as a starter with the same amt of minutes.

 

[Jazzman_86]

Let Wes go! its better to be shadow of ROY and get few mil more.

Than to be a starter and get 35 min in a game!

Wes be a shadow! Its better role for you!

And remember. That without Sloan and Utah Jazz you will be played somewhere in Norway or D-League.

Just Hate those not loyal player.