What's new
By:

Rumor: Jazz prepared to match 'any offer' for Hayward.

Catchall said:
The last ex-Jazz players to max were DWill and Carlos Boozer. Both are considered to be among the worst contracts in the league.
Click to expand...
HUH?
DWill was extremely productive on his max contract for Utah. He was hurt for a few weeks of the season in which he was traded. It was Brooklyn who awarded him that MAX deal afterwards that is the now one of teh worst contracts in the league.

I agree with Boozer's 6/$70M being a terrible deal. But that wasn't a MAX contract.

Now if you had included AK's MAX deal in your statement, I'd agree.


Edit: oh, I see what you are saying. It's getting a MAX contract AFTER they leave Utah. If we match the contract, Gordo is going to become an all-star in Utah. If he leaves, there is a Higher Power which punishes teams for signing away Utah players. Difference is Boozer and DWill were damaged goods with ****ty attitudes. Gordo is healthy, young and wants to achieve. He's played under a horrible coach for 3 years.
 
Cavs can offer 63.4 for 4 years. Do we really want to pay Gordon an average of 15.85 for the next four years???....I just threw up in my mouth.
 
Hayward getting a max contract? I'll believe it when I see it. And if so, see ya later and have a good life!
 
I get less and less interested beyond 10M for Gordon. Wished he was worth that max but he missed too many wide open shots last year for me to blame everything on Corbin or any of the other excuses.
 
sojodave said:
Cavs can offer 63.4 for 4 years. Do we really want to pay Gordon an average of 15.85 for the next four years???....I just threw up in my mouth.
Click to expand...

Will it cause us to lose Enes or Burks when they are up for a new contract? If so, consider letting him go. Also, would have have any trade value to us if we sign him to the max? Even if it is too much, we may be able to get assets in return rather than let him walk for nothing.

I also read (take it for what it is worth) that Cleveland has been wanting Hayward for a long time. Supposedly if we could have done a sign and trade they would have given us the first pick for him. (If true, it is too bad we couldn't do a S&T).

I forget the rule, but if we match how long before we can trade him to Cleveland?
 
A guy that shot 41%FG, 31% 3-pt, had a 16 PER, is a below average defender (analysts have said this) and doesn't have one elite skill is going to get a max contract.


Vomit. The nba owners are tards. I hope they garner zero support in the lockout.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The problem is, we have to spend the $ anyway up to the salary floor. Payroll not spent gets distributed to the players as a bonus.

1. I call the Cavs and tell them we're matching unless they want to work out a S&T.
2. If they call our bluff, I match. The payroll has to be used. The Jazz would still be well under the cap, even with his contract.
3. There is NO problem re-signing everyone up to the tax threshold with Favors and Hayward locked in for 4 more years.
4. At the end of his 4 years, he's either re-signed if he becomes an all-star, or he's let go (or traded as an expiring). Jazz have picks in 2017 that could be used to replace him as a starting SF.


Some of you are looking at this based SOLELY on last season's production. Throw that out the window for now and consider Hayward as a 45%/40% player. Not worth $15M, I agree. But certainly worth a lot more than the ridiculously low amounts some of you are tossing around. This is a player who the national team considers one of the best in the US (not top-12, but just below).
 
Parsons shooting > Gordon
Parsons rebounding > Gordon
Parsons defense = Gordon

I'd rather put money into Parsons
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top