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

[Stifle Tower]

I agree, the amount the Millers spend is their prerogative and it is none of our business. If they choose to give Lucas and Ian Clarke max deals, it will have no bearing on Jazz wins or losses or to fan's enjoyment of Jazz basketball.

Moderators, please close this thread.

Or you could just decide to take the AKMVP route if you feel so strongly that a particular personnel move has destroyed the team and taken away your loyalty. May I suggest the Nets, where the owner has unlimited funds and bought a championship. Oh wait...

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I don't really think there is a right or wrong when it comes to what message they put out there... teams are going to offer what they will. Hayward's agent was very wise... there are a lot of teams with cap space and not many good free agents out there. It's not like teams are going "they said they'd only match a $10 M dollar per year offer... Let's offer 11 M they wouldn't lie to us".

Also, I think the teams can work on the sign and trade after the offer sheet has been signed. I know Minny was trying to do that with Batum and I believe Phx did it with Joe Johnson years ago. So, we really hold all the cards.

I think what I would do is offer him 11 or 12 per year right out of the shoot to let him know you want him. I would then tell him I expect you to shop yourself around for the best deal, but that no matter what we are going to match. Teams won't do him a favor and sign him to the max just to help him out. This will tie up their cap space for 3 days while other guys are getting signed.

I'd like to see him come back and play for a different coach. I think he is our best solution at SF. If he gets offered the max and we sign and trade him I will also understand. Either way... he ain't walking for nothing.

 

[mellow]

Locke just said that it was important to note that the jazz are maintains a open dialogue with Hayward's agent and will be through out the process. They don't want to have him get an offer from another team before they get a chance to match the same dollar figures on the Jazz terms.

Locke said, they don't want to make the mistake that some teams foolishly make by saying to the player "you go find out what the market is and get an offer an we will match it."

Yes, Locke is perfectly aware of the circumstances surrounding Paul Milsap and Wes Mathews. I really really like the way Dennis Lindzey conducts business.

 

[JAZZGASM]

Locke just said that it was important to note that the jazz are maintains a open dialogue with Hayward's agent and will be through out the process. They don't want to have him get an offer from another team before they get a chance to match the same dollar figures on the Jazz terms.

Locke said, they don't want to make the mistake that some teams foolishly make by saying to the player "you go find out what the market is and get an offer an we will match it."

Yes, Locke is perfectly aware of the circumstances surrounding Paul Milsap and Wes Mathews. I really really like the way Dennis Lindzey conducts business.

Locke's comments make me repeat (for confirmation) one of my prior questions. If, as he states, the jazz want a chance to match on their terms. Does that mean there are different ways a similar contract could be structured (frontloaded/backloaded?). And if not why would it matter if we just match another offer?

 

[mellow]

Portland killed the Millers on the Milsap contract. They had to come up with $10 million the day they matched. KOC was pissed, but Milsap was like, what ? They told me to find an offer so I did.

Rumour was that Portland knew the Jazz would match, and also knew that July cash flow was tight in the Miller Companies so they constructed the contract to be purposely painful.

In other news
Chris Herring @HerringWSJ
Pacers produced a movie for Lance, but he'll probably show up late for it. "My bad, Larry; I didn't wanna sit through boring previews!"

Can one of you clever young punks put together a highlight video of Gordon Hayward showing just why he should stay with the Jazz at a responsible price. TIA.

 

[//r00t 4 Jazz]

Not that this really matters but on Sportscenter when talking about the Big3 FA contracts and how much they might agree to take and how much money the Heat would have in cap space, when discussing Wade you could see Hayward (under SG) and had his dollar figure showing $10.5M.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Which until it actually happens, is exactly the thing you say.

I don't really have any concerns about how the Jazz approach this (or really anything).

 

[Twin Towers]

It doesn't matter how the Miller's spend their money? I agree in terms of legally or morally. I don't care what people spend their money on.

As a fan......Of course we should care how they spend the money. Fans view teams in the eyes of being a general manager. If we sign this guy to X contract its going to effect how many players we can sign afterwards.

If there was not a cap or a limit on how much we could spend.......Of course it would not matter. Who cares not our money.

But it is our cap space. And as a fan you want each player paid the right amount so you can make other moves. If you don't think we should worry about this because "its not our money." you could use that logic with wins and losses. Its not OUR TEAM.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

I agree, the amount the Millers spend is their prerogative and it is none of our business. If they choose to give Lucas and Ian Clarke max deals, it will have no bearing on Jazz wins or losses or to fan's enjoyment of Jazz basketball.

Moderators, please close this thread.

I don't quite follow the logic asserting that if the Millers give Lucas and Clarke max deals it won't have any bearing on wins or losses. I can't see any realistic or even half-baked scenario in which this is the case. Am I being thick, or is a very, very questionable assertion?

 

[Stifle Tower]

I don't really think there is a right or wrong when it comes to what message they put out there... teams are going to offer what they will. Hayward's agent was very wise... there are a lot of teams with cap space and not many good free agents out there. It's not like teams are going "they said they'd only match a $10 M dollar per year offer... Let's offer 11 M they wouldn't lie to us".

Also, I think the teams can work on the sign and trade after the offer sheet has been signed. I know Minny was trying to do that with Batum and I believe Phx did it with Joe Johnson years ago. So, we really hold all the cards.

I think what I would do is offer him 11 or 12 per year right out of the shoot to let him know you want him. I would then tell him I expect you to shop yourself around for the best deal, but that no matter what we are going to match. Teams won't do him a favor and sign him to the max just to help him out. This will tie up their cap space for 3 days while other guys are getting signed.

I'd like to see him come back and play for a different coach. I think he is our best solution at SF. If he gets offered the max and we sign and trade him I will also understand. Either way... he ain't walking for nothing.

Nope. If the offer sheet is signed and submitted to the league office, there can't be adjustments. The team has three days to match or refuse. Once matched, a trade is no longer possible to the offering team for at least 1 year.

 

[Stifle Tower]

Portland killed the Millers on the Milsap contract. They had to come up with $10 million the day they matched. KOC was pissed, but Milsap was like, what ? They told me to find an offer so I did.

Rumour was that Portland knew the Jazz would match, and also knew that July cash flow was tight in the Miller Companies so they constructed the contract to be purposely painful.

In other news
Chris Herring @HerringWSJ
Pacers produced a movie for Lance, but he'll probably show up late for it. "My bad, Larry; I didn't wanna sit through boring previews!"

Can one of you clever young punks put together a highlight video of Gordon Hayward showing just why he should stay with the Jazz at a responsible price. TIA.

Sure Portland wanted to include a "poison pill" so the Millers wouldn't match. KOC and the Millers thought the contract was a little high, and the bonus amount was unorthodox. But you can't tell me they couldn't just call up Zion's Bank and ask for the money up front. Short-term loan would be approved in a matter of hours.

Take your choice of any game except the one against OKC. There are plenty of "lowlights" showing why he should be GRATEFUL to get Favors-like money.

 

[cowhide]

Yes, and that's why the Jazz have always taken the stance that players should go out and establish their market value. Backfired with Raja 1.0 because he didn't give Utah a chance to offer him equal or better. Worked with Millsap as they matched the Portland offer (but ruffled the feathers of his uncle/agent). Backfired with Matthews. May have been able to sign him for less. But NO ONE saw that kind of offer coming, so I don't blame KOC.

Well so 2 out of 3 isn't very good and I could argue that the Jazz failed with Millsap. If the Jazz truly will match a MAX deal for Hayward then why didn't they just up their offer a little. According to reports they weren't that far apart, I think the reason why the Jazz allow Jazz FAs to go to market is they believe that they are asking for too much money. The Jazz front office idea of allowing the market to set the price has been proven wrong. They need better negotiators. That is why they lost Raja and Matthews. It is better to up your offer a little than allow some stupid GM to give a player more than he is worth. It is the chance you take but it seems like it doesn't work well that way considering the past examples.

If the Jazz wanted to pay him $11 million and Hayward wanted $12.5 why not meet in the middle and call it a day? You take a chance of having to deal with the possibility of a crazy offer and losing your player instead of paying a little more. So either the Jazz don't think Hayward will get a deal higher than they offered, or they don't want to keep him that badly or they suck as negotiators or they are hoping he doesn't get any offers that are better than they already offered. The last option seems like a big gamble to me. So in the end the Jazz can either lose him for nothing or pay too much to keep him and all they had to do is up their offer a little.