Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 167
  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    846

    New Contracts- who to pay and how much

    Dennis Lindsay has some difficult decisions ahead. The Jazz will not have the money to pay all their players.

    Who should they pay?

    How much should they pay?

    Who should they let go?

    Let the debate begin.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    846
    I'll tell you what I think we should do with our PG's. Feel free to bash it. Mack and Neto both have a bench role ceiling. Hill appears to be a better option long term over Exum, and so far it's not even close. Hill must sign a long term contract at a discount for several reasons: injury history, age, he has never played this well. We need him to give us a discount in order to make our future contracts work. We need to sign him in the 18 million per year range. Yes it's a deal now, but on the back end of the deal when he is in his mid 30's it will be fair. If he wants over 20 per year we must sign him to a short term deal. There is not a realistic option in free agency better for us than Hill. Hill and the Jazz are a great fit. I would be shocked if he wasn't resigned.

    An argument can be made to play Neto and Mack over Exum if we want to win now. However, Exum still has a slim chance to be our guy long term. I think we give him until the end of the season to show us what he's got. If he can't improve drastically, we sign Hill and trade him in the offseason. With 2 first round picks and 2 second round picks we may be able to package Exum to trade up in the draft. Mack is a free agent this offseason and can be retained for cheap. Neto is under contract for next year for only 1 million. Marcus Paige is in the D league and could develop into our 3rd PG next year. Point guard is probably a position we target in the draft if we move Exum.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,800
    Do you guys think we will re-sign Favors? From the games I've seen so far, Lyles hasn't shown he can replace Favors. Especially on the defensive end. Favors does have a history of injuries which is also a big problem.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    21,882
    Code:
    Gordon Hayward	$16,073,140	$16,736,710	$0	$0	$0	$0
    Derrick Favors	$11,050,000	$12,000,000	
    Joe Johnson	$11,000,000	$10,505,000	
    Alec Burks	$9,904,495	$10,595,506	$11,286,515	
    George Hill	$8,000,000	$0	
    Boris Diaw	$7,000,000	$7,500,000	
    Dante Exum	$3,940,320	$4,992,385	$6,619,903
    Shelvin Mack	$2,433,334	
    Trey Lyles	$2,340,600	$2,441,400	$3,364,249	$3,706,357	
    Rudy Gobert	$2,121,287	$21,224,719 $22,741,573 $24,258,427 $25,775,281
    Joe Ingles	$2,100,000	
    Rodney Hood	$1,406,520	$2,386,864	$3,472,887	
    Jeff Withey	$1,015,696	$
    Raul Neto	$877,800	$1,014,746	
    Joel Bolomboy	$600,000	$905,249	$1,050,262
    red is team options, blue is player option, green is qualifying offer.

    next year we have 74 million dollars in active contracts with a salary cap around 102 million. I think we can do whatever we want next year because hood is still on his rookie deal and favors is on his old contract. its the year after when if hill is going to cost 20 mill a year, Hayward needs a max, Favors needs 20 mill, hood needs 20 mil, and with rudy's max its just not possible to pay all of them without paying a huge tax bill. However if hill only costs 15 and hood only costs 18 then it might be possible to keep them all.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    846
    I don't see a better option than George Hill this offseason at point guard. The other PG's on our roster are not starting caliber players. He is the best and most realistic option in free agency by a mile. We are a much better team with Hill. In my opinion we are going to have to pay him unless he wants way too much money. I don't see any way he can ask for too much considering his age, injury history, and the fact that he is having a career year. Long term it will be easier to replace Favors or Hood than Hill.

    2017 free agent point guards

    Steph Curry- Not leaving GS
    Chris Paul- never coming to Utah
    Kyle Lowry- Not leaving Toronto for Utah
    George Hill- wants to stay, great fit, need his leadership, 3 and D compliments teammates
    Jrue Holiday- terrible injury history
    Derrick Rose- injury history, won't come to Utah, not a good fit
    Rajon Rondo- poor attitude, not a good fit
    Jeff Teague- poor defender, Hill is a much better fit
    Shaun Livingston- loves GS role, Hill is a better fit
    Michael Carter-Williams- not a starting caliber PG, can't shoot
    Deron Williams- never going to happen
    Brandon Jennings- not a good fit, inefficient chucker

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,830
    I think Hill has to be a priority. Favors has been great when he's been on the court but I feel like Hill is much more valuable to our specific team. Exum still gets next year to prove what he's got. Same for Lyles. We showed a lot of patience with Favors so I think we need to do the same with our current batch of youngins. Hill HAS to be resigned this off-season and then we worry about what to do with Favors next year.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    846
    Quote Originally Posted by JAZZNC View Post
    I think Hill has to be a priority. Favors has been great when he's been on the court but I feel like Hill is much more valuable to our specific team. Exum still gets next year to prove what he's got. Same for Lyles. We showed a lot of patience with Favors so I think we need to do the same with our current batch of youngins. Hill HAS to be resigned this off-season and then we worry about what to do with Favors next year.
    I agree. We wait on Favors to see what Hayward and Hill do first. If Hayward and Hill join Rudy in long term contracts, then we may have to choose between Hood and Favors. If Hayward leaves we will be able to keep Hood and Favors. Why make the choice before we have to. The exception is George Hill. He is the best option. The sooner we sign him the better. Signing Hill is what Hayward wants and we may be able to get a discount.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    846
    Mack, Ingles, and Withey are all free agents this offseason. I don't see teams lining up for Mack and Withey. We should be able to keep them for a low salary. Ingles is going to get a pay bump. Some team is going to offer Ingles more than we can. When you lead the league in 3 point shooting you are going to make some cash. We love Ingles and want him here but the money will be too much and he will be gone.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    846
    I don't see us making any trades this season. I was thinking maybe Alec Burks, but I changed my mind. Alec Burks is a Hayward insurance policy. We would need him as a wing option without Hayward. If Hayward resigns I think we unload his contract this offseason. Even with the injuries he has a great contract. In a fast paced open floor offense he could do really well.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    1,305
    For the first time in years, we may have a team that people are willing to play for at a discount. We have a potential coach of the year candidate that people enjoy playing for. We have an offensive system that moves the ball and lets everyone be involved. We don't have any arrogant all-star that people don't like to play with. We have a good team that could be good for years. So if we can stay competitive with salary offers, we have alot to offer that players may be willing to give a discount to stay.

    We should and probably can keep Ingles. His witty style of play fits our system well. His lack of athleticism on defense can be mitigated by Gobert. He is close with Exum and I hear he is close with Diaw as well. Things just make too much sense for him to stay put.

    As much as I like Mack, I think he has to give us a hefty discount for him to stay. If Hill stays and Exum continues to develop, Mack could be the 3rd PG and you don't pay big money to a 3rd PG. He has a chance to come back if he gives us a discount because he is friends with Heyward, knows our system, and in general is a solid player and person. But my guys he may want some money and that will not be with us.

    The Withey decision comes down to what we do with Favors. If we keep Favors, then Favors plays the backup Center role. If we do not keep Favors, then Withey makes alot of sense to keep. He has a similar game to Gobert, he always comes to play, he is exactly what you want in a backup Center. But if we keep Favors, then we have to use him at the center position to maximize his minutes and you can't play too much for a 3rd string center in a league where centers have been devalued.

    Ultimately, what happens with Heyward and what happens with Favors will impact every other decision we make. Heyward stays in my opinion, Celtics aren't as good this year and Jazz can give him more money, so I think he is in a good place. If Favors wants a max contract, I don't think the Jazz will give that to him. He has a history of injuries and limited range on his jump shot. He is still a good player and I want him on the team, but when it comes to players that our critical to our success, we have other descent options. Next year we have Diaw, a solid vet, Lyles an up and coming player, and Bolomboy who is tearing up the D-league and a solid development project. So the need for Favors isn't as big as it is for other players / positions, so if we can extend him at a discount, we do it and it is a good move. But no way we give him a max contract.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    846
    Quote Originally Posted by Raupie View Post
    Ultimately, what happens with Heyward and what happens with Favors will impact every other decision we make. Heyward stays in my opinion, Celtics aren't as good this year and Jazz can give him more money, so I think he is in a good place. If Favors wants a max contract, I don't think the Jazz will give that to him. He has a history of injuries and limited range on his jump shot. He is still a good player and I want him on the team, but when it comes to players that our critical to our success, we have other descent options. Next year we have Diaw, a solid vet, Lyles an up and coming player, and Bolomboy who is tearing up the D-league and a solid development project. So the need for Favors isn't as big as it is for other players / positions, so if we can extend him at a discount, we do it and it is a good move. But no way we give him a max contract.
    Solid points on Favors. I agree we can't give him a max deal. Rudy is an elite center. His dominance has changed our long term plans. We need a PF that compliments his game best.

    I also agree Hayward is not leaving. The new CBA just made it so each team can sign 2 players to 6 year extensions. That is a lot of guaranteed money.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    21,882
    I would be scared to give Favors any money at this point. I would give him next year to prove he can stay healthy.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    nowhere
    Posts
    8,728
    we shouldn't lock up anyone too soon. we should have learned our lesson with burks, so it's pretty safe to say we're not locking in favors yet. with our play the last 2 weeks, i don't think i'd be disappointed to see anyone of our guys in a jazz uni next year. withey has been solid backing up gobert, mack has run the offense efficiently when he's in, ingles is top 2 in 3pt % and has made some impressive defensive plays of late, boris is mostly a liability but he's been dynamic with rudy.

    i don't see the value in scrutinizing free agents and running through numbers with a finetooth comb yet... jumping the gun a bit, imo.
    HAWKS '13 ,'1 4, & '15 PREMIERS


    "I ate his liver with some fava beans and a nice chianti...ffftt ffftt ffftt!"


    "of course tom 'jan' brady would whine about a rule change."
    -chipurmunki


  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    1,305
    Injuries are part of the game, so I am not sure I disagree that Burks's extension was a bad decision. He could come back from his injury and be a very good player. When he has been on the floor he has been a solid player, so I don't think we made any wrong moves by extending him when we did and for how much we did. It was the right decision, then, IMO.

    Secondly, I don't ever think it is too early to start evaluating and planning. The teams who are one step ahead of everyone are usually the successful ones. If you wait too long to make a move, you don't get the same value. We held onto Trey Burke too long... we held onto Kanter too long... we didn't hold onto Wes Matthews long enough... we didn't hold onto Paul Millsap long enough... so I don't ever think it is too early to plan and make moves.

    For example, Favors. If we extend him now use this year's extra money, that could be a great move. It could also be a bad move if he can't overcome these nagging injuries. But if you wait until it is obvious that he is a stud and past the injury issues, now you are paying more money.

    Where I personally feel we need to take action is the PG position. We are a playoff team with a question mark at the PG position next year. Hill's contract is expiring. Exum the jury is still out on. Mack is a free agent and not starting calibur. Neto is probably a backup at best. So I feel we need to extend Hill so we are set in every position going into next year.

    I would be curious if anyone has any trade ideas. Is there a move that prepare us for a deep playoff push?

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    846
    Quote Originally Posted by chipurmunki View Post
    we shouldn't lock up anyone too soon. we should have learned our lesson with burks, so it's pretty safe to say we're not locking in favors yet. with our play the last 2 weeks, i don't think i'd be disappointed to see anyone of our guys in a jazz uni next year. withey has been solid backing up gobert, mack has run the offense efficiently when he's in, ingles is top 2 in 3pt % and has made some impressive defensive plays of late, boris is mostly a liability but he's been dynamic with rudy.

    i don't see the value in scrutinizing free agents and running through numbers with a finetooth comb yet... jumping the gun a bit, imo.
    Jumping the gun? Your right. So boring. Nothing to talk about.

    Ca'mon Chip, the short term decisions will greatly influence the long term. Let me give you an example. Resigning Hill is the domino that will change a lot. Do we resign Hill? Exum doesn't look good and would have to prove he was the answer before we resign Hill. Not gonna happen! Mack and Neto are bench players. The market for Hill could be around 20 per year. Discounts are nice but typically unrealistic. You wouldn't do it, why should they. Most importantly there is not a better realistic option in free agency. Don't forget that without Hill Hayward is less likely to stay. Drafting and waiting for another PG is [U]not an option[/U,] so we are painted in the corner. Not much of a decision remains, time to pay Hill what he wants. It would save us money long term to renegotiate his current deal now. Let's say you resign Hill to a 4 year 80 mil contract. Risky considering his age and recent injury history. We just moved our time table up and need to win now. We had to anyway to keep Hayward Happy. Now comes the great ripple effect. Hopefully Hayward stays and we sign him to a max deal. Suddenly we have a $124 million roster with 3 empty roster spots and 4 draft picks. Mack, Ingles, and Withey are free agents we can't pay much. $122 million is the luxury tax line. This probably leads us to letting Diaw walk on a team option and playing Lyles more. With Hill signed long term why would Exum stay? We may even unload him to get something out of him.

    2018/19 season we have $88 million in contracts and only Hayward, Hill, Burks, Lyles, Gobert, and Bolomboy signed. 2018-19 salary cap and luxury tax: $108 million/$130 million. We have 42 million before we hit the luxury tax line and 9 players to sign not including current and prior year rookies. We keep no more than 2 rookies per year. We still have at least 5 players to sign including Favors and Hood and roughly 38 million under the dreaded luxury line. Now what? Even if we can unload Burks 11 million we have no more than 49 mil to sign Favors, Hood, and our entire bench. That is not enough. Considering our injury history we need more than a bunch of rookies. Unless we can get some players to sign for a discount (Hill, Hood, Favors) we will have to choose between Favors and Hood. Favors is much easier to replace than Hood. You can't trade anyone now just in case Hayward doesn't stay. If Ingles keeps hitting 3's he's going to price himself out of our range and Hayward is going to loose his BFF. If we can't pay them all do we trade Hood or Favors this offseason assuming Hayward signs? Will someone take Burks contract? Can Lyles replace Favors? Will Exum ever develop into a solid player? Should we push our time table back considering the Warriors roster? Many of these decisions will need to be made by this summer. Is it too early to talk about it? Uh NO.

Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •