Hill and Hayward: The Package Deal

[Deleted member 848]

I'm not convinced that we have to sign Hill for Hayward to stay. After all, there is no place else Gordon would end up where Hill goes with him. I think Hill is playing that card a lot stronger than Gordon. I am sure Gordon would like to have George back but more than that he wants to see we are serious about winning. If we add another piece to the puzzle and it isn't George I think Gordon will be fine with that.

My worry is that if we downgrade from Hill, then Hayward is gone-- unless Gordon truly believes that Dante is ready to start next year.

So either we grab him, someone who's more or less as good as him, or we improve. Improving will be tough given the contracts currently on our team, mind you. How easy will it be to dump Favors and Burks?

 

[7StraightIsGreat]

My worry is that if we downgrade from Hill, then Hayward is gone-- unless Gordon truly believes that Dante is ready to start next year.

So either we grab him, someone who's more or less as good as him, or we improve. Improving will be tough given the contracts currently on our team, mind you. How easy will it be to dump Favors and Burks?

I do see a scenario in which Hayward returns and is fine with Dante starting at PG. If Utah can make a blockbuster addition at another position, I don't think Gordon feels like we have to have a top level PG on the roster. The type of player I'm thinking about in this scenario (yes, I realize it's highly unlikely) is Paul George.

 

[NUMBERICA]

the main priority of this offseason has to be retaining Hayward, full stop. If that means signing Hill to a ******** contract, unfortunately that's what we'll have to do.

It would be awesome if DL could convince the Pels GM that George Hill would be the better fit in NOLA, and Jrue the better fit here, and have both teams engage in a sign-and-trade. Not sure how possible that is, but that's what would make me most happy.

Why are you so adamant and certain that Jrue Holiday is and would be better than George Hill? Age? Aren't you concerned about one's actual injury proneness/issues/recurrences and the other's freak and unrelated injuries?

 

[NUMBERICA]

I do see a scenario in which Hayward returns and is fine with Dante starting at PG. If Utah can make a blockbuster addition at another position, I don't think Gordon feels like we have to have a top level PG on the roster. The type of player I'm thinking about in this scenario (yes, I realize it's highly unlikely) is Paul George.

Okay, but is it likelier that the Jazz acquire Paul George and keep Hayward or keep George Hill and retain Hayward?

 

[sepanol]

If Hayward is gonna stay because Hill stays... Thats weird. Probably Hill is trying to improve his value by saying, " Hey i know Hayward is invaluable for you and im his buddy. So im pretty valuable too, treat me right."
We have no chance of adding better players and keep our good pieces together next years after paying 25 m to Hill. That just doesnt make sense.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Why are you so adamant and certain that Jrue Holiday is and would be better than George Hill? Age? Aren't you concerned about one's actual injury proneness/issues/recurrences and the other's freak and unrelated injuries?

- because he's better
- list every single Jrue Holiday injury for me, and I'll provide you with an example of a player who went through the exact same injury at a similar age, and has gone on to improve as a player afterwards

 

[karl malone]

Let me just ask this:

Considering the topic of this thread, would any of you risk losing Hayward because you just arbitrarily want to pay ~$5-$10 million less per year to George Hill?

The main problem, aside from the fact that committing 20+ mil to a 31 year-old injury concern for 4 years is extremely risky & would be very restrictive financially in the future, is that committing the majority of the payroll to Hill, Hayward, & Gobert over the next four years would essentially cap the team's potential.

While that would certainly be a formidable core & there is always the possibility that Exum eventually develops or DL uncovers another gem in the draft, I don't see that as a championship caliber foundation.

If overpaying Hill is necessary to retain Hayward, I think the FO has to consider letting them both walk. Hayward is undoubtedly a championship caliber building block & will hopefully remain here long-term. He & Gobert are 2/3 of a potentially elite big 3 & losing him would essentially undo the majority of our rebuild.

But as frustrating as it would be to see this team take a significant step back just as they're beginning to realize their potential, it would be equally frustrating (at least for me) to watch them consistently come up short due to their financial inability to acquire that missing piece(s).

If Gobert wasn't locked up long-term, I might have a different opinion, but I would personally prefer to see the FO attempt to surround Gobert with young talent & hopefully (eventually) replace Hayward with a similar caliber player or (preferably) 2, rather than commit to a core unlikely to ever win a title.

Neither scenarios is ideal but IMO rebuilding around Gobert would give this franchise the best opportunity (or at least potential) to finally win a championship. But let's hope that's a decision that doesn't have to be made.

 

[colton]

To all those saying Hill is the key to keeping Hayward, you have got that backwards. Free agency essentially always starts with the biggest names signing first.

 

[JAZZGASM]

To all those saying Hill is the key to keeping Hayward, you have got that backwards. Free agency essentially always starts with the biggest names signing first.

So you think Hayward will re-sign without a commitment from the Jazz regarding Hill or similar FA signing?

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

To all those saying Hill is the key to keeping Hayward, you have got that backwards. Free agency essentially always starts with the biggest names signing first.

I think it will work almost in lockstep... I think they talk and Hayward re-signs first with a knowledge that Hill is right behind or will be finished by time moratorium is lifted.

Also, any of you saying no to Hill and go get Teague, Holiday, etc. don't understand our cap situation... it won't work. If we say no to Hill it means we are signing someone on the cheap to be our PG.

I think they both come back but don't think its a sure thing at all. I don't know that Hill gets a better deal than the one he was offered and it may be hard to swallow for him.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

I dont think Hayward is coming back if you cant retain Hill or at least show him a guaranteed plan to replace Hill with someone close to his level. If you are telling Hayward Exum is going to be the starter he probably lol's his way to Boston.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I dont think Hayward is coming back if you cant retain Hill or at least show him a guaranteed plan to replace Hill with someone close to his level. If you are telling Hayward Exum is going to be the starter he probably lol's his way to Boston.

Not to be the body language guy because I was watching the games at a sports bar in Hawaii, but I thought I saw a frustrated Hayward moment when Exum made a mistake... can't remember which game and I may have made it all up in my mind.

I agree here... if you tell Hayward that Exum is the dude I think it will really hurt our chances of retaining him. I like Exum and think he's more of a shooting guard tbh... Hill is just a much smarter player than Exum. We need a vet at that position.

 

[7StraightIsGreat]

To all those saying Hill is the key to keeping Hayward, you have got that backwards. Free agency essentially always starts with the biggest names signing first.

I don't believe for one second that Hayward re-ups with the Jazz without ironclad assurances from DL on a George Hill resigning or another big acquisition in his place. In fact, I think Utah's going to be very active in the trade market because they can pull those triggers prior to the start free agency. That way they don't have to try and sell Hayward on what they want to do. They can show him what they've already done.

 

[karl malone]

I'm not convinced that we have to sign Hill for Hayward to stay. After all, there is no place else Gordon would end up where Hill goes with him. I think Hill is playing that card a lot stronger than Gordon. I am sure Gordon would like to have George back but more than that he wants to see we are serious about winning. If we add another piece to the puzzle and it isn't George I think Gordon will be fine with that.

Good post. I don't think it's safe to assume that they're a package deal. I believe Hayward would likely re-sign if we were able to pull off a significant acquisition or the FO's as able to sell him on the promise of eventually landing that missing 3rd piece.

Replacing Hill with a solid stop-gap PG such as Mills/Collison/etc (depending on the financial commitment it would take) while retaining the majority of this year's roster (assuming a significant trade doesn't materialize) shouldn't cause much of a drop-off (if any, considering internal development/incoming rookies/potential additional FA signings/etc) in the teams ability to compete & would help retain long-term flexibility.

Hill missing significant time, Gobert establishing himself as an elite player, & witnessing first hand that the current roster isn't ready to truly compete with GSW are all factors that could convince Hayward to return regardless of how the Hill situation plays out.

 

[gomretat]

I don't think Dante as the starter is enough unless we are after another real strong starter as PF or SG. And I agree with J12 that the Jazz will be very active before free agency starts. Gordon is going to decide before a George Hill deal is finalized so there is an element of trust GH will have to have unless we have pulled off a trade before that point.

 

[karl malone]

I don't think Dante as the starter is enough unless we are after another real strong starter as PF or SG. And I agree with J12 that the Jazz will be very active before free agency starts. Gordon is going to decide before a George Hill deal is finalized so there is an element of trust GH will have to have unless we have pulled off a trade before that point.

Hayward returning without Hill would likely be dependant on acquiring a reasonable starting caliber PG, even if it's just as a stop-gap.

 

[DutchJazzer]

It's pretty clear after the exit interviews that Hill and Hayward are most likely a package deal as far as a return to Utah is concerned. While I would be fine with signing Hill to a 2-year deal, I don't see any scenario in which he signs for less than 4 years. IMO, you don't win championships signing a very good, but not great player to $25-30 million/year deal in which he'll be 35 before you get out from under it. That being said, if Gordon wants Hill in Utah, the Jazz have to do whatever it takes to retain him. It's more than just the prospect of hitting reset on the rebuild again. Losing Hayward to a bigger market after all of the time, effort, and development it has taken to get to this point would just be a monumental let down for a franchise that needs to retain it's homegrown talent now more than ever.

So while I suppose there's a chance Dennis Lindsey can sell Hayward into signing with a promise of a big name acquisition that's not named Hill, I'm starting to make my peace with the fact that we'll be watching a "Big 3" of Hayward-Gobert-Hill for the next 4-5 years. My concern is that even if these moves are absolutely necessary, Utah is committing itself to 4-seed purgatory for the next 5 years. We all know for certain that a roster built around those 3 cannot topple the Warriors as they are currently constituted. My worry is that even if/when GS loses 1 of their Big 4, Utah still isn't good enough to get past them. I also have my doubts about how we will fare against the Kawhi led Spurs and Harden led Rockets as those teams move towards the future.

Assuming that this is our "Big 3" going forward, what exactly is our ceiling? If this is how it plays out, now more than ever Lindsay needs to get aggressive with the other players we have on this roster. It will be time to push the envelope and see what varying combinations of Favors, Hood, Burks, Exum, and draft picks can get us. I'm trying to stay positive but I have this nagging feeling that Utah is in the familiar position of locking itself into being good, but not great, with little wiggle room to change anything.

dont underestimate gobert! if goldenstate loses 1 of their big4. gobert will beat them! he got his taste of playoff basketball!

 

[colton]

So you think Hayward will re-sign without a commitment from the Jazz regarding Hill or similar FA signing?

The jazz will tell him their general plan I'd bet, like "we will make every effort to re-sign Hill, we see him as an integral part of our plans for the next few years," but they won't be able to guarantee what specifically will occur.

 

[colton]

I dont think Hayward is coming back if you cant retain Hill or at least show him a guaranteed plan to replace Hill with someone close to his level. If you are telling Hayward Exum is going to be the starter he probably lol's his way to Boston.

I agree with that.

 

[fishonjazz]

So you think Hayward will re-sign without a commitment from the Jazz regarding Hill or similar FA signing?

I do