So? Why does it being cheaper matter? It's not like having Beverly puts us in a good cap position where we can sign a big time FA.
Patrick Beverley Available
- Thread starter LoPo
- Start date
So? Why does it being cheaper matter? It's not like having Beverly puts us in a good cap position where we can sign a big time FA.
Miggs
Well-Known Member
You don't think the 15+M difference in salaries between Beverley and Hill (along with other moves we've all discussed--dump Burks, opt of Diaw, etc.) could mean the difference between being able to sign a big FA this summer or next? Or help us retain Hood or Favors should one of them have a healthy, semi-breakthrough year?
Okay.
I think the goal should be to get better, not sign a worse PG so we can keep our players that are trending down.
Sign the better player, Hill.
Miggs
Well-Known Member
Signing Beverley, with two years left, also is about the perfect timetable to see what we have in Exum.
We could also have both.
Hill-22, Beverley-26
Hill-4, Hood-26, Exum-18
Hayward-30, Ingles-18
Favors-14, JJ-22, Bell-11, Kuzma-1
Gobert-32, Favors-10, Bolomboy-6
Sure, trade for Beverly after the draft and the Jazz have signed Hayward and/or Hill. Dont use draft picks this year to do it beforehand. Not worth 2 first rounders when there is uncertainty to the future. You dont want to be stuck with that overpay for Beverly with no Hayward.
Miggs
Well-Known Member
You agree though that Kuzma should only get about one minute of PT though, right?
Depends on what the rest of the roster looks like. It would probably be optimal if he could put a month or two in the G-League first.
I'd take him but not in place of Hill -- I'd like the versatility of having both. You could even give him minutes the same way they treat Exum playing off ball. Then I'd move Exum in a larger deal trying to land Love. Draft Ojeleye and sign Bogut and you've got your nasty covered.
Miggs
Well-Known Member
Yes, if there was another move in there that had us moving out Exum to get in Love, then my feelings on working out a deal for Beverly pre-draft change.
The standalone move of getting Beverly? That can wait til after Hayward/Hill's decision.
Cappy_Smurf
Well-Known Member
It will matter once Utah gets into the tax. I've been saying for some time now that they would be paying the tax, and Locke confirmed the other day, but there is still a limit. The deeper you go, the stiffer the penalties get.
LoPo
Well-Known Member
Yes. Hood may or may not be there if we obtain Love but damn would I love that lineup above subbing Danny Green for Hood.
LoPo
Well-Known Member
No. Sorry if that looked wrong. Beverley would cost us $15 million less than Hill if Hill takes around $20. I go PB.
Sent from my VS995 using JazzFanz mobile app
Cappy_Smurf
Well-Known Member
Wasn't Teodosic looking for 10 million a year? MLE is 5.9?
Cappy_Smurf
Well-Known Member
I like the idea of trading for Beverly, but I wouldn't give 2 firsts. Maybe a first and a future 2nd.
I don't believe Teosodic is a realistic option if he's looking for 10 million a year.
I don't believe Teosodic is a realistic option if he's looking for 10 million a year.
Sure, and if we do get Love, having a cheap PG would be optimal. If we aren't getting Love though I think it's more optimal to have the bargain player be at PF and 2nd wing (which will hopefully be Ingles on a 10-ish million dollar deal).
I read it was 24/3 (which I believe is basically the MLE) that Teo was looking for. I think if Utah offered him that with a clear rotation spot for him, he takes it over any comparable offer (or even higher, within reason) from a worse team.
1. Considering Beverly's salary, I don't think your proposal gets it done.
2. You're either spending more money for Teodosic or you're spending more assets for Beverly. Personally, I'd rather add assets.