Favors next season?

[NUMBERICA]

But that's my point. We can reasonably expect the Jazz to get a good deal and it mitigates A LOT of the risk.

I would propose/be in favor of a hedge move that overloads guaranteed money next year and the Jazz retain team options/partially guaranteed salary* after that.

*essetially structured like the deals they have with Thabo, Jonas, Udoh that make the salary pseudo cap-space that they could use on the trade market (just at larger money, which I think would be tempting for Favors and Exum considering the market and their question marks)

 

[silesian]

I think Favs wants to stay -- why else would he be working on his 3-pt shot? If he were leaving to play center for another team, his 3-pt shot wouldn't be important.

I assume you are being sarcastic, because otherwise, you would be saying that only the Jazz would value a big who can shoot 3s.

 

[NUMBERICA]

But that's my point. We can reasonably expect the Jazz to get a good deal and it mitigates A LOT of the risk.

I would propose/be in favor of a hedge move that overloads guaranteed money next year and the Jazz retain team options/partially guaranteed salary* after that.

*like the deals they have with Thabo, Jonas, Udoh that make the salary pseudo cap-space that they could use on the trade market

 

[silesian]

I think Favs wants to stay -- why else would he be working on his 3-pt shot? If he were leaving to play center for another team, his 3-pt shot wouldn't be important.

I assume you are being sarcastic, because otherwise, you would be saying that only the Jazz would value a big who can shoot 3s.

 

[MDAV28]

I would propose/be in favor of a hedge move that overloads guaranteed money next year and the Jazz retain team options/partially guaranteed salary* after that.

*essetiallh structured like the deals they have with Thabo, Jonas, Udoh that make the salary pseudo cap-space that they could use on the trade market (just at larger money, which I think would be tempting for Favors and Exum considering the market and their question marks)

See I hate this from the Jazz side though because if they sign them to good deals, they can trade them barring injury regardless. And what's the goal of having them locked up just next year? They aren't contending next year. I think we both agree the path would hope to be having all these guys + adding a max guy in 2019 FA to be a contender

 

[NUMBERICA]

See I hate this from the Jazz side though because if they sign them to good deals, they can trade them barring injury regardless. And what's the goal of having them locked up just next year? They aren't contending next year. I think we both agree the path would hope to be having all these guys + adding a max guy in 2019 FA to be a contender

Did you read the scenario presented in my post? The Jazz would retain the option to retain them past 2019, giving the Jazz both the best shot at fielding the best team they can next year while giving them the freedom to hunt in 2019 free agency (but having a safety net).

They don't have cap space to spend on anything but their own guys (and maybe some bargain out there) this offseason, and losing guys for nothing isn't likely to be the route to field the best team next year, so get them a raise for next year as an incentive for them to sign an unguaranteed/partially guaranteed/team option for '19. This also milks another contract year out of Favors.

I would also absolutely disagree that Favors and Exum constitute the best way the Jazz could spend $20 million in cap space.

TLDR; there's a way to hunt big in 2019 AND field the best possible team next year, and that should be what the Jazz try to do.

 

[David Stern]

Favors at 25 Million is a gigantic overpay. I don't see why the Jazz would do that. Exum at 8 is an overpay as well if we are paying for his current production, but he's younger and you only pay him that much or more if you are confident gambling on his development. I can't imagine the Jazz getting anywhere close to 25 Million for Favors.

It's an overpay, but it's also a win-win. 2 years, $50Million with the second year unguaranteed makes a ton of sense for both sides. We keep flexibility, and he gets more money than he would on the open market.

 

[NUMBERICA]

It's an overpay, but it's also a win-win. 2 years, $50Million with the second year unguaranteed makes a ton of sense for both sides. We keep flexibility, and he gets more money than he would on the open market.

A lot more money. I think his market is about what he's making now. In other words, in that first year he might make more than for the length of his next contract otherwise.

I don't know what rules the CBA has for changing salary, but making the second year salary significantly less would be ideal (and frankly more than fair).

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

What does this day about rudy? It's a really stupid comment. Because if you think Favors can't shoot and that makes him worthless. .....that's a really bad sign for Gobert, because fave looks like Steph when compared to Gobert as a shooter.

I think you are misunderstanding. The point is that you can't have two non-shooters on the floor together, and everyone (except for a couple of fools) knows we are keeping Gobert. But if Favors can learn to shoot, problem solved. If Gobert figures out how to shoot as well we become practically unstoppable.

 

[Quin's Murderface]

It's an overpay, but it's also a win-win. 2 years, $50Million with the second year unguaranteed makes a ton of sense for both sides. We keep flexibility, and he gets more money than he would on the open market.

I'm probably just not as high on Favs as others. I think you could get something much better for that money even for one season. I guess if we tried and struck out with some big FA's this summer and Favs was still around I might be ok with this, but I still wonder if targeting a couple smaller pieces wouldn't be smarter if you want to do 1+1 deals. I still think adding a complimentary stretch 4 is also a big deal fo rthis team, and sticking with Favors at that amount makes him a starter again which I'd prefer to not have moving forward.

 

[NUMBERICA]

I'm probably just not as high on Favs as others. I think you could get something much better for that money even for one season. I guess if we tried and struck out with some big FA's this summer and Favs was still around I might be ok with this, but I still wonder if targeting a couple smaller pieces wouldn't be smarter if you want to do 1+1 deals. I still think adding a complimentary stretch 4 is also a big deal fo rthis team, and sticking with Favors at that amount makes him a starter again which I'd prefer to not have moving forward.

Whether Favors gets $25 million next year has no practical cap ramifications. The Jazz would only have the MLE to spend on the open market either way.

 

[Quin's Murderface]

I would propose/be in favor of a hedge move that overloads guaranteed money next year and the Jazz retain team options/partially guaranteed salary* after that.

*essetially structured like the deals they have with Thabo, Jonas, Udoh that make the salary pseudo cap-space that they could use on the trade market (just at larger money, which I think would be tempting for Favors and Exum considering the market and their question marks)

To me there's no reason to sign Exum to a short deal. Either cut bait with him now or try to get him on a long deal if you believe in him. It seems like you just don't believe in him and are trying to play a middle ground scenario there. The problem with that is that we lose either way. If he's good we lose team control and also low balled him so he's probably going to leave right when we get the most value out of him. If he's bad, then we waste a couple years (and cap space) for a guy that we aren't committed to anyway. I just don't see the upside to that kind of deal for the Jazz. They should either let him walk or sign him to a minimum 3 year deal (and better if it is 4). No half measures. With Favs I think it's the same issue. Either commit to him if you really believe in the Gobert/Favors pairing or try to find a better fit and commit to playing Rudy with a stretch 4.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

I think we lose our 3rd best player for nothing if we don't re-sign Favors. It's a really bad idea to not even try and sign the 3rd best player on your roster. Gobert is not an offensive powerhouse, giving him more room inside could help but Favors is really consistent from just inside the 3 point shot, stepping one step out isn't that much more space. I think Rubio is still a real hindrance to our offensive potential. I'd rather have Favs than most stretch 4's that are or will be available this off season. Because most stretch 4's can't guard anybody. The Jazz are not beating the Rockets and Warriors by trying to emulate them, Being bigger stronger and more physical is their only shot in the near future and Favors helps that.

Not to mention Favors and Gobert don't play all that many minutes together when the other matchup isn't working. But they are great against lineups like NO and Minn who have 2 good bigs.

Long 2's are the worst shot in the game. Corner three's are the second best. So, yes, that one step makes a really big difference and creates a lot more space.

 

[NUMBERICA]

To me there's no reason to sign Exum to a short deal. Either cut bait with him now or try to get him on a long deal if you believe in him. It seems like you just don't believe in him and are trying to play a middle ground scenario there.

Seems? That's what I said and what I mean. There is no hard data to suggest that Exum is or will be good, I hope everyone is perfectly clear on that fact. His value is the HOPE that he IMPROVES and can get on the court.

If he's good enough to warrant picking up the later years on the contract then you do it. Exum isn't getting a big offer anywhere this offseason, and he's missed more than half his career from shattering, he'd be wise to take any non-insulting offer on the table, frankly. Getting $10 million next offseason and yielding to a team option on partial guarantee is both more than he'll be offered per year anywhere else and more than his QO which he'd have to take in order to gamble on himself. If the Jazz even extend the QO, I don't think there's a team out there that offers him a longterm contract north of the MLE ($8.5 mil), and I doubt there's a team that offers him even that.

 

[Quin's Murderface]

Whether Favors gets $25 million next year has no practical cap ramifications. The Jazz would only have the MLE to spend on the open market either way.

I think it's more complicated than that. They can renounce a couple guys this year. I renounced Thabo (don't really need him with Crowder imo) and Traded Bradley and Burks and I had over 15 MIllion in Cap space after signing Exum to 10 million a year (which I think is around the high end he'll get). So there are definitely options there for DL. I can't see Thabo, Crowder, and Jerebko all with the team next year personally.

 

[infection]

Whether Favors gets $25 million next year has no practical cap ramifications. The Jazz would only have the MLE to spend on the open market either way.

Your scenario presents an interesting dynamic. He knows he'd have to develop a decent three point shot and he'd know being able to play his way in to getting that second year would earn him at least $12M more (relative to what he'd get on the open market), and would really hinge most on whether or not he's hitting threes.

 

[Quin's Murderface]

Seems? That's what I said and what I mean. There is no hard data to suggest that Exum is or will be good, I hope everyone is perfectly clear on that fact. His value is the HOPE that he IMPROVES and can get on the court.

If he's good enough to warrant picking up the later years on the contract then you do it. Exum isn't getting a big offer anywhere this offseason, and he's missed more than half his career from shattering, he'd be wise to take any non-insulting offer on the table, frankly.

Hope is a loaded word that you are using as a fan. As a GM you could simply project that he will be good having more info than the fans. Either way if you are a GM and don't think he'll actually be good there's no reason to pay him anything else. You should move on rather than give him a deal that handicaps your leverage with him. You still aren't getting what I'm saying I don't think. You can't seem to separate your personal feelings for what makes sense for the Jazz. It's 4 (or maybe 3 years) or nothing imo. Anything else will be a short-sighted fail in negotiations. I mean if Exum will do a 1 year deal and 3 years of non guaranteed team options then that's fine but he's obviously not going to do that. No FA signs deals like that.

And again there is plenty of reason to think Dante is going to be worth at least 10 million over the next stretch of his career. Projection is a normal part of signing young players to extensions. The question is how much you are willing to bet on him, not the amount of years. The team HAS to go for 4 years of control if at all possible.

 

[infection]

I think it's more complicated than that. They can renounce a couple guys this year. I renounced Thabo (don't really need him with Crowder imo) and Traded Bradley and Burks and I had over 15 MIllion in Cap space after signing Exum to 10 million a year (which I think is around the high end he'll get). So there are definitely options there for DL. I can't see Thabo, Crowder, and Jerebko all with the team next year personally.

I'd actually love to have all of them, then add Ariza and The Nigerian Prince and then maybe try to get Patrick Beverley. Take out GSW in 5.

 

[NUMBERICA]

The team HAS to go for 4 years of control if at all possible.

Why?

And yeah, hope/faith is a commodity too. There's a reason he was drafted high, and that's what you'd be paying to check out. But that's it. In order to project, one should have data, and hopefully a positive trendline. Dante basically has neither.

I'm also perfectly fine letting Dante walk.

 

[Quin's Murderface]

I'd actually love to have all of them, then add Ariza and The Nigerian Prince and then maybe try to get Patrick Beverley. Take out GSW in 5.

Lol. I mean the problem is kind of a minutes crunch at some point. If Thabo was still playing I guess Jerebko wouldn't be getting minutes, or maybe Royce. I think DL went a little bit overboard with the depth this year, personally. It worked out because we had some injuries and trades, but I think before the deadline they were definitely having some locker room issues with roles and minutes. If you put Thabo back in to that with no other changes some guys are going to be really unhappy who deserve to be playing. DL is more conservative than myself so maybe he'll hold on to all of them haha.