What's new
By:

Free Agent Rumors Thread

NUMBERICA said:
Parsons can be more easily had in the interim between now and whenever Carmello chooses a team. The Rockets have put him on the back burner because they don't want to commit cap to a player that they own rights to (and whose rights cost so little on the cap without the new deal). If Parsons signs a deal, the Rockets have to turn him out or match and risk losing their shot at Carmello.

If they're going to do it, now is the time.
Click to expand...

Possibly. I really wish that was the case. But Parsons might be loyal still to the Rockets. If he is willing to sign a contract great. but I bet he wants to stay until he gets replaced.
 
Chandler Parsons really want to be famous. I doubt he goes from Houston to a smaller market. He's got his sights on California. Can't doubt him. Got to get it in while the getting is good.
 
I'm guessing if we sign Bazemore Hayward will be played at the 3 a lot more.

Burke Exum
Burks Bazemore
Hayward Hood
Kanter Williams?
Favors Gobert

The problem with going out and getting free agents is that we already have a lot of players that need playing time. I think that team up above could be pretty solid in the future. We just need a few of our young guys to take the next step. Or trade for the next step guys. It'll be interesting.
 
Tony Jones: League source says Jazz are confident Hayward can take a leap, therefore not concerned at all about paying him top dollar Twitter @Tjonessltrib

Tony Jones: League Source said that while the Jazz have been quiet behind the scenes, they are open to almost any FA scenario should it benefit them Twitter @Tjonessltrib
 
Stoked said:
Tony Jones: League source says Jazz are confident Hayward can take a leap, therefore not concerned at all about paying him top dollar Twitter @Tjonessltrib

Tony Jones: League Source said that while the Jazz have been quiet behind the scenes, they are open to almost any FA scenario should it benefit them Twitter @Tjonessltrib
Click to expand...
That 1st quote is a little troubling. You don't sign guys to max contracts until they deserve them. In this regard they should have learned from AK. He was not worth the max when they signed him and he never grew to become worth it. Not really even close at anytime during that deal.
 
gregbroncs said:
That 1st quote is a little troubling. You don't sign guys to max contracts until they deserve them. In this regard they should have learned from AK. He was not worth the max when they signed him and he never grew to become worth it. Not really even close at anytime during that deal.
Click to expand...

Understand what your saying, but that AK deal was toxic compared to anything Hayward could get. Probably 2-5 million less and three less years. Son not really the same thing


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Thee jazz fan said:
Understand what your saying, but that AK deal was toxic compared to anything Hayward could get. Probably 2-5 million less and three less years. Son not really the same thing


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Not exactly comparing the 2. But it is still a bad idea to give Max contracts to people who don't deserve them. Players worthy of Max contracts should be worth those max contracts when signed, not sign them to a max hoping they will eventually deserve them. That is the only way I meant to compare the 2. Hayward's contract would undoubtedly be less toxic than AK's, I have not nor will I argue otherwise. But there is still something to be learned from it. The Jazz were essentially in the same place then as they are now. It's a bad idea not to learn from a previous mistake.
.
And the people pretending that signing Hayward to a max contract will have no negative impact are fooling themselves.
 
gregbroncs said:
Not exactly comparing the 2. But it is still a bad idea to give Max contracts to people who don't deserve them. Players worthy of Max contracts should be worth those max contracts when signed, not sign them to a max hoping they will eventually deserve them. That is the only way I meant to compare the 2. Hayward's contract would undoubtedly be less toxic than AK's, I have not nor will I argue otherwise. But there is still something to be learned from it. The Jazz were essentially in the same place then as they are now. It's a bad idea not to learn from a previous mistake.
.
And the people pretending that signing Hayward to a max contract will have no negative impact are fooling themselves.
Click to expand...

I here ya, and I don't want the jazz to give him a max either, but I do recall the jazz over paying for Boozer and Memo, they ended up justifying their contracts and made the jazz a pretty good team along with the Deron draft.

This is the nature of the nba. As a small market sometimes you have to overspend and pay a guy what you hope he will become. A gm or owner of a small market will get swallowed alive if they don't have this mind set. I don't think anyone is going to pay him a max deal, but if we want to keep him, and you think he will improve you have to over pay as a small market.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Thee jazz fan said:
I here ya, and I don't want the jazz to give him a max either, but I do recall the jazz over paying for Boozer and Memo, they ended up justifying their contracts and made the jazz a pretty good team along with the Deron draft.

This is the nature of the nba. As a small market sometimes you have to overspend and pay a guy what you hope he will become. A gm or owner of a small market will get swallowed alive if they don't have this mind set. I don't think anyone is going to pay him a max deal, but if we want to keep him, and you think he will improve you have to over pay as a small market.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I don't necessarily disagree. But I think Boozer was a lot further along than Hayward is now and did not get a max, until he left Utah. Okur was a much bigger risk. But again it was not a max. Maybe the Jazz see something I don't. But I don't see Hayward as a max player.
.
I'd be all for bringing him back, I like him as a player.
.
But being a max player is more that just getting paid. It's a sign to the rest of your team that you are the best player, that you can be counted on to carry the team when needed, and that you can go head to head with anyone in the league and hold your own. I would not say any of those things about Hayward.
 
gregbroncs said:
I don't necessarily disagree. But I think Boozer was a lot further along than Hayward is now and did not get a max, until he left Utah. Okur was a much bigger risk. But again it was not a max. Maybe the Jazz see something I don't. But I don't see Hayward as a max player.
.
I'd be all for bringing him back, I like him as a player.
.
But being a max player is more that just getting paid. It's a sign to the rest of your team that you are the best player, that you can be counted on to carry the team when needed, and that you can go head to head with anyone in the league and hold your own. I would not say any of those things about Hayward.
Click to expand...

My whole argument is that I don't see him as a max, and don't think we will have to pay max $ to sign him, but to sign him we will overpay.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Thee jazz fan said:
My whole argument is that I don't see him as a max, and don't think we will have to pay max $ to sign him, but to sign him we will overpay.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Okay, we pretty much agree then (as usual). I'm not sure they will have to overpay him. But that depends on what you think he's worth.
 
Thee jazz fan said:
Understand what your saying, but that AK deal was toxic compared to anything Hayward could get. Probably 2-5 million less and three less years. Son not really the same thing
Click to expand...
Kirilenko's deal was 6 years at $14.4mm per (as an own team extension). Hayward's could be 4 years at $15.9mm per (as an other team FA signing). Hayward could actually get 5 years at $17.1mm per if the Jazz were to re-sign him at the own team max (with max raises).
 
GVC said:
Kirilenko's deal was 6 years at $14.4mm per (as an own team extension). Hayward's could be 4 years at $15.9mm per (as an other team FA signing). Hayward could actually get 5 years at $17.1mm per if the Jazz were to re-sign him at the own team max (with max raises).
Click to expand...

AK's contract wasn't 14.4 every year it was at least 17 by the end. If it wasn't 7 I'm mistaken, but don't believe anyone will give him a max


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Thee jazz fan said:
AK's contract wasn't 14.4 every year it was at least 17 by the end. If it wasn't 7 I'm mistaken, but don't believe anyone will give him a max
Click to expand...
1. I have no idea if someone will give him the max. Avery Bradley got 8 per, Jody Meeks got 6.3 per. Kyle Lowry, the best player on an on-the-rise team that very nearly got to the second round this past season, only got 12 per over 4. None of this makes sense to me.

2. The 6th year of AK's deal was worth $17.8mm. The 5th year on an own team deal could be as high as $19.3mm. The 4th year on an other team deal could be as high as $16.9mm.

3. Maybe these rumors were total ********, and the market for Gordo is priced at or below Lowry's 12 per. I hope so. 12 is still a fairly large overpay for Gordo, but I could stomach it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top