What's new
By:

All-NBA Teams Announced Thursday (5-18-17)

Utesnjazz said:
Larry was a badass that was totally willing to spend money. He had a history of consistently spending money. Since he has died the jazz haven't spent money. I hope I am wrong. But putting the jazz into a trust is bad news IMHO. The money is spread to thin among all the Millereites. They need to prove that I am wrong this year and spend money.
Click to expand...

He also enjoyed "hometown discounts" with Stockton, Malone and Hornacek.
 
SCS said:
The Miller family has stated several times that if the team is winning they are willing to pay the luxury tax.
Click to expand...

Here is the thing... what are they supposed to say... no we won't pay luxury tax.

I look at actions vs. what people say and we have lived at the salary floor last few years. No need for us to go into luxury tax last few years, but there were opportunities to spend more. We have also sold picks in like every draft. This summer we will see if these words are true... I'm not calling them liars, but there is reason to think we are budget conscious.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
Here is the thing... what are they supposed to say... no we won't pay luxury tax.

I look at actions vs. what people say and we have lived at the salary floor last few years. No need for us to go into luxury tax last few years, but there were opportunities to spend more. We have also sold picks in like every draft. This summer we will see if these words are true... I'm not calling them liars, but there is reason to think we are budget conscious.
Click to expand...

We've already paid the LT twice. I don't think there's any deal that improves us immediately that spends more of that cap, so I don't think being at the salary floor is an indictment of not being willing or able. We could have made waiver claims on Deron and Bogut (huge mistake on not claiming Bogut) and it would have cost us nothing, but they opted against it so it clearly wasn't a financial decision. I believe they'd pay the LT for defined periods of time when there's a specific plan in place. I don't think we pay the LT just because or on the roll of the dice, from both a financial as well as basketball personnel perspective. Spending money and the luxury tax can be the cost of being a championship team but it can also prevent a franchise from being a championship team, and I think there's a fine line between the two and their correlation with each other isn't perfect so we can't judge one by the other, and vice versa.
 
Utesnjazz said:
Larry was a badass that was totally willing to spend money. He had a history of consistently spending money. Since he has died the jazz haven't spent money. I hope I am wrong. But putting the jazz into a trust is bad news IMHO. The money is spread to thin among all the Millereites. They need to prove that I am wrong this year and spend money.
Click to expand...

You have already proven yourself wrong by opening your mouth. The Jazz have paid the luxury tax twice, and it was after Larry died.
 
if the jazz paid LT for the DWill years (where they more or less went as far as we did this year) they'll do it again, I think. Greg has been pretty good for spending money where it was needed (Rudy, bringing in players to work out, etc.)
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
Here is the thing... what are they supposed to say... no we won't pay luxury tax.

I look at actions vs. what people say and we have lived at the salary floor last few years. No need for us to go into luxury tax last few years, but there were opportunities to spend more. We have also sold picks in like every draft. This summer we will see if these words are true... I'm not calling them liars, but there is reason to think we are budget conscious.
Click to expand...

We have also spent money to buy a pick which is where we got Rudy. We also don't have any really bad contracts because we have been careful. Last year, a bunch of people were pointing at Portland and saying Jazz suck cuz we don't operate like those guys. Now they have 3 of the worst 10 contracts in the league and are ****ed financially going forward.

Deron Williams used to think this same thing about Utah after they traded Ronnie Brewer, and wanted to know what it would be like to play for a team who was willing to throw money around. He found out the hard way.

Moral of the story: There are lots of reasons for being conservative in the early/middle stages of building a team, and the salary cap makes it mandatory to have SMART MONEY MANAGEMENT, otherwise you end up making mistakes that can hurt you for years.

P.S. Utah had the 2nd best offseason last year and still managed not to spend in a way that could be detrimental. TBH, one of the best managed teams in the league.
 
So today is actually a pretty big deal... if Hayward makes one of the teams, then he'll have to opt-in to be eligible for the Super Max next offseason.. or I guess if he really wanted to leave at that point, he could. How much more is the Super Max than what he can get this offseason?
 
infection said:
We've already paid the LT twice. I don't think there's any deal that improves us immediately that spends more of that cap, so I don't think being at the salary floor is an indictment of not being willing or able. We could have made waiver claims on Deron and Bogut (huge mistake on not claiming Bogut) and it would have cost us nothing, but they opted against it so it clearly wasn't a financial decision. I believe they'd pay the LT for defined periods of time when there's a specific plan in place. I don't think we pay the LT just because or on the roll of the dice, from both a financial as well as basketball personnel perspective. Spending money and the luxury tax can be the cost of being a championship team but it can also prevent a franchise from being a championship team, and I think there's a fine line between the two and their correlation with each other isn't perfect so we can't judge one by the other, and vice versa.
Click to expand...

We've been at the floor for almost three years... and sold multiple second round picks. I understand we paid luxury tax but that was under Larry's command (iirc). Was also a different and less punitive environment. I just don't put stock into someone saying they will spend... of course that is what they will say.

I think part of the trust deal may change things and that we will spend more. I'm not sure if that was part of the motivation on Gail's part but will certainly prevent us from stacking cash for no reason.
 
Cappy_Smurf said:
We have also spent money to buy a pick which is where we got Rudy. We also don't have any really bad contracts because we have been careful. Last year, a bunch of people were pointing at Portland and saying Jazz suck cuz we don't operate like those guys. Now they have 3 of the worst 10 contracts in the league and are ****ed financially going forward.

Deron Williams used to think this same thing about Utah after they traded Ronnie Brewer, and wanted to know what it would be like to play for a team who was willing to throw money around. He found out the hard way.

Moral of the story: There are lots of reasons for being conservative in the early/middle stages of building a team, and the salary cap makes it mandatory to have SMART MONEY MANAGEMENT, otherwise you end up making mistakes that can hurt you for years.

P.S. Utah had the 2nd best offseason last year and still managed not to spend in a way that could be detrimental. TBH, one of the best managed teams in the league.
Click to expand...

We've done this dance before... we could have signed value deals several years ago. I know we bought a pick, but if we are operating at the floor why are we selling picks with good players on the board.

I don't want us to be the Clippers or Brooklyn and Portland nailed the offseason two years ago and then effed it up the past offseason, but we had ample opportunity to spend with hamstringing the future. Likely cost us the playoffs last year. Not a huge deal.

If we setup all that flexibility and watch Hayward leave it is a fail... if we balk at paying luxury tax to retain Ingles or Hill then what have we saved all this flexibility for? This summer is the acid test... that is all I am saying.
 
Why can't hayward opt out and do a 1+1 at the max to leave himself eligible for megamax. If he opts in can we re-sign him to megamax this offseason as an extension?
 
David Stern said:
So today is actually a pretty big deal... if Hayward makes one of the teams, then he'll have to opt-in to be eligible for the Super Max next offseason.. or I guess if he really wanted to leave at that point, he could. How much more is the Super Max than what he can get this offseason?
Click to expand...

Not much initially but it gets bigger. If you count year for year, without including the extra years on the super-max, it's only a $1 million difference.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
We've been at the floor for almost three years... and sold multiple second round picks. I understand we paid luxury tax but that was under Larry's command (iirc). Was also a different and less punitive environment. I just don't put stock into someone saying they will spend... of course that is what they will say.

I think part of the trust deal may change things and that we will spend more. I'm not sure if that was part of the motivation on Gail's part but will certainly prevent us from stacking cash for no reason.
Click to expand...

Larry died like in 2008. It wasn't until 2010 or so before we hit the LT. I believe the Millers know that at some point paying the LT may be the best business decision and will bet a better return on their money -- I don't believe they're that short-sighted and I believe they've got confidence in DL who I believe can lead them along there -- contrast to KOC, I had no confidence in him. He and Greg were the blind leading the blind.
 
Think I found my answer. He can sign it as an extension, so he wouldn't be risking it by opting out and waiting... makes him an extra $50M.

If he makes the all-NBA team and opts out I'm guessing he's gone.
 
infection said:
Larry died like in 2008. It wasn't until 2010 or so before we hit the LT. I believe the Millers know that at some point paying the LT may be the best business decision and will bet a better return on their money -- I don't believe they're that short-sighted and I believe they've got confidence in DL who I believe can lead them along there -- contrast to KOC, I had no confidence in him. He and Greg were the blind leading the blind.
Click to expand...

Larry died in 2009.. we paid luxury tax in 2009-10 and 2010-11. Since 2013 we have operated under the cap with the last two years at the floor. Selling picks along the way.

I have no problem with this activity if they will pay to keep the team together and continue improving it. I would even support salary dumping Burks to lessen the tax hit. I just have a problem with the view that some have that we are willing to spend based on someone stating we are willing to spend. I look at our actions last few years and it's been quite frugal.
 
Do we really want Hayward to get the supermax, though? It makes this off season and this coming year a lot nicer, but the numbers on the back end of the contract are truly ridiculous--and in my opinion would seriously hamper the team around 4 years from now.

I'm kind of thinking the best case scenario for us is for Gobert to make the all-NBA team (because it doesn't affect his contract), but for Hayward to miss it (but to still re-sign with the Jazz of course). Certainly financially speaking that seems best.
 
colton said:
Do we really want Hayward to get the supermax, though? It makes this off season and this coming year a lot nicer, but the numbers on the back end of the contract are truly ridiculous--and in my opinion would seriously hamper the team around 4 years from now.

I'm kind of thinking the best case scenario for us is for Gobert to make the all-NBA team (because it doesn't affect his contract), but for Hayward to miss it (but to still re-sign with the Jazz of course). Certainly financially speaking that seems best.
Click to expand...

I agree best course is he gets reduced 5-year max, but if it gives us a big advantage in retaining him then I'd take it now over the uncertainty... the cap space is a side benefit.

If he leaves its fairly catastrophic... think we will be okay with the backend of the deal even if it isn't ideal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top