GAME thread: Rising Jazz @ "Setting" Suns : Sat. 2/6/16 ; 7:00 MST

[Coach Ellis]

I'm hoping that Rudy starts using the salute here after the All Star break. That was one thing last year that I loved and I've been waiting to see him to fire that up. Got the team and the fans pumped (and apparently Quin too.)

 

[fishonjazz]

I'm hoping that Rudy starts using the salute here after the All Star break. That was one thing last year that I loved and I've been waiting to see him to fire that up. Got the team and the fans pumped (and apparently Quin too.)

Yes, this.
I miss the salute

 

[Coach Ellis]

Rodney Hood carries the day again, this dude is turning into a great player before our eyes. Still loving that he never seems rattled and is always composed. Hopefully they can keep it going through the ASB.

I want Lyles and Hood to put on a shooting clinic in the Rising Stars game. Seemed like it was a big bump in confidence for both Gobert and Exum last year.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Anyone have a gif of the Gobert jump shot?

 

[BabyPeterzz]

I'm hoping that Rudy starts using the salute here after the All Star break. That was one thing last year that I loved and I've been waiting to see him to fire that up. Got the team and the fans pumped (and apparently Quin too.)

He saluted once this season, and it delayed him getting back on defense, I can't remember the exact game. But I have a feeling after that Q put the kibosh on the salute, unfortunately.

 

[Bawse Dawg]

Players' coach. Guys are going to WANT to come play for Quin in Utah (and stay). EXACTLY the coach we needed for DL to hire. Love the wink, too, This is Rudy's team, He's the leader. And it's contagious. Lyles is into it, then he gets Gordon doing the flex. Booker has fire. Favors has really come out of his shell. Can scarcely remember the quiet boy who arrived via trade and reportedly kept to himself.

This core just HAS to stay together. Gobert can set the first example by agreeing to a 5 yr/$100M extension. That would show the rest he's willing to take less than he'd get on the open market, Then the ball would be in Hayward's court to do the same type deal.

Are these numbers right? He can get $20mil/year on the open market? This says that the max he can get is about $16.5. https://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q16

I know the cap goes up. So maybe that # does get near $20 million. But it still isn't much of a 'sacrifice' sounds like 5 years $100 million is his best case scenario.

 

[Stifle Tower]

Are these numbers right? He can get $20mil/year on the open market? This says that the max he can get is about $16.5. https://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q16

I know the cap goes up. So maybe that # does get near $20 million. But it still isn't much of a 'sacrifice' sounds like 5 years $100 million is his best case scenario.

No, he can get 25%, which would likely be around $25M/ per (assuming BRE of $100M). Hayward and Favors will both be eligible for 30% contracts. I think some team would be willing to go max for each of them. All it takes is just one and each of them is good enough and young enough that if you're sitting around with cap space to burn, it would be worth it to add a player like any of those to your roster.

That's why I'm saying it would be a BARGAIN if Gobert gave Utah a discount down to "only" $20M/per.

 

[Bawse Dawg]

No, he can get 25%, which would likely be around $25M/ per (assuming BRE of $100M). Hayward and Favors will both be eligible for 30% contracts. I think some team would be willing to go max for each of them. All it takes is just one and each of them is good enough and young enough that if you're sitting around with cap space to burn, it would be worth it to add a player like any of those to your roster.

That's why I'm saying it would be a BARGAIN if Gobert gave Utah a discount down to "only" $20M/per.

Do you have some sources for this?


Edit: I see the 25% thing but the 2017 cap projection is $90million not $100.

 

[Stifle Tower]

It adds up in hurry. Assume each of the three gives Utah a hometown discount of $5m per year. That's $70M for those three. Hood certainly projects as a player that's going to get a big deal. So assume maybe close to $20M? Perhaps close to that for Dante? All of a sudden, Jazz are looking at $100-$110m for their starters. And that's assuming hometown discounts.

That's why I've repeatedly said Utah may have to let one of them go and count on those multiple picks in 2017 - or a preemptive trade to replace Hayward or Favors or Hood. And you all know which one of those I favor replacing... not because I don't really like him - just because I don't think Utah can afford to pay him $30M or even $25M.

 

[Bawse Dawg]

I'm seeing $90 million next season but $109 the next season.

What if we just gave them the 'max' this offseason? Sure it's a bit less than they could get if they waited, but they get financial stability. A 'max' offer for Gobert THIS summer would be like $18 million, but it'd be a lot more in 2017. Same with Hayward and Favors.

I don't know much about the salary cap and contracts, but would they say no if we just offered all three of them 2016 'max' extensions this offseason? If they accepted that then suddenly keeping everyone together seems a bit more realistic.

 

[Stifle Tower]

Do you have some sources for this?


Edit: I see the 25% thing but the 2017 cap projection is $90million not $100.

I'm kind of using a midrange approximation, so bring Haywards contract down to $27M with 7.5% increases. The cap will then likely increase to $100m in a couple of seasons. But it doesn't matter if it's $90M or $190M. What matters are the percentages. If Gordon wants 30%, Favors wants 30% and Gobert gets 25% - that's 85% of the cap space for just 3 players. Just can't afford those percentages. Look at what Miami had to do - sign a bunch of ring chasers at the minimum to play with LBJ, Bosh and Wade. Or Brooklyn: pay whatever it was (90m?) in tax fines to field a team.

 

[Bawse Dawg]

I'm kind of using a midrange approximation, so bring Haywards contract down to $27M with 7.5% increase. The cap will then likely increase to $100m in a couple of seasons. But it doesn't matter if it's $90M or $190M. What matters are the percentages. If Gordon wants 30%, Favors wants 30% and Gobert gets 25% - that's 85% of the cap space for just 3 players. Just can't afford those percentages. Look at what Miami had to do - sign a bunch of ring chasers at the minimum to play with LBJ, Bosh and Wade. Or Brooklyn: pay whatever it was (90m?) in tax fines to field a team.

That why the time they sign is important. Cap goes up, salary stays the same.

 

[Diamond77]

This win streak is really nice but the jazz offense still has lots of problems

I agree with you, but winning games is the only thing that counts now.

 

[Stifle Tower]

That why the time they sign is important. Cap goes up, salary stays the same.

Salaries generally don't stay the same; they can increase by either 4.5% per annum (if a player signs with another team) or 7.5% (max raise that the current team can give). IINM, the table you cited does not adjust for the new broadcast agreement.

From what I read, contracts can only be renegotiated in year 3 of a 4 yr deal and only if the team has cap space for that season. And salaries can't be reduced. Really doesn't make much sense to do this. Perhaps an outside chance Favors gets more money on a wink-wink deal for '17'-18' in exchange for agreeing to a discounted contract in '18-'19. I doubt that's technically legal to agree to, but we all know stuff like that goes on with deals and agents shopping players/gauging interest before they're officially free agents. I don't think Jazz could give a new max to Gordon or increase Gobert's salary to $18M beginning next year even if they wanted.

This is an old article, but apparently the league informed teams it expects the cap to be $89M next year and then a whopping $108M in 2017.
https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2015/4/17/8447839/nba-salary-cap-projection-free-agency-2016-2017

To make the math simpler, I'm just going to go with $100M for '17-'18 when Gordon will opt out and Gobert's new deal will go into effect. Next season, Gobert will still be under his rookie deal, even if he agrees to an extension. And it might be better if he and the Jazz don't. IINM, his QO for '17-'18 would only be $3.2M if he doesn't sign an extension. Gives Utah some cap room to work with before they give him a HUGE deal. And there's no risk; he'll be a RFA and he knows Utah is going to re-sign him.


Assuming $100M in BRI for 2017-18
1. Max for Rudy at a 25% contract would be 5yrs/$143.8M (7.5% increases, which are not compounded). There is an outside chance Gibert could be eligible for a 30% contract. He'd need to be named to the all-NBA 1st, 2nd or 3rd team this year and next (or win league MVP this season or next).

2. Hayward can opt out and get a 30% deal. Max from another team would be 4 yrs/$130.8M (4.5% raise). With Utah he could get 4/$133.5M or 5/$172,5M.

3. Favors will be eligible for a bit more per year than Hayward since his new contract would start 1 yr later under a presumably higher cap.

 

[Miggs]

I'm seeing $90 million next season but $109 the next season.

What if we just gave them the 'max' this offseason? Sure it's a bit less than they could get if they waited, but they get financial stability. A 'max' offer for Gobert THIS summer would be like $18 million, but it'd be a lot more in 2017. Same with Hayward and Favors.

I don't know much about the salary cap and contracts, but would they say no if we just offered all three of them 2016 'max' extensions this offseason? If they accepted that then suddenly keeping everyone together seems a bit more realistic.

Agreed. Max them all or make close to max deals for all this summer if we can. With the cap going to 109M the following year and presumably more in years thereafter, their figures, especially if they were a little under max deals, wouldn't kill us.

20M per for Rudy, 24M per for Hayward, 22M per for Favors. That's 66M and wouldn't cripple us going forward imo.

Think those guys would "settle" for that?

 

[Stifle Tower]

Agreed. Max them all or make close to max deals for all this summer if we can. With the cap going to 109M the following year and presumably more in years thereafter, their figures, especially if they were a little under max deals, wouldn't kill us.

20M per for Rudy, 24M per for Hayward, 22M per for Favors. That's 66M and wouldn't cripple us going forward imo.

Think those guys would "settle" for that?

Are you sure we can cancel their contracts and pay them more this summer? Pretty sure Gobert has to play out his rookie contract, even if he signs an extension. I'm seeing that's the case with Westbrook and Davis. Also appears it was that way with Durant and Rose. I know AD signed a record extension last fall, but he's still earning $7M THIS season. That extension doesn't kick in until next year when he's in year #5 of his career.

https://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q16

I certainly think you pitch them on taking less. Actually, Rudy has the first shot at setting the tone since he can negotiate the terms of an extension next summer. Cap wise, it's better to hold off since his QO would be so low. But face it, Utah doesn't have to reserve space for a LaMarcus Aldridge or hope they can get Bosh like Houston did in making Parsons wait. And it backfired on Houston. If Rudy would agree to 5/$100M, Lindsey should JUMP at that. It would show Hayward that Rudy was leaving money on the table to try to keep everyone together. SOMEONE would certainly offer Gobert a max 4/$100M deal, perhaps even with an opt out clause like Hayward so at 7 years of service he'd be eligible to negotiate a 30% deal. He's so dominant defensively I think a few teams would be willing to give him that amount.

 

[Miggs]

Are you sure we can cancel their contracts and pay them more this summer? Pretty sure Gobert has to play out his rookie contract, even if he signs an extension. I'm seeing that's the case with Westbrook and Davis. Also appears it was that way with Durant and Rose. I know AD signed a record extension last fall, but he's still earning $7M THIS season. That extension doesn't kick in until next year when he's in year #5 of his career.

https://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q16

I certainly think you pitch them on taking less. Actually, Rudy has the first shot at setting the tone since he can negotiate the terms of an extension next summer. Cap wise, it's better to hold off since his QO would be so low. But face it, Utah doesn't have to reserve space for a LaMarcus Aldridge or hope they can get Bosh like Houston did in making Parsons wait. And it backfired on Houston. If Rudy would agree to 5/$100M, Lindsey should JUMP at that. It would show Hayward that Rudy was leaving money on the table to try to keep everyone together. SOMEONE would certainly offer Gobert a max 4/$100M deal, perhaps even with an opt out clause like Hayward so at 7 years of service he'd be eligible to negotiate a 30% deal. He's so dominant defensively I think a few teams would be willing to give him that amount.

No, I have no idea. I think we can throw an offer at Gobert this summer and that Hayward can opt out this summer, so those two perhaps. No? I'm not sure about Favors but tbh, I feel like he'd get the least league-wide. I don't think teams look at him as some big get.

 

[Bawse Dawg]

What's the difference between being above the salary cap but below the luxury tax? Does it just mean you don't get luxury tax money from other teams? Because if we have a chance to build something special then I'd be pissed if we weren't at least willing to spend up to the luxury tax limit. So we can add about $20 million onto previous predictions.

If our top 5 players could be had for an average of $20 million each then we'd have another $20 or so million to spend on the bench. Which isn't very much considering Burks is getting $10 million by himself.

This sucks. Even being as optimistic as possible I can't make it work. Unless you want to root against Exum so we don't have to pay him. Or say that Hood has peaked and won't get and better.

If it comes to it, I think Hayward would be the odd man out between Hood, Favors, Gobert and Hayward. He'd command more money than Hood and isn't nearly as irreplaceable as Favors and Gobert.

If he lets it be known that he is going to opt out after next year then I'm guessing he's gone at the deadline.

 

[NUMBERICA]

What's the difference between being above the salary cap but below the luxury tax?

This is useful: https://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm (ctrl+F is your friend here as well)

-A team above the cap and below the tax can only spend the Mid-Level Exception* ("MLE", it's essentially the average wage of an NBA player [~$6 million per year]). A team below the cap can spend their cap however they please (so long as the contracts observes the rules of the CBA). A team above the tax gets a mini-MLE (what it sounds like, worth about half as much as the MLE) and only the mini-MLE*.

-A team above the cap and below the tax has to salary match incoming salary within 150% of the outgoing salary, roughly. A team above the tax is allowed to salary match only 125% of outgoing salaries. A team under the cap can absord as much salary as they have under the cap without sending out any. (https://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q84)

That's the big stuff.

 

[NUMBERICA]

This is useful: https://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm (ctrl+F is your friend here as well)

-A team above the cap and below the tax can only spend the Mid-Level Exception* ("MLE", it's essentially the average wage of an NBA player [~$6 million per year]). A team below the cap can spend their cap however they please (so long as the contracts observes the rules of the CBA). A team above the tax gets a mini-MLE (what it sounds like, worth about half as much as the MLE) and only the mini-MLE*.

-A team above the cap and below the tax has to salary match incoming salary within 150% of the outgoing salary, roughly. A team above the tax is allowed to salary match only 125% of outgoing salaries. A team under the cap can absord as much salary as they have under the cap without sending out any. (https://www.cbafaq.com/salarycap.htm#Q84)

That's the big stuff.

* The Bi-Annual Exception, Larry Bird Exception, and others apply universally to teams, regardless of salary picture (IIRC), and thus aren't worth mentioning as a point of comparison.