What's new
By:

Jazz, George Hill taking contract talks down to wire

stitches said:
You cannot R&E for additional 4 years. The max is 4 years(current contract+future years). It would have been this year + additional 3 years. That's the max we can offer him.
Click to expand...

I know... I wasn't super clear. If he hits free agency I'm much more worried about the years than the dollars... my bad.

I'd rather go 3/75 now than 4/85-90 later.
 
The other thing is if we retain him he is likely still an okay player that no one will want to pay big money to at 34. Might be a cheap vet option like SA has done in the past. Wants to stick around because why change at that stage in the career.
 
Impossible to give a full opinion without knowing what the Jazz actually offered, but I would say not giving him a max is the right move. Hard to justify that much at his age. It's a risk though and the Jazz last risk in FA didnt payoff (not giving Hayward the full 4 year max last contract).
 
And the Spurs are paying Parker 15 million next year. They might not have room to offer Hill the max. Anyone better at looking at cap stuff want to look at that? They also have to make a choice on retaining Patty Mills or not.

Patty Mills coincidentally would be a good backup plan if Hill leaves as a backup to Exum.
 
I trust Bobby's opinion but it only takes one *******... and there are so many assholes out there.

Brooklyn, Sacramento, Orlando, all fit the mode of ahole teams with space.

If we offer 4/80 and SA offers 4/80... where is he going? I think our chance would be less than 50/50.

Our cap space is basically wasted this year already. Is 3/75 much worse than 4/80? I don't think so.
 
Handlogten's Heros said:
I trust Bobby's opinion but it only takes one *******... and there are so many assholes out there.

Brooklyn, Sacramento, Orlando, all fit the mode of ahole teams with space.

If we offer 4/80 and SA offers 4/80... where is he going? I think our chance would be less than 50/50.

Our cap space is basically wasted this year already. Is 3/75 much worse than 4/80? I don't think so.
Click to expand...

Yeah but his line of thought was that all the teams who can really offer him money are bad teams who either wouldn't want a guy his age at that much money, flat out dont want to win ATM, or Hill wouldn't want to go to a ****ty team for the difference of money from Utah (other good team).
 
Stifle Tower said:
We don't Bulletproof. But we do know the two are very good friends. We also know Hayward wants to win. So I think Hill leaving would HAVE to cause Gordon to doubt. The Jazz would certainly take a step backwards. It's not like Exum is going to become a fringe all-star. He's barely a fringe 2nd-stringer.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's the problem, it seems to me like we have to almost pay Hill to keep Hayward.
 
Gambling on nobody else paying a great player what he wants has consistently bitten teams in the *** and will always do so.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
And Pau Gasol has an 16,000,000 player option next year. Does he turn that down?
Click to expand...

No but they could send out Aldridge... trade or stretch Parker. They'd have to move some stuff but it's doable.

If they come with an equivalent or near equivalent offer I think Popp convinces him to go. I don't think they have a brighter future than we do but it's clear they would like to reunite.
 
White Chocolate said:
Jazz are 25-9 when Hill plays and 22-6 when Hill and Hayward both play.

Hill is averaging 17.7 PPG, 4 APG, 3.4 RPG and is shooting 41.3% from three on 5.1 attempts per game. Not to mention he is one of the best defenders at his position in the league.

He's playing arguably his best basketball as a pro as well. Just in case you guys forgot.

Sent from my iPhone using JazzFanz
Click to expand...

He also hasn't played as many NBA years, is skill/length and not hops reliant and hasn't showed decline yet. The best thing is he's willing to move off the ball unlike a lot of other PGs.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Yeah but his line of thought was that all the teams who can really offer him money are bad teams who either wouldn't want a guy his age at that much money, flat out dont want to win ATM, or Hill wouldn't want to go to a ****ty team for the difference of money from Utah (other good team).
Click to expand...

Matthews, Iggy both used Sacramento to get what they want.

The upside of getting a better deal is much worse than the downside of paying the guy a few extra million per year.
 
MT Steve said:
Gambling on nobody else paying a great player what he wants has consistently bitten teams in the *** and will always do so.
Click to expand...

The argument is that the teams that can afford to pay him lots are the teams that are lottery bound.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top