What's new
By:

KOC had a terrible off-season

O

oldtimer

Well-Known Member
Did anyone else see Brian T. Smith's twitter that Mathews said he would have signed with the Jazz for 4 million a year if it was offered. The Jazz never offered him a contract. The way Mathews is playing we sure could use his production.

We could have signed Fes for 3 years and six million according to the reports. I think he will get more in the off-season and he will be missed when he is gone.

He signed Hayward. You know its bad when a five point performance brings numerous threads about turning around his season.

I know he got Jefferson, but really that was a Minnesota gift as they were just trying to dump his contract. Any GM in the league could have and would have completed the Jefferson trade.

Imagine if we had signed Mathews instead of Bell, signed Fess for Cheap, drafted Anyone from 10-15 or Fields (personally I still like Larry Sanders), and signed Jefferson. This was in our reach, but KOC is bound and determined to let other teams set the market for our players. Its a very conservative approach that back-fired this year big time.

I know were are playing and doing well, I think we could have been better
 
No I didn't see Smith's twitter where it said that. I did see this though:
"Sources said that Blazers' Matthews would have initially accepted about $4 million per year to stay with Jazz but Utah never made an offer."

Please link to the tweet where "Matthews said he would have signed with the Jazz for 4 million a year if it was offered." Matthews camp has been on the defensive ever since Matthews signed that offer sheet. I'm not sure I trust their version of events completely.

The Blazers called at midnight. Should KOC called at 11:59PM, yes, probably, but as soon as he got the full midlevel offer portland he was not going to sign with Utah for $3MM/yr; otherwise Matthews would have called Utah and told them so before signing the offer sheet.

I miss him and wish the Jazz would have locked him up during last season (if possible, but I'm not familiar with CBA etc.). But he is now gone. Get over it.
 
KOC has challenged that version of the story. While trying to be very gracious and not call anyone a liar KOC said that if Mathews did not know what the Jazz were offering him then Mathews needed to check on the people who were working for him. Locke was on the radio saying the same thing. This whole story got pretty good run at the time it happened so I wont bother finding a link.
 
You might want to understand some of the most basic tenets of the CBA before pretending like you do.
 
It's very easy to say "I would have signed for less" after you've signed for more. It's very hard to say "I'm going to sign for less" when you have another offer on the table. I'm not saying he wouldn't have... I'm saying I'd have been surprised to see anyone in their sophmore year doing so.
 
oldtimer said:
Did anyone else see Brian T. Smith's twitter that Mathews said he would have signed with the Jazz for 4 million a year if it was offered. The Jazz never offered him a contract. The way Mathews is playing we sure could use his production.

We could have signed Fes for 3 years and six million according to the reports. I think he will get more in the off-season and he will be missed when he is gone.

He signed Hayward. You know its bad when a five point performance brings numerous threads about turning around his season.

I know he got Jefferson, but really that was a Minnesota gift as they were just trying to dump his contract. Any GM in the league could have and would have completed the Jefferson trade.

Imagine if we had signed Mathews instead of Bell, signed Fess for Cheap, drafted Anyone from 10-15 or Fields (personally I still like Larry Sanders), and signed Jefferson. This was in our reach, but KOC is bound and determined to let other teams set the market for our players. Its a very conservative approach that back-fired this year big time.

I know were are playing and doing well, I think we could have been better
Click to expand...

Matthews trying not to make enemies in Utah good for him, but come on do you really believe this? We have our future PF and his name is Millsap. Evans makes what a third of Sanders would make if he were picked 9th and bottom line is that we got Jefferson. Hayward only 20, Sanders is what 23? Ok, what have like to seen Fes signed for a couple of years though. Our record certainly proves your point though. Terrible off season.
 
MGibblets:

Your right it did say "sources" and I inferred Mathews as only Mathews could say what he would or would not have accepted. As for the stories by KOC allegedly refuting this statement, I would have never left it up to an agent to communicate my sort of desire to retain Mathews. By law agents have to communicate "firm offers" to their clients. If KOC had put a 4 million offer on paper and faxed it to his agent we wouldn't have these questions now.

I do know it is tough to complain when the Jazz are Awesome and have been playing well. I just think we could have been playing for the championship with Mathews instead of Bell. Right now I think we are a two guard away from winning the whole thing.
 
People overrate Matthews tremendously on here. Now even more so that he is putting up stats on what is a terrible team without Brandon Roy.
 
Larry Sanders is shooting under .400 as a center. Shoulda drafted that old man...

Consider, also, that the Jazz have no long-term contractual obligations, with everyone coming off the books in the next three offseasons (in the unlikely case the Jazz don't pick up Hayward's options). If the AJ/Sap experiment doesn't work out, the Jazz can make changes very easily. With Boozer + Matthews, the Jazz would have a tough go of things if they decided changes needed to be made.

While I'm not sold on Big Al just yet, and the 2 spot represents a pretty glaring hole, it's unlikely the Jazz could have put themselves in a much better situation than they did this past offseason. Even with Wes, it's HIGHLY unlikely the Jazz would be contending for a championship this OR next season (IMO).

Considering the tough spot the Jazz FO were in this past summer, they did a remarkable job puttign together a competitive team.
 
KOC is a magician given what he has to work with. He misses one guy and he's a failed GM? Na. As reported, Jazz have pretty much no room to work with money wise. They've lost money several seasons. They aren't LA or NY. There aren't very many tools to just pull out of nowhere and hook big players for little money.

With the social way the NBA is turning, Utah's best bet is going to be D-Will recruiting other players to come for less than what they'd get elsewhere in exchange for a championship run (and maybe a few extra passes each night).
 
KOC said somewhere that the story is all wrong. KOC wanted to make an offer, but Matthew's agent wasn't cooperating 100%. It sounds to me like Matthew's agent was keeping things from both Matthews and KOC during the trade discussions. Sorry I don't have a source, but that's what I remember from the whole deal.
 
oldtimer said:
Did anyone else see Brian T. Smith's twitter that Mathews said he would have signed with the Jazz for 4 million a year if it was offered. The Jazz never offered him a contract. The way Mathews is playing we sure could use his production.
Click to expand...

He wouldn't be having the same production on a team with Williams, Millsap, and Jefferson. His stats might be a little better than Bell's, while the players has spoken glowingly of Bell's influence in the locker room. I disagree that Matthews is a significant improvement.

oldtimer said:
We could have signed Fes for 3 years and six million according to the reports. I think he will get more in the off-season and he will be missed when he is gone.
Click to expand...

No one else was will to sign fesenko to $2mil/year. considering how little he has been playing, I don't think he will be missed, except by the beat reporters and bloggers.

oldtimer said:
He signed Hayward. You know its bad when a five point performance brings numerous threads about turning around his season.
Click to expand...

Hayward may well be a bad pick for a #9, and yet still have been the BPA at that spot. Anytime you take the BPA, you did not make a mistake.

oldtimer said:
I know he got Jefferson, but really that was a Minnesota gift as they were just trying to dump his contract. Any GM in the league could have and would have completed the Jefferson trade.
Click to expand...

To get that trade, O'Connor had to convince Chicago to use a sign-and-trade and sign Boozer for more money than Chicago could have signed as otherwise. Do you tink it's easy to persuade a GM to sign a player for more money?

oldtimer said:
Imagine if we had signed Mathews instead of Bell, signed Fess for Cheap, drafted Anyone from 10-15 or Fields (personally I still like Larry Sanders), and signed Jefferson.
Click to expand...

We would be a worse team, overall.
 
oldtimer said:
I know he got Jefferson, but really that was a Minnesota gift as they were just trying to dump his contract. Any GM in the league could have and would have completed the Jefferson trade.
Click to expand...

Then how do you explain the fact that it was KOC who actually DID complete the Jefferson trade?
 
One Brow said:
oldtimer said:
I know he got Jefferson, but really that was a Minnesota gift as they were just trying to dump his contract. Any GM in the league could have and would have completed the Jefferson trade.
Click to expand...
To get that trade, O'Connor had to convince Chicago to use a sign-and-trade and sign Boozer for more money than Chicago could have signed as otherwise. Do you tink it's easy to persuade a GM to sign a player for more money?
Click to expand...
Um, according to the following article, "Boozer’s deal with the Bulls still remains the same from a numbers standpoint. The contract is still worth five years and $80 million." This statement implies IMHO that Boozer and Chicago did it as a favor (and in the Bulls' case, for a measly protected second-round pick) and that the trade exception didn't significantly impact how much Boozer got salarywise.
https://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/jazz/49897200-87/jazz-boozer-trade-exception.html.csp
Probably partly a farewell goodwill gesture from C-Booz's camp to the Jazz (which they might have requested to the Bulls) for Utah paying him five years of big money in exchange for slow-healing injuries and transient defense. Oh, and a few yells and clutch wins.

oldtimer said:
Imagine if we had signed Mathews instead of Bell, signed Fess for Cheap, drafted Anyone from 10-15 or Fields (personally I still like Larry Sanders), and signed Jefferson.
Click to expand...
We would be a worse team, overall.
Click to expand...
. . . unless Utah had drafted Davis (49% FG; Hoopsworld honorable mention rookie watch), Xavier Henry (low FG% yet former HH honorable mention; 16 starts), Larry Sanders (near-40% FG yet nearly 3 BP30 and major upside), and maybe Paul George (piss-poor FG yet higher rate of points, RBs, assists and steals relative to Hayward) :|.

Not giving up on Gordo yet, and Utah needed a wing more than a big if Fes and the likes of Elson were likely available, but to claim that Elder Hayward is a better choice than many of the players who came after him is yet to be determined, 4th quarter vs. the Pesky Timberwolves (and putzy Wolves, too) notwithstanding.

Given that Bell has been the first or second weakest link in the starting lineup (depending on where you rate AJ's lazy box-outs and help defense), a claim that an Bell--who is only now getting his rhythm and conditioning back--is a bit far-fetched. Matthews would've been twice as expensive, even at 4 million, but it's not tough to speculate that a twentysomething Matthews > thirtysomething Bell. I do agree that it's easy for Wes to say that he would've signed for less, now that he didn't.

Given that Fes's signing to a multi-year deal wouldn't affect whether the Jazz were better or worse this year (given that he signed anyway), this aspect is neutral right now (unless the extra cost of the multi-year deal or the Matthews signing would've precluded Utah from signing someone else, but that wasn't part of your argument, and most of the rest of the squad was filled with minimum-salary players anyway).
 
Last edited:
InGameStrategy said:
Matthews would've been twice as expensive, even at 4 million, but it's not tough to speculate that a twentysomething Matthews > thirtysomething Bell.
Click to expand...

And of course, the Jazz being over the luxury tax would have been paying $8 million/year even had Matthews signed for $4 million.
 
Raja bell signed a three years 10 million dollar contract. I do not know the details, but this averages out to 3.33 million per. In that case, and if Mathews could have been signed for 4 million per year, then the total salary and luxury tax implication of signing Mathews over Bell was approximately 666,666 per year. I do not believe the tax implications were a factor at all.
 
InGameStrategy said:
Um, according to the following article, "Boozer’s deal with the Bulls still remains the same from a numbers standpoint. The contract is still worth five years and $80 million." This statement implies IMHO that Boozer and Chicago did it as a favor (and in the Bulls' case, for a measly protected second-round pick) and that the trade exception didn't significantly impact how much Boozer got salarywise.
https://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/jazz/49897200-87/jazz-boozer-trade-exception.html.csp
Probably partly a farewell goodwill gesture from C-Booz's camp to the Jazz (which they might have requested to the Bulls) for Utah paying him five years of big money in exchange for slow-healing injuries and transient defense. Oh, and a few yells and clutch wins.
Click to expand...

I highly doubt Chicago or Boozer did this out of the goodness of their hearts. Someone got something. It's a competitive sport, after all.

Boozer could sign with the Bulls in FA for an 8% maximum raise, regardless. Or, he could sign-and-trade for a 10.5% maximum raise, regardless. He didn't get a max deal, so that wasn't an issue. The jazz could also have paid some sort of a trade bonus to lower Chicago's obligations.

oldtimer said:
Raja bell signed a three years 10 million dollar contract. I do not know the details, but this averages out to 3.33 million per. In that case, and if Mathews could have been signed for 4 million per year, then the total salary and luxury tax implication of signing Mathews over Bell was approximately 666,666 per year. I do not believe the tax implications were a factor at all.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. There were veteran FA exemptions available to the Jazz (and all other teams) that lowered the luxury tax obligations of signing Bell vs. Signing Matthews. In other words, they could have signed Bell or Matthews to identical contracts and would have paid more LT with Matthews than with Bell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top