Rumor: Jazz prepared to match 'any offer' for Hayward.

[LjJazzman]

My prediction is he gets offered 4 years 52 million, and we match... and i'm fine with that.

 

[Litany]

Locke was on with DJ and PK this morning. He said he thinks Hayward could get $14-15 Million a year, so $60 M deal. Vomit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cowhide]

If there are really multiple teams lining up to offer him max you have to match anything he gets. Doesn't matter what we think he is worth. If multiple teams think he is a playmaker at the SF position, a rarity I might add, then he has value and we can sort it out by feb of we are not comfortable long term.

Why? So you are advocating that the Jazz should make decisions based upon what other franchise do?

 

[cowhide]

According to Locke, this isn't the case. Getting Hayward at approx 11 million per year will not hamstring us LT, particularly if, as everyone expects, the salary cap to increase with the new TV deal. It also has to do with the timing of the other contracts, which are spaced such that it should not create a financial logjam. Locke is pretty adamant that Jazz have plenty of flexibility to sign Hayward without a Kirilenko-type blow to the salary cap and payroll/personnel flexibility.

Yea that is nice in theory but when you start overpaying for guys it eventually catches up with you. It also sets a precedent with other players. You raise the bar too high and you start losing players because they want more than they are worth. There is no way that Hayward is worth more than 11 million a year. Even that is overpaying.

 

[JAZZGASM]

Why? So you are advocating that the Jazz should make decisions based upon what other franchise do?

What they should have done is locked him up last year. Sounds like we could have gotten him for around $13M per. And we could have structured the deal in a way that it works best for our cap. When we lost Wes Matthews, the Blazers purposely frontloaded (or backloaded, I don't remember) so it would be almost impossible for us to match. Now we may be paying him more with a structure that may hurt us down the road...

 

[JAZZGASM]

Yea that is nice in theory but when you start overpaying for guys it eventually catches up with you. It also sets a precedent with other players. You raise the bar too high and you start losing players because they want more than they are worth. There is no way that Hayward is worth more than 11 million a year. Even that is overpaying.

What UFA/RFA could the Jazz bring in with the same level of talent (or better) for $11M/per or less?

 

[Shad]

According to D. News, Suns are preparing to offer Gordo the max. Please S&T him. Thanks.

 

[GVC]

Yea that is nice in theory but when you start overpaying for guys it eventually catches up with you. It also sets a precedent with other players. You raise the bar too high and you start losing players because they want more than they are worth. There is no way that Hayward is worth more than 11 million a year. Even that is overpaying.

Keep in mind, the NBA is currently negotiating what will be a HUGE new TV deal, and recently came to terms with the former owners of the ABA's Spirits of St.Louis, who received 1/7 of the league's TV revenues. The cap is increasing by about 10% this coming season, and could continue to increase similarly with the new TV money. A contract counting $11mm against the cap last season could be the equivalent of a contract counting $13-15mm against the cap in a few seasons.

 

[cowhide]

What UFA/RFA could the Jazz bring in with the same level of talent (or better) for $11M/per or less?

It doesn't have to be one player but Ariza/Deng/Parsons could be had for shorter contracts and less money. You make it sound as though Hayward is Malone or Stockton? He is replaceable.

 

[cowhide]

According to D. News, Suns are preparing to offer Gordo the max. Please S&T him. Thanks.

I agree if they give him the Max then look for sign and trades. However who would it be? I don't see Bledsoe coming here unless we move Burke.

 

[JAZZGASM]

It doesn't have to be one player but Ariza/Deng/Parsons could be had for shorter contracts and less money. You make it sound as though Hayward is Malone or Stockton? He is replaceable.

Not at all. I just don't seen any players available with good talent that would come to the Jazz. I think we'd have a hard time with Ariza or Deng who I am sure want to play for a contender at this point in their careers. And honestly, I'd rather have Hayward at this point (Deng/Ariza are fading). If we can get Parsons, great. I think he will have a lot of competition too, and it is likely he will stay put. Until the Jazz know they can get a good replacement(s) for Hayward, it only makes sense to match. The Jazz took a step forward with the draft. I would hate for them to take a step backwards by losing Hayward and not being able to replace him with good talent.

 

[Stifle Tower]

Don't know if this has been addressed, or how it would work with the current CBA, but, can a team offer him the max and majorly backload it? If so, it may be harder for us to match.

Not allowed.

2011 CBA: Five years with 7.5 percent raises for Bird free agents; four years with 4.5 percent raises for other players (including all sign-and-trade transactions). The maximum salaries are the same as the 2005 CBA, except players coming off their rookie scale contracts qualify for the 30 percent maximum if they meet certain criteria.
https://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/CBA-111128/how-new-nba-deal-compares-last-one

Hayward doesn't meet the criteria for the 5/30% contract. So as I understand it, the cap is expected to increase to $63M, which would make a MAX contract for Hayward start at $15,750,000 (25%) and his salary could increase 4.5% per season for 4 years. GVC, Kenwood...is this correct?

I'd HATE to see Gordon playing for anything CLOSE to that amount, but honestly, it doesn't hurt us for a couple of years. And it could be traded. For example, if Phoenix offered Hayward the MAX and we matched, we could turn around and deal Hayward to Boston after 1 year.

 

[Jeditiger]

Here's a novel idea: it's the Miller's money. If they want to spend it, it's their prerogative. Stop worrying about how other people want to spend their money.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

If the Suns offer him the max you either match or force them to send you two first round picks (they have the lakers pick next year only top 5 protected... it'd be great to have a vested interest in more Lakers hate). You can't make this decision by just saying G-time isn't a max player... there is not enough difference between Hayward at 12 per year and Hayward at 16 per year to let the guy walk without significant compensation. If Burks and Exum explode you will be able to move Hayward later.

The only other talent out there that is comparable would be Parsons.... Would it take the max to get Parsons? I would think so.

 

[JAZZGASM]

If the Suns offer him the max you either match or force them to send you two first round picks (they have the lakers pick next year only top 5 protected... it'd be great to have a vested interest in more Lakers hate). You can't make this decision by just saying G-time isn't a max player... there is not enough difference between Hayward at 12 per year and Hayward at 16 per year to let the guy walk without significant compensation. If Burks and Exum explode you will be able to move Hayward later.

The only other talent out there that is comparable would be Parsons.... Would it take the max to get Parsons? I would think so.

I agree about Parsons. I'd love to have him on the Jazz, but I think he will have plenty of suitors, and I honestly think he will stay loyal to the Rockets. If we can't get Parsons, I don't see any other players out there (that would likely come to Utah) that would be an adequate replacement.

The Jazz should at least reach out to Parson's agent and see if he is a viable option. Even then the Cockets could match...

 

[Ron Mexico]

Here's a novel idea: it's the Miller's money. If they want to spend it, it's their prerogative. Stop worrying about how other people want to spend their money.

Heres another novel idea its the Millers team so stop worrying about what they do on the court. We have no say in the Jazz it has nothing to do with us we shouldnt even be watching what someone elses team does right?

How the Jazz spend money dictates the success of the team. We as fans care about the team (I assume you fit in here) and want it to be successful. We as fans come to a discussion board because we want to talk about the team (also assuming you fit in here) and give our opinion on what would make them successful.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I agree about Parsons. I'd love to have him on the Jazz, but I think he will have plenty of suitors, and I honestly think he will stay loyal to the Rockets. If we can't get Parsons, I don't see any other players out there (that would likely come to Utah) that would be an adequate replacement.

The Jazz should at least reach out to Parson's agent and see if he is a viable option. Even then the Cockets could match...

The Rockets have big plans... I think a team could swoop in and offer Parsons the max and it would really screw up what they are trying to do. Them not picking up his option was a bit risky to me.

I really just brought up Parsons as the best comp for Hayward. To attract Parsons it would take the max... so if you get Gtime at less than the max you pump your fist and move on. I think he will have to be our starting SF next year.

 

[Stifle Tower]

If there are really multiple teams lining up to offer him max you have to match anything he gets. Doesn't matter what we think he is worth. If multiple teams think he is a playmaker at the SF position, a rarity I might add, then he has value and we can sort it out by feb of we are not comfortable long term.

Agree.
But Jazz might be going about this wrong. They should be "meh" on re-signing Gordon. Then if a team really, really wants him, they might make a reasonable offer the Jazz could match. Otherwise, Hayward's agent just needs to call in a favor, have a team sign Gordon to a big contract, knowing that the Jazz will certainly match.

 

[Stifle Tower]

If the Suns offer him the max you either match or force them to send you two first round picks (they have the lakers pick next year only top 5 protected... it'd be great to have a vested interest in more Lakers hate). You can't make this decision by just saying G-time isn't a max player... there is not enough difference between Hayward at 12 per year and Hayward at 16 per year to let the guy walk without significant compensation. If Burks and Exum explode you will be able to move Hayward later.

The only other talent out there that is comparable would be Parsons.... Would it take the max to get Parsons? I would think so.

If he signs an offer sheet you can't match and then trade him to that same team. If Gordon really wanted to go to Phoenix, I'd do that deal (Laker's pick) as part of a S&T.

 

[cowhide]

Not allowed.

2011 CBA: Five years with 7.5 percent raises for Bird free agents; four years with 4.5 percent raises for other players (including all sign-and-trade transactions). The maximum salaries are the same as the 2005 CBA, except players coming off their rookie scale contracts qualify for the 30 percent maximum if they meet certain criteria.
https://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/CBA-111128/how-new-nba-deal-compares-last-one

Hayward doesn't meet the criteria for the 5/30% contract. So as I understand it, the cap is expected to increase to $63M, which would make a MAX contract for Hayward start at $15,750,000 (25%) and his salary could increase 4.5% per season for 4 years. GVC, Kenwood...is this correct?

I'd HATE to see Gordon playing for anything CLOSE to that amount, but honestly, it doesn't hurt us for a couple of years. And it could be traded. For example, if Phoenix offered Hayward the MAX and we matched, we could turn around and deal Hayward to Boston after 1 year.

You are assuming that Boston would take him with that contract.