"Stupidility." How poetic.
Whoa--getting a little testy here, aren't you, Memo for Money, especially because all Memo is good for right now--taking the Jazz's money.
I didn't know this was a contest of right vs. not right, but if you want people to interpret what you write the way that you want them to, then maybe you might consider including a link in the first place--or at least explaining the connection between a player who barely scratched the NBA (Hansen) and one who have been overpaid and overplayed (Okur). Otherwise, people might easily claim that the comparison between the two is thinner than you were suggesting.
Actually, it was and still is reasonable to conclude that the Jazz would be better off with Haywood than Okur, ESPECIALLY with the black hole that is Boozer's defense. Utah's loyalty to these two players has been counter-productive, and re-signing Boozer would be the icing on the defenseless cake. Haywood brings 4 points less yet 2 RBs and ~1 block more. From a center, I'll take that anytime, especially when paired alongside an offense-oriented PF.
Yes, it has yet to be proven that Okur's career is proven (rolleyes).
If you are trying to argue that Utah is better off with Okur than a center that can actually control the paint and score a bit, then you have a long row to hoe. Haywood normally gives you 10 points per game, so it's not exactly defense only. And it doesn't have to be "elite," either. If Boston had Perkins, then it is likely that they could've pulled off the win. I am puzzled what happened to Haywood in the playoffs, but I don't think that Okur could've gotten Utah any further than they got, except that Okur + Boozer is maybe a bit better combo than Millsap + Boozer against the lakers. But he's slow, he's matador, and he's not all that strong. No thanks.
LOL. You accuse certain JazzFanz of hating, and you come up with this homer garbage for Okur? He was a slow, poor-defending center before the contract extension. His own-vs.-opposting production was almost even, and his on-court/off-court +/- was barely positive.
https://www.82games.com/0809/0809UTA.HTM
But you don't need stats. You can just watch the games to see that he doesn't control the paint and isn't all that convincing on offense. And with decent perimeter shooting finally present in Utah, Okur isn't all that essential.
I guess history is repeating itself, because you continue to fail to post citations, or even mention your source.
I think that it is reasonable to infer that Okur would be cheaper this year than last year.
Depends on what you call 'respectable deal'. Frye's a borderline starter, but it's "only" $6 million per year that you are claiming to be one of the "respectable deals," vs. $10 million + for Okur. I'd almost want Frye more--and I think that I've explained why I'd want Haywood more at the same price. (In fairness, Utah had the ability to keep Okur but not sign Haywood. But there were trade opportunities.)
The economy is still not great, and the examples that you cite are more likely some teams choosing to settle for mildly overpaying a borderline center at $5 million per year (Darko) or $6 million per year (Frye) than going for someone really pricey. Phoenix let Amar'e go because he is demanding a max contract. Let's see what Richard Jefferson gets anywhere close to $15 million anywhere. RJ probably gave up $15M to get $10M per year, give or take a couple of million, for more years. We'll see. You might just be proving my point. In any case, San Antonio is elated, and they are lucky again. D*mn those Spurs.
https://hangtime.blogs.nba.com/2010/07/01/no-laughing-matter/
