Favors next season?

[infection]

The reason the Pelicans would trade him is to not take salary back, so that doesn't make any sense.

Since the Jazz have three guys that can be waived after July 1st, they basically have the chance to bundle them to the Pelicans, then Pelicans waive them and shed the whole bill.

I’m very curious if there’s a summer loophole on signing guys you trade. The technical rule is that you can’t sign a player you traded in the same season, which is defined as the start of first regular season game until your last game, so no idea if that applies in summer. I’d love to have all three of those guys back.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I’m very curious if there’s a summer loophole on signing guys you trade. The technical rule is that you can’t sign a player you traded in the same season, which is defined as the start of first regular season game until your last game, so no idea if that applies in summer. I’d love to have all three of those guys back.

I'm fairly sure we could re-acquire them. The new season does not start until after July 1. The just didn't want contenders making mid-season trades using guys as cap filler then turning around and re-signing them after they get waived.

 

[infection]

I'm fairly sure we could re-acquire them. The new season does not start until after July 1. The just didn't want contenders making mid-season trades using guys as cap filler then turning around and re-signing them after they get waived.

We’d only need to send out two, and if we landed Mirotic then I’d use the MLE to bring them both back at their current salaries (or a little more, for their troubles), plus another team option. Or make it a mutual opt-in, to give them a bit of flexibility, too, should they desire.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

We’d only need to send out two, and if we landed Mirotic then I’d use the MLE to bring them both back at their current salaries (or a little more, for their troubles), plus another team option. Or make it a mutual opt-in, to give them a bit of flexibility, too, should they desire.

If we had niko I’m not sure we’d need to bring back Jonas or Thabo. I think Thabo may be washed after the last injury. Udoh could end up being more valuable than both.

They also might only waive one guy. Say they figure the need a rotation stretch 4 and they keep Jonas. Still cuts 8M from the overall bill. Plus tax savings.

 

[infection]

If we had niko I’m not sure we’d need to bring back Jonas or Thabo. I think Thabo may be washed after the last injury. Udoh could end up being more valuable than both.

They also might only waive one guy. Say they figure the need a rotation stretch 4 and they keep Jonas. Still cuts 8M from the overall bill. Plus tax savings.

Let’s just sign-and-trade Tomic.

 

[infection]

I would prioritize Udoh above both but if we drop Favors I think having Jerebko is helpful. Having Udoh and Jerebko off the bench let’s you run a poor man’s Gobert and Mirotic. I’d also bring back Thabo for the hell of it. We need badass.

Rubio / Exum / Neto
Mitchell / O’Neale
Ingles / Crowder / Thabo
Mirotic / Jerebko
Gobert / Udoh / Bradley

 

[Coach Ellis]

I'm fairly sure we could re-acquire them. The new season does not start until after July 1. The just didn't want contenders making mid-season trades using guys as cap filler then turning around and re-signing them after they get waived.

I’m pretty sure that the rule says the jazz can’t be the next team to sign anyone they trade to another team for at least a year from the day they’re traded. They can only be re-acquired within that time period if they’ve been signed/traded to a different team and then come back to the Jazz.

Use Trevor Booker as an example. Traded by Brooklyn to Philly, he couldn’t go back to Brooklyn until a year after that trade happened - even as a free agent - unless he was cut or traded by Philly before then. Since that happened, and he signed with Indiana. . . he’s free to go back to Brooklyn as early as this next offseason if they want him.

The rule is in place so that a team like the Jazz can’t just trade someone like Rodney Hood for assets and then re-sign him in the offseason. Both sides have to wait a year before they can sign a new deal.

 

[infection]

I’m pretty sure that the rule says the jazz can’t be the next team to sign anyone they trade to another team for at least a year from the day they’re traded. They can only be re-acquired within that time period if they’ve been signed/traded to a different team and then come back to the Jazz.

Use Trevor Booker as an example. Traded by Brooklyn to Philly, he couldn’t go back to Brooklyn until a year after that trade happened - even as a free agent - unless he was cut or traded by Philly before then. Since that happened, and he signed with Indiana. . . he’s free to go back to Brooklyn as early as this next offseason if they want him.

The rule is in place so that a team like the Jazz can’t just trade someone like Rodney Hood for assets and then re-sign him in the offseason. Both sides have to wait a year before they can sign a new deal.

If you read the wording of the CBA, it doesn’t say a year, it says you can’t sign them within the same yesr, then gives the stipulation that defines it.

 

[MDAV28]

Did you read the scenario presented in my post? The Jazz would retain the option to retain them past 2019, giving the Jazz both the best shot at fielding the best team they can next year while giving them the freedom to hunt in 2019 free agency (but having a safety net).

They don't have cap space to spend on anything but their own guys (and maybe some bargain out there) this offseason, and losing guys for nothing isn't likely to be the route to field the best team next year, so get them a raise for next year as an incentive for them to sign an unguaranteed/partially guaranteed/team option for '19. This also milks another contract year out of Favors.

I would also absolutely disagree that Favors and Exum constitute the best way the Jazz could spend $20 million in cap space.

TLDR; there's a way to hunt big in 2019 AND field the best possible team next year, and that should be what the Jazz try to do.

Yes I get that but I'd want 4 years on a team-friendly deal, especially on Exum. You can move off team-friendly deals like I said, barring injury. Less years only hurts the Jazz.

What other way is there? You suggested a salary dump but that seems counterintuitive when you can just sign a good player to a good deal and a good prospect.

 

[MDAV28]

I'm not even as high on Favors as I was before. I think his defense has fallen off, and that is what intrigued me so much about the Favors/Gobert duo.

 

[Quin's Murderface]

I'm not even as high on Favors as I was before. I think his defense has fallen off, and that is what intrigued me so much about the Favors/Gobert duo.

I think this is especially true on the perimeter. He still does ok, but he doesn't seem as agile and quick as he was a couple years ago. He could switch everything and really cause havoc out there before. Now he is slow ona lot of rotations and closeouts more like a center (which makes sense since he is a modern center). I wonder if the Jazz plan is to let Udoh play bigger minutes next year and then hope Bradley has developed into a rotation player after that. If not I'm really having a hard time understanding the point of drafting Bradley.

 

[Quin's Murderface]

FWIW Tony Jones today said that he doesn't think the Jazz are willing to give up a pick to move Burks. If that is true it comes down to either finding a guy (in a trade) they like enough to bring on for extra years or just waiting it out and maybe releasing him at the deadline (or holding on to him). That would seem to limit who they can go after in FA. If they keep Bradley and sign Exum I think they are only 3 million under the cap next year. DL will have to do some wheeling and dealing to find a better fit than Favs. Jones also said he thinks that the only way Favs comes back is if his market is very weak.