What's new
By:

Hayward & Jazz - not close to agreement (Hayward leaving 4/40 on the table)

Hayward has been the top performing guy of the young core. The Jazz sell more Hayward jerseys than any other player(I think I read that). The jazz just signed favors for 9 million more and have money to spend. Hayward while maybe not worth more than 10 on the open market is worth more than 10 to a small market team that is rebuilding, especially when he is the current face of the franchise. Hayward was right to turn down 10.
 
heyhey said:
Hayward has been the top performing guy of the young core. The Jazz sell more Hayward jerseys than any other player(I think I read that). The jazz just signed favors for 9 million more and have money to spend. Hayward while maybe not worth more than 10 on the open market is worth more than 10 to a small market team that is rebuilding, especially when he is the current face of the franchise. Hayward was right to turn down 10.
Click to expand...

Everything you said was addressed about 10 times in this thread.
 
NUMBERICA said:
Most notably that being from a small market in this situation means SPENDING LESS IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN SPENDING MORE.
Click to expand...

It would be if we were already in a position to actually do something. Right now is different. The jazz won't have to worry about a contract for our franchise player(probably through the draft) for 5 years. Furthermore Hayward @ the 2 if we were to draft a 3 would make the extra couple mill/yr worth it. I think 10 is the lowest he could expect in rfa so why would he take it? You can't expect a player to sign an extension when you offer him the bottom of his pay scale. Hayward has much more to gain than lose in rfa with this offer on the table.
 
Siro said:
Everything you said was addressed about 10 times in this thread.
Click to expand...

I like heyhey's point regardless. Very well stated case, even though I hate the idea of overpaying young players based on hype. heyhey is essentially making the Rudy Gay case.

NBA teams would do well to let Batum-like contracts walk and sign undervalued players in FA for a tenth of the money. Jazz need at least two stars too bad to pay Hayward over $10mm.
 
franklin said:
I like heyhey's point regardless. Very well stated case, even though I hate the idea of overpaying young players based on hype. heyhey is essentially making the Rudy Gay case.

NBA teams would do well to let Batum-like contracts walk and sign undervalued players in FA for a tenth of the money. Jazz need at least two stars too bad to pay Hayward over $10mm.
Click to expand...

I agree but the jazz could front load it so that he makes much more than he is worth now and 10 @ the end of his contract. In terms of the future of the franchise the contract would be a wash.(unless we want to hold on to Biedrins):)
 
heyhey said:
I agree but the jazz could front load it so that he makes much more than he is worth now and 10 @ the end of his contract. In terms of the future of the franchise the contract would be a wash.(unless we want to hold on to Biedrins):)
Click to expand...

I have a hard time arguing against that.

Hayward is an enigma and you are pitching the strongest case for signing heyhey to a maybe might be overvalued contract. As much as I like Hayward I can't get over overpaying a player like Crash Wallace and Batum. Nine-Ten Million seems to be a franchise killing figure under the current CBA. I'd almost rather see a player walk (Raja Bell **** You!).
 
There has been a lot of talk about front loading a contract extension. To what extent is this actually possible? I know when we signed millsap to that front loaded contract, it was basically like they gave him as much as a years salary upfront. I don't think this is possible with extensions?
 
There are some great points in this thread. I guess Im straddling the fence because I don't know what side to take. It looks as though in keeping with fiscal conservativeness, the offer put forth is decent.
 
heyhey said:
I agree but the jazz could front load it so that he makes much more than he is worth now and 10 @ the end of his contract. In terms of the future of the franchise the contract would be a wash.(unless we want to hold on to Biedrins):)
Click to expand...

Except that would make extending him thereafter more difficult because he could only make raises on the salary. Provided he's worth the overall money on the contract to begin with. Which, for the umpteenth time, he hasn't proven yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top