Hayward & Jazz - not close to agreement (Hayward leaving 4/40 on the table)
- Thread starter udflyer
- Start date
Up until today, I would have bet Hayward going to be a RFA.
After those quotes, Jazz do not want Hayward as a distraction all year.
I bet they get it done this week.
At least I hope so
Litany
Well-Known Member
Up until today, I would have bet Hayward going to be a RFA.
After those quotes, Jazz do not want Hayward as a distraction all year.
I bet they get it done this week.
At least I hope so
They don't want the distraction, but I think it's clear they aren't just going to cave.
If you would have asked me a month ago who would get their deal done between Fav and Hayward I would have said Hayward without hesitation.
Sounds like Hayward is overestimating his value.
If you're that good, take 10 per and have incentives built in. Like all star team, all-nba, team USA appearance, etc.
If you are a max player you better be an all star or you're just our Rudy Gay.
The Jazz are in a tough spot right now. They have a bunch of money to spend, but they have to do it wisely. In a few years, they will have the option of extending Burke for 4 years from now. That extension will start a year before the Favors and potentially Hayward contracts end. If they resign Hayward at 12, Kanter at 14, and Burks at 10, they will have 48 million tied up to 4 players. Assume Burke gets about 10 million per, that will be 58 million. They won't be able to stay under the cap, especially if they have a high pick this year it will probably be another 5-6 million for that player alone. I don't know what the salary cap will be, but I doubt it raises by more than 4-5 million. The Jazz would be over the salary cap with just 6 players.
Now if the Jazz could manage to get Hayward at 11, Kanter at 12, Burks at 8, and Burke at about 8 that saves them 7 million a year, and makes it more likely to keep all of them. If they are forced to pay the higher amount, then I don't see a way for them to keep everyone.
The real challenge the Jazz have will be when Favors, and likely Haywards contract ends. They will have likely 2 rookies from next years draft to extend, then they will have Hayward and Favors contracts end at the same time. If the Jazz are smart, they will be able to keep all the players together to make a run for the next 5 years, but at the end of that, they will have some decisions to make.
Now if the Jazz could manage to get Hayward at 11, Kanter at 12, Burks at 8, and Burke at about 8 that saves them 7 million a year, and makes it more likely to keep all of them. If they are forced to pay the higher amount, then I don't see a way for them to keep everyone.
The real challenge the Jazz have will be when Favors, and likely Haywards contract ends. They will have likely 2 rookies from next years draft to extend, then they will have Hayward and Favors contracts end at the same time. If the Jazz are smart, they will be able to keep all the players together to make a run for the next 5 years, but at the end of that, they will have some decisions to make.
b_line
Well-Known Member
No way does Burks command 10 million per year. Not in Zulu's wildest dreams. And if he does, then that is a good problem, because we can trade either him or Hayward for a great draft pick, or a combination of assets.
Kanter at 14 million? Right now Kanter should get slightly less than what Favors just got. If he has a HUGE year, then he is a 14 million guy, but that is pretty much a max extension. This team does not have any max players right now.
I like a lot of the optimism on this board. I just personally don't see it. I see Hayward as a third option type. 8 mill a yr is what I think he should make.
I have watched almost every game that he has played in and I see a good player, I don't see all star or max type player.
This team still needs to find its alpha dog.
I have watched almost every game that he has played in and I see a good player, I don't see all star or max type player.
This team still needs to find its alpha dog.
Yeah, and Hayward isn't a 12 million a year guy right now either, but he has the potential to be that, and might get that as a RFA from a team trying to outbid us. I put up what the potential is for each of these players if they all want to hold out for as much as possible (like it seems like Hayward might be doing now) to show how important it is to not overpay for potential.
If Kanter has an up and down season, but averages 15 and 9, it will be hard to get him for less than 12 per, and if he goes to RFA he would easily get that or more. I think most expect that kind of season for him, and if its better, then he might end up being borderline max player.
If Burks has a good year and averages 12 points, I could see him holding out for around what I said. I would think the Jazz might let someone else set the market for him. I'm sure some other team would gamble on his potential and think of him as a 2nd or 3rd option, which could easily get him around 10 per.
The point is, if the Jazz can get them all at reasonable prices, then they can keep all of them for the next 5 years. If they can't, then at least one of them will be gone. Now if the Jazz see that writing on the wall, I'm sure they will make a trade to get some asset for whomever they decide is most dispensable.
Thee Jazz Fan
Well-Known Member
Don't think he is overvaluing himself. He's seeng what George got this year, and Considering the fact that Haywards numbers were pretty comparable to George's with less minutes, why take less money then what he'll be worth by seasons end. Hell. I think they will both put up similar numbers this year.
b_line
Well-Known Member
I do think Kanter will blow up, but like you said, it will probably be around a 12 mil per year deal, or about what Favors got.
If Burks has a great year, and commands upwards of 10 million, it is only a good problem. They can either trade him, or win a couple championships, and go into the tax. If they are winning, there is no problem with going in to luxury tax penalties.
I don't see any problem in having young players, and paying market value for their skills. The problems arise in the OKC model if you trade for or acquire a player who totally sucks, and does not even approach 80% of their worth, like Kendrick Perkins. OKC could have kept all four of their young guys had they not traded for Perkins. (Not that any of our young guys are on track to be anywhere near as good as Durant or Westbrook...)
Yeah, my point was, don't pay over market value based on potential. Hayward is a good deal at 10-11 per year. At 12-13, that is overpriced, unless he has a big jump. He has the potential to do that, but if the jazz can get him at say 4/44, then they get him at market price. Its the same thing as they did with Favors, they got him at a fair market price, something they are OK with if he doesn't have a huge jump this year. You already know what you get defensively. If he has a good offensive year, he is a max player.
mellow
Well-Known Member
Playoffs:
George: 18-18, took Miami to 7th game in conference finals last season, he scored 28 points in a must win game 6.
Hayward 0-4, Popovich made Hayward look like a D-leaguer. 18% fg, 1-12 on threes, 29 points for the series.
I don't think they are the same player.
b_line
Well-Known Member
I think what you meant is that they didn't play on the same team... playoff records are meaningless when your whole team is built around an inefficient center, and an undersized power forward.