Much more.
2020 Free Agency Thread
- Thread starter Saint Cy of JFC
- Start date
Think that is nearly impossible.
GVC
Well-Known Member
Is this necessarily the case?
How much salary is guaranteed for Niang, NWG, Oni, Morgan and Brantley? When/is there a guarantee date on their contracts?
“Well, there’s no doubt that Joe and Bojan are critical pieces to what we’re trying to accomplish, but Father Time is undefeated as they say and their contracts are coming up. So you take the first thing, that we need a strong, physical defensive presence, and you realize you should probably be developing a player that can make plays on the other side of the floor. So that’s the challenge, guuuys, is how to get those things after ownership has shown such an incredible commitment to putting a winning product on the floor every year, which of course means making tough decisions regarding draft capital moving forward. Part of what makes us comfortable in sacrificing those assets is that we feel we already have those players. You look at Elijah Hughes who is just so smooth with the ball, you look at Jarrell Brantley who puts in the work and has this just incredible physique to go with a really exciting skill set. So we’re excited to come into the season and show the world the talent this organization has invested in and committed to.”
We need a Dennis-speak generator. We could design it like a bot that just randomly patrols the board and responds to people's comments.
NAOS
Well-Known Member
Cy did something similar recently with Kayleigh McEnany’s voice. His gift to JFC.
Handlogten's Heros
Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
Funny because that Lakers game was just another early season game where the bench got clapped...Yeah, I think I’m done with thinking anything DL says has substance. It’s a nice thing to say that we’re being engineered to beat the Lakers.
Handlogten's Heros
Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
He also said we wanted guys that didn’t compromise spacing and had defensive integrity and added two non shooting centers. Today I saw a quote about Favs providing vertical spacing and I just laughed. Whatever fits DLs narrative I guess.
I think the two big lineups could have been achieved with better spacing options but those options don’t protect the paint like Favs.
Until I hear about Rudy extending or not extending I’m gonna chill out.
In theory the two big lineup should be better with Bojan/Conley instead of Rubio. It was never negative. But I still don’t have much faith in it during the playoffs. The Lakers money lineup has AD at C anyways. He played 5 almost exclusively in the finals. So it’s a moot point.
I would respect DL a lot more if he just said that Bradley and Davis were trash and that’s why we signed Favs.
Handlogten's Heros
Well-Known Member
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
It was effective in the playoffs with Morgan so should be solid. It’s matchup dependent but works for a couple of the key matchups.
I’m gonna be honest. Love favs...admittedly underrated his value in the past. But I would have been totally ok with rolling with Morgan for these situations. I have concerns that Favs health is fried and also have lots of optimism with Morgan.
Brantley can inadvertently hurt people. Doest that count?
TLDR overview: possible way to get below luxury tax without trade (though I'm not smart enough to know for sure, so I want feedback on this)
Given what we know now, I'm very confused by the Tucker trade. It seems to only save the Jazz about half a million dollars if they don't go beneath the tax (unless they received a bit more than expected in cash considerations from Cleveland; but even then it's puzzling). If it is something that allows them to go below the tax, then it may be worth up to $10 million or more in the long run (and thus will be well worth it).
The problem is, despite what DL said today in the presser, we don't really know the avenue from there to get below the tax. This problem is compounded by not knowing what certain things (for example, if this seaon's revised CBA makes avenues available that aren't usually there; or whether dollar amounts in the current contracts differ from those publicly reported). Assuming there's nothing in the revised CBA or nothing unknown in the existing contracts, it appears we're in the neighborhood of $1.9 million above the tax level with the 14 contracts we have. So what options do we have for getting below the tax? We (may) have two.
Of course we could make a trade (the OPJ for Conley trade that everyone seems to assume is perpetually on the table from the Bulls, being the easiest).
But it may still be possible through another mechanism. I'm not enough of an expert to calculate this all out. But I have been looking at the CBA (https://cosmic-s3.imgix.net/3c7a0a50-8e11-11e9-875d-3d44e94ae33f-2017-NBA-NBPA-Collective-Bargaining-Agreement.pdf). It looks like there could be a path (this is my plea for someone smarter than me to help figure out whether this is really plausible):
@Handlogten's Heros is right that we generally need 14 players under contract, and 2-ways don't count. But there is an exception. A team can carry 13 players for up to two weeks at a time. I can't find any limit to the number of times per year this can be done.
I also looked at @Saint Cy of JFC's thought of circulating through 10-day contracts if NWG ends up being cut before being guaranteed. That does indeed appear to be a viable option after a certain date (January 5 in normal years; I don't know if the revised CBA makes it different this year). The only requirement for 10-day contracts is that they have to be scaled at least to the level of a minimum contract. There are also stipulations about how many 10-day contracts a team can concurrently have, but I think that this probably won't end up mattering much in our case.
So I'm wondering, if for whatever reason during the season, the Jazz decide that they really do want to go below tax level whether the following strategy would work:
Given what we know now, I'm very confused by the Tucker trade. It seems to only save the Jazz about half a million dollars if they don't go beneath the tax (unless they received a bit more than expected in cash considerations from Cleveland; but even then it's puzzling). If it is something that allows them to go below the tax, then it may be worth up to $10 million or more in the long run (and thus will be well worth it).
The problem is, despite what DL said today in the presser, we don't really know the avenue from there to get below the tax. This problem is compounded by not knowing what certain things (for example, if this seaon's revised CBA makes avenues available that aren't usually there; or whether dollar amounts in the current contracts differ from those publicly reported). Assuming there's nothing in the revised CBA or nothing unknown in the existing contracts, it appears we're in the neighborhood of $1.9 million above the tax level with the 14 contracts we have. So what options do we have for getting below the tax? We (may) have two.
Of course we could make a trade (the OPJ for Conley trade that everyone seems to assume is perpetually on the table from the Bulls, being the easiest).
But it may still be possible through another mechanism. I'm not enough of an expert to calculate this all out. But I have been looking at the CBA (https://cosmic-s3.imgix.net/3c7a0a50-8e11-11e9-875d-3d44e94ae33f-2017-NBA-NBPA-Collective-Bargaining-Agreement.pdf). It looks like there could be a path (this is my plea for someone smarter than me to help figure out whether this is really plausible):
@Handlogten's Heros is right that we generally need 14 players under contract, and 2-ways don't count. But there is an exception. A team can carry 13 players for up to two weeks at a time. I can't find any limit to the number of times per year this can be done.
I also looked at @Saint Cy of JFC's thought of circulating through 10-day contracts if NWG ends up being cut before being guaranteed. That does indeed appear to be a viable option after a certain date (January 5 in normal years; I don't know if the revised CBA makes it different this year). The only requirement for 10-day contracts is that they have to be scaled at least to the level of a minimum contract. There are also stipulations about how many 10-day contracts a team can concurrently have, but I think that this probably won't end up mattering much in our case.
So I'm wondering, if for whatever reason during the season, the Jazz decide that they really do want to go below tax level whether the following strategy would work:
- Jettison two players: likely NWG before guaranteed; Oni also has the same February 27 guarantee date; Morgan and Niang could also be candidates if the right situation emerged
- Once the 10-day contracts are permitted, use the combination of cycling through 10-day players on prorated minimum contracts ($898,310 proration basis) and cycling through the 2-week grace period for a 13-man (non-two-way) roster to cut the ~$1.9 off the salary burden.