Favors next season?

[NUMBERICA]

I think it's important to remember the following:

-contract years are a thing. Favors has even said it
-the reasons the Jazz Favors relationship might not continue largely still exist (including but certainly not limited to injury history)
-Dante Exum has never played good basketball over a significant stretch of time

Sorry if I'm not sold on dumping $20 million+ into that versus other options.

 

[MDAV28]

Jazz don't HAVE to spend that cap in free agency. They could still bargain shop and be selective and use that cap to acquire assets in exchange for bad salary (which they could use since they're not going to be stuck in the mid-late 1st round of the draft for the next four years).

If the Jazz can get a good deal, fine. But... I'm skeptical of the upside considering how many other options exist.

But that's my point. We can reasonably expect the Jazz to get a good deal and it mitigates A LOT of the risk.

 

[MDAV28]

I don't understand the thought process of using Favors/Exum's money to take salary dump and prospect(s). Just sign Favors (a baller and won't be bad money) and sign as good of a prospect as you will get in Exum.

 

[Quin's Murderface]

Also using that, if we keep everyone, pay Exum $8 mill and Favors $25 Mill and keep our draft pick, we'd be about 5 million under the LT still and have TONS of flexibility

Favors at 25 Million is a gigantic overpay. I don't see why the Jazz would do that. Exum at 8 is an overpay as well if we are paying for his current production, but he's younger and you only pay him that much or more if you are confident gambling on his development. I can't imagine the Jazz getting anywhere close to 25 Million for Favors.

 

[NUMBERICA]

But that's my point. We can reasonably expect the Jazz to get a good deal and it mitigates A LOT of the risk.

I would propose/be in favor of a hedge move that overloads guaranteed money next year and the Jazz retain team options/partially guaranteed salary* after that.

*essetially structured like the deals they have with Thabo, Jonas, Udoh that make the salary pseudo cap-space that they could use on the trade market (just at larger money, which I think would be tempting for Favors and Exum considering the market and their question marks)

 

[silesian]

I think Favs wants to stay -- why else would he be working on his 3-pt shot? If he were leaving to play center for another team, his 3-pt shot wouldn't be important.

I assume you are being sarcastic, because otherwise, you would be saying that only the Jazz would value a big who can shoot 3s.

 

[NUMBERICA]

But that's my point. We can reasonably expect the Jazz to get a good deal and it mitigates A LOT of the risk.

I would propose/be in favor of a hedge move that overloads guaranteed money next year and the Jazz retain team options/partially guaranteed salary* after that.

*like the deals they have with Thabo, Jonas, Udoh that make the salary pseudo cap-space that they could use on the trade market

 

[silesian]

I think Favs wants to stay -- why else would he be working on his 3-pt shot? If he were leaving to play center for another team, his 3-pt shot wouldn't be important.

I assume you are being sarcastic, because otherwise, you would be saying that only the Jazz would value a big who can shoot 3s.

 

[MDAV28]

I would propose/be in favor of a hedge move that overloads guaranteed money next year and the Jazz retain team options/partially guaranteed salary* after that.

*essetiallh structured like the deals they have with Thabo, Jonas, Udoh that make the salary pseudo cap-space that they could use on the trade market (just at larger money, which I think would be tempting for Favors and Exum considering the market and their question marks)

See I hate this from the Jazz side though because if they sign them to good deals, they can trade them barring injury regardless. And what's the goal of having them locked up just next year? They aren't contending next year. I think we both agree the path would hope to be having all these guys + adding a max guy in 2019 FA to be a contender

 

[NUMBERICA]

See I hate this from the Jazz side though because if they sign them to good deals, they can trade them barring injury regardless. And what's the goal of having them locked up just next year? They aren't contending next year. I think we both agree the path would hope to be having all these guys + adding a max guy in 2019 FA to be a contender

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.

 

[David Stern]

Favors at 25 Million is a gigantic overpay. I don't see why the Jazz would do that. Exum at 8 is an overpay as well if we are paying for his current production, but he's younger and you only pay him that much or more if you are confident gambling on his development. I can't imagine the Jazz getting anywhere close to 25 Million for Favors.

It's an overpay, but it's also a win-win. 2 years, $50Million with the second year unguaranteed makes a ton of sense for both sides. We keep flexibility, and he gets more money than he would on the open market.

 

[NUMBERICA]

It's an overpay, but it's also a win-win. 2 years, $50Million with the second year unguaranteed makes a ton of sense for both sides. We keep flexibility, and he gets more money than he would on the open market.

A lot more money. I think his market is about what he's making now. In other words, in that first year he might make more than for the length of his next contract otherwise.

I don't know what rules the CBA has for changing salary, but making the second year salary significantly less would be ideal (and frankly more than fair).