"You Gotta Love It Baby" Official Jazz thread

[smokymountainrain]

I don't see your concern here. Sure, I'd be concerned about overpaying any of them, but as Gordon is the best of the 3, if you are going to pay one of them the max, it should be Gordon.

And yes, they would be able to match any offers to their own players regardless of their cap figure.

I'm not convinced Hayward is the best of the three. Favors PER was significantly better than Hayward. Burks has improved significantly every year, is two years younger, had a PER pretty even with Hayward, shot the ball better and got to the line more often. Kanter's PER was also about the same as Hayward and is two years younger. Burke was runner up in the ROY and Exum, if he pans out should be better than a 16 PER guy within the next four years.

I don't think anybody can say which of the young players is better or most important. If anybody has a claim, perhaps it's Favors for his defensive impact and the far superior PER. I don't know, perhaps there are stats that would suggest otherwise, but none of those guys, by themselves, is really all that important to the team.

[BGRTHNUMEGO]

Yeah this is what I think of BGR's argument above. You can talk about the system, coach, players around him, etc., but those aren't the real problem. The real problem is that he doesn't have the skill/ability to be more more than what he already is. His PER for the last 3 years has been steady, and at his age (24) the odds that he makes any significant leap are very low. He and Parsons play different styles, but they're the same in that they're best suited as 3rd options on a good team. Slot them in that role where it's spot ups and a lower workload and I think you see good scoring efficiency and pretty diverse all around contributions. Ask for more than that and you'll get declining scoring efficiency (Hayward for three straight years has shown an inverse relationships between his usage rate and scoring efficiency) and a player not suited for the role. Then if you believe the composite advanced metrics that aren't just boxscore based (WARP, RPM vs. PER), Parsons gives you slightly more value as he's the superior defender. A year in age matters in terms of development a lot in the late teens and early 20s, but by 24 and 25 the difference just isn't much. Over the next four years I don't think there's any indication G-Time will be the more productive player between the two.

I guess this discussion became somewhat moot when CP got paid similar to G, but I wouldn't pay G a cent more. And I wouldn't pay either $15MM.

I don't disagree with this. But I do think Hayward can be very good at what he is, and can give his team versatility that Parsons can't. Last year the Jazz put Hayward in a situation that was not only over his head, but also put him there with a lousy offensive scheme and little help around him. This is how Mahoney of SI described it:

This, in Hayward's case, is what development looks like. Absent the talent that provides a team with a reliable structure, Hayward was left to push on the limits of his game in an attempt to become the star the Jazz needed. He came up as short as his numbers suggest. Hayward is not cut out to be a predominant source of offense, and without the anchoring influence of Jefferson, in particular, his game drifted from equilibrium. Such imbalance should not be confused with regression.

Mahoney points out that Hayward went from creating about 50% of his own shots the year before to over 70% last year. Be thrust into that role on a team with no help around you, and that gets you almost no transition looks, and you are going to put up some poor shooting and efficiency numbers if you aren't LeBron, Durant, or Carmelo. Mahoney's article also says that Hayward went from making only 34% of his jumpers out of pick and roll situations to 42% last year. That is a huge jump made more significant with Snyder and his SnR centric offense in place.

I don't know if Hayward is a 2nd option or 3rd option on a decent team. I think he is probably a very good complimentary piece that makes many other pieces work well together in the right scheme and role, hearkening back to the old comp of Ginobili. He's shown some really high level play. Now that he's been stretched, when he settles back into a more comfortable role, can that high level play become more consistent? If it does, I think Hayward is certainly worth $12-$13 M per year, and then he'll have the premium kicker on his deal that comes from being a RFA and/or signing in a small market.

[BGRTHNUMEGO]

I'm not convinced Hayward is the best of the three. Favors PER was significantly better than Hayward. Burks has improved significantly every year, is two years younger, had a PER pretty even with Hayward, shot the ball better and got to the line more often. Kanter's PER was also about the same as Hayward and is two years younger. Burke was runner up in the ROY and Exum, if he pans out should be better than a 16 PER guy within the next four years.

I don't think anybody can say which of the young players is better or most important. If anybody has a claim, perhaps it's Favors for his defensive impact and the far superior PER. I don't know, perhaps there are stats that would suggest otherwise, but none of those guys, by themselves, is really all that important to the team.

I don't think the Jazz will come to an extension agreement with Kanter, and I think by December they'll be kicking themselves. I think he's going to benefit more than anyone else from the coaching and scheme change. And he's fortunate that he has Favors and Gobert on the roster to help cover for him on defense. I think him being more involved on offense is going to lead to his energy going after rebounds to get back to where it used to be. I don't think he's the star the team needs, but like Hayward, will prove to be another piece that makes Lindsey's job easier when building around them. How quickly can Exum improve?

[MarkGrace]

I'm not convinced Hayward is the best of the three. Favors PER was significantly better than Hayward. Burks has improved significantly every year, is two years younger, had a PER pretty even with Hayward, shot the ball better and got to the line more often. Kanter's PER was also about the same as Hayward and is two years younger. Burke was runner up in the ROY and Exum, if he pans out should be better than a 16 PER guy within the next four years.

I don't think anybody can say which of the young players is better or most important. If anybody has a claim, perhaps it's Favors for his defensive impact and the far superior PER. I don't know, perhaps there are stats that would suggest otherwise, but none of those guys, by themselves, is really all that important to the team.

Or supposed defensive impact since his defensive #'s last year were not good at all. Again if you move past the boxscore stats to WARP and RPM, G-Time definitely looked the best. I think in an aggregate look at all the numbers available G-Time was our best player last year. Even Burks graded better in those metrics than Favors.

[smokymountainrain]

Or supposed defensive impact since his defensive #'s last year were not good at all. Again if you move past the boxscore stats to WARP and RPM, G-Time definitely looked the best. I think in an aggregate look at all the numbers available G-Time was our best player last year. Even Burks graded better in those metrics than Favors.

Interesting.

Oh well, it's a fun discussion, but a moot discussion - the Jazz will match. Wojnarowski as spoken.

[MartyFunkhouser]

Interesting.

Oh well, it's a fun discussion, but a moot discussion - the Jazz will match. Wojnarowski as spoken.

Shit. At least it is only for 4 years.

[smokymountainrain]

Shit. At least it is only for 4 years.

That and apparently it will never affect their ability to sign other players. At least that's what I'm hearing from those who seem to understand contracts and the salary cap better than me.

[MartyFunkhouser]

That and apparently it will never affect their ability to sign other players. At least that's what I'm hearing from those who seem to understand contracts and the salary cap better than me.

Well that is fantastic news. I guess the Jazz are now willing to be a luxury tax payer or forego getting luxury tax payments.

[TripletDaddy]

The Jazz are going to regret this over the next few seasons when guys like Love, Irving, Durant, Rondo, Aldridge, Duncan, Ginobli, Parker, etc all become free agents looking for big money deals.

[MarkGrace]

The Jazz are going to regret this over the next few seasons when guys like Love, Irving, Durant, Rondo, Aldridge, Duncan, Ginobli, Parker, etc all become free agents looking for big money deals.

I definitely wanted to sign Ginobili to a big money deal in the next few seasons.

[Blueintheface]

With the increasing cap at least it won't feel as bad in years 3 and 4.

[Sizzle]

I definitely wanted to sign Ginobili to a big money deal in the next few seasons.

Triplet is a Kobe fan. That's what he's used to, overpaying for a broken down shell of his former self in the name of loyalty. Take his suggestion with a cubic yard of salt.

[smokymountainrain]

I definitely wanted to sign Ginobili to a big money deal in the next few seasons.

Duncan should be great at age 44.

[TripletDaddy]

I definitely wanted to sign Ginobili to a big money deal in the next few seasons.

my guess is that the Jazz will probably be able to do so.

[smokymountainrain]

my guess is that the Jazz will probably be able to do so.

lol