"You Gotta Love It Baby" Official Jazz thread

[smokymountainrain]

Contract year ariza seems to.be different than regular ariza

Non contract year Ariza is a 35% 3pt shooter and 40% FGs - or a little bit better shooter than Hayward was last year.

[MarkGrace]

ESPN had G-time as the 90th ranked player in the league after the 2012-13 season. In 13-14 Hayward went out and played worse than he did the previous season.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/97...rankings-81-90

One could make the argument he hasn't improved since his rookie season or that any improvement is basically negligible.

I like Hayward, but you don't give that guy $16 M per.

That's why I think he and his agent lucked into this. Their play was for him to go out this year and show he was worth more than what the Jazz were offering last year. Not only did he not prove that, in my mind I'm almost willing to pay him less after what we saw this year than I would have at this time last year since there were still some unknowns about his potential growth. But of course what Surfah also says is right in that teams were clearing cash for big names, and if they couldn't land those names they'd start dumping that cash on the leftovers. So I guess you could say that was strategic. But even in that scenario I still didn't think anyone in their right mind would offer Hayward the max, but of course Jordan has clearly never been in his right mind as an owner/exec.

[smokymountainrain]

That's why I think he and his agent lucked into this. Their play was for him to go out this year and show he was worth more than what the Jazz were offering last year. Not only did he not prove that, in my mind I'm almost willing to pay him less after what we saw this year than I would have at this time last year since there were still some unknowns about his potential growth. But of course what Surfah also says is right in that teams were clearing cash for big names, and if they couldn't land those names they'd start dumping that cash on the leftovers. So I guess you could say that was strategic. But even in that scenario I still didn't think anyone in their right mind would offer Hayward the max, but of course Jordan has clearly never been in his right mind as an owner/exec.

It is pretty funny that the guy who finally offered Hayward the max is MJ - perhaps the worst decision maker in terms of player personnel in the league since he took over.

[MartyFunkhouser]

I realize the Jazz are likely to match this contract, but it is a stupid decision to match. We aren't even close to winning with Hayward. Let him walk and preserve cap space. The only way this deal makes sense is if it is structured top heavy, but I doubt that is the case.

Suck again next year and hope for better lottery results.

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

We aren't even close to winning with Hayward. Let him walk and preserve cap space.

I agree the Blazers wouldn't be better with GH, that's probably why they aren't offering.

[TripletDaddy]

I agree the Blazers wouldn't be better with GH, that's probably why they aren't offering.

I think he meant that the Chicago Blackhawks arent going to be better with Hayward, which is why they aren't offering.

[wapiti]

I realize the Jazz are likely to match this contract, but it is a stupid decision to match. We aren't even close to winning with Hayward. Let him walk and preserve cap space. The only way this deal makes sense is if it is structured top heavy, but I doubt that is the case.

Suck again next year and hope for better lottery results.

A max deal is not top heavy by definition. He's getting max money for his tenure in the league in year one with 4.5% yearly increases.

[scottie]

"You Gotta Love It Baby" Official Jazz thread

But that's no benefit to him. It's not like those Portland situations a few years ago where forcing a team to pay more impacts their ability to directly compete with you. MJ's not sticking anything to anybody (well, not in this sense!). He's just dumb enough to want Hayward for this amount.

Easy there, I didn't say anything about it benefiting him. Mostly just a reference to '97 and '98.

[The_Douger]

That's why I think he and his agent lucked into this. Their play was for him to go out this year and show he was worth more than what the Jazz were offering last year. Not only did he not prove that, in my mind I'm almost willing to pay him less after what we saw this year than I would have at this time last year since there were still some unknowns about his potential growth. But of course what Surfah also says is right in that teams were clearing cash for big names, and if they couldn't land those names they'd start dumping that cash on the leftovers. So I guess you could say that was strategic. But even in that scenario I still didn't think anyone in their right mind would offer Hayward the max, but of course Jordan has clearly never been in his right mind as an owner/exec.

That's how I feel. I was willing to extend him for reasonable at the start of the year. Now I want him for 9 million a year after how he played last year.

[MarkGrace]

It is pretty funny that the guy who finally offered Hayward the max is MJ - perhaps the worst decision maker in terms of player personnel in the league since he took over.

All the kid did last year was go out and prove that not only was he not worth a max contract, he probably isn't even worth what the Jazz were offering last year. So of course MJ offers him a max deal.

How do you even get to the place where you offer Hayward the max relative to the cost of other options? I seriously don't even get it. What are the rumors on Parsons? He was better than G-Time last year, and is only a year older. And they're at the age where that one year isn't going to represent a significant jump. I saw where Dallas is going to offer him 10-12 a year. How does someone offer Hayward that much more than him?

[MarkGrace]

Easy there, I didn't say anything about it benefiting him. Mostly just a reference to '97 and '98.

Right, he's not sticking it to anyone because there's nothing to stick in this situation. I was just making light of a dumb reference.

[wapiti]

All the kid did last year was go out and prove that not only was he not worth a max contract, he probably isn't even worth what the Jazz were offering last year. So of course MJ offers him a max deal.

How do you even get to the place where you offer Hayward the max relative to the cost of other options? I seriously don't even get it. What are the rumors on Parsons? He was better than G-Time last year, and is only a year older. And they're at the age where that one year isn't going to represent a significant jump. I saw where Dallas is going to offer him 10-12 a year. How does someone offer Hayward that much more than him?

Outside of James and Melo there are three wings on the market that are worth going after: Hayward, Parsons, and Stevenson. Hayward > Parsons >> Stevenson. Stevenson has an offer from Indiana for $44MM over 4 years. The prevailing thought is that he will do a bit better than that somewhere. Parsons is considering discounted offers to play with a contender in a big market. That's why we are seeing his name associated with Houston, Dallas, and Chicago. The Hayward deal has to make Parsons re-think that. If Hayward is worth $16MM and Stevenson is worth $12MM, Parsons should come in at around $14MM.

[MarkGrace]

Outside of James and Melo there are three wings on the market that are worth going after: Hayward, Parsons, and Stevenson. Hayward > Parsons >> Stevenson. Stevenson has an offer from Indiana for $44MM over 4 years. The prevailing thought is that he will do a bit better than that somewhere. Parsons is considering discounted offers to play with a contender in a big market. That's why we are seeing his name associated with Houston, Dallas, and Chicago. The Hayward deal has to make Parsons re-think that. If Hayward is worth $16MM and Stevenson is worth $12MM, Parsons should come in at around $14MM.

I have no clue what this could be based on. Something other than basketball, I'm just not sure what.

[MarkGrace]

Outside of James and Melo there are three wings on the market that are worth going after: Hayward, Parsons, and Stevenson. Hayward > Parsons >> Stevenson. Stevenson has an offer from Indiana for $44MM over 4 years. The prevailing thought is that he will do a bit better than that somewhere. Parsons is considering discounted offers to play with a contender in a big market. That's why we are seeing his name associated with Houston, Dallas, and Chicago. The Hayward deal has to make Parsons re-think that. If Hayward is worth $16MM and Stevenson is worth $12MM, Parsons should come in at around $14MM.

Isn't Parsons an RFA? He doesn't really get to decide that.

[BGRTHNUMEGO]

All the kid did last year was go out and prove that not only was he not worth a max contract, he probably isn't even worth what the Jazz were offering last year. So of course MJ offers him a max deal.

How do you even get to the place where you offer Hayward the max relative to the cost of other options? I seriously don't even get it. What are the rumors on Parsons? He was better than G-Time last year, and is only a year older. And they're at the age where that one year isn't going to represent a significant jump. I saw where Dallas is going to offer him 10-12 a year. How does someone offer Hayward that much more than him?

Swap Hayward and Parsons last year, and I think Hayward performs better in that Houston role than Parsons did, and I think Parsons struggles more in the Utah role than Hayward did. Parsons hasn't been asked to do anything remotely close to what the Jazz have asked of Hayward: touch the ball a lot, facilitate for teammates, create your own shot. Parsons got a ton of his attempts on catch-and-shoot (presumably a lot of open looks too, considering he was playing off of Harden and Howard), in transition, and on follow-ups. Based on how Hayward shot when he was playing off of Jefferson and Millsap, I think it is fair to assume he would've shot better than 37% from 3 with an eFG% of 54% like Parsons if Gordon had been on that team in that role.

I think Hayward's game is much more diverse than what Parsons can contribute. So if Parsons ends up with $11 or $12 M per year on his deal, is $3 M more per year really that much of a stretch for Hayward? And this deal for Gordon would pay him about $5 M less per year than Paul George, which again seems about right. Does Gordon's last season justify that kind of money? Not at all. But this is the guy who is getting Team USA shots, that Kobe praised pretty heavily to the old SLTrib guy who works in LA now, and that a handful of teams were reportedly really interested in this off-season even with the RFA designation. As Locke tweeted out last week, Lindsey thinks Hayward will more consistently be the good Gordon we've seen under Snyder and a new, faster paced, and more open offensive system.

Woj said teams understand they have to pay $1.5 M - $2 M more per year to get a RFA away from his team. Seems like that is about where this deal is for Hayward. And teams like Utah have to overpay to get good free agents to come to play in SLC, so in this case they're paying one of their own to keep him.