who comes back?

Mo Williams, Tinsley, Watson, Foye, Carroll, Millsap, Jefferson.

My guess is carroll, foye, and tinsley stay.
Millsap Williams, Watson, Jefferson are gone.

therawns wrote:

Mo Williams, Tinsley, Watson, Foye, Carroll, Millsap, Jefferson.

My guess is carroll, foye, and tinsley stay.
Millsap Williams, Watson, Jefferson are gone.

Marvin's got a player option for $8 mill. After this years' cruel dashing of our (my) dreams that with the change in team and scheme, he would burst forth as the second overall pick top draft pick high lottery first rounder non-scrub he has always had the potential to be, I don't think he's going to find that money in the open market.

We HAVE to sign DC. (If we don't it will HAVE to be because Corbin hates him, which is not only the 8th strike against Corbin, but also ridiculous because DC is just the kind of player Corbin was!

That's two. In addition to our fine 5-man nucleus of young talent (Gordo/Fav/Kanter/Evans/Burks). Up to 7.

We're going to draft a PG (probably, maybe) and there are a lot of things that can happen with Mo, starter level FA point guards, bench level FA PGs...we could end up with two Mo-level PGs and a rookie and then wouldn't need Tinsley. Or ONE good vet PF, the rook and Tinsley. Hard to imagine a scenario in which our PG situation doesn't improve, though. But at least two new players here. That's up to NINE.

I agree Foye would be a good addition...to our BENCH. 10.

As for Al and Millsap...I don't think the Jazz are much enamored by the prospect of paying either of them what they are asking (and what they will probably be offered by other teams). I don't think either comes back, except in the highly unlikely event they'll accept less money.

So we got Hay/Fav/Kanter/Burks/Evans. We got DC/Foye/Marvin. We got FA PG (maybe Mo)/rookie PG. That's TEN players right there, and that's counting on bundling the two #1s into a higher #1.

That leaves us with (by vague mental calculation guesswork) plenty of cap space to spend on the last roster positions.

HOWEVER. I think that part of the roster puzzle will have to be solved FIRST. We'll need one good big, and one cheap big. And there's a thousand other possibilities...this is where the NBA GM's job is like building a house of cards while riding a unicycle in a hurricane. On a tight rope. One-handed.

It must be tremendously rewarding to resolve the roster puzzle (with innumerable possibilities each affecting all the others, each itself effected by other influences: winning, making money, fan reaction, owner preference, etc), that GMs are faced with, starting pre-draft (starting right NOW, in fact).

This is the time of year when I always think "NBA GMs really do earn their money." Good luck Mr. Lindsey!!

There was something I saw that I found interesting in the locker room cleanout interviews...

Quote :

Q: Do you have to clear the deck to allow Hayward and Favors to take that [leadership] challenge?

DL: Um, it’s hard to say on Apr. 18 because we don’t know what’s gonna come our way. Again, that’s where superior flexibility has been built in, so we can take this a lot of different ways…No matter what alternative it is, we expect Gordon, Alec [Burks], Derrick, Jeremy [Evans], Kevin [Murphy], Jerel [McNeal] to appropriately participate…you know, Enes [Kanter]. Enes as well.

Thought it was interesting that he included Jerel in that group. Makes me think that his "rest of season" deal had a team option, likely for the minimum, for next year. He's a 26yo combo guard, played PG in the D-League this year.

McNeal, Murphy, and the Jazz second round pick (#44) for this year will all have non-guaranteed contracts, if the Jazz kept all three, and thier two first round picks, that would bring the roster to 11. And it's not like who they actually get with this years draft picks really matters, they need players at every position...

PG: McNeal
SG: Burks, Muphy
SF: Hayward, Williams
PF: Favors, Evans
C: Kanter

Other: Pick #14, Pick #21, Pick #44

How likely is that to happen? Let's ask Dennis Lindsey....

Quote :

Q: Is this a bad time to have flexibility?

DL: I don’t subscribe to “this is a bad draft”…We hear this every third year, and it’s our job to go and find good players.

Q: Top priority?

DL: Our top priority is to be a consistent contender. So the best way to that, whether it’s quick and bold, or long and painful and patient, you know, we’ll figure out. But that’s the top priority. / We’re not collectively afraid if, that the best alternative is to go young, and be very patient with the flexibility that we built in. I’m not afraid of that. You know, if, in, so to speak, take a step back. If we need to do that, then we’ll do that.

Q: Does the aforementioned flexibility have to be used this offseason?

DL: No. We’re not gonna let it burn, the money burn a hole in our pocket…I would say that, you know, if the opportunity to be bold and build the team immediately to be a contender is not there, we’ll be very patient and discerning.

Doesn't sound that far fetched does it? Here's the problem, under the new CBA the new minimum team salary is 90% of the salary cap. That would mean the total Jazz team salary will likely HAVE to be around $53-$54 Million.

The total salary of that 11 man roster? $30 Mil. That means the Jazz would have basically 3 roster spots to spend a required $24 Million. Even if you replace some of those minimum guys with Demarre and Foye you are still looking at probably $20 Million that will need to be spent. This is why you are going to start seeing people talking about the Jazz paying ridiculous amounts for so-and-so role player for just 1 or 2 years, one I'm already hearing is giving Jefferson near max on a 1-2 year contract.

Should be very interesting to watch this all play out....

TheMagnus wrote:

Doesn't sound that far fetched does it? Here's the problem, under the new CBA the new minimum team salary is 90% of the salary cap. That would mean the total Jazz team salary will likely HAVE to be around $53-$54 Million.

The total salary of that 11 man roster? $30 Mil. That means the Jazz would have basically 3 roster spots to spend a required $24 Million. Even if you replace some of those minimum guys with Demarre and Foye you are still looking at probably $20 Million that will need to be spent. This is why you are going to start seeing people talking about the Jazz paying ridiculous amounts for so-and-so role player for just 1 or 2 years, one I'm already hearing is giving Jefferson near max on a 1-2 year contract.

Should be very interesting to watch this all play out....

Well, if the Jazz end up having to overpay a player or two, just to get to the salary minimum, then I say pay a guy like DC a TON up front on a multi-year deal, then have those last few years be for the league minimum. It would likely give him more $ over the coarse of his contract than any other team would offer, but would do absolutley no damage to the Jazz' ability to build for the future.

I'll also go back to a guy I suggested the Jazz target, Carl Landry. Paying him a 2-3 year deal, first year for $10million, with the remaining years for $3-4 million would seem like a lot to pay at first glance, but if there are no big fish out there to be reeled in using all that cap space, then that kind of deal would be great since it would just help the team get to the salary minimum this year, without huring the team the following years, but also doesn't add another player (like this year) that is in the last year of his contract. The Jazz could use this "frontloading" strategy on just about any mid-level FA, to be able to pay them more, without adding a long term salary issue, but staying away from a bunch of 1 year rent-a-player contracts, like they had this year.

Anyone know if I'm off base here? Is there some kind of rule that dictates how "front loaded" an offer can be?

zero24gravity wrote:

TheMagnus wrote:

Doesn't sound that far fetched does it? Here's the problem, under the new CBA the new minimum team salary is 90% of the salary cap. That would mean the total Jazz team salary will likely HAVE to be around $53-$54 Million.

The total salary of that 11 man roster? $30 Mil. That means the Jazz would have basically 3 roster spots to spend a required $24 Million. Even if you replace some of those minimum guys with Demarre and Foye you are still looking at probably $20 Million that will need to be spent. This is why you are going to start seeing people talking about the Jazz paying ridiculous amounts for so-and-so role player for just 1 or 2 years, one I'm already hearing is giving Jefferson near max on a 1-2 year contract.

Should be very interesting to watch this all play out....

Well, if the Jazz end up having to overpay a player or two, just to get to the salary minimum, then I say pay a guy like DC a TON up front on a multi-year deal, then have those last few years be for the league minimum. It would likely give him more $ over the coarse of his contract than any other team would offer, but would do absolutley no damage to the Jazz' ability to build for the future.

I'll also go back to a guy I suggested the Jazz target, Carl Landry. Paying him a 2-3 year deal, first year for $10million, with the remaining years for $3-4 million would seem like a lot to pay at first glance, but if there are no big fish out there to be reeled in using all that cap space, then that kind of deal would be great since it would just help the team get to the salary minimum this year, without huring the team the following years, but also doesn't add another player (like this year) that is in the last year of his contract. The Jazz could use this "frontloading" strategy on just about any mid-level FA, to be able to pay them more, without adding a long term salary issue, but staying away from a bunch of 1 year rent-a-player contracts, like they had this year.

Anyone know if I'm off base here? Is there some kind of rule that dictates how "front loaded" an offer can be?

There are rules that make pretty much everything you said there illegal. Front loading is limited to change by either 4 or 7% of the yearly value and bonuses are paid up front but distributed over the life of the contact for cap purposes. I think front loading is a valid strategy, but it works better with "bird" free agents (7%) and large contacts.

That's why I think the guys that make the most sense in that strategy are Paul Milsap and Al Jefferson.

TheMagnus wrote:

zero24gravity wrote:

TheMagnus wrote:

Doesn't sound that far fetched does it? Here's the problem, under the new CBA the new minimum team salary is 90% of the salary cap. That would mean the total Jazz team salary will likely HAVE to be around $53-$54 Million.

The total salary of that 11 man roster? $30 Mil. That means the Jazz would have basically 3 roster spots to spend a required $24 Million. Even if you replace some of those minimum guys with Demarre and Foye you are still looking at probably $20 Million that will need to be spent. This is why you are going to start seeing people talking about the Jazz paying ridiculous amounts for so-and-so role player for just 1 or 2 years, one I'm already hearing is giving Jefferson near max on a 1-2 year contract.

Should be very interesting to watch this all play out....

Well, if the Jazz end up having to overpay a player or two, just to get to the salary minimum, then I say pay a guy like DC a TON up front on a multi-year deal, then have those last few years be for the league minimum. It would likely give him more $ over the coarse of his contract than any other team would offer, but would do absolutley no damage to the Jazz' ability to build for the future.

I'll also go back to a guy I suggested the Jazz target, Carl Landry. Paying him a 2-3 year deal, first year for $10million, with the remaining years for $3-4 million would seem like a lot to pay at first glance, but if there are no big fish out there to be reeled in using all that cap space, then that kind of deal would be great since it would just help the team get to the salary minimum this year, without huring the team the following years, but also doesn't add another player (like this year) that is in the last year of his contract. The Jazz could use this "frontloading" strategy on just about any mid-level FA, to be able to pay them more, without adding a long term salary issue, but staying away from a bunch of 1 year rent-a-player contracts, like they had this year.

Anyone know if I'm off base here? Is there some kind of rule that dictates how "front loaded" an offer can be?

There are rules that make pretty much everything you said there illegal. Front loading is limited to change by either 4 or 7% of the yearly value and bonuses are paid up front but distributed over the life of the contact for cap purposes. I think front loading is a valid strategy, but it works better with "bird" free agents (7%) and large contacts.

That's why I think the guys that make the most sense in that strategy are Paul Milsap and Al Jefferson.

Ah crap, I figured that was too good to be true.

Well, I petition for a rule change then!

...thanks for the clarification Magnus. Sounds like it can still be done, but not to the extreme like I was suggesting.

I want Watson back ......

Wait, before you start typing angerly ....


But nearly to a man, the Jazz free agents say they would love to return to play for Utah next year.
“I don’t know — it’s a long way from now,’’ said Watson. “The first thing is to get healthy. If I can’t contribute 100 percent healthy, I’d rather contribute doing something else.’’


I'm voting for "something else" ..... i.e. Assistant Coach Watson.

Most of us are assuming that Marv will opt into his $8 million player option next year, since it's very unrealistic to expect he would get any more than that from another team.

So what about using him as trade bait for a team that wants cap flexibity for the 2014-15 season? Marv is an $8 million expiring contract & could be useful in a trade to bring in bigger talent.

Someone who jumps out at me that would work straight-up is Anderson Varejao (3 year $8.4 million). He was hurt, so the team would have to know that he's healed. Not sure if Cleveland would want to trade him, but if they are thinking a year ahead & want cap flexibilty, then maybe Marv & a pick for Anderson V. would be enticing. He, along with Favors & Enes would be a very good three big rotation.

Another possiblily as a temporary PG, if the Jazz can't get someone better, would be Jameer Nelson (3 year $8.5 million). Orlando is in rebuilding mode & I imagine they would make a move like this to help their future, especially if they land a guy like Burke in the draft.


Even if those types of deals don't float your boat, I'm still thinking that Marvin could turn into something of value, assuming he opts in.

Here is who I think comes back....

obviously Burks, Kanter, Hayward, Favors....more than likely Marv does. No way he turns down that kind of money after the year he just had..and ya know what? I am ok with him on the bench as a 6th or 7th man, especially if Al isn't on the team.

DC and Evans will be back (hopefully with increased roles).

I think Foye will be back...and again, I am ok with that if it is in a limited back up, sniper off the bench kind of role.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Tinsley back.

Millsap, Jefferson, Mo Williams, Watson, & Kevin Murphy are all goners.

TheMagnus wrote:

There was something I saw that I found interesting in the locker room cleanout interviews...

Quote :

Q: Do you have to clear the deck to allow Hayward and Favors to take that [leadership] challenge?

DL: Um, it’s hard to say on Apr. 18 because we don’t know what’s gonna come our way. Again, that’s where superior flexibility has been built in, so we can take this a lot of different ways…No matter what alternative it is, we expect Gordon, Alec [Burks], Derrick, Jeremy [Evans], Kevin [Murphy], Jerel [McNeal] to appropriately participate…you know, Enes [Kanter]. Enes as well.

Thought it was interesting that he included Jerel in that group. Makes me think that his "rest of season" deal had a team option, likely for the minimum, for next year. He's a 26yo combo guard, played PG in the D-League this year.

McNeal, Murphy, and the Jazz second round pick (#44) for this year will all have non-guaranteed contracts, if the Jazz kept all three, and thier two first round picks, that would bring the roster to 11. And it's not like who they actually get with this years draft picks really matters, they need players at every position...

PG: McNeal
SG: Burks, Muphy
SF: Hayward, Williams
PF: Favors, Evans
C: Kanter

Other: Pick #14, Pick #21, Pick #44

How likely is that to happen? Let's ask Dennis Lindsey....

Quote :

Q: Is this a bad time to have flexibility?

DL: I don’t subscribe to “this is a bad draft”…We hear this every third year, and it’s our job to go and find good players.

Q: Top priority?

DL: Our top priority is to be a consistent contender. So the best way to that, whether it’s quick and bold, or long and painful and patient, you know, we’ll figure out. But that’s the top priority. / We’re not collectively afraid if, that the best alternative is to go young, and be very patient with the flexibility that we built in. I’m not afraid of that. You know, if, in, so to speak, take a step back. If we need to do that, then we’ll do that.

Q: Does the aforementioned flexibility have to be used this offseason?

DL: No. We’re not gonna let it burn, the money burn a hole in our pocket…I would say that, you know, if the opportunity to be bold and build the team immediately to be a contender is not there, we’ll be very patient and discerning.

Doesn't sound that far fetched does it? Here's the problem, under the new CBA the new minimum team salary is 90% of the salary cap. That would mean the total Jazz team salary will likely HAVE to be around $53-$54 Million.

The total salary of that 11 man roster? $30 Mil. That means the Jazz would have basically 3 roster spots to spend a required $24 Million. Even if you replace some of those minimum guys with Demarre and Foye you are still looking at probably $20 Million that will need to be spent. This is why you are going to start seeing people talking about the Jazz paying ridiculous amounts for so-and-so role player for just 1 or 2 years, one I'm already hearing is giving Jefferson near max on a 1-2 year contract.

Should be very interesting to watch this all play out....

This is why im thinking about the return of ak47. Is he worth 10 mil? Heck no, especially when he misses 1/4 of the games. Id say more in the 6-8 mil range. Yes, its a stop gap vet, but i feel like he would be a nice addition.

Favors was 7th in the league in foul rate. He averaged 6.6 fould per 48 minutes. He will learn, and since he was coming off the bench, foul trouble was not as much of a concern, so he was probably more agressive then a starter would be in foul trouble. We need a quality backup for favors. Get AK47 and he starts at the 3, but also gets a lot of time at the 4. (Which might be his natural position anyways.) Or you start carroll, have ak47 come early off the bench for favors/kanter, and finish the game. You almost try to use a 3 man rotation of ak47/favors/kanter.

Roy has a non-guaranteed contract next year. They wont pick up the option on him, but they are still at about 60 million heading into the year. That is a lot of money for a team that is as bad as they are. Now, are they desperate to get rid of ak47? No, but id guage sota's asking price for him if im lindsay/KOC.

99% of contracts go up every year. What if the Jazz signed a few guys to say 3 year contracts, that decreased every year. Front loading contracts still evens out salary cap wise over the duration of the contract. Never seen it done, but its a thought.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3ZtUvAhzuQ

At least we know this guy will be back. Little Janas hug at the end. CJ boy.

Hayward, Burks, Favors and Kanter I'd like to be the starters. Add a couple vet points and two serviceable bigs to the current roster and let's see these guys mature with major minutes! ! One thing's for sure- it'll be entertaining even if they fall short of the playoffs and they'll improve before our eyes. Every one of the core four will prove they're starters in the league with minutes.

Given minutes, Favors will be up there as most improved player. No doubt. He may even lead the league in blocks if he can stay on the court for 34 min a game ..consider this: Favors wins mip and defensive player of the yr with minutes. Impossible you say? Perhaps because the Jazz may may not make the playoffs. But if they do make the playoffs- I can see it happening although a long shot.

aliveandkickin wrote:

Given minutes, Favors will be up there as most improved player. No doubt. He may even lead the league in blocks if he can stay on the court for 34 min a game ..consider this: Favors wins mip and defensive player of the yr with minutes. Impossible you say? Perhaps because the Jazz may may not make the playoffs. But if they do make the playoffs- I can see it happening although a long shot.

I think the Jazz have two legit MIP candidates in Hayward and Favors if the Jazz FO and coaching staff doesn't muck it up. Hayward will be playing 36+ minutes a game and have one of the higher usage rates on the team if Corbin has learned anything this season and I think he could average 20+ points next season, and Favors will be playing 30+ and could easily average a double-double with 2+ blocks a game. Give the edge to Favors if both of those things happen though, because his jump will seem much more dramatic.