Cutting CJ

[BringtheD]

I think the Jazz should cut Miles this offseason, not pickup the last year of his option. If the Jazz cut Miles they can parlay that money into keeping AK47 who has been with the team for ten years, and it has been reported numerous times that AK$7 would consider a paycut to stay in Utah.
If the Jazz keep Miles, I doubt that they would be able to trade him, as compared to the value of AK47 at a bargain rate, he could be moved. In this market, 5-6mill/per with an extra year at the end, seems below market value which I would estimate at 7-9mill per at 2-3 years. Ak47 can play up to 4 positions, can start or come off the bench, and when he is healthy plays with a good motor. AK47 has been with the Jazz for ten years and is the only surviving link from the Malone to Stockton days, he was around for the boozer dwill days, and I think that should they keep him around for the beginning of the hayward/favors days? Is there a better way the Jazz can spend 6-7 million than on 3-4 years with AK47. Keeping AK47 at a bargain rate would be a strong statement about the franchise which would build team morale and it would give AK47 somewhat of a legacy which should also be motivation for him to help out the franchise with a friendly contract.

[carrottop12]

At this point, I don't really care much about CJ.

He's a bench player, probably best suited for 15-20 minutes a night. He can't shoot, and he doesn't do anything else to help the team win. He's had his chance, I say let him go.

[BringtheD]

I'm not sure he's good enough to be a bench player. I think he'd have a hard time fitting in with another team but if he could he might be a bench player. Alot of players that leave end up sticking around the league and it's because they finally have to put to practice what sloan taught them, that's the truth. Sloan can teach you how to stick around, but the only thing sticking to cj is the smell of cheeseburgers and the look of laziness.

[Fido]

If AK sticks around at a much reduced rate that is one thing--but considering his health record (83% of games on his career, 76% over the past 7 years, 76.8% over the past 3 years) I'm not sure that cutting people to give him more money or keeping him as a mascot of sorts as a connection to the past is a good idea.

The best way to build morale of the team is to put contributers on the court who make a difference. AK can do that--but relying on him as a significant player on the team would be an emotional decision rather than a rational decision. AK's production has also been a bit stagnant. His value has always been his ability to fill the stat sheet in many categories but his season averages have been below his career averages in Points and Rebounds for the past 5 years, Blocks and Steals for 4 of the past 5 years, and Shooting %s (both 3pt and FG%) in 2 of the past 4 years.

The decision about CJ should be made on the merits of CJ.

[Paper Face]

At 3.7 million, I think it's reasonable to pick up the option. He might improve, and he might be a valuable trade asset.

[Paper Face]

double post

[StocktonShorts]

At 3.7 million, I think it's reasonable to pick up the option. He might improve, and he might be a valuable trade asset.

This.

I can stomach CJ for $3.7M.

[jazzfan1971]

I thought he improved over last year on the whole. The bad nights are stinky though. But for 3.7 mil may as well keep him and see if you can move him. I don't think the 3.7 mil impacts a decision on AK all that much anyway. We're pretty bad at the wing positions. He's nothing terrific but at least he can have a big night off the bench now and then.

I don't see AK back myself. I just think he'll get a better offer elsewhere. Maybe even in Russia. If he wants to come back for vet min for 3 years as a payback gesture (Not that any professional athlete does that) we'd just about have to take him. But, if he's looking at 21 mil over 3, I think we just let him go.

[BringtheD]

cj would have to be perfect for the rest of the year for me to change my opinion. if they let ak47 go to free agency it also changes my opinion a little about cj, but if the thinking is to just keep cj on his merits and let ak47 go, then everyone agrees the player with fewer merits is kept. i don't see cj as part of the rebuilding process and ak47 can be an asset in more ways than one. however, i believe that the thinking is to keep cj, there are few reasons, one might be that the 40 point night was nice and ak47 couldn't do that, another that cj is younger and maybe he practices harder than ak47, i don't know. however, i think everyone can agree that ak47 at the mle is a no brain bargain and the vet minimum is way too low. i also don't see ak47 as part of the rebuilding process, but as far as winning games for the next three years it is a step back to keep cj and let ak47 go.

[MeestR]

ak at his worst is better than cj at his best. should be easy to decide who earns how much.

[d-will8]

Back when I perceived this team as a perennial playoff contender, I thought keeping AK for somewhere around 5-7 million a year for 2-3 years would unquestionably be the right move, but now I'm not so sure. I love what a healthy, motivated AK brings to the table, but he's not healthy all that often and I don't really see how he fits in to our future plans.

Given the extreme youth of some of our core players (Hayward, Favors and whoever we draft), we have a long way to go before we're a team that can challenge for fifty wins and a decent playoff seed. AK's time as an effective NBA player may very well have expired before that time comes (if it comes), so why forfeit cap flexibility to pay him the next few years?

Yes, we'd be a better team with AK and, yes, it will be sad to see him go, but he just doesn't fit with what we have going now and I think we'd be wise to follow the Thunder model and preserve our cap space rather than paying veteran role players who can't make us anything more than a middling team.

As for C.J., I've basically given up on him developing in to much more than he is, but I'd rather keep him around next year for 3.7 million than give AK a multi-year deal. C.J. at least could fit in to our future plans.

[babyjax13]

CJ is great as a 8th or 9th man....as a starter, I just don't see it....but, you can't argue with his production for $3.7 million (and yes, I cringe saying that).

[GoosePants]

So CJ and Deron are pretty good friends right? The nets really want to resign Deron. Do you think the nets would be up for a trade? I know this would be a long shot but i reeeeally am sick of CJ.

[Ugly0598]

If we get Anthony Morrow out of it I wouldn't actually mind it.

[Neon Black]

If we get Anthony Morrow out of it I wouldn't actually mind it.

Dear New Jersey:

[jozef]

Money-wise it would be a blessing for him, cause there are 28 teams who would offer C.J. contracts starting at mid-level exception. Sorry, guy,s but you have no idea about bball.

[Soul Patch]

Yeah. You pay him 3.7 and if he plays well you've got a steal if he doesn't he's trade bait.

[HolyToledo]

I find it amazing how much hate there is for CJ! He is a very talented scorer although a chucker. Every team needs a player that can create his own shot. He also has a reasonable contract. I do think CJ would be a distraction if forced to come off the bench next year, but Hayward along with Millsap, Favors, Jefferson, and Harris also need to start. One player is going to be very disappointed next year. Knowing how Corbin is he will make one of the young guys sit (likely Favors).

[jazzfan1971]

Wow, you know Corbin allready? What can we expect out of him?

[StocktonShorts]

but Hayward along with Millsap, Favors, Jefferson, and Harris also need to start.

I have no problem with this starting five.

**** C.J. if he doesn't like coming off the bench.