2019 Utah Jazz Off Season Thread

[wco81]

Not sure if that would help small market teams build more competitive rosters or if it wold allow large market clubs to carry even a higher payroll.

[KqWIN]

Not sure if that would help small market teams build more competitive rosters or if it wold allow large market clubs to carry even a higher payroll.

The key is that it allows both large and small market teams to have a higher payroll. In the current solution, only large market teams can afford to have a high payroll at all. The NBA's solution to helping small market teams has been to make things more costly. They made the luxury tax more punitive and introduced the supermax. It's been a complete failure because more cost disproportionally effects teams with less money.

Put it this way, does a fee hurt someone who makes $70k or $100k more. Similarly, who benefits more if they receive a $1K bonus at work?

[wco81]

Sure but the NBA owners want a cap, especially the smaller market clubs.

That is why they have punitive luxury taxes.

They don't want teams to amass several players earning over $30 million a year.

If the Warriors sign 3 or 4 players with those numbers, it will be an aberration and last only for 3-4 years.

It can't be sustained longer than that.

[KqWIN]

Sure but the NBA owners want a cap, especially the smaller market clubs.

That is why they have punitive luxury taxes.

They don't want teams to amass several players earning over $30 million a year.

If the Warriors sign 3 or 4 players with those numbers, it will be an aberration and last only for 3-4 years.

It can't be sustained longer than that.

The punitive tax effects everyone, and it hurts much more for a smaller market team. Put a smaller market team in the same situation and they can't even do it for one year. Didn't we see that with the Thunder? The tax has effectively worked as a hard cap for several teams because they can't afford it.

The cap is good because it restricts the ways a team can add more salary without using cost as an additive restriction. The luxury tax also puts restrictions on ways a team can add salary, but the real punishment is in dollars. The teams with less dollars will be exponentially more hurt by the punishments related to dollars. Small market teams can't simply be helped by increasing costs. That's not the way to address the situation.

IMO, the real question is if the NBA even wants to address the situation. The luxury tax is perfectly designed to give competitive advantages to large market teams while also keeping the small market teams profitable. That is the best case scenario for the NBA and it's not an accident that the luxury tax enables it. We're pretending that the goal is to have a perfectly competitive league, when the real goal is for everyone to make money.

[KqWIN]

This was still true before Rudy became supermax eligible, but the FO has to be aware of their current window and assessed the future direction of the team. Once the big money kicks in, the Jazz won't be able to make moves. They'll be stuck to Gobert and Mitchell for the long haul. If the Jazz want to win a championship, they have to get players in now and be willing to pay the luxury tax when the pay increases come.

The team has a choice between coasting to 5+ years of playoff births or paying luxury tax for a chance at winning the whole thing, I think it's pretty clear which direction the franchise would pick...does anyone have any doubts about that?

[wco81]

There’s an Espn story which noted that a couple of teams traded their players away before facing paying the super max:

Chicago trading Butler and Sacto trading Cousins.

A couple of super max players forced themselves off the team, in PG13 and Kawhi.

Jazz with Gobert getting super max may have already hit their ceiling, first or second round exit because elite perimeter players will render Rudy ineffective in the playoffs.

[Inigo Montoya]

This was still true before Rudy became supermax eligible, but the FO has to be aware of their current window and assessed the future direction of the team. Once the big money kicks in, the Jazz won't be able to make moves. They'll be stuck to Gobert and Mitchell for the long haul. If the Jazz want to win a championship, they have to get players in now and be willing to pay the luxury tax when the pay increases come.

The team has a choice between coasting to 5+ years of playoff births or paying luxury tax for a chance at winning the whole thing, I think it's pretty clear which direction the franchise would pick...does anyone have any doubts about that?

That's true. The problem is that the Jazz need to get that currently missing player that will take them to the next level before DM's and Gobert's next contracts are signed, which is something we've been saying all along. Once those kick in, the Jazz won't have the cap space to get such a player outside of the draft (excuse me for not including the trade option) even without Gobert's supermax.

There’s an Espn story which noted that a couple of teams traded their players away before facing paying the super max:

Chicago trading Butler and Sacto trading Cousins.

A couple of super max players forced themselves off the team, in PG13 and Kawhi.

Jazz with Gobert getting super max may have already hit their ceiling, first or second round exit because elite perimeter players will render Rudy ineffective in the playoffs.

This (maybe without the last part of the last sentence).

While Gobert is what makes this team a playoff contender and is the most impactful player on the team, I would not want to pay him the supermax, or even a regular max when it's coupled with DM's max and no other difference makers. If we're just going to coast as a 1st-2nd round team for the next two years and then sign Gobert and DM to max contracts with no meaningful 3rd player, just so we could coast another 4-5 years at the same level we're at now, I'd much rather trade Gobert now, while his value is at its highest and he still has some years on his deal, and get the most value for him. Then, use those assets to reset and re-calibrate this roster to fit DM's timeline.

[SoCalJazzFan]

Rudy is awesome, but he is going to have to develop a hook shot and/or a mid-range shot and average over 20pts/gm to come close to earning that kind of cap space.

I'll refer you to my post a few hours ago in this thread for my thoughts on this way of thinking It's not all about ppg.

viewtopic.php?f=33&t=1831092&start=20

I agree, it is not all about ppg. However, I believe that a team needs to be able to rely on a supermax player (or possibly even a max player) to be able to play critical times in games and be able to carry the team during such times or games.

Unfortunately, Gobert is limited so that he is ineffective on defense more than about 10 feet from the rim, and on offense outside of roughly 5 feet. He was nearly unplayable against the Rockets until the Jazz devised the odd funneling scheme for Harden. Any team that doesn't need to rely on a single offensive player and can switch and shoot outside could neutralize Gobert.

He is great at what he does, but he is also limiting. He admitted as much at the end of the season when he said he needs to improve and expand his game.

[SoCalJazzFan]

Easy solution, make the super max bonus not count against the cap. Players get their money, cap sheet not effected. Theoretically opens up more money for non supermax players as well.

Better solution, the supermax needs to turn into a super bonus. One of the reasons the super max is so punitive on teams is that it’s a 5 year deal after a player’s 7th or 8th year. Those last years are going to be a major pain because the player is likely past his prime at that point.

Instead, a player should receive bonus (not counted against the cap) whenever they achieve those benchmarks. Win DPOY? Get the bonus immediately. The idea that a player gets rewarded later for what he did now is dumb. The supermax player should get paid while he’s a supermax player and not after.

It also helps the players out because there’s a less strict time window for them to receive the benchmark. Towns and Beal wouldn’t have to sweat it this year because they could achieve it another year.

The only reason not to do this is if you want to incite player movement. Which is also why it won’t happen. The NBA loves player movement. They also want it to be more difficult for small market teams.

I like the idea, but see the player movement issue. Maybe a blend, the player earns a bonus (not counted towards cap, and distinguishing the 1st, 2nd and 3rd All NBA team selection) payable over 4-5 years for these accomplishments from the team he is currently on, but forfeits the payments if he leaves that team (trades would obligate receiving team to pay the bonuses).

[VCfor3]

When is the bext CBA negotiation and is there any chance the supermax can be removed before we have to give it to Gobert? No?

I hate the supermax. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

It's not just the NBA. It's the NBA Players Association which negotiated the CBA with the NBA.

Of course the players want the most money possible when teams are raking in revenues.

I don't think it's about helping teams build the best teams. It's about maximizing the payout for their best players so that they stay.

It's up to the Jazz FO to make the case to him that they can't improve the team if he takes the full super max. Other franchise players will probably say they don't care, they want that money.

Easy solution, make the super max bonus not count against the cap. Players get their money, cap sheet not effected. Theoretically opens up more money for non supermax players as well.

Better solution, the supermax needs to turn into a super bonus. One of the reasons the super max is so punitive on teams is that it’s a 5 year deal after a player’s 7th or 8th year. Those last years are going to be a major pain because the player is likely past his prime at that point.

Instead, a player should receive bonus (not counted against the cap) whenever they achieve those benchmarks. Win DPOY? Get the bonus immediately. The idea that a player gets rewarded later for what he did now is dumb. The supermax player should get paid while he’s a supermax player and not after.

It also helps the players out because there’s a less strict time window for them to receive the benchmark. Towns and Beal wouldn’t have to sweat it this year because they could achieve it another year.

The only reason not to do this is if you want to incite player movement. Which is also why it won’t happen. The NBA loves player movement. They also want it to be more difficult for small market teams.

I feel like they should meet in the middle and only half of the difference between normal max and super max counts against the cap. Your supermax player is still hella expensive for your team, which somewhat helps against superteams developing in the bigger markets, but doesn't completely kill your cap quite as much while the player still gets their money. Then if the player is traded maybe they count for the full amount or something.

[stitches]

Watch on YouTube

Read on Twitter

[PharmD]

Kemba is eligible for super max too after he made All NBA 3d team... he might be staying...

If Kemba comes to Utah and takes much less money than he would with the Hornets, I'm calling the "Jazz aren't FA destination" thing a myth...

I'm not sure Charlotte will even offer him the supermax. That ties their hands completely and they are already thoroughly mediocre.

[stitches]

Here's an article about the infamous chef DL hired and is proud of:

Read on Twitter

And no, I didn't read it, but if it interests any of you guys, you are welcome to summarize.

[KqWIN]

Here's an article about the infamous chef DL hired and is proud of:

Read on Twitter

And no, I didn't read it, but if it interests any of you guys, you are welcome to summarize.

You mean Zanik!

[TO11]

Here's an article about the infamous chef DL hired and is proud of:

Read on Twitter

And no, I didn't read it, but if it interests any of you guys, you are welcome to summarize.

Not that great of an article. But TLDR is that Zamora is the team nutrition/chef specialist. Studied nutrition at University of Tennessee. Helped Mitchell transition from Eggs/Bacon/Pancakes to sweet potatoes and scallops for breakfast. Prepares mobile meals for players when needed. Everyone really trusts and likes him. Real Professional Dude. The End.

[Inigo Montoya]

Here's an article about the infamous chef DL hired and is proud of:

Read on Twitter

And no, I didn't read it, but if it interests any of you guys, you are welcome to summarize.

#CookingMatters

[stitches]

https://www.theringer.com/nba/2019/5/29/18644002/nba-free-agency-kawhi-leonard-kevin-durant-conversation

I wonder whether more players might try to follow Kawhi’s and Masai’s lead going forward. The less you make it an emotional negotiation, the more favorable the outcome is in your favor. Maybe Anthony Davis should have Uncle Dennis handle his New Orleans exit strategy. As Kawhi’s shown, what’s the worst that can happen? You get booed? Some guy calls you disloyal on TV? If the Raptors had lost in the second round to the Sixers, wouldn’t his value be just as high this summer? He’s also going to have a profound impact on the way teams will be built. If I’m a GM of a Toronto-level team—Utah, Portland, insert a secondary market that’s not a typical free-agency destination—I am making my version of the Godfather offer to David Griffin for Anthony Davis. This is the power of the one-year rental. It can work.

I'm not a huge fan of that reasoning but... oh well... what say you Jazz Nation?

Gobert + our pick + Royce... for AD? Yay or nay?

[KqWIN]

We stink w/o Gobert, so we'd be adding AD to a bad team who he'd certainly leave in the summer.

[Rauxcee]

We stink w/o Gobert, so we'd be adding AD to a bad team who he'd certainly leave in the summer.

Don't see the point in trading a player who might stay, for a player who most definitely leaves. Especially as AD without Gobert doesn't make us that much better than what we already are.

Now if there was a way to get AD without trading Gobert/Mitchell I'd be all over that. (There's not though).

[Luigi]

If Gobert was a little worse, or wasn't a lock to stay, I'd consider it. But as it stands, Gobert is too good to do this.