Future Free Agent Thread, Part 2

[babyjax13]

I don’t think being limited off the dribble matters. We definitely don’t need another player who wants to play off the bounce, that is our number one issue. Everyone wants the ball.

Horford is a really smart player who can keep the ball moving and make good decisions. Unlike almost players on our team, he’s first instinct isn’t going to set up his own play when he catches the ball.

He was good in Boston because they played a team game. PHI was tougher because they don’t and either Ben/Embiid dominate the ball and he just kind of stands there.

Defensively, it’s still preferable to have two bigs. We pushed the limits of Gobert+nobody else plays defense too far. The Bucks are really ahead of the curve on the important e of protecting the rim first, and I hope we’re not going to be late on that bandwagon.

If we had more players like Horford, who are actually there to benefit the team, we’d be a much better team.

The Horford that you are describing doesn't really exist anymore. He is at that age where you see bigs begin to fall off really fast and we have already seen a pretty noticeable decline over the last 2 years. Also I don't think it is preferable to have 2 bigs defensively unless one is a freak of nature defensively like Giannis or Anthony Davis who are strong defenders on the perimeter and interior.

I don't see the noticeable decline over the past two seasons. His 18/19 campaign was arguably one of the better seasons in his career. Horford wasn't even a bad player this season. He's still a very good defender and I'm confident he would have have a better offensive season in a better system despite getting one year older.

Some time soon the NBA is going to learn how to do math again and realize the importance of defending the rim. Having another rim defender on the court is way more valuable than people currently think because we simply don't value the importance of protecting the rim enough. Also, I think we need to give big men more credit in general for their ability to close off space and rotate in general...which is more important than guarding the ball.

Having Rudy+Horford would be just like having Rudy+Favors...which was ridiculously strong defensively. The difference is that Horford can still be a positive offensive player next to Rudy unlike Favs. Rudy +4 guys who don't help just isn't going to get it done.

If this is what you are looking for I think there are cheaper ways to do it, Serge Ibaka being a prime example, and likely an even more affordable option being Jerami Grant.

[KqWIN]

The Horford that you are describing doesn't really exist anymore. He is at that age where you see bigs begin to fall off really fast and we have already seen a pretty noticeable decline over the last 2 years. Also I don't think it is preferable to have 2 bigs defensively unless one is a freak of nature defensively like Giannis or Anthony Davis who are strong defenders on the perimeter and interior.

I don't see the noticeable decline over the past two seasons. His 18/19 campaign was arguably one of the better seasons in his career. Horford wasn't even a bad player this season. He's still a very good defender and I'm confident he would have have a better offensive season in a better system despite getting one year older.

Some time soon the NBA is going to learn how to do math again and realize the importance of defending the rim. Having another rim defender on the court is way more valuable than people currently think because we simply don't value the importance of protecting the rim enough. Also, I think we need to give big men more credit in general for their ability to close off space and rotate in general...which is more important than guarding the ball.

Having Rudy+Horford would be just like having Rudy+Favors...which was ridiculously strong defensively. The difference is that Horford can still be a positive offensive player next to Rudy unlike Favs. Rudy +4 guys who don't help just isn't going to get it done.

If this is what you are looking for I think there are cheaper ways to do it, Serge Ibaka being a prime example, and likely an even more affordable option being Jerami Grant.

If we could get those guys...sure. I don't think we can. Moving Conley is attempting to make lemonade out of lemons. That trade put the franchise in a really tough spot.

I think it will have to be some exchange of "spoiled goods". Someone like Horford or preferably Otto Porter.

[babyjax13]

I don't see the noticeable decline over the past two seasons. His 18/19 campaign was arguably one of the better seasons in his career. Horford wasn't even a bad player this season. He's still a very good defender and I'm confident he would have have a better offensive season in a better system despite getting one year older.

Some time soon the NBA is going to learn how to do math again and realize the importance of defending the rim. Having another rim defender on the court is way more valuable than people currently think because we simply don't value the importance of protecting the rim enough. Also, I think we need to give big men more credit in general for their ability to close off space and rotate in general...which is more important than guarding the ball.

Having Rudy+Horford would be just like having Rudy+Favors...which was ridiculously strong defensively. The difference is that Horford can still be a positive offensive player next to Rudy unlike Favs. Rudy +4 guys who don't help just isn't going to get it done.

If this is what you are looking for I think there are cheaper ways to do it, Serge Ibaka being a prime example, and likely an even more affordable option being Jerami Grant.

If we could get those guys...sure. I don't think we can. Moving Conley is attempting to make lemonade out of lemons. That trade put the franchise in a really tough spot.

I think it will have to be some exchange of "spoiled goods". Someone like Horford or preferably Otto Porter.

Horford is the kind of spoiled goods that prevents you from making moves down the road, though. I'd definitely prefer (in fact, I would love) Otto Porter. I think he's just perfect for us. I do think there are better options than Horford, including just letting Conley expire.

[KqWIN]

If this is what you are looking for I think there are cheaper ways to do it, Serge Ibaka being a prime example, and likely an even more affordable option being Jerami Grant.

If we could get those guys...sure. I don't think we can. Moving Conley is attempting to make lemonade out of lemons. That trade put the franchise in a really tough spot.

I think it will have to be some exchange of "spoiled goods". Someone like Horford or preferably Otto Porter.

Horford is the kind of spoiled goods that prevents you from making moves down the road, though. I'd definitely prefer (in fact, I would love) Otto Porter. I think he's just perfect for us. I do think there are better options than Horford, including just letting Conley expire.

I don't think Horford's contract really changes things from a team building perspective. We are capped out either way if we extend Mitchell early, which we will, so it doesn't open up any moves for us to let Conley expire. It's the difference between having 0 cap space and 0 cap space. If you're willing to pay money, it's actually better to keep more salary on the books because you can't achieve a higher total team salary if you're still capped out after a large salary expires.

The stacking of salaries is why the Jazz had to make a move when they did. It needed to get done before Mitchell and Gobert get their pay raises. Unfortunately they squandered their opportunity (along with lots of assets) on Conley.

[babyjax13]

If we could get those guys...sure. I don't think we can. Moving Conley is attempting to make lemonade out of lemons. That trade put the franchise in a really tough spot.

I think it will have to be some exchange of "spoiled goods". Someone like Horford or preferably Otto Porter.

Horford is the kind of spoiled goods that prevents you from making moves down the road, though. I'd definitely prefer (in fact, I would love) Otto Porter. I think he's just perfect for us. I do think there are better options than Horford, including just letting Conley expire.

I don't think Horford's contract really changes things from a team building perspective. We are capped out either way if we extend Mitchell early, which we will, so it doesn't open up any moves for us to let Conley expire. It's the difference between having 0 cap space and 0 cap space. If you're willing to pay money, it's actually better to keep more salary on the books because you can't achieve a higher total team salary if you're still capped out after a large salary expires.

The stacking of salaries is why the Jazz had to make a move when they did. It needed to get done before Mitchell and Gobert get their pay raises. Unfortunately they squandered their opportunity (along with lots of assets) on Conley.

After extending Gobert and Mitchell that would be about $100 million tied up between the three. If we are going to do that for three players, the third guy needs to make us a contender. I don't think that Horford does that.

[KqWIN]

Horford is the kind of spoiled goods that prevents you from making moves down the road, though. I'd definitely prefer (in fact, I would love) Otto Porter. I think he's just perfect for us. I do think there are better options than Horford, including just letting Conley expire.

I don't think Horford's contract really changes things from a team building perspective. We are capped out either way if we extend Mitchell early, which we will, so it doesn't open up any moves for us to let Conley expire. It's the difference between having 0 cap space and 0 cap space. If you're willing to pay money, it's actually better to keep more salary on the books because you can't achieve a higher total team salary if you're still capped out after a large salary expires.

The stacking of salaries is why the Jazz had to make a move when they did. It needed to get done before Mitchell and Gobert get their pay raises. Unfortunately they squandered their opportunity (along with lots of assets) on Conley.

After extending Gobert and Mitchell that would be about $100 million tied up between the three. If we are going to do that for three players, the third guy needs to make us a contender. I don't think that Horford does that.

If we don't Horford, we still don't have money to get the third guy. Adding Horford isn't really adding salary that you could use somewhere else. Like I said, you're talking about the difference between $0 cap space and $0 cap space with or without Horford.

It's adding salary that could be had unless you have him under contract. In a hypothetical world, you could end up trading Horford and other assets...maybe picks, for another high salary player. Without him, it makes it way more difficult to add another high salary player because you won't be able to do it with cap space anyways.

[babyjax13]

I don't think Horford's contract really changes things from a team building perspective. We are capped out either way if we extend Mitchell early, which we will, so it doesn't open up any moves for us to let Conley expire. It's the difference between having 0 cap space and 0 cap space. If you're willing to pay money, it's actually better to keep more salary on the books because you can't achieve a higher total team salary if you're still capped out after a large salary expires.

The stacking of salaries is why the Jazz had to make a move when they did. It needed to get done before Mitchell and Gobert get their pay raises. Unfortunately they squandered their opportunity (along with lots of assets) on Conley.

After extending Gobert and Mitchell that would be about $100 million tied up between the three. If we are going to do that for three players, the third guy needs to make us a contender. I don't think that Horford does that.

If we don't Horford, we still don't have money to get the third guy. Adding Horford isn't really adding salary that you could use somewhere else. Like I said, you're talking about the difference between $0 cap space and $0 cap space with or without Horford.

It's adding salary that could be had unless you have him under contract. In a hypothetical world, you could end up trading Horford and other assets...maybe picks, for another high salary player. Without him, it makes it way more difficult to add another high salary player because you won't be able to do it with cap space anyways.

I am aware how the salary cap works. From a financial perspective, I highly doubt we could afford to pay Gobert, Mitchell, Horford, Bogdanovic, Ingles, O'neal, and Clarkson much less ever use our MLE. You'd be locking yourself into a team that costs at least $135 million before factoring in Clarkson, draft picks, minimum contracts, etc.

[KqWIN]

After extending Gobert and Mitchell that would be about $100 million tied up between the three. If we are going to do that for three players, the third guy needs to make us a contender. I don't think that Horford does that.

If we don't Horford, we still don't have money to get the third guy. Adding Horford isn't really adding salary that you could use somewhere else. Like I said, you're talking about the difference between $0 cap space and $0 cap space with or without Horford.

It's adding salary that could be had unless you have him under contract. In a hypothetical world, you could end up trading Horford and other assets...maybe picks, for another high salary player. Without him, it makes it way more difficult to add another high salary player because you won't be able to do it with cap space anyways.

I am aware how the salary cap works. From a financial perspective, I highly doubt we could afford to pay Gobert, Mitchell, Horford, Bogdanovic, Ingles, O'neal, and Clarkson much less ever use our MLE. You'd be locking yourself into a team that costs at least $135 million before factoring in Clarkson, draft picks, minimum contracts, etc.

Yeah, and that's what I mean by having to be willing to pay. The other scenario is that you don't have Horford (or someone on a large salary), and you can only really replace him with a minimum player or re-up Conley.

It's not realistic, I don't believe the Jazz are willing to pay. But strictly from a teambuilding perspective I don't see Horford's contract as a huge burden, because Conley's expiring doesn't help us in any way besides less money paid by the Millers.

[babyjax13]

If we don't Horford, we still don't have money to get the third guy. Adding Horford isn't really adding salary that you could use somewhere else. Like I said, you're talking about the difference between $0 cap space and $0 cap space with or without Horford.

It's adding salary that could be had unless you have him under contract. In a hypothetical world, you could end up trading Horford and other assets...maybe picks, for another high salary player. Without him, it makes it way more difficult to add another high salary player because you won't be able to do it with cap space anyways.

I am aware how the salary cap works. From a financial perspective, I highly doubt we could afford to pay Gobert, Mitchell, Horford, Bogdanovic, Ingles, O'neal, and Clarkson much less ever use our MLE. You'd be locking yourself into a team that costs at least $135 million before factoring in Clarkson, draft picks, minimum contracts, etc.

Yeah, and that's what I mean by having to be willing to pay. The other scenario is that you don't have Horford (or someone on a large salary), and you can only really replace him with a minimum player or re-up Conley.

It's not realistic, I don't believe the Jazz are willing to pay. But strictly from a teambuilding perspective I don't see Horford's contract as a huge burden, because Conley's expiring doesn't help us in any way besides less money paid by the Millers.

Gotchya. Sorry I am tired and grumpy and in the middle of packing for a move, so that came out a bit snarky. I agree with what you've said, I just think if we were willing to pay all that money, we could do better. (Watching this game, Saric is probably another option...don't love him, but he'd fit).

[AingesBurner]

What about Rudy Gobert, ONeale, and a few 1sts for Jokic and KBD

[sipclip]

What about Rudy Gobert, ONeale, and a few 1sts for Jokic and KBD

The nugs would laugh us off the phone. Jokic showed last year in the playoffs that he can be a bona-fide superstar. Rudy meanwhile has been able to be exploited at times in the playoffs.

Sent from my SM-G988U using RealGM mobile app

[Tom349]

Derrick Favors recently liked tweets are somewhat interesting. Clearly loved by Utah fans but can't help but think the feeling is mutual and depending on what interest he receives in free agency he may be tempted to come back.

[KqWIN]

The Jazz do seem very committed to Tony Bradley. I’d suspect that they will target a different position. Probably something they should have done anyways.

[Catchall]

Miami Heat fans are in a bit of a frenzy. They want to trade Jimmy Butler for Donovan. Then they want to delay giving both Donovan and Bam extensions so that they can sign two max free agents first. They're hoping they can create a team with Mitchell, Bam, Giannis and Oladipo.

Of course, the Jazz aren't going to go along with this. But now I'm wondering if the Jazz can do something similar by delaying Donovan and Rudy's extensions.

Let Conley expire, sign a free agent, then give Donovan and Rudiy their extensions.

[SoCalJazzFan]

Miami Heat fans are in a bit of a frenzy. They want to trade Jimmy Butler for Donovan. Then they want to delay giving both Donovan and Bam extensions so that they can sign two max free agents first. They're hoping they can create a team with Mitchell, Bam, Giannis and Oladipo.

Of course, the Jazz aren't going to go along with this. But now I'm wondering if the Jazz can do something similar by delaying Donovan and Rudy's extensions.

Let Conley expire, sign a free agent, then give Donovan and Rudiy their extensions.

Interesting idea, who would you target?

[wco81]

Miami Heat fans are in a bit of a frenzy. They want to trade Jimmy Butler for Donovan. Then they want to delay giving both Donovan and Bam extensions so that they can sign two max free agents first. They're hoping they can create a team with Mitchell, Bam, Giannis and Oladipo.

Of course, the Jazz aren't going to go along with this. But now I'm wondering if the Jazz can do something similar by delaying Donovan and Rudy's extensions.

Let Conley expire, sign a free agent, then give Donovan and Rudiy their extensions.

Are they committed to extending both Mitchell and Gobert?

They haven't gotten past the second round and given the WC landscape, they're unlikely to in the next 4-5 seasons without significant additions.

They've averaged around 50 wins in the last 3 seasons before the current one, though 2016-17 was with Hayward as the primary scorer rather than Mitchell.

As a result, they've been picking in the low to mid 20s, unable to develop those picks into a starter level player. Of course they made the great trade of two picks for Mitchell.

Seems the Jazz would have to sign or trade for an all-star level player to add to the Mitchell and Gobert cornerstones or try to move way up in the draft.

Or maybe extend one of them, look to trade the other. Worst case, one walks with nothing in return and the team takes a step back for a couple of years but get better draft picks.

Will the fans tolerate playing the long game vs. trying to build around the core? Bogdanovic is signed for 3 more seasons but he's 31. It's too bad he's out for the season and the Jazz aren't able to evaluate this team in the playoffs.

It might not make either of them happy but probably holding off on extensions for either until they see how the team does in the playoffs in the summer of 2021 might be the best course.

[Catchall]

Miami Heat fans are in a bit of a frenzy. They want to trade Jimmy Butler for Donovan. Then they want to delay giving both Donovan and Bam extensions so that they can sign two max free agents first. They're hoping they can create a team with Mitchell, Bam, Giannis and Oladipo.

Of course, the Jazz aren't going to go along with this. But now I'm wondering if the Jazz can do something similar by delaying Donovan and Rudy's extensions.

Let Conley expire, sign a free agent, then give Donovan and Rudiy their extensions.

Are they committed to extending both Mitchell and Gobert?

They haven't gotten past the second round and given the WC landscape, they're unlikely to in the next 4-5 seasons without significant additions.

They've averaged around 50 wins in the last 3 seasons before the current one, though 2016-17 was with Hayward as the primary scorer rather than Mitchell.

As a result, they've been picking in the low to mid 20s, unable to develop those picks into a starter level player. Of course they made the great trade of two picks for Mitchell.

Seems the Jazz would have to sign or trade for an all-star level player to add to the Mitchell and Gobert cornerstones or try to move way up in the draft.

Or maybe extend one of them, look to trade the other. Worst case, one walks with nothing in return and the team takes a step back for a couple of years but get better draft picks.

Will the fans tolerate playing the long game vs. trying to build around the core? Bogdanovic is signed for 3 more seasons but he's 31. It's too bad he's out for the season and the Jazz aren't able to evaluate this team in the playoffs.

It might not make either of them happy but probably holding off on extensions for either until they see how the team does in the playoffs in the summer of 2021 might be the best course.

Jazz could've been a 55-win team this year and a #3 seed without the internal drama and Rudy pouting. I think the Jazz are committed to Gobert and Mitchell long-term. Bogdanovic is a nice complement. The rest of the pieces are interchangeable, but they definitely need a third guy. Conley isn't it.

Jazz will let Conley expire and try to be aggressive in the draft. They think Mitchell might be able to help recruit a FA, but it's not clear who would be available. As heralded as 2021 is supposed to be, it's not like Lebron, AD, Kawhi or PG13 are going to leave LA. Other than Giannis, none of the other FAs are really big difference makers.

[Catchall]

If the Jazz can get a commitment from Christian Wood in free agency, it would probably be worth dumping Mike Conley's contract to make room, even if it cost the Jazz a pick to do it.

Mitchell/Royce/Bojan/Wood/Gobert would be a good lineup.

They could still try to trade into the late 2nd round for a player like Josh Hall, Corey Kispert, or Nate Hinton.

[KqWIN]

If the Jazz plan is to let Conley expire, their plan is to replace him with a minimum player. We do not have cap space if we let him expire. Mitchell is very clear on his intentions. He wants money first, he’s not going to wait to extend. With Gobert, Mitchell, Ingles, Bogdanovic, and O’Neale are already on the books there is no money left.

That trade was seriously a massive failure. Buying very high for a guy on a steep decline while also handicapping your ability to make other moves now and in the future. Jazz doomed themselves...

The correct way to build from this point is to maintain salary and keep the cap number high. Cap space is not an option. But this requires spending lots of money and that’s just not something we can realistically expect.

Really...the Jazz have to kill it on the margins. It’s not impossible, most of the core was found in the margins (Gobert, Mitchell, Ingles, O’Neale)...but that’s a tough living.

[PharmD]

Best case scenario for Jazz cap room summer '21: Rudy's cap hold is the same as his supermax, currently projected as 37.5M. Donovan's cap hold would be 15.6M. Royce + Ingles + Bojan is 40.6M. And if those are the only contracts on the team you also need 7x roster holds = 7.3M. Add all that together and it's 100.8M. So then it's a question of where does the cap come in, which is very hard to say.

Note that this involves letting Clarkson walk for nothing and probably signing Mitchell to a 3+1 instead of a 5 year no-option deal. It also means having the room exception instead of the full MLE. And any draft picks would probably eat into the cap space a bit.
/bored on overnight shift