Is Hayward more marketable in Boston than Utah?

[incoherent]

Is this even a debate?

The only players from Utahs past that are ever even mentioned are Stockon and Malone.

Everyone who plays there is forgotten.

2016-2017 national TV games (Boston: 22, Utah: 7)

[Roy H.]

Is this even a debate?

The only players from Utahs past that are ever even mentioned are Stockon and Malone.

Everyone who plays there is forgotten.

2016-2017 national TV games (Boston: 22, Utah: 7)

Utah had 16 nationally televised games, including NBATV.

[CelticsJG]

He can very will be the best player in here

Will be the third best player on this team barring any trades.

Nah Hayward would be the best player on this team.

[Phantom255x]

He can very will be the best player in here

Will be the third best player on this team barring any trades.

Nah Hayward would be the best player on this team.

Second Best. Not Best.

If you trade Isaiah, then yes, BUT if you trade Isaiah, why would Hayward come here?

[Moranis]

Locally no, but possibly nationally, but at the end of the day winning will trump most everything else.

Um, no.  The OP is on to something.  At the end of the day, money usually trumps everything else.

this is about marketability not signing a free agent

[incoherent]

Is this even a debate?

The only players from Utahs past that are ever even mentioned are Stockon and Malone.

Everyone who plays there is forgotten.

2016-2017 national TV games (Boston: 22, Utah: 7)

Utah had 16 nationally televised games, including NBATV.

I wouldn't consider NBA TV really that much of a national platform... as I understand it's not a heavily viewed channel like ABC or ESPN or TNT.

Also do you have a source on the 16 national games? Here's the source I used which shows the Jazz having 7 national games.

https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2016/8/11/12440858/nba-schedule-2016-17-national-television-abc-espn

[Roy H.]

Is this even a debate?

The only players from Utahs past that are ever even mentioned are Stockon and Malone.

Everyone who plays there is forgotten.

2016-2017 national TV games (Boston: 22, Utah: 7)

Utah had 16 nationally televised games, including NBATV.

I wouldn't consider NBA TV really that much of a national platform... as I understand it's not a heavily viewed channel like ABC or ESPN or TNT.

Also do you have a source on the 16 national games? Here's the source I used which shows the Jazz having 7 national games.

https://www.sbnation.com/nba/2016/8/11/12440858/nba-schedule-2016-17-national-television-abc-espn

Apparently it was 17:

In addition to the local telecasts, the Jazz are scheduled to appear on national television 17 times, including one ABC broadcast (April 2), three TNT broadcasts (Nov. 17, Jan. 26, March 27), four ESPN broadcasts (Dec. 16, Jan. 13, March 22, April 4) and nine NBA TV appearances, which are only available on NBA TV outside of the ROOT SPORTS Jazz territory.

http://www.nba.com/jazz/2016-17-broadcast-schedule/

[Smokeeye123]

Some have argued that Hayward will make more money in Boston because of endorsements. Is there a way of quantifying this? Boston is a bigger market, but it is also saturated with stars. Is being the biggest fish in the pond Salt Lake more lucrative than being the second best player on the third most popular team in town?

I'm genuinely curious, but I also wanted an excuse to post this:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YnWJOXsBH7o

Does that video single-handedly tip the scales in favor of Utah? I think it may.

Ortiz just retired so Dunkin Donuts needs another guy to film coffee commercials with Gronkowski. I think he'd make more money here.

[kozlodoev]

He can very will be the best player in here

Will be the third best player on this team barring any trades.

Nah Hayward would be the best player on this team.

Second Best. Not Best.

If you trade Isaiah, then yes, BUT if you trade Isaiah, why would Hayward come here?

Because Al Horford is still better than anyone else he's played with, and because our other guys are not chopped liver either.

Then again, if he wants to ride someone's coattails, he won't.

[Roy H.]

Some have argued that Hayward will make more money in Boston because of endorsements. Is there a way of quantifying this? Boston is a bigger market, but it is also saturated with stars. Is being the biggest fish in the pond Salt Lake more lucrative than being the second best player on the third most popular team in town?

I'm genuinely curious, but I also wanted an excuse to post this:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YnWJOXsBH7o

Does that video single-handedly tip the scales in favor of Utah? I think it may.

Ortiz just retired so Dunkin Donuts needs another guy to film coffee commercials with Gronkowski. I think he'd make more money here.

Ortiz can probably make ads in this town until he's 100, haha. Papi will always sell.

[Moranis]

He can very will be the best player in here

Will be the third best player on this team barring any trades.

Nah Hayward would be the best player on this team.

Second Best. Not Best.

If you trade Isaiah, then yes, BUT if you trade Isaiah, why would Hayward come here?

Because Al Horford is still better than anyone else he's played with, and because our other guys are not chopped liver either.

Then again, if he wants to ride someone's coattails, he won't.

Rudy Gobert just made 2nd team All NBA.  Al Horford has never been 2nd team All NBA.

[kozlodoev]

He can very will be the best player in here

Will be the third best player on this team barring any trades.

Nah Hayward would be the best player on this team.

Second Best. Not Best.

If you trade Isaiah, then yes, BUT if you trade Isaiah, why would Hayward come here?

Because Al Horford is still better than anyone else he's played with, and because our other guys are not chopped liver either.

Then again, if he wants to ride someone's coattails, he won't.

Rudy Gobert just made 2nd team All NBA.  Al Horford has never been 2nd team All NBA.

Sure. Gobert also had more votes than Durant and Curry, so I'm guessing he's just better than those guys?

[dreamgreen]

He can very will be the best player in here

Will be the third best player on this team barring any trades.

Nah Hayward would be the best player on this team.

Second Best. Not Best.

If you trade Isaiah, then yes, BUT if you trade Isaiah, why would Hayward come here?

If you're talking more endorsements that I say without questions yes.

IMO Hayward is better than IT4. Better play maker which makes his teammates better and not a liability on defense. Hayward has really stepped up his game.

[Roy H.]

He can very will be the best player in here

Will be the third best player on this team barring any trades.

Nah Hayward would be the best player on this team.

Second Best. Not Best.

If you trade Isaiah, then yes, BUT if you trade Isaiah, why would Hayward come here?

If you're talking more endorsements that I say without questions yes.

IMO Hayward is better than IT4. Better play maker which makes his teammates better and not a liability on defense. Hayward has really stepped up his game.

Hayward is unquestionably better on defense, obviously.

How do you define "play maker", though?

[Boston Garden Leprechaun]

He can very will be the best player in here

Will be the third best player on this team barring any trades.

Nah Hayward would be the best player on this team.

Second Best. Not Best.

If you trade Isaiah, then yes, BUT if you trade Isaiah, why would Hayward come here?

Because Al Horford is still better than anyone else he's played with, and because our other guys are not chopped liver either.

Then again, if he wants to ride someone's coattails, he won't.

Rudy Gobert just made 2nd team All NBA.  Al Horford has never been 2nd team All NBA.

Sure. Gobert also had more votes than Durant and Curry, so I'm guessing he's just better than those guys?

lol