Ole Argentina: Spurs to offer Manu a 3-year deal?

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

http://www.poundingtherock.com/2013/3/21/4132170/ole-ginobili-could-sign-a-three-year-deal

Olé Argentina says Ginobili could sign a three year deal
By J. Gomez (Edg5) on Mar 21 2013, 12:44p

This is an excerpt from a story published by Argentine sports paper Ole about Manu Ginobili (here's the link to the original in Spanish):

Manu 2016

At 35 (Ginobili) understands the game better than ever and he still dunks, from time to time, but he knows the end of his career is nearing.

"I want to play two more years, minimum," Ginobili said when asked about his future. His contract expires after this season and then it's time to start the negotiations. He's the highest paid Spur this season, with Parker ranking second and Duncan in a surprising fourth place after Stephen Jackson. How much could Ginobili get in the open market as a free agent? The Spurs' front office doesn't even want to think about that and is trying to get ahead of the game by planning to offer a three year deal. It looks like number 20 will wear Silver and Black until 2016...

Now, first of all it's important to mention that there is no source credited with the information so you should take it with a grain of salt. Ole is also better known for their soccer coverage, with basketball being almost an afterthought. That being said, Ole usually has connections with inside sources, including managers and a lot of times the players themselves and the language the writer uses seems to suggest that he does have a source in this particular case.

The biggest cause for skepticism would be that a three year contract wouldn't coincide with Tony Parker and Tim Duncan's deals, which expire in 2015. Parker's contract is only partially guaranteed that year and Duncan has a player option. Unless something catastrophic happens, the Spurs will likely keep Parker and if the team is contending, Duncan will likely pick up his player option, too. In that case, offering Ginobili a three year deal with only two years fully guaranteed would make sense, as he could be released in 2016 if the team wants to rebuild.

If new information surfaces, we'll keep you posted.

[capek]

A 3 year deal would be great, as I'm sure the price will be right. Expect to see Ginobili continue the transition into a role more heavily focused on setting his teammates up than carrying the offense himself, as Kawhi takes over that role. No reason to think Manu wouldn't still be worth a smaller paycheck playing a smaller role.

[ElNono]

Good news if it happens, tbh...




PS: razors are in the lower cabinet of the 2nd floor restroom

[DesignatedT]

2 year deal. Let him go out with TD.

[Chinook]

2 year deal. Let him go out with TD.

Yeah. I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't even finish another season after this one.

[Richie]

2 year + 1 fully unguaranteed as an asset to trade?

Tbh the way he has played this year he should be getting an MLE level deal. Any more would be a a career 'thank you' bonus, and it's tough to argue he doesn't deserve it.

[timtonymanu]

2 year deal. Let him go out with TD.

[Brunodf]

3 yrs/20 mil is fair enough

[Trill Clinton]

2 year deal. Let him go out with TD.

[Seventyniner]

I could see a decreasing contract with a partial guarantee on the 3rd year, a golden parachute like McDyess got. The Spurs will only need cap space if they can manage to resign Manu and Jackson for cheap and have enough room to beat the MLE before resigning Splitter.

[chapnis]

Third-year would probably be player option I'd guess.

[Richie]

I could see a decreasing contract with a partial guarantee on the 3rd year, a golden parachute like McDyess got. The Spurs will only need cap space if they can manage to resign Manu and Jackson for cheap and have enough room to beat the MLE before resigning Splitter.

If it's a choice between a decent free agent (Millsap, Jefferson, West) or Jackson, I choose the free agent. We can always offer Jackson the room exception ($5m/2yr) after signing a free agent if we want to keep him.

Is it worth giving Manu a partially guaranteed 3rd year to get him to sign a with a lower starting salary this year? Could be a smart move. Giving him 5/5.5/2 instead of 6/6.5 would save us a bit of money this summer at the expense of a couple million in 2015. If it's the difference between a a decent free agent or not, it could be worth doing.

[pad300]

http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=210932&p=6418844#post6418844

[Mal]

2 yrs for 10mln + 3mln guaranteed in year 3. Basiclly that makes 13/2, which is fair price.

[ElNono]

Manu wants to stay, so I don't think money will be a factor, tbh

[Mel_13]

Manu wants to stay, so I don't think money will be a factor, tbh

And the Spurs want him to stay, although it's probably more accurate to say that money won't be an obstacle. I expect an agreement very early on that will give the Spurs the certainty they need to make other financial decisions this summer.

[rjv]

i'd be happy with a 3 year deal with a team or player option on the 3rd year

[TheGoldStandard]

The Spurs don't dilly dally around when it comes to resigning players, they make an offer and its usually competitive and fair. He'll probably get the 3 year deal which is okay because we'll be able to space out that cash. Wonder what its going to cost to keep Splitter

[BillMc]

The Spurs don't dilly dally around when it comes to resigning players, they make an offer and its usually competitive and fair. He'll probably get the 3 year deal which is okay because we'll be able to space out that cash. Wonder what its going to cost to keep Splitter

Should Manu get more than Splitter at this point in their careers?

And I wonder if we'll even tender an offer to Jax. He's having a poor season, but I'd hate to lose him.

[TheGoldStandard]

I think Splitter has started the conversation on what his price tag will but but ultimately what he does in the playoffs will be his reward. If he is able to show the same kind of shot selection and post play as he has done in the second half of the season he'll get paid. I think the Spurs will offer Jax something because of loyalty and he's a vet and at the same time I think jax will have a realistic price tag so he should be staying.

[024]

give him the MLE for 2 years and some guaranteed money on the third year. anything more would be a bad decision. if you think ginobili in his early 30s was injury prone, ginobili in his late 30s will be even worse. he needs to move to a support role.

[ElNono]

Should Manu get more than Splitter at this point in their careers?

No, and Splitter will get paid this summer. Spurs aren't locking him up again for $3m a season.

[phxspurfan]

Huge mistake

[TD 21]

Should Manu get more than Splitter at this point in their careers?

And I wonder if we'll even tender an offer to Jax. He's having a poor season, but I'd hate to lose him.

No and he won't. Last off season and earlier this season, I was thinking that would be the case, but it's just not realistic at this point. He's probably going to get $7M and Splitter is probably going to $9M (I realize that he can beat that in the open market, but I still maintain that he won't max out and that they won't pay him more than Duncan).

I think it all comes down to the playoffs for Jackson. Personally, unless he goes absolutely nuts during the playoffs, I'd move on. Yeah, his swagger/toughness is nice, but you don't give someone 20 mpg unless they supplement that with at least decent production and he hasn't provided that.

[Richie]

$7m is more than Ginobili is worth playing wise IMO. He has struggled with injury this year and hasn't really performed when he's been on the court.

No doubt he deserves it for his loyalty though. If he gets $7m I won't be mad.

[kaji157]

I think the idea in giving Ginobili a 3rd year is obviously have enough room to resign Splitter and Jack or a FA, and still be below the tax.
Adding a 3rd year will allow a below MLE contract, lets say Ginobili gets a 16 millions two year contract, that would take out 8 millons on average each year, giving him a with a parcially guaranteed 3rd year allows the Spurs to make a frontload deal starting at 7 millions and decreasing.
Ideally you give him a 7, 6.5 and 50% guaranteed 5 millions (that´s the 2.5 millions that would complete the 16 million 2 year contract).

[rjv]

the question about splitter is how long his contract will be for

[TD 21]

$7m is more than Ginobili is worth playing wise IMO. He has struggled with injury this year and hasn't really performed when he's been on the court.

No doubt he deserves it for his loyalty though. If he gets $7m I won't be mad.

The only argument for him not being worth $7M is his lack of durability (and maybe minutes, but that's a coach's decision). As bad as he's looked (by his standards) this season, he's still got the 26th best PER in the league (around 20th for much of the season) and the 18th best WS/48 (around 10th for much of the season). You look at who's around him in those categories and almost without fail, they make significantly more than that and of the ones who don't, only two (Koufos, Hickson) are not on a rookie contract (Cousins, Pekovic, Splitter), don't have major character question marks (Blatche) or don't play relatively sparingly (B. Wright).

I still wouldn't be surprised if this more of an off season than it is decline related (this season could end up being a reversal from last, where he played out of his mind in the regular season and struggled in the playoffs). There's been too many recent examples of veteran stars being written off, only to bounce back. Besides, he was outstanding in the Olympics and before his last injury, he was trending towards that level again.

[Richie]

The only argument for him not being worth $7M is his lack of durability (and maybe minutes, but that's a coach's decision). As bad as he's looked (by his standards) this season, he's still got the 26th best PER in the league (around 20th for much of the season) and the 18th best WS/48 (around 10th for much of the season). You look at who's around him in those categories and almost without fail, they make significantly more than that and of the ones who don't, only two (Koufos, Hickson) are not on a rookie contract (Cousins, Pekovic, Splitter), don't have major character question marks (Blatche) or don't play relatively sparingly (B. Wright).

I still wouldn't be surprised if this more of an off season than it is decline related (this season could end up being a reversal from last, where he played out of his mind in the regular season and struggled in the playoffs). There's been too many recent examples of veteran stars being written off, only to bounce back. Besides, he was outstanding in the Olympics and before his last injury, he was trending towards that level again.

The Olympics is a big factor, but I think you made the point in your first sentence. Durability. The guy is playing less than 24 minutes and has missed 13 games. In terms of what he gives you when he's on the court he is probably still easily worth $8m, but if we're being realistic his minutes are only going to go down from here and thats a big salary for a guy who can't give you big minutes.

I'm assuming PER doesn't take minutes in to account? Looking at Manu and Timmy's per 36 numbers they are still elite, but they wouldn't be if they were actually playing 36 minutes per night and not getting rest after tough stretches (e.g 4 in 5 nights).

Like I say, if Manu gets $8m this summer I won't be mad, he helped bring the Spurs 3 titles and deserves to get paid, but for what he can actually bring to this team I don't think he justifies such a high salary.

[superjames1992]

$7m is more than Ginobili is worth playing wise IMO. He has struggled with injury this year and hasn't really performed when he's been on the court.

No doubt he deserves it for his loyalty though. If he gets $7m I won't be mad.
Let's wait until the Playoffs before saying he's unworthy, tbh.

[superjames1992]

The Olympics is a big factor, but I think you made the point in your first sentence. Durability. The guy is playing less than 24 minutes and has missed 13 games. In terms of what he gives you when he's on the court he is probably still easily worth $8m, but if we're being realistic his minutes are only going to go down from here and thats a big salary for a guy who can't give you big minutes.

I'm assuming PER doesn't take minutes in to account? Looking at Manu and Timmy's per 36 numbers they are still elite, but they wouldn't be if they were actually playing 36 minutes per night and not getting rest after tough stretches (e.g 4 in 5 nights).

Like I say, if Manu gets $8m this summer I won't be mad, he helped bring the Spurs 3 titles and deserves to get paid, but for what he can actually bring to this team I don't think he justifies such a high salary.
Manu never really was that durable earlier in his career, either, tbh. He's only played 30+ MPG twice in his career (31.0 in 07-08 and 30.3 in 10-11). The rest of his career has been mid- to upper-20s, with the exception of his 20.7 MPG in his rookie year).

[exstatic]

$7m is more than Ginobili is worth playing wise IMO. He has struggled with injury this year and hasn't really performed when he's been on the court.

No doubt he deserves it for his loyalty though. If he gets $7m I won't be mad.

:lol He was playing like a fucking All Star before the hamstring tweaked two times.

[Richie]

:lol He was playing like a fucking All Star before the hamstring tweaked two times.

I've watched most Spurs game this year, and while he has had some good games I don't think he has put an all-star level stretch together this year.

[EricB]

I've watched most Spurs game this year, and while he has had some good games I don't think he has put an all-star level stretch together this year.


Then you haven't watched.

[SilverSpur]

Resign him for two years 10 million. We have to start thinking about bringing in future talent and we can't if we keep holding on to older players.

[RD2191]

Resign him for two years 10 million. We have to start thinking about bringing in future talent and we can't if we keep holding on to older players.

[2centsworth]

At 35 (Ginobili) understands the game better than ever

Judging from his recent play, Manu is dumber than ever.

[DJR210]

I honestly wouldn't mind seeing Manu retire this year..he's gonna end up tarnishing a god damn great career by sticking around too long..

[hater]

I don't know. I wouldn't mind seeing Manu in a Fisher type role. Grant Hill, Juwan Howard kinda deal. But pay 8 figures for that??? I don't know...

[Richie]

Then you haven't watched.

Feel free to enlighten me. When this year has Manu put together a streak of even 10-15 games of all star level play?

I'm a huge Manu fan but to say he's played at all-star level this year, even for stretches, is untrue IMO.

[RD2191]

for every great manu game he has 2 shit games

[Chinook]

The only argument for him not being worth $7M is his lack of durability (and maybe minutes, but that's a coach's decision). As bad as he's looked (by his standards) this season, he's still got the 26th best PER in the league (around 20th for much of the season) and the 18th best WS/48 (around 10th for much of the season). You look at who's around him in those categories and almost without fail, they make significantly more than that and of the ones who don't, only two (Koufos, Hickson) are not on a rookie contract (Cousins, Pekovic, Splitter), don't have major character question marks (Blatche) or don't play relatively sparingly (B. Wright).

I still wouldn't be surprised if this more of an off season than it is decline related (this season could end up being a reversal from last, where he played out of his mind in the regular season and struggled in the playoffs). There's been too many recent examples of veteran stars being written off, only to bounce back. Besides, he was outstanding in the Olympics and before his last injury, he was trending towards that level again.

Other people have tried to use that same argument, and it doesn't really hold water. Ginobili's production alone suggests he's worth about $6-7 Million. Even though he's put up good per-minute numbers and advanced stats, players in his category (old All-Star-caliber guards) just aren't worth more than that on the market. Players who got similar deals to what Ginobili can expect had more win-shares. Adding to that is that these players had strung together multiple seasons of consistent, high-level play. Not only does Ginobili miss a lot of games, but he also takes a long time to get back in rhythm. This leads to long sub-par stretches. You add in the missed games, and it gets even worse.

Honestly, I wouldn't really want to pay him more than $6 Million a year. Contracts are supposed to be about what a player can be expected to do over the life of the deal, and Ginobili is trending downward in terms of what the Spurs can realistically expect from him each game. It won't be long now until he starts getting (or should start, in the very least) a minority share of the shooting-guard minutes. If he's going to need elite players next to him on the bench to be productive, his value to the Spurs is going to drop considerably.

EDIT: In looking at examples of deals given out to players in the same class as Ginboili, I found that Ray Allen compared pretty favorably. Manu's PER blew Allen's out of the water, but Allen had more win-shares and generally higher gross stats. Per 36 stats were pretty even. I think Ginobili should get a similar contract to the one the Celtics offered to Allen ($12M/2 with a no-trade clause). I guess I should note that Allen was insulted by the offer and that it was one of the main reasons he left for Miami. Let's hope Ginobili would be more understanding.

[kaji157]

Other people have tried to use that same argument, and it doesn't really hold water. Ginobili's production alone suggests he's worth about $6-7 Million. Even though he's put up good per-minute numbers and advanced stats, players in his category (old All-Star-caliber guards) just aren't worth more than that on the market. Players who got similar deals to what Ginobili can expect had more win-shares. Adding to that is that these players had strung together multiple seasons of consistent, high-level play. Not only does Ginobili miss a lot of games, but he also takes a long time to get back in rhythm. This leads to long sub-par stretches. You add in the missed games, and it gets even worse.

Honestly, I wouldn't really want to pay him more than $6 Million a year. Contracts are supposed to be about what a player can be expected to do over the life of the deal, and Ginobili is trending downward in terms of what the Spurs can realistically expect from him each game. It won't be long now until he starts getting (or should start, in the very least) a minority share of the shooting-guard minutes. If he's going to need elite players next to him on the bench to be productive, his value to the Spurs is going to drop considerably.

EDIT: In looking at examples of deals given out to players in the same class as Ginboili, I found that Ray Allen compared pretty favorably. Manu's PER blew Allen's out of the water, but Allen had more win-shares and generally higher gross stats. Per 36 stats were pretty even. I think Ginobili should get a similar contract to the one the Celtics offered to Allen ($12M/2 with a no-trade clause). I guess I should note that Allen was insulted by the offer and that it was one of the main reasons he left for Miami. Let's hope Ginobili would be more understanding.

The truth is your whole argument falls appart because while you said a contract should reflect "what a player can be expected to do over the life of the deal" you are judging Ginobili on what he did these recent months given that if you consider his last 3 years he has been deserving of much more than 6 million a year, per league standards.

If you consider, and that´s another discussion, that this Ginobili (clearly in a slump and coming out of a serie of inujuries after playing all sumer long) is what you will get, then fine, 6 millions, but anything above it, will be more than six, and i think this will not be the Manu you´ll get over two or three more years. I think he has already adapted his game a lot and can continue to do it to perform at high level.

[BackHome]

Manu is at the end of his career he made his money and Splitter is at his beginning and will want and will get paid a lot more then Manu. Yes, teams will line up to get Splitter, if the Spurs dick around and don't sign him to a decent contract we might have to start rebuilding next year.

No let SJAX go he has the heart but he is the opposite of Neal no offense at all can not put the ball in the whole.

[milkyway21]

Duncan is 4th?

[Sean Cagney]

Manu never really was that durable earlier in his career, either, tbh. He's only played 30+ MPG twice in his career (31.0 in 07-08 and 30.3 in 10-11). The rest of his career has been mid- to upper-20s, with the exception of his 20.7 MPG in his rookie year).

Him and that national team shit all year round would point to his MPG, he has aged himself fully from that IMO and hell he did it for his country so cool (I never liked it because me not an Argie fan nor care but loved when he won the Gold!). I wish he would have stayed more just with the Spurs and took full summers off, but he is a loyal dude, he is who he is. Manu for LIFE!!!!!!!

[spurraider21]

Give him the Wes Welker deal. 2 years 12 million

[benefactor]

$7m is more than Ginobili is worth playing wise IMO. He has struggled with injury this year and hasn't really performed when he's been on the court.

If the 14pts and 5ast per game in roughly 25-28 minutes per game is not really performing on the court then I'm not sure what you are looking for from a 35yr old Manu(30 games prior to his hamstring injury).

[Chinook]

The truth is your whole argument falls appart because while you said a contract should reflect "what a player can be expected to do over the life of the deal" you are judging Ginobili on what he did these recent months given that if you consider his last 3 years he has been deserving of much more than 6 million a year, per league standards.

If you consider, and that´s another discussion, that this Ginobili (clearly in a slump and coming out of a serie of inujuries after playing all sumer long) is what you will get, then fine, 6 millions, but anything above it, will be more than six, and i think this will not be the Manu you´ll get over two or three more years. I think he has already adapted his game a lot and can continue to do it to perform at high level.

To be clear, when making my assessment, I looked at Ginobili's production for the last 4.5 years. So that time span includes some Super Manu as well as some Glassobili. When it comes down to his market value, I compared him with players who were in similar situations as he is now. Those players earned about a million dollars per year on their next deal for every win-share they averaged over the previous three seasons. So players like Nash in 2010 and Kidd in 2009 got bigger deals because, honestly, they were more impactful than Ginobili, and they certainly didn't miss nearly as many games.

If I were to adjust my model (and I used that out of a lack of a better term, not because it's some awesome set of equations or anything) to include just these last three seasons, Ginobili would be worth less than $6 Million. He's been on a down trend for a few years now, and while he can be productive when put in his element and when his minutes are limited, that has to factor into his earning power. Add in that his "adapted game" seems unable to carry a bench unit, and that hurts his value even more.

Sorry if you were hoping that I was just caught up in the moment. I'm not. There are arguments that can be made that I am wrong, but they're not really based on looking at his numbers before this season. Simply put, you can't pay a player for what he has done; you pay him for what you think he will do. Manu's injury history and the increasing trend of him having slow starts makes him more and more a part-time player. To act like that's easily worth more than the MLE is biased, in my opinion. Ginobili may find a way to still be productive, but that doesn't mean that the Spurs should expect him to play at a generally higher level than he has for the last three seasons.

His playoff performance can certainly move the arrow, though. As Bruno said, if he does really well in the post-season, he can bring expected contract numbers up a couple of million. Likewise, if he breaks down in the playoffs, his value can tumble.

[Richie]

If the 14pts and 5ast per game in roughly 25-28 minutes per game is not really performing on the court then I'm not sure what you are looking for from a 35yr old Manu(30 games prior to his hamstring injury).

I may have exaggerated a bit when I said Manu hadn't really performed, but I see no reason to believe that he will have better production, fewer injuries or be able to play more minutes in the coming 2 years.

His injuries this year have been the most worrying. They haven't been accidents like turning an ankle or from collisions, they have been things like back spasms and pulling a hamstring when there is nobody around. Those are the kind of injuries you get as a player gets older and they will keep coming.

If Manu had delivered 14 and 5 and played a full 82 game season I would agree he is easily worth the $8m people are suggesting, but the fact is he can't play 82 games and going forward that is only going to get worse rather than better. Factor in the games he will miss, the games he will underperform when coming back from injury and the likely need to reduce his minutes even further, I think $5m/year is about what he is worth.

Again like I say if he get's $8m I won't be mad, he probably deserves even more than that for what he has done for the Spurs over the years, but I don't think he is worth that much in terms of what he can give us over an 82 game season.

[cd021]

Let's wait until the Playoffs before saying he's unworthy, tbh.

Logical.

[BackHome]

I may have exaggerated a bit when I said Manu hadn't really performed, but I see no reason to believe that he will have better production, fewer injuries or be able to play more minutes in the coming 2 years.

His injuries this year have been the most worrying. They haven't been accidents like turning an ankle or from collisions, they have been things like back spasms and pulling a hamstring when there is nobody around. Those are the kind of injuries you get as a player gets older and they will keep coming.

If Manu had delivered 14 and 5 and played a full 82 game season I would agree he is easily worth the $8m people are suggesting, but the fact is he can't play 82 games and going forward that is only going to get worse rather than better. Factor in the games he will miss, the games he will underperform when coming back from injury and the likely need to reduce his minutes even further, I think $5m/year is about what he is worth.

Again like I say if he get's $8m I won't be mad, he probably deserves even more than that for what he has done for the Spurs over the years, but I don't think he is worth that much in terms of what he can give us over an 82 game season.

+1

[TMTTRIO]

Manu said this earlier in the season so I wouldn't really rely on this to be the total truth. Manu has also said he would wait to see how he felt at the end of this season. At this point of his career with the way he's playing along with all the injuries he's had all season as much as it's hard for me to say it I would like to see him retire. This is not the way I'd like to see him go out and if he retires at the end of the season he has nothing left to play for.