Players that made more money than Tony Parker this season...

[SASdynasty!]

Keep in mind we are the defending champions that were led in scoring and assists throughout the regular season and playoffs by Tony Parker. He not only did that, but was also our only All-Star and All-NBA player last season as he led us in scoring in the Finals.

Kobe Bryant
Amare Stoudemire
Joe Johnson
Carmelo Anthony
Dwight Howard
Chris Bosh
Lebron James
Chris Paul
Deron Williams
Kevin Durant
Derrick Rose
Blake Griffin
Zach Randolph
Lemarcus Aldridge
Paul George
Marc Gasol
Brook Lopez
Russell Westbrook
Kevin Love
David Lee
Dwayne Wade
Eric Gordon
Roy Hibbert
John Wall
Gordon Hayward
James Harden
Chandler Parsons
Tyson Chandler
Josh Smith
DeMarcus Cousins
Al Jefferson
Carlos Boozer
Nene Hilario
Andrew Bogut
Rajon Rondo
Derrick Favors

[ElNono]

sup Brunodynasty!

[Clipper Nation]

The only contracts on that list that are as horrendous as Porker's are Joe Johnson, D-Will, David Lee, Eric Gordon and Nenê. Great company for Porker to be in there :lol

[Johnny RIngo]

Parker fans are more comparable to Kobe fans actually.

-Both groups idolize chuckers that were MJ fanboys growing up.
-Both groups use ring count and absolute numbers to justify a player's greatness because the actual stats come short. Impact stats are also frowned upon. All-Star selections are considered high honors.
-Using past accomplishments to justify the overpaid contracts of both players
-Both fanbases scapegoat the poor performances with phantom injuries, ailments and other excuses.
-Both groups want to stop any and all criticism of their favorite player. Lakersground bans users for anti-Kobe discussions. Spurstalk is less extreme but just as pathetic(posting long cats to derail threads for example)
-Both groups constantly deflect blame onto the superior teammates. Kobe fans would actively blame Pau for losses. Parker fans would deflect criticism onto Manu in the past. Now they blame Kawhi.

[jARS mEsH sEt]

-Using past accomplishments to justify the overpaid contracts of both players?

This is a Porker thread not a Manure thread. Stay the fuck on topic.

[Malik Hairston]

Out of all those players, only Amare, Rondo, David Lee and Hibbert gave less production than Parker, this year, tbh..Boozer and Parker were probably about even, maybe Porky has him beat..pretty terrible contract given by the FO..

[TheGreatYacht]

Gordon Hayward, now that's a SF a GM would love to build around...

[dg7md]

Is this a list of players better than Parker?

[cjw]

The only contracts on that list that are as horrendous as Porker's are Joe Johnson, D-Will, David Lee, Eric Gordon and Nenê. Great company for Porker to be in there :lol

Yeah, because Detroit's not hurting from that Josh Smith contract. Eric Gordon was a far worse contract too (nice job pawning him off) and he's had his only semi-useful stretch with NOP this year.

OP's point isn't that Parker has a good contract. It sucks. But it's not unprecedented and much of the league has a similar albatross. Difference is, most of those are expiring or near-expiring. In 24 months, Parker's will be an expiring deal too.

[Kool Bob Love]

Gordon Hayward, now that's a SF a GM would love to build around...

[Kool Bob Love]

Worth every penny. :tu

Parker has more rings than everyone on the list other than the clown Bryant.

[HI-FI]

sup Brunodynasty!
:lol
wouldn't be shocked

[313]

Worth every penny. :tu

Parker has more rings than everyone on the list other than the clown Bryant.

More fmvps toi

[SASdynasty!]

Worth every penny. :tu

Parker has more rings than everyone on the list other than the clown Bryant.
Yes sir, and Parker's contract is half of Kobe's.

[SASdynasty!]

Out of all those players, only Amare, Rondo, David Lee and Hibbert gave less production than Parker, this year, tbh..Boozer and Parker were probably about even, maybe Porky has him beat..pretty terrible contract given by the FO..
Please...here are 12 players who gave LESS production than Parker this season and had bigger contracts:

Amare Stoudemire
Rajon Rondo
David Lee
Roy Hibbert
Joe Johnson
Deron Williams
Brandon Roy (obviously)
Paul George (obviously)
Eric Gordon
Carlos Boozer
Nene Hilario
Andrew Bogut

Then you have another whole tier of guys who make within $1 mil of Parker and had less production:

Andre Igodala
Joakim Noah
Kevin Garnett
Nicolas Batum
Andrea Bargnani

Then you look at all the other jokers who had slightly better seasons in terms of production but are playing on bottom feeders and whose resumes are complete jokes, you'll understand that Parker's contract isn't bad at all. He's earned every penny of what he's finally going to make.

I mean, do you guys forget that we were paying Tim Duncan $18.7 million in 2010-11 when he averaged 13.4/8.9 and then got destroyed in the playoffs by Z-bo even after Parker carried the Spurs to the #1 seed? I mean, let's talk about bad contract years why don't we?

[Chinook]

The real question is this: Would the Spurs finding a way to offload Parker's deal surpass the Leonard/Hill trade for best in franchise history?

[SASdynasty!]

The real question is this: Would the Spurs finding a way to offload Parker's deal surpass the Leonard/Hill trade for best in franchise history?
Like I always say, thank God this franchise is run by people with some sense of loyalty rather than Spurstalk posters.

[cantthinkofanything]

Is this a list of players better than Parker?

It's the top 5th of that particular list.

[Malik Hairston]

Please...here are 13 players who gave LESS production than Parker this season and had bigger contracts:

Amare Stoudemire
Rajon Rondo
David Lee
Roy Hibbert
Joe Johnson better than Porky this year
Deron Williams probably better than Porky this year
Brandon Roy (obviously) stupid
Paul George (obviously) stupid to include him
Eric Gordon toss-up
Carlos Boozer
Nene Hilario
Andrew Bogut :lmao comparing a DPOY-level player to Porky
Rajon Rondo :lmao naming players twice to make the list seem longer

Then you have another whole tier of guys who make within $1 mil of Parker and had less production:

Andre Igodala better than Porky this year
Joakim Noah better
Kevin Garnett
Nicolas Batum
Andrea Bargnani

Then you look at all the other jokers who had slightly better seasons in terms of production but are playing on bottom feeders and whose resumes are complete jokes, you'll understand that Parker's contract isn't bad at all. He's earned every penny of what he's finally going to make.

I mean, do you guys forget that we were paying Tim Duncan $18.7 million in 2010-11 when he averaged 13.4/8.9 and then got destroyed in the playoffs by Z-bo even after Parker carried the Spurs to the #1 seed? I mean, let's talk about bad contract years why don't we?

9 players, maybe 10, including Garnett, who is just playing out his contract before retiring:lol..impressive..

Out of the 450 or so players in the NBA, Parker is the in the bottom 15 contracts in the league(generous)..impressive..what a great thread idea..smh..

[Chinook]

Like I always say, thank God this franchise is run by people with some sense of loyalty rather than Spurstalk posters.

Why? Serious question. Why is it a good thing that the Spurs are the type of organization that would give Parker that contract?

[SASdynasty!]

9 players, maybe 10, including Garnett, who is just playing out his contract before retiring:lol..impressive..

Out of the 450 or so players in the NBA, Parker is the in the bottom 15 contracts in the league(generous)..impressive..what a great thread idea..smh..
Wow, you must have missed problem solving skills in school. I showed you 12 players who made more money and gave less production than Parker this season. That doesn't mean there are not tons of other players who make in the $5-10 million range whose contracts are worse than Parker's also (even if all you considered was this year's play). I don't have the time to go through all 450 contracts, but I gave you 10-15 specific ones (out of the top 50 contracts in the league) that were worse. No doubt extrapolation would give you dozens and dozens more. But you would probably have to take a high-school-level statistics class to understand that.

But here's a news flash for you...not sure if you understand this or not. Contracts are not based on how a player is going to perform that season. That's why there are limits on early contracts and why veterans make more. How basic a concepts is that to understand? That's the reason Tim Duncan made $18.7 million when he was putting up like 13 PPG (which dropped in the playoffs). Tim Duncan wasn't an $18 million guy in 2011 and he certainly wasn't a $22 million guy in 2010, but we paid him that for his past contributions. Even if Tim Duncan didn't have a resurgence, that money would have been worth it (even though it wasn't reflective of his level of play at that time...veteran contracts almost never are). We are paying Tony Parker partly for what he has done in the past and partly because when he's healthy he's a top-5 PG in the league. He was leading the MVP race 2 frieking seasons ago, give me a break with this narrative. Please tell me you understand some of this stuff.

[SASdynasty!]

Why? Serious question. Why is it a good thing that the Spurs are the type of organization that would give Parker that contract?
Because when you become the type of organization that doesn't pay you well when you are winning championships and a FMVP and also doesn't pay you well after you do, then who in the world is going to want to come play for you? Wow, you proved yourself by being a big part of 2 championship squads (2nd leading scorer and leading assist-man in 2003 and 2005). Then you prove yourself even more by winning a FMVP and outplay Lebron James in the 2007 Finals. Then you carry the team to the playoffs for several years putting up ridiculous numbers in the playoffs (what he did to Steve Nash in 2008 was straight up embarrassing). Then you finish top-6 in the MVP race twice (once leading the pack until you get injured) and have two more top-12 MVP finishes. Then you lead the team back to a WCF appearance, a Finals appearance, and a championship, leading your team in scoring and assists as well as being the only All-Star and All-NBA player on your team, including leading the team in scoring in the Finals and bailing your team out in its only elimination game, something Kawhi just couldn't do this year. And after all of that, you've never been and never will be a top-30 paid player in the league. Ever in your career (which Tony Parker never will). And yet people like you still want us to pay him LESS.

[Dre_7]

Why? Serious question. Why is it a good thing that the Spurs are the type of organization that would give Parker that contract?

I know I did not make the original comment but the reason it is a good thing is because in order for players t be loyal to you, you have to be loyal to them. A team like the Spurs rarely get a big name free agent. They have to draft and build a team. If you want you guys to stay with the team long term, and sometimes take less money, they have to trust the organization. Part of that trust is rewarding guys for taking less money in the past to stay with the team and help them win 4 of their 5 titles.

[SASdynasty!]

I know I did not make the original comment but the reason it is a good thing is because in order for players t be loyal to you, you have to be loyal to them. A team like the Spurs rarely get a big name free agent. They have to draft and build a team. If you want you guys to stay with the team long term, and sometimes take less money, they have to trust the organization. Part of that trust is rewarding guys for taking less money in the past to stay with the team and help them win 4 of their 5 titles.
You would think this would be common sense.

[$pursDynasty]

Because when you become the type of organization that doesn't pay you well when you are winning championships and a FMVP and also doesn't pay you well after you do, then who in the world is going to want to come play for you? Wow, you proved yourself by being a big part of 2 championship squads (2nd leading scorer and leading assist-man in 2003 and 2005). Then you prove yourself even more by winning a FMVP and outplay Lebron James in the 2007 Finals. Then you carry the team to the playoffs for several years putting up ridiculous numbers in the playoffs (what he did to Steve Nash in 2008 was straight up embarrassing). Then you finish top-6 in the MVP race twice (once leading the pack until you get injured) and have two more top-12 MVP finishes. Then you lead the team back to a WCF appearance, a Finals appearance, and a championship, leading your team in scoring and assists as well as being the only All-Star and All-NBA player on your team, including leading the team in scoring in the Finals and bailing your team out in its only elimination game, something Kawhi just couldn't do this year. And after all of that, you've never been and never will be a top-30 paid player in the league. Ever in your career (which Tony Parker never will). And yet people like you still want us to pay him LESS.

Truth Nuke by Dynasty, bomb doesn't do it justice

[$pursDynasty]

I know I did not make the original comment but the reason it is a good thing is because in order for players t be loyal to you, you have to be loyal to them. A team like the Spurs rarely get a big name free agent. They have to draft and build a team. If you want you guys to stay with the team long term, and sometimes take less money, they have to trust the organization. Part of that trust is rewarding guys for taking less money in the past to stay with the team and help them win 4 of their 5 titles.
.

Dre you are making so much sense I am sure this thread will die soon, only trolling treads stay current in ST these days smh

[Malik Hairston]

Wow, you must have missed problem solving skills in school. I showed you 12 players who made more money and gave less production than Parker this season. That doesn't mean there are not tons of other players who make in the $5-10 million range whose contracts are worse than Parker's also (even if all you considered was this year's play). I don't have the time to go through all 450 contracts, but I gave you 10-15 specific ones (out of the top 50 contracts in the league) that were worse. No doubt extrapolation would give you dozens and dozens more. But you would probably have to take a high-school-level statistics class to understand that.

We're discussing contracts based on production vs. salary..even including smaller contracts and extrapolating, he's still bottom 20 at best, probably still bottom 15, and that's generous:lol..


But here's a news flash for you...not sure if you understand this or not. Contracts are not based on how a player is going to perform that season. That's why there are limits on early contracts and why veterans make more. How basic a concepts is that to understand? That's the reason Tim Duncan made $18.7 million when he was putting up like 13 PPG (which dropped in the playoffs). Tim Duncan wasn't an $18 million guy in 2011 and he certainly wasn't a $22 million guy in 2010, but we paid him that for his past contributions. Even if Tim Duncan didn't have a resurgence, that money would have been worth it (even though it wasn't reflective of his level of play at that time...veteran contracts almost never are). We are paying Tony Parker partly for what he has done in the past and partly because when he's healthy he's a top-5 PG in the league. He was leading the MVP race 2 frieking seasons ago, give me a break with this narrative. Please tell me you understand some of this stuff.

Duncan signed an extension after the 2007 title when he was still arguably the best player in the NBA according to most advanced metrics, you imbecile:lmao..

Parker signed an extension after the 2014 title when he was one of the only starters in league history to have negative on/off metrics for a championship team..1 of 4 or 5 guards in league history IIRC..signing a net negative player to a 14 mil per year extension when he was clearly beginning his decline is not comparable to signing Tim Duncan after he was still arguably the best player in the NBA:lol..

There's literally no argument for Parker being anything close to a top 5 PG in the league, that's just silly, and at this point, one of the most outrageous statements ever made in the history of this forum IMO..he was literally a bottom 10 starting PG according to virtually any legit metric you can use, and he was historically bad in the playoffs(albeit small sample size, but he's generally a playoff choker, to be fair)..

[Malik Hairston]

Anyways, this thread is stupid, not surprising coming from the OP..

It's like arguing between having Aids, Cancer, ALS, MS, etc:lol..

[SASdynasty!]

There's literally no argument for Parker being anything close to a top 5 PG in the league, that's just silly, and at this point, one of the most outrageous statements ever made in the history of this forum IMO..he was literally a bottom 10 starting PG according to virtually any legit metric you can use, and he was historically bad in the playoffs(albeit small sample size, but he's generally a playoff choker, to be fair)..
When healthy Parker is a top 5 guard in the league. Are you saying he was healthy this season or last year in the playoffs?

Parker was an All-Star last season (coach-voted by the way) AND a 2nd-team All-NBA player. How in the hell does that make him a bottom guard? Are you honestly this dumb?

[Malik Hairston]

When healthy Parker is a top 5 guard in the league. Are you saying he was healthy this season or last year in the playoffs?

Parker was an All-Star last season (coach-voted by the way) AND a 2nd-team All-NBA player. How in the hell does that make him a bottom guard? Are you honestly this dumb?

Jesus, enough with this injury shit..that's all we heard during last year's playoffs and this year..is it ever going to end?

Parker was fine in last year's regular season..he clearly had a severe drop-off in the playoffs, and had a colossal drop-off this year..that's over 1 year of progressive decline..I actually gave him the benefit of the doubt last year and assumed he was worn out from international play, but he took the Summer off, yet still joined the Spurs out of shape and looking terrible..

I don't know why you're using last year's regular season to defend Parker this year, what the fuck?:lol..he was horrendous, this year, by any measure, and there's absolutely no reason to believe a 32-year old PG that relies on speed will return to form..hopefully he'll be a positive-impact player again, at least, though..

[Chinook]

Because when you become the type of organization that doesn't pay you well when you are winning championships and a FMVP and also doesn't pay you well after you do, then who in the world is going to want to come play for you? Wow, you proved yourself by being a big part of 2 championship squads (2nd leading scorer and leading assist-man in 2003 and 2005). Then you prove yourself even more by winning a FMVP and outplay Lebron James in the 2007 Finals. Then you carry the team to the playoffs for several years putting up ridiculous numbers in the playoffs (what he did to Steve Nash in 2008 was straight up embarrassing). Then you finish top-6 in the MVP race twice (once leading the pack until you get injured) and have two more top-12 MVP finishes. Then you lead the team back to a WCF appearance, a Finals appearance, and a championship, leading your team in scoring and assists as well as being the only All-Star and All-NBA player on your team, including leading the team in scoring in the Finals and bailing your team out in its only elimination game, something Kawhi just couldn't do this year. And after all of that, you've never been and never will be a top-30 paid player in the league. Ever in your career (which Tony Parker never will). And yet people like you still want us to pay him LESS.

I'm just glad you didn't assert that Tony took less in 2010. I'll give you props for that. Parker has always been a semi star in the same way Kawhi is now. People never quite bought that he was the best player on his team or that he was a franchise corner stone. His stock has fluctuated a lot over the years (with 2011 being its nadir until this season). That's part of the reason why he signed so many extensions, as he wanted to lock in his value rather than better on himself. To his credit, he's always signed at low points in his career (2004, 2010, 2014), so he's not a guy getting fat checks off contract years.

He's always gotten paid off his market value based on the year he signed his deal. Well, until last year. That he's had booms in between his bust cycles doesn't negate the fact that he's been paid as well as he's wanted to be. His current contract isn't even absurd in a vacuum, but it's indefensible in the context of the Spurs holding off on signing Leonard to potentially have cap space.

[K...]

Anyways, this thread is stupid, not surprising coming from the OP..

It's like arguing between having Aids, Cancer, ALS, MS, etc:lol..

It's about on par for 90% of the Parker threads.

There are several reasonable points here:

It's ok to overpay based on past production if you are a small market team

Bad contracts are common in the nba

The exact terms of Tony's decline weren't and still aren't known

To Chinook, what are we trading Parker for? There's virtually no scenario in which another team values Parker as highly as the spurs.

So on it's face a trade would be bad or neutral unless we got back a specific player who would lead to a great impact, or we have a good to better pg replacement already.

Number one is speculative. The spurs have several needs but no glaring holes.

Number two is debatable depending on your opinion of mills and draft available pg.

Trading George hill was great because we had surplus guard talent and for back a glaring need. Trading Parker takes a hole and makes it bigger.

Finally, if Boris diaw is one of your top 5 best players are you really going to trade his best friend? I don't think this is that important because both guys are veterans, but unhappy Boris is a cancer and you may not want to roll those Dice.

[mkurts]

Fail thread .... again

Desperation setting in with the realisation that Porker is just really a pig in disguise

[K...]

Fail thread .... again

Desperation setting in with the realisation that Porker is just really a pig in disguise

Uh, this is getting just strange. Are all people who gain ten to fifteen pounds actually pigs in disguise? Because many people gain weight in their late 20s. Are they really pigs?

Help me here, because I'm scared if pig people.

[SASdynasty!]

It's about on par for 90% of the Parker threads.

There are several reasonable points here:

It's ok to overpay based on past production if you are a small market team

Bad contracts are common in the nba

The exact terms of Tony's decline weren't and still aren't known

To Chinook, what are we trading Parker for? There's virtually no scenario in which another team values Parker as highly as the spurs.

So on it's face a trade would be bad or neutral unless we got back a specific player who would lead to a great impact, or we have a good to better pg replacement already.

Number one is speculative. The spurs have several needs but no glaring holes.

Number two is debatable depending on your opinion of mills and draft available pg.

Trading George hill was great because we had surplus guard talent and for back a glaring need. Trading Parker takes a hole and makes it bigger.

Finally, if Boris diaw is one of your top 5 best players are you really going to trade his best friend? I don't think this is that important because both guys are veterans, but unhappy Boris is a cancer and you may not want to roll those Dice.
Agree with pretty much all of this. I think more importantly for the franchise and the culture you retire Parker here. I don't see him playing too much more than 35-36 because he's got so many miles since he was so young when he came into the league. Can you imagine if we had shopped Robinson around at the end? People will say otherwise, but a winning and loyal culture is important to build. You can look around at all the franchises who have sent away players when they declined and how it messes up the culture that took so long to build. I truly don't see a problem with Parker making a top 40 salary in the league (especially since he never has and never will be a top-30 paid player). It's not that bad of a contract especially with the cap increase coming.

[Spur-Addict]

:rollin

[K...]

So to sum up. On the pro Parker side you have several valid points


On the anti Parker side you have "he's not worth the contract" which is generally agreed upon and "having to work with the salary cap sucks" which is also agreed upon. It just be so exhausting having to make those two stale arguments.


I agree with Chinook to an extent. The spurs didn't have to make the extension when they did. But it's such a small thing to complain about. The one big free agent we're even remotely likely to get had unique special circumstances. Otherwise how likely is it that cap space would make or break an off season?


Let's wait at least until we know about Duncan and Manu before complaining about cap space. Geez.

[Russ]

Our own TP is number 23 on the All-Time richest NBA players list!

Ahead of the Admiral. :)

:flag:

http://www.celebritynetworth.com/list/top-50-nba/