How much will Simmons get in the offseason?

[apalisoc_9]

The spurs won't be able to afford him..He probably gets around 6-8/ year.

Is it possible to sign and trade RFAs? Can we sign and trade him for lou williams? They can also get Kyle Anderson and second round pick...

Should help the lakers..imo.

[TheGreatYacht]

I really hope Mitch Kupchak isn't lurking, us losing Kyle Anderson would be devastating

[MaNu4Tres]

I'll be suprised if a team offers him a lucrative deal. Hes not young enough to get a deal that has potential factored into it. And he needs more seasons (plural) of consistency for most teams to invest long term.

I see him signing a 1+1 player option deal with Spurs for 6-8 million per. Imo

[SAGirl]

I am unsure as of yet. He has a short track record. In the postseason is where he's going to earn his money. I hope Spurs can keep him...
wings are in high demand and guys like Bazemore got paid after just the one season, same with demarre Carroll.

he doesn't play much but he's behind Kawhi and shares minutes with Manu and he was t going to dethrone Danny bc he's a better shooter and the SL, playing Tony needs that shooter.

I think with a good playoff performance he will get paid. It's just tough to say until we see him.

[urunobili]

He'll get 10
Mill by some franchise.
Per year that is.

[SAGirl]

I'll be suprised if a team offers him a lucrative deal. Hes not young enough to get a deal that has potential factored into it. And he needs more seasons (plural) of consistency for most teams to invest long term.

I see him signing a 1+1 player option deal with Spurs for 5-6 million per. Imo
With a good playoff performance he gets more... qualifier: he has to show up in the playoffs.

[Blake]

If he leaves he'll dissappear into obscurity imo

[GSH]

I was gonna say he'll get all he wants, and 2-3 at a time. But you guys are talking about money.

[TheGreatYacht]

No one knows how Simmons will play in the playoffs. Fathead and Martin took his minutes because he was a "rookie"

[MaNu4Tres]

With a good playoff performance he gets more... qualifier: he has to show up in the playoffs.

I dont think he'll get enough minutes to be a consistent stand out performer in the playoffs. Hard to have a coming out party when he'll play 15-18 minutes at most.

[SAGirl]

I was gonna say he'll get all he wants, and 2-3 at a time. But you guys are talking about money.
No kidding. I used to think Spurs were going to prioritize Mills, if I have lately been doubting that. Simmons is definitely impactful and despite his age, still getting better. I will chalk it up to some years of his life spent not playing that competitive of basketball. It's really tough to say at this point but I am starting to see a scenario where he's more significant to keep than Mills. He has to be impactful in the playoffs though. If he's getting benched that would. Hangs his $, but I doubt it happens.

on the one hand I wouldn't want Spurs to overpay for any role player. On the other. They have to start paying their young players at some point and it may be between him and Mills, or others.

[SAGirl]

I dont think he'll get enough minutes to be a consistent stand out performer in the playoffs. Hard to have a coming out party when he'll play 15-18 minutes at most.
You never now. Too much small ball, injuries, foul trouble, Patty getting flambeau prompting Simmons to come in... it's tough to say... and all it takes is one team to see enough.

[Robz4000]

Starting to think the Spurs hold onto him tbh. As long as he doesn't get $10mil+ per season I think he stays.

[MaNu4Tres]

You never now. Too much small ball, injuries, foul trouble, Patty getting flambeau prompting Simmons to come in... it's tough to say... and all it takes is one team to see enough.

Im not saying theres absolutely no way that can happen. Im just saying given his limited role..its less likely he has a coming out party. Remember, Kawhi & Dannys minutes in the playoffs are maxed out. Manu will be a 15-20 minute player then you have the rest for Simmons and Anderson to split ( which isnt a lot).

[GSH]

No kidding. I used to think Spurs were going to prioritize Mills, if I have lately been doubting that. Simmons is definitely impactful and despite his age, still getting better. I will chalk it up to some years of his life spent not playing that competitive of basketball. It's really tough to say at this point but I am starting to see a scenario where he's more significant to keep than Mills. He has to be impactful in the playoffs though. If he's getting benched that would. Hangs his $, but I doubt it happens.

on the one hand I wouldn't want Spurs to overpay for any role player. On the other. They have to start paying their young players at some point and it may be between him and Mills, or others.


Sorry, SAGirl. That was a crude attempt at humor. Simmons is a regular on a good NBA team now, plus he's going to get paid. And the girls are going to come a'runnin.

People trying to speculate what the salaries are going to look like this offseason must be joking, too. Everyone knew the cap was going up last year, but still even the experts were shocked at some of the contracts. It's going to take a big bump this year, and there are going to be some eye-popping deals thrown at a lot of guys. I think my prediction has a much better chance of being accurate.

[MaNu4Tres]

The cap is expected to increase to 102 million..which is less than originally anticipated and only 8 more million than where its at right now. Dont expect as much change in salary as we saw last year.

[lefty20]

Teams always overpay role players on the Spurs. Expect a shithead to throw 10-12 mill at him.

[SAGirl]

Im not saying theres absolutely no way that can happen. Im just saying given his limited role..its less likely he has a coming out party. Remember, Kawhi & Dannys minutes in the playoffs are maxed out. Manu will be a 15-20 minute player then you have the rest for Simmons and Anderson to split ( which isnt a lot).
As much as I have been in Kyles camp, it just isn't his season. He's running out of time. I am not opposed to him being traded either though he will likely have a very rude awakening then.. but I hate to make this a Kyle thread bc I myself have posting subject fatigue... the only thing that matters is that he's a deep bench reserve and unlikely to play for real unless something unfortunate happens. I like him and all but he has been indeed disappointing.

So back to Simmons, it's tough to say. He's been incredibly streaky but has had aye opened games like he did against GSW. He's got that in him somewhere. One never knows what trailing from behind game he can come in and spark things up. I think Davis also has that potential, but this is about JSimms.

my only concern is that if he were to get paid the big bucks then Pop would need to see that nightly and he's been streaky. I don't want to jinx him frankly so I won't hype it up, but Manu looks a. It done at times Simmons with his desire to get to the rim makes a difference. Spurs have been almost dead last in points in the paint. It's just uncertain right now, it I can see a scenario where he earns at least a multi year deal similar to Danny's, provided he doesn't disappear in the bright lights.

[SAGirl]

Sorry, SAGirl. That was a crude attempt at humor. Simmons is a regular on a good NBA team now, plus he's going to get paid. And the girls are going to come a'runnin.

People trying to speculate what the salaries are going to look like this offseason must be joking, too. Everyone knew the cap was going up last year, but still even the experts were shocked at some of the contracts. It's going to take a big bump this year, and there are going to be some eye-popping deals thrown at a lot of guys. I think my prediction has a much better chance of being accurate.
Oh yea... I think he's more likely to go over the estimate than under too.

This subject about JSimms interests me and I considered posting a similar thread not long ago but I would get typical response plus the trolling about Anderson included... which frankly has nothing to do with this... so I decided against it. For whatever reason team construction fior the offseason interests me.

[Ellsworth]

If he leaves he'll dissappear into obscurity imo

At the end of the day, He'll get paid plenty enough to feed his family :hat

[r0drig0lac]

spurs = 22/3 or nets ....30/3

[Big Empty]

He can't shoot. 2.5 million

[Chinook]

Could see a 1+1 MLE deal, but I think he'll get better offers. Him taking them would probably depend on how the Spurs see him factoring into their future plans. Right now, he's the replacement for Manu. But if he can hang out another year, he might be the replacement for Green. While I don't think starting is a big deal for Simmons, I'd assume the pay increase that comes with that would be.

[peacemaker885]

Spurs will pay if they want him.

[HarlemHeat37]

He isn't going to get much IMO, you can find a Simmons on virtually every team..his defense has improved to the point where he can be considered legitimately good, but he has been a relatively poor offensive player with limited consistency(52% TS, poor assist to turnover ratio, does most of his damage vs. bad teams or against 2nd/3rd stringers)..

I like him in an energy role for the Spurs where he plays 10 MPG, though..

[SAGirl]

Could see a 1+1 MLE deal, but I think he'll get better offers. Him taking them would probably depend on how the Spurs see him factoring into their future plans. Right now, he's the replacement for Manu. But if he can hang out another year, he might be the replacement for Green. While I don't think starting is a big deal for Simmons, I'd assume the pay increase that comes with that would be.
If I am his agent no way I take one and one.. just no way. I throw that in RC's face. He needs a multi year deal...even two years with the the third a team option is ok... it no way a one and one... just no way.

[TrainOfThought5]

If he leaves he'll dissappear into obscurity imo

I could see him having a Gary Nealesque career after the spurs.

[Chinook]

If I am his agent no way I take one and one.. just no way. I throw that in RC's face. He needs a multi year deal...even two years with the the third a team option is ok... it no way a one and one... just no way.

The option would be a PO.

[SAGirl]

The option would be a PO.
Yea sorry about my mistake. I just think there's no way he takes 1 and 1... I just can't see it. My premise was that he shows in the playoffs obviously. If he's pedestrian he won't raise the interest I think he can raise from some team

[UNT Eagles 2016]

About tree fiddy

[superbigtime]

So you're saying there's a chance for a one year deal?

[cd021]

i'm cool if he walks, so long as Mills and Dedmon are resigned. Murray could fill the backup SG minutes on the second unit with Mills, Anderson, Bertans/Lee , and Dedmon.

Murray gets a rotation spot with 18-20 mpg with a chance to really show what he can do.

[SpursforSix]

With a good playoff performance he gets more... qualifier: he has to show up in the playoffs.

:pop: Don't worry...I'll make sure that doesn't happen.

[SpursforSix]

i'm cool if he walks, so long as Mills and Dedmon are resigned. Murray could fill the backup SG minutes on the second unit with Mills, Anderson, Bertans/Lee , and Dedmon.

Murray gets a rotation spot with 18-20 mpg with a chance to really show what he can do.

I'd rather lose Mills than Simmons. Mills is just another in the line of good shooters that has a great year or two and then regresses. Assuming the system encourages ball movement, I think he's easier to replace.

[GSH]

He isn't going to get much IMO, you can find a Simmons on virtually every team..his defense has improved to the point where he can be considered legitimately good, but he has been a relatively poor offensive player with limited consistency(52% TS, poor assist to turnover ratio, does most of his damage vs. bad teams or against 2nd/3rd stringers)..

I like him in an energy role for the Spurs where he plays 10 MPG, though..


I don't disagree with the logic. The second huge bump in the cap next year probably means that things won't be logical. Boban got what... 3 years/$21M? It's not hard to picture someone throwing some pretty stupid money at Simmons.

If he does re-sign for a price the Spurs are happy with, I don't see him being cut down to a 10 MPG role. It would have to be on hell of an offseason for them to be able to do that.

[TXstbobcat]

The spurs won't be able to afford him..He probably gets around 6-8/ year.

Is it possible to sign and trade RFAs? Can we sign and trade him for lou williams? They can also get Kyle Anderson and second round pick...

Should help the lakers..imo.

it doesn't look like a team can sign and trade a RFA.

In the National Basketball Association (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Basketball_Association), a sign-and-trade agreement is a type of contract (allowed by the collective bargaining agreement (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Collective_Bargaining_Agreement) [CBA]) wherein one franchise/team signs an unrestricted free agent (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unrestricted_free_agent) player to a new contract, only to then immediately trade (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_(sports)) him to another team (of the player's choosing). This is typically done to enable the player to obtain a higher salary and/or greater number of years on their contract than NBA salary cap (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_salary_cap) rules ordinarily allow the destination team, itself, to provide the player.[1] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sign_and_trade#cite_note-1)

[apalisoc_9]

it doesn't look like a team can sign and trade a RFA.

In the National Basketball Association (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Basketball_Association), a sign-and-trade agreement is a type of contract (allowed by the collective bargaining agreement (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Collective_Bargaining_Agreement) [CBA]) wherein one franchise/team signs an unrestricted free agent (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unrestricted_free_agent) player to a new contract, only to then immediately trade (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_(sports)) him to another team (of the player's choosing). This is typically done to enable the player to obtain a higher salary and/or greater number of years on their contract than NBA salary cap (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_salary_cap) rules ordinarily allow the destination team, itself, to provide the player.[1] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sign_and_trade#cite_note-1)

Thanks. I'm not infrormed with contract details and CBA.

[Chinook]

Yea sorry about my mistake. I just think there's no way he takes 1 and 1... I just can't see it. My premise was that he shows in the playoffs obviously. If he's pedestrian he won't raise the interest I think he can raise from some team

That makes sense. But what also makes sense is that the most Simmons is likely to earn next year is the MLE, whether than is as part of a one-year deal, multi-year MLE deal or an Arenas RFA deal. The only team that can pay him more than that is SA. So if he signs, say a $40M/4 Arenas deal, he'd get like 5/6/14/15. That's good money, but if he took the one-and-one, he'd give the same next year and then be an RFA without Arenas restriction and another season under his belt. Dude could get Bazemore money.

So that's $75M/5 rather than $40M/4, and he'd have the same starting salary in either case. It would really depend on how he would feel about having another season to prove himself in a bigger role.

[Chinook]

it doesn't look like a team can sign and trade a RFA.

In the National Basketball Association (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Basketball_Association), a sign-and-trade agreement is a type of contract (allowed by the collective bargaining agreement (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_Collective_Bargaining_Agreement) [CBA]) wherein one franchise/team signs an unrestricted free agent (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unrestricted_free_agent) player to a new contract, only to then immediately trade (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_(sports)) him to another team (of the player's choosing). This is typically done to enable the player to obtain a higher salary and/or greater number of years on their contract than NBA salary cap (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_salary_cap) rules ordinarily allow the destination team, itself, to provide the player.[1] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sign_and_trade#cite_note-1)

Yes, you can S&T RFAs. Even if they had to be UFAs for it to happen, the team could just withdraw the QO in facilitate the move.

[apalisoc_9]

Yes, you can S&T RFAs. Even if they had to be UFAs for it to happen, the team could just withdraw the QO in facilitate the move.

Wouldnt that be considered tampering? No?

[spurraider21]

If manu retires after this season Simmons would probably love a one year deal so he can showcase himself in that role

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

That makes sense. But what also makes sense is that the most Simmons is likely to earn next year is the MLE, whether than is as part of a one-year deal, multi-year MLE deal or an Arenas RFA deal. The only team that can pay him more than that is SA. So if he signs, say a $40M/4 Arenas deal, he'd get like 5/6/14/15. That's good money, but if he took the one-and-one, he'd give the same next year and then be an RFA without Arenas restriction and another season under his belt. Dude could get Bazemore money.


Didn't they flatten the money/years in the new CBA? Or was it only for teams matching the offer?

I doubt he'd get anything near that though, unless he's phenomenal in the playoffs. Something like Ramon Sessions money - 2/12 mil or 3/20 at best.

[TXstbobcat]

Yes, you can S&T RFAs. Even if they had to be UFAs for it to happen, the team could just withdraw the QO in facilitate the move.

in that case once the qualifying offer is withdrawn the player would become an unrestricted free agent and the team can then sign and trade that player??

[Chinook]

Wouldnt that be considered tampering? No?

With whom and against whom? All three parties are aware of what's going on here. It would be the same thing the Spurs did with Neal and Cory, but they'd do an S&T instead of just letting the guy walk. But straight S&Ts for RFAs happen regardless.

[Chinook]

in that case once the qualifying offer is withdrawn the player would become an unrestricted free agent and the team can then sign and trade that player??

Yes, but I also want to say that you can just S&T an RFA. I think the CBA FAQ was just ambiguous there.

[Chinook]

Didn't they flatten the money/years in the new CBA? Or was it only for teams matching the offer?

I doubt he'd get anything near that though, unless he's phenomenal in the playoffs. Something like Ramon Sessions money - 2/12 mil or 3/20 at best.

I know they were supposed to change the way the Arenas rule worked, but I heard nothing specific. The MLE is supposed to increase, but not all at once. It'll take a few years before it grows to actually reflect the new cap reality.

[BillMc]

I think he's gone, especially if he has one memorable playoff game that approaches what he did in the opener. Some scrub team will offer him silly money the Spurs won't match. Given his age I can see Pop giving him the same speech he gave Boban. Go take the money. Simmons, with 5 kids, probably wouldn't even need that speech.

If he under perfoms the rest of the season we may be able to keep him, but then, if that were the case, we might not wish to do so.

[TXstbobcat]

Yes, but I also want to say that you can just S&T an RFA. I think the CBA FAQ was just ambiguous there.

thank you for CBA rules clarification.

[SAGirl]

That makes sense. But what also makes sense is that the most Simmons is likely to earn next year is the MLE, whether than is as part of a one-year deal, multi-year MLE deal or an Arenas RFA deal. The only team that can pay him more than that is SA. So if he signs, say a $40M/4 Arenas deal, he'd get like 5/6/14/15. That's good money, but if he took the one-and-one, he'd give the same next year and then be an RFA without Arenas restriction and another season under his belt. Dude could get Bazemore money.

So that's $75M/5 rather than $40M/4, and he'd have the same starting salary in either case. It would really depend on how he would feel about having another season to prove himself in a bigger role.
That's one point and nuance I am not familiar with so I thank your input.

At his age I don't know if it's wise to gamble on himself like that. He could have a down season next, an injury, heck I'd rather it doesn't happen for the teams sake, but he could bomb out without Ginobili (I think that's HarlemHeat37 point mostly about the role he thinks Simms could do well). It's a legit concern bc he's got the short track record.

I have seen young guys just wanting to get their first multi year deal even if it's Arenas type. That's still millions. Bc he's just older though, after that deal is done he likely doesn't get another like it... so it's tough to say. I would not advise him to bet on himself for an even bigger contract after the one year... but maybe he's full of confidence and thinks he can be even better with more opportunities without Manu in the fold for example.

I think he goes for the multi year deal and puts some pressure on the Spurs with some other team offers.

[TheGreatYacht]

I'm hearing a lot about his age :lol

He'll be the same age as Danny when he got the 4/40M deal... people are overblowing that shit lmfao

[BillMc]

Simmons, Patty, Lee, Dedmon, it's like musical chairs who we'll be able to keep. (Assuming the later two opt out, and Pau opts in).

[Chinook]

I'm hearing a lot about his age :lol

He'll be the same age as Danny when he got the 4/40M deal... people are overblowing that shit lmfao

Danny's better and was more proven. If Simmons were a mult-year starter with a long track record of playoff performances, then they'd be the same. As of now, Jon is still being evaluated for what he could be, and he's getting too old for that.

[HarlemHeat37]

Why do people assume the Nets will pay when the already have Kilpatrick and LeVert under contract on cheap deals, tbh? Simmons certainly hasn't proven that he's clearly better than either guy..

[SAGirl]

I'm hearing a lot about his age :lol

He'll be the same age as Danny when he got the 4/40M deal... people are overblowing that shit lmfao
It's
all about how old he will be when his deal is done. He's going to be 28 years old at the start of his,next season. He's not that young that he can gamble with a one year deal hoping for a huge payoff after that, by which time he will be 29 and if he was just ok in that one season, the next season he's not getting a bigger deal.... that's why his age is important. Some younger guys, around 23-24 years old can gamble on themselves bc they will still have several seasons ahead b4 their prime and at some point provided they continue to improve, they will get the big paycheck. I think Simmons needs to go for it right now personally is all. He doesn't have years to wait for that big paycheck.

[TXstbobcat]

It's
all about how old he will be when his deal is done. He's going to be 28 years old at the start of his,next season. He's not that young that he can gamble with a one year deal hoping for a huge payoff after that, by which time he will be 29 and if he was just ok in that one season, the next season he's not getting a bigger deal.... that's why his age is important. Some younger guys, around 23-24 years old can gamble on themselves bc they will still have several seasons ahead b4 their prime and at some point provided they continue to improve, they will get the big paycheck. I think Simmons needs to go for it right now personally is all. He doesn't have years to wait for that big paycheck.

i agree that at his age this could be his one and only opportunity to cash in with a really nice NBA contract.

[GSH]

Danny's better and was more proven. If Simmons were a mult-year starter with a long track record of playoff performances, then they'd be the same. As of now, Jon is still being evaluated for what he could be, and he's getting too old for that.


You're right. Simmons isn't nearly the player Danny was when he got that contract. But then again, $10M isn't what it was back then either. If the cap had been as big when Danny got that deal, he might have gotten paid double the $10M per that he got.

I'm telling you guys, this second bump in the cap is going to leave some heads spinning. Some guys, like David Lee, didn't get overpaid. But a lot did. And it's going to happen again. The only question is who.

[MaNu4Tres]

I'm telling you guys, this second bump in the cap is going to leave some heads spinning. Some guys, like David Lee, didn't get overpaid. But a lot did. And it's going to happen again. The only question is who.

The cap isnt expected to be as high as some thought it would be next year. The cap is said to be around 102 million, roughly 8 million higher than it is now. It wont change much next summer.

[SAGirl]

You're right. Simmons isn't nearly the player Danny was when he got that contract. But then again, $10M isn't what it was back then either. If the cap had been as big when Danny got that deal, he might have gotten paid double the $10M per that he got.

I'm telling you guys, this second bump in the cap is going to leave some heads spinning. Some guys, like David Lee, didn't get overpaid. But a lot did. And it's going to happen again. The only question is who.
And the worst overpays were wings. Maybe the market is burned out with overpaying wings and it backfires. The market is unpredictable that way. Simms has warts that depress his value like his 3 pt shooting slump. The wings that got overpaid could should the 3 well and defend. I do think there's a chance Spurs decide to do something different with their bench if they don't think he can be "that guy", leaving a reduced budget for his spot (assuming Spurs go after a proven scorer for their bench). In that case Simms might be like Cojo, Baynes, and Boban. A good role player the Spurs would have liked to have kept but going after other FA in the market edged them out. No mater what he's getting a nice contract likely. If he's pedestrian in the playoffs, then offers like Manu4tres mentioned would come into place and if he feels he's getting undersold only then would he do the 1 and 1...

BillMC above had a good point. Though we find it hard to believe Spurs role players who made it into the rotation have gotten nice role player priced deals (Cojo, Baynes, Boban recently... there are other prior like Neal).

[GSH]

The cap isnt expected to be as high as some thought it would be next year. The cap is said to be around 102 million, roughly 8 million higher than it is now. It wont change much next summer.


I'm hearing that it will be at least $104M. I know what they're printing, but they have the ability to shift revenues from year to year, to a degree. They made a mess last year, and people who were lucky enough to have contracts come up at the right time are getting compensated out of proportion to other players. They know that if they chop it off too abruptly, they have a problem with the bulk of the players in the league.

What I'm hearing (and it's worth what you paid for it) is that they said $102M to leave themselves some room to negotiate, because they know they're going to have to.

Either way, the cap is up basically 50% from two years ago. A few big names are going to get huge deals. But some other guys are going to get more than they should. That's what I think, at least.

[james evans]

depending on how bad he plays in the playoffs. If he plays like shit in the playoffs, he'll get no less than $10-13 million per year

[cd021]

I'd rather lose Mills than Simmons. Mills is just another in the line of good shooters that has a great year or two and then regresses. Assuming the system encourages ball movement, I think he's easier to replace.

I think Simmons is far more replaceable than Mills is. Simmons is basically an above average athlete that can attack the rim and defend a bit but can't really shoot outside of 18 feet. Murray looks like he could do that starting next season (and hopefully be a better 3pt shooter than Simmons too). Mills is an elite 3pt shooter, both spotting up and shooting off the dribble. I think he's a better fit with or without Manu next year on the bench. Spurs don't have a lot of high volume 3pt shooters (we lag behind the rest of the NBA in attempts per game by significant number), if he we to return the spurs could have 4 in the rotation

[MaNu4Tres]

Murrays effectiveness and overall ceiling is significantly higher playing the PG on BOTH ends. Defending the PG and playing the PG offensively ( having smaller guards defending him).

I'm not sure why people prefer to pay Mills 50 million to limit Murray's growth and effectiveness by forcing Murray into the SG role. Him defending SG's and having SG's defend him diminishes his value and effectiveness because he no longer has an edge with his size and length. So pay 50 million to diminish Murray's value.... sounds smart.

Put Murray at PG as soon as possible to expedite his development playing and defending the position he's going to play in the long run. He has an All-Star ceiling at the PG spot. At SG, he has a 6th man potential while being net negative to mediocre on D because he has to guard bigger players at SG. Under the Mills at PG/Murray at SG scenario, Spurs would then have two liabilities at the PG and SG spot on the defensive end. Whereas with the other scenario, where Murray would play and defend PGs, while Simmons - Hanga - SG FA/ Rookie plays and defends SGs. This scenario gives the Spurs an edge and net positives on the defensive end. Not sure why it's so hard for people to understand this. You move Murray to Simmons role and Murray doesn't have the same impact defending and being guarded by bigger players.

[Chinook]

It's not just about Murray. If Mills is better than a two, they have to go with that. They intend to remain contenders past this year, so doing what's best for Murray isn't really in their best interest. Hell, it's possible the Spurs re-sign Patty AND get a vet SG and push Murray to the deep bench for another year. We just don't know.

[MaNu4Tres]

It's not just about Murray. If Mills is better than a two, they have to go with that. They intend to remain contenders past this year, so doing what's best for Murray isn't really in their best interest. Hell, it's possible the Spurs re-sign Patty AND get a vet SG and push Murray to the deep bench for another year. We just don't know.

It's not about Murray. You're right. But Murrays ceiling and overall effectiveness will be tied to the Spurs' success to a degree. I just think Spurs are better going Murray at back up PG and trusting the FO to do find the best opportunity to fill the SG role -- whether it be Simmons, Hanga, rookie, free agent or a vet like Korver or all of the above. Murray alone would fill in Mills' 10 ppg while providing much better defense. I think Murray will bring more than Mills next year.

Watching Murray this summer reminded me a lot of when I watched Parker in the team scrimmage his rookie year in training camp when he out shined Antonio Daniels in stints. Its the same feeling I felt watching Kawhi initially his rookie year. I saw the hints of greatness with All-Star ceiling. I can't explain it -- but I trust my thoughts on this after watching the game pretty closely for 20+ years. I have the same damn feelings about Murray. Yes, it's subjective to a degree and we don't know FOR SURE yet, but I'm telling you right now --the kid is special. He's going to be a star in this league and he's more ready than most people thought he would be just a few months in his rookie year.

Of course the Spurs will intend to remain contenders, they always do. And giving Murray a bigger role or the keys at the back up PG should align with their intentions if they see what I see with Murray. I'm not playing favorites or being delusional -- it's not like I'm an advocate of a meh player or prospect getting an expanded role. This is different.

[Chinook]

It's not about Murray. You're right. I just think Spurs are better going Murray at back up PG and trusting the FO to do find the best opportunity to fill the SG role -- whether it be Simmons, Hanga, rookie, free agent or a vet like Korver or all of the above. Murray alone would fill in Mills' 10 ppg while providing much better defense. I think Murray will bring more than Mills next year.

Watching Murray this summer reminded me a lot of when I watched Parker in the team scrimmage his rookie year in training camp when he out shined Antonio Daniels in stints. Its the same feeling I felt watching Kawhi initially his rookie year. I saw the hints of greatness with All-Star ceiling. I can't explain it -- but I trust my thoughts on this after watching the game pretty closely for 20+ years. I have the same damn feelings about Murray. Yes, it's subjective to a degree and we don't know FOR SURE yet, but I'm telling you right now --the kid is special. He's going to be a star in this league and he's more ready than most people thought he would be just a few months in his rookie year.

Of course the Spurs will intend to remain contenders, they always do. And giving Murray a bigger role or the keys at the back up PG should align with their intentions if they see what I see with Murray. I'm not playing favorites or being delusional -- it's not like I'm an advocate of a meh player or prospect getting an expanded role. This is different.

I love Murray's ceiling, and I could see a scenario where the Spurs give DeJounte the ball next year with a potential for him getting the de-facto starting job. However, I do think that if Murray isn't beating out Simmons or getting the nod when Simmons or Manu was out that we should slow our role on the team's expectations for him. While they might do well to consider him a PG, if they wanted him to play a big role soon, it would make sense to get him rotational minutes wherever they could find them.

Simply put Parker and Kawhi were rotational players their rookie years. Murray hasn't beat out Patty or Simmons for a backup slot yet.

[MaNu4Tres]

Simply put Parker and Kawhi were rotational players their rookie years. Murray hasn't beat out Patty or Simmons for a backup slot yet.

There's different variables in place this year for Murray compared to Parker and Kawhi's rookie year.

When Parker was a rookie, Spurs had just let Avery go and Pop was never big on Antonio Daniels. Spurs had just lost their one play-maker on the perimeter with Derek Anderson going to Portland. Parker was forced into the starting role due to high demand -- Pop really had no choice but to throw Parker in the fire. Murray doesn't have that situation in front of him with Parker and Mills ahead of him. Spurs don't have that desperate need right now -- this year. As for Kawhi, he came in when Spurs desperately needed his size at the wing in the rotation. Jefferson was the only true SF on the roster and he had been a disappointment for the most part. Both Parker and Kawhi came into desperate situations for their position, it's not the same with Murray.

Also, Simmons has played the back up SF this year -- not SG. It's clear the Spurs haven't had Murray as a SF or a wing this year. All of his minutes (sans maybe 5) have been at the point guard.

[Chinook]

I don't want to get to into positional semantics, but Pop could easily have Manu play the three. It's not like Simmons is Kyle's size. While I don't necessarily want Murray checking James when Kawhi is on the bench, I also don't see how he wasn't getting minutes when Dallas was trotting out three PGs or when NO was scrub city on their perimeter.

[MaNu4Tres]

I don't want to get to into positional semantics, but Pop could easily have Manu play the three. It's not like Simmons is Kyle's size. While I don't necessarily want Murray checking James when Kawhi is on the bench, I also don't see how he wasn't getting minutes when Dallas was trotting out three PGs or when NO was scrub city on their perimeter.

So you're ignoring the different situations with Parker and Kawhi compared to Murray? Okay.

And Simmons has had a solid year, he's earned a role, has size and ability to defend the best wing scorers off the opposing benches ( you're not taking defense into account). If Simmons had a down year then I'd understand you questioning why Murray hasn't been given an opportunity but that's not the case. Plus, that's not Murray's position. Spurs clearly have him at PG.

[Chinook]

So you're ignoring the different situations with Parker and Kawhi compared to Murray? Okay.

I wasn't aware that this was a UIL CX round where I had to worry about arguments flowing through or else I lose.

I'm not asking why Murray isn't starting in any event. I'm wondering how strongly Pop can feel about DJM if he can't even beat out Simmons or Anderson for PT.


And Simmons has had a solid year, he's earned a role, has size and ability to defend the best wing scorers off the opposing benches ( you're not taking defense into account). If Simmons had a down year then I'd understand you questioning why Murray hasn't been given an opportunity but that's not the case.

Simmons and D is a topic best not gotten into. I have no problem with the idea that Jonathon is better than Murray and that Patty is better. I have a bigger issue accepting that Pop's going to let guys walk to give Murray the ball if those guys are better than him. Kawhi showed he was better than RJ before the trade. Murray is struggling to get minutes. While I don't think that's a sign of his long-term potential or even that it's right that he's not getting more time, it's something to consider when talking about how the team will handle him next year.


Plus, that's not Murray's position. Spurs clearly have him at PG.

The Spurs have run him next to Forbes. So they seem not to have qualms about him being the bigger guard in a lineup. The Mills-Forbes distinction hardly matters, especially considering how much better Patty is. If Murray/Forbes works for Pop, Murray/Mills should too, especially when Simmons was out. Pop has already played Parker/Mills before as well, so I doubt he kept Murray on the bench because he wanted him to be a PG only.

I think that if Pop were really excited for what Murray could do next year, he'd be trying to get him as much experience as possible. It's not like DJM is in Austin. He can "play PG" offensively any time he's on the floor if Pop wants him to do it, and there's no downside to him getting experience defending bigger guys. No matter what, he's going to do that a lot due to nature of NBA defenses. He might start off possessions on Steph, but he could easily end them on Klay, KD or Green. If that's the case, a couple hundred minutes worth of experience spent at the wing would help him.

[MaNu4Tres]

Bottom line: Murray not getting time has more to do with Parker and Mills in front of him on the depth chart at his position. It has nothing to do with how Pop thinks less of him. Anytime Pop has talked about the kid, he's talked very highly of him and has used terms such as " he's oozing with talent/potential" and his "potential is off the charts". He's even mentioned that this scenario is different than when Parker was a rookie because Parker had to be throwin in the fire so to speak.

[Chinook]

I'm not going to tell you not to believe what you want or even that you're wrong on his prospects for next year, but in the NBA, the best players play, and Pop doesn't consider Murray one of the top 10 right now. I don't see Pop letting go of better players unless 1) Murray finds a way to show Pop a leap between now and July that would make him just a better player than Mills and Simmons or 2) The team is forced to let those guys go because they are making a big move with cap space.

I would love for 2) to be the case. Hell 1) would be nice. Any other scenario wouldn't sit well with me.

[MaNu4Tres]

I'm not going to tell you not to believe what you want or even that you're wrong on his prospects for next year, but in the NBA, the best players play, and Pop doesn't consider Murray one of the top 10 right now. I don't see Pop letting go of better players unless 1) Murray finds a way to show Pop a leap between now and July that would make him just a better player than Mills and PoSimmons or 2) The team is forced to let those guys go because they are making a big move with cap space.

I would love for 2) to be the case. Hell 1) would be nice. Any other scenario wouldn't sit well with me.

The best players don't play all the time. Pop is loyal to a fault and rookies typically have to be patient unless there's an urgent situation with a position like there was with Parker/Leonard. Splitter and Hill were the last two rookies who were more than ready but Pop went with Bonner/Blair instead of Splitter. And as Jacque Vaughn had regressed significantly by 2009 ( Hills rookie year), Hill played back up a lot of the year due to the strong need ( Vaughn was done) , but Pop still chose not to play Hill to begin the playoffs -- when it mattered most. He said something like, " Hill wasn't ready for the playoffs." and then once they went down 2-1 in the series Pop began to play him but it was too late. Splitter is a better example because there were four guys on the team who were already part of the front court rotation a year prior ( Duncan, McDyess, Bonner and Blair. Even though it was obvious Splitter was a top 10 player, he rode the bench and had to be patient because " it wouldn't be fair to the rest of the guys".

[Chinook]

The best players don't play all the time. Pop is loyal to a fault and rookies typically have to be patient unless there's an urgent situation with a position like there was with Parker/Leonard. Splitter and Hill were the last two rookies who were more than ready but Pop went with Bonner/Blair and Jacque Vaughn over them when it mattered most.

I'm not talking about "when it matters most" I'm talking about during the regular season, and Pop has few qualms about giving young player regular-season burn. That Murray isn't in the d-league anymore is interesting (and he made it sound like he's never going back, which is even more interesting), but that he can't even get fifth-guard minutes in the regular season is more than a little odd. Pop went with Simmons at PG over him last game, I think.

[MaNu4Tres]

Murray has taken advantage and surpassed expectations with the playing time he's received. Unfortunately, there's just not a lot of opportunity on this 37 and 11 team -- when the back court is loaded with proven players, who Pop likes and respects, all of which have returned from last season and seasons prior. There's Green, Manu, Simmons at SG and Parker and Mills at PG -- all ahead of him. That is why he hasn't been part of the everyday rotation. It has nothing to do with his lack of ability or lack of production -- as he's shown great ability and great production with the opportunities he's been given.

[TD 21]

It's not just about Murray. If Mills is better than a two, they have to go with that. They intend to remain contenders past this year, so doing what's best for Murray isn't really in their best interest. Hell, it's possible the Spurs re-sign Patty AND get a vet SG and push Murray to the deep bench for another year. We just don't know.

:tu

The "positional semantics", as you call them, are being overblown in this case. Murray is clearly tall (about half an inch shorter than Simmons) and long enough (about two inches longer wingspan than Simmons) to primarily defend shooting guards and the way this league is now, they can easily cross match at times and have him guard the point guard, while they hide Mills on a non threatening wing. Opposing teams will also flip assignments as they see fit, so they'll be times Murray has a point guard on him too.

This isn't the 90s, when the slightest height/strength advantage lead to post ups. There's guys much smaller than Murray defending shooting guards. He obviously has to get stronger, but he has to do that anyway. For the most part, he should be fine and if the Spurs considered this such an issue, they wouldn't have converted Bertans into a full time power forward.

As long as it's within' reason, you play your best players and you don't let one go because of semantics and replace them with inferior players.

[MaNu4Tres]

If money was all equal...then a lot of what you just said would make sense. Patty making 50 million has a lot to do the situation and my opinion. We will see what PATFO thinks is best in 5 months.

And a size/ length advantage is a huge edge. You think Murray can get off and be as efficient with his floaters with a 6'6"-6-8" player defending him? All shots are contested a little better vs a longer/ athletic players. My opinion has nothing to do with posting up.

[south side spur]

I think we're getting a little too excited with Simmons having athletic ability since as Spurs fans we're not used to having players who can run and jump. Like Harlem says players like Simmons are a dime a dozen.

10 million a year? No way in hell. 3 years 10 million. If I'm wrong that means as some of y'all said he'll finish as the third scorer on this team and he'll earn that big contract. I just don't see it BUT at the same time, if that happens it'll mean that the Spurs win the title which in that case I'd be glad to be wrong about Simmons.

[TD 21]

If money was all equal...then a lot of what you just said would make sense. Patty making 50 million has a lot to do the situation and my opinion. We will see what PATFO thinks is best in 5 months.

And a size/ length advantage is a huge edge. You think Murray can get off and be as efficient with his floaters with a 6'6"-6-8" player defending him? All shots are contested a little better vs a longer/ athletic players. My opinion has nothing to do with posting up.

You don't know that he'll get offered $50 million and even if he does, you don't know that he'll accept. Also, while steep, $12.5M as an AAV (average annual value) isn't insane in '17. It's not like they'd be hamstrung and in the event something significant arises, they shouldn't have much difficulty dumping him if they so choose. Besides, In a year and a half, Ginobili will be retired, Parker will probably be taking a significant pay cut and so too will Gasol, should be continue playing.

If Murray becomes even close to what you think he will, teams will be putting solid or better defenders, including wing ones, on him, sooner than later and it'll only be easier if he's playing next to Hanga and to a lesser extent Simmons. Whether he primarily defends their shooting guard won't dictate that.

[DAF86]

I'd rather pay Bertans and Dedmon over Simmons, tbh.

[MaNu4Tres]

.

If Murray becomes even close to what you think he will, teams will be putting solid or better defenders, including wing ones, on him, sooner than later and it'll only be easier if he's playing next to Hanga and to a lesser extent Simmons. Whether he primarily defends their shooting guard won't dictate that.

Most teams have their best wing defenders play against the starters. And if Murray is on the floor at that time ( when Pop staggers lineups), the best wing defender will be on Kawhi.

[CGD]

There's different variables in place this year for Murray compared to Parker and Kawhi's rookie year.

When Parker was a rookie, Spurs had just let Avery go and Pop was never big on Antonio Daniels. Spurs had just lost their one play-maker on the perimeter with Derek Anderson going to Portland. Parker was forced into the starting role due to high demand -- Pop really had no choice but to throw Parker in the fire. Murray doesn't have that situation in front of him with Parker and Mills ahead of him. Spurs don't have that desperate need right now -- this year. As for Kawhi, he came in when Spurs desperately needed his size at the wing in the rotation. Jefferson was the only true SF on the roster and he had been a disappointment for the most part. Both Parker and Kawhi came into desperate situations for their position, it's not the same with Murray.

Also, Simmons has played the back up SF this year -- not SG. It's clear the Spurs haven't had Murray as a SF or a wing this year. All of his minutes (sans maybe 5) have been at the point guard.

Good distinction based on context at the time.

[TheGreatYacht]

Pay the man. Showed his potential tonight with no Manure getting all the touches

[TheDoctor]

All depends on what the HOTS thinks tbh.

[sasaint]

Pay the man. Showed his potential tonight with no Manure getting all the touches

On the offensive end Simmons is learning how to balance his athleticism with playing under control within the system. On the defensive end he is learning how to avoid the cheap fouls and still make some of his spectacular defensive plays. The growth of his confidence is obvious. The more minutes he gets the more comfortable and confident he becomes.

[GSH]

On the offensive end Simmons is learning how to balance his athleticism with playing under control within the system. On the defensive end he is learning how to avoid the cheap fouls and still make some of his spectacular defensive plays. The growth of his confidence is obvious. The more minutes he gets the more comfortable and confident he becomes.


Start keying on him a little. He's been playing some damn good defense. Much better than the beginning of the season, and a whole world better than last year.

[sasaint]

Start keying on him a little. He's been playing some damn good defense. Much better than the beginning of the season, and a whole world better than last year.

Exactly. He is not out of position. He isn't reaching to try to overcome poor defensive position. He is "playing defense with his feet" as we used to say.

[ElNono]

I would give him a similar deal Danny received, (4/40, IIRC)... it would be relatively cheap in today's NBA numbers, and despite the age and whatever, I think the team hasn't found his ceiling yet. He has room to grow, IMO, even just on familiarity with the league, refs, etc.

[Mikeanaro]

Hopefully he will get enough to have 4 more daughters and play happy for the Spurs.

[MaNu4Tres]

Start keying on him a little. He's been playing some damn good defense. Much better than the beginning of the season, and a whole world better than last year.

Agreed.

He's been the most solid wing off the bench in recent weeks, maybe months. The discipline and confidence in his game has been evident. Love his defense and his calm,smarter decisions on offense.

[jermaine]

Whatever he gets, I'm sure It'll be a dream like for him. To go from having to pay your way into a camp invite, to let's say 4yr/20mil... 3rd yr P.O... How can he beat that!?!

[GSH]

Whatever he gets, I'm sure It'll be a dream like for him. To go from having to pay your way into a camp invite, to let's say 4yr/20mil... 3rd yr P.O... How can he beat that!?!

Spurs will have the non-taxpayer MLE available. (That much, I think, I've got right. I've whiffed several times lately. :lol) With the annual 4.5% raises, a full MLE contract should be about 4 yr/24M. Unless Simmons gets injured like Patty, or takes a serious step backwards, I don't see Simmons getting less than that. I'd look to that as his floor. Then we see if some scrub team comes calling with some huge offer. There's always a chance that he continues to improve and expand his role before the end of the season, and make a bigger contract almost automatic. People should remember, though, that when Danny got his contract he was a solid, regular starter. Simmons isn't.

I don't think for a minute that Simmons should take less just to stay here. This one contract changes his life from here on out. I think getting a too-large contract would be the worst thing that could happen to his basketball career, but he would have the luxury of being set for life while he thinks about what he wants to do when he grows up.

[TheDoctor]

Hopefully he will get enough to have 4 more daughters and play happy for the Spurs.
Cold facts.

[wildbill2u]

How much will he get? Depends on how many ladies want to know if he is as good an athlete in bed as on the court.

[GSH]

How much will he get? Depends on how many ladies want to know if he is as good an athlete in bed as on the court.


That was my first thought, Bill.



I was gonna say he'll get all he wants, and 2-3 at a time. But you guys are talking about money.

[Splits]

https://blog-blogmediainc.netdna-ssl.com/upload/SportsBlogcom/2702154/0022738001436217344_filepicker.jpg

[Spurtacular]

Losing Simmons wouldn't be a big loss, tbh. He's good for highlight reels; but that doesn't make him an above average player.

[GSH]

Losing Simmons wouldn't be a big loss, tbh. He's good for highlight reels; but that doesn't make him an above average player.


SMDH.

Simmons is making $874K this year. He's earning 18 minutes on one of the best teams in the league. He's worth a hell of a lot more than he's getting paid. Next year he will get paid more. If he gets offered too much, the Spurs will let him go.

No, he's not irreplaceable. What are there... maybe 10 irreplaceable players in the league? Beyond that, there are guys who are good values, and guys who are a good fit for the team they're on. Right now, Simmons is both. Next year he won't be a bargain, but he'll still have a lot of knowledge of this system, and of the other players. If the price is reasonable, the Spurs will keep him for sure. If he gets a stupid offer, they will wish him well and move on.

[spursistan]

He's the Spurs Free Agen I'm most confident he'll be gone..he's played himself out of (non-garbage time) rotation already..Don't think he'll ever develop any consistency in his style of play, and the lack of shooting is going to kill short his career in this league..

[DAF86]

That first game against the Warriors will probably get him a couple millions more than what he's really worth, tbh.

[spursistan]

That first game against the Warriors will probably get him a couple millions more than what he's really worth, tbh.Don't think he will get more than 3 years/15 millions..

[kaji157]

Vet Min

[Hoops Czar]

Vet Min

Who knows but, whatever team signs him will be trying to unload him by the trade deadline.

[SAGirl]

That first game against the Warriors will probably get him a couple millions more than what he's really worth, tbh.
I am hoping he can have 1 or 2 games like that in the playoffs.... that way he gets himself paid and helps the Spurs along the way. I think it was really that game that got him in the rising star game bc he's hasn't had another like it and has gone missing offensively most of the time.

He's a good defender and energy player, certainly has some positives but it would be a mistake to overpay for him. A few good games in the playoffs can entice some team though. You only have to look at the Pelicans, Brooklyn, even the Magic. There are so many teams with bad perimeter wings... specially bench ones. He will get paid IMO. Since early season I said playoff performance matters for him.

[313]

I was gonna say he'll get all he wants, and 2-3 at a time. But you guys are talking about money.
At his age, and already having kids, I feel like he's probably passed that stage tbh

[SAGirl]

He's the Spurs Free Agen I'm most confident he'll be gone..he's played himself out of (non-garbage time) rotation already..Don't think he'll ever develop any consistency in his style of play, and the lack of shooting is going to kill short his career in this league..
It's a good prediction if his confidence shooting is gone. I wish him the best. He's had an inspiring story. I still think a good playoff run will get him paid. For some reason I wouldn't underestimate the underdog. When he plays with that chip on his shoulder he's a different guy.

I hate to say this but maybe he's become complacent bc he's made the rotation? If that were the case it would be too early to get the Diaw syndrome. What do you think?

[SAGirl]

And actually bc his future career in the league remains murky... I'd advise him to go for however much he can get like Boban.