Article: Estimating Tre Jones' Next Contract

[timvp]

https://www.spurstalk.com/tre-jones-spurs-contract/

[slick'81]

Definitely no problem at 11 a year

[Ariel]

When I’ve asked scouts and capologists to estimate Jones’ next contract, most opinions land somewhere in the $40 million over four years ballpark. However, a recent article by John Hollinger discussed the possibility of Jones signing a four-year, $70 million contract.

Looking at what comparable players received last summer, it’s safe to say Jones lands somewhere between what his big brother Tyus Jones got from the Memphis Grizzlies ($29 million over two years) and what Delon Wright got from the Washington Wizards ($16 million over two years).
That Hollinger number is just crazy, no way he gets more than Tyus. He's a future backup, which is nice to have but you can replace him fairly cheap. 10M per year sounds more like it and even then, 4 years also seems like a lot, I'd do 3 years 30M otherwise just let him walk and send a couple second rounders to Washington for Tyus and be done with it.

[Mugen]

If my man Tre gets 4yrs/70mil, I would wish him a huge congrats and good luck with his new team :lol

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

4/40 seems a little bit on the expensive side for a projected backup to me but with the rising cap who knows. Can’t see another team giving him that much with so many PGs around the league nowadays. Spurs will probably take care of him, though, especially since Pop likes him as a big part of the team culture, not just a future back up. A frontloaded deal would be awesome, it won’t affect the cap space for this summer and his cap hold is tiny.

[DAF86]

I'm a little outdated on contract negotiations but isn't 10 millions per year way too much for a backup PG?

Tre won't get many suitors, if any, I don't know why the Spurs should outbid themselves. I don't see why Tre would be getting more than those 5.2 millions of the qualyfing offer, tbh.

[Chinook]

$45M/3 after the Spurs use their cap space is my guess.

[spurraider21]

I wouldn’t want him at 10 per. If he were a FA from another team i can’t imagine us wanting to sign him to that kind of money. RFA tender. If he wants 10 per I’d only consider it on a 2 year deal with a club option tbh. I think he's like a 3/21 type player tbh. absolutely dont see good teams thinking "this guy is worth using all or most of our MLE on"

[BatManu20]

Anything over $12-$13M/per is too much imo. Love Tre and I know Pop wants him back, but he’s an undersized, backup PG who’s still a poor 3-Point shooter. Hopefully the market is dry and he winds up back in San Antone though cause we need him given our PG situation.

[Teamduncan21]

I'm a little outdated on contract negotiations but isn't 10 millions per year way too much for a backup PG?

Tre won't get many suitors, if any, I don't know why the Spurs should outbid themselves. I don't see why Tre would be getting more than those 5.2 millions of the qualyfing offer, tbh.

The cap has ballooned lately. 10m is mid level give or take.

[Ariel]

$45M/3 after the Spurs use their cap space is my guess.
Tyus Jones didn't get that, which team is going to give Tre that much when he can't shoot from 3? Also, if the Spurs are going to overpay to not disrupt team chemistry, make it a 2 year deal, team option 3rd, or you might be shooting yourself in the foot for '25 free agency (the Spurs could be big time players).

[Bruno]

A reason for Spurs to not sign Tre Jones to an extension would be to maximize cap space. His cap hold will be his qualifying offer of $5.2M which is less than what would have been the first year of his extension.

There is the whole "patience" talk from Spurs which would suggest a quiet off-season but who knows...

[BatManu20]

3-year deal with a club option on the 3rd should be fine. 2025 FA market is where the Spurs might get lucky and land a big fish.

[Chinook]

Tyus Jones didn't get that, which team is going to give Tre that much when he can't shoot from 3? Also, if the Spurs are going to overpay to not disrupt team chemistry, make it a 2 year deal, team option 3rd, or you might be shooting yourself in the foot for '25 free agency (the Spurs could be big time players).

Tyus wasn't the starter and signed his contract years ago. Jones may be a backup, but he's not now. The team doesn't have a ton of leverage on him. Completely different situation than Tyus, who was at best in a position like Zach Collins is now.

[Ariel]

Tyus wasn't the starter and signed his contract years ago.
Tyus signed his contract less than a year ago and he had Ja Morant ahead of him, whereas Tre was fighting for minutes with rookie Blake Wesley and a bunch of guys out of position. Those are not small details.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

Definitely no problem at 11 a year

Agreed. For a sturdy rotation player that's a no-brainer number.

[CGD]

Two birds one stone:
(1) re-sign Tre
(2) front load his deal so the spurs get closer to the floor

[exstatic]

I'm a little outdated on contract negotiations but isn't 10 millions per year way too much for a backup PG?

Tre won't get many suitors, if any, I don't know why the Spurs should outbid themselves. I don't see why Tre would be getting more than those 5.2 millions of the qualyfing offer, tbh.

Mid level this year (league average salary) is $12.4M.

[CGD]

A reason for Spurs to not sign Tre Jones to an extension would be to maximize cap space. His cap hold will be his qualifying offer of $5.2M which is less than what would have been the first year of his extension.

There is the whole "patience" talk from Spurs which would suggest a quiet off-season but who knows...

Wondered if they told him that, or if Tre wanted to bet on himself. My understanding is that his extension number was lower than perhaps what he could get in restricted free agency. Who knows.

[Chinook]

Tyus signed his contract less than a year ago and he had Ja Morant ahead of him, whereas Tre was fighting for minutes with rookie Blake Wesley and a bunch of guys out of position. Those are not small details.

Tre wasn't fighting for minutes with anyone. That's dishonestly portraying the situation. Tre is a starter and is going to ask for a starter's salary. Tyus signed knowing he was a backup. There was no talk of Wesley taking the nod. If the Spurs bring in a capable PG, the leverage calculation will change. But for now, the Spurs have no business asking him to be paid like they don't value him while they apparently value him enough to not get someone better.

And I want them to get someone better or at least another guy who could start like Micic. I want them to use cap and assets to attack their weaknesses. But if they "like what they have" then they're going to have to pay up for it.

[Ariel]

Tre wasn't fighting for minutes with anyone. That's dishonestly portraying the situation.
Listen, you can disagree with me all you want, but you seem to have a habit of calling people dishonest (or their portrayal of a given situation) when you don't agree with their takes (I can search you if you want proof), and if anything that description fits your comment that conveniently disregarded the circumstances under which each one was starting or not. So before making such a comment, look inwards and check if you're not projecting.

[spurraider21]

Mid level this year (league average salary) is $12.4M.
how often are teams burning all or nearly all of their MLE on a guy projected to be their backup PG?

[MultiTroll]

Move on for anything over 6 mil for 2 years.
Trying to build a Championship here not more Pops Pets bullshit.

"That said, the news for Jones wasn’t all positive last season. He shot only 28.5% from three-point range despite rarely being defended beyond the arc. While he passed the ball well in transition, his halfcourt playmaking remained rudimentary at best. Though his assist rate was up, his turnover rate was up even more.
Jones also had trouble finishing in the paint. Coming off of a season in which he hit half of his shots between three and ten feet, Jones shot only 38.5% from that range last season. Specifically, his floaters and runners weren’t nearly as dependable. As a result, his two-point percentage decreased from 54.2% to 50.6%."

Could easily find a replacement who could do that for far less. Prolly even the right rookie.

[lmbebo]

Hope he comes back, but at a good salary.

[RC_Drunkford]

10 per year is the absolute max and I hope it's less than that

[John B]

Tyus is getting about 14.5 a year for two years. I think Tre gets the same.

[DAF86]

The cap has ballooned lately. 10m is mid level give or take.


Mid level this year (league average salary) is $12.4M.

Well, I don't think Tre is mid level, tbh. I would just wait and see if any team offers him something. I don't see teams showing much interest, tbh. In the scenario he doesn't get any offer (I don't know if that's realistic), what's the least the Spurs can re-sign him for, those 5.2 millions?

[exstatic]

how often are teams burning all or nearly all of their MLE on a guy projected to be their backup PG?

You’re not asking the right question. Yes, I would pay a rotation player a below average salary.

[DAF86]

Tyus wasn't the starter and signed his contract years ago. Jones may be a backup, but he's not now. The team doesn't have a ton of leverage on him. Completely different situation than Tyus, who was at best in a position like Zach Collins is now.

No leverage needed, tbh. Just wait and see what kind of offers (if any) Tre gets and then just analyze if you're willing to match that or not. I really don't see an undersize, non-shooting, below average playmaker getting much interest in today's NBA, tbh. You are better off taking a chance on any non-drafted guy.

[Chinook]

Listen, you can disagree with me all you want, but you seem to have a habit of calling people dishonest (or their portrayal of a given situation) when you don't agree with their takes (I can search you if you want proof), and if anything that description fits your comment that conveniently disregarded the circumstances under which each one was starting or not. So before making such a comment, look inwards and check if you're not projecting.

It's dishonest to portray Tre as fighting for minutes with Wesley. It just is. It doesn't matter if me saying that offends you. I didn't say you were a bad person or disingenuous poster. But your comment was a dishonest way of phrasing a situation in an attempt to dismiss my argument for why Tre can ask for more money than Tyus got. Memphis wasn't going to give Tyus a big deal to back up their superstar. The Spurs may have a hard time trying to convince their starting PG to take backup money if they don't intend to start anyone over him.

You're riding with the idea if the Spurs should compare Tre to other guards in terms of skills and just sign Tre to whatever value matches that. But that's not how it works. Tre's representation is going to try to get him as much as they can, and the Spurs will have to balance out giving him enough money with the risk of losing him, or at least alienating him if they use their RoFR to suppress offers that might at least give him a chance to go to a better situation. I think they should take that chance, but I suspect they'll pay him low-end starter money on a shorter deal. That's not $10 Million a year or less in today's NBA. If they get him for less then I'll be wrong, but I won't be sad.

In general, I tend to make it clear when I'm talking about a person or a person's point. I don't have an issue with you and think you're a fine poster. I do not apologize for criticizing your comparison. I do apologize that it came off as a personal attack. That was not my intention. I should've put more nuance into it, but I'm on my phone and didn't want to type that out.

[DAF86]

It's dishonest to portray Tre as fighting for minutes with Wesley. It just is. It doesn't matter if me saying that offends you. I didn't say you were a bad person or disingenuous poster. But your comment was a dishonest way of phrasing a situation in an attempt to dismiss my argument for why Tre can ask for more money than Tyus got. Memphis wasn't going to give Tyus a big deal to back up their superstar. The Spurs may have a hard time trying to convince their starting PG to take backup money if they don't intend to start anyone over him.

You're riding with the idea if the Spurs should compare Tre to other guards in terms of skills and just sign Tre to whatever value matches that. But that's not how it works. Tre's representation is going to try to get him as much as they can, and the Spurs will have to balance out giving him enough money with the risk of losing him, or at least alienating him if they use their RoFR to suppress offers that might at least give him a chance to go to a better situation. I think they should take that chance, but I suspect they'll pay him low-end starter money on a shorter deal. That's not $10 Million a year or less in today's NBA. If they get him for less then I'll be wrong, but I won't be sad.

In general, I tend to make it clear when I'm talking about a person or a person's point. I don't have an issue with you and think you're a fine poster. I do not apologize for criticizing your comparison. I do apologize that it came off as a personal attack. That was not my intention. I should've put more nuance into it, but I'm on my phone and didn't want to type that out.

There's really no risk in losing Tre fucking Jones, tbh. Like non at all. :lol

I know Pop might want to retain him because of continuity and locker room presence and blah, blah, but the kid is just extremely limited at basketball. There's no scenario where he's getting an offer of 10 millions per year, but if any team is crazy enough to do it, then you just let him walk and replace him with any other dime a dozen backup PG.

[DAF86]

For real folks, we are talking about Tre Jones. C'mon now. :lol

[LeBowen]

Yeah, he seems like a great kid and is a solid player, but his ceiling is really low due to lack of both size and range.

I'd offer him 32/4 at the most. Maybe some bonuses if he improves his shot.

[spurraider21]

You’re not asking the right question. Yes, I would pay a rotation player a below average salary.
"below average salary" could mean a lot of things. it could mean 10 mil per year. it could mean 3. so to justify a big contract, yeah you could frame it that way. i mean yes, i'd also be glad to pay Tre a below average salary. but not the same below average salary that you would

average salary figures are also heavily skewed by the monster players on huge contracts. the median nba salary, on the other hand, is right around 4 mil per year.

for a guy who is going to be, what the 7th/8th best player on his team at his highest aspiration, he'd be the median player on the club

[PrimeMinister]

doesn't really have an obvious suitor with cap space that will overpay.... unless they try to get his brother or maybe monte morris via trade he's coming back. low risk contract for a rotation player who will play whatever role the team needs without complaint depending on what other players might pass him up in coming seasons.

[slick'81]

Still a helluva 2nd pick for sa

[spurraider21]

Still a helluva 2nd pick for sa
oh, definitely

even if we let him walk id say that was a successful pick. our only 2nd rounder to be a rotation player since the 2009 draft when we took blair/nando

[spurraider21]

i dno man, if Tre Jones looked like exactly the same player, but was just coming off his rookie deal with another team, say, Washington... would we really be going into this offseason thinking "yeah lets go get that guy for 4/40 right now, thats what our team needs"?

i dont see it

[JPB]

Tre wasn't fighting for minutes with anyone. That's dishonestly portraying the situation. Tre is a starter and is going to ask for a starter's salary. Tyus signed knowing he was a backup. There was no talk of Wesley taking the nod. If the Spurs bring in a capable PG, the leverage calculation will change. But for now, the Spurs have no business asking him to be paid like they don't value him while they apparently value him enough to not get someone better.

And I want them to get someone better or at least another guy who could start like Micic. I want them to use cap and assets to attack their weaknesses. But if they "like what they have" then they're going to have to pay up for it.

Tre isn't a starter in the NBA in a vacuum and he wouldn't be for the length of whatever contract he would sign with the spurs. He's certainly not your starting PG in a competitive, mush less a contending team and might not even be next season if the spurs pick up a vet PG this summer (who knows?)...

Spurs should defintiely play the patience game here and let things play out since I really don't believe he impressed many people in the NBA so far as a PG who can't shoot the 3 and I'm not sure may people would be ready to give him more than MLE money if at all... Anything over 10M is overpaying for the spurs. If Tre wants to stay, I wouldn't offer him more than a 3year/24-26M contract. just sign the qualifying offer and see what happens, over 10M/year, let him walk.

[DAF86]

i dno man, if Tre Jones looked like exactly the same player, but was just coming off his rookie deal with another team, say, Washington... would we really be going into this offseason thinking "yeah lets go get that guy for 4/40 right now, thats what our team needs"?

i dont see it

Of course not, that's why I found this thread so crazy. I thought I was way off on contract values, but no, folks are just overvaluing the heck out of Jones, starting from timvp.

[Degoat]

I like Tre Jones, he’s solid. What I don’t like is that Graham and Wesley are the only other PG options behind him. I guess Branham & Sochan can play some spot minutes at PG

[slick'81]

i dno man, if Tre Jones looked like exactly the same player, but was just coming off his rookie deal with another team, say, Washington... would we really be going into this offseason thinking "yeah lets go get that guy for 4/40 right now, thats what our team needs"?

i dont see it

yea,we're entering patty mills moneys

[spurraider21]

I like Tre Jones, he’s solid. What I don’t like is that Graham and Wesley are the only other PG options behind him. I guess Branham & Sochan can play some spot minutes at PG
since we didnt get one in the draft, i think the best case scenario is a 1 year Lowry rental if miami is looking to shed salary, either in general or as part of a potential Lillard deal. having just graham/wesley as the pure point guards on the roster does suck but i dont think you go there and overpay a whatever player like Tre Jones in response to that

[Extra Stout]

For real folks, we are talking about Tre Jones. C'mon now. :lol
you can’t put a price tag on that corporate knowledge. it’s priceless.

[DAF86]

you can’t put a price tag on that corporate knowledge. it’s priceless.

I don't know if sarcastic but just in case, what corporate knowledge? 2nd worst record in the league corporate knowledge? That corporate knowledge? :lol

[MultiTroll]

No Sniffers, just NO!
We're moving fwd with Championship pursuits.
Here's what Pops Pets gets you:

https://clips.clippit.tv/lwxqyx/360.mp4

Spurs don't foul for some dumb reason in the final seconds of Game 7 loss to Nuggets (thecomeback.com) (https://thecomeback.com/nba/spurs-dont-foul-for-some-dumb-reason-in-the-final-seconds-of-game-7-loss-to-nuggets.html)

[timvp]

Of course not, that's why I found this thread so crazy. I thought I was way off on contract values, but no, folks are just overvaluing the heck out of Jones, starting from timvp.

We'll see what he ends up getting. I think some of the disconnect when talking salaries is that the salary cap is growing so quickly that it messes with the frame of reference. The salary cap is twice what it was in 2014 and is all but guaranteed to grow at a compounded rate of 10% for the foreseeable future. To put this back into Spurs contending era terms, the contract options I laid out for Jones has less impact on today's cap than the 4-year, $14 million Matt Bonner signed back in 2010. It's difficult to visualize but a $40 million contract is 2023 is equivalent to like a $12 million contract in 2010 when you factor in cap inflation, expected cap growth and the differences in the CBA from then to now.

[Seventyniner]

It's dishonest to portray Tre as fighting for minutes with Wesley. It just is. It doesn't matter if me saying that offends you. I didn't say you were a bad person or disingenuous poster. But your comment was a dishonest way of phrasing a situation in an attempt to dismiss my argument for why Tre can ask for more money than Tyus got. Memphis wasn't going to give Tyus a big deal to back up their superstar. The Spurs may have a hard time trying to convince their starting PG to take backup money if they don't intend to start anyone over him.

You're riding with the idea if the Spurs should compare Tre to other guards in terms of skills and just sign Tre to whatever value matches that. But that's not how it works. Tre's representation is going to try to get him as much as they can, and the Spurs will have to balance out giving him enough money with the risk of losing him, or at least alienating him if they use their RoFR to suppress offers that might at least give him a chance to go to a better situation. I think they should take that chance, but I suspect they'll pay him low-end starter money on a shorter deal. That's not $10 Million a year or less in today's NBA. If they get him for less then I'll be wrong, but I won't be sad.

I think this idea that Tre will want to be paid like a starter is exactly why the Spurs will let him go to restricted free agency. The teams with cap space aren't going to be paying him like a starter if they sign him, saving the Spurs from having to do so.

[Seventyniner]

We'll see what he ends up getting. I think some of the disconnect when talking salaries is that the salary cap is growing so quickly that it messes with the frame of reference. The salary cap is twice what it was in 2014 and is all but guaranteed to grow at a compounded rate of 10% for the foreseeable future. To put this back into Spurs contending era terms, the contract options I laid out for Jones has less impact on today's cap than the 4-year, $14 million Matt Bonner signed back in 2010. It's difficult to visualize but a $40 million contract is 2023 is equivalent to like a $12 million contract in 2010 when you factor in cap inflation, expected cap growth and the differences in the CBA from then to now.

It's very easy to think of flat dollar amounts when comparing contracts in different years, let alone eras, but % of the cap used is a far better metric.

Even that isn't as useful now, because as you point out the cap will be going up 10% each year for the next several years. Even if Tre gets a flat 4/44 deal, the cap will be almost 50% higher in 2027 as it is now (10% per year compounded 4 times).

[Extra Stout]

I don't know if sarcastic but just in case, what corporate knowledge? 2nd worst record in the league corporate knowledge? That corporate knowledge? :lol
he put his heart and soul into the tank. he would run through a wall for this team. the spurs aren’t the kind of organization that would do that to their win shares leader. what would that say to future second round picks? he’ll play so much better next to wemby.

[spurraider21]

We'll see what he ends up getting. I think some of the disconnect when talking salaries is that the salary cap is growing so quickly that it messes with the frame of reference. The salary cap is twice what it was in 2014 and is all but guaranteed to grow at a compounded rate of 10% for the foreseeable future. To put this back into Spurs contending era terms, the contract options I laid out for Jones has less impact on today's cap than the 4-year, $14 million Matt Bonner signed back in 2010. It's difficult to visualize but a $40 million contract is 2023 is equivalent to like a $12 million contract in 2010 when you factor in cap inflation, expected cap growth and the differences in the CBA from then to now.
bonner should have been amnestied tbh

but he did randomly start in that big playoff game against OKC :lol

[timvp]

Considering Jones' qualifying offer of $5.2 million, what's the minimum he would sign for as opposed to just signing the QO and becoming an unrestricted free agent next summer? His agent knows that eyes will be on the Spurs this year due to Wemby, which theoretically bumps up what Jones could get on the open market next summer. Also, the cap is going up another 10%.

In a situation that no team comes calling for Jones, would he even be willing to sign a 2-year, $16 million contract a la Delon Wright? I mean, maybe ... but probably not. Unless Jones completely flops (and he doesn't really have the type of game that can flop too dramatically), his agent has to confident that he could make up that $11 million difference by just taking the QO and waiting until Jones is unrestricted.

We'll see. From San Antonio's perspective, I like the idea of locking Jones up in a declining contract in an environment where the salary cap is rising at a compounding 10% clip. But even if it comes down to just Jones playing on his $5.2 QO, that's not bad news for the Spurs. Jones has value but backup point guards are replaceable.

I guess worse case scenario is Jones plays on the QO and then proves to be the perfect PG for Wemby ... and then you'd be stuck either paying him Hollinger's $70 million next summer ($77 million with inflation) or letting him walk.

[DPG21920]

That’s not a problem ^ if he proves he’s worth it then that it great news and you pay him just like you would pay anyone you think IS the PG for Wemby moving forward.

Spurs should only sign Tre, IMO, if its a very good no risk value like 10M or less per year

[JPB]

I agree with that, we're seeing too many bad contracts in the NBA that you do'nt want spurs to sign one. That wouldn't be a dramatically bad one but it's about global discipline and building your roster the right way... Once you overpay for one, you set a standard and a precedent that other players and their agents are watching... I don't know where Hollinger comes from with those numbers, and if he's just helping Tre's agent for whatever reason, but 4/70 for Tre is just not good business.

[jesterbobman]

The 4 year 40m structure is perfectly fine.
You need competent depth, and Tre Jones is a decent player, albeit one with warts that were particularly prevalent with the lack of shooting at other positions. He'll probably never get to be a high level starter, but competent backup is useful and an important piece to have. Ideally he gets beaten out by Wesley learning to shoot / finish, but that's not close now. At that level, he's not really going to stop you going after free agents either.

I'd also guess that Tre wants money confirmed now, rather than QO and waiting for the 2024 FA - He's had three years on a (relative for the NBA) low money deal, getting locked in generational wealth is a decent move for him.

[timvp]

That’s not a problem ^ if he proves he’s worth it then that it great news and you pay him just like you would pay anyone you think IS the PG for Wemby moving forward.

It'd be kinda bad in the scenario where the Spurs balk at giving him $40 million over four years this summer ... only to be be forced to pay him $82 million over five years.

[Extra Stout]

It'd be kinda bad in the scenario where the Spurs balk at giving him $40 million over four years this summer ... only to be be forced to pay him $82 million over five years.
Having Tre Jones improve to the point where he’s worth $82 million over 5 years sounds like a great problem to have.

[Seventyniner]

Having Tre Jones improve to the point where he’s worth $82 million over 5 years sounds like a great problem to have.

I agree. The Spurs would only even consider paying that much if Tre improves immensely. The cap sheet next summer will still be quite clean even if the Spurs use all their cap space this summer (on multi-year deals) because McDermott and Birch will roll off, so the Spurs could pursue a PG in free agency.

[CGD]

40/4 would be tremendous value. I’d toss him a few additional incentives to allow for the front loading. I think comes in higher though

[TD 21]

In a league that's quietly phasing out small guards and non shooters (outside of rim running/protecting bigs), the notion of giving one 4 years is insane. Anything more than 2 fully guaranteed (3rd can be partial or t/o) is too much.


only to be be forced to pay him $82 million over five years.

Considering there's no other team where Jones would be gifted the opportunity he has been here and they're flush with cap space and draft capital, he has virtually no leverage and needs the Spurs far more than they need him.

They should never be "forced" into paying him period and if his representation even thinks about playing hardball, they shouldn't hesitate to move on.

[spurraider21]

people on this forum have talked about wanting to absorb contracts in exchange for draft capital yet we are apparently on the verge of just walking into a bad contract for a player with minimal impact

[MultiTroll]

It'd be kinda bad in the scenario where the Spurs balk at giving him $40 million over four years this summer ... only to be be forced to pay him $82 million over five years.
And if they pay him 40/4 and he shows he still at 27% treys etc etc and the Spurs find a far better option in the next year or so you just got jammed for 4 years as the team is trying to grow to Champ stature with Wemby.

Let him test the RFA market. If he has some leaps and bounds improvement for one year and earns a raise, so be it.
I'm not putting in a bunch of chips on a meh very maybe hand. Seems like there would be tons of other options available for the same or even less.

[MannyIsGod]

People have misunderstood salaries for quite some time on this forum because they are locked into a very static idea of what the average salary is.

I don't really have a problem with a 4 year 40 million dollar figure for Tre, but I also find some of the arguments in this thread ridiculous. I don't GAF that Tre was a starter last year and while his agent may push that narrative heavily (since that's his job) it's easy AF to push back and point out that 1) it was a largely awful team and 2) his stats are really fucking pedestrian as it is. Tre may have started a lot last year, but in no way should he be considered a starter type of player. He's a backup caliber PG and sometimes these players start for one reason or another (like tanking) but that doesn't mean they get to magically use that fact in negotiations without anyone easily pushing back against it.

Definitely prefer a shorter term contract for him, but its not like his game is going to fall of a cliff so its whatever. I have a hard time seeing scenarios where he's worse than what he is now in the future, and 4/40 is about the right amount for a good backup PG.

If Tre Jones is our starting PG on day 1 then we have a problem, though.

[DPG21920]

It'd be kinda bad in the scenario where the Spurs balk at giving him $40 million over four years this summer ... only to be be forced to pay him $82 million over five years.

I disagree. Sure in hindsight on value? But if he’s truly that good then it’s nothing. Spurs want to be good and if he’s THAT good it would be a massive turn of events and Sa was going to pay someone that money anyways as they look to leap is all I’m saying.

I have no problems paying really good players that we know are perfect fits along side Wemby. I have an issue with gambling on that and not being cautious to avoid bad deals on guys that don’t move needle at this point with the advantage Sa has right now

[tonight...you]

I disagree. Sure in hindsight on value? But if he’s truly that good then it’s nothing. Spurs want to be good and if he’s THAT good it would be a massive turn of events and Sa was going to pay someone that money anyways as they look to leap is all I’m saying.

I have no problems paying really good players that we know are perfect fits along side Wemby. I have an issue with gambling on that and not being cautious to avoid bad deals on guys that don’t move needle at this point with the advantage Sa has right now
Seems like you're on Wright's side who is preaching patience and seeing who fits with who well for next year while allowing Jones to hit RFA to properly gauge his value throughout the league.
I see not a lot of need to stress unless they do something uncharacteristic to what he's been saying/doing.

[DAF86]

Yeah, there's literally no scenario where it makes sense for the Spurs to outbid themselves on a player that probably isn't going to attract much interest from opposing teams. Even 4/40 seems too high for my taste. Nobody's gonna come knocking on the door for an undersized PG that can't shoot.

[CGD]

Yeah, there's literally no scenario where it makes sense for the Spurs to outbid themselves on a player that probably isn't going to attract much interest from opposing teams. Even 4/40 seems too high for my taste. Nobody's gonna come knocking on the door for an undersized PG that can't shoot.

^ I’m not so sure. He would be a nice get for a contender with the MLE to use looking for back up pg. For example, he would perfect on the Suns or Nuggets.

[Uriel]

Why not just sign Dejounte Murray next summer?

[MultiTroll]

^ I’m not so sure. He would be a nice get for a contender with the MLE to use looking for back up pg. For example, he would perfect on the Suns or Nuggets.
Then you take that chance.
If Tre signs with Suns or Nuggets you easily replace him with a player who can do just as much as him for probably half the cost.
Certainly half the years.

[MultiTroll]

Why not just sign Dejounte Murray next summer?
With over half of his salary being paid by what would be going to Tre, that would be SWEET!
And for only the last year of DJs remaining contract. Double sweet.

[Mugen]

2yr/25-30mil sounds fine to me for Tre. Tack on a team option for the 3rd year if you want. The '25 free agency class is the one they should circle tbh.

[RC_Drunkford]

that's way too much. Monte Morris earns 9.8 million. 25-30/2 would be Tyus Jones money and Tyus is way better than Tre

[KobesAchilles]

Why tf would you sign him for 4 years? It makes zero sense. Who signs back up point guards to 4 year deals when they are small and can’t shoot? You offer him a 2 year deal 16 million next year. Have him play out his QO. He hasn’t earned real money yet and if contract year Danny was a thing then I want to see contract year Tre. 4 fucking years :lol

Nobody is going to offer him 4 years $82 million next year. We would have to make noise in the playoffs, which we won’t with this current roster, or his overrated ass would have to play on the Lakers. I mean seriously he would have to average 15 and 10 to get that kinda contract with remarkable improvement on his shooting. Both inside and outside the paint. It’s not happening. Realistically, what team is going to pay him 10 million a year for 4 years? And if they do THEN you can decide if you want to match it

[timtonymanu]

"12:01 am Spurs sign Tre Jones to 4 yr/70 million contract.

I hope it's not another 50 Mills situation. This kid better show more improvement if he's gonna make that kind of money. I know the Spurs need a PG and contracts are more expensive now but I don't think he's worth that much.

[K...]

Why tf would you sign him for 4 years? It makes zero sense. Who signs back up point guards to 4 year deals when they are small and can’t shoot? You offer him a 2 year deal 16 million next year. Have him play out his QO. He hasn’t earned real money yet and if contract year Danny was a thing then I want to see contract year Tre. 4 fucking years :lol

Nobody is going to offer him 4 years $82 million next year. We would have to make noise in the playoffs, which we won’t with this current roster, or his overrated ass would have to play on the Lakers. I mean seriously he would have to average 15 and 10 to get that kinda contract with remarkable improvement on his shooting. Both inside and outside the paint. It’s not happening. Realistically, what team is going to pay him 10 million a year for 4 years? And if they do THEN you can decide if you want to match it

one, trade off for total payment. more years less total, especially with rising cap, two: trade value. Jones is going get shine with wemby and people might bight on him being the next surefire starter while the spurs might have a better or cheaper prospect by then.

[TrainOfThought5]

Why not just sign Dejounte Murray next summer?

â​ he’s got good defense, a good shot, knows the system, and good with social media. No Brainer.

[objective]

Tyus signed his contract less than a year ago and he had Ja Morant ahead of him, whereas Tre was fighting for minutes with rookie Blake Wesley and a bunch of guys out of position. Those are not small details.

At the start of the year I would say that he was on his way to losing his starting job by the end of the year to Primo

In their first 4 games Tre did average 29 minutes compared to Primo's 23 but they were equal in assists. And Primo was shooting like garbage and not being aggressive looking for a shot. It's easy for me to imagine that if Primo had behaved and turned his shooting around he would have become the starter.

[poopbox]

Spurs going to dust off patty old contract and give it to tre :depressed

We can only find solace in the fact that its not bryn forbes:cry

[TD 21]

^ I’m not so sure. He would be a nice get for a contender with the MLE to use looking for back up pg. For example, he would perfect on the Suns or Nuggets.

Nah, non superstar/star small guards are the new immobile non superstar/star big, in that they're being played off the floor in the playoffs. Non shooters continue to be too, so he's a double whammy.



that's way too much. Monte Morris earns 9.8 million. 25-30/2 would be Tyus Jones money and Tyus is way better than Tre

Can't compare contracts signed under a different salary cap. When Morris and Tyus are up next off season, they'll leapfrog him again.

[rankingtear]

I am fine with 12 mil for 3 years. I believe you can build a top tier bench around his skills. He is more dynamic than Monte or Tyus. It is better than paying traditional sixth men 25 million, you save 13 million with the same output.

[tmtcsc]

Tre is an undersized PG worth 6-8 million per year at most & that's about it. He was serviceable on a bad team last year. 10-11 per year is ridiculous. Nothing special.

[sfernald]

If you can’t get him at a low to reasonable price, release him and pick another, anyone else pls.

[Dejounte]

Justified or not, the Spurs might end up paying Tre for more than just his contributions on the court. If Tre is the guy who keeps Wemby happy (or if it helps develop Wemby’s character) because of his leadership skills in the locker room, then it’s worth it IMO. Tre has been praised for his community service work and almost won an award for it last season.

In the end, that’s how every dollar will be spent from this point forward— keeping Wemby happy + molding him into a good person (Wemby being a good person = doesn’t break loyalty to the Spurs in the future).

[RC_Drunkford]

oh please no more "he's a nice guy" contracts. We've had enough of those. How about paying players for their on court skills?

[Ice009]

I really like Tre are a person, but I'm not willing to pay him big money just yet. He has to prove he can be a good player on a good (playoff bound) team before I'd give him anywhere near or over 10M+ per season.

[Dejounte]

oh please no more "he's a nice guy" contracts. We've had enough of those. How about paying players for their on court skills?

If being a nice guy keeps Wemby, yes. If signing a nice guy for the sake of just signing a nice guy, then no. Did you read the part where I said that this might help keep Wemby? For the record, I don’t think the Spurs will overpay Tre. Their actions for the past couple years have been to reach and maintain maximum flexibility. They might find a balance here between paying him more than what the average fan desires and just about right (between market price and enough cap flexibility). Hugely overpaying Tre would be out of the norm from what we’ve come to expect of the Spurs lately, so I think folks are getting too worried for no reason, IMO.

[Dejounte]

Btw, how would people react if Wemby asked the Spurs to sign one of his homies? This would be no different, except that it’s on the Spurs’ terms instead of Wemby’s tbh. And that’s taking away a lot of credit from Tre… he’s not a total bum.

[RC_Drunkford]

Wembanyama is on a 4-year contract. I don’t think he will ask to be traded if the Spurs don’t bring back Tre Jones…

[Dejounte]

Wembanyama is on a 4-year contract. I don’t think he will ask to be traded if the Spurs don’t bring back Tre Jones…

The clock starts now vs the last year of that 4-year contract where Wemby is probably already ghosting you because Tre’s leadership skillz weren’t there to be a big brother to Wemby tbh

[rankingtear]

oh please no more "he's a nice guy" contracts. We've had enough of those. How about paying players for their on court skills?

Who?

[RC_Drunkford]

The clock starts now vs the last year of that 4-year contract where Wemby is probably already ghosting you because Tre’s leadership skillz weren’t there to be a big brother to Wemby tbh

yeah right :lol


Who?

you forgot the 50 Mills and Bryn Forbes era?

[rankingtear]

yeah right :lol



you forgot the 50 Mills and Bryn Forbes era?

I meant who should they sign?

[SpursFan86]

I think people are being a little harsh here. No, I don’t view Tre as the long-term answer at PG but spending ~5-7% of your cap space to lock down an above average backup PG really isn’t a bad deal. He’s also only 23 and going into his 3rd “real” NBA season - it’s not crazy to imagine a scenario where he continues to improve and is a better player in 2023/2024 than he was this past year.

Not saying we NEED to bring him back or anything, but if he’s willing to take $8-10MM then that’s a solid deal IMO and I wouldn’t be opposed.

[rankingtear]

If you can’t get him at a low to reasonable price, release him and pick another, anyone else pls.

Who?

[rankingtear]

Spurs going to dust off patty old contract and give it to tre :depressed

We can only find solace in the fact that its not bryn forbes:cry

Who should they sign?

[Ariel]

It's dishonest to portray Tre as fighting for minutes with Wesley. It just is. It doesn't matter if me saying that offends you. I didn't say you were a bad person or disingenuous poster. But your comment was a dishonest way of phrasing a situation in an attempt to dismiss my argument for why Tre can ask for more money than Tyus got. Memphis wasn't going to give Tyus a big deal to back up their superstar. The Spurs may have a hard time trying to convince their starting PG to take backup money if they don't intend to start anyone over him.
Players aren't starters or backups in a vacuum, being a starter is conditioned upon a certain set of circumstances over a period of time. In Tre's case, the UNDISPUTABLE FACTS are:
1) He wasn't a starter until every proven quality point guard was traded (Dejounte Murray, Derrick White)
2) He got the starting job on a team where the possible alternatives to his role were rookies (Wesley) or players whose contribution was deemed detrimental by their teams (Graham) and we took on in a salary dump for compensation, or were situationally playing out of position (e.g.: Sochan).
3) His starting job happened to be in one of the worst teams in the league (tied for 2nd worst) that was trying to lose purposefully.
Starting isn't the end all be all, as Killian Hayes and Tyus Jones exemplify at opposite sides of the spectrum, and that context is exactly what I mean by saying that "Tre was fighting for minutes with Blake Wesley". Who if not him (and later Graham) and a bunch of players out of position were playing PG? How is pointing that out "dishonest" (i.e., purposefully deceiving) when it's a factual description of those circumstances?

You're riding with the idea if the Spurs should compare Tre to other guards in terms of skills and just sign Tre to whatever value matches that. But that's not how it works. Tre's representation is going to try to get him as much as they can, and the Spurs will have to balance out giving him enough money with the risk of losing him, or at least alienating him if they use their RoFR to suppress offers that might at least give him a chance to go to a better situation. I think they should take that chance, but I suspect they'll pay him low-end starter money on a shorter deal. That's not $10 Million a year or less in today's NBA. If they get him for less then I'll be wrong, but I won't be sad.
I'm not riding with anything, I'm using the most elemental of notions of how markets work. Factoring into his salary will be:
1) What other teams will be willing to offer, which is dependant on what role he'd play elsewhere and not just situationally on the 22-23 Spurs (i.e., "starter")
2) how far would the Spurs will be willing to go, which is dependant on:
a) what role the Spurs envision for him not just last year but FOR THE FUTURE (just because he was a starter last year doesn't mean they see him long term in that role)
b) what it would cost to find a substitute similar (at a lower price) or better (at a similar price)
c) what other opportunities do you forego by commiting to him long term (free agency, etc.)
d) what would be his value for the rest of the league, because things change and it wouldn't be smart to lock yourself up long term into a contract that no one else is willing to take off your hands (i.e., untradeable) should you have to move him.
e) how that precedent works in future negotiations with your own players, because Tre's pricetag is sure to influece the guys that follow.
All in all "starter money" is too simplistic an approach, it may give you a broad estimate but whenever you project you can't take any scenario for granted and "assume" he's going to be something which he has not proven whatsoever. That's probably the reason behind every disastrous deal made that hamper franchises.

In general, I tend to make it clear when I'm talking about a person or a person's point. I don't have an issue with you and think you're a fine poster. I do not apologize for criticizing your comparison. I do apologize that it came off as a personal attack. That was not my intention. I should've put more nuance into it, but I'm on my phone and didn't want to type that out.
An apology wasn't necessary but I am bringing to your attention that you seem to have an attachment to the term:
https://i.ibb.co/XtCsVK0/b.png
https://i.ibb.co/CK04vFw/c.png
It's an interesting choice for a fellow that doesn't usually strike me as careless with his words of choice, and if you don't want others to get a certain impression from your repeated use of it, you might want to try a different approach next time.

[Ariel]

Btw, how would people react if Wemby asked the Spurs to sign one of his homies? This would be no different, except that it’s on the Spurs’ terms instead of Wemby’s tbh. And that’s taking away a lot of credit from Tre… he’s not a total bum.
I think re-signing Tre is not undesirable at all, the point is he's not the PG you want to build around, so making a huge commitment to a deal that will be hard to move later on isn't a smart investment. If he comes at a reasonable deal (IMO ideally no more than 10M per year, if above that then not more than 2 years with possibly a team option 3rd so that it doesn't hurt '25 free agency) then great, otherwise the risks (him regressing and his contract becoming a negative) are not worth it when you can get competent replacement without too much trouble.

The clock starts now vs the last year of that 4-year contract where Wemby is probably already ghosting you because Tre’s leadership skillz weren’t there to be a big brother to Wemby tbh
There's plenty of that in the Spurs roster, coaching staff and entourage. Wemby is more likely to be ghosting you if he perceives you're not setting him up to succeed, that should be the main concern.

[KobesAchilles]

If being a nice guy keeps Wemby, yes. If signing a nice guy for the sake of just signing a nice guy, then no. Did you read the part where I said that this might help keep Wemby? For the record, I don’t think the Spurs will overpay Tre. Their actions for the past couple years have been to reach and maintain maximum flexibility. They might find a balance here between paying him more than what the average fan desires and just about right (between market price and enough cap flexibility). Hugely overpaying Tre would be out of the norm from what we’ve come to expect of the Spurs lately, so I think folks are getting too worried for no reason, IMO.

Thats the key component though. Bc nobody is saying we shouldn’t re-sign him. We all want him back. He’s a very solid back up. But this notion that he’s worth 14 million (the high end on Timvp range) is ridiculous. Also why do a 4 year deal? Who exactly are we competing with? I think a 2 year deal would be more appropriate. If he wants 10 million a season then fine but for 2 years and not 4. Otherwise let him test the market. We could always match. Nobody is going to pay him a 4 year 40 million deal besides us so why would that be a reasonable contract?

Timvp worrying about an Austin Reaves situation is a little far fetched seeing as we aren’t a prime time team. We don’t get the national media coverage the Lakers do and if we do then it will literally only be Wemby getting it, and we aren’t making a deep postseason run. It took all these things for Austin Reaves to potentially make his big contract. If he played well on the Pelicans then nobody would give a damn and his contract would be much smaller. That being said, Reaves is better than Tre.

[Chinook]

Players aren't starters or backups in a vacuum, being a starter is conditioned upon a certain set of circumstances over a period of time. In Tre's case, the UNDISPUTABLE FACTS are:
1) He wasn't a starter until every proven quality point guard was traded (Dejounte Murray, Derrick White)
2) He got the starting job on a team where the possible alternatives to his role were rookies (Wesley) or players whose contribution was deemed detrimental by their teams (Graham) and we took on in a salary dump for compensation, or were situationally playing out of position (e.g.: Sochan).
3) His starting job happened to be in one of the worst teams in the league (tied for 2nd worst) that was trying to lose purposefully.
Starting isn't the end all be all, as Killian Hayes and Tyus Jones exemplify at opposite sides of the spectrum, and that context is exactly what I mean by saying that "Tre was fighting for minutes with Blake Wesley". Who if not him (and later Graham) and a bunch of players out of position were playing PG? How is pointing that out "dishonest" (i.e., purposefully deceiving) when it's a factual description of those circumstances?

You're adding in other points and then saying I called the whole string dishonest when I've said repeatedly my issue was with saying Jones was fighting for minutes with Wesley. He wasn't and isn't. Wesley may not leave Austin this year. Tre is the starter until they get someone better. There's no fight between them for minutes. I think you can argue there might be a push from Branham for minutes (though he wasn't very good in terms of impact stats) and that there SHOULD be more of a fight between him and Graham for minutes. But Jones was the pretty clear starter, especially once the Spurs didn't have to try to push Primo into getting star touches.


I'm not riding with anything, I'm using the most elemental of notions of how markets work. Factoring into his salary will be:
1) What other teams will be willing to offer, which is dependant on what role he'd play elsewhere and not just situationally on the 22-23 Spurs (i.e., "starter")
2) how far would the Spurs will be willing to go, which is dependant on:
a) what role the Spurs envision for him not just last year but FOR THE FUTURE (just because he was a starter last year doesn't mean they see him long term in that role)
b) what it would cost to find a substitute similar (at a lower price) or better (at a similar price)
c) what other opportunities do you forego by commiting to him long term (free agency, etc.)
d) what would be his value for the rest of the league, because things change and it wouldn't be smart to lock yourself up long term into a contract that no one else is willing to take off your hands (i.e., untradeable) should you have to move him.
e) how that precedent works in future negotiations with your own players, because Tre's pricetag is sure to influece the guys that follow.
All in all "starter money" is too simplistic an approach, it may give you a broad estimate but whenever you project you can't take any scenario for granted and "assume" he's going to be something which he has not proven whatsoever. That's probably the reason behind every disastrous deal made that hamper franchises.

"Markets" work in multiple ways and rely on competing interests balancing, not one side coming up with a number they think is fair and the other just accepting it because of a stat or whatever. I don't disagree that those are factors the Spurs have to consider when making their initial offer and in deciding how far they can go up if Jones presses for more money. For Tre, he has his own things he will consider when his representation puts forth their deal. A real part of that is the risk of having to take the QO and/or getting hurt and ending up losing millions. But it's not all negative pressures for him. If Jones is expected to perform the duties of a starter, he should ask for starter money. I think in basically every other context people can understand that. Like in retail if they were going to hire someone to be the store manager but wanted to pay them what ASMs were getting at other stores, the incoming manager has every right to balk. And if the store tried to argue "Well you aren't any more competent than those ASMs, so we want to pay you for your worth, not for the job" I don't think that would go over well. Jones has every right to say, "If you think someone is going to do a better job than me, bring them in. If you don't, then pay me for the duties I'm supposed to perform and STFU." Does that mean he gets whatever he wants? No. But it's actual upward pressure for his salary, as is general inflation, team culture, whether the team has anyone else they're trying to bring it, etc. The team might have more leverage to push that salary down closer to what they want, but there's an opportunity cost to using that leverage.


An apology wasn't necessary but I am bringing to your attention that you seem to have an attachment to the term

1) When I ran a search I didn't actually find those results, but ST's search has always been finicky like that.

2) For what I can see, that's an average of 1/500 posts that contain that word. That's not even necessarily how many times I've called someone that. Like that second post (the one about LMA's touches) literally has "dishonest" in the post I'm quoting. That said, there are other words like "disingenuous" that I'm sure I've also said non-zero number of times. Some of those are in the exact way as the one you "called out" -- me criticizing a way a poster has framed a certain situation. As I said before, I believe there are situations where posters are being dishonest or otherwise intentionally unfair/ungenerous in their interpretation of a situation. That's not actually me saying they're sneaky people of low character. It's more an aspect of poster gamesmanship where two folks debating will try to define the "ground" of the debate in a way that is more favorable to them. Yes, I think it's intentional in the same way a defender might foul a bad FT shooter rather than giving up a bucket.


It's an interesting choice for a fellow that doesn't usually strike me as careless with his words of choice, and if you don't want others to get a certain impression from your repeated use of it, you might want to try a different approach next time.

I will call things dishonest again, maybe a take you have. I should take care to specify exactly what I'm calling dishonest and why. If I do that, I won't feel any particular regret if someone gets upset by it. They can disagree with it, and we can have that discussion. Or we can move on, and if they want to let that stick in their craw long after I've forgotten about it, then I can't stop them. As I said before, it wasn't my intention to offend you. You know what I mean now, and if you're still offended by it, then it is what it is.

[spurraider21]

Think his point was that Tre had an absurdly easy path to minutes given Wesley was among his main competition at the position, rather than suggesting there was actually a bona fide competition for the gig

[DAF86]

Justified or not, the Spurs might end up paying Tre for more than just his contributions on the court. If Tre is the guy who keeps Wemby happy (or if it helps develop Wemby’s character) because of his leadership skills in the locker room, then it’s worth it IMO. Tre has been praised for his community service work and almost won an award for it last season.

In the end, that’s how every dollar will be spent from this point forward— keeping Wemby happy + molding him into a good person (Wemby being a good person = doesn’t break loyalty to the Spurs in the future).

When it's go time and Tre can't make a jumper, I doubt Wemby will be happy.

[DAF86]

Who?

Micic.

[rankingtear]

Micic.

Is he a free agent?

[R. DeMurre]

Tre is an undersized PG worth 6-8 million per year at most & that's about it. He was serviceable on a bad team last year. 10-11 per year is ridiculous. Nothing special.


I understand trying to set a value, but in a league where the average team payroll is north of $130 mil, it seems odd to me to call $8mil reasonable but $10mil ridiculous. That difference is relatively minuscule in context. I'd give him a descending contract that rewards him most in the first year (where $$ isn't much of an issue for the Spurs). This not only sets money free in the future, but makes him an appealing piece in a potential trade. By the end of the contract, the MLE might be approaching $15mil, so his deal would still look like a bargain in, say, a trade in 2026.

[Chinook]

Think his point was that Tre had an absurdly easy path to minutes given Wesley was among his main competition at the position, rather than suggesting there was actually a boba fide competition for the gig

And if that's the case, that's just me being wrong and misinterpreting what they meant. I would certainly apologize for that. I don't think the greater debate is affected by that. The point isn't about whether Jones was one of the better PGs or even that he started last year and thus should get paid now for what he did then. I think a lot of people have cleaved to that notion that Jones is a backup. He's only a backup if he's actually backing up someone. If they're signing him expecting him to start, he would be justified in asking for a starter's salary. If they're signing him to be a backup, he wouldn't be justified (in my mind) to ask for that. Too many people are caught up in how good he was when the bigger factors for me concern what the team is going to do with the position now. If they don't upgrade from Jones, they don't have the same leverage some folks think.

But yes, this entire side spiral Ariel and I are having could be mainly because I wrongly interpreted something they said. That would be completely my bad and I could understand why me calling that interpretation dishonest would seem inappropriate. Do I care about whether I have a "habit" of it? No. But yeah, I would look pretty foolish.

[DAF86]

Is he a free agent?

Technichally not, but you probably can get him for a 2nd rounder.

If not, just pick anyone, that wouldn't demand a 4/40 contract, from this bunch: https://hoopshype.com/lists/2023-nba-free-agent-top-point-guards/

[DAF86]

And if that's the case, that's just me being wrong and misinterpreting what they meant. I would certainly apologize for that. I don't think the greater debate is affected by that. The point isn't about whether Jones was one of the better PGs or even that he started last year and thus should get paid now for what he did then. I think a lot of people have cleaved to that notion that Jones is a backup. He's only a backup if he's actually backing up someone. If they're signing him expecting him to start, he would be justified in asking for a starter's salary. If they're signing him to be a backup, he wouldn't be justified (in my mind) to ask for that. Too many people are caught up in how good he was when the bigger factors for me concern what the team is going to do with the position now. If they don't upgrade from Jones, they don't have the same leverage some folks think.

But yes, this entire side spiral Ariel and I are having could be mainly because I wrongly interpreted something they said. That would be completely my bad and I could understand why me calling that interpretation dishonest would seem inappropriate. Do I care about whether I have a "habit" of it? No. But yeah, I would look pretty foolish.

That's not how it works, though. Tre might start next season but I doubt the Spurs see him as the long term solution on that starting position. Therefore, signing him for starter money on a long contract would be a mistake.

Tre's manager will ask for that because that's his job, the Spurs' obligation is to tell him "fine then, go check the market and see which team gives you starter's money".

[Chinook]

That's not how it works, though. Tre might start next season but I doubt the Spurs see him as the long term solution on that starting position. Therefore, signing him for starter money on a long contract would be a mistake.

Tre's manager will ask for that because that's his job, the Spurs' obligation is to tell him "fine then, go check the market and see which team gives you starter's money".

Or they can sign him to a short-term deal at low-end starter money, so they aren't committed but Tre also gets compensated. For the Spurs, saving money on Jones, especially next year, shouldn't be a priority. Hamstringing the team for years would be something they'd want to avoid unless they're in love with him. But if they think they need him now the it doesn't matter whether he makes $8 Million or $18 Million. The team is going to have to figure out how to spend that money this summer anyway. If the Spurs' Plan A is to have an engaged Tre starting for them next season, they shouldn't play games about it. There's just no upside to doing that. Paying more APY to reduce the years might be the better play.

Or they could sign a real PG and then pick between Jones and Graham for who to keep as the backup.

[rankingtear]

Technichally not, but you probably can get him for a 2nd rounder.

If not, just pick anyone from this bunch that wouldn't demand a 4/40 contract: https://hoopshype.com/lists/2023-nba-free-agent-top-point-guards/

Would you sign Micic for 4/40? Would he translate?

[Spursfanfromafar]

The Spurs should try getting the Wizards to deal Delon Wright or Monte Morris, now that they have got three PGs (Tyus Jones to go with them, besides a combo guard in Jordan Poole). Morris would be better on offense while Wright is better on defense. Either could start and can offer more than Jones in terms of shooting. Morris would most likely be retained by the Wiz as he is younger but Wright should be available easily. A SRP/ couple of SRPs and Khem Birch should be enough to pry him out.

Having Wright/Morris, Jones and Wesley (who, I think needs one more year of seasoning in the G-League before he is good enough) should complete the PG requirements for this season.

[Seventyniner]

There's a middle ground between re-signing Tre expecting him to be a starter and re-signing him expecting him to be a backup. The Spurs might prefer Tre to be the backup but he might go out and a secure a deal before the Spurs can work out a trade or free agent signing for a starting PG.

[JPB]

Would you sign Micic for 4/40? Would he translate?

Vade retro Satanas!

[Chinook]

There's a middle ground between re-signing Tre expecting him to be a starter and re-signing him expecting him to be a backup. The Spurs might prefer Tre to be the backup but he might go out and a secure a deal before the Spurs can work out a trade or free agent signing for a starting PG.

Yep. If the Spurs intend to use their cap space through other ways of improving the team, it would benefit them to have an agreement with Jones good enough to prevent him from seeking other teams. Sure, if he leaves they might have the room exception to replace him. But that's not guaranteed. As I mentioned, I don't know that the Spurs and Jones will be fighting about this like some seem to want them to. They'll probably be honest about what each side expects from the other and figure out a deal. If the Spurs have other pans on the stove they have to balance, that's only added excitement for us. If they're just running it back, there probably won't be a lot Jones-related suspense.

[DAF86]

Or they can sign him to a short-term deal at low-end starter money, so they aren't committed but Tre also gets compensated. For the Spurs, saving money on Jones, especially next year, shouldn't be a priority. Hamstringing the team for years would be something they'd want to avoid unless they're in love with him. But if they think they need him now the it doesn't matter whether he makes $8 Million or $18 Million. The team is going to have to figure out how to spend that money this summer anyway. If the Spurs' Plan A is to have an engaged Tre starting for them next season, they shouldn't play games about it. There's just no upside to doing that. Paying more APY to reduce the years might be the better play.

Or they could sign a real PG and then pick between Jones and Graham for who to keep as the backup.

Well, sure, but that isn't the point of discussion here. I think nobody is against signing Tre to a short deal. Is the 4/40 contract talk that everybody seems to have a problem with.

[DAF86]

Would you sign Micic for 4/40? Would he translate?

I wouldn't, but he wouldn't ask for that. That's the point: before signing Tre to that kind of deal i would rather sign, literally, anybody else.

But, just to play along, yeah, all contract talks equal, think I would rather take a chance on Micic over Tre. At least Micic has the advantage of the unknown, instead of Tre's really limited, reallly visible, ceiling.

[Chinook]

Well, sure, but that isn't the point of discussion here. I think nobody is against signing Tre to a short deal. Is the 4/40 contract talk that everybody seems to have a problem with.

But $10 Million a year isn't a starter salary anymore. So if you're good with a $30M/2 deal with maybe the second year partially guaranteed, then you're right that it's the the point of the discussion. But if you think Tre is going to be pushed into signing for $8 Million a year, then you're definitely picking a side in the discussion, whether that deal is for two years for five.

[mo7888]

I think the question is what is he worth to us in light of the other plans the FO has in place? I wouldn't be surprised if we sign him at starters money and I wouldn't be surprised if we let him go and went with other PG's we could acquire on shorter contracts. I dont think it's as simple as "he's worth 8M or he's worth 15M", it's a broader equation that has data we aren't privy too.

[tonight...you]

I think the question is what is he worth to us in light of the other plans the FO has in place? I wouldn't be surprised if we sign him at starters money and I wouldn't be surprised if we let him go and went with other PG's we could acquire on shorter contracts. I dont think it's as simple as "he's worth 8M or he's worth 15M", it's a broader equation that has data we aren't privy too.
Great summation. Agreed.

[TD 21]

This will probably be relatively straightforward because he can't possibly be foolish enough to risk squandering the opportunity they're probably going to continue to hand him in the interim.

He's also helped by the fact that they don't appear ready to make significant moves, yet with the projected cap at roughly $136M, them being $38.5M under it and needing to get to $122.4M/add $24.9M before the start of the regular season.

Wembanyama is projected to earn $12.1M, taking the number down to $12.8M.

Can't remember if minimum's count towards the cap, but if so, sign Mamukelashvili and convert Champagnie, leaving about $10.5M.

[DAF86]

But $10 Million a year isn't a starter salary anymore. So if you're good with a $30M/2 deal with maybe the second year partially guaranteed, then you're right that it's the the point of the discussion. But if you think Tre is going to be pushed into signing for $8 Million a year, then you're definitely picking a side in the discussion, whether that deal is for two years for five.

What I feel is that the market for Tre isn't there, so the Spurs won't be forced to overpay for him, so they shouldn't.

And, in case I'm wrong, and there's a team willing to pay big bucks for Tre, I have no problem with letting him walk, since he's a dime a dozen backup PG.

[K...]

What I feel is that the market for Tre isn't there, so the Spurs won't be forced to overpay for him, so they shouldn't.

And, in case I'm wrong, and there's a team willing to pay big bucks for Tre, I have no problem with letting him walk, since he's a dime a dozen backup PG.

Theres no market bc hes restricted and teams know the spurs want to match. If the spurs sign another PG the interest in tre will grow. I guarantee most teams know about TJ

[Seventyniner]

What I feel is that the market for Tre isn't there, so the Spurs won't be forced to overpay for him, so they shouldn't.

And, in case I'm wrong, and there's a team willing to pay big bucks for Tre, I have no problem with letting him walk, since he's a dime a dozen backup PG.

I agree with all this except the last part. I think Tre is well above average for a backup, but overmatched as a starter unless he makes significant improvements this summer.

[rankingtear]

I wouldn't, but he wouldn't ask for that. That's the point: before signing Tre to that kind of deal i would rather sign, literally, anybody else.

But, just to play along, yeah, all contract talks equal, think I would rather take a chance on Micic over Tre. At least Micic has the advantage of the unknown, instead of Tre's really limited, reallly visible, ceiling.

Unknown to who? This guy is almost 30 with more tape than Tre.

[Ice009]

Look, as much as a like Tre, he never won the starting position. He was given it by default. There was no competition, so I don't believe he should be getting starters salary just yet. He still has to prove he's a starter IMO. I'd be happy to give it to him, but he's gotta prove he's a legit starter first. If he doesn't want to do that and wants starter's salary first, I'd really consider letting him walk. Would he have started on any other team in the NBA last season? I can't think of one off the top of my head.

[SpursFan86]

Look, as much as a like Tre, he never won the starting position. He was given it by default. There was no competition, so I don't believe he should be getting starters salary just yet. He still has to prove he's a starter IMO. I'd be happy to give it to him, but he's gotta prove he's a legit starter first. If he doesn't want to do that and wants starter's salary first, I'd really consider letting him walk. Would he have started on any other team in the NBA last season? I can't think of one off the top of my head.

Well that’s the thing: do you think $10MM is “starting PG” money? I’m not sure it is, especially not in years 3 or 4 of the deal when the cap has increased.

Regardless, if you’re investing in Tre it should be assumed that, long-term, he’s likely just a reliable “floor general” for the bench unit and you still need an answer at starting PG. I would hope that we’re not considering just rolling with Tre for the next 2-3 years with no intention of bringing in any other PG talent whether it be through the draft, FA, or trades.

[MultiTroll]

Justified or not....... because of his leadership skills in the locker room, then it’s worth it IMO. Tre has been praised for his community service work and almost won an award for it last season.
The Patty Mills Championship Culture type stuff?

I saw zero improvement on the court during the Pop n Patty n Bryn Culture Club years.

[DAF86]

Unknown to who? This guy is almost 30 with more tape than Tre.

Unknown in the NBA. If he translates his game to the league, then there's no question I would rather have Micic over Tre. Are you fucking serious?

[scott]

We’ll probably sign him to a contract that pisses everyone off, much like Doug’s, for it to eventually turn out to be irrelevant, like Doug’s.

[onechance87]

We’ll probably sign him to a contract that pisses everyone off, much like Doug’s, for it to eventually turn out to be irrelevant, like Doug’s.

yup...im expecting us to over pay him like 15 million a year over 4 years or some shit

[rankingtear]

Unknown in the NBA. If he translates his game to the league, then there's no question I would rather have Micic over Tre. Are you fucking serious?

Seriously, a 29 year old rookie guard from euro league? Making a successful jump at 29 has not been done since the cold war. I'll take Tre low ceiling.

[cutewizard]

We really need a lead guard

[cutewizard]

Tony Parker can come out of retirement hahahahah

[MultiTroll]

What % of our season hinges on Tre Jones next contract?

[exstatic]

Well that’s the thing: do you think $10MM is “starting PG” money? I’m not sure it is, especially not in years 3 or 4 of the deal when the cap has increased.

Regardless, if you’re investing in Tre it should be assumed that, long-term, he’s likely just a reliable “floor general” for the bench unit and you still need an answer at starting PG. I would hope that we’re not considering just rolling with Tre for the next 2-3 years with no intention of bringing in any other PG talent whether it be through the draft, FA, or trades.

It's really not even right now. If you consider that contracts are approaching $60M/yr, $10M is like a solid rotation player contract.

[JuneJive]

I really don't see a problem with extending Jones for however many years if the price is reasonable, let's say ~11M.

He's smart, gritty, knows how to set up players, push the pace, be the floor general -- Pop's right hand man.
Won't complain. Won't be a defensive liability.

And what's most important, in close games he won't be one of the closers.

You have him for the start of the game where he does all the little things. Basically empowering his teammates.

When clutch time comes, he will most probably be on the bench. What's not to like in this, a very probable, scenario?

[duncan2150]

Let the market set his price, i don't see a cap space team offering him something ( maybe Houston or Utah if they really want a PG ) so he could have some MLE tough i'm not sur about that

Imo if the Spurs offers him something like 33/3 years that could be ok for both.

[DAF86]

Seriously, a 29 year old rookie guard from euro league? Making a successful jump at 29 has not been done since the cold war. I'll take Tre low ceiling.

At 4/40 nobody should take Tre's low ceiling.

[spurraider21]

i dont see a cap space team offering him 4/40, nor do i see above the cap teams blowing almost their entire MLE on tre jones :lol

[Extra Stout]

If the Spurs strike out on acquiring a FA big man, might they overpay Tre on a shorter-term deal just to reach the salary floor?

[spurraider21]

If the Spurs strike out on acquiring a FA big man, might they overpay Tre on a shorter-term deal just to reach the salary floor?
it bothers me that this appears to be a likely scenario

[SpursFan86]

1674064793907372034

Assuming this means they’ll extend a qualifying offer, not necessarily saying he’d be surprised if they don’t re-sign him…but leaving here nevertheless.

[spurraider21]

he's getting tendered 100%

as he should

[Seventyniner]

I fully expect the Spurs to let Tre talk to other teams and then match an offer, rather than bid against themselves. The teams with cap space more than the MLE don't have much of a use for Tre anyway.

[MultiTroll]

I fully expect the Spurs to let Tre talk to other teams and then match an offer, rather than bid against themselves. The teams with cap space more than the MLE don't have much of a use for Tre anyway.
I dunno, how big of "Pops Pets" is Tre?

12:01 Patty Mills offer incoming?

[Chomag]

I like Tre , but I think the best thing to do is let him float out a little and see what offers other teams might be willing to pay and match it if its nothing crazy. Non of this 12:01 signing nonsense but sadly I do see this happening.

I don't see any teams looking to throw crazy money at Tre but if that does happen it's not like Tre is an irreplaceable type of player, even though I do feel like he is going to improve even more next season.

[Obstructed_View]

We’ll probably sign him to a contract that pisses everyone off, much like Doug’s, for it to eventually turn out to be irrelevant, like Doug’s.
Instead of that, how heavily can they front load his contract? Does the NBA have some provision against bonuses?

[Jordan Jackson]

Bryn Forbes 2: The Electric Boogaloo

Pop just can’t help himself. A short deal for short money would be ok.

[Ariel]

And if that's the case, that's just me being wrong and misinterpreting what they meant. I would certainly apologize for that. I don't think the greater debate is affected by that. The point isn't about whether Jones was one of the better PGs or even that he started last year and thus should get paid now for what he did then. I think a lot of people have cleaved to that notion that Jones is a backup. He's only a backup if he's actually backing up someone. If they're signing him expecting him to start, he would be justified in asking for a starter's salary. If they're signing him to be a backup, he wouldn't be justified (in my mind) to ask for that. Too many people are caught up in how good he was when the bigger factors for me concern what the team is going to do with the position now. If they don't upgrade from Jones, they don't have the same leverage some folks think.

But yes, this entire side spiral Ariel and I are having could be mainly because I wrongly interpreted something they said. That would be completely my bad and I could understand why me calling that interpretation dishonest would seem inappropriate. Do I care about whether I have a "habit" of it? No. But yeah, I would look pretty foolish.
I meant "fighting for minutes with Blake Wesley" as in overlapping roles compete for limited playing time and Blake was about the only available alternative for Tre (other than guys out of position and Graham later on) as I expanded in a follow-up post:

Players aren't starters or backups in a vacuum, being a starter is conditioned upon a certain set of circumstances over a period of time.

He got the starting job on a team where the possible alternatives to his role were rookies (Wesley) or players whose contribution was deemed detrimental by their teams (Graham) and we took on in a salary dump for compensation, or were situationally playing out of position (e.g.: Sochan).

Starting isn't the end all be all, as Killian Hayes and Tyus Jones exemplify at opposite sides of the spectrum, and that context is exactly what I mean by saying that "Tre was fighting for minutes with Blake Wesley". Who if not him (and later Graham) and a bunch of players out of position were playing PG? How is pointing that out "dishonest" (i.e., purposefully deceiving) when it's a factual description of those circumstances?
It never occurred to me that it could be reasonably interpreted as me implying they were on even terms or that it wasn't clear who had the nod, when Tre started in 65 out of 68 games and Blake only 1 out of 37 (and may be out of the league within a year or two). My point is that under those circumstances (tanking team with virtually no competition) being a "starter" doesn't really say much, just as it doesn't for Killan Hayes (who started most of the season for Detroit's tanktastic job).
To sum up, I don't think the Spurs should re-sign Tre "to start". Hell, I'd even argue if they do he might bet on himself and go for LESS money just to take advantage of an opportunity he wouldn't be afforded anywhere else in the league. But if his role last season got to his head and that's his argument ("starter role, starter money"), maybe it's time to call the Wizards and get Monte Morris for a future 2nd (to "meet the salary floor") and put a fire under his butt. He's a good player but the Spurs can easily get an affordable and competent replacement.

PS: it's "he", as in (former Israeli Prime Minister) Ariel Sharon. Here in Argentina (where I'm from) Ariel is a boy's name.

[SpursFan86]

Unsurprising news but Spurs officially tendered a qualifying offer according to Tre’s agent.

[MultiTroll]

Please get this over with one way or the other.

[BatManu20]

Looks like Sochan and Devin Vassell are in Minnesota for Tre’s wedding tomorrow. Wonder if any other current or former Spurs were invited tbh.

[BatManu20]

1674586160113303553

[ismael-robert]

We know, how much tho

[Russ]

1674586160113303553

Why not just wait for an offer from another team to Tre and match (if it makes sense) and pay accordingly if he doesn't get any offers.

What is the market for Tre Jones outside 210? Is there any? This might be a good way to find out.

[Splits]

ESPN has him between $10-12m, tied for 5th highest PG in free agency:

https://www.espn.com/nba/insider/story/_/id/37933713/nba-free-agency-2023-projected-salaries-every-free-agent

[spurraider21]

then just wait until he gets an offer sheet. otherwise play him out on his tender tbh

unless he signs a 3 year deal with last year being club option

[kobyz]

to give him 10 mil is crazy to me

[duncan2150]

https://twitter.com/wojespn/status/1674916223304232964

Nice

[Kurik]

Good deal

[spurraider21]

I wouldn’t want him at 10 per. If he were a FA from another team i can’t imagine us wanting to sign him to that kind of money. RFA tender. If he wants 10 per I’d only consider it on a 2 year deal with a club option tbh. I think he's like a 3/21 type player tbh. absolutely dont see good teams thinking "this guy is worth using all or most of our MLE on"
well... i wanted 2/20 with a club option, but looks like its just 2/20 regardless.

i had him pegged at 3/21, and jevon carter signed for 3/19. i figured those two were valued a little more closely

[timvp]

That said, that doesn’t change what I think will happen in free agency. I expect Jones to re-sign. A four-year, $40 million contract or a two-year, $20 million contract sounds about right.

Nice, IMO.

[slick'81]

Two years is absolutely perfect

[RC_Drunkford]

again Spurstalk evaluated his contract at exactly that number. Give yourselves some credit :bobo

[Ariel]

Ok, I wasn't too far off:

That Hollinger number is just crazy, no way he gets more than Tyus. He's a future backup, which is nice to have but you can replace him fairly cheap. 10M per year sounds more like it and even then, 4 years also seems like a lot, I'd do 3 years 30M otherwise just let him walk and send a couple second rounders to Washington for Tyus and be done with it.

Tyus Jones didn't get that, which team is going to give Tre that much when he can't shoot from 3? Also, if the Spurs are going to overpay to not disrupt team chemistry, make it a 2 year deal, team option 3rd, or you might be shooting yourself in the foot for '25 free agency (the Spurs could be big time players).
All in all, considering the madness we're seeing elsewhere, this feels like a solid compromise where:
1) Tre gets paid well according to his status (starter on a Spurs team but backup elsewhere)
2) The length is just right in that it aligns with '25 free agency thus not harming the Spurs long term, while it also gives Tre 2 years to prove he's a full time starter period (not just on a tanking team) and deserves to be paid as such.
Fair for both parties.

[Vince Carter's ankle]

to give him 10 mil is crazy to me
are you still in 2010? don't forget to buy bitcoins.

[kobyz]

are you still in 2010? don't forget to buy bitcoins.


Seems like it's you that still in the 90's