BREAKING: De'Aaron Fox Signs $4-yr/$229M Max Extension with the Spurs

[TekXX]

It would have been great if he was healthy last season so we could have a better evaluation. He looked rather pedantic, sure some of that was just being on a new team, but i'm hoping that injury was mostly the issue.

[MaNu4Tres]

Never thought I'd agree with exstatic so much in a single thread tbh :lol

As I said earlier, if you don't like this extension then you should have hated the deadline deal because this contract was locked up the moment Fox made it public that the Spurs were his preferred destination.

Harper wasn't involved then. Harper was a far fetched unlikely dream when the trade was made. Spurs were in the mix for the play-in and possibly the playoffs.

[TD 21]

At worst, Fox is the 2nd best player on the roster for at least the next two seasons.

Now I know you're being unserious.


His value wont decline

It did the second the ink was dry on the contract.


There are legit so many minutes to go around on the team.

I suspect people are going to be shocked at how relatively small Harper's role will be and that it'll only be a matter of time before it becomes an issue.

[KDKSpurs24]

It would have been great if he was healthy last season so we could have a better evaluation. He looked rather pedantic, sure some of that was just being on a new team, but i'm hoping that injury was mostly the issue.
The injury combined with Wemby getting hurt so I’m sure his motivation/excitement for the playoff push went out of the window for the remainder of the season. Probably all he could think about was when he wanted to shut down and get surgery at that point. Not sure why some people here think that was the real Fox we are gonna get next season.

[KDKSpurs24]

I suspect people are going to be shocked at how relatively small Harper's role will be and that it'll only be a matter of time before it becomes an issue.

Harper’s role won’t be small. The Spurs organization isn’t that stupid/incompetent. This is the #2 pick! Don’t compare it to the other Spurs rookies(mid-late first rounders) of the past. He will get #2 pick level opportunities as long as he shows he is capable.

[DAF86]

Now I know you're being unserious.



It did the second the ink was dry on the contract.



I suspect people are going to be shocked at how relatively small Harper's role will be and that it'll only be a matter of time before it becomes an issue.

What do you mean by "small"? I would be very surprised if Harper isn't getting, at least, 25 mpg all season long, tbh. Regardless of any playoffs aspiration, to have a possible future franchise player getting less than 25 mpg on his rookie season would be monumentally dumb by the Spurs, and I don't see the Spurs as a monumentally dumb organization.

[twodeep]

What do you mean by "small"? I would be very surprised if Harper isn't getting, at least, 25 mpg all season long, tbh. Regardless of any playoffs aspiration, to have a possible future franchise player getting less than 25 mpg on his rookie season would be monumentally dumb by the Spurs, and I don't see the Spurs as a monumentally dumb organization. most likely he will sub for fox and castle off the bench

[The Truth #6]

Spurs like flexibility and need star power so this makes sense. Keep everyone and see who plays well.

I'm old enough so the numbers look shocking but probably a better contract than Devin's - at least Fox can make things happen with the ball in his hands. Moving Devin looks difficult.

Keldon and Jeremy - they should either have to sign cheap or move on. I'm guessing the Spurs will look to to replace them with either old veterans or Julian affordable type of players.

We'll see. Nothing is screwed yet.

[TimmyBuckets]

Basically people value Harper over Wemby is what its looking like.

[LeBowen]

I have season tickets last 5 years and go to every game :lol

Even worse, then you're just lying on purpose to push narratives that obviously aren't true.
How can you even talk about Spurs being nowhere near the playoffs when they were around .500 and traded for Fox? You can't hold Wemby's DVT against the front office.


small, non-playmaking shooters who aren't great defenders.

I get you don't rate Fox, but this take is just wrong and you've been at it ever since we traded for him even though it's obviously not true and it's been debunked many times.

SGA, Ja, Conley, Harden, FVV, Curry, Murray, Luka, Cade, Brunson, Lillard, Haliburton, Herro, Garland, Suggs, Jrue, Giddey, Trae, Monk, Kyrie.

Those are the primary ballhandlers on 20 teams that made the play-in this season.

How many are better defenders than Fox?
SGA, Suggs, Jrue for sure. The best guard in the league and two defense specialists who generate very little offense.
FVV, Conley have a case. Harden and Cade can be solid in some setups because of their size, even though they're bad defenders.
Either way, Fox is clearly above average compared to other primary ballhandlers.

How many are bigger than Fox?
SGA, Harden, Murray, Luka, Cade, Suggs, Jrue, Giddey.
Key word bigger, I'm not going to nitpick over an inch of height for players like Herro or Haliburton when they're twigs and non-factors on defense with Fox being clearly better than them.
Out of those bigger players, we come to the same conclusion that other than the already mentioned elite defenders, Fox is better than the rest as a defender, with some like Luka/Giddey being so bad that even the huge size advantage doesn't really matter since they're awful on that end.

Again, Fox is most definitely above average in both size and defensive ability if we compare him to other playoff ballhandlers.
Just because OKC and Celtics have found a perfect recipe for the modern game, it doesn't mean other teams also did, they're the exception and not the norm.

That's with Fox's defensive ability being rated with a defensively tragic team around him and one of the worst rim protectors in the league having his back.
Look no further than Spurs when Wemby wasn't on the floor, playing defense without a rim protector is just a different sport and can't be held against players unless they're absolutely tragic on that end. Like for example Keldon if we're talking Spurs.
Will Fox ever be an elite man to man defender? Most definitely not, but saying he's bad when he had to score 25ppg on one end and didn't have any defensive personnel around him on the other is just hating for the sake of it.
Steals are often inflated and sometimes even a bad sign because players like to gamble too much, but I think Fox can be great as an off-ball matchup for shooters that don't stop moving because he'll be able to easily keep up with them and take advantage of any errant passes.

Would I prefer Harper/Castle to develop into idk, Jrue/Jimmy like duo? Obviously. But until then Fox is more than enough on defense and we need an offensive engine to start winning games on consistent basis.

Non-playmaking? This is just hating for the sake of it.
Small sample size, but Fox averaged 6.8 assists with 2.8 ast/to ratio after the trade.
He's not an elite playmaker, but Spurs don't want to have a heliocentric guard and 6 to 7 assists he'll average are more than enough.

He's not a superstar who can be the first option, but his 25/4/6 averages were consistent over the 4 years before the last season and that's as about as good as it gets for the second option.
48/34/75 efficency isn't bad, either. It can only be better because he's never played with a 3pt shooting big before which is an amazing thing to have if you're a paint penetrating guard.

Yes, 30% of the cap is an overpay, but he's definitely a 25% max player and those 5% won't kill us before 2029. I'd rather give extra 5% to Fox than have friendship crew on their contracts.
If Jeremy gets more than 7 million a year extension, Devin/Keldon/Jeremy will be making more than Fox in 26-27 season when his extension kicks in.

[Dex]

Spurstalk is so funny sometimes.

People are always clamoring that we need to sign stars to win now and keep Wemby happy. And then the Spurs go out and get Fox on a great trade while dumping a bunch of crap.

Then when it comes time to pay said stars, they are upset that we paying market value.

News flash: Players aren't going to come to San Antonio to take a pay cut. This isn't 2005 when we had three Hall of Famers forming a dynasty.

[SpursFan86]

I suspect people are going to be shocked at how relatively small Harper's role will be and that it'll only be a matter of time before it becomes an issue.

This is really only the case if the Spurs aren’t willing to get creative with lineups. Castle and Vassell can (and should, given the alternatives) soak up minutes at the 3.

I’m guessing Harper gets ~25 mpg as a rookie. First half of the season that might be closer to ~22 mpg but as he gets more comfortable and injuries inevitably pop up I’d hope that it will get more into the ~28ish mpg by the end of the season.

Do you think he’s not even going to play 20 mpg or are you assuming most here are expecting a 30+ mpg role right off the bat?

[Bruno]

Spurs aren't trading Fox next year, it would be a bad look to sign him to an extension and trade him even before it kicks in.

I don't think it would be a bad look because he got a max extension. If he took a pay cut, then it would have been.

Regarding the situation between Fox, Harper and Spurs:

- It's important to notice that it was the lottery luck that push Harper to Spurs. Spurs didn't try to deliberately screw Fox by adding another PG. It was just that at #2, Harper was a way better prospect than other ones. I'm sure Fox is well aware that drafting Harper was the only logical option for Spurs.

- While there are definitively fit concerns between Fox and Harper, there are only concerns at that stage. There might never have some issues with it. Fox and Harper might be able to play well together or Harper might just turn into a bust.

- Fox has already faced that situation in Sacramento with Haliburton. It ended with Haliburton being traded for Sabonis. This time, it would be more logical for Spurs to keep Harper and trade Fox given Wembanayama's age if Harper is as promising as Haliburton was in Sacramento.


Spurs might be headed into a delicate situation with Fox and Harper. It might occur in 6 months, a year, 2 years or never. By signing his extension on August 4th instead of August 6th, Fox gave the possibility for him and Spurs to get out of it as soon as the next trade deadline if needed.

[Vienna]

Fox is an eloquent, humble and smart young man.

but would the Spurs sign him to a max, if he and Wemby didn't match on AND off court? I don't think so.

so, even if Wemby doesn't play an active role in this, to keep him comfortable by adding/keeping a person he likes, does count.

[Spurs Homer]

Never in a million years - never - will i understand/comprehend -sports fans spending hours and hours and hours of their lives;
arguing
debating
insulting each other


on money paid to players...when ZERO dollars ...are coming from anyone here who is not an owner.


I guess it would be like me and my family having years-long arguments - over the budget of our neighbor down the fucking block.

Someone/anyone - make it make sense.

Oh, by the way , ive been a lifelong spurs fan since they were the chapparrals...so those insults wont work here...i am a fan and supporter blah blah

but not one penny of mine was ever used to pay gervin,timmy,d rob,tp,wemby, etc....not one penny - so why invest years of my life caring about spurs players salaries?

[HankChinaski]

I get the hate on this contract. It's a huge sum. Spurs usually do the big contract in players prime though.

I like it. No BS of extension talks leading into the season or throughout. Contract ends as he is peaking.

He got his contract and now and can just focus on the upcoming season.


Both Wemby and Fox healthy is going to be exciting to watch have some front court depth now with Olynyk and Kornet and not Bassey and Zach Collins combo.

Harper doesn't have the pressure of having to live up to the 2nd overall and can just focus on improving and playing behind or next to Fox and Castle.

[Darkwaters]

Why would it not have conveyed?

It was a top 16 protected pick. Chicago selected #12.

You stated that the Spurs traded away an "already lottery pick." But the only way the Spurs would have actually had that pick was if it was outside the lottery.

The claim that they "traded away a lottery pick" is disingenuous. Just because the Bulls eventually used that pick at #12 doesn't mean the Spurs gave away the #12 pick.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

Fox is making more than Luka and so many other legit stars. And Im shocked Spurs couldn’t even leverage making it a declining front loaded deal??


That was my first thought. Maybe we don't have all the details, but a front-loaded deal seems like it should have been automatic. Maybe I'm missing something.


You can't front-load a max contract because it's a max contract. Math doesn't work.

I would have loved it if the rumours about him getting a bit less were true but it can't be a surprise to anyone following the Spurs closely that he got the max. He already declined a max offer from Sacramento, I mean...

If he stays healthy I don't imagine it's going to be a bad contract as these are his prime years. Spurs aren't going to have cap space for a while anyway, whether Fox got 25% or 30%. It'll be about carefully managing the cap, which the Spurs have been good at historically. We can only hope that either Castle or Harper, or both, get to a level where the Spurs would have to extend them to max or near-max deals. I can see Fox finish his contract in Heat colours.

[AFBlue]

Paying "max" money to an all-star caliber player entering his prime should not be controversial. If the other guards reach their potential in the next two years, it'll be a good problem to have.

[024]

Knew the max was coming as that was payment for Fox tanking his value to force a trade to the Spurs. Some flexibility is maintained as the Spurs have so many of their major pieces on rookie deals.

Was kind of hoping though that this would have been a Chet/Jdub "max" where there were escalators that required all star or all nba selections. Would have made the 50-60M/yr more palatable.

[Knoxxx]

OKC media source loves it but not for good reasons:

https://thunderousintentions.com/okc-thunder-easily-biggest-winners-deaaron-fox-extension-one-major-reason

[scott]

It was a top 16 protected pick. Chicago selected #12.

You stated that the Spurs traded away an "already lottery pick." But the only way the Spurs would have actually had that pick was if it was outside the lottery.

The claim that they "traded away a lottery pick" is disingenuous. Just because the Bulls eventually used that pick at #12 doesn't mean the Spurs gave away the #12 pick.

The CHI pick was Top 10 protected this year and then Top 8 protected for the next two. If we held on to that pick, no doubt Chicago would have continued to managing their W/L record to stay in the Top 10, but it still would have been in play for the next two years.

Your facts are incorrect here, but it is still true to say it is disingenuous to say the pick would have conveyed to us last year.

[ambchang]

There is a real possibility that Fox and Harper will never reach 2023 Fox.

Actually it is highly impossible for either of them to reach peak fox levels. 25/6/4 is franchise level numbers. With wemby Around, then fox, then harper and castle in the 3rd spot there simply won’t be enough shots usage for those types of numbers. My biggest wish is for Harper and/or castle to be the best 2/3 or 3/4 they could be and embracing it.

[LeBowen]

Actually it is highly impossible for either of them to reach peak fox levels. 25/6/4 is franchise level numbers. With wemby Around, then fox, then harper and castle in the 3rd spot there simply won’t be enough shots usage for those types of numbers. My biggest wish is for Harper and/or castle to be the best 2/3 or 3/4 they could be and embracing it.

I think one of them can reach 25ppg if the other one fails and Spurs become a one-two punch instead of a three-headed monster.
Realistically, it would be amazing if Castle can become Derrick White level player and if Harper reaches Parker's 22/7 peak while being a positive defender.

New CBA will be all about who's the best player in the league, which healthy Wemby will obviously be.
You beat those players with superteams which will be impossible to create with such strict cap rules. It really works in our favor.

[scott]

Actually it is highly impossible for either of them to reach peak fox levels. 25/6/4 is franchise level numbers. With wemby Around, then fox, then harper and castle in the 3rd spot there simply won’t be enough shots usage for those types of numbers. My biggest wish is for Harper and/or castle to be the best 2/3 or 3/4 they could be and embracing it.

This is also why I’m not concerned about a theoretical crisis where both Castle and Harper require max deals to retain. Behind Wemby and Fox, it’s going to be nearly impossible for both of them to elevate their play to max levels. One of them, perhaps, but not both.

On the other hand, if both of them do elevate their play to max levels, then it probably means that one of Wemby or Fox has gotten hurt or fallen off a cliff. And it will also mean that Vassell is probably a 12ppg bench scorer whose contract looks terrible. The other scenario is just that by Harper Y3/Castle Y4, that they are both outplaying Fox at a max player, at which time you look to trade Fox. But for that to happen, Harper is going to have to hit the high end of his range of outcomes and Castle will have to had developed into more than just a high useage downhill scorer. Good problems to have.

[Mugen]

This new CBA really punishes teams that draft well. Teams should be able to pay/reward guys that were acquired prior to their rookie season with some type of allotment that would not count towards the second apron threshold.

[Brazil]

OKC media source loves it but not for good reasons:

https://thunderousintentions.com/okc-thunder-easily-biggest-winners-deaaron-fox-extension-one-major-reason

:lol like OKC won't have soon their own problem with salary gap

[Santa Ana]

When you have star level players who want to be Spurs you sign them.

No Uncle/Nephew bullshit

[poopbox]

I dont think Spurs acting rationally in this case (unexpectedly landing Harper) would have had anyone looking at the Spurs like bad guys for doing what 99% of people agreed was rational (not maxing Fox). But I get the perception and understand reality

Only an emotionally unintelligent person would think not maxing Fox was rational, because their is a human element to the nba beyond just what happens on the basketball court. Fox and his agent did the Spurs a MASSIVE favor by forcing their way out of Sac and making the Spurs the only destination. Had the Spurs tried to play any type of hardball with Fox he would have been both the first player to try and force their way to the Spurs and the last, because any other player is going to look at the situation and say "yeah no, not going to try to force myself to a place that will then turn around and play hardball with me because they drafted a guard who might legit never even be as good as I am right now."

Real life isn't Nba2k.

The actual irrational thing to do would be to draft a guy number 2 and then tell the star player you traded for who is way better than the player you drafted right now you are not going to max him. That would open you up to Fox wanting to leave as soon as he got here ( having Victor like wtf) and put an insane amount of pressure on Harper to be good right now. Like be an all star his rookie year good if you pulled some foolishness like that.

And Fox is clearly a max player. If he hit free agency he would have multiple teams offering him a max contract no questions asked.

[Agloco]

I hate the “this was probably discussed during the trade” stuff. Like Spurs didnt give up 3 legit firsts for Fox + 2nds so they owed him the max for “helping” the Spurs? Spurs paid fair value for him easily in terms of draft capital. Then they landed Harper alongside Castle.

They did not have to do this and they now introduced a lot of uncertainty and risk that was not needed. Im hopeful it still works out ok but theres palpable risk now that was not there before.

There was indeed palpable risk all along - If you don’t extend him he becomes a one year rental with the Spurs having paid all of your aforementioned draft capital.

The odds that both Harper and Castle become “max-type” players is astronomically low. I think most of the trepidation surrounding Fox’s deal stems from everyone assuming those guys will become “the guy”.

[Mnky]

Now I know you're being unserious.



It did the second the ink was dry on the contract.



I suspect people are going to be shocked at how relatively small Harper's role will be and that it'll only be a matter of time before it becomes an issue.

I honestly believe he will be treated like a 2nd overall pick. Castle was given the keys very early for the 2nd string and took the 1st group when available and was also given the keys to lead.

I expect Harper to have the same opportunities.

This Spurs talent is below average overall. There is a reason they've had three lottery picks, even if one was pretty lucky.

The players on the team aren't franchise changing players outside of Wemby, Castle, Fox , Harper and now Bryant coming into the mix. The other players are still developing and growing etc, but have shown they're good enough to be one of the worst teams in the NBA. I don't think prioritizing their minutes is going to be a big factor. Moving Johnson, vassell, Sochan etc frees up money and creates opportunities to mix and match better around Wemby accordingly.

Those four core players mentioned are guaranteed part of the next 4-5 years. That's your franchise. Harper is up there with Wemby and Castle as far as priority. There isn't a ton of talent standing in his way either.

Of course, maybe Pop calls down to sit him so he can get over himself as well. I think the Spurs are moving towards the future now though.

[baseline bum]

Knew the max was coming as that was payment for Fox tanking his value to force a trade to the Spurs. Some flexibility is maintained as the Spurs have so many of their major pieces on rookie deals.

Was kind of hoping though that this would have been a Chet/Jdub "max" where there were escalators that required all star or all nba selections. Would have made the 50-60M/yr more palatable.

Fox cannot become supermax eligible so there would be nothing to build an escalator to unlike the OKC signings.

[The Truth #6]

He got his contract - that was Klutch's priority. If Fox has to adapt to our young backcourt and doesn't like it, Klutch is very adept at moving players somewhere else, obviously. So the problem in the theoretical future is if the guards don't mesh, then can we trade Fox?

Being that SA is also boring for most pro athletes, if someone really wants to leave, it's hard to find a less desirable city for lifestyle reasons - he's already done Sacramento so any other place would be more exciting.

That is a worst case cynical interpretation of the future.

The positive is that Fox is insurance if either of Castle or Harper don't take a leap.

I don't love the fit given the dearth of shooters, but still these are good problems to have compared to the Dark Ages between Kawhi and Victor

[BSfromTX]

Only an emotionally unintelligent person would think not maxing Fox was rational, because their is a human element to the nba beyond just what happens on the basketball court. Fox and his agent did the Spurs a MASSIVE favor by forcing their way out of Sac and making the Spurs the only destination. Had the Spurs tried to play any type of hardball with Fox he would have been both the first player to try and force their way to the Spurs and the last, because any other player is going to look at the situation and say "yeah no, not going to try to force myself to a place that will then turn around and play hardball with me because they drafted a guard who might legit never even be as good as I am right now."

Real life isn't Nba2k.

The actual irrational thing to do would be to draft a guy number 2 and then tell the star player you traded for who is way better than the player you drafted right now you are not going to max him. That would open you up to Fox wanting to leave as soon as he got here ( having Victor like wtf) and put an insane amount of pressure on Harper to be good right now. Like be an all star his rookie year good if you pulled some foolishness like that.

And Fox is clearly a max player. If he hit free agency he would have multiple teams offering him a max contract no questions asked.

This. You definitely have to reward someone making an effort to join your small market team. Spurs can not afford to piss him off and give the young players reason to look elsewhere when their time comes

[spurraider21]

This new CBA really punishes teams that draft well. Teams should be able to pay/reward guys that were acquired prior to their rookie season with some type of allotment that would not count towards the second apron threshold.
i only slightly agree with this, and its with respect to the rose rule and DPE (supermax) where teams actually get punished for their players receiving accolades. i think that extra 5% they get from the accolades should not count against the cap.

aside from that, no i dont think you get punished for drafting well. by drafting well, you are getting good players on rookie scale deals for 4 years. and if you have drafted "too well" and it becomes hard to give all these guys big deals, then you have the luxury of trading one of them for more ammo to continue replenishing with good players on rookie deals (provided you keep drafting well) to augment your retained home grown stars

[SpurSpike]

I know it can seem like a large number and we aren't used to signing players to that kind of salary but it really doesn't seem like some big risky decision either. The spurs didn't include a player option on the last year for a reason. He is locked up so that if his salary becomes an issue you can trade him with a couple years still under contract for a decent haul, so long as he plays well and stays healthy. In the mean time you have a great player that should be a good match next to Wemby. The only way this blows up in our face is if he gets injured badly. Sometimes you have to take a risk and this one seems calculated.

[skin27]

Basically people value Harper over Wemby is what its looking like.
Why do you say so? Thats insane! This is wemby’s team not harper lmao. We’re still not sure if harper will be better than fox in the future.

[TimmyBuckets]

Why do you say so? Thats insane! This is wemby’s team not harper lmao. We’re still not sure if harper will be better than fox in the future.

Exactly my point lol

[TD 21]

Harper’s role won’t be small. The Spurs organization isn’t that stupid/incompetent. This is the #2 pick! Don’t compare it to the other Spurs rookies(mid-late first rounders) of the past. He will get #2 pick level opportunities as long as he shows he is capable.

The operative word was 'relatively' and it's a matter of a combination of fit and expectation/pressure to make the playoffs.

Harper is obviously a higher tier of prospect than Sheppard, for example, but he was the 3rd pick a season ago, yet a fringe - non rotation player for those same reasons (and he actually brought a skill the Rockets desperately needed).

Harper won't be in danger of that, but until he can stretch the floor, I'm not sure how much he'll play alongside Fox.

Maybe they banish Johnson to fringe - non rotation status if the situation becomes dire, but initially? I'll believe it when I see it. Meanwhile, Champagnie as a rotation staple is a must.


This is really only the case if the Spurs aren’t willing to get creative with lineups. Castle and Vassell can (and should, given the alternatives) soak up minutes at the 3.

I’m guessing Harper gets ~25 mpg as a rookie. First half of the season that might be closer to ~22 mpg but as he gets more comfortable and injuries inevitably pop up I’d hope that it will get more into the ~28ish mpg by the end of the season.

Do you think he’s not even going to play 20 mpg or are you assuming most here are expecting a 30+ mpg role right off the bat?

I mostly answered above, but I think most foresee a 3 guard rotation, with something like a 36 (Fox), 32 (Castle), 28 (Harper) split.

In addition to what I've said, I think Vassell as exclusively a 3 and Barnes as a lone true forward, is too small/lacking physicality.



Never in a million years - never - will i understand/comprehend -sports fans spending hours and hours and hours of their lives;

on money paid to players...when ZERO dollars ...are coming from anyone here who is not an owner.

All related to the new CBA, a de facto hard cap. Previously, it was just a matter of how much ownership was willing to spend, in which case I mostly shared your sentiment.

Now, it's all about flexibility and optionality.



I honestly believe he will be treated like a 2nd overall pick. Castle was given the keys very early for the 2nd string and took the 1st group when available and

was also given the keys to lead.

I expect Harper to have the same opportunities.

The differences are, there wasn't an expectation/pressure to make the playoffs last season and the only primary ball handler ahead of Castle was ancient Paul.

Not only will the former ramp up, but Harper will have prime Fox as well as Castle ahead of him in this regard, on a team starved for shooting.

[Arguendo]

He's more of a penetrator than a spacer.

My only concern with Fox (and it's fairly minor) is that he fits best as the lead guard on a running team and I'm not sure that's where this Spurs' roster is headed.

This is a really interesting point, got me to look at the pace stats. Would like to get some feedback from you'll- can the Spurs play fast?
Last yr everyone on the roster was basically above average pace, even being dragged down by CP3 tempo, with Barnes, Bismack, and CP3 being the 3 slowest, followed by Vassell and Wemby.

Obviously the Spurs will go as Wemby goes, would he be comfortable playing fast or would that wear him out?

Roster wise, I think we are very well suited. Fox, Castle, Harper, Keldon, and Champ would all thrive playing fast, prolly the best way to use all of them. Byrant too if he actually plays, think Sochan wouldn't mind running too. Olynek actually ranked ahead of Fox in pace.
I think Wemby could definitely thrive, Vassell too if he cuts the dribble/dribble/dribble and learns his role. Really just seems that Barnes and Kornet have to play slow, but no surprise there. Lots of potential to D to turn into quick O with our roster.

[lefty]

BRIAN WRIGHT IS THE GOAT GM HE IS BETTER THAN THAT FRAID JERRY WEST

[Arguendo]

Honestly if you want to talk about risk the biggest risk the Spurs took this offseason was not moving Castle. It is quite possible that out of Harper, Fox, and Castle the one with the lowest chance of success is Castle. If he doens't develop, then you've punted on moving him this year when his value was highest. I've got absolutely no problem with this, but if I'm judging outcomes for these 3 players then the most likely by a good margin is that Castle is the worst out of the 3. I love the kid and have high hopes, but I think not all that likely he is ever better than Fox.
Yeah, think Scott laid it out pretty well before the draft, but Castle's career peak trade value was very likely this summer. He'd prolly have to become a top 30 player for his value to ever reach what it is right now as a 20y/o, ROY, with tons of 2-way upside, and enough production/answers to get teams to overlook the very real questions/concerns with 3 more yrs of cheap control, then RFA. So much value right now, extremely difficult to improve on that value as he becomes more of a known quantity.

That said, I'd rather have kept him, I love the idea of a D juggernaught and I love guys that get free points, Castle was absolutely elite at FTr last yr like 12th amongst non-centers, top 30 overall. He's good enough at getting to the line that he can be near elite scoring efficiency w/o his 3 ever developing, but I think it will, at least to average.

There's not many (non-AllNBA) guys I'd actually trade Castle for though, although I would call NOP and see if they'd bite for Trey Murphy III.

[Arguendo]

Remember when good but NOT great players were paid what they were really worth?

I'm starting to forget..
Blame it on the absurdity of the Max contract. The Jokers, Giannis, Luka, SGA, prime Curry/LeBron/periennial All-NBA1/MVP top 10 guys should be getting like 60%-80% of the cap, everyone else should be fighting for the rest. Instead those guys get 25-35%, so guys like Beal/Lavine/Lauri/Fox/Barnes/etc point to their 1 AS/NBA3 or 25ppg or "face of the franchise" and you can't really argue because it is market value for those guys. 30 teams, each with enough to pay at least 2 max slots, you're always gonna have lots of "max" guys that don't produce the way the true superstars/max guys do.
It's an absolute joke that Scottie Barnes gets the same contract (structure) as SGA or Luka. But you also can't blame Barnes, that's his market value as it stands (22y/o AS, face of franchise).

Keep the cap, get rid of the Max, the league would be a lot more interesting, lots more parity, lots more team basketball vs Star+scrub teams. It'd be so much fun, better basketball. Pay the greats what their worth, pay the role players what their worth. Pay LeBron the 85% that he's definitely worth as a revenue producer and fill out the roster with min guys. Make it like the NFL, IMO the on-court product would improve drastically but it'd likely have to be 40-50 games (so never happen), can't pay a guy 75% of the cap and expect a healthy 82 games/too risky.

Bonus, heap tons of praise on the Duncan's/Dirk's/Brunson's (likely Jokers/Giannis) who would sacrifice ten's of millions for their teammates and judge the LeBrons who would never ever consider leaving one (deserved) penny on the table for the sake of winning, rewarding teammates, etc accordingly.

[LeBowen]

Blame it on the absurdity of the Max contract. The Jokers, Giannis, Luka, SGA, prime Curry/LeBron/periennial All-NBA1/MVP top 10 guys should be getting like 60%-80% of the cap, everyone else should be fighting for the rest. Instead those guys get 25-35%, so guys like Beal/Lavine/Lauri/Fox/Barnes/etc point to their 1 AS/NBA3 or 25ppg or "face of the franchise" and you can't really argue because it is market value for those guys. 30 teams, each with enough to pay at least 2 max slots, you're always gonna have lots of "max" guys that don't produce the way the true superstars/max guys do.
It's an absolute joke that Scottie Barnes gets the same contract (structure) as SGA or Luka. But you also can't blame Barnes, that's his market value as it stands (22y/o AS, face of franchise).

Keep the cap, get rid of the Max, the league would be a lot more interesting, lots more parity, lots more team basketball vs Star+scrub teams. It'd be so much fun, better basketball. Pay the greats what their worth, pay the role players what their worth. Pay LeBron the 85% that he's definitely worth as a revenue producer and fill out the roster with min guys. Make it like the NFL, IMO the on-court product would improve drastically but it'd likely have to be 40-50 games (so never happen), can't pay a guy 75% of the cap and expect a healthy 82 games/too risky.

Bonus, heap tons of praise on the Duncan's/Dirk's/Brunson's (likely Jokers/Giannis) who would sacrifice ten's of millions for their teammates and judge the LeBrons who would never ever consider leaving one (deserved) penny on the table for the sake of winning, rewarding teammates, etc accordingly.

All of that sounds good until you realize at least half the league is ran by retards that would ruin everything if contract rules weren't strictly regulated.

[Arguendo]

And, as for the top 30 stuff, he's definitely not a top 30 player right now, and has not been one for a few years. This contract hopes that he becomes top 30 again, but he's definitely not at this time.

Hyperbole much? A few means 3. 3 years ago Fox finished 11th in MVP and was AllNBA3, but he wasn't top 30?
You can name 30 better players in 23'-24' when Fox produced 26.6/5.6/4.6 and led the league in Stl/g on .465/.369/.738 splits? You absolutely can't because there were not 30 better basketball player better than him.
I think Fox is overrated by many here and maybe he's only a borderline top-30 guy now (but maybe he looks way better healthy next to Wemby), but he was absolutely one of the best 30 basketball players on earth in 2 of the past 3 seasons. His down season last yr while injured/traded/shut-down was still borderline top 30

[Arguendo]

All of that sounds good until you realize at least half the league is ran by retards that would ruin everything if contract rules weren't strictly regulated.
Agree, the owners implemented the Max contracts to save them from themselves and they have, it spreads the risk. It's also a luxury toy for nearly every owner/group now, the core value is in being 1 of 30 with TV revenue share, with valuations in the billions, you don't actually have to win or run the franchise well, that profit/loss is a rounding error compared to franchise appreciation and the loss will prolly be less than your mega-yacht and your prolly use it more.
You don't need to run a luxury toy like a profit maxing business in fact that's probably likely to suppress your franchise value. But you also don't want 1 mistake to tarnish your prestige toy and cripple the next 3-4 yrs.

And its not just the 1/2 retarded/public facing idiots and its misaligned incentives plus subject matter novice owners relying on those idiots as subject matter experts in a crazy specialized and subjective field.
If I'm a struggling GM with little prospect of another GM job, why wouldn't I throw crazy money at a Scottie Barnes type lottery ticket? If he turns into an All-NBA1 I'm a genius, if he doesn't I was out the door anyways. And if I'm a hedge-fund/tech/heir billionaire do I really know enough about what's going on to overrule the person I'm paying to be my subject matter expert and decision maker? The Luka's and LeBron are easy, but if your an Owner and the GM is telling you Barnes is the next Joker/Giannis level guy who just needs to develop more it'd be pretty hard to overrule.

[scott]

Blame it on the absurdity of the Max contract. The Jokers, Giannis, Luka, SGA, prime Curry/LeBron/periennial All-NBA1/MVP top 10 guys should be getting like 60%-80% of the cap, everyone else should be fighting for the rest. Instead those guys get 25-35%, so guys like Beal/Lavine/Lauri/Fox/Barnes/etc point to their 1 AS/NBA3 or 25ppg or "face of the franchise" and you can't really argue because it is market value for those guys. 30 teams, each with enough to pay at least 2 max slots, you're always gonna have lots of "max" guys that don't produce the way the true superstars/max guys do.
It's an absolute joke that Scottie Barnes gets the same contract (structure) as SGA or Luka. But you also can't blame Barnes, that's his market value as it stands (22y/o AS, face of franchise).

Keep the cap, get rid of the Max, the league would be a lot more interesting, lots more parity, lots more team basketball vs Star+scrub teams. It'd be so much fun, better basketball. Pay the greats what their worth, pay the role players what their worth. Pay LeBron the 85% that he's definitely worth as a revenue producer and fill out the roster with min guys. Make it like the NFL, IMO the on-court product would improve drastically but it'd likely have to be 40-50 games (so never happen), can't pay a guy 75% of the cap and expect a healthy 82 games/too risky.

Bonus, heap tons of praise on the Duncan's/Dirk's/Brunson's (likely Jokers/Giannis) who would sacrifice ten's of millions for their teammates and judge the LeBrons who would never ever consider leaving one (deserved) penny on the table for the sake of winning, rewarding teammates, etc accordingly.

Bingo. This is exactly what I've been saying. The max is too low if you truly want salaries to reflect the true market value of players. This is just the predictable outcome of price controls in a structured system like this. The NFL's system is better in this regard, although they completely screw it up with the way contracts and non-guaranteed and you can play games by restructuring and stretching contracts into infinity, making the salary cap effectively fictional.


All of that sounds good until you realize at least half the league is ran by retards that would ruin everything if contract rules weren't strictly regulated.

Which they all probably realize, which is why they like this structure to begin with :lol

[scott]

Agree, the owners implemented the Max contracts to save them from themselves and they have, it spreads the risk. It's also a luxury toy for nearly every owner/group now, the core value is in being 1 of 30 with TV revenue share, with valuations in the billions, you don't actually have to win or run the franchise well, that profit/loss is a rounding error compared to franchise appreciation and the loss will prolly be less than your mega-yacht and your prolly use it more.
You don't need to run a luxury toy like a profit maxing business in fact that's probably likely to suppress your franchise value. But you also don't want 1 mistake to tarnish your prestige toy and cripple the next 3-4 yrs.

And its not just the 1/2 retarded/public facing idiots and its misaligned incentives plus subject matter novice owners relying on those idiots as subject matter experts in a crazy specialized and subjective field.
If I'm a struggling GM with little prospect of another GM job, why wouldn't I throw crazy money at a Scottie Barnes type lottery ticket? If he turns into an All-NBA1 I'm a genius, if he doesn't I was out the door anyways. And if I'm a hedge-fund/tech/heir billionaire do I really know enough about what's going on to overrule the person I'm paying to be my subject matter expert and decision maker? The Luka's and LeBron are easy, but if your an Owner and the GM is telling you Barnes is the next Joker/Giannis level guy who just needs to develop more it'd be pretty hard to overrule.

The worst of both world's is when you get the Jerry Jones/Matt Ishbia's of the world who have the power to do what they want, but don't realize they are completely clueless :lol

[LeBowen]

If I'm a struggling GM with little prospect of another GM job, why wouldn't I throw crazy money at a Scottie Barnes type lottery ticket? If he turns into an All-NBA1 I'm a genius, if he doesn't I was out the door anyways.

This is already the biggest issue for franchises with no organizational structure above GM.
Like Magic said when asked about the Lakers future as he was leaving, "I won't be here".
That's how we got so much for Dejounte and how Nico was allowed to trade Luka.
If it doesn't work out, the GM is gone, either way, as you said.

[scott]

Isn't this the case with any employee-employer relationship though? The only thing keeping any employee from making bad decisions (within legal bounds) is the fear or losing their job. If you make the stakes high enough, people not making the cut-line will always engage in riskier behavior to try and hit the targets. The solution is to take the fear out of the ability to take calculated risks. You have to find the right balance between empowering employees to take those swings without fear, while still setting some expectations.

I've been critical of this FO because they've been allowed to fail with little accountability... but that's also what allows them to take the very patient approach that landed us Wemby, Castle and Harper.

[Seventyniner]

It's the rank-and-file middling NBA players that like having a maximum salary per player. Less money for the megastars means more for the low-end starters and role players. Those guys outnumber the stars and the players union is a one man one vote system.

[benefactor]

The Sticker Shock Krew is still in mental gymnastics mode here?

[ambchang]

Wonder what a no max system will be In the long term.

Sure the LeBron’s and Jokics will make $150M per but then it means there will be much more churn at the lower or even mid levels, where players will continue to be switched out for mid millions or low $10m contracts with a shorter career. At some point young athletes will wonder if they are better off focusing on another safer sport which would net them a higher elected return. Making it to the nba as one of the 450 players is hard enough now, it when 430 of those players don’t make enough to make that risk and investment worth it then the talent pool will inevitably shrink.

[TD 21]

and judge the LeBrons who would never ever consider leaving one (deserved) penny on the table for the sake of winning, rewarding teammates, etc accordingly.

James did in fact leave more than a "penny on the table" when he "took his talents to south beach". Save for the '11 Finals, he authored arguably the greatest stretch in league history. His reward? The Heat pinching pennies, including waiving Miller.

He also offered to last off season, if the Lakers could sign Thompson or Valanciunas with the MLE.

Whitey's fear and dislike/hatred of the powerful, unapologetic black man, never ceases to amaze.

If Klutch were ran by a white guys, their reputation would be entirely different.

[heyheymymy]

Love the deal. It was a good bet. I believe in Fox and feel he's a good fit for the team. I'm pleased to be locked in on him through his prime. Hope he can work on with his three shot some and his health is a concern. Just feels like acceptable levels of standard risk here and you'd have it with any max you offer in some form or another.

[Arguendo]

It's the rank-and-file middling NBA players that like having a maximum salary per player. Less money for the megastars means more for the low-end starters and role players. Those guys outnumber the stars and the players union is a one man one vote system.
Yes they like getting paid more than otherwise, but its not just them. Their agents like it too. Every GM would rather have max salaries, every owner would rather have max salaries. I'm sure the league would rather have maxes compared to 10-15 guys getting literally 1/2 of all salaries. The media prefers it, more stupid articles and fake-fights this way, more talent aggregation/destiny potential. I think pretty much everyone likes it except the handful of guys that generate more revenue than their contract, and the handful of fans that would appreciate parity.

[Arguendo]

James did in fact leave more than a "penny on the table" when he "took his talents to south beach". Save for the '11 Finals, he authored arguably the greatest stretch in league history. His reward? The Heat pinching pennies, including waiving Miller.

He also offered to last off season, if the Lakers could sign Thompson or Valanciunas with the MLE.

Whitey's fear and dislike/hatred of the powerful, unapologetic black man, never ceases to amaze.

If Klutch were ran by a white guys, their reputation would be entirely different.
Holy shit wow. Whitey's fear...of the unapologetic black man? Just wow

Hahaha so you are full retard, got it, never go full retard. I was pretty obviously being hyperbolic and I specifically said he deserved every penny. My guess is your IQ is a little too low to understand such things. That's ok, full retard is tough.
Lebron is literally a billionaire, did he leave money on the table in Miami? Theoretically but not actually -- Quote "Over the four seasons with the Miami Heat, LeBron James earned approximately $67.14 million. The estimated maximum salary during that time was around $69.31 million, meaning he forfeited roughly $2.17 million by taking less than the maximum." He theoretically left a $2.17 million rounding error on the table, but did he actually? Are systems complex and dynamic and multivariable? In actuality he made WAY more than made that back by "sacrifying" less than $$550K a yr going to a bigger market and winning along side 2 other All-stars. I guarantee he made far more than $2.2 million his first yr in Miami in endorsements that he would not have gotten in Cleveland. But I understand context, hyperbole, sarcasm, and any concept beyond white=devil, black=king is a bit too high level for your 75IQ to handle. Also fun that Duncan, Giannis, and Brunson aren't black? Like what, how the fuck was race a factor here. Oh 75IQ, literally everything is race. Its probably its because I'm afraid of the powerful black man. Never ceases to amaze...

Greatest stretch in history? Hahaha. The guy simply couldn't get past the Celtics and Magic in the East, so he did the easy thing, took a couple million less and joined two future HOFers in Miami, before adding a 3rd.
Yes, 4 straight finals is impressive in a vaccuum, but they were a contrived super team, they were supposed to go to 4 straight finals. They were supposed to win MORE than 2. They lost to a traditionally constructed Mavs team in 2011 and a near totally home-grown Spurs team in 2014, and came within an inch of losing to the Spurs in '13. If they lose 3/4 finals history would absolutely judge their contrived ass as a failure. Winning 2 was the minimum expectation barring injury before adding Ray Allen. Greatest stretch in history? Never ceases to amaze...

[Pauleta14]

Wish there was a poll to have an idea on who like the extension and who doesn't...

The last 2 seasons of the deal are going to be a massive weight for a non shooter who already doesn't use much his athleticism anymore

We need to buy Chip Engeland back ASAP at whatever cost :lol

[Mal]

The last 2 seasons of the deal are going to be a massive weight for a non shooter who already doesn't use much his athleticism anymore


He will be 32 in the last year of the deal, come on

[benefactor]

He will be 32 in the last year of the deal, come on
It's like people just keep saying things and have it read any of the thread or done any research at all.

Jesus fucking Christ you people. This was the right decision and the money was the right decision. It works on the timeline, the current personnel and it's something you have and above average chance to get out of if it doesn't work. He's a top 30 player and a good locker room guy. He wants to be here badly and he wants to win badly.

Everything can't be perfect. But saying it isn't good it's just being ridiculous.

[Maddog]

Wonder what a no max system will be In the long term.

Sure the LeBron’s and Jokics will make $150M per but then it means there will be much more churn at the lower or even mid levels, where players will continue to be switched out for mid millions or low $10m contracts with a shorter career. At some point young athletes will wonder if they are better off focusing on another safer sport which would net them a higher elected return. Making it to the nba as one of the 450 players is hard enough now, it when 430 of those players don’t make enough to make that risk and investment worth it then the talent pool will inevitably shrink.

Not sure- even fringe players are compensated at crazy numbers

Riley Minix by end of year will have made close to two million.
This is someone who in all likelihood has no student loans

[TimDunkem]

It's like people just keep saying things and have it read any of the thread or done any research at all.

Jesus fucking Christ you people. This was the right decision and the money was the right decision. It works on the timeline, the current personnel and it's something you have and above average chance to get out of if it doesn't work. He's a top 30 player and a good locker room guy. He wants to be here badly and he wants to win badly.

Everything can't be perfect. But saying it isn't good it's just being ridiculous.
Good contract or not, it's like these ST-lifers brains get factory reset every time a contract is signed, and then act like we haven't watched nearly every "bad" contract that has ever been signed eventually get moved. The Spurs have the luxury of having some great guards on the roster if that becomes necessary.

The contract as of right now is not a big deal.

[Brazil]

Without max contract, Fox would not have stayed then you have spent assets for a one year rental. I'm totally fine with the signing. It is a 4 years contract, at the end Victor won't even be in his prime yet, short term objective is to make the POs, you won't do that with a couple of rookies even with Harper level of talent.

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

When Fox came here last year we knew this signing was inevitable. Klutch is a pretty good player pipeline for the Spurs, so they weren’t going to mess that up.

Vassel’s contract bugs me far more than this signing. Fox will make us better. Not sure Devin does.

[ambchang]

Not sure- even fringe players are compensated at crazy numbers

Riley Minix by end of year will have made close to two million.
This is someone who in all likelihood has no student loans

My bad, should’ve clarified. Younger players, more specifically, parents of these younger players are pouring thousands in training growing up because there are chances of hitting a $15M annual paycheque for a good 5 to 10 years, even if you are a ln average player. However, if that shrinks to $5m a year to one to two years, even as an average player, the risk is just too high. Your still be one of the top 150 players or so to make that coin, and if you are an 8th man level you’d be making the minimum, which is about a million for a year or two.

Still great money, they’d still be able to become trainers afterwards, but that risk reward isn’t worth pouring insane amounts of time and money into. Might as well put them in baseball or soccer at that point.

[ambchang]

Btw, fox NOT getting the max has always been viewed as a wish. He’s a max player plain and simple. If he willingly ask to sign below the max to give more future financial flexibility to the spurs then great, but why would he do that? So that the spurs can extend castle and Harper to max extensions if they become good three years down the line? It’s not like the spurs are pushing the second apron and trying to field a championship team now.

[Dex]

When Fox came here last year we knew this signing was inevitable. Klutch is a pretty good player pipeline for the Spurs, so they weren’t going to mess that up.

Vassel’s contract bugs me far more than this signing. Fox will make us better. Not sure Devin does.

Devin's contract was fine when we were tanking/rebuilding. The money had to go somewhere.

Now it's definitely become a burden unless he significantly increases his level of play (and can stay fucking healthy). Hopefully with better supporting cast around him, he can find a niche. He doesn't seem to be the go-to scorer that the Spurs were hoping he could be.

[Ariel]

I don't think it would be a bad look because he got a max extension. If he took a pay cut, then it would have been.

Regarding the situation between Fox, Harper and Spurs:

- It's important to notice that it was the lottery luck that push Harper to Spurs. Spurs didn't try to deliberately screw Fox by adding another PG. It was just that at #2, Harper was a way better prospect than other ones. I'm sure Fox is well aware that drafting Harper was the only logical option for Spurs.

- While there are definitively fit concerns between Fox and Harper, there are only concerns at that stage. There might never have some issues with it. Fox and Harper might be able to play well together or Harper might just turn into a bust.

- Fox has already faced that situation in Sacramento with Haliburton. It ended with Haliburton being traded for Sabonis. This time, it would be more logical for Spurs to keep Harper and trade Fox given Wembanayama's age if Harper is as promising as Haliburton was in Sacramento.


Spurs might be headed into a delicate situation with Fox and Harper. It might occur in 6 months, a year, 2 years or never. By signing his extension on August 4th instead of August 6th, Fox gave the possibility for him and Spurs to get out of it as soon as the next trade deadline if needed.
He still forced his way to San Antonio and took the PR hit for it, yes, trading him in 6 months is a bad look no matter how you slice it. Down the road, it's a different deal. As for taking Harper, sure, Spurs don't owe Fox to pass on who they believe is the best available talent, especially at 2 and when there's a perceived large gap. But Harper should take at least a couple of years before he can take over, best case scenario.

Assuming no other high profile trades / signings, in year 3 Wemby would need a new contract (hopefully 30%), in year 4 it'd be Castle's turn (hopefully 20% - 25%), in year 5 it'd be Harper and Bryant's turn. So I think Spurs can ride it safely with Fox for a couple of years, improving their competitive level, and should look to move him in years 3-4, because by year 5 you're in a tough spot if the core rookies pan out (Harper, Castle, Bryant).

By then you've given him a max contract and 2/3 years with the team, Spurs should be able to move him safely without hurting their reputation.

[BacktoBasics]

It's like people just keep saying things and have it read any of the thread or done any research at all.

Jesus fucking Christ you people. This was the right decision and the money was the right decision. It works on the timeline, the current personnel and it's something you have and above average chance to get out of if it doesn't work. He's a top 30 player and a good locker room guy. He wants to be here badly and he wants to win badly.

Everything can't be perfect. But saying it isn't good it's just being ridiculous.

Exactly... and its not like this hasn't been expected and discussed to death here so its not like it was breaking news out of nowhere.

[LeBowen]

Devin's contract was fine when we were tanking/rebuilding. The money had to go somewhere.

Now it's definitely become a burden unless he significantly increases his level of play (and can stay fucking healthy). Hopefully with better supporting cast around him, he can find a niche. He doesn't seem to be the go-to scorer that the Spurs were hoping he could be.

We're risking a lot by keeping Devin for another year.
Yeah, theoretically he could be a good fit as a shooter, but that's not his natural role and there are serious health concerns. He missed 72 games over the past three seasons.
I think right now we could flip him as a neutral asset and get rid of his long-term salary for a shorter contract, but if he gets injured again or has another inconsistent season with poor defense, he'll go into negative asset territory next summer.

My biggest issue is that even though he can be a good fit on offense, we're giving up Castle's size advantage by playing him at SF because Devin is just too small to match up with forwards. We've seen how it went last season when Bane just kept running through him. And we've also seen that he wasn't missed when Champagnie was starting instead. When a player who's on 10% of your supposed starter's salary is as almost as good, that's a huge red flag.

[Ariel]

It's like people just keep saying things and have it read any of the thread or done any research at all.

Jesus fucking Christ you people. This was the right decision and the money was the right decision. It works on the timeline, the current personnel and it's something you have and above average chance to get out of if it doesn't work. He's a top 30 player and a good locker room guy. He wants to be here badly and he wants to win badly.

Everything can't be perfect. But saying it isn't good it's just being ridiculous.
Especially when you consider that, at the time, Spurs had no way to predict Wemby would be out for half a season and the lottery balls would fall into the only spot where it could matter in a Fox trade (2, nowhere else a PG was BPA). By then Spurs probably had a tacit agreement with Fox and his representation that forcing his way to the Spurs came with a max extension.

Also, Fox was always getting a max (or very close), if you played hardball he could take it to free agency and surely more than team with cap room (starting with Brooklyn) would give hiim that money no questions asked, that kills your leverage. Bottom line, the way events unfolded Spurs had to do this, if Fox stays healthy he should contribute now and be movable in the future.

[TD 21]

Quote "Over the four seasons with the Miami Heat, LeBron James earned approximately $67.14 million. The estimated maximum salary during that time was around $69.31 million, meaning he forfeited roughly $2.17 million by taking less than the maximum."

But I understand context, hyperbole, sarcasm, and any concept beyond white=devil, black=king Also fun that Duncan, Giannis, and Brunson aren't black?

Greatest stretch in history? Hahaha. The guy simply couldn't get past the Celtics and Magic in the East, so he did the easy thing, took a couple million less and joined two future HOFers in Miami, before adding a 3rd.

Like I said, he took less. It's not about the amount or whether it can be recouped through other avenues, it's about the principle. He (and MVP caliber players in general) are already significantly underpaid because of the cap on max salaries based on experience.

The usual overly defensive nonsense. They're all black, but they don't fit the same description as James.

I clearly meant individually. Early 90s Jordan and early 10s James are probably the two GOAT peaks. If it were so easy, then why were the Heat one miracle play a way from going 1 for 4? They weren't the Durant Warriors, who started on the two-yard line.

[Gibbz]

I think we should not pay good players and go back to a Sochan/Tre Jones PG rotation tbh

[exstatic]

Wonder what a no max system will be In the long term.

Sure the LeBron’s and Jokics will make $150M per but then it means there will be much more churn at the lower or even mid levels, where players will continue to be switched out for mid millions or low $10m contracts with a shorter career. At some point young athletes will wonder if they are better off focusing on another safer sport which would net them a higher elected return. Making it to the nba as one of the 450 players is hard enough now, it when 430 of those players don’t make enough to make that risk and investment worth it then the talent pool will inevitably shrink.

Guys who are mid level and a bit above would just go to Europe. They’d be making 2 way money here.

[KobesAchilles]

It's like people just keep saying things and have it read any of the thread or done any research at all.

Jesus fucking Christ you people. This was the right decision and the money was the right decision. It works on the timeline, the current personnel and it's something you have and above average chance to get out of if it doesn't work. He's a top 30 player and a good locker room guy. He wants to be here badly and he wants to win badly.

Everything can't be perfect. But saying it isn't good it's just being ridiculous.
I mean people here wouldn’t even trade Castle for Giannis. Some guy was literally saying that Castle is going to have more elite years going forward than Giannis and that Giannis is going to drop off a cliff after next season. On Spurstalk the age 32 is a death sentence :lol

[LeBowen]

On Spurstalk the age 32 is a death sentence :lol

Which is hillarious considering that Spurs owe most of their success to veteran play.

[scott]

Yes they like getting paid more than otherwise, but its not just them. Their agents like it too. Every GM would rather have max salaries, every owner would rather have max salaries. I'm sure the league would rather have maxes compared to 10-15 guys getting literally 1/2 of all salaries. The media prefers it, more stupid articles and fake-fights this way, more talent aggregation/destiny potential. I think pretty much everyone likes it except the handful of guys that generate more revenue than their contract, and the handful of fans that would appreciate parity.

Nailed it. And those Top 10-15 who are underpaid due to the max are making it up in other ways (if they want to). Everyone seems happy with the arrangement, save for fans too stupid to recognize how resource allocation works and would rather slobber all over themselves with "a ToP 30 pLaYeR iSnT wOrTh ThE mAx"

[Mal]

It's like people just keep saying things and have it read any of the thread or done any research at all.

Jesus fucking Christ you people. This was the right decision and the money was the right decision. It works on the timeline, the current personnel and it's something you have and above average chance to get out of if it doesn't work. He's a top 30 player and a good locker room guy. He wants to be here badly and he wants to win badly.

Everything can't be perfect. But saying it isn't good it's just being ridiculous.

I am in deal had to be done camp, Fox is good player in the prime, and that's the market value for borderline all-stars these days.

And 32 is prime age for NBA, dont get me wrong

[CGD]

No one would care about the max had we not lucked into Harper. It’s time to move on.

[Pauleta14]

He will be 32 in the last year of the deal, come on

We'll see but I'm not sure it's an easily tradable contract, which is to me the main criteria to quality it as a good one.

There was no negotiations as the assurance to give Fox the max was probably negociated part of the reasons Spurs didn't have to give too much to SAC, but they'll have to pay ultimately in 4-5 years (with Wemby Castle AND Harper's extensions in the books!)

I hope he gets a reliable jumpshot

[Pauleta14]

It's like people just keep saying things and have it read any of the thread or done any research at all.

Jesus fucking Christ you people. This was the right decision and the money was the right decision. It works on the timeline, the current personnel and it's something you have and above average chance to get out of if it doesn't work. He's a top 30 player and a good locker room guy. He wants to be here badly and he wants to win badly.

Everything can't be perfect. But saying it isn't good it's just being ridiculous.

I'm not saying it wasn't the right thing to do. There was no other choice anyway

[LeBowen]

We'll see but I'm not sure it's an easily tradable contract, which is to me the main criteria to quality it as a good one.

If you're going to go with that criteria, no max deal is easily treadeable due to salary matching and whatnot.
We got Fox for dirt cheap and if he gives us 3 peak level years we can let him go for free when Castle/Harper are up for extensions if they develop into all-star level guards.
Barring major injuries which can happen to anyone, Fox will never be a negative contract we'll have to pay to get out of.
We went over it before, but theoretically just the 29-30 season is critical with cap management if both Castle and Harper get rookie max extensions and even then we wouldn't be over projected second apron. We can (hopefully) afford to pay a bit more tax for one season.

[Ice009]

What are all you people complaining for? I'm seeing complaints everywhere - even outside of ST. He asked to be traded to the Spurs, the Spurs wanted him, and part of the deal would have been a max contract. If the Spurs didn't want to pay him that, they wouldn't have traded for him.

[poopbox]

Why are people so fixated on how tradeable this contract is? Who says Fox ever get's traded?

How do you guys take a player who has played in 0 real nba games in harper and another guard who shot below league average from almost everywhere on the floor in Castle and say "yeah both of these guys will be so good one day we will have to trade Fox let's make sure we get him on a contract we can easily trade when we have to" :rollin

Is that how you guys live your day to day life?

Yeah let me turn down this job that pays 80k right now cause 3 years from now I will be working a job that pays 130k let me make sure I don't have anything distracting me so that in 3 years I can accept that job :rollin

[Pauleta14]

If you're going to go with that criteria, no max deal is easily treadeable due to salary matching and whatnot.
We got Fox for dirt cheap and if he gives us 3 peak level years we can let him go for free when Castle/Harper are up for extensions if they develop into all-star level guards.
Barring major injuries which can happen to anyone, Fox will never be a negative contract we'll have to pay to get out of.
We went over it before, but theoretically just the 29-30 season is critical with cap management if both Castle and Harper get rookie max extensions and even then we wouldn't be over projected second apron. We can (hopefully) afford to pay a bit more tax for one season.

Fair point, the logic works for lower contracts mostly.

Again, I'm not complaining, happy we signed him especially considering how young and unreliable Castle and Harper will be for a few more years.

It's all about leverage anyway and Fox/Klutch has all of it considering how their player's portfolio keeps growing, we better keep good relations with them

All I was saying is pointing the timing of the last 2 seasons and their weight in the extensions of Castle and Harper & Bryant (Wemby being a no-brainer max). There's a scenario where Fox becomes a huge handicap in constructing the team if there's a huge drop off in production or career altering injury (2 unfortunately realistic cases at his (future) age)

[LeBowen]

All I was saying is pointing the timing of the last 2 seasons and their weight in the extensions of Castle and Harper & Bryant (Wemby being a no-brainer max).

Wemby 30% + Fox 30% + Castle 25% + Harper 25% = 100% of the cap. Luxury line is at 120%, first apron is at 125%, second apron is at 135% of the cap. We could keep all five for one season, I doubt that Bryant will be a rookie max extension player.
The only ones who should be worried in all of this are the friendship crew members.

If both Castle and Harper prove to be the real deal with Wemby being the best player in the league, we wouldn't need anything more than a cheap backup big with a handful of Champagnie-like 3-D guys to be the best team in the league.
Then Fox's contract expires and he either walks or becomes a 6th man on a reasonable contract at 33.

[spurraider21]

this is also assuming that both castle and harper are max players. if they're all max caliber players, then you can definitely trade one of castle/fox/harper and still have 2 all star guards

[scott]

this is also assuming that both castle and harper are max players. if they're all max caliber players, then you can definitely trade one of castle/fox/harper and still have 2 all star guards

If Fox is performing up to his contract, there isn't really a likely path to both Castle and Harper being max players since there is only one ball to go around. The closest example I can think of is Tatum (35%) + Brown (35%) + Jrue (21%) + Tingus (21%) + DWhite (18%). That was a markedly different situation in a much different market.

If everything goes absolutely perfectly and the Spurs become a championship winner and perennial 60 game winner, I could see one of Harper or Castle getting the max and the other getting 20%. But this assumes the absolute best case on the court outcome.

The case where both Castle and Harper become max players is actually one of the worst case scenarios, because it probably means one of Fox or Wemby has been injured or their performance just falls off a cliff. This is worst case because now you're in a situation where either Fox or Wemby has become a negative asset that will be very difficult to move. But that's a risk present with any big contract.

[TekXX]

Everyone assuming Castle and Harper are the future, let's just wait and see first. Damn the off-season daydreaming can get out of control. The Spurs are getting racked over the coals for giving a max deal to a guy who isn't even top 30. I don't have a good feeling about this. This is the biggest sign that Pop has been sidelined.

[Brazil]

:lol if Harper and Castle become max players I don't think we should worry too much of how salaries will fit

[Seventyniner]

Fox is great insurance against one or both of Castle and Harper not turning into a star. If both do, that's a really great "problem" to have.

[LeBowen]

If Fox is performing up to his contract, there isn't really a likely path to both Castle and Harper being max players since there is only one ball to go around. The closest example I can think of is Tatum (35%) + Brown (35%) + Jrue (21%) + Tingus (21%) + DWhite (18%). That was a markedly different situation in a much different market.

If everything goes absolutely perfectly and the Spurs become a championship winner and perennial 60 game winner, I could see one of Harper or Castle getting the max and the other getting 20%. But this assumes the absolute best case on the court outcome.

The case where both Castle and Harper become max players is actually one of the worst case scenarios, because it probably means one of Fox or Wemby has been injured or their performance just falls off a cliff. This is worst case because now you're in a situation where either Fox or Wemby has become a negative asset that will be very difficult to move. But that's a risk present with any big contract.

If Wemby gets hurt the only thing that's moving are the Spurs. :lol

[spurraider21]

If Fox is performing up to his contract, there isn't really a likely path to both Castle and Harper being max players since there is only one ball to go around. The closest example I can think of is Tatum (35%) + Brown (35%) + Jrue (21%) + Tingus (21%) + DWhite (18%). That was a markedly different situation in a much different market.

If everything goes absolutely perfectly and the Spurs become a championship winner and perennial 60 game winner, I could see one of Harper or Castle getting the max and the other getting 20%. But this assumes the absolute best case on the court outcome.

The case where both Castle and Harper become max players is actually one of the worst case scenarios, because it probably means one of Fox or Wemby has been injured or their performance just falls off a cliff. This is worst case because now you're in a situation where either Fox or Wemby has become a negative asset that will be very difficult to move. But that's a risk present with any big contract.
i think the path to them becoming max players is if Castle becomes a Jaylen Brown level wing and Harper becomes that Manu or OKC Harden supersub who can play minutes at SG in addition to running the unit when Fox sits

from watching all the offseason stuff Castle has been doing with guard whisperer guy, it doesnt really seem like his jumper is getting all that much better, and the emphasis has been on handling/self creation stuff which probably isnt the direction the team wants to take his game anyway

[Guru of Nothing]

OFFICIAL: I triple dog dare Castle and Harper to become max level all stars.

[dn0774]

If Harper and Castle become legit max guys (all stars) and Wemby/Fox are healthy then we are one of the greatest teams ever assembled. In that scenario Fox's contract isn't a concern and life as a Spurs fan would be amazing. If one or both don't become max guys then we absolutely needed Fox anyway. Either way, I am glad Fox is in the fold.

[clampi]

Few thoughts:

-Trade ('YEAH CRAZY BARGAIN') and extension ("OMG OVERPAY") have to be considered as a package, it's obvious that Rich Paul and Fox applied max leverage to tank his trading value in exchange for a 4 year max extension commitment, we just got to know the second half of the deal

-Nobody ever questioned that Fox was worth his current contract which is a 25% cap max deal, so at the very worst this is an overpay by around 8/9M$ a year, FO estimated that they could live with that in exchange for getting Fox for minimal assets

-"but now we have Harper': if we were good with Fox before the lottery we are even better now with Harper on top, this is a rich man problem to have and as much as I believe in Dylan thats not reasonable at all to expect him to be as good within 2/3 years as Fox, a consensus top 30 player and top 8 lead guard when he was fully healthy in 22-24

-Obviously, if Harper develops as we hope we'll need to make room for him on the court and on the spreadsheet by 2029 at the latest, at this time Fox will have just 1 year left so barring crazy injuries or dramatic level drop his contract will be movable, there will always be a mid team lacking talent at that position willing to pay a 30/31yo Fox.

-In the meantime we will be able to compete way better than with just starting DH, the young guys will have the opportunity to gain some PO experience earlier, we keep Victor happy, and if everything clicks we might contend as soon as 27. All of that with keeping our future assets quasi untouched (2 real first picks)

All in all, a solid move short and long term wise in my opinion. Would I have preferred a flat 200/4 effectively decreasing from 30 to 25% cap over its course ? Yeah sure that would have been ideal but we dont always get exactly what we want, and this is a reasonable compromise.

[twodeep]

Few thoughts:

-Trade ('YEAH CRAZY BARGAIN') and extension ("OMG OVERPAY") have to be considered as a package, it's obvious that Rich Paul and Fox applied max leverage to tank his trading value in exchange for a 4 year max extension commitment, we just got to know the second half of the deal

-Nobody ever questioned that Fox was worth his current contract which is a 25% cap max deal, so at the very worst this is an overpay by around 8/9M$ a year, FO estimated that they could live with that in exchange for getting Fox for minimal assets

-"but now we have Harper': if we were good with Fox before the lottery we are even better now with Harper on top, this is a rich man problem to have and as much as I believe in Dylan thats not reasonable at all to expect him to be as good within 2/3 years as Fox, a consensus top 30 player and top 8 lead guard when he was fully healthy in 22-24

-Obviously, if Harper develops as we hope we'll need to make room for him on the court and on the spreadsheet by 2029 at the latest, at this time Fox will have just 1 year left so barring crazy injuries or dramatic level drop his contract will be movable, there will always be a mid team lacking talent at that position willing to pay a 30/31yo Fox.

-In the meantime we will be able to compete way better than with just starting DH, the young guys will have the opportunity to gain some PO experience earlier, we keep Victor happy, and if everything clicks we might contend as soon as 27. All of that with keeping our future assets quasi untouched (2 real first picks)

All in all, a solid move short and long term wise in my opinion. Would I have preferred a flat 200/4 effectively decreasing from 30 to 25% cap over its course ? Yeah sure that would have been ideal but we dont always get exactly what we want, and this is a reasonable compromise.

Nailed it people are overreacting

[cutewizard]

Only an emotionally unintelligent person would think not maxing Fox was rational, because their is a human element to the nba beyond just what happens on the basketball court. Fox and his agent did the Spurs a MASSIVE favor by forcing their way out of Sac and making the Spurs the only destination. Had the Spurs tried to play any type of hardball with Fox he would have been both the first player to try and force their way to the Spurs and the last, because any other player is going to look at the situation and say "yeah no, not going to try to force myself to a place that will then turn around and play hardball with me because they drafted a guard who might legit never even be as good as I am right now."

Real life isn't Nba2k.

The actual irrational thing to do would be to draft a guy number 2 and then tell the star player you traded for who is way better than the player you drafted right now you are not going to max him. That would open you up to Fox wanting to leave as soon as he got here ( having Victor like wtf) and put an insane amount of pressure on Harper to be good right now. Like be an all star his rookie year good if you pulled some foolishness like that.

And Fox is clearly a max player. If he hit free agency he would have multiple teams offering him a max contract no questions asked.

On point

[cutewizard]

I'm fine with Fox leading this iteration together with Wemby for the next five years

[kxs783kms]

I still think Harper or Castle are traded before Fox because of this contract. If Fox is a big part of the Spurs winning a ring or two before his contract is up, I don't see him being the one the Spurs let go. If he becomes great friends with Wemby, Wemby isn't going to let them trade him. I really think this is a battle between Castle or Fox on who gets traded first.

[TDomination]

Which is hillarious considering that Spurs owe most of their success to veteran play.
how quickly we have forgotten about the past

[ambchang]

Everyone assuming Castle and Harper are the future, let's just wait and see first. Damn the off-season daydreaming can get out of control. The Spurs are getting racked over the coals for giving a max deal to a guy who isn't even top 30. I don't have a good feeling about this. This is the biggest sign that Pop has been sidelined.

Spurstalk is like that parent with unrealistic expectations for the kid when they are young, and then become over-bearing once they start to grow up. When the kid is a baby, the parent would be like "She can become a doctor because look at how much she likes to play with the toy stethoscope!" (Carter Bryant, Harper, to an extent Castle), but once the kid starts to get any screen time, it'd be "That lazy mofo is doing nothing but get on that stupid iPad, she will be homeless I bet you!" (Vassell, Keldon, Sochan, and now Fox).

[ambchang]

To put this in perspective, as of now, by the time the contract kicks in for the 26-27 season, he will be tied at 17 in terms of salary at $49.64M, with Luka (thanks Nico) and Bam). The guys immediately below him, not counting rookie deals and rookie extensions (Like Ant, Tyrese, etc...), are players like JJ Jr, Lavine, Lauri, Sabonis, Anunoby and such. I'd say this is a fair contract just based on that.

[buttsR4rebounding]

If Wemby gets hurt the only thing that's moving are the Spurs. :lol

Spurs aren't going anywhere. They just had a huge investment in a practice facility. Project Marvel is going to go through and they will likely sign a 30 year lease and no doubt get a piece of bookings in the new arena when the Spurs aren't playing. COSA is handing the Spurs a huge cash cow to insure their long-term residency.

[scott]

Spurstalk is like that parent with unrealistic expectations for the kid when they are young, and then become over-bearing once they start to grow up. When the kid is a baby, the parent would be like "She can become a doctor because look at how much she likes to play with the toy stethoscope!" (Carter Bryant, Harper, to an extent Castle), but once the kid starts to get any screen time, it'd be "That lazy mofo is doing nothing but get on that stupid iPad, she will be homeless I bet you!" (Vassell, Keldon, Sochan, and now Fox).

Perfect analogy. Every draft pick is part of our "promising young core" but every veteran is a washed up loser, leaching money away from the SpursTalk server budget

[rjv]

Spurstalk is like that parent with unrealistic expectations for the kid when they are young, and then become over-bearing once they start to grow up. When the kid is a baby, the parent would be like "She can become a doctor because look at how much she likes to play with the toy stethoscope!" (Carter Bryant, Harper, to an extent Castle), but once the kid starts to get any screen time, it'd be "That lazy mofo is doing nothing but get on that stupid iPad, she will be homeless I bet you!" (Vassell, Keldon, Sochan, and now Fox).

not to mention that some parents have unrealistic expectations. another analogy is the little league parent who thinks their kid can make it to the majors when maybe the ceiling is playing for a DII school. our expectations for KJ, sochan and vassell have to be tempered. in the end, the best case scenario for them is that they comprise a big chunk of a solid back up squad.

[Tyronn Lue]

So what's the new nickname? DeEarnin Faux?

[cutewizard]

Quicksilver

[Russ]

Quicksilver

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ejj81Y2ZlM&list=RD7ejj81Y2ZlM&start_radio=1

[tonight...you]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ejj81Y2ZlM&list=RD7ejj81Y2ZlM&start_radio=1
Nice.

[T Park]

Im sorry, but 1 already lottery pick, 2 unprotected firsts and 5 2nds is not underpaying for a one time all star and I like Fox well enough. It was fair value.

Lmfao amazing

[cutewizard]

https://youtu.be/4f6zVMb4dU0?si=iBBq099G5k1e5IKA

[cutewizard]

https://youtu.be/jgnLwd5y_jk?si=p8TfWt1G0jPjpRGJ

[scott]

https://youtu.be/jgnLwd5y_jk?si=p8TfWt1G0jPjpRGJ

Thanks for posting this… can’t wait to see fully healthy Fox with fully Healthy Wemby and the overall improved roster.

[heyheymymy]

Yeah Fox hit a few daggers last season the Hornets game and the Memphis game for example. How are people not excited for Fox? He could really elevate the Spurs and it was a pretty fortuitous turn of events how SA obtained him.

[Gagnrath]

So what happens with Harper and Castle? You don’t hand this kind of contract with multiple guys with potentially similar skills on the same roster
So what happens is you have them through their rookie deals and first extension. That's about 3 years from now, you should have a pretty good idea of where you are skills wise with two young big combo guards at that point. You put up your hands and say well guys you have choices we can't afford three of you either people take cuts for the team and the agents work on compensation from having a player who gets major time in national games putting out his name for endorsement deals to make up for the smaller contracts or someone goes on the trade block. (probably fox at that point but depending on deal and packages we can work with other options.) This gives you flexibility, you have to remember that after year on it looked like Keldon was going to be a very good 3 and D small forward who had a drive the bucket option at times as well.

[exstatic]

So what happens is you have them through their rookie deals and first extension. That's about 3 years from now, you should have a pretty good idea of where you are skills wise with two young big combo guards at that point. You put up your hands and say well guys you have choices we can't afford three of you either people take cuts for the team and the agents work on compensation from having a player who gets major time in national games putting out his name for endorsement deals to make up for the smaller contracts or someone goes on the trade block. (probably fox at that point but depending on deal and packages we can work with other options.) This gives you flexibility, you have to remember that after year on it looked like Keldon was going to be a very good 3 and D small forward who had a drive the bucket option at times as well.

I never remember Keldon being projected as a defender at all, and he also didn’t win RoY. The comparison doesn’t stand up.

When you have two guards who were top 4 lottery picks playing off a generational extraterrestrial, there’s a really good chance they both pop.

[Gagnrath]

I never remember Keldon being projected as a defender at all, and he also didn’t win RoY. The comparison doesn’t stand up.

When you have two guards who were top 4 lottery picks playing off a generational extraterrestrial, there’s a really good chance they both pop.

Wasn't meant as a comparison was meant as a point that what is projected in the first couple of years of a NBA career doesn't happen. I do agree that I do think that both Castle and Harper turn out. Which is a big part of why I am ok with this contract. It lets you still have Foxes 4th year when you go D Now that you've got your Bag and a ring why don't you let us trade you to pick your big market team.... You go get a final Bag lead that team for a 4 year contract then come back retire in SA and raise the kids around their grandma and extended family.

[kht]

Looking back, how much of question was it really that Fox was getting the full max full years extension?

[baseline bum]

Looking back, how much of question was it really that Fox was getting the full max full years extension?

I never thought it was in any doubt once the Spurs traded for De'Aaron. You put up 25 a night on a competitive team, you're a max player.

[djohn2oo8]

Jesus. :lol
:lmao

[djohn2oo8]

I never thought it was in any doubt once the Spurs traded for De'Aaron. You put up 25 a night on a competitive team, you're a max player.
Christ lol