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

[BatManu20]

Fox gets his Max Deal.

1952443033607094412

[Mal]

Noone is taking less than max these days

[Rosewood]

Didn’t think he’d be getting less than the max. Was a little confused at all the chatter regarding that the last few days.

[Donald Sterling.]

Giving the max to a fringe all star who made the playoffs once in 8 seasons and had Curry drop 50 on his head in a close out game 7.

Such is life for small market franchises who cannot attract true game changers :lol

[vander]

we will have to trade away 1sts to unload him in a few years

[jeebus]

lmfao

[spurraider21]

seemed like there was some momentum to him getting a bit less but the spurs org is usually good at being tight lipped. its a lot of money but it captures his entire prime. with the last year not being a player option, we control him through his age 31-32 season.

[Guru of Nothing]

Zero surprises detected.

[TimmyBuckets]

Not surprising. Remember him and Klutch helped us out too. We essentially only gave up 2 conveyable FRPs and got rid of Collins. We kept everyone. He was always getting the max.

[TimDunkem]

Only retards will be surprised.

[LeBowen]

https://i.imgur.com/QdM3WDm.png

https://i.imgur.com/n5bR9ss.png

Fox's max won't be an issue until Harper's extension kicks in, but there's a lot of time between now and 2029.
I'd rather pay an all-star like Fox 5 to 10 million more than his worth than give Jeremy 20 million a year.

[The Third Man]

Bad Idea Jeans.

[djohn2oo8]

Jesus. :lol

[scott]

I thought the new max based on the updated cap estimates was 4/222?

[scott]

I'd rather pay an all-star like Fox 5 to 10 million more than his worth than give Jeremy 20 million a year.

Brian Wright:

https://i.imgur.com/s4eamxv.jpeg

[TimmyBuckets]

Also this max is right through his prime 27-31. Imagine extending guy in his 30s. Spurs locked him in no whining (except from some fans) and now we got a playoff squad with 1 superstar in Wemby and an all star caliber in Fox.

[LkrFan]

https://media.tenor.com/vphCPbVnw_cAAAAM/fred-sanford-annoyed.gif
:lol

[Dverde]

Any word on a player opt out? I’m guessing no.

[SpursFan86]

Meh I don’t think it’s as bad as some people make it seem. Fox has shown he can be a legitimate all-star, and there’s the potential he looks even better next to Wemby. I think a lot of people have a sour taste in their mouth because of how he looked in the very limited sample we got last year while he was dealing with a known finger/hand issue.

A borderline all-star caliber guy in his prime isn’t going for less than the max…think anyone who was expecting him to take less was being overly optimistic. I’m not saying I’m thrilled but it’s a fair deal and none of this should be surprising.

[fafo]

I'll be surprised if he finishes this contract in San Antonio. Playing with Wemby will gas his value, and they'll move him when Harper is ready to take over.

[djohn2oo8]

Meh I don’t think it’s as bad as some people make it seem. Fox has shown he can be a legitimate all-star, and there’s the potential he looks even better next to Wemby. I think a lot of people have a sour taste in their mouth because of how he looked in the very limited sample we got last year while he was dealing with a known finger/hand issue.

A borderline all-star caliber guy in his prime isn’t going for less than the max…think anyone who was expecting him to take less was being overly optimistic. I’m not saying I’m thrilled but it’s a fair deal and none of this should be surprising.
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

[scott]

Spurs Fan has a new contract to whine about it, except this time it's for a player who's actually good.

But I won't fall for the distraction from the real contract we should all be whining about... I still see you, YungDev0

[Leetonidas]

Hopefully this is a front loaded contract. But not really surprising either way. Klutch ain't letting a top 30 player in his prime take a big discount in what is probably going to be the largest deal of his career

[jhfenton]

Hopefully this is a front loaded contract. But not really surprising either way. Klutch ain't letting a top 30 player in his prime take a big discount in what is probably going to be the largest deal of his career

How would you front-load a max contract? The concept assumes max raises.

[BatManu20]

I thought the new max based on the updated cap estimates was 4/222?

Yea assuming the Cap only goes up 7% as predicted, this deal will be 4-yrs/$222.4M, not $229M. The $229M figure would be if the Cap goes up 10%, which it's not expected to, so not sure what's going on.

[TimmyBuckets]

I'll be surprised if he finishes this contract in San Antonio. Playing with Wemby will gas his value, and they'll move him when Harper is ready to take over.

Maybe, but at least for the next few years, neither Harper, Castle, Bryant or any other player on this team is ready to get in to the playoffs or compete at that level. We got Fox for this exact reason. Harper talk is cute and all but people forget this isn’t Harper’s team, it’s Wemby’s. He’s not waiting another 4 years or whatever for some noob PG to git good.

[Mugen]

Fox is gonna be pretty great these next two seasons while Castle and Harper develop. I'd be surprised if he plays out the duration of the contract in San Antonio. But he'll still be a decent trade piece halfway into it tbh.

[Leetonidas]

How would you front-load a max contract? The concept assumes max raises.

I don't know shit about fuck when it comes to that stuff my guy, not gonna pretend I do :lol

[BatManu20]

Fox needs to up his 3PT% to at least league average now that he's getting this kind of money tbh. Or even 37% like his last year in Sacto.

[fafo]

Maybe, but at least for the next few years, neither Harper, Castle, Bryant or any other player on this team is ready to get in to the playoffs or compete at that level. We got Fox for this exact reason. Harper talk is cute and all but people forget this isn’t Harper’s team, it’s Wemby’s. He’s not waiting another 4 years or whatever for some noob PG to git good.
Agreed, there's no telling exactly how good these players will be. No harm in locking up the real deal for the next few years.

[jhfenton]

I don't know shit about fuck when it comes to that stuff my guy, not gonna pretend I do :lol

Fair enough. I was hoping we'd see something like that: 2 years max, 3rd year flat, 4th year team option or declining. I didn't really expect it, but the buzz made me think something like that was possible.

[Dex]

Not surprised by the outcome. Was probably part of the trade negotiations coming in.

Probably an overpay, but we still have to see how it plays out. Spurs have an insurance policy in Harper, but it's not like he could be expected to come in and be a starting PG for a playoff team in the NBA on day one. Even guys like Parker and Ginobili needed a few years to figure it out, and they'd been playing "pro" basketball in other leagues for years.

As the cap and salaries continue to rise, Fox's deal won't seem so crazy in the future, and could be moved if needed.

[Allan Rowe vs Wade]

pay the man i said i said

[LeBowen]

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

Castle and Harper won't be better than Fox for the next couple of seasons at the very least.
Spurs can't waste away any more seasons, right now Spurs have the second longest playoff drought in the league, which is embarrassing.
Wemby will be an MVP candidate for the rest of his career and is ready to compete.

Fox is as good of a second option for Wemby as it gets, as we've seen from the small sample size they have together. It's just that Spurs need shooters around those two, which could still be an issue.
But to say Fox/Harper/Castle can't co-exist after watching this year's finals is just wrong.
The idea is obvious. Wemby will be the best rim protector in the league by some margin and a wing on offense. He's not a post player and he likely won't ever be one, which is a good thing because that's just asking for trouble with his build. He already has a lot of 3pt gravity and is the best vertical threat in the league, he'll get his 27-30ppg with ease.

Put two elite paint penetrators and two elite 3pt shooters around Wemby and it's over. It's that simple.
Obviously Harper and Castle will have to improve their shooting and Spurs will have to get better spacing from the wings over the next few years, but the roster is already taking shape.
With potentially three elite paint penetrators and relentless rim pressure for 48 minutes, Spurs will ran most slow paced teams off the floor.

If Harper exceeds all expectations and Fox outlives his second option role, then we trade Fox. Unless he suffers serious injuries, he won't be a negative asset, he's turning 28 this year and his prime has just started.
But we have at least three years before cap situation becomes an issue.
Castle's extension starts in 2028, Harper's in 2029. You don't trade away an all-star in their prime in 2025 because of something that could happen 3 years down the road.

Castle isn't projected to be a true point guard, his best case scenario is somewhat of a Jimmy/Jrue hybrid. And as I already said, the NBA is moving to two or even three ballhandlers on the floor together. As long as they can defend and shoot, having too many playmakers will never be an issue.

For me personally, bigger concerns are if Spurs will be dumb and give Sochan more than he deserves considering he's horrible on offense and if Vassell's contract will become a negative because he's really streaky and injury prone. Everything else is going according to the plan, imo. Hitting another jackpot with Harper doesn't mean Spurs should change the rest of their roster building strategy.

[NASpurs]

Does that mean there's less money for Sochan now? If so, seems like it's a W for Fox and the team as a whole.

[Dverde]

Fox needs to up his 3PT% to at least league average now that he's getting this kind of money tbh. Or even 37% like his last year in Sacto.

He doesn’t need to do anything, he got the bag. We own the cow, no more negotiation.

[Dex]

Does that mean there's less money for Sochan now? If so, seems like it's a W for Fox and the team as a whole.

Means that guys like Johnson, Vassell, and Sochan are basically playing for a job now.

I like them as people. They were fun to have on a rebuilding team. I also wouldn't miss any of them as players if they get moved.

They've had chances to prove their worth, and...well...they haven't.

[KobesAchilles]

Not a bad deal at all if we actually draft correctly. Title contenders have a main centerpiece, and all-star teammate, and role players who can defend and hit open shots. Spurs have 2 of the 3. The role players hitting open shots and defending are where we are sorely lacking. Carter is a great start. The sooner we ditch KJ and Vassell the better for the team. Tbh if Hailburton isn’t coming back I would offer the farm for Siakim.

[Donald Sterling.]

Fox needs to up his 3PT% to at least league average now that he's getting this kind of money tbh. Or even 37% like his last year in Sacto.

:lmao

As a great spur once so eloquently put it: "There's no pressure to perform" :lol

[Mugen]

Fox is a pretty elite fit next to Wemby. Sure, Castle, Sochan and Harper might not be great fits in between those guys but you have time to figure it out and can move off of any of them pretty easily.

If Castle and Harper hits then great, move Fox. It's not a Bradley Beal situation where he has a no trade clause or he's gonna be in his mid 30s halfway into the deal. He'll still be in his prime and can easily be moved :lol

[Bruno]

Like it or not, that's his market value. Fox is a max player.

Question is when the extension will be officially signed. If it's today or tomorrow, Fox will be eligible to be traded at next trade deadline. If it's after tomorrow, he won't be trade eligible until the end of the season.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

Hate this, but let’s see if he can improve his torrid outside shooting

[spurraider21]

Like it or not, that's his market value. Fox is a max player.

Question is when the extension will be officially signed. If it's today or tomorrow, Fox will be eligible to be traded at next trade deadline. If it's after tomorrow, he won't be trade eligible until the end of the season.
other than giannis becoming available im struggling to come up with any scenario where trading fox at the deadline makes any sense

[BatManu20]

1952457218336448695

[Mugen]

Like it or not, that's his market value. Fox is a max player.

Question is when the extension will be officially signed. If it's today or tomorrow, Fox will be eligible to be traded at next trade deadline. If it's after tomorrow, he won't be trade eligible until the end of the season.

I don't think there's any world where Fox is traded before next summer tbh.

[SpursFan86]

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

Few things...

1) I don't think Castle is a lock to become some sort of all-star caliber guy. I'm excited to have him and hopeful for his future, but there's absolutely a real chance he never is the caliber of player that Fox is. It's not like he was some dominant rookie; he won ROTY in a very weak rookie class and had inflated raw stats due to injuries. I'm not trying to shit on him, but just saying that him being an all-star caliber player isn't some sort of certainty at this point.

2) The above pretty much applies to Harper as well. I'm super optimistic about him but you don't piss off Fox/go back on a verbal agreement because Harper might make Fox redundant down the road.

3) Let's take the best case scenario and assume both Castle/Harper are as good as we hope they'll be and in 2-3 years we're ready to move on from Fox entirely. He'll still be in his prime with 1-2 years left on his contract. As long as he plays at a high level the next couple of years then it really shouldn't be that hard to move him if that's the direction the team wants to go.

Obviously if Fox is super disappointing then the contract will backfire. That would be the case regardless of Castle/Harper being in the picture. If the Spurs view Fox as a borderline or legitimate all-star caliber guard (which they almost certainly do) then it'd be foolish to not go this route just because Castle/Harper might make him redundant in a few years.

[LeBowen]

From all the interviews I've seen, Fox seems like an intelligent guy.
Hopefully all these comments about him being a career loser and the extension not being worth it fuel a fire and he proves the doubters wrong.

There are people out there who actually think the likes of Garland, Lamelo, Murray and Harden are better players right now, ffs.

[Russ]

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

Why not?

Roll your best five players out there and change the game (like the Warriors did a few years ago).

[Poolboy5623]

I'm just glad the Spurs have someone on the roster, not named Wemby, that's worthy of the Max.

[Mr. Body]

Didn’t think he’d be getting less than the max. Was a little confused at all the chatter regarding that the last few days.

Because he's not worth this kind of money

[TimmyBuckets]

The guy got his money (when he signs officially) but he'll have the will to perform too. He's in his prime, has family in Texas, and this is where he wanted to be. He's definitely not as miserable as he was in Sac.

[Bruno]

other than giannis becoming available im struggling to come up with any scenario where trading fox at the deadline makes any sense

I think a potential Fox trade would be mainly because Harper/Castle turn out great and struggle to fit with him.

Last summer, Markkanen waited a day to sign his extension to make him ineligible to be traded at the trade deadline. If Fox don't do that, it is meaningful.

[DPG21920]

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.

[DPG21920]

Like it or not, that's his market value. Fox is a max player.

Question is when the extension will be officially signed. If it's today or tomorrow, Fox will be eligible to be traded at next trade deadline. If it's after tomorrow, he won't be trade eligible until the end of the season.

I think Shams said hes signing it today or tomorrow.

[DPG21920]

I think a potential Fox trade would be mainly because Harper/Castle turn out great and struggle to fit with him.

Last summer, Markkanen waited a day to sign his extension to make him ineligible to be traded at the trade deadline. If Fox don't do that, it is meaningful.

Per Shams hes signing today:

1952457218336448695

[Old School 44]

Happy it’s a done deal. I do think it was a already a handshake deal when he came over. I know they’re different situations, but glad they didn’t let this linger like Kuminga with the Warriors. Now time to just focus on basketball! Let’s go!

[TD 21]

Clearly, this was agreed to in conjunction with the trade. The question is, why? The Spurs were/are the ones with the premier asset in the league.

There was always going to be a race for star lead ball handler x to come here. By that standard, he's not a high level one, so I don't understand why he was treated as if he he had the leverage.


Fox is a pretty elite fit next to Wemby. Sure, Castle, Sochan and Harper might not be great fits in between those guys but you have time to figure it out and can move off of any of them pretty easily.

If Castle and Harper hits then great, move Fox. It's not a Bradley Beal situation where he has a no trade clause or he's gonna be in his mid 30s halfway into the deal. He'll still be in his prime and can easily be moved :lol

In a vacuum, but that's obviously not how these things work. Fox will spend the majority of his minutes with one of Castle or Harper alongside him and a good amount with Sochan too, which makes him a questionable fit overall.

Actually, Beal is the comp (minus the no trade clause) that sprung to mind when I saw this. He was a similar aged, borderline All-Star caliber player with an inflated reputation due to bloated usage/ppg on middling efficiency/teams paid as if he were an All-NBA player.

My sense is they'll try to make this work as best they can for up to 3 seasons, but with the ill fitting core, no one is in position to be maximized, so the most likely scenario is this ends with them having to salary dump him.

[LeBowen]

Because he's not worth this kind of money

Is Devin Vassell worth 27 million he'll be getting up until 2029?
Is Keldon Johnson worth anything, let alone 17.5 million he'll be getting this and the next season?

Fox isn't worth 55-60 million a year, but he's definitely worth 40-45 in today's market.
The question is would you rather waste an extra 10-15 million on an all-star guard who's a good fit with your franchise player or would you overpay some role players?

I wrote about all the variable that need to allign for the Spurs to get an all-star.
We somehow managed to get one who's young enough, fits well with Wemby, doesn't have injury issues, wants to be here and we got him for dirt cheap considering the going rate for anyone relevant these days.
Having him also take a discount would've been too much.

He average 25/4/6 on 48/34/75 in from 2021 to 2024.
If he can play on that level for the Spurs, then he's worth a bit of an overpay while Castle and Harper are on their rookie deals.

[LeBowen]

Actually, Beal is the comp (minus the no trade clause) that sprung to mind when I saw this. He was a similar aged, borderline All-Star caliber player with an inflated reputation due to bloated usage/ppg on middling efficiency/teams paid as if he were an All-NBA player.

Beal is the comp only if you look at the stats and not the style of play.
Beal never played any defense and put no pressure on the rim. And for all the talk about him being an elite shooter, his 3pt% in his peak Wizards years was 36%, just 3% higher than Fox's with Fox obviously being a tier above in almost every other aspect of the game.

[ffadicted]

Because he's not worth this kind of money

Can we name someone of his caliber and age these days that isn't getting max money when a team retains them? (legitimate question not being facetious)

[poopbox]

Finally, we locked up the player that Dylan Harper won't ever be better than.

[Dverde]

It’s one of those contracts in which the contract isn’t unreasonable, but you don’t want to be the team paying it. Fox can be that clutch guy to end games. He hits those shots for the silver and black than he’ll be worth it.

[LeBowen]

Can we name someone of his caliber and age these days that isn't getting max money when a team retains them? (legitimate question not being facetious)

Brunson is the only one who took a significant paycut. Who knows what kind of endorsments and under the table deals he got in return, especially with his father on the coaching staff.
He'll surely get that money back, even if it's after he retires.

[djohn2oo8]

Why not?

Roll your best five players out there and change the game (like the Warriors did a few years ago).
Because you make this kind of deal when you’re ready to compete. Spurs still need to develop guys and that won’t happen like it should because Fox just got his money.

[Mugen]

Clearly, this was agreed to in conjunction with the trade. The question is, why? The Spurs were/are the ones with the premier asset in the league.

There was always going to be a race for star lead ball handler x to come here. By that standard, he's not a high level one, so I don't understand why he was treated as if he he had the leverage.



In a vacuum, but that's obviously not how these things work. Fox will spend the majority of his minutes with one of Castle or Harper alongside him and a good amount with Sochan too, which makes him a questionable fit overall.

Actually, Beal is the comp (minus the no trade clause) that sprung to mind when I saw this. He was a similar aged, borderline All-Star caliber player with an inflated reputation due to bloated usage/ppg on middling efficiency/teams paid as if he were an All-NBA player.

My sense is they'll try to make this work as best they can for up to 3 seasons, but with the ill fitting core, no one is in position to be maximized, so the most likely scenario is this ends with them having to salary dump him.

I'm not letting Castle let alone Jeremy F'n Sochan prevent us from locking up an All NBA PG to pair with Wemby for the next few years. If those guys don't end up being good fits next to Fox then I wish them well on their next teams :lol

[djohn2oo8]

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.

This. The timeline to win feels rushed.

[LeBowen]

Because you make this kind of deal when you’re ready to compete. Spurs still need to develop guys and that won’t happen like it should because Fox just got his money.

Wemby, the franchise player, is ready to compete.
It's that simple.

[Mugen]

Because you make this kind of deal when you’re ready to compete. Spurs still need to develop guys and that won’t happen like it should because Fox just got his money.

Weren't you slurping the Rockets giving FVV 40mil a year a few years back? Castle and Harper are going to get plenty of minutes this upcoming season regardless if Fox is on the roster. What this team (and more importantly their generational big man) needs to get to the next level is to finally play meaningful games in April/May. Fox helps with that.

[LeBowen]

This. The timeline to win feels rushed.

Zach Collins was a negative contract.
Bulls first wouldn't have conveyed for the Spurs.
2027 Spurs should be in 20s.
2031 Timberwolves is probably the most valuable asset, but still a complete unknown and they got a new ownership that's willing to spend.

[Mugen]

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.

Spurs paid below market for Fox. You're just underselling him tbh.

If all goes well, their '27 pick should be in the 20s. The Minny '31 pick is only good if Ant decides to leave. Those aren't "legit" first rounders IMO.

[RC_Drunkford]

always expected this to be the case. Spurs will figure this one out as they go. Plenty of time left. You really have to start worrying about it from 2028/29 on. It's also not etched in stone that both Castle and Harper will get max extensions. Even if they do, Spurs could pay luxury tax for one season as well. Plenty of options and way too early to worry about the implications of that contract later on.

[scott]

Can we name someone of his caliber and age these days that isn't getting max money when a team retains them? (legitimate question not being facetious)


Brunson is the only one who took a significant paycut. Who knows what kind of endorsments and under the table deals he got in return, especially with his father on the coaching staff.
He'll surely get that money back, even if it's after he retires.

If we use the Ringer Top 100 as the proxy for the best players in the league, Brunson is the only one ahead of him not on a max deal (or rookie deal). https://nbarankings.theringer.com/

There are numerous players ranked below Fox who are also on a max.

Anyone saying Fox is not worth the max is essentially of one of the following opinions:

1) Fox is overrated relative to where most player ranking place him (he's ranked in the 20-30 range by almost all of them)
2) Too many players get the max, it should be reserved for only the Top N players (with N varying depending on who you ask)

If you believe in #2, then you also belong to one of two groups (whether you realize it or not):

1) You believe the max is too low, so it qualifies too many players for it. (For example, if you made the max only 5% of the cap, then almost the entire league would get the max)
2) You're a crusty old boomer who thinks athletes are just paid too much in general and you'd prefer if the owners could just keep more of the money

edit: one more link, here is a link to the ranking of player contract's as a % of the cap for next year. You can filter for other years as well https://www.spotrac.com/nba/rankings/player/_/year/2025/sort/cap_total_league_pct

[Mugen]

If you were criticizing the Spurs acquiring Fox at the deadline for below market value then you can gripe about this extension.

But if you weren't, then shut your mouth because this was literally baked into that transaction. Lucking into Harper doesn't change the calculus at all tbh, ESPECIALLLY with how this organization operates.

[Jordan Jackson]

Fox is the only other legitimate NBA player on the roster. Be for real people. Spurs cannot keep losing and that’s all you do when you have a team full of young players and mediocre veterans.

The writing is on the wall for Vassell/Johnson/Sochan also. I’d be shocked if all 3 are in Spurs uniforms at the start of next season.

I still think the Spurs have enough contracts and picks to target a trade for another high level player. Has to be 3/4 big wing - not sure who though.

If you’re a Rocket fan - not sure why you have anything of value to offer on this extension. You’re about to hand a guy who has one good Achilles an absurd extension. What makes you laugh, eventually makes you cry.

[TD 21]

I'm not letting Castle let alone Jeremy F'n Sochan prevent us from locking up an All NBA PG to pair with Wemby for the next few years. If those guys don't end up being good fits next to Fox then I wish them well on their next teams :lol

Agreed, but their presence makes his own fit less than clean and while technically they can decrease their role or trade them, this being the Spurs, I'll believe it when I see it.

Fox is not an All-NBA caliber player though, he's a fringe All-Star caliber player, which is 1.5 tiers below that.

[rjv]

Beal is the comp only if you look at the stats and not the style of play.
Beal never played any defense and put no pressure on the rim. And for all the talk about him being an elite shooter, his 3pt% in his peak Wizards years was 36%, just 3% higher than Fox's with Fox obviously being a tier above in almost every other aspect of the game.

not to mention that the absence of a no trade clause is a huge difference.

[TimmyBuckets]

I'm curious as to what the alternative was to paying him. He clearly wanted the max, and it was very likely discussed before he was traded because Spurs got a great deal there no question. So whats the alternative? Trade him away after giving up 2 firsts so basically waste those picks? Pray Harper/Castle/idgaf who maybe turn out to be Fox's caliber (and yes its no question a maybe because nothing is guaranteed, and neither is the godsend of a talent Wemby is)? This was an inevitability.

Don't forget this team hasn't made the playoffs since 2019. Wemby and some rookies or whatever aren't winning shit together in the next few years without a legit number 2. Castle isn't that guy (yet? ever?) and No NBA games under his belt Harper is definitely not that. ST wants Wemby to win now, but now they don't anymore lmao.

[scott]

always expected this to be the case. Spurs will figure this one out as they go. Plenty of time left. You really have to start worrying about it from 2028/29 on. It's also not etched in stone that both Castle and Harper will get max extensions. Even if they do, Spurs could pay luxury tax for one season as well. Plenty of options and way too early to worry about the implications of that contract later on.

And as is should have been. If you're not going to extend him, you don't trade for him to begin with (and yes, we got him for below market, but it would have been an overpay for a 1.5 year rental). Hilarious to see people contemplating this as though there wasn't 6 months to prepare for this exact same happening.

[DPG21920]

Spurs paid below market for Fox. You're just underselling him tbh.

If all goes well, their '27 pick should be in the 20s. The Minny '31 pick is only good if Ant decides to leave. Those aren't "legit" first rounders IMO.

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.

[Mugen]

Agreed, but their presence makes his own fit less than clean and while technically they can decrease their role or trade them, this being the Spurs, I'll believe it when I see it.

Fox is not an All-NBA caliber player though, he's a fringe All-Star caliber player, which is 1.5 tiers below that.

I mean he's literally made an all nba team before and he's in theory still in his prime. I don't think it's absolutely out of the realm of possibility that he sneaks into third team next year playing alongside Wemby and with a lot of notable players (Hali, Tatum, Lillard, Kyrie) missing significant time next season.

[SpursFan86]

And as is should have been. If you're not going to extend him, you don't trade for him to begin with (and yes, we got him for below market, but it would have been an overpay for a 1.5 year rental). Hilarious to see people contemplating this as though there wasn't 6 months to prepare for this exact same happening.

I really think it's just because of what Fox looked like when he played last year (which seems beyond silly IMO)...because otherwise it just makes no sense that people here were celebrating when we traded for him and then suddenly now gawking at giving him a max :lol

[baseline bum]

seemed like there was some momentum to him getting a bit less but the spurs org is usually good at being tight lipped. its a lot of money but it captures his entire prime. with the last year not being a player option, we control him through his age 31-32 season.

From where? Randos saying he'd sign for 4 year $200 million? Dude was always getting max and the Spurs knew it when they traded for him. He only forced his way out once all nba looked extremely unlikely so he couldn't sign for supermax in sac.

[Mugen]

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.

Like I said, you're underselling him and that's fine tbh.

[LeBowen]

One West all-star appearance is worth as much as 3 Eastern, tbh.

[TD 21]

I mean he's literally made an all nba team before and he's in theory still in his prime. I don't think it's absolutely out of the realm of possibility that he sneaks into third team next year playing alongside Wemby and with a lot of notable players (Hali, Tatum, Lillard, Kyrie) missing significant time next season.

Circumstances/narrative often dictate accolades in this league, especially with borderline candidates.

The Kings broke a 16 year playoff drought in resounding fashion by being a shocking three seed in the West, so naturally their two stars got rewarded for it.

Outside of that, he's never so much as made an All-Star team, which is about right considering his "catch-all" metrics.

[Mugen]

Circumstances/narrative often dictate accolades in this league, especially with borderline candidates.

The Kings broke a 16 year playoff drought in resounding fashion by being a shocking three seed in the West, so naturally their two stars got rewarded for it.

Outside of that, he's never so much as made an All-Star team, which is about right considering his "catch-all" metrics.

So player who is still in his prime and literally made an All NBA team within the last 2 years is not all-nba caliber, got it :lol

And the Spurs haven't sniffed the playoffs in 6 years. There'll be plenty of potential narratives this upcoming season tbh.

[poopbox]

People thinking they can get a guard putting up all nba numbers for years as the best player on another team for anything less than the max :lol

Can't wait to see this thread 2 years from now when one of Castle or Harper has bust and we are like thank god for that fox deal or we'd be fucked :lol

It's more than likely Harper and/or Castle are never as good as Fox. People are really underselling his talent.

[TD 21]

So player who is still in his prime and literally made an All NBA team within the last 2 years is not all-nba caliber, got it :lol

And the Spurs haven't sniffed the playoffs in 6 years. There'll be plenty of potential narratives this upcoming season tbh.

Whether inadvertently or not, you're being obtuse. Fox is a player who made an All-NBA team, he's not an All-NBA player.

Last 15 seasons: Bogut, Johnson, Randolph, Bynum, Rondo, Jefferson, Lee, Noah, Dragic, Thompson, DeRozan, Thomas, Oladipo, Walker, Simmons, Beal, Siakam, Randle, all made it.



People thinking they can get a guard putting up all nba numbers for years as the best player on another team for anything less than the max
:lol

Can't wait to see this thread 2 years from now when one of Castle or Harper has bust and we are like thank god for that fox deal or we'd be fucked :lol

It's more than likely Harper and/or Castle are never as good as Fox. People are really underselling his talent.

No, people who know how restrictive the new CBA is know you don't blindly give out maxes to players like this anymore.

[Darkwaters]

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.

Has it not already been established that the "1 already lottery pick" would not have conveyed? So including it here seems disingenuous. It was a token inclusion, but not something of any real value given up.

[TimmyBuckets]

No one has offered a single solution to their problem of signing Fox to a max. "You just don't do it." "It's not smart." No alternatives whatsoever. Just a bunch of waaahhh. He wanted the max and it was probably discussed prior to trade. Minus Wemby, Spurs haven't glimpsed at the shadow of a player Fox's caliber since nephew.

[Mugen]

Spurs get a top 30 player in his prime for peanuts and Spurfan is upset that he's not taking late career Timmy discounts tbh :lol

[LeBowen]

Spurs get a top 30 player in his prime for peanuts and Spurfan is upset that he's not taking late career Timmy discounts tbh :lol

Best guard paint penetrator in the league with no range Sabonis as his big.
As he said in an interview, those few games with Wemby were the first time in his career where he wasn't always the focus of PNR defense.

[djohn2oo8]

Spurs get a top 30 player in his prime for peanuts and Spurfan is upset that he's not taking late career Timmy discounts tbh :lol
It’s not that. Fox isn’t a 230 million dollar player.

[LeBowen]

It’s not that. Fox isn’t a 230 million dollar player.

NBA fans really need to start using percentages of the cap.
Is he worth 30% of the cap? Probably not, but he's definitely worth 25% and with Spurs having so many rookie and cheap contracts, those 5% won't be an issue of at least 3 more years.

[TimmyBuckets]

Another thing too. I don't give a rat's ass about a Harper or a Castle or Vassell or whoever. The only player worth anything is Wemby. Every other player is a maybe, and a hopefully at best. There are no all-stars on this team. Fox is the only all-star caliber player, and Wemby is an arguable superstar. That's it. You really think Spurs are going to trade away the guy they sent 2 conveyable FRPs to for a player that doesn't even exist or a metaphysical star that's in ST's ether? The fear is Spurs are going to limit Harper? Screw him. I don't give two shits about some rook or a castle. They can stay, learn, get better, and get paid when it's their time or they can bounce this season for all I care. Wemby and Fox is the combo that will get Spurs sniffing the playoffs since more than half a decade. Too much focus on limiting Harper, Castle, Bryant or whichever new dweeb we drafted. This is Wemby's team. Not Ron Harper's kid's team.

[Mal]

Max was 229M. There was not way Spurs would be cheap to save 29M, because he wasnt signing lower than 200M/4. It`s a decent deal, Fox is good player. Looking forward to him playing for Spurs

[spurraider21]

From where? Randos saying he'd sign for 4 year $200 million? Dude was always getting max and the Spurs knew it when they traded for him. He only forced his way out once all nba looked extremely unlikely so he couldn't sign for supermax in sac.
i didnt take it seriously until Stein said something a couple days ago. he didnt phrase it very strongly or anything, just said that ppl around the league werent sure it would certainly be a full max

[benefactor]

Never change, ST

[TD 21]

No one has offered a single solution to their problem of signing Fox to a max. "You just don't do it." "It's not smart." No alternatives whatsoever. Just a bunch of waaahhh. He wanted the max and it was probably discussed prior to trade. Minus Wemby, Spurs haven't glimpsed at the shadow of a player Fox's caliber since nephew.


Clearly, this was agreed to in conjunction with the trade. The question is, why? The Spurs were/are the ones with the premier asset in the league.

There was always going to be a race for star lead ball handler x to come here. By that standard, he's not a high level one, so I don't understand why he was treated as if he he had the leverage.

That was the solution. If he was unwilling to extend for less than the max, then don't make the trade and wait out the next All-Star caliber or better offensive "engine" who was bound to attempt to force his way here.

Or maybe they'd have lucked into Harper either way, in which case they could have signed some stopgap to platoon and still had a legit shot at making the playoffs.

[DPG21920]

Has it not already been established that the "1 already lottery pick" would not have conveyed? So including it here seems disingenuous. It was a token inclusion, but not something of any real value given up.

Why would it not have conveyed?

[LeBowen]

Max was 229M. There was not way Spurs would be cheap to save 29M, because he wasnt signing lower than 200M/4. It`s a decent deal, Fox is good player. Looking forward to him playing for Spurs

229 only if the cap rises by 10% each year. This season it went up by 7%.

26-27: $51M
27-28: $55.1M
28-29: $59.2M
29-30: $63.2M

Bobby Marks projection for 10% growth.

[djohn2oo8]

NBA fans really need to start using percentages of the cap.
Is he worth 30% of the cap? Probably not, but he's definitely worth 25% and with Spurs having so many rookie and cheap contracts, those 5% won't be an issue of at least 3 more years.
Then he better become better than a career 74 percent free throw shooter and shoot better than 30 percent from three. Being unable to shoot three’s won’t help the spacing for Wemby.

[DPG21920]

NBA fans really need to start using percentages of the cap.
Is he worth 30% of the cap? Probably not, but he's definitely worth 25% and with Spurs having so many rookie and cheap contracts, those 5% won't be an issue of at least 3 more years.

Worth 25% of the cap + 3 firsts + 5 2nds? Think that gets more debatable but we will see. At end of the day I liked the trade a lot for Spurs but I dont love the contract even though it’s understandable.

It could be a non issue and work out great but if it doesnt it will be obvious as to why in hindsight. Theres some real risk that should be acknowledged IMO but thats about the extent of it.

[Mugen]

It’s not that. Fox isn’t a 230 million dollar player.

Under this current CBA, he definitely is. As LeBowen outlined, the Spurs are pretty well set up to give him this type of extension without hamstringing themselves tbh.

[LeBowen]

Why would it not have conveyed?

It was top10 protected for this and top8 for the next season.
Bulls were 22-30 before the trade went down, 17-13 after. Started competing for some reason, just Bulls things.
But they would've surely tanked to keep their pick if they hadn't gotten it back.

[Mugen]

Worth 25% of the cap + 3 firsts + 5 2nds? Think that gets more debatable but we will see. At end of the day I liked the trade a lot for Spurs but I dont love the contract even though it’s understandable.

It could be a non issue and work out great but if it doesnt it will be obvious as to why in hindsight. Theres some real risk that should be acknowledged IMO but thats about the extent of it.

How can you have loved the trade when it happened and be at all surprised by him getting this max extension? It was literally baked into the transaction unless you were being purposefully oblivious to that fact tbh.

[LeBowen]

Then he better become better than a career 74 percent free throw shooter and shoot better than 30 percent from three. Being unable to shoot three’s won’t help the spacing for Wemby.

He had a fucked up finger. He shot 34% on high volume in 4 seasons before the last one.

[benefactor]

Under this current CBA, he definitely is. As LeBowen outlined, the Spurs are pretty well set up to give him this type of extension without hamstringing themselves tbh.
Exactly. This has been explained at length many times. People are acting like it's their money or some shit:lol

[TimmyBuckets]

That was the solution. If he was unwilling to extend for less than the max, then don't make the trade and wait out the next All-Star caliber or better offensive "engine" who was bound to attempt to force his way here.

Or maybe they'd have lucked into Harper either way, in which case they could have signed some stopgap to platoon and still had a legit shot at making the playoffs.

So the solution is to pray?

[scott]

NBA fans really need to start using percentages of the cap.
Is he worth 30% of the cap? Probably not, but he's definitely worth 25% and with Spurs having so many rookie and cheap contracts, those 5% won't be an issue of at least 3 more years.

Fox aside, this is an interesting conversation to me (for the reasons I spelled out in an earlier post).

If Fox is a Top-30 player, is he not worth the max (leave aside 25%, 30%, 35% as those are functions of a player's years of service, age, other criteria, etc)? There are 30 teams, so you would assume, at a minimum, that the league's Top 30 players would be making the max just by a function of the division of resources.

If someone doesn't think Fox is a Top-30 player, then that's a different conversation (and that's a fine opinion for them to have, but it is counter to almost every major publication's rankings).

If you think that too many players make the max, then it's really a problem of the max being too low. Is Fox worth the same annual salary as Luka? No, but that's a function of the fact that Luka's value is artificially capped not so much that Fox's is artificially inflated. That's an interesting discussion that can be had, but it's generally accepted (and certainly accepted by the teams and players union) that top players' pay is capped to allow more money for the non-top players.

Of course, there are others who are just old men yelling at clouds and think "spoiled athletes" are paid too much in general. Their opinions can be summarily ignored. These are the "big number hurt brain" folks who just can't adapt to the realities of modern NBA economics. In 2011-12, Kobe was the highest paid player at 43.5% of the cap, and Duncan was the 3rd highest at 36.5% of the cap. But the numbers were only $25MM for Kobe and $21MM for Timmy, so it didn't hurt their brains as much.

[Russ]

Then he better become better than a career 74 percent free throw shooter and shoot better than 30 percent from three. Being unable to shoot three’s won’t help the spacing for Wemby.

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.

[DPG21920]

It was top10 protected for this and top8 for the next season.
Bulls were 22-30 before the trade went down, 17-13 after. Started competing for some reason, just Bulls things.
But they would've surely tanked to keep their pick if they hadn't gotten it back.

I mean that’s conjecture but fact is the pick conveyed.

[DPG21920]

How can you have loved the trade when it happened and be at all surprised by him getting this max extension? It was literally baked into the transaction unless you were being purposefully oblivious to that fact tbh.

I didnt think it was baked in and I certainly thought getting pick 2 and Harper for sure meant it was not baked in .

[DPG21920]

So the solution is to pray?

It’s less of prayer to think players would want to team up with Wemby than it is that Fox will live up to this deal IMO (mostly because Harper and Castle are here - if that wasn’t the case it would be more understandable to me personally).

[Dejounte]

It’s settled. He’s our new age Parker. Castle is competing with Dylan to complete our future big 3.

[Mr. Body]

This guy better turn in some 40 and 50 point games and be dominant. Instantly my least favorite top level Spur ever. I don't think he has a Spur mentality, I don't think he has a Spur fit. I think he's overrated. He's one dimensional and his best years are hopefully not behind him. But whatever, we're a Klutch team now so we're paying for the mobster touch going forward. Let's do this.

[exstatic]

we will have to trade away 1sts to unload him in a few years

Nope. He’s going to make multiple All Star appearances, and an All NBA team or two in the next 3-4 years, and then we’ll trade him for ending contracts and a few firsts.

Spurs never get themselves into cap jail. They know way more about contracts and player value than you do.

[exstatic]

seemed like there was some momentum to him getting a bit less but the spurs org is usually good at being tight lipped. its a lot of money but it captures his entire prime. with the last year not being a player option, we control him through his age 31-32 season.

Only here.

[DPG21920]

I think my main issue is two things:

1) I get spurs made a deal with fox but a major unforeseen variable changed the equation (Harper). No one in the league given that change would have called the Spurs terrible for not paying Fox 230M especially when it’s unlikely anyone in open market would have paid him that anyways. If you try to buy a house and commit to doing so but before closing you lose your job? You aren’t expected to keep buying the home.

There was a material change to the equation for the Spurs and they have every right to negotiate vs cave and give Fox full max. Again, do I think its a for disaster? Not at all. Im simply saying that theres very real risk now and the only path for that risk to even come to fruition was giving Fox this max and they did it.

2) This is a win now move but nothing else they did was win now really. Spurs weren’t even close to playoffs and it seems like vast majority of what they did was seemingly relyhign on patience and internal growth vs pushing pedal down to truly give best chance to make playoffs. Now, I believe in that approach and I think SA could make playoffs as is. But still, trading 3 firsts + 5 2nds and paying Fox 230M is a win now move and they didnt really do much to win now other than sign a back up Center?

Trade pick 14 for some actual help if thats your goal. Trade Keldon or Dev + picks to get better fits/shooting and talent upgrades.

It’s very mixed messaging and half assed win now (which I was fine with that approach before paying Fox 230M).

[spurraider21]

Like it or not, that's his market value. Fox is a max player.

Question is when the extension will be officially signed. If it's today or tomorrow, Fox will be eligible to be traded at next trade deadline. If it's after tomorrow, he won't be trade eligible until the end of the season.


I think a potential Fox trade would be mainly because Harper/Castle turn out great and struggle to fit with him.

Last summer, Markkanen waited a day to sign his extension to make him ineligible to be traded at the trade deadline. If Fox don't do that, it is meaningful.
spurs have already announced the signing, so looks like the door is open

1952494355358572551

1952494560510386498

[DPG21920]

But to clarify: I like Fox on the court. Im not concerned for first 2 years really (and if Harper and Castle leap that much this year that’s great problem to have but it will make this contract look worse).

I think he will be damn good and I fully understand the reality of why it happened even if I dont agree with it or love it. I don’t hate it either. I don’t think it’s a for sure disaster. Im just simply approaching it with the understanding theres a very real path to issues that look obvious today. Just have to hope it doesnt go bad and go down that path.

[DPG21920]

1952494355358572551

[Mugen]

I didnt think it was baked in and I certainly thought getting pick 2 and Harper for sure meant it was not baked in .

If you think the Spurs paid a fair market price for Fox then you have had to assume that an extension was coming. Maybe he takes a little less than the full max but I don't expect a a star player in his prime to leave 10+ mil on the table nor would I begrudge him for not doing so tbh.

If anything, the Spurs lucking into Harper probably solidified Fox asking for the full max knowing that it's very possible he's traded after Year 2 or 3 of the extension.

[rogcl1]

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.
I would respectfully disagree with your thought. It seems to me we are becoming much more equipped to be an athletic running team with the capabilities to also break down a defense in a half court setting.. At least I hope that's the case.

[spurraider21]

I think my main issue is two things:

1) I get spurs made a deal with fox but a major unforeseen variable changed the equation (Harper). No one in the league given that change would have called the Spurs terrible for not paying Fox 230M especially when it’s unlikely anyone in open market would have paid him that anyways. If you try to buy a house and commit to doing so but before closing you lose your job? You aren’t expected to keep buying the home.

There was a material change to the equation for the Spurs and they have every right to negotiate vs cave and give Fox full max. Again, do I think its a for disaster? Not at all. Im simply saying that theres very real risk now and the only path for that risk to even come to fruition was giving Fox this max and they did it.

2) This is a win now move but nothing else they did was win now really. Spurs weren’t even close to playoffs and it seems like vast majority of what they did was seemingly relyhign on patience and internal growth vs pushing pedal down to truly give best chance to make playoffs. Now, I believe in that approach and I think SA could make playoffs as is. But still, trading 3 firsts + 5 2nds and paying Fox 230M is a win now move and they didnt really do much to win now other than sign a back up Center?

Trade pick 14 for some actual help if thats your goal. Trade Keldon or Dev + picks to get better fits/shooting and talent upgrades.

It’s very mixed messaging and half assed win now (which I was fine with that approach before paying Fox 230M).
its not like Fox is 31 and we are entering a do or die season. he is 27. the objectives for this season are going to be to actually get into the playoffs to give these guys a taste of at least one 7 game series while also carving time to develop young guys like harper, bryant, castle.

[scott]

For the record, Spotrac more accurately is reporting Fox's deal as 4/222.

Spotrac also listing Fox as trade eligible on 2/4/26

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/player/_/id/23600/deaaron-fox

[Arguendo]

Not surprised by the outcome. Was probably part of the trade negotiations coming in.

Probably an overpay, but we still have to see how it plays out. Spurs have an insurance policy in Harper, but it's not like he could be expected to come in and be a starting PG for a playoff team in the NBA on day one. Even guys like Parker and Ginobili needed a few years to figure it out, and they'd been playing "pro" basketball in other leagues for years.

As the cap and salaries continue to rise, Fox's deal won't seem so crazy in the future, and could be moved if needed.
This is exactly right imo. Offer likely in place when Fox/Klutch got us the discount to get him. I don't think there was a much of a chance for anything less than max $$$ and that chance went to zero when we lucked into #2/Harper and turned down trade offers. Like maybe Fox would be willing to take slightly less to bring on another win-now star (like Giannis or some giant move like that), but he wasn't gonna leave anything on the table with Castle and Harper fighting to take his job.

I wanted Fox for the next 3 years and unless he falls off an age/injury cliff he'll still either bring us value (likely) or will be fairly easily movable throughout the contract.
I the meantime, we have tons of insurance if Fox declines, or Castle/Harper don't develope as hoped.
Regardless of fit we're in a very enviable position even without Wemby- top 20-30 player with 2-3+ typical prime yrs ahead, a going on 21y/o reigning ROY with real All-D/AS potential, and jumbo 19y/o G with star pedigree/legit top-15 upside who would've been #1 in some recent drafts/top #3 in pretty much all.
Sure, they all have concerns, their fit is subpar, but from a talent/age/control POV, there's only a few teams in the league who wouldn't trade all of their guards plus other assets for our 3 and their contracts.

I am worried Fox could be an albatross max at 30/31, speed reliant, not big, not a plus assist man/defender. But we were pot committed when we made the trade.
Buy the ticket, take the ride!

[Russ]

I would respectfully disagree with your thought. It seems to me we are becoming much more equipped to be an athletic running team with the capabilities to also break down a defense in a half court setting.. At least I hope that's the case.

You may be right. I think an athletic running team is what they (like anyone else) might want.

But Harper, while quick and uber-skilled, does not seem like an end-to-end court runner.

Castle is also an athletic explosive extremely talented player but doesn't seem like a pure court-runner.

Wemby can run but do they really want him to -- do they want Wemby to race the floor every time some teammate gets a defensive rebound (with all the implications for him that would mean).

Carter Bryant may be the one guy who would fit perfectly with Fox as a pure speed merchant.

[rogcl1]

This guy better turn in some 40 and 50 point games and be dominant. Instantly my least favorite top level Spur ever. I don't think he has a Spur mentality, I don't think he has a Spur fit. I think he's overrated. He's one dimensional and his best years are hopefully not behind him. But whatever, we're a Klutch team now so we're paying for the mobster touch going forward. Let's do this.

Well, at least you did not hold back on your thoughts. Personally, I think he will do good and even in a worst case scenario except for injury, I don't think the outlook is as bleak as the one you have put forward. I am ready for the season to begin.

[DPG21920]

If you think the Spurs paid a fair market price for Fox then you have had to assume that an extension was coming. Maybe he takes a little less than the full max but I don't expect a a star player in his prime to leave 10+ mil on the table nor would I begrudge him for not doing so tbh.

If anything, the Spurs lucking into Harper probably solidified Fox asking for the full max knowing that it's very possible he's traded after Year 2 or 3 of the extension.

That makes sense from Fox side, but not Spurs. I get why Fox would not take less if he knew Harper + taking less makes him more likely to be traded, but from Spurs side? Plenty of guys want to play with Wemby and they do have Harper and they need to make sure they protect their future and Wemby future.

Even if one thought that a deal was agreed to during trade, Harper was a legit variable shift that matters.

[DPG21920]

its not like Fox is 31 and we are entering a do or die season. he is 27. the objectives for this season are going to be to actually get into the playoffs to give these guys a taste of at least one 7 game series while also carving time to develop young guys like harper, bryant, castle.

Do you disagree that giving up 3 firsts + 5 2nds + paying a player 230M is a win now move?

[scott]

It’s settled. He’s our new age Parker. Castle is competing with Dylan to complete our future big 3.

And for posterity's sake, Tony Parker was an All-Star, All NBA 2nd Team player, and MVP Vote Getter (finishing 5th, 6th, and 12th) in his age 29, 30, and 31 seasons.

Only point this out because everyone talks about how "fast guards" all fall off a cliff when they are 30.

[Mugen]

Porky's best years were age 28-32, same age as Fox will be during this contract. The blueprint is there tbh.

If Wemby continues on his development trajectory and actually becomes a decent outside threat, there's probably less than 10-15 guys that I'd rather pair him with than Fox tbh.

[vander]

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.

And it was known he wanted a max extension, fair value at best.

[Mugen]

That makes sense from Fox side, but not Spurs. I get why Fox would not take less if he knew Harper + taking less makes him more likely to be traded, but from Spurs side? Plenty of guys want to play with Wemby and they do have Harper and they need to make sure they protect their future and Wemby future.

Even if one thought that a deal was agreed to during trade, Harper was a legit variable shift that matters.

Deep, you're too smart and have been a Spurs fan for too long to know that the Spurs were never welching on a handshake deal with Klutch & Co. Lucking into Harper didn't move that contract number one way either direction tbh.

[rogcl1]

You may be right. I think an athletic running team is what they (like anyone else) might want.

But Harper, while quick and uber-skilled, does not seem like an end-to-end court runner.

Castle is also an athletic explosive extremely talented player but doesn't seem like a pure court-runner.

Wemby can run but do they really want him to -- do they want Wemby to race the floor every time some teammate gets a defensive rebound (with all the implications for him that would mean).

Carter Bryant may be the one guy who would fit perfectly with Fox as a pure speed merchant.

No Wemby needs to rebound and initiate the break and then be the trailer and shoot his 3 as an option off the break and choose his spots when to sprint to beat his man down the court.

[dbestpro]

After the burned village the Spurs have been the past several years and am very pleased we are getting better.

[DPG21920]

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??

[dn0774]

Glad to see this piece of business is done, the last thing we wanted was it looming over training camp etc (like Sochan's extension probably will). I was hoping for a small discount or maybe a 3 yr deal ala Luka, but the trade that brought Fox to SA doesn't happen unless Klutch was confident their guy BWright would come through for them. The trade was absolutely a great deal for the Spurs, especially when you account for the negative value Zollins brought to the deal.

Looking ahead, if Castle and Harper both hit then Fox becomes expendable, obviously. But the odds of that happening are far lower than many of us here want to admit.

[DPG21920]

Deep, you're too smart and have been a Spurs fan for too long to know that the Spurs were never welching on a handshake deal with Klutch & Co. Lucking into Harper didn't move that contract number one way either direction tbh.

I knew it was coming I dont have to love it though :lol

But again, I am honestly very excited about the on court product this season. I dont think we are a lock to be a playoff team, but we should be in mix. Hopefully Fox pays off.

[ZeusWillJudge]

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.

Not to worry, though. If the City doesn't vote to build the arena this month, the Vegas team will be able to afford some second apron money when the time comes.

[baseline bum]

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

Guessing the plan is for Fox to be a big expiring to ship out in the summer of 2029 if Harper becomes a star. Even if Castle becomes a max player it's not until 2029 where the money becomes a problem. Assuming they don't do something retarded like throw a big money extension at Suckhan.

[Limguogolo]

Uncle Scrooge's nephew is coming.

No kidding. The Spurs will indeed have to pay up and prepare to see their cap space explode. And when Wemby, Harper, and Castle get their share of the pie, Fox can be used as a bargaining chip to assemble the best possible team in three or four years. OKC had to pay. It's only going to go from here on out.

[DPG21920]

Uncle Scrooge's nephew is coming.

No kidding. The Spurs will indeed have to pay up and prepare to see their cap space explode. And when Wemby, Harper, and Castle get their share of the pie, Fox can be used as a bargaining chip to assemble the best possible team in three or four years. OKC had to pay. It's only going to go from here on out.

Difference is OKC had to pay when they were a contender.

[Limguogolo]

Difference is OKC had to pay when they were a contender.
If Spurs aren't aiming for the title in three years, then they'll have far more important questions to ask themselves than cap space.

[Russ]

Difference is OKC had to pay when they were a contender.

This time they did.

[baseline bum]

As the cap and salaries continue to rise, Fox's deal won't seem so crazy in the future, and could be moved if needed.

That was the thought when 10% annual raises to the cap looked inevitable, but with the cap at 7% compounded now Fox's 8% yearly non-compounded raise makes this a flat contract in terms of the cap in the sense that it starts at 30% of the cap with its max at 30.4% of the cap in year 3.

[Seventyniner]

The difference between the 4/222 max and 4/200 or whatever some people are all twisted up about was more than made up for in the discounted price the Spurs had to pay to get Fox in the first place.

[spurraider21]

Do you disagree that giving up 3 firsts + 5 2nds + paying a player 230M is a win now move?
of course not, but there are varying degrees of "win now" moves. i dont think the trade made the spurs a title or bust team.

[DPG21920]

of course not, but there are varying degrees of "win now" moves. i dont think the trade made the spurs a title or bust team.

Well clearly, but I also dont think giving up 8 picks +230M then drafting 2 rookies and signing a back up Center is exactly “going for it” lol

[LeBowen]

I mean that’s conjecture but fact is the pick conveyed.

You're honestly insufferable at times.
A team going 22-30 while they weren't in control of their pick and 17-13 after they got it back is a conjecture, but your patronizing nonsense based on nothing but personal opinion which is obviously wrong in this case isn't a conjecture.


1) I get spurs made a deal with fox but a major unforeseen variable changed the equation (Harper). No one in the league given that change would have called the Spurs terrible for not paying Fox 230M especially when it’s unlikely anyone in open market would have paid him that anyways. If you try to buy a house and commit to doing so but before closing you lose your job? You aren’t expected to keep buying the home.

Except that Spurs didn't lose their job, but got a call from a friend that they can switch jobs whenever they want if their current one doesn't work out.


There was a material change to the equation for the Spurs and they have every right to negotiate vs cave and give Fox full max. Again, do I think its a for disaster? Not at all. Im simply saying that theres very real risk now and the only path for that risk to even come to fruition was giving Fox this max and they did it.

Yeah, giving a max to a proven all-star level player who's a good fit with Wemby is a risk as opposed to pissing off both him and his agency, which happens to be the most powerful one in the league, just so we can focus on developing a rookie who's guaranteed to not be as good as Fox for at least three more years.
All that while we have the second longest playoff drought in the league and a top5 player on the roster.


This is a win now move but nothing else they did was win now really.

Are you serious?
Over the past year we went from Tre Jones to CP3 to Fox as our starting PG.
We went from Tre to Harper as the backup.
Replaced useless Collins and Bassey with Kornet and Olynyk.
Got paid to take Barnes, but you can't say he wasn't an upgrade over Keldon/Jeremy as a starter.
Those two got their roles reduced because they weren't good enough.

There's a long way to go to being a legit playoff team, but to say Spurs haven't made any moves just shows you didn't follow what was going on at all.


Spurs weren’t even close to playoffs

Spurs were on course for a .500 season, give or take.
Traded for Fox which would've guaranteed a play-in spot if Wemby situation didn't happen.


But still, trading 3 firsts + 5 2nds and paying Fox 230M is a win now move

I'll repeat it again just because you're so fucking dense.
'25 CHI: Top10 protected in '25 and top8 in '26. Bulls were well in top10 pick territory when we gave them their pick back and then they started winning.
'27 SAS: Not even the most valuable '27 pick we have. Barring a major disaster with Wemby, it's going to be in 20s. If a Wemby disaster happens, we might aswell relocate the team, tbh.
'31 MIN: A complete unknown, they changed ownership and are willing to spend now. The only really good asset we gave up.

Some of those seconds were a payment to get rid of Zach Collins and his awful contract.
The rest? What are we talking about, they would've been sold for a couple million and we already have way too many SRPs.


and they didnt really do much to win now other than sign a back up Center?

Again, just shows you haven't been following things closely.
Spurs were actually solid when everyone was healthy. Backup C was by far the biggest need after the Fox trade.
Do we need a couple of 3-D wings better than Barnes/Vassell/Keldon/Jeremy? Obviously, but we already made a lot of changes over the past year.


Trade pick 14 for some actual help if thats your goal. Trade Keldon or Dev + picks to get better fits/shooting and talent upgrades.

You wouldn't believe how many times we went over this. So many that these "trade X and Y for Z" posts trigger me so much because none of you people are capable of providing actual names and examples that would fit role and timeline wise.
I want Keldon, Devin and Jeremy gone, too, but there are no viable 3-D targets in the #14 + a combination of them price range. Go across everything that's happened this offseason and try to come up with some names.


It’s very mixed messaging and half assed win now (which I was fine with that approach before paying Fox 230M).

It's actually very clear messaging.
Last season we missed the playoffs because Wemby went down, this season we'll definitely go above .500 with healthy Fox+Wemby and everyone else is playing for their job.
Last chance for the friendship crew to stay on the team and if we're exceeding expectations and something like 30-20 at the deadline, it will be easy enough to get one more piece with the entire league being in their usual panic mode.

If I was you or anyone else, I'd be way more worried that Devin will get injured again and become dead weight with 4 more years on his contract or that Wright will fall for Sochan's workout videos and offer him 15 to 20 million a year.
Why are you making such a big deal out of nothing is beyond me.
Fox making 6% more than what he's making now won't make or break our roster or cap situation if he plays on his usual level.
Role players getting overpaid is the only thing that can fuck us up until 2029 when some tough decisions will need to be made.

[Obstructed_View]

Only bad part of this contract is that it comes in the time of season when there's literally nothing else going on. Nobody will complain about this deal when they see Fox playing with ten digits and a camp with Victor under his belt.

Properly utilized, this could be a really good group.

[Arguendo]

other than giannis becoming available im struggling to come up with any scenario where trading fox at the deadline makes any sense
Just never know how things will play out...maybe ORL is balling, Bane keeps being Bane/Suggs returns to 23'-24' All-D/40% 3 form, but Franz struggles hard, Paolo has to carry too much of the Point load, Fox/Harper ball out, ORL sees Fox, knows how he fit next to Sabonis, concludes he's the missing piece to get them to the finals next yr and beyond is a weak east. Sure its unlikely, but Fox playing like a top 20-25 guy is just maybe close enough to get you a Franz type if ORL thinks the window is open.

Or NOP continues to be a horribly managed team, their ready to fire-sale for a new star if they can move a bad contract (DJM, Poole, etc) but they're willing to move Trey Murphy III at the right price or Herb Jones for a lot less.
Or maybe Booker just gets totally fed up in Phx.
Or the Heat come to you thinking Fox+Powell+Wiggins+Bam may be enough to compete in the East, and they'll give you Herro (and avoid his extension decision) to find out.

Or all of the potential multi-team trades where you can add a top 20-30 guy and expirings (Barnes, Olynek) to make some magic happen and balance the roster better.

Nothing likely, but better to have the option...and if Fox + one of Castle or Harper ball out, their will be lots of potential.

[exstatic]

I think a potential Fox trade would be mainly because Harper/Castle turn out great and struggle to fit with him.

Last summer, Markkanen waited a day to sign his extension to make him ineligible to be traded at the trade deadline. If Fox don't do that, it is meaningful.


It doesn’t even have to be a bad fit. You just can’t pay 4 guys. That’s the bad fit, a cap fit.

Utah was rebuilding and monetizing pieces. That’s why Markkanen waited.

[playbonner15]

LMAO Klutch does it again

[exstatic]

And as is should have been. If you're not going to extend him, you don't trade for him to begin with (and yes, we got him for below market, but it would have been an overpay for a 1.5 year rental). Hilarious to see people contemplating this as though there wasn't 6 months to prepare for this exact same happening.

I’m guessing this was “negotiated” before the trade was executed.

[LeBowen]

It doesn’t even have to be a bad fit. You just can’t pay 4 guys. That’s the bad fit, a cap fit.

Utah was rebuilding and monetizing pieces. That’s why Markkanen waited.

Technically, we could survive one year of 35% (Wemby) + 30% (Fox) + 25% (Castle) + 25% (Harper) contracts because second apron is at 135% of the cap and those 4 contracts would add up to 115%.
Luxury line is at 120%.

It's just that it's not feasible long term, but that would be only for 29-30 season and Fox's contract is done in 2023.

if Castle or Harper earn 30% extension it will be a good problem to have because they'll be all-star level at the end of their rookie contracts and Spurs could probably create an overpowered roster for 26-27 and 27-28 seasons.

[DPG21920]

You wrote so much with not actually refuting much lol - Classic LeBowen

[exstatic]

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.

Chicago would have sat on their pick like Charlotte did. It was a worse pick by the draft than it was by the lottery, because they no longer cared about tanking to keep it because they had it back.

One of those unprotected firsts is ours, and Sacto loved the Minnesota pick so much that they carved it up, and traded the 17-30 rights to OKC.

[exstatic]

Agreed, but their presence makes his own fit less than clean and while technically they can decrease their role or trade them, this being the Spurs, I'll believe it when I see it.

Fox is not an All-NBA caliber player though, he's a fringe All-Star caliber player, which is 1.5 tiers below that.

Since he’s made an All NBA team, he is by definition an All NBA caliber player.

[LeBowen]

You wrote so much with not actually refuting much lol - Classic LeBowen

Go away, we'll let you know when the Spurs start contending again so you can start watching games.

[exstatic]

Why would it not have conveyed?

Chicago would have sat on it like Charlotte did with their pick. Their pick was about 8th when the trade went down,but in slot 11 when the lottery happened. You don’t intentionally improve tat much from February to April, unless you were sandbagging all along.

[MannyIsGod]

I think my main issue is two things:

1) I get spurs made a deal with fox but a major unforeseen variable changed the equation (Harper). No one in the league given that change would have called the Spurs terrible for not paying Fox 230M especially when it’s unlikely anyone in open market would have paid him that anyways. If you try to buy a house and commit to doing so but before closing you lose your job? You aren’t expected to keep buying the home.

There was a material change to the equation for the Spurs and they have every right to negotiate vs cave and give Fox full max. Again, do I think its a for disaster? Not at all. Im simply saying that theres very real risk now and the only path for that risk to even come to fruition was giving Fox this max and they did it.

2) This is a win now move but nothing else they did was win now really. Spurs weren’t even close to playoffs and it seems like vast majority of what they did was seemingly relyhign on patience and internal growth vs pushing pedal down to truly give best chance to make playoffs. Now, I believe in that approach and I think SA could make playoffs as is. But still, trading 3 firsts + 5 2nds and paying Fox 230M is a win now move and they didnt really do much to win now other than sign a back up Center?

Trade pick 14 for some actual help if thats your goal. Trade Keldon or Dev + picks to get better fits/shooting and talent upgrades.

It’s very mixed messaging and half assed win now (which I was fine with that approach before paying Fox 230M).

What you're not acknowledging is that the Spurs aren't the Lakers and can't run the risk of alienating players who make the move to be traded to them without also running risk. There's no obvious risk free course of action here so while there is risk with this contract, there is risk with every pathway the Spurs could possible take so simply pointing out the existence of said risk doesn't somehow make a point.

What the real question here should be does this course of action have an acceptable level of risk to the chance of it being successful? Well how do you evaluate that? You have to consider the risk involved with the other scenarios. So as we can't go back and rewrite history and Fox WAS traded whats the downside of not giving him the max? Obviously is hte fact that he turns this season toxic, you lose trust with a very powerful agency entering the prime years of what you hope is the best player in the league, and you lose the trust of other players in your organization and across the league. That seems like a very risky situation, no? YMMV but I would rather not risk that and instead count on Fox maintaining his value since he is not old or showing signs of becoming worse and is on a very talented roster.

Your analogy really falls flat for me. You're comparing the Spurs getting Harper and having more options and opportunities moving forward with about the most catastrophic type of situation in a job loss and home purchase. Its a bad analogy.

[Obstructed_View]

It doesn’t even have to be a bad fit. You just can’t pay 4 guys. That’s the bad fit, a cap fit.

Utah was rebuilding and monetizing pieces. That’s why Markkanen waited.
Trade a guy who put you at the top of his trade list and watch no player ever request a trade to your franchise again.

[Arguendo]

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.
They were pot committed because they care about relationships and always try to honor the spirit of the deals they do, regardless of what changes. That's what the Spurs do and its paid off for them repeatedly.

The Max contract was baked in when they decided to make the trade, Spurs were always going to offer it unless Fox offered to take less.
Fox requesting a trade to the Spurs absolutely decreased the value. Desmond Bane got 4 unprotected 1sts, the '26 is very likely the most valuable pick in next yrs drafts bc its the BEST OF PHX, WASH, ORL. They also got a top-2 protected swap. Yes they got off KCPs 2/43M, Spurs got off Collins 2/36, Cole is marginally better than Tre.

Bridges landed NYB 4 unprotected 1sts, + a top-4 protected + an unprotected swap.
Fox is easily the best of those 3 players, highest upside, most success/resume/ability.
Spurs gave up their own unprotected '27, the Minny '31, and top 10/8/8 Chi pick, and a fake first. They obviously got a big discount, the '26 ORL/Phx/Wsh pick is worth the Minny pick + the fake Charlotte 1st at least, but prolly the Minny and another real 1st. That pick will have 2 swings at top 4, its a virtual lock for a top-5 pick.

The Spurs paid value, but WAY less value than what Fox would've commanded w/o the request the trade.

I'm scared of Fox's contract too, but it was practically a done deal when they did the trade. Like it or not, he is a max player in the NBA. I don't love it, but it is what it is.
Fox is tradeable, he is a huge asset unless and until he slows way down. He was/is worth significantly more than we paid. Castle and Harper are 21 and 19, Fox opens the window for next yr and Wemby may be ready. This is one of those good problems, down the road maybe its a problem, but its not a problem today.

[MannyIsGod]

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.

[itzsoweezee]

Well, at least there won’t be any hard feelings if he gets traded in a couple of years

[spurraider21]

Well clearly, but I also dont think giving up 8 picks +230M then drafting 2 rookies and signing a back up Center is exactly “going for it” lol
backup C was a crucial pickup. the on/off splits from being a high end defense to a historically bad one is something that absolutely needed to be addressed if the spurs wanted to "go for it" and "win now"

and if you think trading for a 27yo Fox means they had to trade away the #2 pick to be consistent then i whole heartedly disagree

as for #14, it depends what veteran you think could have been had for 14. they were in on Durant from what we know, didnt happen.

[exstatic]

Trade a guy who put you at the top of his trade list and watch no player ever request a trade to your franchise again.

In 3-4 years, he gets a max bag of $$$, probably a ring, and some awards hardware. They’ll also include he and Rich Paul in the process, and let them pick their team again. Spurs don’t screw or surprise people. He’ll be taken care of.

[Spurs Brazil]

https://www.instagram.com/p/DM88KbaxGDN/?igsh=cXNpZGdhZ2djMWNw

[twodeep]

Why are people scared of his contract he is in his prime years and his contract will be ending when the young guys should be ascending if they growth to that level in that time frame.

I swear people are crazy they are over reacting because we got harper who could become a great player or he could become Green of the rockets and never advanced past a good player. Sorry Fox is proven as a good player

[Mugen]

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.

[Mugen]

If Fox and Wemby stay healthy next season then the most important player becomes Vassell tbh.

If Devin has a good season, I can see this roster getting out of the play in bracket.

[exstatic]

If Fox and Wemby stay healthy next season then the most important player becomes Vassell tbh.

If Devin has a good season, I can see this roster getting out of the play in bracket.

Or being 6 or better to start with.

[jjspur]

Makes me wonder if Sacramento told Fox he wasn't getting a max from them and to go find another team willing to pay him (we all know Sac has a messed up front office), and 6 months later here we are. Its a lot of money, hope he's worth it.

[dbreiden83080]

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

I'm starting to forget..

[Spurs Homer]

I just checked my account and exactly -ZERO $$$ - came out of it to help the spurs make this deal...

so its a good deal all around.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

If Fox and Wemby stay healthy next season then the most important player becomes Vassell tbh.

If Devin has a good season, I can see this roster getting out of the play in bracket.

Ugh Devin was rough last season, if he can’t get it together this year it’ll probably be his last as a Spur.

[scott]

Technically, we could survive one year of 35% (Wemby) + 30% (Fox) + 25% (Castle) + 25% (Harper) contracts because second apron is at 135% of the cap and those 4 contracts would add up to 115%.
Luxury line is at 120%.

It's just that it's not feasible long term, but that would be only for 29-30 season and Fox's contract is done in 2023.

if Castle or Harper earn 30% extension it will be a good problem to have because they'll be all-star level at the end of their rookie contracts and Spurs could probably create an overpowered roster for 26-27 and 27-28 seasons.

Wemby won't be eligible for 35% until 2031-32 at the earliest, Fox's deal won't be an issue by then.

[scott]

What you're not acknowledging is that the Spurs aren't the Lakers and can't run the risk of alienating players who make the move to be traded to them without also running risk. There's no obvious risk free course of action here so while there is risk with this contract, there is risk with every pathway the Spurs could possible take so simply pointing out the existence of said risk doesn't somehow make a point.

What the real question here should be does this course of action have an acceptable level of risk to the chance of it being successful? Well how do you evaluate that? You have to consider the risk involved with the other scenarios. So as we can't go back and rewrite history and Fox WAS traded whats the downside of not giving him the max? Obviously is hte fact that he turns this season toxic, you lose trust with a very powerful agency entering the prime years of what you hope is the best player in the league, and you lose the trust of other players in your organization and across the league. That seems like a very risky situation, no? YMMV but I would rather not risk that and instead count on Fox maintaining his value since he is not old or showing signs of becoming worse and is on a very talented roster.

Your analogy really falls flat for me. You're comparing the Spurs getting Harper and having more options and opportunities moving forward with about the most catastrophic type of situation in a job loss and home purchase. Its a bad analogy.

The better analogy is that the Spurs are an employer and made a job offer to a candidate (Fox) who accepted the job offer. Then a better/cheaper/different candidate applied for the same job, so the company withdrew their offer to Fox, who has already put in notice with his other job and moved across the country to start on Monday.

It's a bad look when employers do that, and it would be a bad look for the Spurs to do that.

[scott]

In 3-4 years, he gets a max bag of $$$, probably a ring, and some awards hardware. They’ll also include he and Rich Paul in the process, and let them pick their team again. Spurs don’t screw or surprise people. He’ll be taken care of.

Or maybe he'll be an All NBA PG next to Wemby, win multiple chips, maybe a Finals MVP, retire a Spur and have his jersey hanging in the rafters. There is tons of optionality here. Spurs are only really shit out of luck if Fox gets hurt or just completely falls off the cliff, but that is the same risk that exists with any player in the NBA. You don't avoid giving good players the contracts they command based on the risk inherent in being an NBA player.

[Raven]

he'll probably get traded in a few years

[LeBowen]

Wemby won't be eligible for 35% 2031-32 at the earliest, Fox's deal won't be an issue by then.

My bad, I was sure he could get 35% if he wins an MVP, but it's only for second extension.

Another thing with Fox/Harper dynamic is that we needed another point guard.
Harper will surely be overqualified for your usual backup point guard job, but he's got the size to play as SG if he can shoot well enough.
How many important minutes he gets is up to him.

[ismael-robert]

Harper n castle not fully panning out makes them more affordable. Plus theyre always going to be more part of plan than fox simply based on ages being similar to wemby. Fox will decline while theyre still young

[John B]

Funny how the Spurs haven’t had an AS for years, and ST complaining on the 1st max signing. It’s a sign of good things to come bitches

[scott]

My bad, I was sure he could get 35% if he wins an MVP, but it's only for second extension.

Another thing with Fox/Harper dynamic is that we needed another point guard.
Harper will surely be overqualified for your usual backup point guard job, but he's got the size to play as SG if he can shoot well enough.
How many important minutes he gets is up to him.

Yeah I think the earliest you can get the 35% max (if you qualify) is Year 9. Paolo's extension, for example voided the 5th year of his rookie deal and has a voidable 5th year on his extension, so he could get 35% in his 9th year. You have to have 7 or 8 years of service and 1 or 2 years on your contact remaining - which I read as being Year 9 is the earliest possible season you can get 35%.

[DPG21920]

Go away, we'll let you know when the Spurs start contending again so you can start watching games.

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

[DPG21920]

What you're not acknowledging is that the Spurs aren't the Lakers and can't run the risk of alienating players who make the move to be traded to them without also running risk. There's no obvious risk free course of action here so while there is risk with this contract, there is risk with every pathway the Spurs could possible take so simply pointing out the existence of said risk doesn't somehow make a point.

What the real question here should be does this course of action have an acceptable level of risk to the chance of it being successful? Well how do you evaluate that? You have to consider the risk involved with the other scenarios. So as we can't go back and rewrite history and Fox WAS traded whats the downside of not giving him the max? Obviously is hte fact that he turns this season toxic, you lose trust with a very powerful agency entering the prime years of what you hope is the best player in the league, and you lose the trust of other players in your organization and across the league. That seems like a very risky situation, no? YMMV but I would rather not risk that and instead count on Fox maintaining his value since he is not old or showing signs of becoming worse and is on a very talented roster.

Your analogy really falls flat for me. You're comparing the Spurs getting Harper and having more options and opportunities moving forward with about the most catastrophic type of situation in a job loss and home purchase. Its a bad analogy.

Maybe - but we have Wemby and plenty of guys would be willing to play and I dont think anyone would think less of Spurs acting completely rational. I mean look at the collective reaction by non spurs fans to this deal. Both fans and pundits alike dont really like it and see risk. Im not taking some contrarian position here.

I think the fear of Klutch and reputation in a league where CBA is killer, players have all the power anyways and demand trades whenever they want is misplaced fear and team, as long as you are acting rational and not scummy for no reason should be ok looking out for their best interest overall.

I dont think anyone, player or agent, especially after Spurs gave up 8 picks to get Fox out of a situation he hated would be mad at Spurs for telling Fox “look, we are a small market and the only way this works is if you take less especially now that we unexpectedly got Harper in addition to Castle”

What’s he going to do request a trade and let spurs get some of their picks back and a player that fits better?

[DPG21920]

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.

Not even close. A ROY on a rookie scale deal busting does not hurt nearly as much as a max player who you gave up 8 picks for busting. Castle will always have some plus value or at worst you can just let him walk as a FA. Fox downside is infinitely more painful IMO

[DPG21920]

backup C was a crucial pickup. the on/off splits from being a high end defense to a historically bad one is something that absolutely needed to be addressed if the spurs wanted to "go for it" and "win now"

and if you think trading for a 27yo Fox means they had to trade away the #2 pick to be consistent then i whole heartedly disagree

as for #14, it depends what veteran you think could have been had for 14. they were in on Durant from what we know, didnt happen.

I never said backup C was not needed. Im saying in context of making huge win now swings, doing just a back up center is not really doing much towards that goal overall to truly accelerate.

I also never said trade pick 2. But Spurs not only had guys like Vassell, Barnes, Sochan and Keldon to move but pick 14 and the other future picks/swaps to use as well.

[DPG21920]

The better analogy is that the Spurs are an employer and made a job offer to a candidate (Fox) who accepted the job offer. Then a better/cheaper/different candidate applied for the same job, so the company withdrew their offer to Fox, who has already put in notice with his other job and moved across the country to start on Monday.

It's a bad look when employers do that, and it would be a bad look for the Spurs to do that.

Not even close lol. NBA is not a regular job. Spurs paying Fox 200M would still be seen as a top flight deal for Fox for example. Thats why so many are shocked SA paid Fox the full max.

[DPG21920]

Again, Im not hating on it. I think theres some context and nuance here. I dont love the deal mostly because it doesn’t benefit Spurs at all and didnt make sense IMO to have to do this now.

That doesnt mean I think it’s a high probability it blows up or that Fox wont fit well and team wont be good. I just think the tracks are now laid for some real trouble beyond the normal “well everything has risk if you think about it” stuff.

[baseline bum]

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

I'm starting to forget..

Not really. Before the 99 lockout and max contracts they were hugely underpaid while the Jordans and Ewings sucked up all the money, and after the 99 lockout and max contracts they became overpaid while the megastars like Tim, Kobe, LeBron, etc became grossly underpaid.

[scott]

Not even close lol. NBA is not a regular job. Spurs paying Fox 200M would still be seen as a top flight deal for Fox for example. Thats why so many are shocked SA paid Fox the full max.

It's been explained ad nauseum for you here. If you still don't get it, that's a you thing.

[Jordan Jackson]

Makes me wonder if Sacramento told Fox he wasn't getting a max from them and to go find another team willing to pay him (we all know Sac has a messed up front office), and 6 months later here we are. It’s a lot of money, hope he's worth it.

The Kings did offer and he declined. Which sent up red flags, he was gone. Well that and him hiring Klutch.

He doesn’t want to be perceived as a loser anymore and wanted a bigger stage. Say what you want about the Spurs the last few years - it’s still a marquee team especially with Wemby.

[itzsoweezee]

Do people think this contract is untradeable? Seems like the spurs still have a lot of flexibility, especially if castle and Harper turn out to be good.

[baseline bum]

The better analogy is that the Spurs are an employer and made a job offer to a candidate (Fox) who accepted the job offer. Then a better/cheaper/different candidate applied for the same job, so the company withdrew their offer to Fox, who has already put in notice with his other job and moved across the country to start on Monday.

It's a bad look when employers do that, and it would be a bad look for the Spurs to do that.

Except Harper's more like a hotshot MIT grad with a good gpa and an impressive thesis, not a guy who has been doing the job for years and who you know is great at it already who produces results now like Fox. So you hire both if you can.

[cd98]

Spurstalk may be unsufferable for the next few years because the hate dial goes up every time a player not Tim Duncan or Wemby is talked about as getting paid. Fox is one of the fastest players in the league, he's an all star with all-star level skills, and he can be a great player for our team, but I think most importantly, my impression is he is a great leader and that is just what our young guards need.

[scott]

Not really. Before the 99 lockout and max contracts they were hugely underpaid while the Jordans and Ewings sucked up all the money, and after the 99 lockout and max contracts they became overpaid while the megastars like Tim, Kobe, LeBron, etc became grossly underpaid.

Here is the top paid player as a % of the cap going back to 2011 and then highest paid going forward based on currently signed deals and the estimated cap from 2025-2030.

2011 - Kobe 43.9%
2012 - Kobe 48.0%
2013 - Kobe 51.9% (!!!)
2014 - Kobe 37.3% (#2 was Joe Johnson at 36.8% :lol)
2015 - Kobe 35.7%
2016 - LeBron 32.9% (#2 was Mike Conley followed by Demar Derozan, speaking of not great players getting paid)
2017 - Steph 35.0%
2018 - Steph 36.8%
2019 - Steph 36.9%
2020 - Steph 39.4%
2021 - Steph 40.7%
2022 - Steph 38.9%
2023 - Steph 38.2%
2024 - Steph 39.7%
2025 - Steph 38.5%
2026 - Steph 36.8%
2027 - Embiid 36.0%
2028 - Embiid 36.8%
2029 - Shai 36.8%
2030 - Shai 37.5%

But throughout all of those years there have always been "not great players" getting paid the max. In 2030, Mikal Bridges will be making 31% of the cap. He's not a great player. I already pointed out Joe Johnson, Mike Conley and DDR. In 2011, WAS was paying Rashard Lewis 36.4% of the cap. Rudy Gay was getting 30.6% of the Cap in 2014. In 2019, John Wall was getting 35% and Tobias Harris was getting 30%.

There will always been these "not great players" getting max deals because the max is too low to truly allocate the cap according to pure value. Kobe getting 50% of the cap was probably about what Jokic and Giannis would be worth these days if they weren't capped, and then maybe you'd see less of these middling max deals. But since there are 30 teams and the cap is limited to 25-35% of the cap, you'll always have at least the top 30 players getting a max.

[Mr. Body]

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.

Moving Castle this summer would be one of the stupidest things I've seen in a long, long time. What the fuck bro.

[DPG21920]

It's been explained ad nauseum for you here. If you still don't get it, that's a you thing.

Lmao ok. ST guys said something so that’s gospel. Forget the 99% of earth that disagrees what Scott explained is how it is.

[scott]

Except Harper's more like a hotshot MIT grad with a good gpa and an impressive thesis, not a guy who has been doing the job for years and who you know is great at it already who produces results now like Fox. So you hire both if you can.

The good company hires both (like the Spurs did). The shitty company drafts Marvin Bagley III instead or burns bridges with every other agent and FA in the league :lol

[DPG21920]

Here is the top paid player as a % of the cap going back to 2011 and then highest paid going forward based on currently signed deals and the estimated cap from 2025-2030.

2011 - Kobe 43.9%
2012 - Kobe 48.0%
2013 - Kobe 51.9% (!!!)
2014 - Kobe 37.3% (#2 was Joe Johnson at 36.8% :lol)
2015 - Kobe 35.7%
2016 - LeBron 32.9% (#2 was Mike Conley followed by Demar Derozan, speaking of not great players getting paid)
2017 - Steph 35.0%
2018 - Steph 36.8%
2019 - Steph 36.9%
2020 - Steph 39.4%
2021 - Steph 40.7%
2022 - Steph 38.9%
2023 - Steph 38.2%
2024 - Steph 39.7%
2025 - Steph 38.5%
2026 - Steph 36.8%
2027 - Embiid 36.0%
2028 - Embiid 36.8%
2029 - Shai 36.8%
2030 - Shai 37.5%

But throughout all of those years there have always been "not great players" getting paid the max. In 2030, Mikal Bridges will be making 31% of the cap. He's not a great player. I already pointed out Joe Johnson, Mike Conley and DDR. In 2011, WAS was paying Rashard Lewis 36.4% of the cap. Rudy Gay was getting 30.6% of the Cap in 2014. In 2019, John Wall was getting 35% and Tobias Harris was getting 30%.

There will always been these "not great players" getting max deals because the max is too low to truly allocate the cap according to pure value. Kobe getting 50% of the cap was probably about what Jokic and Giannis would be worth these days if they weren't capped, and then maybe you'd see less of these middling max deals. But since there are 30 teams and the cap is limited to 25-35% of the cap, you'll always have at least the top 30 players getting a max.

So then what’s your actual beef with me saying Spurs overpaid especially with context of Sa landing Harper unexpectedly when you agree it’s an overpay?

[Mr. Body]

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.

The deal was locked in because this is Klutch. The market is evaporating for players like Fox -- small, non-playmaking shooters who aren't great defenders. We're literally seeing teams leave that market in droves. Yet the Spurs max that player out. Sure, they have to bow down to Klutch, but sticking with a max is pretty crazy and we're going to be bleeding from this for a while.

[scott]

Lmao ok. ST guys said something so that’s gospel. Forget the 99% of earth that disagrees what Scott explained is how it is.

It has nothing to do with what I said. You stated your opinion, we heard you. What are you hoping to get out of repeating it a dozen times?

[scott]

So then what’s your actual beef with me saying Spurs overpaid especially with context of Sa landing Harper unexpectedly when you agree it’s an overpay?

Where in what I said did you read that Fox is an overpay? He got exactly what Top 30 players in this league get. I think he's a top 30 player (as does just about every ranking of players in the league). Sounds like he got market.

[Mr. Body]

Basically, what the argument seems to be is that Fox was maxed because:

1. He forced himself to the Spurs
2. He's a Klutch client

and not

3. He's a good player

This isn't disputing or dispelling his talents, but it's acknowledging that this contract has been made for other purposes, that we're rewarding a player who twisted his position to get here. Fine. And that it's to pay into the Klutch services. We have FO members who are Klutch. We seem to be piling in on the gravy train. Fine.

But that seems to make clear that this max contract is NOT because Fox is actually good. Market value, with his player archetype, would be lower. We're paying because of other reasons.

[DPG21920]

It has nothing to do with what I said. You stated your opinion, we heard you. What are you hoping to get out of repeating it a dozen times?

What are you getting by, as you said “explaining it ad nauseam”? It’s a conversation - don’t like it? Move on

It just happened hours ago and people are making points. You’re acting like I’m going on about it for weeks spamming multiple threads. Gtfo

[Mr. Body]

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.

[DPG21920]

Where in what I said did you read that Fox is an overpay? He got exactly what Top 30 players in this league get. I think he's a top 30 player (as does just about every ranking of players in the league). Sounds like he got market.

But throughout all of those years there have always been "not great players" getting paid the max. That’s not a ringing endorsement and also misses some context about this cba compared to others.

[scott]

The deal was locked in because this is Klutch. The market is evaporating for players like Fox -- small, non-playmaking shooters who aren't great defenders. We're literally seeing teams leave that market in droves. Yet the Spurs max that player out. Sure, they have to bow down to Klutch, but sticking with a max is pretty crazy and we're going to be bleeding from this for a while.

You've been anti-Fox since we made the deal, which is fine. But you can also just say what you really mean - which is that you don't think he's very good.

[DPG21920]

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.

He’s top 30

[scott]

Basically, what the argument seems to be is that Fox was maxed because:

1. He forced himself to the Spurs
2. He's a Klutch client

and not

3. He's a good player

This isn't disputing or dispelling his talents, but it's acknowledging that this contract has been made for other purposes, that we're rewarding a player who twisted his position to get here. Fine. And that it's to pay into the Klutch services. We have FO members who are Klutch. We seem to be piling in on the gravy train. Fine.

But that seems to make clear that this max contract is NOT because Fox is actually good. Market value, with his player archetype, would be lower. We're paying because of other reasons.


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.

There you go, you finally said it. It's fine to have that opinion. Other folks disagree.

He got paid a max because he's a Top 30 player and that what Top 30 (actually more like Top 45) players get, is my argument. Everyone is free to disagree on whether he is a Top Whatever player... but, there are currently 44 max contracts (rookie max, 30% max and 35% max) deals in the NBA. That's just the reality. If the absolute top were allowed to get paid over 35%, there would probably be less - but that's just the the economic structure of the league today.

[Mugen]

The deal was locked in because this is Klutch. The market is evaporating for players like Fox -- small, non-playmaking shooters who aren't great defenders. We're literally seeing teams leave that market in droves. Yet the Spurs max that player out. Sure, they have to bow down to Klutch, but sticking with a max is pretty crazy and we're going to be bleeding from this for a while.

There's a significant gap between guys like Collin Sexton/Cam Thomas/Malik Monk and guys like Fox/Jamal Murray tbh. You need bucket getters when you're playing meaningful games come April/May. Fox is elite at that and his gravity should make others around him better even if he's not prime Nash. Those guys get paid, plain and simple.

He's a much better fit than guys like Young, Garland, tbh especially if his shooting returns to form after a broken finger.

[scott]

But throughout all of those years there have always been "not great players" getting paid the max. That’s not a ringing endorsement and also misses some context about this cba compared to others.

It's not intended to be an endorsement or not an endorsement, it's just reality. There are 44 max contracts in the NBA right now. You just said Fox is a Top 30 player. Top 30 players (and really top 45 players) get max deals. The reality in today's NBA (and for a long time now) is that the qualification for getting a max isn't being a great player, otherwise there would only be like 10-15 max contracts.

[scott]

There's a significant gap between guys like Collin Sexton/Cam Thomas/Malik Monk and guys like Fox/Jamal Murray tbh. You need bucket getters when you're playing meaningful games come April/May. Fox is elite at that and his gravity should make others around him better even if he's not prime Nash. Those guys get paid, plain and simple.

He's a much better fit than guys like Young, Garland, tbh especially if his shooting returns to form after a broken finger.

Fox with tied with KD for most Pts/Opp on ISOs last year at 1.16/opp (minimum 2 opportunities/game), just to add more stats to the fire

[Ariel]

Like it or not, that's his market value. Fox is a max player.

Question is when the extension will be officially signed. If it's today or tomorrow, Fox will be eligible to be traded at next trade deadline. If it's after tomorrow, he won't be trade eligible until the end of the season.
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 think the earliest they'd consider trading him is 2 years from now, when Castle becomes extension eligible. If both he and Harper develop into budding stars, then you can move Fox having given him a couple of years to get playing with Wemby out of his system, while not causing him to lose money. That'd be a good outcome for all parties, IMO.

[Mugen]

Naysayers are also overestimating the leverage FO had here.

At worst, Fox is the 2nd best player on the roster for at least the next two seasons. For an organization desperate to get back into the playoffs, you need talent like Fox plain and simple and you need him happy.

[MannyIsGod]

Not even close. A ROY on a rookie scale deal busting does not hurt nearly as much as a max player who you gave up 8 picks for busting. Castle will always have some plus value or at worst you can just let him walk as a FA. Fox downside is infinitely more painful IMO

But you're not factoring in possible opportunity cost. Not to mention that on their rookie contracts early on people would have said the same about Keldon and Vassel and while they are too an extent, correct (both those players still hold a lot more value than most here acknowledge), that's not an all together unlikely for a shooting guard who won ROY in a year without much top end talent and never developed a 3 point shot. People are viewing Castle with rose colored glasses right now but there's a really significant chance he ends up like those two guys. A greater shot of that than him surpassing Fox, honestly.

EDIT - I'd agree worst case Fox is more painful but that worst case is far less likely than Castle's worst case.

[DAF86]

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

In the best case scenario where both Castle and Harper prove to be future cornerstones of the franchise, you just trade Fox for multiple first rounders. There has never been a bigger non-issue than this one, tbh. :lol

[MannyIsGod]

Again, Im not hating on it. I think theres some context and nuance here. I dont love the deal mostly because it doesn’t benefit Spurs at all and didnt make sense IMO to have to do this now.

That doesnt mean I think it’s a high probability it blows up or that Fox wont fit well and team wont be good. I just think the tracks are now laid for some real trouble beyond the normal “well everything has risk if you think about it” stuff.

I don't disagree with any of this honestly, but I don't think they made the decision for this now. Pretty clear to me they made it when they made the trade and just didn't think it was right to go back on that which I respect, honestly.

[scott]

Naysayers are also overestimating the leverage FO had here.

At worst, Fox is the 2nd best player on the roster for at least the next two seasons. For an organization desperate to get back into the playoffs, you need talent like Fox plain and simple and you need him happy.

Indeed. And what leverage would the Spurs have had to play hard ball here?

Spurs: we want to pay you less than the max because we got #2 and drafted a guy to replace you

Fox: No.

What are the Spurs going to do? Let him walk next offseason? Trade him and recoup a fraction of what they gave up for him because now he's a distressed asset you're trying to flip after 6 months?

[TimmyBuckets]

I love how Fox, an all NBA caliber player, who's one of the best guards in the league is being shat on by some for getting the max because Castle and Harper will guaranteed get max deals and Harper will become the next Jordan lmfaoo

[MannyIsGod]

Moving Castle this summer would be one of the stupidest things I've seen in a long, long time. What the fuck bro.

No where do I see me saying they should have moved him. I legit say that I love him and have high hopes, but he's a 2nd year player who's value may be at the highest it will ever be. That's - quite frankly - the most likely scenario moving forward. That doesnt' mean you don't see it out, it just means that it's not without risk. Out of the 3 players I named, its hard to argue that Castle isnt' the one who's got the lowest chance of ever being an All Star.

[tbdog]

Depending on the site, Fox is usually ranked between 27th and 32nd.

[DPG21920]

It's not intended to be an endorsement or not an endorsement, it's just reality. There are 44 max contracts in the NBA right now. You just said Fox is a Top 30 player. Top 30 players (and really top 45 players) get max deals. The reality in today's NBA (and for a long time now) is that the qualification for getting a max isn't being a great player, otherwise there would only be like 10-15 max contracts.

Sure - but what Im saying is nearly every time we all realize even though it happens it’s not smart. Teams continually making mistakes does not mean it’s a good thing. Im not arguing its an outlier or doesnt happen; Im saying with context of where Spurs are at I dont think it makes sense even if its not end of the world.

But would it surprise you or anyone here if in 2 years we are talking about “man this contract is not great?” I think it’s a fair discussion given it just happened and the context.

But Im not sitting here dooming it and saying Spurs are idiots who f’d up everything either.

[MannyIsGod]

ITs wild how much people value potential vs a proven track record for nearly a decade in the NBA.

[tbdog]

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

[MannyIsGod]

Sure - but what Im saying is nearly every time we all realize even though it happens it’s not smart. Teams continually making mistakes does not mean it’s a good thing. Im not arguing its an outlier or doesnt happen; Im saying with context of where Spurs are at I dont think it makes sense even if its not end of the world.

But would it surprise you or anyone here if in 2 years we are talking about “man this contract is not great?” I think it’s a fair discussion given it just happened and the context.

But Im not sitting here dooming it and saying Spurs are idiots who f’d up everything either.

I'm with you when you say its not great or awful. Where I'm not with you, is when you say it doesn't make sense. Given that the point we're reanalyzing this is basically at the draft, I don't see how anything you've learned since the draft makes you think its the right choice to not sign him to the Max. That doesn't mean the contract is magically great, but that clearly is the best route that the Spurs have to make. You still have to decide on what to do with Fox in one year, and you are very unlikely to think that you can hand the team over to Castle and/or Harper in that year so how is making that decision in the offseason any better than signing him now? You've put yourself in a substantially worse situation and don't really get anything for it!

[scott]

Sure - but what Im saying is nearly every time we all realize even though it happens it’s not smart. Teams continually making mistakes does not mean it’s a good thing. Im not arguing its an outlier or doesnt happen; Im saying with context of where Spurs are at I dont think it makes sense even if its not end of the world.

But would it surprise you or anyone here if in 2 years we are talking about “man this contract is not great?” I think it’s a fair discussion given it just happened and the context.

But Im not sitting here dooming it and saying Spurs are idiots who f’d up everything either.

Any contract we sign has the potential of not being great in two years.

We can sign nothing but value contracts... or we can avoid having Top 20-45 guys who will cost max deals on our team... but then we probably won't be very good.

I want us to be good, and having a Top 30 player is helpful to that. Those players cost the max. Would it have been nice to get a discount? Of course. But homie got paid what players his caliber get paid. The alternative seems to be not having him on the team. I prefer him on the team.

[DPG21920]

But you're not factoring in possible opportunity cost. Not to mention that on their rookie contracts early on people would have said the same about Keldon and Vassel and while they are too an extent, correct (both those players still hold a lot more value than most here acknowledge), that's not an all together unlikely for a shooting guard who won ROY in a year without much top end talent and never developed a 3 point shot. People are viewing Castle with rose colored glasses right now but there's a really significant chance he ends up like those two guys. A greater shot of that than him surpassing Fox, honestly.

EDIT - I'd agree worst case Fox is more painful but that worst case is far less likely than Castle's worst case.

Thats fair - Im very high on Castle but I also understand theres still hills to climb for him to be any where near Fox level and no guarantees he gets there. But hes so young and so much potential and we get years of relatively cheap money to see what happens.

[scott]

ITs wild how much people value potential vs a proven track record for nearly a decade in the NBA.

The mystery box could be a boat!

[DPG21920]

I don't disagree with any of this honestly, but I don't think they made the decision for this now. Pretty clear to me they made it when they made the trade and just didn't think it was right to go back on that which I respect, honestly.

I understand it but Spurs have been doing this for years without getting shit in return honestly. But, if they made the promise they are right to keep it. Fox doesnt care about Harper and he shouldn’t.

[scott]

I'm with you when you say its not great or awful. Where I'm not with you, is when you say it doesn't make sense. Given that the point we're reanalyzing this is basically at the draft, I don't see how anything you've learned since the draft makes you think its the right choice to not sign him to the Max. That doesn't mean the contract is magically great, but that clearly is the best route that the Spurs have to make. You still have to decide on what to do with Fox in one year, and you are very unlikely to think that you can hand the team over to Castle and/or Harper in that year so how is making that decision in the offseason any better than signing him now? You've put yourself in a substantially worse situation and don't really get anything for it!

And, the league appears to be trending in a direction that lends itself to having all 3 of Fox, Harper and Castle on the team (but ideally if they are able to shoot a decent % at volume). I don't see this as a situation where they are crowding each other out, at least not in the near (2-3 years) term.

[baseline bum]

Here is the top paid player as a % of the cap going back to 2011 and then highest paid going forward based on currently signed deals and the estimated cap from 2025-2030.

2011 - Kobe 43.9%
2012 - Kobe 48.0%
2013 - Kobe 51.9% (!!!)
2014 - Kobe 37.3% (#2 was Joe Johnson at 36.8% :lol)
2015 - Kobe 35.7%
2016 - LeBron 32.9% (#2 was Mike Conley followed by Demar Derozan, speaking of not great players getting paid)
2017 - Steph 35.0%
2018 - Steph 36.8%
2019 - Steph 36.9%
2020 - Steph 39.4%
2021 - Steph 40.7%
2022 - Steph 38.9%
2023 - Steph 38.2%
2024 - Steph 39.7%
2025 - Steph 38.5%
2026 - Steph 36.8%
2027 - Embiid 36.0%
2028 - Embiid 36.8%
2029 - Shai 36.8%
2030 - Shai 37.5%

But throughout all of those years there have always been "not great players" getting paid the max. In 2030, Mikal Bridges will be making 31% of the cap. He's not a great player. I already pointed out Joe Johnson, Mike Conley and DDR. In 2011, WAS was paying Rashard Lewis 36.4% of the cap. Rudy Gay was getting 30.6% of the Cap in 2014. In 2019, John Wall was getting 35% and Tobias Harris was getting 30%.

There will always been these "not great players" getting max deals because the max is too low to truly allocate the cap according to pure value. Kobe getting 50% of the cap was probably about what Jokic and Giannis would be worth these days if they weren't capped, and then maybe you'd see less of these middling max deals. But since there are 30 teams and the cap is limited to 25-35% of the cap, you'll always have at least the top 30 players getting a max.

Should check the late 90s man. Jordan made something like 125% of the cap in 1998 and Ewing was around 75% of the cap before the lockout. :lol

[scott]

I understand it but Spurs have been doing this for years without getting shit in return honestly. But, if they made the promise they are right to keep it. Fox doesnt care about Harper and he shouldn’t.

What if guys like Fox and Durant (reportedly) wanting to come here is the return? We're assigning all of the equity to Wemby, and there is no real way to know, but I imagine the way the Spurs have treated players over the years (and having guys like DDR and Derrick White say positive things in that context) is playing into that. What other return are we hoping for? We're a small market team, we can't afford the reputation of being incompetent dickwads, or next thing you know we'll be SAC/CHA/NOP.

[DPG21920]

I'm with you when you say its not great or awful. Where I'm not with you, is when you say it doesn't make sense. Given that the point we're reanalyzing this is basically at the draft, I don't see how anything you've learned since the draft makes you think its the right choice to not sign him to the Max. That doesn't mean the contract is magically great, but that clearly is the best route that the Spurs have to make. You still have to decide on what to do with Fox in one year, and you are very unlikely to think that you can hand the team over to Castle and/or Harper in that year so how is making that decision in the offseason any better than signing him now? You've put yourself in a substantially worse situation and don't really get anything for it!

Sure - I get that. It’s not about the basketball aspect; just the complications as it ages.

[TimmyBuckets]

Essentially 2 FRPs and some second rounders who no one gives a shit about, and getting rid of Collins, for Fox is a fleece. Sac said it themselves, and were pissed at Klutch for strong-arming them. This is Fox btw, whose not only an elite top-tier talent, but a top 5-10 point guard, a position that synergies perfectly with Wemby. Fox would get a max in any team he's on. Spurs reward that with a less than max deal, and ruin a relationship with Fox, Klutch, Wemby most likely, and every other star who would would ever want to play here?

[scott]

Should check the late 90s man. Jordan made something like 125% of the cap in 1998 and Ewing was around 75% of the cap before the lockout. :lol

Oh yeah for sure. I wish Spotrac went back that far! I was just saying - after Kobe's deal, things settled into where they are now. The 35% max is honestly too low for truly great players like Jokic, Giannis, and (eventually) Wemby... the result is that more max deals go to these Top 16-45 guys. The league could easily devise a structure where the top 15 players made more and the next tier of guys (I'm calling Top 16-45) made less... but the union didn't want that.

[DPG21920]

Any contract we sign has the potential of not being great in two years.

We can sign nothing but value contracts... or we can avoid having Top 20-45 guys who will cost max deals on our team... but then we probably won't be very good.

I want us to be good, and having a Top 30 player is helpful to that. Those players cost the max. Would it have been nice to get a discount? Of course. But homie got paid what players his caliber get paid. The alternative seems to be not having him on the team. I prefer him on the team.

Im fine with Max deals for guys that are pristine fits….its not just about the money. It’s not my money lol. I think Fox is going to be damn good here honestly - Im not mad at the fit and I liked the trade.

[poopbox]

Whether inadvertently or not, you're being obtuse. Fox is a player who made an All-NBA team, he's not an All-NBA player.

Last 15 seasons: Bogut, Johnson, Randolph, Bynum, Rondo, Jefferson, Lee, Noah, Dragic, Thompson, DeRozan, Thomas, Oladipo, Walker, Simmons, Beal, Siakam, Randle, all made it.




No, people who know how restrictive the new CBA is know you don't blindly give out maxes to players like this anymore.




We got exactly one max contract. Calm down on talking about how restrictive the new cba is :lol

[DPG21920]

What if guys like Fox and Durant (reportedly) wanting to come here is the return? We're assigning all of the equity to Wemby, and there is no real way to know, but I imagine the way the Spurs have treated players over the years (and having guys like DDR and Derrick White say positive things in that context) is playing into that. What other return are we hoping for? We're a small market team, we can't afford the reputation of being incompetent dickwads, or next thing you know we'll be SAC/CHA/NOP.

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

[scott]

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

I'm not sure I agree with that (and I also don't think landing Harper should in any way impact what you pay Fox anyway, because there is plenty of room for them both, IMO). I agree it could make sense for the team if they pivoted because they landed Harper... but from the player's POV it still looks like the Spurs going back on their promises. It sends a signal to everyone else that the Spurs might do the same thing next summer if they luck into Booker/Dybansta/Peterson. The message being sent is that you're only part of our plans until something better comes along. It's understandable, but that certainly would play into a player's mind, right? "It's not personal, it's just business" is easy to say... but a lot of these players take it quite personally.

It's like if a company lays off a bunch of people. It might be perfectly justifiable and make sense to everyone... but you're still the company that lays people off, and the people you laid off are still going to hate you. Obviously companies still do this all the time... but that's just not how the Spurs roll.

[BatManu20]

1952520092228411567

1952518172986221022

1952523478604669315

[Robz4000]

Late to the party but anyone surprised by this is crazy tbh. As has been said too, if Castle/Harper become who we hope they can be then you just flip Fox. His value wont decline unless he suffers a serious injury and in that case at worst he's a massive expiring contract when they need to pay Harper.

[KobesAchilles]

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??
Luka signed a shorter deal so he can opt out and make 80 million a year. Luka will make waaaay more than Fox (and rightfully so). But really what is there to complain about? He will be the same level player in 4 years. He’s not going to just drop off a cliff at age 31. Even the most athletically needy player in the league (Westbrook) put up all nba stats when he was 32.

Plus Fox is a known entity. We have to unknowns in Castle and Harper that every poster here has just automatically assumed will be better than Fox. Bc the only reason Fox’s contract becomes an issue is if we have to extend Harper to a max deal. I mean Jalen Williams from OKC is comparable to Fox and he is going to be getting the same money.

Spurs have one franchise player, one all star level player, and a pretty good third option in Castle. The Spurs are ready to win now. The only reason people think we can’t is bc we were so inept at drafting in the pre-Wemby years. Seriously if this team had actual good role players who played defense and shot well then we’d be a title contender today.

[scott]

Sometimes I think it would be cool if every 4 years a player's contract value was decided by a third party that did so based on some objective formula (or maybe even not objective... maybe they just use The Ringer's Player Rankings and everyone outside the Top 100 just gets the minimum).

Then teams just have to go with that and construct their rosters.

[tonight...you]

Dude is straight up the 2nd best player here. A top 30 player who actually fought to be here.
Everyone else on the team is unknown.
Pay the man, shut up and let them play and figure shit out on the way.

[TekXX]

IDK let's see how this plays out. I don't expect competence from this front office after the last decade so if Fox works out then it's gravy if he's Derozan stat padder 2.0 well then, the sky is still blue. Fox was getting paid, the Klutch GM was gonna pay the Klutch player, that was the deal.

[Mnky]

Late to the party but anyone surprised by this is crazy tbh. As has been said too, if Castle/Harper become who we hope they can be then you just flip Fox. His value wont decline unless he suffers a serious injury and in that case at worst he's a massive expiring contract when they need to pay Harper.

His contract also ends when it's time to pay the young guards. He won't get in the way of their development, he will help it in plenty of ways. If they keep Harper on the bench squad, he's running his own team and getting the opportunity to make mistakes with less weight While still getting minutes with the stars and learning to play with them.

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

Dude wanted to be here and is a great mentor. He wants to win. He didn't come for the paycheck. He could have got it anywhere he went. He wanted to be here and he wanted to win here.

It's wild people still try to spin this as a negative or surprising thing.