What would you pay Tony Parker?

[Kori Ellis]

I know we talked about it before, but I can't find the thread.

What's the maximum that you would pay Tony Parker over a six-year extension?

I would top out at $68M.

The Spurs have their limit, what's yours?

[timvp]

I know we talked about it before, but I can't find the thread.

What's the maximum that you would pay Tony Parker over a six-year extension?

I would top out at $68M.

The Spurs have their limit, what's yours?

If you gotta break the bank, you gotta break the bank. If you lose Parker, the team is dead.

[Kori Ellis]

So you'd pay him the max if he wanted it right now (I think his max would be like a 6year/88M extension)?

[timvp]

If that's what it takes to keep him, yes. If you lose Parker, the Spurs would no longer be a championship contender.

[xcoriate]

I think I'd got to $70M of the 6 years...

Any cap experts know what the actual figure for the MAX in Tony's case is...

We can only sign to a 6 year becuase we don't have full bird rights so that rules out the 7th year.

Edit: I agree with Timvp though... It's kinf of imperative to the teams success that he stays.

Maybe a shorter deal to give him time to devlop and gauge his potential better would be possible but I don't really see that happening.

[King]

I agree with Timvp, in that you might have to overpay for him. Even if you do overpay, it won't ever be something as ludicrous as Shandon Anderson or Eddie Robinson, but if he maxes out, he maxes out.

I think San Antonio's offer to Parker would be close enough to max money, that another team just won't be able to absolutely blow him away with an offer enough to make it worth leaving San Antonio, and Tim Duncan.

[pooh]

I wouldn't break the bank for Parker...the Spurs spent the money wisely on Ginobili. You can get any point guard to win a title....look at the Lakers, Pistons, etc.

[Spurminator]

I'd offer $60 million, but yeah, I'd go to the max too if another team actually offered it to him. We have more to lose by not paying Parker the max and losing him than any other team has to gain by paying the max to bring him aboard.

[Kori Ellis]

We can only sign to a 6 year becuase we don't have full bird rights so that rules out the 7th year.

That's not the reason we can't offer the seventh year. I think we can only offer a 6-year extension because he is already contract for this (2004-05) season, and the maximum length of contract is seven years (this year + six-year extension).

[Kori Ellis]

I'm pretty sure his max extension is 6years/$86,369,063.

Someone like ChumpDumper can correct me.

[baseline bum]

I'm with timvp... you pay Parker whatever it takes to lock him up in Spurs gear for another 6 years. He's just beginning to enter his prime and he is already one of the top points in the league, and a guy who creates horrible matchups for most of the teams in the league.

[picnroll]

No point in paying Parker max now. You can always get him for max next summer. There is a premium to be paid on his part for signing now and getting the security of an agreement made before the new CBA and a year early where he doesn't have to worry about risking injury before he has a long term deal.

And Parker won't earn max from being an elite defensive PG or rebounder at the 1 and the Spurs system doesn't require or allow for a mega-assist PG so Parker has to move his game up a notch by becoming a consistent scorer whenever needed to get the max and also become a little better playmaker. To sign early he has to sign for less.

[timvp]

I think the Spurs are going to play hardball with him. Peter Holt is going to try to tighten up the salaries in the next CBA and then give Parker and toned down deal.

They are going to be playing with fire next summer if they don't lock up Parker soon.

[picnroll]

Does paying Parker max factor in improvement? Would he be worth max if, after this summer working on his game, he played about the same next year?

[ShoogarBear]

I don't think Parker has proven that he's a max player yet. The past two years he's pooped out in the playoffs. Yes he's young, yes he'll continue to get better, but how would you feell if the Spurs maxed him and he then lays a third straight late-playoff gooseegg?

[xcoriate]

Thanks Kori that clears all that up then...

From what I've read Parker at this point is not asking the MAX. he could well be at the end of next season and I'm prepared to believe that someone else will definately make the offer if the spurs don't.

[Marcus Bryant]

Tony Parker is 22 years old, has 3 years of full time starting experience behind him including significant playoff experience and a NBA championship. He is definitely a top 10 point guard in the NBA, if not top 5 today. He is the second star on this Spurs team.

In 7 seasons he will be 29 years old.

The 1 and the 5 are the toughest spots to fill in this league. The Spurs have a superstar 4 so that kinda makes up for what they have at the 5 but Parker is better than any 1 I can see them ending up with anytime soon.

If you have to max him sobeit. I hope Holt Cat et al are not cheap.

[ducks]

more then jason kidd or sam cassel or steve nash at this point in their careers

[Brodels]

Teams that overpay players usually struggle to compete if a player doesn't live up to expectations. Pay Parker the max, and kiss any future flexibility goodbye.

I could see him getting 6 years/$70 million. He is an average defender, and average distributer, and a streaky scorer. He's only going to get better, but unless he can become an elite scorer, he's not going to be worth the max. Tony has showed that he can play like a star one night and disappear the next. He needs to take another step forward before he should be considered a max player.

He's very good and will continue to get better, but the Spurs need to make sure that they don't wildly overpay. If Parker is smart, he'll accept 6 years/$70 million. If there are significant changes in the CBA, he might not be able to get that much guaranteed money next summer.

[ducks]

you kissed the $ flexibility away with manu
spurs will be over the cap tell manu's contract is out anyhow

tony does not even want the max anyhow

[ducks]

they will only be able to sign their current players wth their bird rights
they can offer them any amount but no fa's

[Nikos]

Would be nice to lock him up now for $68 million or so (6 years).

No one knows for sure TP will be an elite PG, but he is already very good and likely to become a Top 5 PG at some point. But of course this isn't certain. Thats why its nice to get him just below MAX money now in case he doesn't improve into an elite PG in the league -- at worst he stays at still a very good level and all star calibur anyway. So this would be a nice bargain. Sign him now if possible.

[Marcus Bryant]

Tim Duncan is in his prime. You need to maximize the talent that surrounds him over the next 5 seasons. Either you get Parker or else you could easily find yourself back in the early to mid-90s hamstrung when you are trying to surround DRob with talent and are capped out.

The Spurs are basically capped out today. That's not going to change for some time. Stick with TP and roll.

[timvp]

The Spurs are basically capped out today. That's not going to change for some time. Stick with TP and roll.

That's very true. From now on in the Duncan era, the salary cap means nothing. The Spurs will be over it and will just have the MLE each year to try to add players.

That doesn't mean that you give every player whatever they want, but if another team puts a max deal on the table for Parker ... you must match.

If you don't, you might as well go back to rotating Tom Garrick and Greg Sutton at the point.

[ducks]

only way spurs will have cap room is if the new cba changes alot but I doubt that happens with the salary cap

[Nikos]

Thank you ducks :wink

[jalbre6]

I think that if they don't sign him now, and the Spurs go into next summer not wanting to max him out, someone else will. Then they'll have to scramble to replace him with either a player with less talent or someone with more mileage. He might be at 29 when his deal would expire one of the few players actually worth the maxxed out salary of a final year.

If he wants to sign now, do it. A core of Tim, Manu, and Parker under long term contracts all still in their 20's trumps anyone else's young talent as far as a core goes.

[ducks]

no problem

would have done it last night
but my new free laptop did not have any software to resize the image to the right size last night

[SequSpur]

If the Spurs don't resign him and he leaves, then they are hosed. They don't have any damn caproom.

They have to much jack wrapped in tools like Rasho and Malik.

[picnroll]

There's capped out and then there's maxed out. Spurs don't have salary cap room but Holt, like most owners will reach a point where he doesn't want to take on any more salary, be it adding an MLE player or offering a large salary to a player that they have Bird rights on like a Beano in a few years.

Ideally for a team every contract signed with it's players should be at a price where that player is tradeable. For the Spurs Duncan and his contract are certainly tradeable as is, I believe, Manu, Rasho, Bowen, Berry, everybody but Malik. Ideally whatever price Parker's signed at, if the need arose, his contract would not be a major hindrance to trading him. A max or near max contract, if he didn't improve, would be such a contract.

[SequSpur]

I wouldn't count on Pop making any trade unless it was a foreigner who couldn't speak English.

Pop's style is to yell and scream and try to get his way or make a player into something they are not.

If he was smart, he would realize that the only person that you can change is yourself.

Larry Brown trades 5 players a year. He won without a David Robinson or Tim Duncan.

One day, the rest of you will open your eyes and see how fucking stupid Greg Popovich is.

He benefitted from David Robinson and Tim Duncan. Tpark could have coached that team to more championships than Pop did.

[Marcus Bryant]

Point guard is a tough position to fill in this league and we've all seen how easy it has been to get top free agent talent to come to San Antonio de Bexar.

It would be hard for me to believe that the Spurs signed Ginobili to that deal without planning properly for Parker's next deal.

[SequSpur]

Retain or trade. The only way to go.

[xcoriate]

What do you think we could get in a sign and trade if it came to that? (Hope it doen't)

If Beno develops I'd shop for a SF or C

If he didn't then we'd have to find a genuine point.

[picnroll]

Agree the Spurs should retain or trade Parker.

Spurs and Pop haven't traded players in the past but for the most part they haven't had much to trade, getting by and competing using veteran talent like Smith, Kerr, Ferry, Willis, etc.. They do have a talent for identifying , bringing in and developing, using good young talent like Jackson, Claxton, Brown. Maybe Litton, Thomas will fall in that mold. Problem is that they've lost much of that talent without compensation, Claxton, Jackson, even Hedo. Same may happen with Brown. Scola is now on the horizon, maybe Sanikidze, maybe Javtokas.. Beano may be really good, the little I've seen reminds me of Hinrich, a guy who in his own way I think may be as good as Parker.

Spurs are becoming a team with a lot of good young talent and they can't keep them all but they shouldn't just lose them. They have entered a different era and will have to begin to wheel and deal. Maximize and capitalize on their special ability to identify and develop young talent to acquire players or draft picks to improve the team. Not continue to lose resources without compensation.

[Phenomanul]

How is it Marcus has a post count of 1,000,059 every time he posts?

Is it a inside-joke reference on his many identities? Smiafro

[timvp]

How is it Marcus has a post count of 1,000,059 every time he posts?

Is it a inside-joke reference on his many identities? Smiafro

He's been posting since 1932. We counted all posts, even the hanging chads.

[timvp]

If you trade Parker, you better get a stud point guard back. If you don't, they'll realize how important having a point guard who can push the pace is when Duncan gets triple-teamed in the playoffs.

[spursfaninla]

first off, I agree you keep parker, whatever the cost.

He is probably worth 6 years, 60mil, but could get 70.

IF he gets the max (86), starting around 11 mil (i remember that number stated earlier), with 10% raises, it puts us just at the luxury tax, hoping the tax continues to increase at that 10% to avoid paying double dollars for going over.

It's hard to swallow, paying him the max or near it, but if it came down to it, there really is no choice. If he goes, we have no money to replace him. We would be forced, worse case, to sign-n-trade him.

Glad to hear he does not want max, and if we are smart, we will take his offer if it is below 70.



I disagree that we lost Jackson and hedo for nothing; if you think about it, we essentially spent the money we WOULD have spent on Jackon on Hedo, and then the money we WOULD have paid Hedo on Barry.

Plus, everyone PLEASE realize we could not afford Parker now if we had paid either of those OVER RATED, OVERPAID swing players.

We got Barry for a bargain, and as a better skilled, more polished player than either of them, his all-around game will matter much.

They can keep either of em'.

[SequSpur]

You don't trade Parker.

You unload wasted capspace like Malik and Rasho. You get a solid backup point guard and a center that can rebound and dunk the damn ball.

You keep everybody else and you win the next 3 or 4 championships.

The Spurs will never win with Rasho in the middle.

NEVER.

[SequSpur]

Not resigning Jackson and Claxton costed the Spurs the Championship.

That is what happened there. Hedo sucks. You know, if you mention his name in a post again, you should be banned for a season.

Hedo fucking blew chunks. His buddy Rasho blows too.

[spursfaninla]

uh, sequ, if you feel like talking about the worthlessness of our c and backup bigman, start a new thread.

Hijacking this one so blatantly bites.

:hang

And, if Parker did demand the Max, it could make sense to trade him, depending on the deal. If a team was ready to Max him out, I would consider trading him for afew of their best players if it made sense.

[Phenomanul]

With or without Rasho, the SPURS are already poised to win 3 or 4 of the next 5 titles.

Having a core of TD, TP, Manu, Bowen, and Barry already assures us of that.

[spursfaninla]

Hedo sucked when it counted, but he was VERY good for a few months late in the season.

If he was hot like that in the playoffs instead of a month before them, and that does happen (see d. fish during lakers 3rd championship), you are justifying the big contract the spurs laid on him, and lamenting that we could not keep him, manu and parker.

We had NO CHANCE at keeping Claxton; he wanted more than we could pay, and he wanted to start. Crying about it is about as useless as, for example, your advice on, well, anything.

[SequSpur]

BS. Didn't you just see the Spurs get wacked by an old ass Laker team a few months ago?

What's the difference? Barry?

Bro, common denominator......... Rasho Nesterovic.

Look at the success Minnesota had with him. Look at the success San Antonio had with him.....

None. Rasho could have been on the injured list in the playoffs and the Spurs would have advanced further.

[spursfaninla]

Sequ, I'm afraid your common denominator sucks.

As in, makes no sense, defies logic, lacks reasoning and devoid of fact.

See, Minny is worse today than we are in the middle; can you say Kandi?

He was and is WORSE than our guy, by all accounts. During the season, on the pine, during the playoffs, and next year. Worse.

[SequSpur]

Spurs should offer Parker a max deal...

Now back to the laker weiner.....

Rasho HAS NO RINGS.

MINNESOTA WAS IN THE WEST FINALS.

SAN ANTONIO WAS TOURING THE SAN ANTONIO ZOO.

Rasho is to suck as suck is to your opinion.

It's no lie that the Spurs had A GAPING HOLE IN THE MIDDLE AND IN RASHO'S SHORTS.

Are you banging Rasho or something?

[spursfaninla]

So you would trade Kandi for our guy, I take it?

Speak up, foo.

I didn't think so.

And if yes, you are an even bigger fool than I imagined.

Our center is fine. With no Shaq to worry about for the most part, an average center is plenty. The centers of the league are nothing to fear for the most part anyway.

You are living in the past; today's centers generally are just rebounders with a limited offensive game. Pf's are today's money men, and we have the best one.

[spursfaninla]

Laker Weiner?

Again, foo, I may live in LA but I'm no laker fan. Born and raised in SA, I choose to live in LA for my own reasons.

It is superior in terms of culture, diverisity, entertainment, weather and pay, but hey, live where you like :)

[timvp]

I have a bad feeling that Holt and the Spurs are trying to pinch pennies with Parker. The only reason they don't lock him up this year is if they think the CBA is going to change in their favor.

I think that has a good chance of happening. Spurs' brass is going to bet that the owners can get a tighter deal with players union and just wait it out. That way, they save a few million or a couple years.

Now if another team comes along and offers the max, I think the Spurs will flinch. Holt won't want it and Parker won't (and shouldn't) have any loyalty to the Spurs.

This is going down a slippery slope if they don't hammer out a deal soon.

[picnroll]

Agreed that there was little or nothing that could be done about Claxton, Jackson or Hedo. Hedo at the right price, much lower than what he got, still would have brought rebounding and defense against some matchups that the Spurs don’t have now. He had no nuts going to the basket on O and his nuts did shrivel up when it counted shooting from the outside.

Reasons we lost Claxton and Jackson was that they were at the end of their contracts and little or nothing could be done about it short of using the cap space on them and Spurs felt the price was too high. Spurs have been in a position before where their core was young and the team needed to stock key positions with seasoned players to be championship level contenders. Also Pop had inherited a team thin on overall talent. Now the core is mature and many key reserve positions can be stocked by less seasoned players, developmental players, Brown, Johnsons, … . Hopefully now Spurs won’t let developed talent go but use them as resources to build with by trading them when they’re still under contract, a favorable contract to trade with. Every player should be brought in with minimum two year, team option and preferably three year team option. The Spurs reputation for developing players who ultimately end up with good deals should be the incentive for agents to agree. If a Johnson or a Brown is a stud trade him before he’s at the end of the contract for a player needed or one with a lot of potential. Trade him to move up in the draft and pick off a slightly better player with potential, maybe a Dorell Wright. Spurs can even trade rights to overseas talent like Scola which I think will become a trend as Euro players gain greater value. Spurs have possibly the best eye for talent and ability to develop players in the league and this is their tool for the future.

With Parker there are several possibilities;

1) He signs now for a contract that has a built in premium to the Spurs for taking on the risk that he could be injured this year and still end up with long term guaranteed money, that he may not progress and that the CBA may be more favorable to the Spurs if they waited.

or

2) He doesn’t get signed and
a) Spurs do a S&T during the season.
b) He plays out the season and goes on the market where the
i. Spurs resign him
ii. Spurs end up doing a S&T
iii. Spurs lose him to another team by not matching an offer
iv. He ends up signing a qualifying offer, plays out the next year becoming an unrestricted FA.

Of those possibilities the one I don’t want to see is Spurs lose him to another team by not matching an offer and I'm not to crazy about ifhe signs a qualifying offer and plays out the next year becoming an unrestricted FA either.

[ducks]

Not resigning Jackson and Claxton costed the Spurs the Championship.

That is what happened there. Hedo sucks. You know, if you mention his name in a post again, you should be banned for a season.

Hedo fucking blew chunks. His buddy Rasho blows too.

yeah speedy hit all of 0 threes in as a spur :rolleyes

[SequSpur]

yeah speedy hit all of 0 threes in as a spur :rolleyes

Your blind. Speedy and Kerr were the guards that led the team to a championship.

What were you watching?

[Jimcs50]

minimum wage and a dozen donuts...the guy chokes in the playoffs, when it matters most. trade his ass. If not for having Speedy in 03, the Spurs would be sitting on one championship.

Ok, I will give him 8-9 million per, but only if he comes up strong in this year's playoffs.

[ducks]

spurs would not have gotten as far with just speedy last year
tp got them there
nets were not prepared for him that is why he was effective

what has speedy done in gs? I think he had one good game maybe......

[picnroll]

what has speedy done in gs?

rehabed

[ducks]

exactly

if spurs did not have tp they would not have even made it to face the nets
speedy was lucky to be healthy the last 2 games against the nets.......

and had tp had not let his success against kidd go to his head speedy would not have even made a big difference

rember rumors were floating around kidd was going to sa at that time

[Brodels]

- Picnroll is right in one sense. You can't be thinking "the Spurs are over the cap anyway, so they might as well spend as much money as they can." It does matter. Sign Parker to the max and it could mean that we never see Scola, Javtokas, any MLE free agents, any LLE free agents, Devin Brown beyond this season, etc. For one thing, nobody really knows what the new CBA is going to look like. It's entirely possible that the moves made by the team now will determine how much cap space is available in three years. Even if they do end up being over the cap for the next six years, a maxed-out Parker will certainly limit their ability to make other moves.

- The Spurs have found success during the Duncan years by not overpaying players (with the exception of Rose). They didn't give in to DA. They didn't give in to SJax. And it's arguable that they are better off now. Once you get in cap hell it's difficult to get out. The farther into it you get, the harder it becomes to create flexibility in the future. Teams don't consistently win by overpaying non-superstars. They do so by making smart financial decisions.

- Parker is still improving and he's already very good. But his playmaking ability and defense can be replaced. His scoring ability would be difficult to replace. But he's still an average playmaker and an average defender. If you're going to pay the max for a point guard, he better be a great playmaker and a great defender. Parker is not.

- If he doesn't begin to show some consistency this season, he certainly won't be worthy of a max contract. As it stands right now, the Spurs don't really know when he's going to play well. When he does, he's great. When he doesn't, Speedy is his equal.

- Beno could turn out to be a good player. If Parker isn't willing to sign for a reasonable amount right now, you hold off on giving him the max until the end of the season. If he has a real breakout year, you reconsider. If he doesn't and if Beno develops quickly, you choose not to overpay him. We won't really know if Parker is worth the max until he gets on the court this season. If he has improved to the point where he is one of the top point guards in the league, he might be worth the max. If he hasn't reached that level after four seasons of starting on a good team, he may never.

- Under no circumstances do you offer Parker a max deal right now. If he becomes great, you can always match after the season. The Spurs need to offer him a contract right now based upon what he's already done and reasonably might do in the future. They can't pay him like a superstar because he isn't one. He might become one, but he might not. Offer him 6 years/$60 million. If he turns it down, play out the season.

- Overpaying non-superstar players is a surefire way to hurt your team's chances of winning in the future. Repeat. Read again. Repeat.

[Marcus Bryant]

- Parker is still improving and he's already very good. But his playmaking ability and defense can be replaced. His scoring ability would be difficult to replace. But he's still an average playmaker and an average defender. If you're going to pay the max for a point guard, he better be a great playmaker and a great defender. Parker is not.

Defense he could use some work on, but his playmaking has been a function of the offense he has to run in SA. When Pop loosens the reigns then Parker seems to do well. The only hope the Spurs would have if they lost him was they could get some talent back in a S&T to use to eventually replace him or perhaps they could land someone in the draft again. Let's see how Udrih does for a season before we think he can replace Parker.

[ShoogarBear]

- Overpaying non-superstar players is a surefire way to hurt your team's chances of winning in the future. Repeat. Read again. Repeat.

Repeat Brodels' post again. Stick my name at the bottom.

[Kori Ellis]

Tony's decision making as to when to score and when to pass is an evolutionary process. But I don't know if it's all his fault, or a result of mixed messages from the Spurs' coaching staff. When Tony is distributing and other players suck, then Tony feels pressure (from himself? from Pop?) to try to score in bunches -- and if he's not hot, that turns into a disaster.

Then there's game when he is told to ease up on scoring and just look to pass. At those times, sometimes he gets befuddled in his decision making process and ends up looking to pass too much even when he has an easy hoop. Once Tony finds the balance of being able to score and distribute, the Spurs will be unstoppable with Tony, Manu and Duncan. The only way for him to find it is for the reins to be loosened a little bit more, so that he can make mistakes yet grow.

I'm a scrooge when it comes to Holt's money. I still believe in max contracts only for superstars. I know Tony isn't looking for max money and I know the Spurs aren't looking to pay it, so it seems that the contract should be worked out this summer. I just hope that Tony's agent and the Spurs' brass don't get caught up in the game of the negotiation and hold off until next summer. You never know what the new CBA is going to bring.

[Marcus Bryant]

The Spurs have nothing to wait for. The time is now. This is Tim Duncan's prime. I do not care about the 2009-10 season I care about now.

[Brodels]

I care about this year, next year, and the year after.

That's why Parker should not get a max dollar deal as of right now.

[Marcus Bryant]

So how long would Duncan have to wait while the Spurs search for a comparable replacement?

[FilSpursFan]

I think the trio Tim-Tony-Manu, they are the future of the Spurs. They are irreplaceable...So they must make a deal to lock Tony for a longest possible contract for maximum price..

[Brodels]

So how long would Duncan have to wait while the Spurs search for a comparable replacement?

You might not find a comparable replacement very soon. But you could find a point guard capable of defending and distributing the ball. And while you're at it, you might be able to strengthen the center position, get some more bench depth, and add some scoring punch.

I want the Spurs to win now, but if Tony doesn't improve, he'll help limit the team to mediocrity for the remainder of Duncan's prime. If Tony isn't a superstar player, he shouldn't get superstar money. A max contract to Tony handcuffs the Spurs for years to come and they are pretty much stuck with that roster unless they could make some trades.

Can you honestly see Holt authorizing management to use the MLE if Parker signs a max deal? If Parker signs a market value contract, the chances are much better that Holt would spend the money.

I'm not against paying Parker. I want to see him get a good contract and remain a Spur. But he needs to get a contract that reflects the kind of player that he actually is. He isn't a superstar. He's a good point guard.

Offer Parker big dollars. But don't overpay.

[Brodels]

I think the trio Tim-Tony-Manu, they are the future of the Spurs. They are irreplaceable...So they must make a deal to lock Tony for a longest possible contract for maximum price..

Wrong and Wrong. The only irreplaceable player on the Spurs is Tim Duncan. It might be difficult to replace Manu and Tony, but there are other players out there with similar capabilities.

And while it makes sense to lock up Parker for as long as possible, under no circumstances to you give him a maximum-dollar contract now. That's insane. If the Spurs were going to do that, why wouldn't they just wait for the season to end and match a maximum dollar deal next summer?

If he wants to sign for a fair price now, you do it. If he's seeking the max, you let him play out the season and see if he's improved enough to be worth it. You can always match a maximum dollar deal next summer.

[ducks]

what is he worth?
an Gilbert Arenas type contract?

steve nash contract?
bibby jackson type contract?

[Brodels]

what is he worth?
an Gilbert Arenas type contract?

steve nash contract?
bibby jackson type contract?

Yes.

[ducks]

Remaining Arenas Contract:

Season Salary
2004/2005 9,282,371
2005/2006 10,240,000
2006/2007 11,093,333
2007/2008 11,946,667
2008/2009 12,800,000


for your info I heard he is looking for that type of a contract

[Kori Ellis]

I heard the same thing.

[Brodels]

I think a 6 year/$60 million contract is in the range of fair. That's in the neighborhood of what Arenas is making.

[Kori Ellis]

Arenas signed for six-year/$64M if I remember correctly. If the Spurs can get Tony for that, they should jump all over it.

[Marcus Bryant]

If the Spurs had shown an ability to land star level free agent then I could see them being prepared to lose Parker. But that hasn't been the case. Obviously the Spurs are good at evaluating talent but I am not sure they can count on finding comparable draft steals to that of Parker and Ginobili.

[Nikos]

You can always match a maximum dollar deal next summer.

This is what I was thinking.

But at the same time, what if Tony grows a decent amount, but not quite a MAX player? Where does the team draw the line? What if Parker improves and still has some growth left in him, even after season 4? Many point guards do tend to take long to reach their peak and it wouldn't be impossible for him to still have some growth left even after 4 straight seasons of starting.

Lets say Parker is not quite the max player, but still very good and capable of developing into one. What if the team wins the championship and Parker does well -- but in the offseason someone offers the MAX? Problem is you never know how far along a player is on their development curve. You can make guesses, but the situation can get a little iffy. Thats why I guess it would be nice to sign him now for $64 million or whatever.

[E20]

Sign Parker around 68 Mil 6 years. Parker is a keeper. Spurs HAVE to keep this guy at all costs. PG's are really hard to come by and with a few years Parker could be top 3 PG material.

http://www.mistilynn.com/tp-45.jpg

[Brodels]

Spurs HAVE to keep this guy at all costs. PG's are really hard to come by and with a few years Parker could be top 3 PG material.


At all costs? You keep superstars at all costs. You don't keep support players at all costs.

And what if he's not top-three material in a few years? You're stuck with a core of Parker, Manu, and Duncan surrounded by Rasho and minimum-salary role players.

I understand the need to pay for potential, but he's not a "keep at any cost" kind of player. He could become that kind of player this season. If he does, by all means, sign him for whatever he wants.

[ducks]

you keep him at all cost OR sign and trade him

you can only hope to package rose for a young point
but a team wouild be a FOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL to trade a young point for rose

[E20]

Ok Brodels what if TP had a similar season like last year. Do we sign him? If we don't then who is our PG? Udrih? Barry? Tony Parker is likely going to become a top PG.

[E20]

At all costs? You keep superstars at all costs
Tell that to LA.

[ShoogarBear]

If a point guard is so irreplacable, then explain this:

2004: Chauncey Billups
2003: TP/Speedy
2002: Derek Fisher
2001: Fisher
2000: Fisher
1999: Avery Johnson
1998: Ron Harper/Steve Kerr/Randy Brown
1997: Harper/Kerr/Brown
1996: Harper/Kerr
1995: Kenny Smith
1994: Kenny Smith
1993: B. J. Armstrong
1992: Armstrong/John Paxson
1991: Armstrong/Paxson
1990: Isiah Thomas

The last top-flight point guard to win an NBA championship was 14 years ago. It's certainly nice to have one, but there no need to break the bank for it if your goal is a championship.

[ducks]

Fisher Had Kobe And Shaq 2 Mvp Candiates

[E20]

I only see like 4 PG's that are 'Top 3 PG material' good.

[Marcus Bryant]

Different team structures. Both LA and Chicago had dominant wing players and ran an offense which deemphasized the PG role. AJ was certainly a vital part of the team and definitely a rather solid playmaker. Billups isn't a slouch.

[Marcus Bryant]

Also, (this has been touched on briefly in the thread) the Spurs should be in a rather good bargaining position with Parker since there is the distinct possibility that the maximum guaranteed contract length will be reduced in the next CBA.

[ShoogarBear]

The poiint is that point guard isn't such an indispensible position that you have to pay the max for a player who hasn't proven he is worth it.

All of those guys were solid, but a number of different players in the league could have done the same job.

Same is true of Parker and the Spurs. In fact, if it was up to Pop, you get the feeling he'd rather have a Derek Fisher (plays defense, dumps the ball to the big men, can hit open threes) than a "classic" point.

[Nikos]

Same is true of Parker and the Spurs. In fact, if it was up to Pop, you get the feeling he'd rather have a Derek Fisher (plays defense, dumps the ball to the big men, can hit open threes) than a "classic" point.

Well if thats the case, Parker is neither a shooter nor a classic distributor. Not really something Pop would seem like he would want :lol

Parker seems like he can improve in his decision making a bit, he can become a better passer aside from being just a 'drive and dish' type of guy.

If Parker proves to be an elite talent this season and improves his scoring efficiency, output, and consistency while also continuing to improve his PG skills then you can bet he will be important to the Spurs future.

[picnroll]

Parker's is an adequate playmaker and should and needs to improve some there. But his greatest attribute is his scoring ability. That's where he's streaky and needs to improve for Holt to show him the money. If Parker becomes a near Isiah Thomas level scorer he gets max. And the Spurs need a scorer. With Pop's heavy emphasis on defnse he's willing to sacrifice scoring at a couple of positions (SF and C) in exchange for defenders. That throws an extra scoring burden on a couple of the other positions (PF and PG).

[SequSpur]

Same is true of Parker and the Spurs. In fact, if it was up to Pop, you get the feeling he'd rather have a Derek Fisher (plays defense, dumps the ball to the big men, can hit open threes) than a "classic" point.

Huh? You can't be serious.

[Marcus Bryant]

Also, Parker is one of the Spurs' top 3 players. You lose him and this team definitely will suffer a scoring hit.

[Brodels]

Ok Brodels what if TP had a similar season like last year. Do we sign him? If we don't then who is our PG? Udrih? Barry? Tony Parker is likely going to become a top PG.

You offer him a fair contract. If he has a similar season, you pay him what an above-average point guard makes. You don't pay him superstar money. And just because you happen to think that Tony is "likely" to become a top PG doesn't mean that he actually will. He needs to improve.

He didn't improve by leaps and bounds last season. It's arguable that he didn't improve much at all aside from a slight improvement in his playmaking capabilities. He was essentially the same offensive player that he was the year before.

He needs to improve this season. If he's likely to become a top three point guard, he should be taking significant steps towards improving in his fourth year in the league.


Tell that to LA.

What's your point? They didn't want Shaq back because they didn't feel he was healthy and motivated to enough to earn his contract. That situation has nothing to do with this one.

And besides, if you're saying that even superstars shouldn't be kept at all costs, how can you possibly think that Parker should be given the max?


I only see like 4 PG's that are 'Top 3 PG material' good.

Right. That shows that you can win without a top point guard if you have other good players. The Spurs don't have the strong offensive small forwards to get the job done, but they might be able to get a player like that in a sign-and-trade or with the MLE in the future.

The Spurs are better off with Parker. But don't pretend that they don't have a chance without him. The first championship team won with Avery Johnson at point guard, a declining Mario Elie at two guard, and a small forward with serious medical issues.


Also, (this has been touched on briefly in the thread) the Spurs should be in a rather good bargaining position with Parker since there is the distinct possibility that the maximum guaranteed contract length will be reduced in the next CBA.

That's what I'm hoping. If all goes well, Parker accepts a six-year deal at fair market value right now.


Parker's is an adequate playmaker and should and needs to improve some there. But his greatest attribute is his scoring ability. That's where he's streaky and needs to improve for Holt to show him the money. If Parker becomes a near Isiah Thomas level scorer he gets max. And the Spurs need a scorer. With Pop's heavy emphasis on defnse he's willing to sacrifice scoring at a couple of positions (SF and C) in exchange for defenders. That throws an extra scoring burden on a couple of the other positions (PF and PG).
Exactly. If he improves to the point where he is a max kind of player, he should get max dollars.

I'm a Tony Parker fan. He's one of my favorites. But that doesn't mean that the Spurs should throw any sense of fiscal sanity out the window because he could possibly someday be a top point guard. The Spurs are good because they've managed their money well. They need to continue doing that. Overpaying players will make it harder to win two, three, and four years down the road.

Look at Malik Rose. The Spurs overpaid him, and you can bet that they would love to have a do-over on that.

[E20]

Brodels always hands my ass to me in debates. FUCK.

[Brodels]

:hat

[picnroll]

Point of reference Gasol did get a max deal. Gasol's value is greater than Parker's.

http://www.commercialappeal.com/mca...3225044,00.html

Gasol inks 6-year extension

Deal totals some $86 million; forward says he's up to the challenge it brings

By Ronald Tillery
Contact
October 2, 2004

Pau Gasol finally received what he has worked the past three seasons trying to earn.

Respect.

That's how the 7-foot Spaniard equated his lucrative contract extension with the Grizzlies.

Gasol, 24, signed a six-year deal that sources say is worth the maximum amount the Grizzlies were allowed to offer. The contract totals an approximate $86 million -- a figure computed within guidelines of the NBA's collective bargaining agreement.

So with Cottonwoods Golf Course at Tunica's Grand Casino serving as the backdrop, Gasol teed off on the notion that money will suddenly define expectations for him on the court.

"It's not about money. It's about respect and the team showing that they want you to be here for a long period of time as the cornerstone. That's all you can ask. I'm real happy and proud," Gasol said Friday before participating in the Memphis Grizzlies House Golf Classic.

"I know I'll be the guy everyone is going to criticize. I'm ready for that. I love the pressure. I live for it. I love to be in the (position) that everyone is looking at. That's how I am. So I'll react pretty good."

Contract negotiations went relatively smoothly once Gasol hired an agent in August. He entrusted Arn Tellem's SFX Sports Group after a mutual separation with agent, Mark Termini during the spring.

Gasol's new contract makes him the NBA's second-highest foreign player behind Dallas' Dirk Nowitzki.

The Griz are counting on Gasol to show the steady improvement he's displayed since joining the NBA in 2001.

"His play in the Olympic Games this summer displayed his value, while showcasing his talent to people throughout the world," Griz president Jerry West said. "Pau is a dynamic player, and we are happy to have him in Memphis as the cornerstone of our franchise."

West has made it no secret that the franchise would build around Gasol.

The 2002 Rookie of the Year has led the Grizzlies in points and rebounds in each of their three Memphis seasons -- the length of Gasol's NBA stint. Gasol's career averages are 18.1 points, 8.5 rebounds and 50 percent shooting.

In four playoff games with the San Antonio Spurs last season, Gasol averaged 18.5 points, five rebounds and 57 percent shooting. He led the Grizzlies during the regular season by averaging 17.7 points, 7.7 rebounds and 1.7 blocks.

"He's one of the premier power forwards we have in the league," Griz coach Hubie Brown said. "And then you put the factor of his age into that. What we have is our team leader and our go-to guy. I'm happy for Pau and his family. Also, I'm happy for the Grizzlies because what we now have is a stabilizing force. He knows his worth."

Gasol's role as an iron man shouldn't go understated.

He has only missed four of 246 possible regular-season games in his career. A sore right foot near the end of last season snapped Gasol's streak of 240 straight games.

The streak was the league's sixth longest at the time.

Gasol now has another chance at longevity in a Grizzly uniform.

"I've been here from the beginning, when this team was winning 23 games," Gasol said. "And it's nice to be a part of the progress that this franchise is making. It makes me appreciate it more. ... I can't wait to start playing. I'm going to go out there and prove to everybody that I deserve what I got. They won't ever doubt me as a player and as a professional. I'll produce as much as I can."

-- Ronald Tillery: 529-2353

[Mark in Austin]

The Spurs can match any offer for Parker next summer, so if they don't get the deal they want now and are willing to wait, fine.

As long as they are prepared for the potential distractions this can cause (1) in the media a la Kidd and Kobe, and (2) with team chemistry if Parker is pissed and doesn't handle it well.

[spursfaninla]

Good point Mark. Parker has shown he will air his dirty laundry in the media in the past. If the spurs lowball him, or perhaps even wait until after the season to re-up with him, he might be disgruntled this year. That would not be very smart; rather, taking advantage of the chance and playing out of his mind would potentially make his lots more dough...

[baseline bum]

Parker has made leaps and bounds in his game each of his three years in the league, so there's nothing that leads me to believe he has topped off. The Spurs are completely screwed if they lost him. They'll never get anything better than him in a sign and trade, and if they lose him straight up they have no point and no money to go get one. I think it's pretty likely that Tony gets a max offer from someone next season, and the Spurs will have to match it or kiss being competitive in this league goodbye.

[ducks]

even if spurs got lucky and drafted a point guard
it would take the rookie atleast 2 years
tp was not the typical rookie point guard
and teams are scouting better over there now then before

[xcoriate]

The point beingg is that the consequences of losing TP are diabolical...

The championship dream would be over without him. The spurs have to make it worse. It's all well and good to hope for a fair and reasonable price.

However without TP the spurs are in the shitter an extension is by far the best option.

Pay up Holt.

[picnroll]

One scary fact is the number of teams that may have max salary cap space in 2005. Not factoring in trades, the cap limit and the new CBA, I count NJ, Chicago, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Atlanta, Charlotte, Washington, Denver, Portland, Seattle, Utah, Golden State, Clippers. Some have players to sign like Chicago, Portland, Utah, some don't need PGs like Washington and probably Clippers and Portaland, some teams are unattractive like Atlanta, Charlotte but there are teams that are serious threats who could use a good PG like Denver if they don't re-up Miller, NJ if Kidd is traded, Cleveland.

[exstatic]

pic - The Spurs only need match in that case, and if the CBA mandates shorter contracts, may be on the hook for less guaranteed money.

One thing struck me as kind of funny. Most of the "don't MAX Parker" crowd are hovering in the vicinity of $70M. The Max is $86M. For a six year deal, you're going to quibble over ~$2.5M a year, when the Spurs are over the cap, and couldn't hope to acquire a player of that talent on the FA market?

I agree with timvp. In the end, you pay the kid. Maybe you wait until next summer, but if the chips go in the pot, and he gets a MAX offer, you MATCH.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

u know i think the spurs management is pretty smart, i bet they drafted udrih because they thought they migh lose parker from a max deal, everyone is really high on this kid and they say he is the better jump-shooter and passer, hey thats trading unstopable penetartion for versatility in the back court, either way you gotta say were good. I think the development of Devin Brown may also be something to ponder, if we lose parker how much does it hurt?

it just means more time for more young and developing player. and don't forget TP was a project, did anyone think he would be better than the incumbant Antonio Daniels?

[Kori Ellis]

I would hope the Spurs aren't banking on Beno to be better than Parker. That's a huge stretch. So far, Beno can't even stay healthy.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

ahh but we have depth so it doesnt matter, Barry can easily start at the 1

[Kori Ellis]

Not long-term. Barry can't play big minutes at the point over a season. Parker is the future of the Spurs at the point. If they don't re-sign Parker, they won't be using Beno or Barry as the starter (unless Beno just explodes), they'd have to get another point guard.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

manu could then you move devin brown to the two with Barry backing up both, throw in romain sato and beno and gosh, your kinda set

[ChumpDumper]

did anyone think he would be better than the incumbant Antonio Daniels?I thought he could play the point, so yes.

[Brodels]

Parker has made leaps and bounds in his game each of his three years in the league, so there's nothing that leads me to believe he has topped off.
Well, he didn't become a better offensive player last year, and he didn't become a better defender. He did improve him playmaking abilities some, but it's hard to believe that he improved by "leaps and bounds" last season. He probably hasn't topped off. But unless you believe he's going to be a superstar, he shouldn't be paid like one.

The Spurs are completely screwed if they lost him.
That's overly dramatical. As long as they have Tim Duncan and some decent support players, they will contend for a title every season.

They'll never get anything better than him in a sign and trade, and if they lose him straight up they have no point and no money to go get one.
It would't be ideal if he left, but they still could improve the team. They could use the MLE to bring in some quality supporting players, and sign-and-trading Parker isn't outside the realm of possibility.

I think it's pretty likely that Tony gets a max offer from someone next season, and the Spurs will have to match it or kiss being competitive in this league goodbye.

It depends on how he plays this season. And the Spurs will still be competitive without Tony. Do you honestly believe that team led by Tim Duncan couldn't compete in the NBA?



The championship dream would be over without him. The spurs have to make it worse. It's all well and good to hope for a fair and reasonable price.

However without TP the spurs are in the shitter an extension is by far the best option.


Please. They won the last championship with Parker sitting on the bench during many key moments. Don't underestimate the ability of Pop and R.C. to acquire the missing pieces. Parker is an important part of the team, but the Spurs can replace his scoring or at least come close to replacing it.


One thing struck me as kind of funny. Most of the "don't MAX Parker" crowd are hovering in the vicinity of $70M. The Max is $86M. For a six year deal, you're going to quibble over ~$2.5M a year, when the Spurs are over the cap, and couldn't hope to acquire a player of that talent on the FA market?


It's very possible that $16 million could be the difference between Holt trying to use exceptions to improve the team and Holt sitting on his money. What if a Parker-Duncan-Manu core simply isn't good enough? The Spurs won't have any kind of flexibility at all to bring in other players. They won't get a Parker-like player on the open market, but they might be able to get other lesser pieces that would work just as well in the Spurs' system.


I agree with timvp. In the end, you pay the kid. Maybe you wait until next summer, but if the chips go in the pot, and he gets a MAX offer, you MATCH.


And then you join most other fiscally irresponsible teams and you stagnate and struggle.

The Spurs need to try really hard to sign Parker to a fair contract. If he ends up getting the max, you don't give it to him unless he becomes a max player this season. It's as simple as that. You can acquire other players later. But fiscal insanity is a sure-fire way to bring down your team.

[Nikos]

I would agree with the fact that TP did not improve that much this season. His play making and decision making did get better, but his scoring efficiency dropped a little bit. So did Duncan's and part of that reason was not only the team offense being worse, but the fact they didn't HIT their FT's. Hitting them would help the team offense immensly (even at the 0203 rate in which they shot FTs).

If Parker improves in scoring and in his PG skills by a considerable amount and essentially finds that balance and consistency between the two then you pay him the MAX.

[spur219]

If the Spurs do not sign Parker to an extension then they will have to overpay him next offseason because teams will overpay Parker.

[Marcus Bryant]

It would't be ideal if he left, but they still could improve the team. They could use the MLE to bring in some quality supporting players, and sign-and-trading Parker isn't outside the realm of possibility.

Given their struggles in free agency I don't see that as that great of an option. Perhaps they could get something worthwhile back in a sign and trade. Parker right now is definitely a top 10 point guard in this league and arguably top 5. In addition to that he is definitely one of the Spurs' top 3 players and an important scoring threat at the age of 22. Parker is not as run of the mill as you seem to think.

You don't lose Parker for the hypothetical 'we could do better.' This team has taken its shot at landing top free agent talent. That is not an attractive way for them to add star talent. Sure, if a good deal came along then dealing Parker is not out of the question, but the Spurs are not in a position to lose talent without getting talent back in return. They will be capped out for roughly the next 5 years. You don't lose talent without getting some back in return and even if the Spurs were going to be under the cap as I have mentioned above that is not exactly a great situation for them.

If Udrih is yet another Spurs' draft steal then perhaps the sign and trade route for Parker would make sense, but again if the Spurs can afford it I don't believe you move Parker at this point.

[SequSpur]

Just because Duncan gets the max doesn't mean Parker doesn't.

Tony Parker is a max player. The bar has been set by previous top 10 point guards in this league. Parker is a max player. Period.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

not if beno is as good as parker, than you just fucked yourself for seven years.

[Mark in Austin]

The odds are better that Beno is as good as Greg Sutton.

[coachtf]

Just my opinion but I would pay Tony the max if that's what it takes. You cannot lose Parker because he is only going to become more valuable as Timmy slows down. Sooner or later Tony will be responsible for more of the offense and he and Manu will be counted on to create more shots for the team. As Tim ages his role will increase and he has age and talent on his side to support his position.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

i propose a ginobilli-esque deal

[Ed Helicopter Jones]

I'd give Tony $25 to mow my lawn. $35 if he edges around the sidewalks and patios.

[RobinsontoDuncan]

jesus you must have a huge lawn

[Mark in Austin]

If Parker is asking for less than 6 years, 70 million right now, the Spurs would be fools not to jump all over that deal.

[timvp]

Exactly, MIA. The Spurs would be naive to think that a team won't offer Parker a max contract next offseason.

[baseline bum]

Look at what happened to this team after they let Strickland walk. They'd be fools to repeat that.

[CosmicCowboy]

Cosmic Cowboy is now officially in the house...

OK...I have stayed out of this debate till now but I would do exactly what the Spurs are gonna do...

They will probably offer Parker something in the range of 6 years 65-75 million...maybe with some extra incentives...this is enough that they aren't disrespecting him...any team that would pay him max now is betting on future improvement and not current value...every coach/GM in the league saw him wilt in the playoffs when the Lakers focused on him defensively and got physical...but at the same time they can make the case that he MIGHT be able to get a little more later from someone and then spend the next six years on a shitty team (you remember Jason Kidd don't you?)

They will talk about it for a few weeks (3-4 at the most) and if they can't get anything done Pop/RC will shut negotiations down till next summer...Pop will pat Tony on the butt and tell him to go out this year and prove he is worth max money...now lets forget about all this shit and go out there and win another championship...

Next summer the Spurs will have had another year to evaluate exactly how much more improvement they can expect from Parker...after 4 years in the NBA the "well he is still young" excuse for errors goes out the window...

Either way the Spurs will quietly put out the word that if another team makes a max offer they will stall out the full waiting period and then match the offer on their RFA...even a front loaded one...so any team that considers making a max qualifying offer will know they will have squandered their opportunity to be major players in the first tier FA market if the Spurs match...anyone want to sit across from Pop and RC at a poker table?

By that time the Spurs will have a max number in mind that they are willing to pay...if Parkers improvement levels off or just improves slightly this year and he doesn't get any qualifying offers they will sweeten the original offer a little and see what hapens...if he kicks ass and takes names this year they will match any qualifying offer he gets or offer a near max deal if he doesn't get any qualifying offers...

[xcoriate]

anyone want to sit across from Pop and RC at a poker table?

:rollin

[exstatic]

They will talk about it for a few weeks (3-4 at the most) and if they can't get anything done Pop/RC will shut negotiations down till next summer...

Actually, CC, they have exactly 26 days, at which time the CBA shuts them down. Neither side is allowed to negotiate between 1 Nov and 30 jun of next year, inclusive, if a deal hasn't been reached by 31 Oct.

[Marcus Bryant]

I think it's difficult for any player (and esp for any agent) to justify leaving money on the table, especially a 6 year guaranteed deal. There is also the prospect of the CBA changing the max contract length.

I suspect they'll get a deal done now. Both sides have some rather strong reasons to get it done now.

[Kori Ellis]

Actually they aren't going to talk about it that long. Pop said they aren't going to wait out the whole month.

http://www.woai.com/spurs/

Click on the link that says "Pop Playing Hardball with Parker" in the sidebar.

From his tone, it may not be getting done this summer.

[timvp]

The Spurs would be wise to save all the controversy and the risk of losing him next summer by just locking him up. If it takes $70 million, it takes $70 million.

[BronxCowboy]

^
Agreed. I hope Pop is just bluffing with his hints that they're planning on putting it off until next summer.

[IceColdBrewski]

If the Spurs offer him the max I'll puke. Paying that much for a player that disappears in the playoffs would be enough to make me give up on the front office.