What if Tony......

[whottt]

tries too hard this year to earn a big contract?


I know Parker handled the challenge of Jason Kidd extremely well...

But this is an entirely different challenge...

If Parker goes into this season playing for a contract...he's going to be going for a max deal next summer...not for a 68 million dollar contract...

Unfortunately, numbers, not team play, get players max contracts in the NBA. I think the Spurs should bite the bullet and pay Tony what he is asking. I don't think it's a good idea to go into this season with him playing for a max contract next season. He is going to have a lot of incentive to try and boost his own numbers, possibly to the detriment of the team..what if he gets Steve Francisitis?...We are talking millions of dollars here.

And a 64 million dollar contract from the Spurs is less than a 64 million dollar offer from any other team...since SA is a endorsement hell. The Spurs do not hold all the cards in this deal, the Spurs are not the best deal in town...they are the worst deal in town..and Parker already has a ring. Parker is already giving up star status by being Duncan's sidekick and playing in this market. Most players would want to get paid and even that's not enough to get them to sign here...Remember...we almost lost Tim Duncan. Drob was unique. We can't afford to get choosey.

Stephen Jackson is not worse off for playing hardball with us..I don't think Parker will be either...I wonder, if Tim Duncan was not already locked up to a long term deal, if this would be happening...Tim no longer has the leverage he once had to force issues with the Spurs ownership. This franchise is more valuable with Parker locked up to a long term deal than without.

Honestly, with the dynasty potential this team has...with the international roster...this team is on the verge of being the worlds team. A once in a lifetime opportunity...This is a crossroads for the Spurs...they have a chance to bust out of their smalltime market and take a shot a worldwide bigtime...they have to win to do it...and Parker's value is immeasurable in that goal, as well as maintaining international appeal.

I don't understand the Spurs not signing him...even if they don't want to pay him the full contract they could always trade him at a later date.

IMO the Spurs are tripping over pennies on their way to dollars...SA is a long way from LA. We're San Antonio...we're not the Yankees, Cowboys or Lakers, we're not even the Mavs, sign Parker now and win, and you take a big step in changing that.

[Rick Von Braun]

The buck stops with Pop. If TP doesn't do what Pop wants, he'll be benched... period. If he wants to get a better contract, he better have enough playing time to rack up stats... in order to do that, he must do what Pop wants.

I don't think there is going to be a problem with TP getting more shots. Pop has been quite happy with TP taking more shots... in fact he even encouraged him several times the last couple of years to shoot the ball more often.

Tony has been working on his shooting, which I think it's fine already (he could improve his 3pt shooting, but this is not critical). IMHO, he should try to develop two things:

- Better feeling for the game. The Spurs very often lose big leads badly (10 to 20 pts). While this is responsabilty of the entire team, a good PG would handle the tempo and wouldn't allow such a big lead to evaporate. The PG gets the ball in his hands at least 50% of the time in each posesion.

- Learn how to make the interior pass to a cutter or a baseline penetrator. There are two reasons why players don't do it... they don't have the vision and/or they don't have the skills to make the pass in traffic. A player like Steve Francis doesn't have the vision. He just doesn't. I disagree with people that say Tony doesn't have the vision... I think he does. He showed to me in 3 games back in December 2003. I obviously think he does have the skills to make any pass, but he may be afraid that Pop would yell at him if he makes a mistake. He should practice this skill and do it so comfortably that he will be confident enough to do it when it counts.

If he shows improvements in those areas, watch out!

[Solid D]

the Spurs are not the best deal in town...they are the worst deal in town

Very inciteful (not insightful) statement.

If the Spurs can match any offer next season, that probably doesn't make them the "worst deal" in town monetarily. If your definition of "deal" can be expanded beyond money, there are a lot worse deals "in town" than Tim Duncan with whom to run screen/rolls.

[samikeyp]

worse than Utah? uh..no.

[whottt]

If he shows improvements in those areas, watch out!

RVB, I am sure Pop will bench Tony...but I don't see how that's going to help us win a title this year.

I just think it's a bad idea to go into a season with, arguably, our second best player, attempting to go after more than 1 goal.

[whottt]

Very inciteful (not insightful) statement.

If the Spurs can match any offer next season, that probably doesn't make them the "worst deal" in town monetarily. If your definition of "deal" can be expanded beyond money, there are a lot worse deals "in town" than Tim Duncan with whom to run screen/rolls.

That may be what you feel Solid but no great player is going to share that view...

Parker has already been taught a lesson by the Spurs that the decision to play with Duncan is not in his hands...Spurs taught Parker it was a business 2 years ago and I don't think he's forgotten it.

I think he's already had to accept the fact that he is not intrinsically bound to Tim Duncan...and it takes a huge ego to put up with the reamings Pop has given him...Tony's not worried in the slightest about not being able to play with Tim Duncan. As 6 out of Duncan's 8 years in the league have proven...it takes more than Tim Duncan to win a title. Besides...Parker has already proven he can be the starting PG on an NBA champion. That motiviation is not as strong for him as it would be for many players...And I gurantee you if we put Duncan in this situation he would react exactly like I think Parker will.

[whottt]

worse than Utah? uh..no.

Utah= Entire State of endorsements, with a wealthy population, and the Jazz are the only pro sports franchise in the state.

San Antonio = 1 financially strapped city in a state with 7 other competing franchises. And for Parker that also means not being the top man in the state.

Don't forget we're San Antonio.

[aka_USAPA]

Utah= Entire State of endorsements, with a wealthy population, and the Jazz are the only pro sports franchise in the state.

San Antonio = 1 financially strapped city in a state with 7 other competing franchises. And for Parker that also means not being the top man in the state.

Don't forget we're San Antonio.

You make it too complicated. The Spurs went cheap on TP, and they went dumb. Now, it's going to cost them more than $4 million to make Parker happy. The Spurs saw the small picture. Parker knows the big picture!

[Kori Ellis]

Now, it's going to cost them more than $4 million to make Parker happy.

That might not be true.

With the pending changes in the CBA, maximum contract length could be only four years and raise percentages may be decreased. It might cost the Spurs less than $64M next summer to retain Parker.

[BronxCowboy]

That might not be true.

With the pending changes in the CBA, maximum contract length could be only four years and raise percentages may be decreased. It might cost the Spurs less than $64M next summer to retain Parker.

With all due respect, I wouldn't count on it. If you are right (i.e., the owners are going to play hardball and insist on such drastic changes to the CBA), I doubt there will be a 2005-06 season. I sure hope you're wrong.

[aka_USAPA]

That might not be true.

With the pending changes in the CBA, maximum contract length could be only four years and raise percentages may be decreased. It might cost the Spurs less than $64M next summer to retain Parker.

That's a good point but that's a bigger gamble than not giving Parker his $4 million. First of all, the 4 year max contract is still not written in stone. They can only hope that will materialize.Furthermore, that mostly was a gripe by the owners where players who can still play but were getting up in age. For example, a player who is still in his prime at 32 years of age shouldn't be given a 7-year deal that will push him up to 39. Secondly, Parker is only what, 22 years old? Why wouldn't you want to lock him up for 6 years when he hasn't even scratched the surface of his potential? He can only get better. Lastly, should this new 4-year max rule go through, it might take less than $68 million to keep Park over a 4-year contract (roughly about $56 million) but Parker will instead make more even though the life of the contract is shorter.

[Kori Ellis]

With all due respect, I wouldn't count on it. If you are right (i.e., the owners are going to play hardball and insist on such drastic changes to the CBA), I doubt there will be a 2005-06 season. I sure hope you're wrong.

I'm not counting on it; that's why I used the word "could". But the owners are very serious about making some changes. I am hoping that both sides compromise a little bit. No one wants a holdout.

I just don't think the issue with Parker's contract is so simple as to just say "it's only $4M -- pay him". Maybe the Spurs have already made a lot of compromises in the negotations, and maybe Fleischer/Parker have made none. Who knows? You can't let your players hold you hostage. You have to set parameters.

I still think the deal may get done. I don't think either side wants to deal with posssible CBA changes or restricted free agency next summer.

Again, AKA USAPA, why do you keep deleting your posts?

[aka_USAPA]

It may not be just $4 million. It could have some luxury tax implications which makes it $8 million. But again, if that's the case, the Spurs will have to pay more than that now that the contract talks have broken off. Also, if talks do resume, I doubt Parker will still want $68 million. Perhaps he'll up the ante this time now that he clearly knows he's in the driver's seat. More power to him.

[samikeyp]

Utah= Entire State of endorsements, with a wealthy population, and the Jazz are the only pro sports franchise in the state.

San Antonio = 1 financially strapped city in a state with 7 other competing franchises. And for Parker that also means not being the top man in the state.

Don't forget we're San Antonio.

Which of course explains the numerous national endorsements Jazz players have recieved over the years.

Pitting Salt Lake against San Antonio is irrelevant because its all about national corporate endorsements and the big companies that sign NBA players (Nike, Sprite, Nestle etc.) tend to gravitate toward players in bigger markets like LA, NY and Chicago. SLC and SA are in the same boat actually. Besides with Parker, he can make a shitload of money by just going home. Apparently he has national fame in France.

[IceColdBrewski]

tries too hard this year to earn a big contract?


I know Parker handled the challenge of Jason Kidd extremely well...

He did? Because if memory serves me correctly, he commited one of the biggest cardinal sins there is. He went and complained to the media instead of keeping it in-house.


...and Parker's value is immeasurable in that goal, as well as maintaining international appeal...

International appeal?! Who gives a shit about international appeal?

[Kori Ellis]

Off topic, but not really off topic: Tony got banged up quite a bit tonight -- his knee and his hand.

[whottt]

He did? Because if memory serves me correctly, he commited one of the biggest cardinal sins there is. He went and complained to the media instead of keeping it in-house.

In your opinion...Some of us saw it coming from miles off and didn't think Parker did anything wrong there.

You hate Parker so I wipe my ass with your opinion on this subject :).



International appeal?! Who gives a shit about international appeal?

The Spurs ownership do if they have any kind of insight into running and marketing a pro sports franchise.

It's obvious they are worried about the bottom line but their bottom line is better with Parker than without.

As I said earlier, they are tripping over dimes on their way to dollars. Dumb move.