RJ watch is over. He'll re-sign tomorrow

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tuncaboylu

Honestly I can't say anything about pre-arrangement. I'm suspicious, but I'm not sure of course.

But let's assume that there's no pre-arranged deal between 2 sides. I think that Jefferson's value is more than MLE at the moment, it's obvious. 4 years/32M is very logical and fair deal for both sides. It may be a little more then MLE, but we should offer more then MLE to outbid the potential suitors.

---

Wouldn't you wait for potential suitors to offer something though? I mean, you always have bird rights and you always can match an offer.

This is exactly what Utah did with Matthews. Eventually deciding he was not worth matching and picking Bell instead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obstructed_View

People like TPark like to shit on Hairston as a potential starter, which doesn't really make sense. He can't possibly be much worse can than Jefferson was last season.

---

You're right. He could be much, much worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

First of all New Jersey didn't have Travis Outlaw when the FA period started.

Second, if RJ is as good as he's billed here, he should have been a significant upgrade over Gallinari or Chandler in NY. Same could be argued for Sacramento.

Third, we still don't know what the Spurs offered or even what they were willing to match for RJ. Were they interested in matching a 5 year guaranteed deal? Over $10m/per deal? RJ made clear we was looking for a long term deal, but the Spurs never really stated what they would offer, simply that they would like him back.

Fourth, add the Blazers who handed out a $33m/5 year deal for Wesley Matthews. The Suns after moving Amare had a huge trade exception that they decided to spend on Hedo + pieces. Same for Toronto after the Bosh deal.

So, you know, the fact that two days ago we were scrapping the bottom of the barrel for a starting SF, and we still are to see if we can pick up a backup pretty much tells you that the market was very active for those guys.
Which makes the lack of demand for RJ even more glaring.

---

I've protest on some issues. New York: After failing to get Lebron, New York is changed their tactics from win-now to wait till 2012 summer. Now they're getting 2 years contracts at most and that's very shorted than Jefferson's demands.

Same as New Jersey, they're rebuilding and want to gamble with Outlaw who has a potential to improve. On the other hand Jefferson is Jefferson and he won't improve.

Sacramento have Omri Casspi on their roster and he's improving. They didn't want to get a veteran SF in front of him.

Suns don't have anything in return of Jefferson, so sign&trade was not an option with them. Blazers would want him I guess, but they don't have more than MLE this summer and it's also less than Jefferson's demand.

The teams that you listed as potential suitor are not available destinations for Jefferson.

I afraid that Cavs may go after Jefferson following of Lebron's exchange. But I really couldn't find the reason why they didn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tuncaboylu

I've protest on some issues. New York: After failing to get Lebron, New York is changed their tactics from win-now to wait till 2012 summer. Now they're getting 2 years contracts at most and that's very shorted than Jefferson's demands.

Same as New Jersey, they're rebuilding and want to gamble with Outlaw who has a potential to improve. On the other hand Jefferson is Jefferson and he won't improve.

Sacramento have Omri Casspi on their roster and he's improving. They didn't want to get a veteran SF in front of him.

Suns don't have anything in return of Jefferson, so sign&trade was not an option with them. Blazers would want him I guess, but they don't have more than MLE this summer and it's also less than Jefferson's demand.

The teams that you listed as potential suitor are not available destinations for Jefferson.

I afraid that Cavs may go after Jefferson following of Lebron's exchange. But I really couldn't find the reason why they didn't.

---

Now we're repeating ourselves. We've established that there *was* a market for Richard, but nobody was interested in giving him what he wanted. He obviously miscalculated grossly what he thought his value was. The question is why would the Spurs outbid themselves for his services?

Obviously, we won't know if they did until the actual deal numbers are out there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

First of all New Jersey didn't have Travis Outlaw when the FA period started. .

---

Travis Outlaw signed not even 12 hours after free agents were eligible to sign with a team. http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/n...ory?id=5363686

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

Second, if RJ is as good as he's billed here, he should have been a significant upgrade over Gallinari or Chandler in NY. Same could be argued for Sacramento..

---

You are obviously unaware or oblivious on how team's value skill-level correlated with salary. There's no reason for them (Kings; Casspi, Knicks; Gallinari-Chandler, Blazers; Batum-Babbitt) to add significant salary at a position already garnered by very talented young starters on a cheap salary. It is dumb basketball economics (Unless you are David Kahn) to add significant salary at a position that's already set for cheap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

Third, we still don't know what the Spurs offered or even what they were willing to match for RJ. Were they interested in matching a 5 year guaranteed deal? Over $10m/per deal? RJ made clear we was looking for a long term deal, but the Spurs never really stated what they would offer, simply that they would like him back.

---

Spurs never state what they are going to offer to the public until the deal is sealed. There's been many rumors since July 2nd that R.J and Spurs had a deal in place. We don't know the parameters of what exactly transpired and we probably never will find out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

Fourth, add the Blazers who handed out a $33m/5 year deal for Wesley Matthews. The Suns after moving Amare had a huge trade exception that they decided to spend on Hedo + pieces. Same for Toronto after the Bosh deal. .

---

Wesley Matthews is a two-guard. Batum and Babbitt are the Blazers cheap and valuable options at small forward ( Jefferson's position). Again there's no need for the Blazers to add salary that only get's in the way of Batum and Babbitt's progression, especially Batum since he's already proven to be a valuable starter in the league.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by benefactor

C'mon now...this is seriously reaching. Yes, this will save the Spurs money. Yes, the Spurs don't have many other options. But this is done out of need...nothing more and nothing less. There is very little upside to keeping Jefferson.

---

The upside is that Hairston or Gee will not be given heavy minutes. I agree that this is done out of need but RJ has only been on the roster for 1 season and you act as if he is a 12th man. RJ at 6-8 mil is not that bad a deal (take a look around at other contracts signed this and previous years) and as history has shown he should be much better in season 2.

ive heard 4 years 31.5 mil ...... the 4th year player option, only half guaranteed.... Tryin to find the link now... We needed RJ.... Im Hoping he is better this year....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres

Travis Outlaw signed not even 12 hours after Free Agency started. http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/n...ory?id=5363686

---

And? They could have easily targeted Richard if they felt he was as good or had the same upside as Outlaw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres

You are obviously unaware or oblivious on how team's value skill-level correlated with salary. There's no reason for them (Kings; Casspi, Knicks; Gallinari-Chandler, Blazers; Batum-Babbitt) to add significant salary at a position already garnered by very talented young starters on a cheap salary. It is dumb basketball economics (Unless you are David Kahn) to add significant salary at a position that's already set for cheap.

---

This is the Knicks we're talking about. :lol
But I digress, if RJ is not any better than any of those guys, how do you justify handing out $8m per for him?
If RJ didn't think he would get more than MLE offered, why didn't he sign earlier? What was there to explore if there was no market for him? What was the holdup? And if nobody is really ready to offer him more than MLE money, why should the Spurs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres

Spurs never state what they are going to offer to the public until the deal is sealed. There's been many rumors since July 2nd that R.J and Spurs had a deal in place. We don't know the parameters of what exactly transpired and we probably never will find out.

---

Oh, I agree it's going to be really rare if we ever find out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaNu4Tres

Wesley Matthews is a two-guard. Batum and Babbitt are the Blazers cheap and valuable options at small forward ( Jefferson's position). Again there's no need for the Blazers to add salary that only get's in the way of Batum and Babbitt's progression, especially Batum since he's already proven to be a valuable starter in the league.

---

Ok, scratch Blazers. How about Phoenix, who traded for that horrible Hedo contract?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpurCharger

ive heard 4 years 31.5 mil ...... the 4th year player option, only half guaranteed.... Tryin to find the link now... We needed RJ.... Im Hoping he is better this year....

---

player option?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

player option?

---

I have heard mutual option, a "player" option which is partially guaranteed. Never really heard of that before. So, why wouldn't RJ pick that option up? He would be bought out immediately after he picks up the option, making him a free agent. Good for both parties.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chieflion

I have heard mutual option, a "player" option which is partially guaranteed. Never really heard of that before. So, why wouldn't RJ pick that option up? He would be bought out immediately after he picks up the option, making him a free agent. Good for both parties.

---

I see Pierce has somewhat the same deal in the last year of his contract...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

I see Pierce has somewhat the same deal in the last year of his contract...

---

That option is just a cheat code for NBA franchises. They shouldn't allow that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

I see Pierce has somewhat the same deal in the last year of his contract...

---

Please explain what you mean by "has somewhat the same deal in the last year of his contract."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tuncaboylu

But we're going to sell our house 2 years later and we should watch as much as movie during this period. And while watching move, our eyes being tired and watching movie in TV is much confortable. Moreover we have enoguh money to buy 3D TV and we can spend that money to buy anything else.
That's why getting 3D TV is better than going at the moment.

---

But I don't want a rusting 3D TV in my new home. It will damage my other electronic appliances, especially the laptop I will be upgrading over the few years. I don't want it to be affected by the rust. I also want everything to look new as it gives me a sense of fresh air.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpurCharger

ive heard 4 years 31.5 mil ...... the 4th year player option, only half guaranteed.... Tryin to find the link now... We needed RJ.... Im Hoping he is better this year....

---

I highly doubt RJ will be better this year. He is going on 31, and his athleticism is starting to wane. When you figure most of his points last year came on raw athleticism he'll be lucky to match last year's production, considering that's on the decline.

Unless Pop pairs him up exclusively with Manu/Hill, where he'll be getting fed on fast breaks regularily (where he's effective) he'll be relatively useless (can't spread the floor well, not a good creator of offense).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TJastal

I highly doubt RJ will be better this year. He is going on 31, and his athleticism is starting to wane. When you figure most of his points last year came on raw athleticism he'll be lucky to match last year's production, considering that's on the decline.

---

Why would he be asked to score? Pretty much everybody else on the roster is there to score, starting from the great backcourt all the way to our very own "spread 4". It's not all about offense (even though he can contribute on e.g. the fast break or some nice alley-oops with Parker), he can be asked to focus only on the defensive aspect, which is almost the "traditional" role the Spurs 3s.

The Spurs of recent years definitely needed some more athleticism but not from RJ (see Blair, Splitter).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oligarchy

Please explain what you mean by "has somewhat the same deal in the last year of his contract."

---

Excerpt from here

In making the announcement, the Celtics gave no details of Pierce's deal. ESPN The Magazine's Ric Bucher reported at the time of the agreement that it was a four-year, $61 million contract, with the fourth year fully guaranteed. The Boston Herald reported that there is a mutual option for the last year.

More comment on this RealGM thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by will_spurs

Why would he be asked to score? Pretty much everybody else on the roster is there to score, starting from the great backcourt all the way to our very own "spread 4". It's not all about offense (even though he can contribute on e.g. the fast break or some nice alley-oops with Parker), he can be asked to focus only on the defensive aspect, which is almost the "traditional" role the Spurs 3s.

The Spurs of recent years definitely needed some more athleticism but not from RJ (see Blair, Splitter).

---

If all were asking of our starting 3 is defense I'd much rather throw Hairston into the fire and see what he's got.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

At the very least an offensive/defensive production that would put him over Hill when closing out games. That would be an average production at best, something he was unable to pull out obviously, otherwise he would have been out there.

---

What do you call average production? Strictly speaking the "average" NBA player scores around 8 points a game and gets about 3 rebounds. Even if you shorten the team to 10 players that get minutes the average would be about 10 points and 4 rebounds. RJ did better in both areas as a 4th option. So, specifically what production would make you happy with him? Oh, by the way, RJ was in 11 out of the top 12 5-man units for the Spurs according to 82games.com.

The people typing in blue have serious comprehension problems. The tv comment was with regards to value, not need. Just because RJ might be a good value compared to his overall talent does not mean it makes sense to sign him long term.

A LTD if that is what this turns out to be is just robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TJastal

If all were asking of our starting 3 is defense I'd much rather throw Hairston into the fire and see what he's got.

---

With Bruce the Noose, you got D plus ability to spread the floor via corner 3's. Is Hairston able to do that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chieflion

But I don't want a rusting 3D TV in my new home. It will damage my other electronic appliances, especially the laptop I will be upgrading over the few years. I don't want it to be affected by the rust. I also want everything to look new as it gives me a sense of fresh air.

---

So lets just buy a $100, 22 inch TV made from low quality vendors. Sure its going to suck ass but its better to save now right?

A 4-year deal worth around $32 million.

He opted out of a $15 million dollar deal, so that became the baseline from which to begin negotiations. He essentially gets a deal with MLE money (something he may have been able to swing in the open market) for the balance of the contract - around $5 to $6 million per season.

So, $15 mil + ~$17 mil = ~$32 mil

:lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Agent

A 4-year deal worth around $32 million.

He opted out of a $15 million dollar deal, so that became the baseline from which to begin negotiations. He essentially gets a deal with MLE money (something he may have been able to swing in the open market) for the balance of the contract - around $5 to $6 million per season.

So, $15 mil + ~$17 mil = ~$32 mil

---

If this is the case he easily saved the Spurs 5-6 mil or more in tax savings thus playing the equal of one year for free when you look at it form the presepctive of Holt's pocket.