RJ's Contract Details

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lebowski Brickowski

No it's not, especially for a FB offensive sf in a 1/2 court, defensive system. But I gotta hope that the FO realized this FUBAR situation w/ RJ and tried to come out of it the best they could.

If there is a trade of the contract after 2 yrs (Or yrs 3-4 are some combo of team options and/or partial guarantees,) the FO at least breaks even on the mistake.

---

For an FO that has been so good at being frugal, this is far from the best they could do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oligarchy

I'd rather that 4th be fully non-guaranteed rather than simple team option..

---

+1

Hell, I'll take a partial guarantee. Holy bejeezus.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lebowski Brickowski

I also gotta believe that Pop thinks RJ will be better this yr, or else Pop wouldn't be able to look TD in the eyes.:ihit

---

Agree with this. I think we will see a better fitting RJ next season.

This. Fucking. Sucks.

Did EricB take over Timvp's account?

Oh well. I'm just glad it's done and we have an idea of what our lineup is going to look like. I have very low expectations for Jefferson but I also know that he didn't just become a shitty basketball player overnight last year. Hopefully a year in the Spurs system, and perhaps some adjustments on how he is integrated on the court, will benefit him and the team. Crossing fingers.

I thought Pop and RC were geniuses WTF :bang

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oligarchy

I'd rather that 4th be fully non-guaranteed rather than simple team option..

---

And it had better be one of those two.

Let's wait the numbers until an official declaration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buddy Holly

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_F5blIU0mkJ...00-R/o_rly.jpg

Eric needs a new fucking source. :lol

---

If the 4th year is an option year then the contract's 1st 3 years are for about $28 million--not that far off.

Somehow the off season just got worst. He wants a four year contract and we want a two year contract, i guess they could not compromise on three. If this is true the opt out was a good decision.

If my math is right, this could be the rough salary structure (assuming 10.5% max raises):

2011: $8.54M
2012:: $9.44M
2013: $10.43M
2014: $11.53M

If true, I think we could stay under lux tax this year, but we couldn't use the rest of the MLE.

If those numbers are correct, the RJ should be really happy and should play even better this season because he wasn't lowballed. In addition, he should be ready to sacrifice all his numbers in order to become a world-class defender, because a good contract was the only thing holding him back all this time. ;)

now the FO remember to be lavish, where they been when we had Scola?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oligarchy

I'd rather that 4th be fully non-guaranteed rather than simple team option..

---

It's semantics.

It's like, "Hey, if you can go out and average 30 a game and lead us to a championship ... we'd love to pick up that option!"

Ain't a chance in hell they pick up a $15M dollar option on a 34-year-old RJ after Tim and Manu are gone.

So the Spurs are going to be paying Bonner and Jefferson 56 million over the next four years?

:smchode:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

Heard from a good source that Richard Jefferson's contract is a four-year, $40 million deal.

---

http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/c...es/thefuck.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gooshie

If my math is right, this could be the rough salary structure (assuming 10.5% max raises):

2011: $8.54M
2012:: $9.44M
2013: $10.43M
2014: $11.53M

---

i think it will be better for Spurs to do the contract front-loaded

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gooshie

If my math is right, this could be the rough salary structure (assuming 10.5% max raises):

2011: $8.54M
2012:: $9.44M
2013: $10.43M
2014: $11.53M

If true, I think we could stay under lux tax this year, but we couldn't use the rest of the MLE.

---

I'm ok with this as long as the 4th year in non-guaranteed so we can at least use his contract as trade bait when Manu and Tim are on their way out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eric365

If i have not made a mistake the 1st yaer would be at 8,6 mil.

Do we have any margin for the luxury tax for a defensive SG/SF ?

---

I don't think so

see here: http://airalamo.com/2010/07/19/updat...cap-situation/

It's overpaying but was there really a better option? We need him and that made the price where is seems to be.

I'm actually shocked that RJ thought he could get a better deal than this out there...

If this is true, this is by far, and I mean by far worst case scenario and makes this one of the worst most pointless off seasons in a long time.

Not only is that way to much money given there was no market for RJ, but he does not want to be here and does not fit.

He has now managed to do nothing to improve the Spurs chances at winning a title short-term and severely hindered the re-building process.

Then they give Bonner a 4 year deal.

I am disgusted if this is true. Absolutely disgusted.

Well played, RJ...well played.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blackjack

It's semantics.

It's like, "Hey, if you can go out and average 30 a game and lead us to a championship ... we'd love to pick up that option!"

Ain't a chance in hell they pick up a $15M dollar option on a 34-year-old RJ after Tim and Manu are gone.

---

Well, not from a trade stand point -- in so far as the summer that you would guarantee it. You might be able to trade for a not-so-terrible contract, versus someone having to keep his contract for a year. In the latter (non-guarantee) the team doesn't have to incur any salary. It's a better trade asset in that regards, but I get what you are saying.