If you give 40M to RJ, you have to give the max to TP imo. 10M per year for RJ (does not matter if it saved the Spurs money) means TP has to start above that.
Printable View
If you give 40M to RJ, you have to give the max to TP imo. 10M per year for RJ (does not matter if it saved the Spurs money) means TP has to start above that.
One mistake doesn't deserve another. Tony is no longer a max player - not sure if he ever was. Spurs fans won't admit this, but Tony will be injury prone from here on out - his style of play and the way defenses play him will contribute to injuries with his high mileage body. Why give a max contract to a player that runs such a high risk of being injured? Allen Iverson should be a good example of a player that took so many falls to floor and look what happened to him and he had much more talent than Tony.Quote:
Originally Posted by DPG21920
First off, a max player and a franchise player are not the same thing. Given the fact that Chris Bosh and Joe Johnson are max players due to the current economics then Parker is absolutely a max player. Whether or not he's a franchise player is debatable and difficult to determine since he hasn't been the best player on the team for a long enough stretch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ginobili2Duncan
Second, I think you've forgotten just how good Parker was before he turned his ankle year before last.
The question in the thread is:
Should we sign Tony for the max?
The answer is clear:
No. Doing so would make sure we won't win a title after Timmy retires.
What most people are saying is because a lot of teams are dumb enough to give max money to some good, not great, players then Tony should get it too. Agree, he could get it and probably will, but we sure shouldn't do it.
Now, the question asked should be:
Is Tony resigning with us when we offer him (a lot) less than max money. I believe he will but I wouldn't be surprised otherwise.
As for Tony vs George:
Tony is an all-star and if healthy he could be a high level star but not quite a superstar scoring PG with an ever improving jumpshot (deadly in the playoffs last year) which could include a consistent enough 3 for when he enters his 30s and loses speed. He is an average defender, not bad but not that good either.
George is a young, up and coming (2nd in MIP voting in 09-10) combo guard with the potential to be an all-star and maybe better. The key words here are potential and combo. He has shown he can score when he looks for his shot and also has shown he can hit the corner 3 at a great percentage and when it matters. He is a good, maybe great defender.
Haters gonna hate. :sleep
Just to be clear, I want him to stay :flag:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruno
THIS IS WHAT THE HOMERS DONT UNDERSTAND!! shit i would love to keep him but damn guys he said hes not talking about an extension w/us what more do you want!!!???Quote:
Originally Posted by BadMotorscooter
every one keeps saying how were not going to be contenders after timmy i think we are and its looking like pop is really trying to get someone bad ass over here in san antonio when we trade parker maybe a young bad ass PF thats all we really need guys and w/our new players we should be contenders for a long time to come
Building a team around Tony Parker is a recipe for "good but not good enough" basketball team. But that's exactly what the Spurs will do if we sign Tony for the max. I don't see any difference if Hill runs the point , but at least we have a shot of using what's left (Hill not getting max) for someone who could potentially be really good,
parker aint worth max
just let what offer sheet he signs to, b4 we outbid ourselfs
Didn't he say that he will not sign with the Spurs??
Lets see how'll he play, if not good enough then trade him.
Has the question been raised yet about what exactly the max will be next season? With the new CBA, it might be $12 million per season...TP is definitely worth that.
I don't think it is fair to compare Tony to RJ. One is a proven merchandise the other is, at best, a dream merchandiseQuote:
Originally Posted by underdawg
What the max next year after the new CBA is not as important as it seems. Because it is likely that the current ratio between the max per player / year and total team cap will be similar in the new CBA. So even assuming the max is brought down to $ 12 M / season, that still represents 25 % of team cap . Leaving just 75 % of what's left to build your team around. So the same implications for signing Tony at the max ( though less $) still applies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seventyniner
I am OK with Tony staying he is a great player but if he is asking for Max money then I am OK with moving him.
Just what ever happens please let it not play out like Bosh where Toronto gets nothing.
I would like to believe that the Spurs FO is not as dumb as Toronto and Cleveland :nope
Quote:
Originally Posted by BackHome
If next years max is 12 mil, then we just got a sf for almost a max contract. YAY!!!:clap:clap
Sweet Baby Jesus, how long before training camp starts? This off season is getting too long...
I'm not sure how it works, but it's logical that previous contracts signed would be pro-rated to the old salary cap. So if RJ's contract was equivalent to 10 % of the cap. It would only make-up 10 % of the new cap whatever that be. But really I don't know how these things work .
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan89
I hope it is adjusted or we would be royally screwed. Either way though he is still going to be way over payed. I wish the spurs would have just payed rj 15mil+the luxury tax for one year. Then we could spend the money on players that actually deserve big contracts. I am really disappointed in the spurs for making this deal with rj that may prolong the rebuilding phase after the duncan era.Quote:
Originally Posted by analyzed
Speaking of FO moves, just read this in www.poundingtherock.com . I hope the tables are not turned on FO this FA , where they end up bitting their nails to see what the "decision" will be :)
Challenge: What Was the Spurs Management's Best Offseason Move?
http://cdn1.sbnation.com/profile_ima..._copy_tiny.jpg by BlaseE on Aug 7, 2010 1:54 AM CDT in Analysis http://cdn1.sbnation.com/images/icon...t.v8c9bafb.png 34 comments
We had so much fun discussing the Spurs draft picks yesterday, I thought I would come up with a new challenge. The Spurs offseason may appear pretty ho-hum to outsiders and pretty epic to 13 year old Spurs fans who like playing Halo or dudes who work for Nintendo (that's a reference to E3 and the AVGN...yeah, I went there). This is all about how great our Spurs management is, and taking a step back to look at the moves made this offseason (and some prior) by our FO to keep us a top contender for this season's title.
I think the Challenge is a no brainer in the end, but the field isn't any weaker for it.
http://cdn1.sbnation.com/images/blog...e.v5e9d7f1.jpg
Catching the Lightning in Our Bottle Before The Heat Steal Everyone's Thunder
I could so write song titles for Moneen. I'm talking about the Spurs FO and JA's fan group getting Manu to stay before the shit-icane (Trailer Park Boys, anyone?) LeBron created. Could you imagine Manu taking his sweet time with a gigantic offer on the table from NY or NJ while we wait biting our nails to our shoulder blades??? I'm freaking out just thinking about it and he's under contract now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Obstructed_View
Don't get me wrong Parker is one my favorite players and I'll never understand why some people on this board seem to hate him. With that being said, I do not think that giving Parker a max contract will be a good move for the franchise long term.
Max contracts should only be given to franchise players. Such as, Durant, Paul, Howard. Bosh and Johnson are not franchise players and are not worth max contracts. Does that mean that they won't get offered the max some GM's? No.
Parker will certainly be offered a max contract by some other teams. But, the Spurs shouldn't give him a max contract. At his best, a case can be made for Parker as a top 20 player. But after Ginobili and Duncan retire, the Spurs will not be contending for championships. What would be the point of giving Parker max money? You can't build around him and unless he develops a 3 point shot, his game will regress rapidly as he ages, which could be in the next 3 years.
Convincing RJ to Relieve Us of Current Financial Burden and Giving Us Some SF Security.
This is the worst move the FO has made in the duncan era. The trade for him was pretty bad also.
Bonus: Pushing for a Trade Last Summer and Not Bullshitting Ourselves Into Thinking Bosh, Amare, etc. Were an Option.
That trade sucked. I wish we would have bullshitted ourselves into thinking bosh,amare,etc. were an option.
Manu Resigned Before Hitting Open Market.
I wish the spurs would have resigned him at the beginning of last season instead of sign him when his stock was at a all time high.
C'mon, now. That shit is small fries compared to the Scola trade.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan89
Fact: A 2002 second-round draft pick of the Spurs, Scola has been playing for Spanish team Tau Ceramica, where he is generally regarded as one of the best players in Europe. The Spurs had hoped to sign him two years ago, but his buyout was too large, so they instead opted to bring over his friend and countryman, center Fabricio Oberto.Quote:
Originally Posted by admiralsnackbar
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/M...age=1#storytop