Reply With Quote
The Sticker Shock Krew is still in mental gymnastics mode here?
It's the rank-and-file middling NBA players that like having a maximum salary per player. Less money for the megastars means more for the low-end starters and role players. Those guys outnumber the stars and the players union is a one man one vote system.
The Sticker Shock Krew is still in mental gymnastics mode here?
Wonder what a no max system will be In the long term.
Sure the LeBron’s and Jokics will make $150M per but then it means there will be much more churn at the lower or even mid levels, where players will continue to be switched out for mid millions or low $10m contracts with a shorter career. At some point young athletes will wonder if they are better off focusing on another safer sport which would net them a higher elected return. Making it to the nba as one of the 450 players is hard enough now, it when 430 of those players don’t make enough to make that risk and investment worth it then the talent pool will inevitably shrink.
James did in fact leave more than a "penny on the table" when he "took his talents to south beach". Save for the '11 Finals, he authored arguably the greatest stretch in league history. His reward? The Heat pinching pennies, including waiving Miller.
He also offered to last off season, if the Lakers could sign Thompson or Valanciunas with the MLE.
Whitey's fear and dislike/hatred of the powerful, unapologetic black man, never ceases to amaze.
If Klutch were ran by a white guys, their reputation would be entirely different.
Love the deal. It was a good bet. I believe in Fox and feel he's a good fit for the team. I'm pleased to be locked in on him through his prime. Hope he can work on with his three shot some and his health is a concern. Just feels like acceptable levels of standard risk here and you'd have it with any max you offer in some form or another.
Yes they like getting paid more than otherwise, but its not just them. Their agents like it too. Every GM would rather have max salaries, every owner would rather have max salaries. I'm sure the league would rather have maxes compared to 10-15 guys getting literally 1/2 of all salaries. The media prefers it, more stupid articles and fake-fights this way, more talent aggregation/destiny potential. I think pretty much everyone likes it except the handful of guys that generate more revenue than their contract, and the handful of fans that would appreciate parity.
Holy wow. Whitey's fear...of the unapologetic black man? Just wow
Hahaha so you are full re , got it, never go full re . I was pretty obviously being hyperbolic and I specifically said he deserved every penny. My guess is your IQ is a little too low to understand such things. That's ok, full re is tough.
Lebron is literally a billionaire, did he leave money on the table in Miami? Theoretically but not actually -- Quote "Over the four seasons with the Miami Heat, LeBron James earned approximately $67.14 million. The estimated maximum salary during that time was around $69.31 million, meaning he forfeited roughly $2.17 million by taking less than the maximum." He theoretically left a $2.17 million rounding error on the table, but did he actually? Are systems complex and dynamic and multivariable? In actuality he made WAY more than made that back by "sacrifying" less than $$550K a yr going to a bigger market and winning along side 2 other All-stars. I guarantee he made far more than $2.2 million his first yr in Miami in endorsements that he would not have gotten in Cleveland. But I understand context, hyperbole, sarcasm, and any concept beyond white=devil, black=king is a bit too high level for your 75IQ to handle. Also fun that Duncan, Giannis, and Brunson aren't black? Like what, how the was race a factor here. Oh 75IQ, literally everything is race. Its probably its because I'm afraid of the powerful black man. Never ceases to amaze...
Greatest stretch in history? Hahaha. The guy simply couldn't get past the Celtics and Magic in the East, so he did the easy thing, took a couple million less and joined two future HOFers in Miami, before adding a 3rd.
Yes, 4 straight finals is impressive in a vaccuum, but they were a contrived super team, they were supposed to go to 4 straight finals. They were supposed to win MORE than 2. They lost to a traditionally constructed Mavs team in 2011 and a near totally home-grown Spurs team in 2014, and came within an inch of losing to the Spurs in '13. If they lose 3/4 finals history would absolutely judge their contrived ass as a failure. Winning 2 was the minimum expectation barring injury before adding Ray Allen. Greatest stretch in history? Never ceases to amaze...
Last edited by Arguendo; 08-06-2025 at 02:47 AM.
Wish there was a poll to have an idea on who like the extension and who doesn't...
The last 2 seasons of the deal are going to be a massive weight for a non shooter who already doesn't use much his athleticism anymore
We need to buy Chip Engeland back ASAP at whatever cost
He will be 32 in the last year of the deal, come on
It's like people just keep saying things and have it read any of the thread or done any research at all.
Jesus ing Christ you people. This was the right decision and the money was the right decision. It works on the timeline, the current personnel and it's something you have and above average chance to get out of if it doesn't work. He's a top 30 player and a good locker room guy. He wants to be here badly and he wants to win badly.
Everything can't be perfect. But saying it isn't good it's just being ridiculous.
Not sure- even fringe players are compensated at crazy numbers
Riley Minix by end of year will have made close to two million.
This is someone who in all likelihood has no student loans
Good contract or not, it's like these ST-lifers brains get factory reset every time a contract is signed, and then act like we haven't watched nearly every "bad" contract that has ever been signed eventually get moved. The Spurs have the luxury of having some great guards on the roster if that becomes necessary.
The contract as of right now is not a big deal.
Without max contract, Fox would not have stayed then you have spent assets for a one year rental. I'm totally fine with the signing. It is a 4 years contract, at the end Victor won't even be in his prime yet, short term objective is to make the POs, you won't do that with a couple of rookies even with Harper level of talent.
When Fox came here last year we knew this signing was inevitable. Klutch is a pretty good player pipeline for the Spurs, so they weren’t going to mess that up.
Vassel’s contract bugs me far more than this signing. Fox will make us better. Not sure Devin does.
My bad, should’ve clarified. Younger players, more specifically, parents of these younger players are pouring thousands in training growing up because there are chances of hitting a $15M annual paycheque for a good 5 to 10 years, even if you are a ln average player. However, if that shrinks to $5m a year to one to two years, even as an average player, the risk is just too high. Your still be one of the top 150 players or so to make that coin, and if you are an 8th man level you’d be making the minimum, which is about a million for a year or two.
Still great money, they’d still be able to become trainers afterwards, but that risk reward isn’t worth pouring insane amounts of time and money into. Might as well put them in baseball or soccer at that point.
Btw, fox NOT getting the max has always been viewed as a wish. He’s a max player plain and simple. If he willingly ask to sign below the max to give more future financial flexibility to the spurs then great, but why would he do that? So that the spurs can extend castle and Harper to max extensions if they become good three years down the line? It’s not like the spurs are pushing the second apron and trying to field a championship team now.
Devin's contract was fine when we were tanking/rebuilding. The money had to go somewhere.
Now it's definitely become a burden unless he significantly increases his level of play (and can stay ing healthy). Hopefully with better supporting cast around him, he can find a niche. He doesn't seem to be the go-to scorer that the Spurs were hoping he could be.
He still forced his way to San Antonio and took the PR hit for it, yes, trading him in 6 months is a bad look no matter how you slice it. Down the road, it's a different deal. As for taking Harper, sure, Spurs don't owe Fox to pass on who they believe is the best available talent, especially at 2 and when there's a perceived large gap. But Harper should take at least a couple of years before he can take over, best case scenario.
Assuming no other high profile trades / signings, in year 3 Wemby would need a new contract (hopefully 30%), in year 4 it'd be Castle's turn (hopefully 20% - 25%), in year 5 it'd be Harper and Bryant's turn. So I think Spurs can ride it safely with Fox for a couple of years, improving their compe ive level, and should look to move him in years 3-4, because by year 5 you're in a tough spot if the core rookies pan out (Harper, Castle, Bryant).
By then you've given him a max contract and 2/3 years with the team, Spurs should be able to move him safely without hurting their reputation.
Exactly... and its not like this hasn't been expected and discussed to death here so its not like it was breaking news out of nowhere.
We're risking a lot by keeping Devin for another year.
Yeah, theoretically he could be a good fit as a shooter, but that's not his natural role and there are serious health concerns. He missed 72 games over the past three seasons.
I think right now we could flip him as a neutral asset and get rid of his long-term salary for a shorter contract, but if he gets injured again or has another inconsistent season with poor defense, he'll go into negative asset territory next summer.
My biggest issue is that even though he can be a good fit on offense, we're giving up Castle's size advantage by playing him at SF because Devin is just too small to match up with forwards. We've seen how it went last season when Bane just kept running through him. And we've also seen that he wasn't missed when Champagnie was starting instead. When a player who's on 10% of your supposed starter's salary is as almost as good, that's a huge red flag.
Especially when you consider that, at the time, Spurs had no way to predict Wemby would be out for half a season and the lottery balls would fall into the only spot where it could matter in a Fox trade (2, nowhere else a PG was BPA). By then Spurs probably had a tacit agreement with Fox and his representation that forcing his way to the Spurs came with a max extension.
Also, Fox was always getting a max (or very close), if you played hardball he could take it to free agency and surely more than team with cap room (starting with Brooklyn) would give hiim that money no questions asked, that kills your leverage. Bottom line, the way events unfolded Spurs had to do this, if Fox stays healthy he should contribute now and be movable in the future.
Like I said, he took less. It's not about the amount or whether it can be recouped through other avenues, it's about the principle. He (and MVP caliber players in general) are already significantly underpaid because of the cap on max salaries based on experience.
The usual overly defensive nonsense. They're all black, but they don't fit the same description as James.
I clearly meant individually. Early 90s Jordan and early 10s James are probably the two GOAT peaks. If it were so easy, then why were the Heat one miracle play a way from going 1 for 4? They weren't the Durant Warriors, who started on the two-yard line.
I think we should not pay good players and go back to a Sochan/Tre Jones PG rotation tbh
Guys who are mid level and a bit above would just go to Europe. They’d be making 2 way money here.
I mean people here wouldn’t even trade Castle for Giannis. Some guy was literally saying that Castle is going to have more elite years going forward than Giannis and that Giannis is going to drop off a cliff after next season. On Spurstalk the age 32 is a death sentence
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
