Reply With Quote
$12 million for four years is overpaying for Najera, who is already 32. I'm glad the Spurs didn't go overboard.
I don't know if this has been posted. For whatever it's worth, the Spurs did make a big play for former Nuggets forward, Eduardo Najera.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/s...najeraanalysis
Among the veteran free-agent signings, Eduardo Nájera joining the New Jersey Nets was somewhat of a surprise. The quintessential "glue" player had been courted by New Orleans, Dallas, Golden State, San Antonio and even the Oklahoma City formerly-known-as-the-Sonics, teams that could extend a four-year deal for the 32-year-old forward.
Eduardo Najera answers a question Wednesday during a news conference to introduce him as a member of the Nets. "The West is tough. Even when I played for Dallas, we were never favored to get to the Conference finals. Last year, a Nuggets team with an $83 million roster was swept out of the playoffs. Going to the East always intrigued me," Nájera said in his introductory news conference Wednesday at the Nets' facility in East Rutherford, N.J.
The Nets reportedly offered Nájera $12 million over those four years, while San Antonio offered $8 million for that span. The Spurs' priority was signing Corey Maggette. When the free-agent shooting guard signed for more money with Golden State, San Antonio signed Roger Mason to fill that active, penetrating, backup shooting guard role they could have used in the playoffs this May.
Mason's money took the gilt off the offer for Nájera, who presumably would have replaced Robert Horry in the rotation. Nájera's 36.1 percent 3-point shooting, rebounding (4.3 per game in 21.3 minutes) and team play displayed last season likely would have far exceeded what the fading Horry produced.
"Teams interested in signing me really brought up my 3-point shooting. It's funny because I have always had the stroke, but only last year did a coach [Denver's George Karl] encourage me to take those shots," said Nájera, whose 147 attempts were nearly three times more than the 55 he took in his first seven seasons combined.
Nets coach Lawrence Frank wants a team that "attacks, attacks, attacks" as he put it. "If the 3 is there for Eduardo, I want him to take it," said Frank. "That's part of what attracted us to him.
"Here's a player with character, who competes every second on the court, who is disciplined, who brings a tremendous work ethic. He will have an impact on the young players on this team."
The recently-acquired Bobby Simmons will likely start ahead of Nájera, who will get his minutes backing up Simmons and at the power forward position when the Nets decide to go small.
Nájera also runs the court well, as he had to do with the Nuggets last season. "Coach Karl wanted us to take a good shot ideally in the first 12 to 13 seconds of a possession, so I had to run the court a lot. I expect to do that at times with the Nets," Nájera said.
"Fast-breaking became a lesser-used weapon over the years. When we had Kerry Kittles, Kenyon Martin, Richard Jefferson and Jason Kidd in their primes, we may have had the top fast-breakers in each of their positions in the league. We may have some of those qualities with this group now," Frank noted. "If Eduardo is on the court, feeding the fast break off his defense is definitely an option."
So Nájera quickly took the best deal that was on the table, but not necessarily the best offer that could have materialized.
"My representatives advised me that if I waited, a team could be in such a position of need for a player like me that they would work out a deal, or a sign-and-trade that would have netted me more money. But I know [Nets GM Kiki Vandeweghe] very well from our time in Denver, I got to know [Nets president] Rod Thorn and coach Frank, and I realized how serious they are about building a contender in the East," Najera said. "I would much rather enjoy my summer than torture myself and my family and risk losing an opportunity like the Nets', in order to maybe squeeze a few more bucks. I don't like to play those games."
For the first time in his eight-year career, Nájera will walk into a locker room where he is one of the senior figures, one of the natural leaders in the franchise. In the past, he may have seen things done wrong or at udes in need of adjustment, but he would defer to the team's stars and leaders. Now, other than Vince Carter, there are no other veterans with Nájera's life experiences and track record.
"I guess I have the opportunity to be more vocal, but I will probably still speak through my actions on and off the court, as I always have. Anyone can talk," noted Nájera.
So what did Nájera see in the Nets, beyond the additional dollars in the contract and his trust in Vandeweghe?
"I have always been an underdog. As a Mexican player coming to the United States, I was an underdog the day I arrived at the University of Oklahoma. Same thing in the NBA. Coach Don Nelson had me playing center at times with the Mavs.
"I see the Nets and I see where the Hornets were a few years ago -- young talent that got better as they played and won together. What the Nets will emphasize will play to my strengths. If my hunch is correct, I may play a larger role in more meaningful playoff games with this franchise than with most of the others who were interested in signing me. We'll see," said Nájera.
$12 million for four years is overpaying for Najera, who is already 32. I'm glad the Spurs didn't go overboard.
I wouldn't be upset to hear the Spurs were paying him 3 mil/year, but I would balk at giving a 32 year old hustle player a four year contract at any price. Would have been nice to have him, but the price was not right.
They offered $8 mil.
Agreed. That was simply too much for a player like Najera. It still amazes me how these GMs and owners throw exhoribant sums of money to average players, or even sub-par players. The Spurs get credit for being fiscally responsible where those types of decisions are concerned.
Damn. If we had gotten Najera for that contract it would've been awesome.
Exactly.
It doesn't look like it was possible based on their demands, but (once Maggette was proven to be unrealistic) it would have been very nice to split the MLE between Mason and Najera.
Najera is a great role player
$12 mil over 4 wouldn't have been that bad either. Such a deal would start with a $2,678,572 salary in 2008-09.
i don;t think Najera would accept that knowing that Bonner makes more...
Well he just accepted it from New Jersey so I don't think he has a problem with it.
He took that from the Nets.
not from us though... if i am his agent.. while negotiating with the Spurs.. i would say "and do you think we'll be here earning less than Bonner and having probably a bigger role, make more threes, more rebounds... " we are not the Nets...
If we were to sign Najera we would've probably gotten rid of Bonner by now.
Trenton Hassell makes more than Najera. So much for that theory.
And yes, the Spurs are not the Nets. He played HS ball in SA, I believe he still has family there, and Texas has no state income tax.
If the Spurs had managed to sign Najera, you would think that the writing would definitely have been on the wall for Bonner. Especially if Najera proved that his three-point shooting last year was no fluke.
With the Spurs shown interest in Najera, and then the signing of Tolliver, it's possible that they've probably given up on Bonner already.
I don't see them giving Bonner another shot this season after attempting to sign two players that are very similar to him skillwise.
According to Najera, he's always had the ability to hit the 3-ball. It's just that Karl was the first coach to ask him to use it.
Had the Spurs been able to successfully sign Najera, I don't think there's any question that he comes in and immediately moves ahead of Bonner. Sure Bonner is also a hustle guy, but a horrible defender. Najera has become a very decent shooter and is a downright pest on the defensive end and on the glass.
Last edited by SenorSpur; 07-25-2008 at 08:16 PM.
I agree 100%. Looking at some of the comments above, I was shocked with posters insinuating that $2M/yr for a player like Najera is overpaying. He is a proven commodity and would have made slightly more than the minimum. I'm now disappointed that he didn't accept our offer.
I wouldn't object to paying him $2 million per year. Nor would I have objected to a 2 year deal that paid him more than $3 per year, but I wouldn't want to see the Spurs spending that kind of money on Najera for four years. He may be a slight upgrade over Bonner, but their skill sets aren't really that different and Bonner's contract will be off the books in a couple of years.
And I almost hit mega millions.
4yr/$8M is a HUGE bargain IMHO. I agree that I'm glad that the Spurs didn't give him what the Nets did, but I don't care if it is 1 year or 4 years at $2M per.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
