http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/c...or_Duncan.html
Loss comes another way for Duncan
Buck Harvey - Buck Harvey DALLAS — The Spurs made a mistake, and they know it. They have been shopping Richard Jefferson, even calling the same teams twice.
They also know a trade is unlikely. The same reason the Spurs want to move him — money — is the same reason no one wants him.
But this time it’s more than just salary-cap complications or Peter Holt looking to cut his losses. This time, someone else’s money is involved.
Tim Duncan’s.
If Duncan has been bothered by anything this weekend, it’s hard to tell. He flew into Dallas after a late game Thursday in Denver, yet he was smiling in the North Texas snow on Friday at one of the NBA’s community projects.
“I love what the NBA has done with this day of caring,” Duncan said.
The next day, a division rival already above the Spurs in the standings got better. Yet when asked about the Mavericks’ trade, Duncan nodded nicely and said, yes, Dallas should be improved.
Duncan is used to Mark Cuban spending more money, and maybe Duncan is used to getting less, too. It’s been going on for a while.
By the time Duncan entered the league, after all, the owners had already reacted to escalating rookie salaries. They put in a monetary scale for first-year players, and even a can’t-miss star such as Duncan was assigned a uniform salary slot.
Glenn Robinson, taken three years earlier as another No. 1 overall draft pick, earned more.
The lockout that ended in 1999 provided another way for Duncan to get less. Because of the new labor agreement, Duncan didn’t earn what he could have.
A contrast: Duncan hit the $20 million level just last year, and Shaquille O’Neal, playing under the old system, was already there in 2000.
Duncan has never groaned publicly about any of it. He was the same this weekend in Dallas when asked about the next, great labor dispute.
“You understand the situation you’re in, and you understand it’s coming, whether we like it or not,” he said. “It’s something we’re going to have to face.”
Duncan has never come across as someone in search of buying his own island. Still, to paraphrase the late Sen. Everett Dirksen: a million here, a million there, and pretty soon Duncan is losing some real money.
His latest came in the fall of 2007, when Duncan volunteered as he did when he worked Friday in Dallas. Then, he agreed to a two-year, $40 million extension with the Spurs.
Duncan could have taken maximum money on a two-year extension worth about $51 million. At the time, Gregg Popovich and R.C. Buford approached Duncan knowing he deserved that and more.
But Popovich and Buford also offered an alternative then. They showed Duncan the possible impact on the rest of the roster if he accepted less.
Duncan earns a lot of money as it is. His $20 million salary can buy a few things in San Antonio. Still, the amount he gave up is nearly $11 million.
How many would do the same?
Duncan believed, by agreeing to less, the Spurs could better pursue free agents in the summer of 2010. Coming off his fourth le, he’d hoped the Spurs could find championship players to put around him, as they had done before.
But that changed with the Jefferson trade. The Spurs are already obligated to pay a half-dozen players $54 million next season.
Duncan’s decision will not carve out extra room this summer, because there is no room. Duncan gave up a max contract for minimum return, and that’s why this expensive Spurs mistake is not only rare but different.
It’s shared.
[email protected]
No huh. So the Spurs have been shopping Jefferson hard. WOW I wonder what RJ would think when he reads this.
If he is still here he better not play worse.
I wonder what it would have taken for the Spurs to get Haywood and Butler. Tim cannot be happy with that trade at all.
I wonder if Tim is even pissed off because I forgot about the pay cut he took for this. He has really missed out on a lot of cash. I doubt that he cares about all of it, but still, guys like Shaq and KG really cashed in.
Last edited by Ice009; 02-14-2010 at 08:02 AM.
Based on how he comes across in public, I doubt it eats at him too much. But, I am sure it's there a little bit; how can't it be? Probably it would come across more in terms of him saying "Pop, spending on RJ was re ed."
The good news is the Spurs are actively trying to make a change. The bad news is no bites. In relation to the Haywood/Butler deal, unless they annihilated their depth, I don't think they could have put together a better package than what the Mavs did.
Edit: One more thing, it's items like this that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Duncan will go down in history as one of the greatest team players in NBA history. Most superstars (ie Lebron, Jordan, Shaq, Ama're, KG and so on) care about being paid what they think they are worth. Duncan has always cared about doing what's best for the team. From any perspective, 11 million is huge chunk of change.
I don't think Tim would be upset about his "financial decisions" in the past. He would be upset about the diminishing returns from the Richard Jefferson investment and thats that. As a captain he would try to maximise that investment through some pep talking and locker room mentoring.. and would leave it to RCB and Pop to make the decision whether or not they could replace RJ if possible.
This article is depressing. It really sucks.
I'm glad the Spurs are trying to trade Jefferson, but lets face it, that ain't happening. I hope that they have some other deals in the works and that when they realize nobody is taking from us, they'll bite on some other deal that they've put on hold. Hopefully it can be some sort of guard/forward combination like that of Tyrus and Salmons. I can't see us get any worse than we already are by pulling such a deal.
Yeah I still think we can add to the team if we have to keep RJ. TT and Salmons being one of the examples.
I just read this again do you think Buck Harvey is saying the Spurs want to move him so they can save money and try to get back under the luxury tax? ie cut bait and run rather than improve the team?
The Mavs trade just made it that much harder for the Spurs to make any noise this year. Unfortunately, we just don't have any pieces any team would want that could bring us back some real value. We can't trade Manu, Hill, Blair, or even Bonner because they're a factor in what the Spurs are trying to do, WIN. That leaves us the rest of the scrubs and face's team killing contract. The best we can hope for is if some team is willing to give us their star player for scraps (COLLUSION, oh ya).
You're saying you wouldn't even be willing to give up Bonner to get a deal made?
Holy criminy, ST has reached a new level of absurdity today.
At this point, I'm just hoping that the Spurs aren't so desperate to unload Jefferson that they pull a Scola redux i.e. offer draft picks and/or the rights to players overseas while getting nothing in return other than salary relief.
The spurs need to bring someone in the front office that knows how to improve the team through trades.
That is a weak spot for the fo through the years. Inability to pull the trigger on impact trades and when they do they don't get a player that fits.
How much more money does Duncan need? He has made mega millions and still its not enough?
I know Bonner gets a lot of around, but he in fact helps the offense by leaving the paint open for Duncan to go to work and Tony to drive the lane. Plus, when he is on, he is a pretty good shooter from beyond the arc. Defensively, he's a liability. So, ya, I think he is still important part of the team whether people in here like to admit or not.
From that quote, it sounds like that's the case. RJ hasn't done enough to justify paying him a salary of $14/15 million and the FO realizes they can get the same production from a player who gets paid significantly less.
We consistently debate about how the Spurs can use their expiring contracts to acquire another player. What if it's the other way around. Perhaps the Spurs are now working to get back into the free agent race by trying to trade RJ for expiring contracts.
Who would be stupid enough to trade expiring contracts for a worthless player with a fat contract??????
oh wait
The Spurs that's who!
Another Buck Harvey article acting like hindsight isn't 20/20.
It would be enough for me, and I think it is enough for duncan too. That is not the point.
No one gives up more than 20% of their salary for no reason. It appears that Duncan merely enabled the team to pay less luxury tax in the end? Maybe.
Remember that sports players have a limited earning window, pay high taxes, and many go bankrupt because they sadly never get a sustainable lifestyle. Their earning spread over a lifetime is less impressive.
We just got RJ, that was the biggest trade this team has seen since Rodman. WTF do you want.
Buck's whole approach in this article is rather odd. I feel certain that Tim is much more mad at losing than at making less money when he is a multi-millionaire. Really out of place is the reference to the salary structure over which the Spurs and Tim had no control.
That's their fault. That's why I side with the owners. theirs greed all around, but guys can do a lot with their money if they are smart, too many of these athletes don't manage their money wisely, and whose fault is that. The NBA gives them classes as to how to deal with the large sums of money yet guys still go broke. I think Duncan is one of the rare players who is putting his money to work for him, a lot like Robinson.
The Mavs have made a bunch of trades as have many teams, and they still haven't won a le. The Spurs have done things their way for some time and if 4 les in 10 years isn't successful what is? The franchise has gotten older, his sidekicks are getting older and more beat up, everything comes to an end. For my part I am amazed that Pop and RC have held it together for such a long time.
He also knows the front office took a shot at it...even with money, there was no guarantee a star free agent would come to San Antonio. With an aging Duncan, what's the attraction? I'm guessing the front office consulted Tim before a move was made-and he signed off on it. Sometimes it just blows up in your face. Really a pointless artice.
Agreed. It gave the impression that Timmy's probable sour mood lately has to do w/ tha money he forfeited instead of the team's struggles. I'm assuming Buck was simply trying to write a piece on how UNselfish Tim is, but he has an odd way of going about it.
dumb article, lets all feel sad for millionaires
Not so much trade him because of his contract for stingy reasons but to trade him because of his contract because he isn't worth what he's being paid.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
