RJ's Contract Details

[MaNu4Tres]

You mad? You kept telling me "I don't get it" because you said there is no negative impact to this deal, so I thought you were referring to that.


at you throw away lines:

"I see you just don't get it"

"With all due respect, you are f*cking clueless"

"Get a clue"

You are like a human cliche.

I never said there was ZERO negative impact on the deal, I just simply tore down a few of your reasons why it supposedly negatively impacted the Spurs.

[kaji157]

Counting on Anderson and Neal, who have not proven anything on the NBA level, to be better than RMJ and Bogans will probably lead to disappointment.

They aren't the reasons you should be optimistic. The reasons you should be optimistic are...

1) Tony Parker healthy and fresh
2) Tony Parker healthy and fresh
3) Return of key players
4) Addition of Splitter to frontline
5) Development of young core (Hill, Blair, Temple/Hairston/Gee)

I would say that if there are any real reasons to think high are.

1- Tp being healthy and fresh from the begining.
2- Manu being healthy and fresh from the begining.
3- 2nd year from RJ, Dyess, Blair and Temple.
4- Addition of Splitter.
5- Younger and hunger thrid fiddles.

[DPG21920]

Not really "tore" down. You used hypothetical situations and opinion to refute some of what I said though.

I have seen you say nothing about the potential negative effects. All you have done is say "tell me how there is a negative to this". Implying you don't see one.

[AFBlue]

I would say that if there are any real reasons to think high are.

1- Tp being healthy and fresh from the begining.
2- Manu being healthy and fresh from the begining.
3- 2nd year from RJ, Dyess, Blair and Temple.
4- Addition of Splitter.
5- Younger and hunger thrid fiddles.

Manu was healthy and fresh from the beginning last year....that's not a change. Besides that, you repeated everything I said. But the fact that you agree means we have reached consensus. That feels good.

[kaji157]

Manu was healthy and fresh from the beginning last year....that's not a change. Besides that, you repeated everything I said. But the fact that you agree means we have reached consensus. That feels good.

Manu was healthy, but not fresh. Remember he said a couple of times how he lacked strenght on his legs and felt rusty.

[AFBlue]

Manu was healthy, but not fresh. Remember he said a couple of times how he lacked strenght on his legs and felt rusty.

In that case, Tony will be healthy but not fresh to start the season...still, it's better than injured.

[DPG21920]

I never said there was ZERO negative impact on the deal, I just simply tore down a few of your reasons why it supposedly negatively impacted the Spurs.

Jefferson is not a washed up scrub by any means.


Giving him a deal 3 yr/24-27 mil or 4 yr/30-32 mil (4th year being partially guaranteed or having a team option) is a good and fair deal to make and it doesn't necessarily hinder the Spurs future by any means.

Explained here..

He did not get that deal and you did say it does not hinder the Spurs future. Unless you did not mean it that way.

[MaNu4Tres]

Not really "tore" down. You used hypothetical situations and opinion to refute some of what I said though.

I have seen you say nothing about the potential negative effects. All you have done is say "tell me how there is a negative to this". Implying you don't see one.

Pretty sure I tore them down.imo But you have a big ego, so I'll let you believe otherwise.

[The Truth #6]

As usual, a lot of people are working really hard to make lemonade out of this.

Our window, if it's even still open is next year. If RJ is so important than let him play his last year, see how we do by mid-season, and then at that point make assessments on trading RJ, and TP, depending on how things shape up.

Instead, they go full re on deals to Bonner and RJ - players no one gives a crap about...but us.

It looks like they overestimated how the FA period would go and gave in to RJ's restructuring of his contract. Maybe it looked good at the time, but there's no way it looks good now. The dude is lazy. Even if he learns the system, he has no more incentive to play hard. When has he shown an ability to persevere? He's going to mail it in even worse the next 4 years. He wasn't working with Pop. The whole thing stinks. Ironically, his stats go up in 3 years when the team is in the tank and we're Milwaukee v. 2.0.

Looking back it's sad to see how poorly Bowen was treated in his last year compared to how well RJ has been treated with this ridiculous contract. Just bizarre.

[AFBlue]

I go with DPG in this argument...partially because I believe him, but mostly because he's the man for his place and time. I'm talking about the dude here.

[AFBlue]

Instead, they go full re on deals to Bonner and RJ

And as everyone knows...you never go full re .

[ThaBigFundamental21]

Way to much money, and a year to long at that.

[DPG21920]

Pretty sure I tore them down.imo But you have a big ego, so I'll let you believe otherwise.

Another throw away line.

Link to my big ego?

I can link to yours by telling people "they just don't get it" & to "f*ck off" & calling them "uninformed idiots".

Then you use hyperbole to claim you "tore down" arguments. That reeks of ego right there.

Then I catch you lying about saying "you never said there is no negative impacts". I quoted it.

Just because you think RJ's fully guaranteed, 4 year contract is an asset and disregard the effects in the final year or two (not from signing FA's with extra money, but the ability to re-sign TP and to bring on other players because they are capped out and are only willing to spend so much) does not mean you "tore" any thing down or that your opinions are any more valid.

Like I said, people way smarter than you and I think this deal sucks.

[DPG21920]

I go with DPG in this argument...partially because I believe him, but mostly because he's the man for his place and time. I'm talking about the dude here.

[MaNu4Tres]

You used hypothetical situations and opinion to refute some of what I said though.

I have seen you say nothing about the potential negative effects. All you have done is say "tell me how there is a negative to this". Implying you don't see one.

@ hypothetical situations.

I have nothing more to say to you.

Go dig up more quotes from me, and try to degrade me by making false accusations.

But to answer your question, I actually don't like that the 4th year is guaranteed now with a player option. In my perfect world it would be a 3 year deal, where his expiring becomes a valuable trading asset as Duncan's 20 million comes off the books. Now Spurs will have to wait another year to try to use his expiring(if he opts in) in a trade scenario where they net an expiring contract and a player for the future.

[AFBlue]

I should also have keyed in on this one...

The dude is lazy.

The dude is most certainly that. Possibly the laziest in Los Angeles county, which would put him in the runnin' for laziest worldwide.

[DPG21920]

@ hypothetical situations.

I have nothing more to say to you.

Go dig up more quotes from me, and try to degrade me by making false accusations.

But to answer your question, I actually don't like that the 4th year is guaranteed now with a player option. In my perfect world it would be a 3 year deal, where his expiring becomes a valuable trading asset as Duncan's 20 million comes off the books. Now Spurs will have to wait another year to try to use his expiring(if he opts in) in a trade scenario where they net an expiring contract and a player for the future.

Why are you laughing? You used a hypothetical argument about RJ's contract. You thought it would only be 32M guaranteed. It's not. That is reality.

You also use hypothetical that he might not opt in and that he is a trade chip.

How am I trying to degrade you? You are going wayyyyyyyyy overboard. Almost Ericb territory.

You tell me I don't have a clue, tell me to f*ck off, tell other people they are uninformed idiots, tell us you "tear down" our arguments and then when we quote actual things you say, you accuse us of having egos and say we try to degrade you?

lol what?

[MaNu4Tres]

Then you use hyperbole to claim you "tore down" arguments. That reeks of ego right there.

I seldom act as such, I only do when warranted and I'm the type of guy that doesn't take nonsense from anyone. So be it.

Then I catch you lying about saying "you never said there is no negative impacts". I quoted it.

I never said there is absolutely no negative impact. There is no negative impact and "doesn't necessarily hinder the Spurs future by any means" are two different things. Doesn't necessary hinder the Spurs future means for the most part it doesn't hinder the future by any means.

Like I said, people way smarter than you and I think this deal sucks.

And people WAAAAAY smarter than you think this deal is the right and fair and doesn't necessarily hinder the rebuilding process. (Such as R.C Buford and Gregg Popovich.

[DPG21920]

I seldom act as such, I only do when warranted and I'm the type of guy that doesn't take nonsense from anyone. So be it.

What did I say that warrants you acting like that? Please show me. You taking something the wrong way is a different story.

And people WAAAAAY smarter than you think this deal is the right and fair and doesn't necessarily hinder the rebuilding process. (Such as R.C Buford and Gregg Popovich.

Another perfect example of your ego. I always said people smarter than "YOU & I", never just you. I did that on purpose. You try to single me out while raising your point.

Your counter point that people smarter than "me" only adds to the point I was making. It does not detract from it.

My point was it is foolish and egotistical to say you tore down any arguments because there are clear arguments to be made on both sides by smarter people than YOU & I.

[Chieflion]

Guys, can't we all just be friends?






Is the blue font needed?

[benefactor]

lol robbery

[Chieflion]

lol robbery

I thought that post came out before the official contract details did.

[MaNu4Tres]

You aren't aware of what bad contracts do to teams rebuilding process.

You can say screw the future all you want, but you look silly doing so when your team has no shot at a le now IMHO.

No you are not aware.

R.J's new deal won't hinder their rebuilding process with Manu and Tim making maximum salary the next 2 seasons. Spurs wouldn't be able to afford a significant free agent anyway the next 2 years with or without R.J's new deal.

His new deal doesn't handcuff them in any potential signings or take away their future 1st round picks either.

I also care about the future, but I'm fully aware R.J's contract (when it won't be as valuable to other teams --the first 2 seasons) won't hurt the Spurs from adding anything because of cap situation with Manu, Tim, Splitter, Bonner, Anderson, Blair, Hill, McDyess, Gee, Temple under contract. They will still only have around 5-7 million to make additions via MLE/ LLE with or without R.J's new deal.

Entering his 3rd season, Tim's contract comes off the books for 20 million. Which frees up money to add a significant free agent ( If Spurs can find a match) and Spurs will have a valuable expiring contract in Manu to use as a valuable trading asset to net assets for the future.

Entering his 4th year, if Spurs pass on the options that were available the previous season or if the free agents simply don't want to come to SA (which is reasonable), the Spurs then will have even more money with Manu's contract coming off the books ( If he isn't traded for future assets already). Also, R.J's contract be an expiring trading asset before or during his final season to give the Spurs an asset for the future. If not, then Spurs will use the money coming off the books for the 2014 summer.

TP could very well be gone bc of this and your "explanation" does nothing to truly refute that. It is purely your opinion, like this is many of ours.

With R.J, Splitter, Bonner, Anderson and Neal now signed Spurs will be close to 58 million for the 2011/2012 season without Parker.

With Parker, if his deal is back loaded, they may be able to fit him under the luxury tax (70.37 million; current lux-level; most likely to change) still if he doesn't look for a max-deal. If he looks for a max deal, Spurs will still be able to afford him under the luxury tax by McDyess retiring and by Spurs waiving one of Gee/Hairston/Neal (whichever doesn't pan out).

If he does look for a max-deal, I don't expect Parker to be resigned especially if he has a so so year for his standards and if Hill and Temple continue to show significant progress next year.

Here are other reasons:

There was no realistic scenario the Spurs could have done to put them in a better position the next two years. At least realistically.

I'm all for giving the young guys an opportunity as well.

And next year even with Jefferson, the young guys will have a significant opportunity with Finley, Mason and Bogans all gone. (10-20 MPG at the 2; 15-18 MPG at the SF position.)

So saying you rather give the young players an opportunity instead of re-signing R.J doesn't make sense.


To my understanding you have been pretty damn adamant on the Spurs letting R.J go and signing a player like Simmons, Nachbar, Hayes (best case signings) to play 24-28 minutes a night.

Do you understand that scenario (instead of the current scenario; R.J re-signed) just gives the young players 6-8 more minutes a night?

So you'd be willing to sacrifice significant talent at the starting SF position (Jefferson for Simmons, Nachbar, Hayes at best*) in order to free up a measly 6-8 minutes a night for the young wings? That makes no sense.

As I said already, the young players will still be given a significant opportunity with the newly re-signed R.J because of Mason, Bogans and Finley all gone.

Do you realize if Spurs signed Simmons or Hayes with the remainder of the MLE for say 3 years, the difference between their contract and R.J's is not close to 10 million?


1st year: (R.J's)8.4 million- (F.A) 2.365 million = 6.04 million
2nd year: 9.28 million- 2.55 million = 6.78 million
3rd year: 10.16 million- 2.74 million = 7.42 million

Even if it was 10 million extra in cap space like you say, which it is obviously not, the Spurs would still not be able to afford a significant free agent anyway with or without R.J the next two seasons, which was stated here


R.J's new deal won't hinder their rebuilding process with Manu and Tim making maximum salary the next 2 seasons. Spurs wouldn't be able to afford a significant free agent anyway the next 2 years with or without R.J's new deal.

His new deal doesn't handcuff them in any potential signings or take away their future 1st round picks either.

I also care about the future, but I'm fully aware R.J's contract (when it won't be as valuable to other teams --the first 2 seasons) won't hurt the Spurs from adding anything because of cap situation with Manu, Tim, Splitter, Bonner, Anderson, Blair, Hill, McDyess, Gee, Temple under contract. They will still only have around 5-7 million to make additions via MLE/ LLE with or without R.J's new deal.

Entering his 3rd season, Tim's contract comes off the books for 20 million. Which frees up money to add a significant free agent ( If Spurs can find a match) and Spurs will have a valuable expiring contract in Manu to use as a valuable trading asset to net assets for the future.

Entering his 4th year, if Spurs pass on the options that were available the previous season or if the free agents simply don't want to come to SA (which is reasonable), the Spurs then will have even more money with Manu's contract coming off the books ( If he isn't traded for future assets already). Also, R.J's contract be an expiring trading asset before or during his final season to give the Spurs an asset for the future. If not, then Spurs will use the money coming off the books for the 2014 summer.


*NOTE JUST MY OPINION- NOT FACT*
We can agree to disagree on this.

There were no signs to suggest that R.J's athleticism was declining and I don't think he's an average player. In fact, he has a high talented ceiling to reasonably believe he has the ability to improve to be more efficiently effective in a mul ude of ways (not just one way like Mason(shooting) or Bogans(decent defense)).

If he didn't have such a proven resume and if he was one-dimensional with a low ceiling like a Mason or Bogans then I'd agree with you. But that is not the case with Jefferson. IMO

So to say he can't change from last year, when he's proved year in and year out to be a top 10 small forward in the league doesn't make sense to me.

Spurs had much bigger issues and weaknesses last year, such as a horrid nucleus of a bench in Mason, Bogans, to an extent Bonner over Blair (which they have already improved simply by having Anderson and Hairston on the roster in place of Mason, Bogans).

The second major weakness was the fact that the interior defense had deteriorated and was the worst it had ever been in the Duncan era (which they improved by signing Splitter).


Spurs are spending 6.04 million more in year one /6.78 million more in year 2/7.42 million more in year 3 because they don't want the team to regress as a whole with new additions (Splitter, Anderson, fresh Parker/Manu, improved Blair/Hill, Hairston finally getting an opportunity).

If the Spurs decided to save the 6.04 million+, the Spurs wouldn't have improved as much with the new additions because of the significant difference between Jefferson and Simmons or Hayes (best case scenario)starting.

By spending the money, Spurs are only significantly improving.

[MaNu4Tres]

I thought that post came out before the official contract details did.

It was before, and I said it had a chance being a steal because of his stock being at an all-time low. Obviously that is not the case now.

[DPG21920]

I don't get why you just re-posted all of that. It does not make any difference. I am now more interested in how you pulled an EricB

At least you got me off of the RJ topic for now.