RJ's Contract Details

[DPG21920]

Also, it does handcuff them in signings because with him on the books, they might not want to take on another player (at whatever the salary would be). I could be wrong, but we will see.

Again, you act like there are no negatives and re post everything you said.

So lets do it this way. You post what you think some potential negatives could be.

[ElNono]

@ hypothetical situations.

lol, there's not one projection posted by you in this thread that's not hypothetical.

TBH, I have no beef with you. I think what the FO did is very shortsighted, and that's my opinion, but we can sit down and argue all day and it's all going to be hypothetical situations looking down the line.

RJ is here, there's no going back. I didn't like the contract they handed him and neither I like the contract they handed to Bonner. I'm disappointed in that they bet from the get go on the status quo. But there's nothing I can do about it other than support the team and wish they both turn it around.

As I said earlier, this is water under the bridge now. Time to look forward and see what happens.

[Chieflion]

I am here to support the facts. Has RJ's athletic abilities declined? I say yes. There is no direct statistical proof to say he lost athletic ability but there are indirect numbers. It actually happened for quite a while now in 2007.

After RJ played a healthy 2005-2006 NBA season (rebounding percentage at 10.2%), in 2006-2007 season, he had an injury and only played 55 games. His rebounding percentage dropped 3% to 7.2%.

This isn't an outlier. RJ had 2 other seasons with his rebounding percentage above 10%, none of them after the 2005-2006 season. With the Spurs, his rebounding percentage is 8.3%, which is a slow but gradual improvement from 2007. Does this show his athletic ability has declined? Maybe. There are other examples of bigs whose rebounding percentage has declined while they become older and their rebounding rate drops gradually while they lose their athletic ability. And he played quite some small ball PF, which doesn't make the improvement really significant.

Moving on, steals percentage. In Jefferson's early years, he had good steal percentages. He always finished at 1% or higher except for 2 seasons. One is his injury-riddled 2006-2007 season, the other was past season, the 2009-2010 season. I think he shows some decline in his abilities here. Maybe he was used as a small ball PF a little too much.

Blocks percentage is an outlier here though. It stands out as an obvious outlier here. After Richard Jefferson's first 2 seasons in the NBA, he never averaged above a 1% block percentage. He did it last season. Otherwise, he was usually hovering around 0.4%. Is this sign of him not losing athletic ability or a sign of too much small ball PF? I don't know.

[MaNu4Tres]

So lets do it this way. You post what you think some potential negatives could be.

-R.J tearing an ACL or pulling a Grant Hill 2001 and Spurs are stuck with his salary for 4 years.

-R.J continually regresses significantly and has an even worse year than last year. Which could happen.

Even if these negatives do happen though, Spurs will be able to afford the same free agents as they would if they hadn't resigned Jefferson.

So signing him is irrelevant with what free agents they can add the next 2 seasons.

Entering season 3, Duncan's contract comes off the books and Spurs will be able to then afford a significant free agent. Spurs can even squeeze in another significant free agent if R.J is included in a sign and trade. (Far-fetched)

Entering season 4, Manu's contract comes off the books for the Spurs to have an opportunity to add even another piece and then R.J's contract becomes a valuable expiring asset.

[cd98]

I don't know if RJ's athletic ability has declined. All I know is that there hasn't been a Spur at the small forward position that could dunk like he did over Greg Oden and others in about 15 or so years.

If he's declined at all, it's not by much when he can still dunk on people like he did last season.

His "decline" has more to do with less opportunities than actual age in my opinion.

[ploto]

I am wondering when the dust settles how many Spurs fans will be laughing so much at other teams' deals when they see what the Spurs paid to keep Jefferson and Bonner for 4 more years!

[objective]

all the people posting about their concerns with how this terrible RJ contract will affect Parker are pretty much spot on.

Parker had to go public with Pop just to beg Holt to crap in another $2 million over 6 years. But now he sees how a one year disappointment gets paid beyond what is even considered the Spurs le window?

Paying RJ his ridiculous salary now, I don't see any way Parker is willing to give a discount. Nor Duncan if he ever re-ups.

Furthermore with all the talk over the years about how this would eventually become 'Tony's team' . . . how good could that team be when it's hamstrung by an Eddy Curry-sized contract albatross?

Maybe you can spin that year 4 will be an expiring, but expirings never got jack in return with LaFrentz and Szczerbiak. Even Chandler's expiring contract only got back modest one year savings but added future obligations like Matt Carroll and Najera's contracts.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

-R.J tearing an ACL or pulling a Grant Hill 2001 and Spurs are stuck with his salary for 4 years.

-R.J continually regresses significantly and has an even worse year than last year. Which could happen.

Even if these negatives do happen though, Spurs will be able to afford the same free agents as they would if they hadn't resigned Jefferson.

So signing him is irrelevant with what free agents they can add the next 2 seasons.

Entering season 3, Duncan's contract comes off the books and Spurs will be able to then afford a significant free agent. Spurs can even squeeze in another significant free agent if R.J is included in a sign and trade. (Far-fetched)

Entering season 4, Manu's contract comes off the books for the Spurs to have an opportunity to add even another piece and then R.J's contract becomes a valuable expiring asset.

I do not know why you even bother. Its not like they are even trying to address anything you say. They just blather the same nonsense or throw out red herrings.

[ElNono]

-R.J tearing an ACL or pulling a Grant Hill 2001 and Spurs are stuck with his salary for 4 years.

-R.J continually regresses significantly and has an even worse year than last year. Which could happen.

Even if these negatives do happen though, Spurs will be able to afford the same free agents as they would if they hadn't resigned Jefferson.

So signing him is irrelevant with what free agents they can add the next 2 seasons.

Entering season 3, Duncan's contract comes off the books and Spurs will be able to then afford a significant free agent. Spurs can even squeeze in another significant free agent if R.J is included in a sign and trade. (Far-fetched)

Entering season 4, Manu's contract comes off the books for the Spurs to have an opportunity to add even another piece and then R.J's contract becomes a valuable expiring asset.

Yeah, but if he would not have opted out and he lays another turd this season, we could have had a nice $15m trading chip we could have traded for different/better talent to have one more go before Tim retires. Or swapped him for expirings or a TE that would have allowed us to do a trade at a later day. Obviously, that would mean the FO would have needed to take a fairly high tax hit for that to happen. They decided to avoid the tax instead and refinance RJs, and well, it's their money and their choice, so be it.

[TD 21]

This debate is still going on? Who has a long, drawn out back and forth and hijack's a thread like this? The nerve of some people...

I'm fairly certain this deal was in place before free agency even commenced. The Spurs probably talked Jefferson into opting out. Basically, you do us a favor (if it's not entirely wiped away, he single-handedly allowed them to drastically slash their luxury tax bill and re-sign Bonner, which we all knew they wanted to do), we'll do you a favor (give you a contract you won't get anywhere else).

He probably wouldn't have opted out had a deal like this not been presented to him beforehand. I doubt he'd have opted out and risked a deal like this being out there. Could the Spurs have lowered it when he agreed to accept it? Yeah, because there more than likely wasn't an offer even close out there. But if this was a standing offer for a few weeks, it's unethical to after the fact lower it when he agrees to accept it. It would also lead to him moping and his play probably being affected.

[ElNono]

This debate is still going on? Who has a long, drawn out back and forth and hijack's a thread like this? The nerve of some people...

I'm fairly certain this deal was in place before free agency even commenced. The Spurs probably talked Jefferson into opting out. Basically, you do us a favor (if it's not entirely wiped away, he single-handedly allowed them to drastically slash their luxury tax bill and re-sign Bonner, which we all knew they wanted to do), we'll do you a favor (give you a contract you won't get anywhere else).

He probably wouldn't have opted out had a deal like this not been presented to him beforehand. I doubt he'd have opted out and risked a deal like this being out there. Could the Spurs have lowered it when he agreed to accept it? Yeah, because there more than likely wasn't an offer even close out there. But if this was a standing offer for a few weeks, it's unethical to after the fact lower it when he agrees to accept it. It would also lead to him moping and his play probably being affected.

We all understand how it went down. The question is wether it made sense from a compe ive standpoint for the Spurs to tender that offer to RJ in order to avoid the tax hit. Obviously, from the short term economic standpoint, it makes sense, but compe ively speaking, did this deal made us better to try to maximize Duncan's last two seasons? What are the economic consequences long-term from this deal?

[MaNu4Tres]

It's w/e...

I've said my piece

I clearly understand R.J is not the picture-perfect fit, I have never donned R.J as the second coming or the Real Alexander. I'm just aware of the financial situation the Spurs have in place the next 2-3 years and how R.J's new deal doesn't affect who the Spurs can bring in via Free Agency because of the salary that is committed to the Spurs (even w/out R.J) for at least the next two years.

And I also understand Spurs couldn't have done better realistically in terms of filling their starting SF spot this off-season(even if R.J doesn't fit perfectly like Bowen did).

Which all collectively brings me to the notion I currently stand in.

[DPG21920]

Nothing but love for my man Manu4Tres though

[objective]

Entering season 3, Duncan's contract comes off the books and Spurs will be able to then afford a significant free agent.

I don't know how realistic that is if Parker is re-signed.

Year 3 salaries:

Parker if re-signed after 2011 will be a 10 year vet, meaning his max would start at 19 per based on the current deal just in the 11-12 year. But let's assume he doesn't hold RJ's contract against Holt in negotation and merely wants a modest raise.

Parker = 16
Manu = 14.1
Jefferson = 10.1
Bonner = 4.0 ? by year 3 I'm sure it could creep up that far
Splitter = 4.1
Blair = 1
Hill = 2.3
Anderson = 1.5 (equal's Eric Maynor's year 3)

That's 53 for 8 players. Plus roster charges and they're looking at being in MLE territory. Assuming the cap stays relatively the same after the new CBA, which isn't safe to assume.

[MaNu4Tres]

This debate is still going on? Who has a long, drawn out back and forth and hijack's a thread like this? The nerve of some people...

I'm fairly certain this deal was in place before free agency even commenced. The Spurs probably talked Jefferson into opting out. Basically, you do us a favor (if it's not entirely wiped away, he single-handedly allowed them to drastically slash their luxury tax bill and re-sign Bonner, which we all knew they wanted to do), we'll do you a favor (give you a contract you won't get anywhere else).

He probably wouldn't have opted out had a deal like this not been presented to him beforehand. I doubt he'd have opted out and risked a deal like this being out there. Could the Spurs have lowered it when he agreed to accept it? Yeah, because there more than likely wasn't an offer even close out there. But if this was a standing offer for a few weeks, it's unethical to after the fact lower it when he agrees to accept it. It would also lead to him moping and his play probably being affected.

Agreed.

[TD 21]

We all understand how it went down. The question is wether it made sense from a compe ive standpoint for the Spurs to tender that offer to RJ in order to avoid the tax hit. Obviously, from the short term economic standpoint, it makes sense, but compe ively speaking, did this deal made us better to try to maximize Duncan's last two seasons? What are the economic consequences long-term from this deal?

I think it did because like MaNu4Tres is alluding to, he's the best they could do at SF in the present and near future even though he's clearly overpaid. As it stands right now, the Spurs will still have enough flexibility in a few years (as MaNu4Tres has detailed) to add a significant piece or a few quality pieces.

Short term, it makes the Spurs better than they otherwise would have been without him in all likelihood and long term, it doesn't kill them. This is not the Raptors, who, prior to miraculously finding a taker for Turkoglu's contract, were hamstrung with Turkoglu's, Bargnani's, Calderon's and to a lesser extent, Jacks's contracts, long term. That's a ty team in the present with a ty outlook going forward and it didn't look like they had the flexibility to alter that. The Spurs should have flexibility.

[ElNono]

And BTW, I you take out RJ, the deal Bonner he just signed, and Tony, the Spurs were actually committed to a little over $42m for 2011/2012... I don't know what the CBA will look like then, but that's a good chunk of change by today's standards.

[ElNono]

I think it did because like MaNu4Tres is alluding to, he's the best they could do at SF in the present and near future even though he's clearly overpaid. As it stands right now, the Spurs will still have enough flexibility in a few years (as MaNu4Tres has detailed) to add a significant piece or a few quality pieces.

Actually, he detailed that the Spurs could not add pieces in the next two seasons wether the Spurs would have offered RJ that deal or not. I don't agree with that, and I don't think his numbers are right.

Short term, it makes the Spurs better than they otherwise would have been without him in all likelihood and long term, it doesn't kill them. This is not the Raptors, who, prior to miraculously finding a taker for Turkoglu's contract, were hamstrung with Turkoglu's, Bargnani's, Calderon's and to a lesser extent, Jacks's contracts, long term. That's a ty team in the present with a ty outlook going forward and it didn't look like they had the flexibility to alter that. The Spurs should have flexibility.

But they don't. RJ's contract is untradeable until the 4th season basically. I suspect Bonner's too. It would have cost them more right now to take the tax hit, but they would have ended with more flexibility down the line, and more importantly, more options from a compe ive standpoint. Obviously, they feel that saving the money now is more important, and that's their choice.

[TD 21]

And BTW, I you take out RJ, the deal Bonner he just signed, and Tony, the Spurs were actually committed to a little over $42m for 2011/2012... I don't know what the CBA will look like then, but that's a good chunk of change by today's standards.

Sounds great. Which big name free agent is coming to the Spurs, when there's a good chance Parker will be long gone, Duncan will be retired and Ginobili will be on his last legs?

Cap space is great...if you're in a market or a situation that will allow you to capitalize on it and by capitalize on it, I don't mean doing what the Clippers or Nets have done this off season. I don't mind what they've done (though the Petro contract was stupid), but they've spent a good chunk of their space on second and third tier players. Not exactly the types that are going to thrust them into contention for a championship.

The Spurs would likely be in the same position. Talking themselves into the Outlaw's and Foye's of the world, trying to save face after striking out on the big names, overpaying the aforementioned types just to fill out the roster.

Realistically, if a team like the Spurs wants to get back to the top (after Duncan is retired), they're going to have to do it through the draft as well as a few shrewd trades and under the radar free agent signings.

[ElNono]

These are the numbers I have for 2011/2012 without RJ, Bonner and Tony... feel free to correct them:

TD: $21.3 m
Manu: $12.9 m
Dice: $5.2 m
Splitter: $4 m
Hill: $2.1 m
Blair: $1 m

Total: $46.5m

I actually rounded up the numbers.

[elemento]

i don't think the deal was in place b4 the free agency at all. Why would it take so long ? It was a valid argument b4 Lebron's decision. I mean, many teams waited for Lebron's decision to start making some moves. Lebron not going to the Clippers or the Nets, would give RJ a shot to get the deal he wanted in the places he wanted to play.

But after the decision, RJ simply realized his value in the market was not as big as he thought.

RJ opted out because he thought he could have a 40m/4y deal somewhere else. In the beginning it was good for the Spurs because they could check the market and see the options available.

Since the market was so inflated, the Spurs just coudn't find a better replacement for RJ. RJ had the Spurs in his hands.

Or we sign RJ, or we start the season with d-league scrubs. IMO, that's what happened.

[MaNu4Tres]

These are the numbers I have for 2011/2012 without RJ, Bonner and Tony... feel free to correct them:

TD: $21.3 m
Manu: $12.9 m
Dice: $5.2 m
Splitter: $4 m
Hill: $2.1 m
Blair: $1 m

Total: $46.5m

I actually rounded up the numbers.

Add Bonner's 3.5 million (roughly)
Add Anderson's 1.2 million (roughly)
Add Temple 1 million
Add Hairston or Gee or Neal thats 1 Million ( They could keep all 3; which increases the payroll by 2 million)
Add their 2011 First round pick - 1 million (estimate)

That will leave the Spurs with roughly 7 million in cap space- Which is essentially the same as the MLE and the LLE Spurs would have available due to the re-signing of R.J.

[TD 21]

Actually, he detailed that the Spurs could not add pieces in the next two seasons wether the Spurs would have offered RJ that deal or not. I don't agree with that, and I don't think his numbers are right.



But they don't. RJ's contract is untradeable until the 4th season basically. I suspect Bonner's too. It would have cost them more right now to take the tax hit, but they would have ended with more flexibility down the line, and more importantly, more options from a compe ive standpoint. Obviously, they feel that saving the money now is more important, and that's their choice.

That's what I said: "In a few years".

They might not be able to move Jefferson's contract specifically, but I mean overall roster flexibility. They're not locked in with four awful contracts and devoid of good young talent and/or draft picks.

elemento, why would it take so long? Because Jefferson's agent was seeing if he could find a better deal and/or fit. When he couldn't, they agreed to accept this offer (obviously, this can't be verified, but if this was all prearranged as I and others suspect, that would be the reasoning as to why it took so long to get done).

[ElNono]

Sounds great. Which big name free agent is coming to the Spurs, when there's a good chance Parker will be long gone, Duncan will be retired and Ginobili will be on his last legs?

When TD retired we're playing the lottery. There's no two ways to look at it.
And if you hit the lottery, you want to have the cap flexibility to build a team around whatever that piece is.

And BTW, what I was discussing was 2011/2012. That's TD's last run. You don't think he deserves to have the best possible team around him before he runs into the sunset? They could have had the flexibility to do just that for him, but now it's either RJ/Bonner work or bust.

Cap space is great...if you're in a market or a situation that will allow you to capitalize on it and by capitalize on it, I don't mean doing what the Clippers or Nets have done this off season. I don't mind what they've done (though the Petro contract was stupid), but they've spent a good chunk of their space on second and third tier players. Not exactly the types that are going to thrust them into contention for a championship.

RJ is the 5th option on this team. He's not going to thrust you anywhere either. That's why you want to keep your options to potentially upgrade from RJ if he lays another turd this season.

The Spurs would likely be in the same position. Talking themselves into the Outlaw's and Foye's of the world, trying to save face after striking out on the big names, overpaying the aforementioned types just to fill out the roster.

That's what we just did. Once TD goes away that's exactly what this Spurs team is going to look like. A $10m RJ and a $4m Bonner running around.

Realistically, if a team like the Spurs wants to get back to the top (after Duncan is retired), they're going to have to do it through the draft as well as a few shrewd trades and under the radar free agent signings.

They're going to have to hit the jackpot again. There's no two ways to look at it, IMO. I'm 100% with Many on this. People way underestimate Duncan and way overestimate the kids we have. There's not a single franchise player there. I'm even skeptic TP is one, but I expect him to walk after this season, so it's moot.

[ElNono]

Add Bonner's 3.5 million (roughly)
Add Anderson's 1.2 million (roughly)
Add Temple 1 million
Add Hairston or Gee or Neal thats 1 Million ( They could keep all 3; which increases the payroll by 2 million)
Add their 2011 First round pick - 1 million (estimate)

That will leave the Spurs with roughly 7 million in cap space- Which is essentially the same as the MLE and the LLE Spurs would have available due to the re-signing of R.J.

- I said without Bonner (which means I'm considering the scenario where Bonner didn't re-sign)
- Neil is $500k this season, not sure anything is guaranteed for 2011/2012
- Temple, Hairston and Gee are all unguaranteed for 2011/2012
- They don't have to pick in 2011. We've traded our first round pick many times.

So the only thing I missed was $1.2m for Anderson.
That brings the total to $47.7m committed money for 2011/2012.

That would leave nearly $11m under today's cap numbers (I do expect this to be lower under the new CBA, but obviously I also expect salaries to be adjusted accordingly).