funny article -- Pop was ready to trade RJ

[Blackjack]

I'm cautious about all these positive RJ articles. The fact that he worked hard during this offseason isn't enough to offset his bad previous season. I have almost no expectation regarding him and I'm just waiting to see if this great offseason will give results on the court.

The points about him getting down to 7% body fat are encouraging (and noticeable to anyone who does any kind of weightlifting or training) and I expect him to be a better, more useful player this year. But I think it's both fair and wise to take a wait-and-see approach.

It stands to reason he'd be better in his second year with the Spurs and after having a full offseason and camp to train and do all it entails to succeed with this team - he had bulked up a bit and lost edge/fundamentals playing on bad teams and in a more prominent role. But it can't be overlooked that he's now a 30-year-old that's been reliant on his athleticism and doesn't possess all that great of a shot. He is and always will be a scorer and slasher more than a shooter.

Basically, the expectations have done such a 180 with the fan base that it can't possibly be as bad as the complete naysayers would have you believe. I didn't believe he was the answer to what the Spurs needed or some kind of savior then, and I don't believe he's a bum that can't possibly help the cause in some way, shape or fashion now.

I hope and expect improvement, but I don't believe he'll be the reason this team does or doesn't win.

[history2b]

I'm cautious about all these positive RJ articles. The fact that he worked hard during this offseason isn't enough to offset his bad previous season. I have almost no expectation regarding him and I'm just waiting to see if this great offseason will give results on the court.

The expectation should be that he is not a role player, never has been and never will be because he's a player whose relative success relied entirely on his athleticism. His jump shooting ability has always been atrocious, his defense sub par and his court vision / IQ below average.

He enjoyed some success playing with the best passing point guard of this generation dishing out gift wrapped dimes while a young RJ filled the lane and got to the cup with ease.

When the Spurs acquired him last summer, I laughed. Seriously. I was sitting in my chair at the office and guffawed. Why Pop would want such a fundamentally poor sap who's defense is light years behind what Bruce Bowen contributed was beyond me.

What was even more laughable was the wink wink restructured $40M contract that he was awarded this summer. I guffawed again.

[Blackjack]

What was even more laughable was the wink wink restructured $40M contract that he was awarded this summer. I guffawed again.

Why is that?

[history2b]

Why is that?

Is that a joke?

[5in10]

http://espn.go.com/blog/TrueHoop/pos...-work-overtime

[Blackjack]

Is that a joke?

No, what would you have had them do this past summer?

[history2b]

No, what would you have had them do this past summer?

First of all not tell him to opt out of his previously horrendous contract, in order to reward him with a wink wink longer term contract for less per year, saving the Spurs from delving into luxury tax territory this season.

Bite the bullet for the contract you traded for, pay it for the time being and use your front office savvy to yield a new piece (or pieces) for that massive expiring contract come February.

That would have been smart.

[Blackjack]

First of all not tell him to opt out of his previously horrendous contract, in order to reward him with a wink wink longer term contract for less per year, saving the Spurs from delving into luxury tax territory this season.

Bite the bullet for the contract you traded for, pay it for the time being and use your front office savvy to yield a new piece (or pieces) for that massive expiring contract come February.

That would have been smart.

What piece or pieces would have been available to be had, and would said piece(s) make them better off on the court or financially after restructuring the contract?

[history2b]

What piece or pieces would have been available to be had, and would said piece(s) make them better off on the court or financially after restructuring the contract?

How am I supposed to project who will be available in the future? That's a stupid question.

And what do you care about what the Spurs do financially? Are you multi-millionaire Peter Holt's beneficiary? He ok'd the deal to trade for RJ knowing full well it was a 2 year contract so what's the problem now? He didn't want to pay it? lol.

[Blackjack]

How am I supposed to project who will be available in the future? That's a stupid question.

No, that's a stupid answer. Those are the questions and cir stances asked and assessed before making that kind of move.

Maybe you're just much smarter than the Spurs' front office and have more insight as to what their options really were?

And what do you care about what the Spurs do financially? Are you multi-millionaire Peter Holt's beneficiary? He ok'd the deal to trade for RJ knowing full well it was a 2 year contract so what's the problem now? He didn't want to pay it? lol.

Because what they do financially has bearing on what they can and are willing to do moving forward, Ace.

After the contract's restructuring, the Spurs will only be paying $13,492,000- $14,492,000 for RJ's final 3 years after the savings. They won't have the huge contract of Duncan (gone or paycut) and possibly Parker (could bolt), so his contract won't be all that bersome should he play it out.

Doing what they did allowed them to field a more talented team while remaining under the tax - something that allows an owner that isn't among the richest in the league to do more for his team down the road when any or all of the Big 3 are gone.

It's what smart front offices do - they can't all be Buss, Cuban, Allen or Prokhorov

[dbestpro]

So, when is Pop gonna have a talk with Bonner?

[Blackjack]

So, when is Pop gonna have a talk with Bonner?

He did: "shoot the ball or sit on the bench."

Like I said, wait-and-see.

[history2b]

No, that's a stupid answer. Those are the questions and cir stances asked and assessed before making that kind of move.

Maybe you're just much smarter than the Spurs' front office and have more insight as to what their options really were?



Because what they do financially has bearing on what they can and are willing to do moving forward, Ace.

After the contract's restructuring, the Spurs will only be paying $13,492,000- $14,492,000 for RJ's final 3 years after the savings. They won't have the huge contract of Duncan (gone or paycut) and possibly Parker (could bolt), so his contract won't be all that bersome should he play it out.

Doing what they did allowed them to field a more talented team while remaining under the tax - something that allows an owner that isn't among the richest in the league to do more for his team down the road when any or all of the Big 3 are gone.

It's what smart front offices do - they can't all be Buss, Cuban, Allen or Prokhorov

So when the Lakers traded Kwame for Pau Gasol are you implying the Lakers knew in advance prior to the season starting Pau was going to want out of Memphis, Memphis was going to want to shed cap space and a deal was going to be made? That's the kind of magical insight front offices need in order to make successful deals?

The reality is that no one knows who is going to want out and who's going to be willing to sell for pennies on the dollar. Chris Paul might that guy, could be someone else. No one knows right now. But what we do know is that it happens every year now and this is where the best deals are to be had.

Perhaps you'd like to share your mathematical insight on RJ's new deal. He opted out of a $15.2M deal this year for an $8.4M one. $6.8M difference x2 for luxury tax penalty = $13.6M saved this season.

Now add up the 9.3, 10.1 and 11M he makes the following 3 years and you have over $30M. Subtract 13.6 and it's still just a tad under $17M not 13.4 or 14.4. But whatever.

What's the luxury tax going to be in 2011-12? No one knows. It could be much lower, higher or non-existent. The new CBA will determine that.

That considered, let's say it's lower than it is now; You have to re-sign Tony Parker to a new contract? How much does that $9.3M to RJ factor in to what you'd pay to keep Tony Parker now? Does signing him to a multi-year contract at (presumably) $10M+ put you back in the luxury tax territory? Possibly.

What about the next year when George Hill will be looking to get paid? Does RJ's $10.1M contract assist or impede that process?

Bottom line in the NBA is you never make a bad business deal consciously. And the Spurs did just that vastly overpaying an underachieving scrub in order to save a buck or two this year. And they'll pay eventually. Guaranteed. And I'll be laughing all the way.

[Blackjack]

So when the Lakers traded Kwame for Pau Gasol are you implying the Lakers knew in advance prior to the season starting Pau was going to want out of Memphis, Memphis was going to want to shed cap space and a deal was going to be made? That's the kind of magical insight front offices need in order to make successful deals?

No. Terrible and irrelevant analogy.

The reality is that no one knows who is going to want out and who's going to be willing to sell for pennies on the dollar. Chris Paul might that guy, could be someone else. No one knows right now. But what we do know is that it happens every year now and this is where the best deals are to be had.

But you already know that the resigning and restructuring of RJ's contract was a stupid move all the way around? Interesting.

Perhaps you'd like to share your mathematical insight on RJ's new deal. He opted out of a $15.2M deal this year for an $8.4M one. $6.8M difference x2 for luxury tax penalty = $13.6M saved this season.

Now add up the 9.3, 10.1 and 11M he makes the following 3 years and you have over $30M. Subtract 13.6 and it's still just a tad under $17M not 13.4 or 14.4. But whatever.

The contract was originally $15.2M, the tax payment would have been between $6,039,921 and $6,894,310 (depending on 13 or 14 players) and the redistribution they wouldn’t have been eligible for is projected as being $3.3M.

Holt's line actually improved by $24,539,921 for 13 players and $25,394,310 for 14 with RJ's opt out -- but they were still over the cap.

When all is said and done, after re-signing RJ, the savings come out between $16-17M.

And if you look at the $16-17M in savings for the upcoming year, because of the Jefferson refinancing, the Spurs will only be paying $14-15M in additional spending for Jefferson’s final 3 years:

2011/12: $9,282,000

2012/13: $10,164,000

2013/14: $11,046,000 (player option)

Total = $30,492,00

Minus the upcoming year’s savings ($16-17M) = $14,492,000 – $13,492,000

What's the luxury tax going to be in 2011-12? No one knows. It could be much lower, higher or non-existent. The new CBA will determine that.

And? You don't think the Spurs' front office is aware of that? Do you believe the the Spurs and Holt are looking to pay tax once the Big 3 are gone and they're no longer a viable contender? Would they pull the trigger on something like that if they didn't believe they had enough flexibility?

Bottom line in the NBA is you never make a bad business deal consciously. And the Spurs did just that vastly overpaying an underachieving scrub in order to save a buck or two this year.

Sure, that's usually the case. But they did what they believe they had to for a very short and closing window. They're looking to capitalize on a championship window that doesn't come around often (if at all) for a small market team. They're not looking to punt one of Duncan's final years away.

Was RJ overpaid? Most definitely. But it's about winning now and what they could have got from their exceptions (again, over the cap) wasn't deemed to be better than what RJ offered

And they'll pay eventually. Guaranteed.

They would have paid this year had RJ not opted out. They prevented that from happening - they're putting off payment to a later date in order to give themselves the best and most opportune situation now and under the likely assumption that their future salary won't be teetering on the tax line once the Big 3 run's over.

Sometimes it's not if you pay but when - just look at tax and redistribution ramifications.

And I'll be laughing all the way.

Good for you. I'll have to try going to another team's board to find satisfaction in my life.

Trolls I can respect. This, not so much.

[history2b]

No. Terrible and irrelevant analogy.

Actually it's not. You claimed you need to know who will be available so you can assess what moves to make. You can't because no one knows how things will shake up this season. Period. But you hold onto you hand in order to have the chance to make a play. Will anyone in this league, I'm talking every single one of the 29 other teams, touch Jefferson's contract now? no.

But you already know that the resigning and restructuring of RJ's contract was a stupid move all the way around? Interesting.

Of course. If he was overpaid, it was a bad deal. You can sit high and mighty in the first year of the restructuring priding yourself on the great move your franchise made in saving a couple of bucks in taxes this one season but in year 4 when a washed up 34 year old Jefferson is hobbled on the bench sucking the team for $11Million you'll still be singing the praise of the 2010-11 luxury tax savings extravaganza presumably right?

And? You don't think the Spurs' front office is aware of that? Do you believe the the Spurs and Holt are looking to pay tax once the Big 3 are gone and they're no longer a viable contender? Would they pull the trigger on something like that if they didn't believe they had enough flexibility?

The Spurs aren't contenders anyway, lol. Was the 2010 sweep of an ass kicking not wake up call enough for you? How many more times do you have to watch your Spurs fail miserably in the playoffs to understand this fact. I bet that if Tim was 50 years old playing in a wheel chair you'd be one of those fan boys claiming "Hey if Tim's out there on the floor we still have a shot."

Worse case scenario you let RJ's contract expire at the end of the 10-11 season and you wipe your hands clean and save even more money that could be appropriately spent on players worthwhile, whether it was your own free agents or through the MLE. Overpaying underachieving scrubs never works out for the better. Never.

Sure, that's usually the case. But they did what they believe they had to for a very short and closing window. They're looking to capitalize on a championship window that doesn't come around often (if at all) for a small market team. They're not looking to punt one of Duncan's final years away.

Was RJ overpaid? Most definitely. But it's about winning now and what they could have got from their exceptions (again, over the cap) wasn't deemed to be better than what RJ offered

You're not winning now. End of story.

They would have paid this year had RJ not opted out. They prevented that from happening - they're putting off payment to a later date in order to give themselves the best and most opportune situation now and under the likely assumption that their future salary won't be teetering on the tax line once the Big 3 run's over.

Sometimes it's not if you pay but when - just look at tax and redistribution ramifications.

It won't matter. And at the end of the day they'll have shot themselves in the foot for their future in order to stubbornly and delusionally believe they still had a shot now. This is play out for all to see and know shortly. Guaranteed.

[ChumpDumper]

lol why does lakerfan care so much about the Spurs?

[history2b]

lol why does lakerfan care so much about the Spurs?

I care about basketball first and foremost and can talk about the game all day.

What do you want me to do? Find a Laker board and say "Hooraaay we're the best, we're number one, woo hoo!"

I came here at the challenge of a Spurs fan on the ESPN board who claimed I was "afraid" to come here and post on this board. So here I am, doing what I do, which is talk about the game of basketball without a filter, honestly and openly. Sit back and pay close attention to what I have to say and you'll stand to learn a lot.

[ChumpDumper]

What do you want me to do? Find a Laker board and say "Hooraaay we're the best, we're number one, woo hoo!"

Why not? That's all you are doing here.

I came here at the challenge of a Spurs fan on the ESPN board who claimed I was "afraid" to come here and post on this board. So here I am, doing what I do, which is talk about the game of basketball without a filter, honestly and openly. Sit back and pay close attention to what I have to say and you'll stand to learn a lot.

Frankly, I already knew that many lakerfans are s.

[history2b]

Why not? That's all you are doing here.

Frankly, I already knew that many lakerfans are s.

ChumpDumper I'm officially making you history2b fanboy #1. Man_in_Black almost sealed it but fizzled at the last minute.

Get ready cause it's going to be a long season.

[ChumpDumper]

ChumpDumper I'm officially making you history2b fanboy #1. Man_in_Black almost sealed it but fizzled at the last minute.

Ah, insecure lakerfan needs to act like he is in control and can actually dole out official les on a spurboard.

Get ready cause it's going to be a long season.

So you are going to continue trolling a spurboard because you want to make it personal with spurfans like you did on the ESPN boards and you think that being a fan of a basketball teams gives you some kind of magical power on the internets.

Good luck with that.

[senorglory]

Frankly, I already knew that many lakerfans are s.

Apparently, there's some truth to this stereotype.

[Seventyniner]

The Spurs aren't contenders anyway, lol. Was the 2010 sweep of an ass kicking not wake up call enough for you? How many more times do you have to watch your Spurs fail miserably in the playoffs to understand this fact. I bet that if Tim was 50 years old playing in a wheel chair you'd be one of those fan boys claiming "Hey if Tim's out there on the floor we still have a shot."

When the Lakers got swept in 1999, they won the le the next year.

When the Spurs got swept in 2001, they won the le 2 years later.

How do you know that a sweep completely destroys a team? Anything can happen, and that's what keeps fans following the sport. If you insist that the Spurs have no chance, so be it. Just don't expect Spurs fans to agree with you, even if you brand your opinion as "fact" or "truth".

[dbestpro]

I care about basketball first and foremost and can talk about the game all day. .

Ok, what are the three most common types of screens in a motion offense?

....and for your bonus question what type of offense is a shuffle offense?

[Blackjack]

Actually it's not. You claimed you need to know who will be available so you can assess what moves to make. You can't because no one knows how things will shake up this season. Period. But you hold onto you hand in order to have the chance to make a play. Will anyone in this league, I'm talking every single one of the 29 other teams, touch Jefferson's contract now? no.

No, I was correct: terrible and irrelevant analogy.

Not sure if you're from LA or just the typical front-running , so maybe there's some inherent lack of knowledge when it comes to burden of proof (if the glove don't fit...), but you suggested the Spurs were crazy for what they did.

The burden of proof lies with you to provide evidence that they were in fact crazy. Simply suggesting such without anything to back it up only makes you look like a or in over your head.

Of course. If he was overpaid, it was a bad deal. You can sit high and mighty in the first year of the restructuring priding yourself on the great move your franchise made in saving a couple of bucks in taxes this one season but in year 4 when a washed up 34 year old Jefferson is hobbled on the bench sucking the team for $11Million you'll still be singing the praise of the 2010-11 luxury tax savings extravaganza presumably right?

Overpaying a player doesn't mean the deal was bad or not the right thing to do under the cir stance. I was against the trade for RJ to start. I've been one of the biggest critics of his fit on this team. I've also come to believe the Spurs' logic was sound in restructuring his deal the way they did.

Why do I believe that? Because I followed the money and looked at the outside opportunities and probabilities as best I could.

Playing some good percentages -- as in, given their options and the probabilities of -- I've yet to hear or see you suggest anything better.

The Spurs aren't contenders anyway, lol. Was the 2010 sweep of an ass kicking not wake up call enough for you? How many more times do you have to watch your Spurs fail miserably in the playoffs to understand this fact. I bet that if Tim was 50 years old playing in a wheel chair you'd be one of those fan boys claiming "Hey if Tim's out there on the floor we still have a shot."

Are the Spurs a favorite? No. Are they a contender? Yes. Can they win without a solid trade? I don't believe so.

The Spurs beat the No. 2 seed last year without playing on all cylinders and ran into a hot team and bad matchup. There's no real great separation between 2-8. And to the notion that a team that gets swept the prior year is devoid of any chance to win a championship the following year?

Who knows ... maybe the reigning champions have their franchise player and All-Everything get injured, miss the playoffs and the team they swept the prior year wins it all.

Nah ... that could never happen.

Worse case scenario you let RJ's contract expire at the end of the 10-11 season and you wipe your hands clean and save even more money that could be appropriately spent on players worthwhile, whether it was your own free agents or through the MLE. Overpaying underachieving scrubs never works out for the better. Never.

Worst case scenario is you let Tim's final year(s) go by without doing everything in your power to win it all one more time.

You're not winning now. End of story.

I don't play and the season hasn't even started yet, so it's kinda not 'end of story.'

It won't matter. And at the end of the day they'll have shot themselves in the foot for their future in order to stubbornly and delusionally believe they still had a shot now. This is play out for all to see and know shortly. Guaranteed.

The only guarantee is your detachment from reality when it comes to basketball and finance outside of your LA team.

Seems to me you'd rather have your team make the perfect move rather than make the best move possible under the cir stance.

But I guess that's what happens when you're gifted an All-NBA big man that takes you from first-round fodder to back-to-back champions.

lol Lakerfan.

[duhoh]

bahaha history is getting crapped on. to us, you're a troll in a forum of trolls. raise yo game son! at our existing trolls are funny/entertaining.

i like how he's making all of these ridiculous statements saying how stupid it was to trade away pretty much a fossilized kurt thomas + bruce bowen for richard jefferson.

blackjack, you need speak no more