Pop & RC - take note as Mr. Presti gets it

[TJastal]

Backroom dealing. Given the Spurs's history, no way they resign Jefferson to a long-term deal. But what probably happened, but can't be officially said, is that the Spurs asked Jefferson to opt out and they guaranteed they would resign him for a longer deal with more money so they could use the savings to sign Splitter and stay under the cap.

Spurs are hoping to make the same deal with Duncan most likely. Instead of paying him one large payment this year, spread it out over a couple years so you can sign players now and avoid salary cap issues.

Spurs are not Dallas. They can't absorb bad contracts and make due with paying hugh salary cap penalties.

Spurs could have just used Bonner's money to sign Splitter and paid the got damn tax 1 got damn year and don't pretend otherwise.

Holt is worth 80m according to USAToday. Considering Jerry Buss @ 380m spent 21m in tax in 2010 (and regularily spends over the tax) I think Holt could (for one measly year) pay 1/5 of that, or 4m... which would have been roughly the difference in Jefferson's salary. And had the spurs not resigned Bonner, that difference becomes even smaller, to almost paying no tax at all.

[ChumpDumper]

I agree, playoff conteders like Minnesota, Toronto, New Jersey, and Golden State would have all paid him considerably more.

Nobody said anything about paying him more.

[rascal]

This post could have been written in 2008.

Instead, others decline more rapidly than Mr. Ginobili.

It was written in 2008.

[ChumpDumper]

Spurs could have just used Bonner's money to sign Splitter and paid the got damn tax 1 got damn year and don't pretend otherwise.

Holt is worth 80m according to USAToday. Considering Jerry Buss @ 380m spent 21m in tax in 2010 (and regularily spends over the tax I think Holt could (for one measly year) pay 1/5 of that, or 4m... which would have been roughly the difference in Jefferson's salary. And had the spurs not resigned Bonner, that difference becomes even smaller, to almost paying no tax at all.

That's really bad math.

[Maddog]

Backroom dealing. Given the Spurs's history, no way they resign Jefferson to a long-term deal. But what probably happened, but can't be officially said, is that the Spurs asked Jefferson to opt out and they guaranteed they would resign him for a longer deal with more money so they could use the savings to sign Splitter and stay under the cap.

Spurs are hoping to make the same deal with Duncan most likely. Instead of paying him one large payment this year, spread it out over a couple years so you can sign players now and avoid salary cap issues.

Spurs are not Dallas. They can't absorb bad contracts and make due with paying hugh salary cap penalties.

I would wager cash that this is the truth and would also suspect that this was done way before the summer.

[rascal]

By the time Splitter is as good as Gasol, the big 3 will be long gone. My question is could the FO have picked differently to help the Spurs right away (in 2007) instead of 5 or 6 years later to have an impact.

Darrell Arthur, Mario Chalmers or Luc Mbah a Moute would probably been better for the Spurs than Hill.

Budinger probably would have been better for the Spurs than Blair

Landry Fields and Jordan Crawford probably would have been better for the Spurs than Anderson.

I do understand that a lot of other teams passed on the above players too, I also don't think that the FO did a stellar job with the Spurs picks.

It's not the draft that is killing the spurs it's the lack of key trades to upgrade the talent level and good free agent signings. Too much standing pat with the same roster year after year and watching the key players get older.

[TJastal]

That's really bad math.

Not really.

I rounded everything down, not up. Figuring in the stinginess factor of Peter Holt I figured this would only be appropriate.

[ChumpDumper]

Not really.

I rounded everything down, not up. Figuring in the stinginess factor of Peter Holt I figured this would only be appropriate.

It's bad math because it's stupidly simplistic. One can tell you have never run a business and never will.

lol appropriate

[rascal]

There is absolutely no way the Spurs would get rid of Manu. If the Spurs traded Manu or let him sign somewhere else then i and others would cancel our season tickets. Gervin, Robinson, Duncan, Ginobili and Parker have been the face of the Spurs franchise and should not be traded. Yes, I know Gervin was traded but look what happened to the team after that. Four years of bottom dwelling.

You are a fan of a player and not of the team.
If the spurs get back players that make them better then trading manu is a good deal. Manu is way overrated here.

The guy has always been very inconsistent, can hardly log big minutes like the true stars of the league and has been injured 4 years in a row during the playoffs now. he is on the wrong side of 30 and will be in rapid decline as a player.

[ChumpDumper]

You are a fan of a player and not of the team.

Many of the people who actually pay money to the team feel the same way about Manu.

[TJastal]

It's bad math because it's stupidly simplistic. One can tell you have never run a business and never will.

lol appropriate

Why is a simple math formula bad math? And stupid on top of that. For a guy ing about simple, maybe you should try words other than "bad" and "stupid'...

[ChumpDumper]

Why is a simple math formula bad math? And stupid on top of that. For a guy ing about simple, maybe you should try words other than "bad" and "stupid'...

The words simply fit you so well.

Thanks for the confirmation.

[K-State Spur]

Fcould have traded RJ's expiring for just about anything they wanted,

Only if 'what they wanted' was an equally bad - but longer term - contract.

[Fabbs]

Originally Posted by Rump Humper

Quite a few of them, actually.

You're acting like it's a maximum contract.

I agree, playoff conteders like Minnesota, Toronto, New Jersey, and Golden State would have all paid him considerably more.

nicely done.

[ChumpDumper]

nicely done.

Who said anything about paying him more?

[TJastal]

The words simply fit you so well.

Thanks for the confirmation.

Such sophistry you have.

[ChumpDumper]

Such sophistry you have.

There's nothing deceptive about what I said.

It's quite straightforward.

Do you even know what sophistry is?

[TJastal]

There's nothing deceptive about what I said.

It's quite straightforward.

Do you even know what sophistry is?

Yes, and I think it fits you quite well. You've accomplished your goal here, which was to distract the forum readers from the hard facts I presented to your little word games. Congrats.

[ChumpDumper]

Yes, and I think it fits you quite well. You've accomplished your goal here, which was to distract the forum readers from the hard facts I presented to your little word games. Congrats.

Nope, your "hard facts" consisted of your opinion based a stupid little equation you made up that means absolutely nothing.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

lol hard facts

[cd98]

Fail, fail, fail. Trading for RJ was a great move, but resigning him was stupid, both before and after the fact. The Spurs drafted a small forward, have a glut of swingmen on a team where the coach loves three guard lineups, and could have traded RJ's expiring for just about anything they wanted, particularly since RJ was playing out of his mind at the beginning of the season.

Also, hasn't the whole RJ-helping-to-sign Splitter myth been debunked? It's been so long since someone tried to use it that I've forgotten.

Splitter was statistically the second best player on the Spurs in the playoffs. If that's not reliable, then I'm not sure what you folks call it.

The only way for the Spurs to get below the salary cap was to get rid of RJ's contract. One can only infer that RJ opted out of his contract on a deal that the Spurs would sign him for multiple years. They'll have more flexibility going forward because of his contract.

And RJ didn't have a bad season, just a bad playoffs. He provided us with decent defense and timely three point shooting. Without his contributions, we wouldn't have won as many games as we did.

Splitter was good in limited minutes. Given more playing time, he might not have been so. I can't say what he would have done, but Pop knows way more than I do.

[ChumpDumper]

Seriously TJ, show me which CEO makes decisions on how much money his business should lose based solely on his personal net worth.

Give us the hard facts.

[cd98]

Spurs could have just used Bonner's money to sign Splitter and paid the got damn tax 1 got damn year and don't pretend otherwise.

Holt is worth 80m according to USAToday. Considering Jerry Buss @ 380m spent 21m in tax in 2010 (and regularily spends over the tax) I think Holt could (for one measly year) pay 1/5 of that, or 4m... which would have been roughly the difference in Jefferson's salary. And had the spurs not resigned Bonner, that difference becomes even smaller, to almost paying no tax at all.

It isn't just about personal income, it's income the team generates. The Lakers will more than pay for themselves. The Spurs, not as much. Small market team vs. big market team. Holt doesn't want to take million dollar losses. I can't blame him.

Bonner was not a bad signing. Look at how much money he makes and it is reasonable when you compare him to veteran players around the league. The problem is that we have higher expectations given the minutes he receives. But again, without his near 50% three point shooting, we don't get the seeding we got. He won quite a few regular season games for us.

[rmt]

Presti had his Bonner-like loser in Green.
Actually younger and more athletic.

Where is he, again?

And who did he get for Green - that's right - Perkins.

It's only logical that eventually the Spurs would run their course and deteriorate. Yes, its tough to watch, but no tougher than watch the 80s Celtics and Lakers teams deteriorate and get run by the younger NBA compe ion. Same thing happend with the Bulls, who disbanded before things got ugly, though we have a hint of how bad things would have gone with seeing Pippen in Portland and Houston and Jordan with the Wizards.

Give Pop and RC the same tools Presti had, and they would have done equally well. As is, Spurs front office is the best in the business at putting together contenders on late first round picks and cheap signings. Good thing for us.

As a side, Phil Jackson is leaving the Lakers when it is obvious that they won't contend anymore. But he remains open to coaching a different team (I'd say Miami so he can yet again coach the best players in the league). Good thing Pop and R.C. aren't opportunists like Phil or the Spurs would soon be run by the Kevin McHales and the Isaiah Thomases of the world and everyone here would respect R.C. and Pop a lot more.

They could have continued to contend by signing Scola, by not resigning Bonner and RJ, and by integrating Splitter.

What makes you think LA won't contend anymore? They get an athletic point guard and they're right back in business.

Scola was a mistake, but in fairness to the Spurs, not another GM other than Houston saw value in Scola, so it's hard to fault them for making that move after the fact.

Jefferson trade was also hailed by everybody as a great move, so again, it's easy to criticize after the fact, but at the time the move was made, most thought it was a great move.

Resigning RJ was a no brainer and shouldn't be criticized. (1) we had no small forward; (2) he opted out so we could pay him more money over several years, a move which allowed us to get under the salary cap and have flexibility to make other moves, like signing Splitter and staying under the cap.

Splitter did play and did okay. He still has a long way to go to be reliable in the playoffs. Hopefully next season.

Better to play SF by committee - Novak, Anderson, whatever scrub they could pick up than pay $10m for the disappearing act that was RJ.

You have a strange idea of what is reliable. IMO Splitter played very well considering the lack of time he had on the court during the regular season.

Bonner's deal isn't that ridiculous. His play was a big factor in us getting the number one seed. Same wth Jefferson. And while they may be to blame for not playing better in the playoffs, they certainly weren't the only ones and Memphis played really well against the Spurs.

A lot of good that #1 seed did them with Gasol/Randolph abusing Bonner in the paint. RJ was a complete disaster in the playoffs. Why do you think MEM played really well against the Spurs? Spurs had inferior interior defense which opened up the perimeter shots.

Bonner and RJ are going to be the cement block around the Spurs neck for the next 3 years.

It's not the draft that is killing the spurs it's the lack of key trades to upgrade the talent level and good free agent signings. Too much standing pat with the same roster year after year and watching the key players get older.

Totally agree.

[TJastal]

Nope, your "hard facts" consisted of your opinion based a stupid little equation you made up that means absolutely nothing.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

lol hard facts

Well why don't u explain exactly why my "stupid little equation" means absolutely nothing.

[ChumpDumper]

Well why don't u explain exactly why my "stupid little equation" means absolutely nothing.

Seriously TJ, show me which CEO makes decisions on how much money his business should lose based solely on his personal net worth.

Give us the hard facts.