Woj: Kawhi Wants Max Contract Extension; No Progress Made in Talks With Spurs

[wildchild]

...but no way the Spurs can let him take a QO next summer. No chance the deal gets done this year, but they have to give it to him next summer...

I know, this is pure speculation but play the "what if" game...
What if Leonard won't receive the max offer/4y next summer, other teams know the Spurs'll match any offer -and offers eat their cap space for three days-, so the Spurs propose a deal less than the max (just because they sign no one but two big name FA, or R.C./Pop leave the Spurs, or whatever crazy reason) why Kawhi won't take his QO and wait to 2007?

[100%duncan]

Spurs are absolutely doing the right thing by waiting. No reason to bid against themselves. With their track record of history and success and not overpaying the "others", despite how good they are, there is no difference with Kawhi.

It's very tough to do what guys like Parsons did. To turn down that extra 4th year at max level. It's an investement in yourself, but risky. Worst case, the Spurs pay him less than they would by matching a 3 year max, and have 3 years to see him "earn" that bigger, longer deal. If he does, the Spurs would be fine paying that money and I'm sure Kawhi would be more than happy to except that from the Spurs.

Hopefully what happens is Kawhi agrees to a 4 year deal with the Spurs before hitting RFA. But if not, no biggie. Those using the logic of " so and so got a big deal and they aren't as good" doesn't mean Kawhi automatically should get that. Just because other teams are foolish, doesn't mean the Spurs should be. The fact the Spurs aren't like other teams in that regard is a big reason they have sustained the success they have.

But the market dictates the player's worth even if he's not supposed to get paid that much. The Spurs have been lucky with the big 3 but don't act like they've made other "superstars" (past spurs players) take less because there have been no superstars other than the big 3 in the era of TD so you are overrating the "superstars always take less for the spurs" card since the truth is that the organization have only been saving bucks for role players before but they have not yet faced a situation like the situation at hand right now with Kawhi, again with the exception of the big 3.

[Russ]

Lakers fans on Twitter getting excited about the Lakers possibly luring him to LA

I've been thinking about this for over a year and I still haven't heard word one about it here in LA.

It's quiet, too quiet.

It makes way too much sense -- Kawhi as a Laker.

The Lakers are desperate and they'll offer the max (and every other inducement they can think of).

[Mel_13]

I know, this is pure speculation but play the "what if" game...
What if Leonard won't receive the max offer/4y next summer, other teams know the Spurs'll match any offer -and offers eat their cap space for three days-, so the Spurs propose a deal less than the max (just because they sign no one but two big name FA, or R.C./Pop leave the Spurs, or whatever crazy reason) why Kawhi won't take his QO and wait to 2007?

Because some team will be willing to give him a three year deal with a player option for year three. That gets him two years at the max and makes him an unrestricted FA in the summer of 2017. No reason to take the QO just to get to free agency one year earlier. The Parsons scenario is the risk that the Spurs assume by not reaching an extension agreement this summer.

[wildchild]

Worst case, the Spurs pay him less than they would by matching a 3 year max, and have 3 years to see him "earn" that bigger, longer deal. If he does, the Spurs would be fine paying that money and I'm sure Kawhi would be more than happy to except that from the Spurs.

I don't know why he would be interested in staying in San Antonio rebuild mode without Pop/Tim/Manu after those three years if he can sign with a contender team for the same or more money in 2018.

[Mel_13]

But the market dictates the player's worth even if he's not supposed to get paid that much. The Spurs have been lucky with the big 3 but don't act like they've made other "superstars" (past spurs players) take less because there have been no superstars other than the big 3 in the era of TD so you are overrating the "superstars always take less for the spurs" card since the truth is that the organization have only been saving bucks for role players before but they have not yet faced a situation like the situation at hand right now with Kawhi, again with the exception of the big 3.

+1

The situations of Tony and Manu in 2004 are really not comparable to Kawhi in 2014. And remember that Tony fought for every penny he got in the extension he signed that summer.

[wildchild]

Because some team will be willing to give him a three year deal with a player option for year three.

Just for the record, I said what if Leonard won't receive that offer...

[Mel_13]

Just for the record, I said what if Leonard won't receive that offer...

Actually you said:

I know, this is pure speculation but play the "what if" game...
What if Leonard won't receive the max offer/4y next summer, other teams know the Spurs'll match any offer -and offers eat their cap space for three days-, so the Spurs propose a deal less than the max (just because they sign no one but two big name FA, or R.C./Pop leave the Spurs, or whatever crazy reason) why Kawhi won't take his QO and wait to 2007?

The Parsons deal was 2 yrs plus a player option for a third.

[Spursfanfromafar]

With the salary cap set to grow quite soon.. giving up the max for Leonard doesn't seem such a bad idea for the Spurs.

[wildchild]

Actually you said:

Sorry, you're right.
I mean whatever offer, after all the teams know the Spurs will match any offer.

[littlecoyotecoin]

Just pay the man.



Duncan received the maximum possible salary for the first 13 years of his career.



Nice to see you come around on this.

Mel, what financial advantage is there to signing him to the extension? I am not sure I've heard of any. At the poker table, you know what they say about "scared money".

Leonard =\= Tim Duncan. I am not sure he's even a Manu Ginobili. He's more than we expected, but I don't know that he's a franchise player. Pop has flattered him, to be sure. But, do you build around him like a Robinson, or a Duncan? I am glad they are not negotiating out of fear of losing him next year. He is a great player, but if we are going to be in rebuilding mode, I don't want to be hamstrung by him, either. I am sure they will pay him, but on their schedule. If the extension screws up their rebuilding plans, I totally understand their hesitance.

Make him earn his walking papers this year by carrying us to 6. If he does, and out of spite wants to spurn us next year by walking, so be it. If he can't make the expected leap this year, then all the better we didn't commit.

Lastly:

http://www.physioadvisor.com.au/1493...sioadvisor.htm

I'm not sure that's a thing of the past, and won't be surprised to see it get worse. I don't think we'll be seeing him play the kind of minutes that Tim had as a youngster. I think Pop may always have to monitor his minutes like he has done with Tim as an old man. Except, well, he's a kid. You would like to be able to run him out there 40 minutes a game like Parker did/does sometimes. I just don't feel we'll be able to do that with him without him breaking down, but who knows. I'm probably very wrong.

[scanry]

Tim signed a max deal in 03 also.

You're right. Tim signed a $122 mil/7 yr contract in 03.

[Budkin]

The Spurs don't have to pay right now... they can wait another season, take a better look at Kawhi's progression and eventually match anything thrown at him when he's a RFA if they want to keep him.

Then again, the Spurs can't stop saying he's the future of the franchise, so now it's time to show him the money.

This. They need to not around and take care of Kawhi.

[Mel_13]

Mel, what financial advantage is there to signing him to the extension?

First, I wasn't comparing him to Duncan, merely replying a posted comment.

As to your question. There is no financial advantage, at least for the first three years of his new deal, for the Spurs to sign him to an extension this summer rather than a new contract next summer. There are, as has been discussed in many previous threads on this subject, significant advantages for the team to wait until next summer. My point, in those threads and this one, is that waiting comes with risks. Many choose to dismiss those risks, but I believe that they're real and that the Spurs would be well served to avoid those risks. I said so long before the details of the new TV deal were known, and I feel even more strongly now that we know the actual numbers.

[Mel_13]

Sorry, you're right.
I mean whatever offer, after all the teams know the Spurs will match any offer.

Everyone believed that Houston would match any offer for Parsons. It just takes one team, the Lakers come to mind, that's willing to tie up their cap space for 72 hours.

[skut_farkus]

Kawhi getting max?

[DPG21920]

+1

The situations of Tony and Manu in 2004 are really not comparable to Kawhi in 2014. And remember that Tony fought for every penny he got in the extension he signed that summer.

The biggest difference is that Kawhi is no where as close, IMO, to Tim/Manu/TP from a "centerpiece" perspective. There is infinitely more risk with him than those 3. That's where I don't get people saying its automatic. Especially when the Spurs don't have to bid against themselves.

[BG_Spurs_Fan]

First, I wasn't comparing him to Duncan, merely replying a posted comment.

As to your question. There is no financial advantage, at least for the first three years of his new deal, for the Spurs to sign him to an extension this summer rather than a new contract next summer. There are, as has been discussed in many previous threads on this subject, significant advantages for the team to wait until next summer. My point, in those threads and this one, is that waiting comes with risks. Many choose to dismiss those risks, but I believe that they're real and that the Spurs would be well served to avoid those risks. I said so long before the details of the new TV deal were known, and I feel even more strongly now that we know the actual numbers.

Perhaps the stumbling block could be the still undecided smoothing mechanism of the salary cap raise. If they decide to do so, which is likely, then Kawhi's max extension would be based on the 2015 max ( right? ) and thus - bigger than the expected 5 years/90 mil, which would also make it quite significant even in the new post-TV deal salary cap world for a player who's not projected as a franchise type even by his greatest admirers.

[Darius McCrary]

We're gonna lose him.

[100%duncan]

The biggest difference is that Kawhi is no where as close, IMO, to Tim/Manu/TP from a "centerpiece" perspective. There is infinitely more risk with him than those 3. That's where I don't get people saying its automatic. Especially when the Spurs don't have to bid against themselves.

Because those three had each other, while Kawhi is already proclaimed as the future of the franchise. The pressure in signing Tony or Manu are nowhere close to reclaiming and making sure Kawhi stays.

[Mel_13]

Perhaps the stumbling block could be the still undecided smoothing mechanism of the salary cap raise. If they decide to do so, which is likely, then Kawhi's max extension would be based on the 2015 max ( right? ) and thus - bigger than the expected 5 years/90 mil, which would also make it quite significant even in the new post-TV deal salary cap world for a player who's not projected as a franchise type even by his greatest admirers.

Any extension Kawhi gets this summer will be based on the 2015 cap, regardless of any smoothing agreement. While it's true that we don't know what the 2015 numbers will be, they will certainly be less than they will be in 2017 or 2018

[DPG21920]

Because those three had each other, while Kawhi is already proclaimed as the future of the franchise. The pressure in signing Tony or Manu are nowhere close to reclaiming and making sure Kawhi stays.

There is absolutely 0 pressure to make sure Kawhi stays. At worst, they have him this year and he signs a QO (not happening). So real worst case scenario he signs a Parsons deal next year and the Spurs match so they have him this year, plus 2 more years and then can easily sign him later too if he earns it.

[Mel_13]

The biggest difference is that Kawhi is no where as close, IMO, to Tim/Manu/TP from a "centerpiece" perspective. There is infinitely more risk with him than those 3. That's where I don't get people saying its automatic. Especially when the Spurs don't have to bid against themselves.

Kawhi is nowhere close to any previous version of Duncan, but 2014 Kawhi compares quite favorably IMO, to 2004 Tony and 2004 Manu when those two were negotiating their first post-rookie deals.

[spurraider21]

The Spurs don't have to pay right now... they can wait another season, take a better look at Kawhi's progression and eventually match anything thrown at him when he's a RFA if they want to keep him.

Then again, the Spurs can't stop saying he's the future of the franchise, so now it's time to show him the money.

don't expect anything to get done. our FO is just a bunch of gutless worms

[wildchild]

Make him earn his walking papers this year by carrying us to 6. If he does, and out of spite wants to spurn us next year by walking, so be it.

If a team sign a player extension contract is not only because they want locking him up for the longest possible length of time, they want to make him feel comfortable with the franchise, keep him happy/motivated, they want him to focus only on his game and winning.
It makes sense to lose the best SF in the league after Lebron/KD/Melo ...