Players that made more money than Tony Parker this season...

[$pursDynasty]

I know I did not make the original comment but the reason it is a good thing is because in order for players t be loyal to you, you have to be loyal to them. A team like the Spurs rarely get a big name free agent. They have to draft and build a team. If you want you guys to stay with the team long term, and sometimes take less money, they have to trust the organization. Part of that trust is rewarding guys for taking less money in the past to stay with the team and help them win 4 of their 5 les.
.

Dre you are making so much sense I am sure this thread will die soon, only trolling treads stay current in ST these days smh

[Malik Hairston]

Wow, you must have missed problem solving skills in school. I showed you 12 players who made more money and gave less production than Parker this season. That doesn't mean there are not tons of other players who make in the $5-10 million range whose contracts are worse than Parker's also (even if all you considered was this year's play). I don't have the time to go through all 450 contracts, but I gave you 10-15 specific ones (out of the top 50 contracts in the league) that were worse. No doubt extrapolation would give you dozens and dozens more. But you would probably have to take a high-school-level statistics class to understand that.

We're discussing contracts based on production vs. salary..even including smaller contracts and extrapolating, he's still bottom 20 at best, probably still bottom 15, and that's generous..

But here's a news flash for you...not sure if you understand this or not. Contracts are not based on how a player is going to perform that season. That's why there are limits on early contracts and why veterans make more. How basic a concepts is that to understand? That's the reason Tim Duncan made $18.7 million when he was putting up like 13 PPG (which dropped in the playoffs). Tim Duncan wasn't an $18 million guy in 2011 and he certainly wasn't a $22 million guy in 2010, but we paid him that for his past contributions. Even if Tim Duncan didn't have a resurgence, that money would have been worth it (even though it wasn't reflective of his level of play at that time...veteran contracts almost never are). We are paying Tony Parker partly for what he has done in the past and partly because when he's healthy he's a top-5 PG in the league. He was leading the MVP race 2 frieking seasons ago, give me a break with this narrative. Please tell me you understand some of this stuff.

Duncan signed an extension after the 2007 le when he was still arguably the best player in the NBA according to most advanced metrics, you imbecile..

Parker signed an extension after the 2014 le when he was one of the only starters in league history to have negative on/off metrics for a championship team..1 of 4 or 5 guards in league history IIRC..signing a net negative player to a 14 mil per year extension when he was clearly beginning his decline is not comparable to signing Tim Duncan after he was still arguably the best player in the NBA..

There's literally no argument for Parker being anything close to a top 5 PG in the league, that's just silly, and at this point, one of the most outrageous statements ever made in the history of this forum IMO..he was literally a bottom 10 starting PG according to virtually any legit metric you can use, and he was historically bad in the playoffs(albeit small sample size, but he's generally a playoff choker, to be fair)..

[Malik Hairston]

Anyways, this thread is stupid, not surprising coming from the OP..

It's like arguing between having Aids, Cancer, ALS, MS, etc..

[SASdynasty!]

There's literally no argument for Parker being anything close to a top 5 PG in the league, that's just silly, and at this point, one of the most outrageous statements ever made in the history of this forum IMO..he was literally a bottom 10 starting PG according to virtually any legit metric you can use, and he was historically bad in the playoffs(albeit small sample size, but he's generally a playoff choker, to be fair)..

When healthy Parker is a top 5 guard in the league. Are you saying he was healthy this season or last year in the playoffs?

Parker was an All-Star last season (coach-voted by the way) AND a 2nd-team All-NBA player. How in the does that make him a bottom guard? Are you honestly this dumb?

[Malik Hairston]

When healthy Parker is a top 5 guard in the league. Are you saying he was healthy this season or last year in the playoffs?

Parker was an All-Star last season (coach-voted by the way) AND a 2nd-team All-NBA player. How in the does that make him a bottom guard? Are you honestly this dumb?

Jesus, enough with this injury ..that's all we heard during last year's playoffs and this year..is it ever going to end?

Parker was fine in last year's regular season..he clearly had a severe drop-off in the playoffs, and had a colossal drop-off this year..that's over 1 year of progressive decline..I actually gave him the benefit of the doubt last year and assumed he was worn out from international play, but he took the Summer off, yet still joined the Spurs out of shape and looking terrible..

I don't know why you're using last year's regular season to defend Parker this year, what the ?..he was horrendous, this year, by any measure, and there's absolutely no reason to believe a 32-year old PG that relies on speed will return to form..hopefully he'll be a positive-impact player again, at least, though..

[Chinook]

Because when you become the type of organization that doesn't pay you well when you are winning championships and a FMVP and also doesn't pay you well after you do, then who in the world is going to want to come play for you? Wow, you proved yourself by being a big part of 2 championship squads (2nd leading scorer and leading assist-man in 2003 and 2005). Then you prove yourself even more by winning a FMVP and outplay Lebron James in the 2007 Finals. Then you carry the team to the playoffs for several years putting up ridiculous numbers in the playoffs (what he did to Steve Nash in 2008 was straight up embarrassing). Then you finish top-6 in the MVP race twice (once leading the pack until you get injured) and have two more top-12 MVP finishes. Then you lead the team back to a WCF appearance, a Finals appearance, and a championship, leading your team in scoring and assists as well as being the only All-Star and All-NBA player on your team, including leading the team in scoring in the Finals and bailing your team out in its only elimination game, something Kawhi just couldn't do this year. And after all of that, you've never been and never will be a top-30 paid player in the league. Ever in your career (which Tony Parker never will). And yet people like you still want us to pay him LESS.

I'm just glad you didn't assert that Tony took less in 2010. I'll give you props for that. Parker has always been a semi star in the same way Kawhi is now. People never quite bought that he was the best player on his team or that he was a franchise corner stone. His stock has fluctuated a lot over the years (with 2011 being its nadir until this season). That's part of the reason why he signed so many extensions, as he wanted to lock in his value rather than better on himself. To his credit, he's always signed at low points in his career (2004, 2010, 2014), so he's not a guy getting fat checks off contract years.

He's always gotten paid off his market value based on the year he signed his deal. Well, until last year. That he's had booms in between his bust cycles doesn't negate the fact that he's been paid as well as he's wanted to be. His current contract isn't even absurd in a vacuum, but it's indefensible in the context of the Spurs holding off on signing Leonard to potentially have cap space.

[K...]

Anyways, this thread is stupid, not surprising coming from the OP..

It's like arguing between having Aids, Cancer, ALS, MS, etc..

It's about on par for 90% of the Parker threads.

There are several reasonable points here:

It's ok to overpay based on past production if you are a small market team

Bad contracts are common in the nba

The exact terms of Tony's decline weren't and still aren't known

To Chinook, what are we trading Parker for? There's virtually no scenario in which another team values Parker as highly as the spurs.

So on it's face a trade would be bad or neutral unless we got back a specific player who would lead to a great impact, or we have a good to better pg replacement already.

Number one is speculative. The spurs have several needs but no glaring holes.

Number two is debatable depending on your opinion of mills and draft available pg.

Trading George hill was great because we had surplus guard talent and for back a glaring need. Trading Parker takes a hole and makes it bigger.

Finally, if Boris diaw is one of your top 5 best players are you really going to trade his best friend? I don't think this is that important because both guys are veterans, but unhappy Boris is a cancer and you may not want to roll those Dice.

[mkurts]

Fail thread .... again

Desperation setting in with the realisation that Porker is just really a pig in disguise

[K...]

Fail thread .... again

Desperation setting in with the realisation that Porker is just really a pig in disguise

Uh, this is getting just strange. Are all people who gain ten to fifteen pounds actually pigs in disguise? Because many people gain weight in their late 20s. Are they really pigs?

Help me here, because I'm scared if pig people.

[SASdynasty!]

It's about on par for 90% of the Parker threads.

There are several reasonable points here:

It's ok to overpay based on past production if you are a small market team

Bad contracts are common in the nba

The exact terms of Tony's decline weren't and still aren't known

To Chinook, what are we trading Parker for? There's virtually no scenario in which another team values Parker as highly as the spurs.

So on it's face a trade would be bad or neutral unless we got back a specific player who would lead to a great impact, or we have a good to better pg replacement already.

Number one is speculative. The spurs have several needs but no glaring holes.

Number two is debatable depending on your opinion of mills and draft available pg.

Trading George hill was great because we had surplus guard talent and for back a glaring need. Trading Parker takes a hole and makes it bigger.

Finally, if Boris diaw is one of your top 5 best players are you really going to trade his best friend? I don't think this is that important because both guys are veterans, but unhappy Boris is a cancer and you may not want to roll those Dice.

Agree with pretty much all of this. I think more importantly for the franchise and the culture you retire Parker here. I don't see him playing too much more than 35-36 because he's got so many miles since he was so young when he came into the league. Can you imagine if we had shopped Robinson around at the end? People will say otherwise, but a winning and loyal culture is important to build. You can look around at all the franchises who have sent away players when they declined and how it messes up the culture that took so long to build. I truly don't see a problem with Parker making a top 40 salary in the league (especially since he never has and never will be a top-30 paid player). It's not that bad of a contract especially with the cap increase coming.

[Spur-Addict]

[K...]

So to sum up. On the pro Parker side you have several valid points


On the anti Parker side you have "he's not worth the contract" which is generally agreed upon and "having to work with the salary cap sucks" which is also agreed upon. It just be so exhausting having to make those two stale arguments.


I agree with Chinook to an extent. The spurs didn't have to make the extension when they did. But it's such a small thing to complain about. The one big free agent we're even remotely likely to get had unique special cir stances. Otherwise how likely is it that cap space would make or break an off season?


Let's wait at least until we know about Duncan and Manu before complaining about cap space. Geez.

[Russ]

Our own TP is number 23 on the All-Time richest NBA players list!

Ahead of the Admiral.



http://www.celebritynetworth.com/list/top-50-nba/