Manu suffers a minor injury

[kaji157]

Manu was older than Parker when he earned $14,000,000 to cost us the 2013 championship. The only players that sacrificed were Duncan & Parker tbh

Stop being delusional comparing one bad year against 3 consecutive ones.
The only overpaid player of the big 3 as of now is Tony, that 45 million dollar contract sucks.

I give you the right hand saying that Manu was not a 14 million dollar player that year, yet, Parker has not been worth his contract for 3 seasons now. THATS overpaid in my book, not a season slump.

Dont get idiotic with me.

[ElNono]

If anything, this is his bonus for being underpaid since 2014, tbh, taking less money so the Spurs could stack the deck and delivering that #5 ring on a broken leg...

Also, testicle surgery isn't cheap, from what I've heard.

[TheGreatYacht]

That same production value has Fathead being worth 75M over the next 5 years.... Lol.

Also has Kawhi peaked at 24/25 years old... Lol.

[ElNono]

You could argue with the numbers, I won't. At the end of the day, the decision is entirely the Spurs, tbh...

And frankly, because the Spurs have his bird rights, and they will sign them with money once they're over the cap, whatever they sign him for won't make any difference as far as FA signings...

If it's a one year deal as rumored, it won't have any impact next season either.

[dabom]

But many stats and eye test all say porker is washed up. We don't need to single out 1 stat.

[GSH]

I posted this in the other thread, but Manu plays almost exactly half-time - 58 games a year, and last year down to 20 minutes per game. That's actually a little less than half the minutes of a guy who plays 74 games, and 31 minutes. His numbers remain pretty good, but they wouldn't if a team tried to play him full-time, and everyone knows it. So you'd have to have two Manus to equal one full-time player with the same kind of production. That would cost $20M per year.

When you look at actual production: minutes, points, rebounds, FTA's, etc., Manu costs just about as much as Kevin Durant. More, actually. And don't discount minutes. Somebody has to play those minutes. A full time player gives you around 2,200 minutes at a high level. Manu gives you about half that.

Manu has ed the Spurs' chances many times with his summer injuries. He better hope this is really a minor injury, or he may finally have ed himself. I like Manu - always have. But I'm not going to pretend that his half-time status shouldn't be reflected in his salary. Or that it doesn't affect the roster.

[ElNono]

I posted this in the other thread, but Manu plays almost exactly half-time - 58 games a year, and last year down to 20 minutes per game. That's actually a little less than half the minutes of a guy who plays 74 games, and 31 minutes. His numbers remain pretty good, but they wouldn't if a team tried to play him full-time, and everyone knows it. So you'd have to have two Manus to equal one full-time player with the same kind of production. That would cost $20M per year.

When you look at actual production: minutes, points, rebounds, FTA's, etc., Manu costs just about as much as Kevin Durant. More, actually. And don't discount minutes. Somebody has to play those minutes. A full time player gives you around 2,200 minutes at a high level. Manu gives you about half that.

Manu has ed the Spurs' chances many times with his summer injuries. He better hope this is really a minor injury, or he may finally have ed himself. I like Manu - always have. But I'm not going to pretend that his half-time status shouldn't be reflected in his salary. Or that it doesn't affect the roster.

This is silly, it's not him handing himself that contract, the Spurs already know how long he can play for and what production they get from that. If anything, the Spurs are smart in being aware of that, instead of riding him like a Joe Johnson or a Wade for 30+ minutes, and getting diminished results for the same money (actually a lot cheaper if we're talking Wade).

Neither of those guys should be playing the amount of minutes they are, or the roles they have.

And I say this after stating the Spurs shouldn't expect Manu to be their best player off the bench anymore.

[ducks]

then why pay him 10 million

[SAGirl]

I posted this in the other thread, but Manu plays almost exactly half-time - 58 games a year, and last year down to 20 minutes per game. That's actually a little less than half the minutes of a guy who plays 74 games, and 31 minutes. His numbers remain pretty good, but they wouldn't if a team tried to play him full-time, and everyone knows it. So you'd have to have two Manus to equal one full-time player with the same kind of production. That would cost $20M per year.

When you look at actual production: minutes, points, rebounds, FTA's, etc., Manu costs just about as much as Kevin Durant. More, actually. And don't discount minutes. Somebody has to play those minutes. A full time player gives you around 2,200 minutes at a high level. Manu gives you about half that.

Manu has ed the Spurs' chances many times with his summer injuries. He better hope this is really a minor injury, or he may finally have ed himself. I like Manu - always have. But I'm not going to pretend that his half-time status shouldn't be reflected in his salary. Or that it doesn't affect the roster.

I have to agree with you. I saw some media reporters tweet that someone hit him in the calf. I just hope he doesn't hurt himself for real out there playing at 60-70% capacity at his age.

[SAGirl]

then why pay him 10 million

Because he was worth more than that to someone in this market. That is what this market has done. Plenty others got way overpaid. Someone wanted to pay a 1 year Manu rental a lot to put butts in seats and mentor some youngsters, I imagine. Plenty of very talented youngsters out there that don't compete like they should or have no professionalism. Dare I say even Lakers. They have that D'Bust... doesn't that kid need some mentoring besides Kobe? He's a good passer, it was his best asset together with 3 pt shooting coming into the league. If I were the Lakers, I'd look at Manu for example.

So, Spurs value the same mentoring, the same example, plus they value Manu the person beyond anything that can be expressed here probably. And depending on whether you value the youngsters we have or not, Manu is a great example for them. He does need rest, he does play part time if you will, but he can still play part time at a high level.. and his resting allows Spurs to develop the youngsters they do have, so they have some plan. They already have others ready to soak up the 1200 minutes or so give or take that Manu will leave unplayed out there. And these youngsters are so much the better for having played next to him and learned from him when they could.

I love Manu TBH. I just hope he keeps himself healthy and does right by the team. I really look forward to seeing him play just as much as I look forward to seeing our youngest players develop.

[ElNono]

then why pay him 10 million

Because apparently that's his value in a market that pays Joe Johnson 2/$22m or Wade 2/$47.5m.

Some people will disagree (I actually think Wade is clearly overpaid with that deal), but it's been a crazy market this summer, tbh

[ducks]

it does not effect spurs next season but keeping the 10 million and signing someone next year
manu by your numbers can not be counted on
all I can say is this is more like a thank you contract not paying for his production
I would have rather 7 million go to bobon losing his to pistons and 3 million to manu same 10 million

[DAF86]

$12m should be the realistic value, but Manu will probably give them a discount... think $10m...

18/19 mil son.

[slick'81]

Lmao discount

[ElNono]

it does not effect spurs next season but keeping the 10 million and signing someone next year

It doesn't. Once you don't have cap space, you just don't have cap space. Those 10 mill aren't the ones putting the Spurs over the cap, so it doesn't matter.

If the Spurs want to do anything mid-season, it will have to involve a trade.

[ElNono]

As long as it's a one year deal, the Spurs could give him whatever, it doesn't matter. It's not a contract like Tony's that hamstrung the Spurs ability to retool, tbh

[ElNono]

Also, people need to adjust to the new market realities, and expect accordingly. $10m in this market is a drop in the bucket, that's role player money.

Cap is expected to jump to almost $110 million within 2 seasons. Actual difference-makers (which Manu is not at this point), will be priced accordingly.

[EVAY]

As long as it's a one year deal, the Spurs could give him whatever, it doesn't matter. It's not a contract like Tony's that hamstrung the Spurs ability to retool, tbh

This is silly, it's not him handing himself that contract, the Spurs already know how long he can play for and what production they get from that. If anything, the Spurs are smart in being aware of that, instead of riding him like a Joe Johnson or a Wade for 30+ minutes, and getting diminished results for the same money (actually a lot cheaper if we're talking Wade).

The latter is your quote defending Manu's contract.

I happen to agree with what Manu did - and he had every right to say to the Spurs - "hey- just like you told me it was just business when you didn't let me play for Argentina in 2014, I'm telling you now that an offer from another team showing what I could make elsewhere and saying you need to give me more than you were planning on - is just business.

My only point in quoting your previous quote is to say that what is true for Manu is also true for every player on the team....they didn't give themselves the contracts they are operating under.

[ElNono]

This is silly, it's not him handing himself that contract, the Spurs already know how long he can play for and what production they get from that. If anything, the Spurs are smart in being aware of that, instead of riding him like a Joe Johnson or a Wade for 30+ minutes, and getting diminished results for the same money (actually a lot cheaper if we're talking Wade).

two different arguments. If Manu did get 2/$20m then sure, that's a problem. Not the case here (at least as far as we know).