Reply With Quote
I could see him having a Gary Nealesque career after the spurs.
If I am his agent no way I take one and one.. just no way. I throw that in RC's face. He needs a multi year deal...even two years with the the third a team option is ok... it no way a one and one... just no way.
I could see him having a Gary Nealesque career after the spurs.
The option would be a PO.
Yea sorry about my mistake. I just think there's no way he takes 1 and 1... I just can't see it. My premise was that he shows in the playoffs obviously. If he's pedestrian he won't raise the interest I think he can raise from some team
About tree fiddy
So you're saying there's a chance for a one year deal?
Last edited by superbigtime; 02-01-2017 at 01:18 PM.
i'm cool if he walks, so long as Mills and Dedmon are resigned. Murray could fill the backup SG minutes on the second unit with Mills, Anderson, Bertans/Lee , and Dedmon.
Murray gets a rotation spot with 18-20 mpg with a chance to really show what he can do.
Don't worry...I'll make sure that doesn't happen.
I'd rather lose Mills than Simmons. Mills is just another in the line of good shooters that has a great year or two and then regresses. Assuming the system encourages ball movement, I think he's easier to replace.
I don't disagree with the logic. The second huge bump in the cap next year probably means that things won't be logical. Boban got what... 3 years/$21M? It's not hard to picture someone throwing some pretty stupid money at Simmons.
If he does re-sign for a price the Spurs are happy with, I don't see him being cut down to a 10 MPG role. It would have to be on of an offseason for them to be able to do that.
it doesn't look like a team can sign and trade a RFA.
In the National Basketball Association, a sign-and-trade agreement is a type of contract (allowed by the collective bargaining agreement [CBA]) wherein one franchise/team signs an unrestricted free agent player to a new contract, only to then immediately trade him to another team (of the player's choosing). This is typically done to enable the player to obtain a higher salary and/or greater number of years on their contract than NBA salary cap rules ordinarily allow the destination team, itself, to provide the player.[1]
Thanks. I'm not infrormed with contract details and CBA.
That makes sense. But what also makes sense is that the most Simmons is likely to earn next year is the MLE, whether than is as part of a one-year deal, multi-year MLE deal or an Arenas RFA deal. The only team that can pay him more than that is SA. So if he signs, say a $40M/4 Arenas deal, he'd get like 5/6/14/15. That's good money, but if he took the one-and-one, he'd give the same next year and then be an RFA without Arenas restriction and another season under his belt. Dude could get Bazemore money.
So that's $75M/5 rather than $40M/4, and he'd have the same starting salary in either case. It would really depend on how he would feel about having another season to prove himself in a bigger role.
Yes, you can S&T RFAs. Even if they had to be UFAs for it to happen, the team could just withdraw the QO in facilitate the move.
Wouldnt that be considered tampering? No?
If manu retires after this season Simmons would probably love a one year deal so he can showcase himself in that role
Didn't they flatten the money/years in the new CBA? Or was it only for teams matching the offer?
I doubt he'd get anything near that though, unless he's phenomenal in the playoffs. Something like Ramon Sessions money - 2/12 mil or 3/20 at best.
in that case once the qualifying offer is withdrawn the player would become an unrestricted free agent and the team can then sign and trade that player??
With whom and against whom? All three parties are aware of what's going on here. It would be the same thing the Spurs did with Neal and Cory, but they'd do an S&T instead of just letting the guy walk. But straight S&Ts for RFAs happen regardless.
Yes, but I also want to say that you can just S&T an RFA. I think the CBA FAQ was just ambiguous there.
I know they were supposed to change the way the Arenas rule worked, but I heard nothing specific. The MLE is supposed to increase, but not all at once. It'll take a few years before it grows to actually reflect the new cap reality.
I think he's gone, especially if he has one memorable playoff game that approaches what he did in the opener. Some scrub team will offer him silly money the Spurs won't match. Given his age I can see Pop giving him the same speech he gave Boban. Go take the money. Simmons, with 5 kids, probably wouldn't even need that speech.
If he under perfoms the rest of the season we may be able to keep him, but then, if that were the case, we might not wish to do so.
thank you for CBA rules clarification.
That's one point and nuance I am not familiar with so I thank your input.
At his age I don't know if it's wise to gamble on himself like that. He could have a down season next, an injury, heck I'd rather it doesn't happen for the teams sake, but he could bomb out without Ginobili (I think that's HarlemHeat37 point mostly about the role he thinks Simms could do well). It's a legit concern bc he's got the short track record.
I have seen young guys just wanting to get their first multi year deal even if it's Arenas type. That's still millions. Bc he's just older though, after that deal is done he likely doesn't get another like it... so it's tough to say. I would not advise him to bet on himself for an even bigger contract after the one year... but maybe he's full of confidence and thinks he can be even better with more opportunities without Manu in the fold for example.
I think he goes for the multi year deal and puts some pressure on the Spurs with some other team offers.
I'm hearing a lot about his age
He'll be the same age as Danny when he got the 4/40M deal... people are overblowing that lmfao
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
