Reply With Quote
People here just don't understand how much NBA players get paid under the new(ish) CBA. Its why they're still always so hung up on Patty Mills contract.
You don't have to be an All-Star to get that money, so Murray doesn't have to be an All-Star to get it. He does have to be a good player, better than some more skeptical folks believe he'll be. But you can't simultaneously think Murray is a building block and believe he'll get a small (especially smaller enough to matter) contract. That's the disconnect my post was talking about. All of those examples I listed are non-stars who were considered to be core pieces nonetheless by their clubs. That's why they apply to Murray's caseHow am I shifting goal posts?
And, fwiw, you can expect Murray to be serviceable without being an all-star. To be really honest, my biggest expectations regarding Murray are for him to become a Pat Beverly type player. That's not worth 100/4, tbh.
Also, let's say he does become an all-star type player. The chances of him becoming that next season are slim to none. So he's not very likely to get 100/4 next offseason, no matter what you say.
It's moving the goal posts to go from "Well Murray won't be a DPoY/All-Star next year, so he won't get that much" to, "Murray isn't even going to be a top-four player on the team, so he won't get that much." You're setting a completely different standard for how good Murray needs to be and thusly how reasonable it is to project him as significantly less than $100M. The consensus here isn't that Murray is an All-Star, but it is that Murray is the defensive anchor with a burgeoning offensive game. That get $100 Million. Disagreeing with that consensus is understandable and defensible. But then that's a completely different argument than we were having. As long as you keep vacillating between these two different standards, you're going to keep letting every counter argument slough off.
To put it (yet) another way:
Premise 1a: Murray won't be an All-Star next year -- That's fine.
Premise 2a: The only players who get $100M/4 deals are All-Star (caliber) players -- This is wrong as demonstrated by the numerous counter-examples.
Conclusion a: Murray won't get $100M/4 -- This is invalid.
To contrast:
Premise 1b: Murray won't be good enough to be considered an essential piece to the young core -- This would be fine if you actually made this point..
Premise 2b: The only players who get $100M/4 deals considered to be essential pieces to a young core -- This is almost completely true.
Conclusion b: Murray won't get $100M/4 -- This would be valid.
1a and 1b aren't the same, and trying to move from the first to the second is moving the goalposts.
People here just don't understand how much NBA players get paid under the new(ish) CBA. Its why they're still always so hung up on Patty Mills contract.
Dude, stop beating around the Bush. I quoted this comment from you:
So, what type of production are you expecting from Murray to think he will get that kind of money?
Mills is part of that summer when folks thought contracts were going to be bigger than they ended up being. It really didn't play that way after that. Murray is not a 100/4 player under any cir stance.
Lol he’s going to average close to 20 points and 7 rebounds per game
Well, if he does, I have no problem with paying him 100/4.
20 ppg after spending a year off the court with an ACL injury? Some of you people have some unrealistically high expectations. Murray will be rusty and for sure playing carefully because of the knee. If he can average 12 to 15 ppg, it should be considered a success.
Totally agree...patfo should take care of him in that sense. That's why I don't understand how a big part of ST is so much inclined to see him starting from the beginning of the season...
White, just before hitting the play off wall, showed enough to gain his starting point guard spot and actually he's hands down our best point guard simply cause, differently from DJM, he sees the court and the movements of his teammates and plays accordingly.
Forbes has probably been our best play off guard and played a season improving step by step...and his outside shooting is, as of now, essential to the team. He's become a deserving starter...and only reason he could came from the bench could be if FO is so impressed by Walker progress in playing game and outside shooting and confident in health (his problems in that regard last season limited his role...but they were nowhere near to DJM problems) to see him as a potential star needing to shine from the start of the season.
On the other side, DJM comes from an injury that ended his season and put big questions on his future...also a blind man could see that his coming back to the game must come with absolute prudence...obviously his playing time must be limited till reaching a comfort zone that would help him to be back to where he was and possibly improve. In that sense, starting from the bench playing most of the time, at least from the beginning of the season, with players that he already knows and played with and that are the best to complement his skills (Mills, Forbes, Belli...aka the best and proven outside shooters we have) could be the best way to let him re-gain his confidence in the game and in his skills. That said, I see no problems for patfo to pay him next off season...its obvious they consider him a big part of the future and DJM looks to have a very good relationship and confidence in our team and fo. But it takes time to figure out at what level is your game and reliabilty and at what point is your career after such unfortunate season...
Totally agree, acl is a killer for players improvement. Before acl murray was just a decent young player with great D but still with no shoot which in 3pt-shooting era is a must have for point guards. Im in shock how u overvalue spurs young players. If spurs want to have some young guys who can become an all star in future they need to tank or trade for some high picks. And I still dont understand why spurs management dont want to sacrifice 1-2 seasons for rebuilding. Just imagine what we could do with luka doncic, tatum or mitc . They would become a fcking beast under spurs coaches.
Btw as long as i think about trading derozan, the idea of getting aaron gordon and mo bamba and/or isaac is a great deal. We get some young pieces and with loonie, white, samanic, keldon, poetl spurs future seems to be definetely brighter than now. Mo bamba is very interesting, people think he’s a bust but under our coaches i think he would become a solid center. Orlando get another almost all star caliber player next to vucecic who they recently signed for 4yrs.
There is also a posibility to add cavs to this trade and get kevin love if cavs would be interested to get some our picks to continue rebuilding. Starting 5: white/loonie/gordon/lma/love and deep bench.
Last edited by spurspl; 07-17-2019 at 05:57 AM.
Yeah, but you're in a thread where a huge chunk of the justification for trading DMDR comes from believing the team needs to do what's best for DJM. DeRozan literally fits with every other piece of the young core just fine. It's just Murray that's an issue. There's no way he'll be that important and not get a $100-Million contract.
I had already answered your question. That was in a response to you, but you went off the rails thinking Draymond had already been an All-Star and DPoY when he was really just a young player who had shown potential.So, what type of production are you expecting from Murray to think he will get that kind of money?
Mills' contract is only bad because he fell off. His projected role (that he doesn't play but was thought he would play) totally warrants his contract now.
Of course you don't. But Murray would get a max with that production. I don't know how many times I have to tell you that for you to get it. This is once again you vacillating. If Murray is a star for the team, a 20-point scorer, he'll get the max. That's what that threshold means. But if he's less than that, a good core player who looks like he'll keep getting better, than he'll get a huge, non-max deal. That's where $100 Million comes into play.
DDR cannot he traded to receive multiple players. Too many contracts already. DDR for one contract + picks makes more sense, if that’s possible. Best case would be DDR + Mills and get back one contract plus the picks.
He ain’t getting traded
Sure he could. They'd just have to cut Metu, and eat that small contract.
yeah, most likely bc spurs management is re ed and they prefer to make another weak performance in playoffs instead of moving forward (make some huge trades and/or tank for top picks)
LaMarcus wants a buyout?
https://www.blazersedge.com/2019/7/1...-antonio-spurs
Tell uncle and nephew's media sycophant (Jabari) to go fly a kite.
Lol,that clown tries desperately to stay relevant,he shows up in a Portland Morning Show,mentions that the Spurs could look to get some assets for Aldridge and in the end of his speculation,LMA already asked for a buyout/got waived and joined Portland.
Jabari Young.Worthless,speculative,biased piece of .
The easy answer is trade him to the bulls for porter and an unprotected 1st. But I think I’d prefer trading him to the magic for Gordon and Okeke. Spurs solidify the PF and SF positions for the future that way plus all of our good young guards. I think Okeke will become a very good player...as in a solid starter at least.
On board with Gordon/Okeke. Basically getting a lottery pick in that deal with Okeke, as well as a starting PF. Lots of athleticism in that lineup.
The Spurs were incredibly high on Murray coming into last year. IF he comes in and starts living up to their expectations, which is probably less than 20 ppg and whatever else, then Chinook is absolutely right that they'll lock him up and 4/100 is probably in the ballpark. Maybe a bit high but not by much.
forget about athleticism from okeke. Hes coming back from acl injury. better than him would be bamba or isaac
I think it was about a year after the deal, someone posted that his annual salary was like 112th in the NBA, and his production was about the same, somewhere in the one teens. It's also not like you can NOT pay Patty using Bird rights, and turn around and use that money on someone else. It wasn't cap room they used to sign him.
This, I'm afraid...
Dude, what a ing chicken you are.
You said this:
"I" as in "you". YOU are "really" expecting Murray to make 100/4. You didn't write "people in this thread", you wrote "I". So I ask you again, please answer with a direct response. None of this "what people believe" , what YOU believe. And with countable, verifiable numbers like 16, 7 and 7 or 18, 8 and 6. None of this "consistent double-digit scorer" bull . A consistent double-digit scorer can average 10 ppg or 20 ppg.
Last edited by DAF86; 07-17-2019 at 01:07 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
