You're right about Gordon. I thought he has signed an extension. That said, I don't think they're situations are very different at all. Gordon wasn't even rumored to be look at offer sheets, so I don't see his contract as being particularly market-driven.
I'd inflate that money. Both Murray and Schoder have the same narrative going for them. Dennis got starting PG money. He is yet another example of guys getting extensions based on what they're projected to be rather than just what they are.
Yeah, that's sort of what I mean. I don't believe the market works the way you seem to think it does. I don't think there's anything wrong with the Spurs seeing things how you see them. It makes sense to not give Murray more than proven PGs got given he hasn't shown yet that he's better than them. But how is that "fair" from Murray's point of view? Does it really make sense for him to agree to a deal when his value is at it's nadir? Not really. If he's truly concerned about his health and long-term security, then I'd certainly understand giving a lot back to make it work. But outside of another injury, I have a hard time seeing him getting less than $12 Million or so if he waits, no matter how badly he plays.
I think teams want guys PATFO covets. It'll be one thing if the Spurs stop marketing Murray as a future star and start to bench him. But as long as they go into the off-season of 2020 trying to bring him back, he'll have suitors.
Anyways, we'll probably have to agree to disagree on what "breaking the bank" is. We are talking about two or three tiers lower than the max here.
In truncated that to save some space.
I don't have an issue with Siakam's contract. I do think that it'd be hard to see his 2018-2019 production truly being worth his contract if he doesn't get any better than he is now. 17/7/3 isn't worth $32 Million a year. There was speculation and there was narrative, given his importance to Ujuri and the need for the Raptors to maintain a future after Leonard left. You can make a really strong argument for waiting until next summer to see how Pascal progressed. Two years of production with the second being minus Leonard's and Green's gravity would take out most of the speculation.
It's not hard to compare Wiggins' situation at all. He was paid under the assumption that he'd get better, and he didn't. His contract never looked great, but there was a chance Wiggins could have fixed his issues and not become a top-three worst contract in the league.
I don't think they'd be too happy with less-than-DeRozan production at $34 Million a year. I don't think many folks blame them for doing it. But it was all downside with the best-case scenario pretty much being getting your money back.
I understand where you're coming from, but that doesn't make it a good deal for Murray. I think the real answer here is an extension doesn't make sense for either side unless the other gives in a lot to make it happen. The Spurs shouldn't pay Murray as if he's already a great bet, and Murray shouldn't lock himself into a deal that assumes he's not going to have a very good year. Maybe one side will end up regretting not getting an extension done.
Exum's a terrible comp. He certainly started off with the hype, but he was a walking injury issue, and even be the time he got his extension very few folks believed in him. He had an anti-narrative going for him. Best guy in your corner is probably Winslow, since he got less than $15M and got his extension based more on narrative than production.
Can't ride with that. It's not simply Pop carrying that hype train. You're correct that Pop's comments sparked the chatter, but since then, the national media has caught on. It doesn't hurt that Murray's had a number of his best games on national television. It also only helps DJM's stock how Pop treated him after the injury. If Murray comes out and is just a little bit better than he was before, but a lot more consistent? The train is not going to stop. And maybe it shouldn't, because we're talking about a two-time All-Defensive player how has a consistent offensive game, an intriguing physical profile and Pop's stamp of approval? It's not a struggle at all to get him over $15 Million a year.
Do you think the Spurs are going to let Murray walk? I just don't see it. Rozier and the Celtics were on the outs before free agency. They just weren't going to keep him. The Bucks could have traded Bledsoe but simply valued him and Mids more highly. It's not like EB lose all his value just because he didn't perform well in the playoffs. Brogdon's injury history played a big role in his value, both to MKE and on the market. That's why the only thing that would really torpedo DJM's value is another injury. ACL injuries no long really carry a stigma like Achilles injuries do. Brogdon has had lingering injuries that have had him miss chunks of multiple seasons. It's a bigger concern for him. Healthy and a few years younger, he'd've gotten quite a bit more -- and MKE would have probably matched.