What would you pay Tony Parker?

[E20]

Sign Parker around 68 Mil 6 years. Parker is a keeper. Spurs HAVE to keep this guy at all costs. PG's are really hard to come by and with a few years Parker could be top 3 PG material.

[Brodels]

Spurs HAVE to keep this guy at all costs. PG's are really hard to come by and with a few years Parker could be top 3 PG material.

At all costs? You keep superstars at all costs. You don't keep support players at all costs.

And what if he's not top-three material in a few years? You're stuck with a core of Parker, Manu, and Duncan surrounded by Rasho and minimum-salary role players.

I understand the need to pay for potential, but he's not a "keep at any cost" kind of player. He could become that kind of player this season. If he does, by all means, sign him for whatever he wants.

[ducks]

you keep him at all cost OR sign and trade him

you can only hope to package rose for a young point
but a team wouild be a FOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL to trade a young point for rose

[E20]

Ok Brodels what if TP had a similar season like last year. Do we sign him? If we don't then who is our PG? Udrih? Barry? Tony Parker is likely going to become a top PG.

[E20]

At all costs? You keep superstars at all costs

Tell that to LA.

[ShoogarBear]

If a point guard is so irreplacable, then explain this:

2004: Chauncey Billups
2003: TP/Speedy
2002: Derek Fisher
2001: Fisher
2000: Fisher
1999: Avery Johnson
1998: Ron Harper/Steve Kerr/Randy Brown
1997: Harper/Kerr/Brown
1996: Harper/Kerr
1995: Kenny Smith
1994: Kenny Smith
1993: B. J. Armstrong
1992: Armstrong/John Paxson
1991: Armstrong/Paxson
1990: Isiah Thomas

The last top-flight point guard to win an NBA championship was 14 years ago. It's certainly nice to have one, but there no need to break the bank for it if your goal is a championship.

[ducks]

Fisher Had Kobe And Shaq 2 Mvp Candiates

[E20]

I only see like 4 PG's that are 'Top 3 PG material' good.

[Marcus Bryant]

Different team structures. Both LA and Chicago had dominant wing players and ran an offense which deemphasized the PG role. AJ was certainly a vital part of the team and definitely a rather solid playmaker. Billups isn't a slouch.

[Marcus Bryant]

Also, (this has been touched on briefly in the thread) the Spurs should be in a rather good bargaining position with Parker since there is the distinct possibility that the maximum guaranteed contract length will be reduced in the next CBA.

[ShoogarBear]

The poiint is that point guard isn't such an indispensible position that you have to pay the max for a player who hasn't proven he is worth it.

All of those guys were solid, but a number of different players in the league could have done the same job.

Same is true of Parker and the Spurs. In fact, if it was up to Pop, you get the feeling he'd rather have a Derek Fisher (plays defense, dumps the ball to the big men, can hit open threes) than a "classic" point.

[Nikos]

Same is true of Parker and the Spurs. In fact, if it was up to Pop, you get the feeling he'd rather have a Derek Fisher (plays defense, dumps the ball to the big men, can hit open threes) than a "classic" point.

Well if thats the case, Parker is neither a shooter nor a classic distributor. Not really something Pop would seem like he would want

Parker seems like he can improve in his decision making a bit, he can become a better passer aside from being just a 'drive and dish' type of guy.

If Parker proves to be an elite talent this season and improves his scoring efficiency, output, and consistency while also continuing to improve his PG skills then you can bet he will be important to the Spurs future.

[picnroll]

Parker's is an adequate playmaker and should and needs to improve some there. But his greatest attribute is his scoring ability. That's where he's streaky and needs to improve for Holt to show him the money. If Parker becomes a near Isiah Thomas level scorer he gets max. And the Spurs need a scorer. With Pop's heavy emphasis on defnse he's willing to sacrifice scoring at a couple of positions (SF and C) in exchange for defenders. That throws an extra scoring burden on a couple of the other positions (PF and PG).

[SequSpur]

Same is true of Parker and the Spurs. In fact, if it was up to Pop, you get the feeling he'd rather have a Derek Fisher (plays defense, dumps the ball to the big men, can hit open threes) than a "classic" point.

Huh? You can't be serious.

[Marcus Bryant]

Also, Parker is one of the Spurs' top 3 players. You lose him and this team definitely will suffer a scoring hit.

[Brodels]

Ok Brodels what if TP had a similar season like last year. Do we sign him? If we don't then who is our PG? Udrih? Barry? Tony Parker is likely going to become a top PG.

You offer him a fair contract. If he has a similar season, you pay him what an above-average point guard makes. You don't pay him superstar money. And just because you happen to think that Tony is "likely" to become a top PG doesn't mean that he actually will. He needs to improve.

He didn't improve by leaps and bounds last season. It's arguable that he didn't improve much at all aside from a slight improvement in his playmaking capabilities. He was essentially the same offensive player that he was the year before.

He needs to improve this season. If he's likely to become a top three point guard, he should be taking significant steps towards improving in his fourth year in the league.

Tell that to LA.

What's your point? They didn't want Shaq back because they didn't feel he was healthy and motivated to enough to earn his contract. That situation has nothing to do with this one.

And besides, if you're saying that even superstars shouldn't be kept at all costs, how can you possibly think that Parker should be given the max?

I only see like 4 PG's that are 'Top 3 PG material' good.

Right. That shows that you can win without a top point guard if you have other good players. The Spurs don't have the strong offensive small forwards to get the job done, but they might be able to get a player like that in a sign-and-trade or with the MLE in the future.

The Spurs are better off with Parker. But don't pretend that they don't have a chance without him. The first championship team won with Avery Johnson at point guard, a declining Mario Elie at two guard, and a small forward with serious medical issues.

Also, (this has been touched on briefly in the thread) the Spurs should be in a rather good bargaining position with Parker since there is the distinct possibility that the maximum guaranteed contract length will be reduced in the next CBA.

That's what I'm hoping. If all goes well, Parker accepts a six-year deal at fair market value right now.

Parker's is an adequate playmaker and should and needs to improve some there. But his greatest attribute is his scoring ability. That's where he's streaky and needs to improve for Holt to show him the money. If Parker becomes a near Isiah Thomas level scorer he gets max. And the Spurs need a scorer. With Pop's heavy emphasis on defnse he's willing to sacrifice scoring at a couple of positions (SF and C) in exchange for defenders. That throws an extra scoring burden on a couple of the other positions (PF and PG).

Exactly. If he improves to the point where he is a max kind of player, he should get max dollars.

I'm a Tony Parker fan. He's one of my favorites. But that doesn't mean that the Spurs should throw any sense of fiscal sanity out the window because he could possibly someday be a top point guard. The Spurs are good because they've managed their money well. They need to continue doing that. Overpaying players will make it harder to win two, three, and four years down the road.

Look at Malik Rose. The Spurs overpaid him, and you can bet that they would love to have a do-over on that.

[E20]

Brodels always hands my ass to me in debates. .

[Brodels]

[picnroll]

Point of reference Gasol did get a max deal. Gasol's value is greater than Parker's.

http://www.commercialappeal.com/mca...3225044,00.html

Gasol inks 6-year extension

Deal totals some $86 million; forward says he's up to the challenge it brings

By Ronald Tillery
Contact
October 2, 2004

Pau Gasol finally received what he has worked the past three seasons trying to earn.

Respect.

That's how the 7-foot Spaniard equated his lucrative contract extension with the Grizzlies.

Gasol, 24, signed a six-year deal that sources say is worth the maximum amount the Grizzlies were allowed to offer. The contract totals an approximate $86 million -- a figure computed within guidelines of the NBA's collective bargaining agreement.

So with Cottonwoods Golf Course at Tunica's Grand Casino serving as the backdrop, Gasol teed off on the notion that money will suddenly define expectations for him on the court.

"It's not about money. It's about respect and the team showing that they want you to be here for a long period of time as the cornerstone. That's all you can ask. I'm real happy and proud," Gasol said Friday before participating in the Memphis Grizzlies House Golf Classic.

"I know I'll be the guy everyone is going to criticize. I'm ready for that. I love the pressure. I live for it. I love to be in the (position) that everyone is looking at. That's how I am. So I'll react pretty good."

Contract negotiations went relatively smoothly once Gasol hired an agent in August. He entrusted Arn Tellem's SFX Sports Group after a mutual separation with agent, Mark Termini during the spring.

Gasol's new contract makes him the NBA's second-highest foreign player behind Dallas' Dirk Nowitzki.

The Griz are counting on Gasol to show the steady improvement he's displayed since joining the NBA in 2001.

"His play in the Olympic Games this summer displayed his value, while showcasing his talent to people throughout the world," Griz president Jerry West said. "Pau is a dynamic player, and we are happy to have him in Memphis as the cornerstone of our franchise."

West has made it no secret that the franchise would build around Gasol.

The 2002 Rookie of the Year has led the Grizzlies in points and rebounds in each of their three Memphis seasons -- the length of Gasol's NBA stint. Gasol's career averages are 18.1 points, 8.5 rebounds and 50 percent shooting.

In four playoff games with the San Antonio Spurs last season, Gasol averaged 18.5 points, five rebounds and 57 percent shooting. He led the Grizzlies during the regular season by averaging 17.7 points, 7.7 rebounds and 1.7 blocks.

"He's one of the premier power forwards we have in the league," Griz coach Hubie Brown said. "And then you put the factor of his age into that. What we have is our team leader and our go-to guy. I'm happy for Pau and his family. Also, I'm happy for the Grizzlies because what we now have is a stabilizing force. He knows his worth."

Gasol's role as an iron man shouldn't go understated.

He has only missed four of 246 possible regular-season games in his career. A sore right foot near the end of last season snapped Gasol's streak of 240 straight games.

The streak was the league's sixth longest at the time.

Gasol now has another chance at longevity in a Grizzly uniform.

"I've been here from the beginning, when this team was winning 23 games," Gasol said. "And it's nice to be a part of the progress that this franchise is making. It makes me appreciate it more. ... I can't wait to start playing. I'm going to go out there and prove to everybody that I deserve what I got. They won't ever doubt me as a player and as a professional. I'll produce as much as I can."

-- Ronald Tillery: 529-2353

[Mark in Austin]

The Spurs can match any offer for Parker next summer, so if they don't get the deal they want now and are willing to wait, fine.

As long as they are prepared for the potential distractions this can cause (1) in the media a la Kidd and Kobe, and (2) with team chemistry if Parker is pissed and doesn't handle it well.

[spursfaninla]

Good point Mark. Parker has shown he will air his dirty laundry in the media in the past. If the spurs lowball him, or perhaps even wait until after the season to re-up with him, he might be disgruntled this year. That would not be very smart; rather, taking advantage of the chance and playing out of his mind would potentially make his lots more dough...

[baseline bum]

Parker has made leaps and bounds in his game each of his three years in the league, so there's nothing that leads me to believe he has topped off. The Spurs are completely screwed if they lost him. They'll never get anything better than him in a sign and trade, and if they lose him straight up they have no point and no money to go get one. I think it's pretty likely that Tony gets a max offer from someone next season, and the Spurs will have to match it or kiss being compe ive in this league goodbye.

[ducks]

even if spurs got lucky and drafted a point guard
it would take the rookie atleast 2 years
tp was not the typical rookie point guard
and teams are scouting better over there now then before

[xcoriate]

The point beingg is that the consequences of losing TP are diabolical...

The championship dream would be over without him. The spurs have to make it worse. It's all well and good to hope for a fair and reasonable price.

However without TP the spurs are in the ter an extension is by far the best option.

Pay up Holt.

[picnroll]

One scary fact is the number of teams that may have max salary cap space in 2005. Not factoring in trades, the cap limit and the new CBA, I count NJ, Chicago, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Atlanta, Charlotte, Washington, Denver, Portland, Seattle, Utah, Golden State, Clippers. Some have players to sign like Chicago, Portland, Utah, some don't need PGs like Washington and probably Clippers and Portaland, some teams are unattractive like Atlanta, Charlotte but there are teams that are serious threats who could use a good PG like Denver if they don't re-up Miller, NJ if Kidd is traded, Cleveland.