Are you on acid there son?
When I rag on Duncan, I'm dismissed as just being 'Walton', but now according to you, I've never called him out?
You're about as consistent as Parker when it comes to calling people out timvp
Get some sleep, this forum re-designing thing has you tired and cranky.
Well if Parker and Duncan sucked with the rest of the team, how are you going to hold that against Parker? The team folded ... not Parker.
If you use that logic, the Spurs might as well trade away everyone on the team.
P.S.
What happened to Canada's finest making a San Antonio appearance during the summer? I guess you got scared.
Again.
Actually, there was a tragic occurence if you really must know....we'll leave it at that ok?
Sorry, should have called but I had other things on my mind.
As for the Parker thing, look you know I'm a Tony supporter but fans kill me on this one. We'd be ing and ing if we cheered for a team that didn't even make these kind of commitments- see the LA Clippers for instance- but the bottom line is that Peter Holt has, in the last two summers, (the 64 million to Parker included) agreed to spend 238 million dollars on three players alone. To me, that's called building and rebuilding a winner and really ing looking out for your fans and your city. Yet now people are ripping Holt for not spending 4 million more? You see where I'm going? NHL owners have made those mistakes and now the sport is literally on ice. The NBA is heading towards the same fate if every new contract is negotiated under the premise that "I want what he got". We've got zeros like Eddy Curry looking for max dollars now and wastes of carbon like Allan Houston making max money.
Why isn't anyone blaming Tony's agent?
Because he's right. He'd be doing the Spurs a favor be letting Parker accept a $66M deal. On the open market, Parker is a max player.Why isn't anyone blaming Tony's agent?
Condolences.Actually, there was a tragic occurence if you really must know....we'll leave it at that ok?
I blame Parker's agent. Tony should be happy with the $64M and sign. Tony needs to think about his long-term future. Six years with a team that you know is going to have Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili and going to contend. Six years of insurance. Six years of security. God knows what is going to happen with the CBA, maybe a potential strike, etc. Just take the money.
We can all say the extra $2M doesn't make a difference to the Spurs, but that's not the point. They set a limit -- they need to stick to it. You can't let players and agents push you around. Or else it will become ridiculous, if the Spurs would have offered $68M, then I guarantee that Fleischer would be holding out for $72M right now. He's trying to get the most he can get. And I'm not sure that's in Tony's best interest.
What's better, six years/$64M or potentially getting injured this season, having a horrible year, a lockout, lower contracts or whatever else might happen.
If Tony doesn't sign, I don't blame the Spurs -- I blame Fleischer. $64M is more than enough.
I don't think there's anyone to blame. Yet.
There's a reason he went to the press with three days left.
Now all we need to do is see if someone blinks.
I think someone will.
Right now Bibby is better than Tony Parker.
Parker is quicker, a better defender and has the ability to make Bibby look BAD one on one (and has). But thats NOT the point.
Bibby is the more well rounded PG. He is a better distributor and generally has risen to the occasion more often than Parker has.
In 2002 he stepped up EVERY SINGLE series, not just against LA. Sure he was a bit off in 2003, but the Kings were missing their best player in Cwebb. In 2004 he played very well in certain games, but again he wasn't perfect -- but neither were the Kings with a choking Peja, no BoJax, a 50% Webber, and still taking it to Game 7 vs Minnesotta. Sure some guys choked, but I don't consider Bibby to be one of them.
If Parker can make his jumpshot more reliable, get to the line more and hit his FTs, and be a bit more consistent overall he can be better than Mike Bibby.
But as of now I think Bibby is the better player in the grand scheme of things.
Exactly. You've got a smart woman there timvp, you should listen to her more often.We can all say the extra $2M doesn't make a difference to the Spurs, but that's not the point. They set a limit -- they need to stick to it. You can't let players and agents push you around. Or else it will become ridiculous, if the Spurs would have offered $68M, then I guarantee that Fleischer would be holding out for $72M right now. He's trying to get the most he can get. And I'm not sure that's in Tony's best interest.
The league's salaries are spiraling out of control right now. Players are demanding salaries that they aren't even close to deserving. Just because some fool GM will pay Tony max dollars doesn't mean he's earned it yet.
There is a looming power struggle coming between management and the players and things don't look good for the next CBA being hammered out by next year right now. Players are getting paid way too much and on top of that they're pouting and demanding trades while still under contract. It's coming to a head and unfortunately it looks like there'll be a lockout next year.
All this to say that the timing ing sucks. We're the favorites to win the le this year and I have a feeling Tony may come to his senses and sign an extension. If we win it all this year only to suffer a lockout the next, that would totally blow.
Parker is doing the right thing. Homeboy deserves a max contract. PERIOD. The NBA is a business Kori. Last time I checked, Parker doesn't sleep with Manu and Tim. Tim got his and Manu got his. Now its Parker's turn. He is completely justified in holding out for the max or close to it. Dude is not going to get hurt and if he does, he is so damn young he has plenty of time to recover and come back. Last time I checked, San Antonio was not a major free agent draw. Why would Parker want to stay here? Pop screams at him. Pop rags on him. Pop tried to sign Kidd. Parker needs to take every fricking penny Holt has.
I don't feel sorry for the Spurs. They want to be in the business of basketball then ing pay up. Popovich is the head that signed Rose and Rasho to stupid long term deals and neither one of them is worth a . Why should Parker settle? Because of a ring? What guarantees a ring? Not Tim and Rasho.
As for Manu, dude is overrated because he is the Olympic Gold Man. Lets see if he can ave. over 10ppg this year.
This whole thing causes a problem. Parker needs touches because he needs to keep his value. Manu needs touches to make up for his contract. Tim well, uh... he is the MVP... and what about the rest?
Pop is taking this team into another season with turmoil. No backup pointguard, your starter is going media on his organization... The Spurs should just pay up.
I blame Pop and Peter.
Remember, its a PLAYER'S LEAGUE.
Besides, Parker has been using a fricking lone star card the last 3 years while the Spurs won a championship, they are a consistent winner, the organization is making money off of his ass...
Not only do they need to pony up for the upcoming years, they ought to reimburse him for the crap he has done in the past that has enabled this organization to do the things it has. MAXIMIZE!
Whoa, some of Sequ's points were not onlt relevent but potentially viable...
Good Talk
Since Tim Duncan's rookie year the free agents the Spurs have signed away from other teams to long term contracts have been Brent Barry and Radosoft Nestero . That, despite having offering max contracts and playing alongside Tim Duncan for the next 6 years. As much as you guys want to debate whether or not Parker should get paid $64 mil versus $64.05 mil the cold hard reality is that the San Antonio Spurs cannot afford to lose real talent. The town just cannot attract top level free agent talent. Whether or not Parker is a top 5 or a top 10 point guard if they lose him, then they are going to be hard pressed to replace him.
Now you may say they can draft a replacement. Perhaps. But the success of international players in the NBA has sparked a boon in the international scouting efforts of every franchise in the league.
About the only way the Spurs lose Parker and come close to making up for what they lost next summer is if they work out a sign and trade. But that's a big IF.
Again, the young man in 22 years old, has 3 years of NBA starting experience, plenty of playoff experience, and he has improved markedly every season. 22 years old.
In the past I argued for pursuing cap flexibility because of DRob's impending retirement and because I wanted Duncan to have real talent surrounding him through the rest of his prime. Now the Spurs have that talent.
ing lock him up and be done with it already.
Word.
That's the thing. Who knows where this could end up if the Spurs concede a few million?Or else it will become ridiculous, if the Spurs would have offered $68M, then I guarantee that Fleischer would be holding out for $72M right now.
Smart basketball decisions with an emphasis on fiscal responsibility = a quality team.
We should sign Tony during the off season now that negotiations are over now.
The best thing about TP not signing is that I'll win a vBookie dollar! WOOHOO!
Edit: Stupid me, I forget about the odd. That'll be vBookie $4 for me. That will be almost enough to buy a vBookie lunch!
To all of those arguing that players are overpaid.
Go sign a replacement then, that's right, you can't. Maybe YOU think there getting too much money but until there's another guy or two available that will equal Shaq, Kobe, TD, KG's contracts, they're worth whatever the they want. Being a GM is basically keeping up with the Jones's, and Kupchak's, McHale's, Buford's, etc... What THEY pay DOES dictate what you have to pay to keep that level of talent around.
I'm new to this group, but come on people! The Spurs management has to deal with a financial limit at some point. They offered what they felt they could at this time and no more. They still have the option to match later if Parker proves himself. Those of you who think that's already happened are lively a fantasy. He's had some great games, but he's also had some considerable down periods. It's business. If he comes through this season and gets a big offer, the Spurs can match it. If he sucks, we can let him go somewhere else. Where's the down side?
Welcome to the forum, northerner@heart.
If that is their mindset, then that makes sense.
But I think their mindset is if they can get him for a bargain this summer, they'll do it. If not, they'll go into next summer and hope that no one overpays for Parker because they just won't match anything.
Exactly. You actually have a good point for a minny fan.
Exactly.
" the bottom line is that Peter Holt has, in the last two summers, (the 64 million to Parker included) agreed to spend 238 million dollars on three players alone. To me, that's called building and rebuilding a winner "
That's why it seems so stingy that they're letting 2 million dollars keep them from signing parker. "oh no, i just spent 238 million dollars. 240 is inconceivable!!!!!" considering the way parker came on at the end of last season, with his assists going way up and his leadership improving, and how hard he's worked on his game in the offseason, 66 million doesn't sound like too much to chisel the best ever group of three spurs into stone. Holt is being too stubborn. parker's market value next year will be MAX no matter how he does this season. he'd have to seriously tank to drop his pricetag. and he's been practicing too much in the offseason to tank. with his speed he'd fit in great on the Mavericks or the Cavs. the spurs are making a huge mistake. they will probably lose him if they don't sign him before halloween. BOO!
The rest of the NBA is currently salivating over Peter Holt's stingy mistake. You still have three days. 2 million more dollars. give it to him or lose him. bottom line.
I don't understand.
Why the Spurs should sign Parker for 66mln. ?
Instead of : Why Parker shouldn't sign with the Spurs for 62mln.?
So do you always play your players whatever they want? If Rasho asks for a max contract, do you pay it? Do you pay any attention to the salary cap at all?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
