RJ's Contract Details

[DPG21920]

They weren't handcuffed before? I'm pretty sure RJ wasn't opting out with out this.

No they weren't hand cuffed before. In fact, if RJ does not opt out they get exactly what they want; RJ to fill the SF need that lines up with the perceived one year window. Then they still get his expiring to possibly trade.

[elec99]

Maybe someone touched on this before, but this deal kinda reminds me of the botched deal the cavs were gonna pull with boozer. I believe he was a restricted FA, so they had a "gentleman's agreement" to make him an unrestricted FA (something like that) with the assumption he would resign, but he jetted for the jazz for a much bigger deal.

My theory (only a theory) is that we also had a gentleman's agreement with RJ. He gets a bigger/longer contract but spurs pay about 9 instead of 15 mil per year. I dont think either party thinks RJ will be at the spurs for 4 yrs, thus no 38 mil. So I think front office is looking at anywhere between 9-18mil, with some other team picking up the other 18 mil.

Sure, spurs could've pulled a boozer and then said see ya as soon as RJ opted out. But they have a little more class than boozer does. That's the theory anyway.

[oligarchy]

The Joe Smith situation also spanned several NBA seasons and several one year contracts in order to build up bird rights.


There's nothing illegal about the Spurs saying opt out and we'll sign you long term or RJ proposing the same.

I didn't say illegal. I said against CBA policy/rules.

Why would John Hollinger write following?
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insid...winners-100726

[The Jefferson re-signing] raised eyebrows in front offices around the league, many of which suspected that there was a prearranged deal between the two parties. [...]

That said, we have no smoking gun that there was any kind of prearranged deal between the Spurs and Jefferson. We don't even have a smokeless gun. All we have is the cir stantial evidence above, as well as two other pieces of information:

1. The Spurs don't sign bad contracts.

2. This is the worst contract of the summer.

If there's no CBA problems, why couldn't they have said it was pre-arranged from the beginning? Why would Hollinger even worry about a smoking gun if they are free to discuss contracts before July 1st?

[Obstructed_View]

If there was a handshake agreement between RJ and the Spurs, I can't see any difference between the Boozer/Cavs agreement which was a violation of the rules.

If the NBA decides to investigate, they'll look at what the Spurs got for their 40 million dollars and decide they've been punished enough.

[MannyIsGod]

No they weren't hand cuffed before. In fact, if RJ does not opt out they get exactly what they want; RJ to fill the SF need that lines up with the perceived one year window. Then they still get his expiring to possibly trade.

So they weren't handcuffed but RJ was still going to be here. Geez, I can how RJ being here and RJ being here are two completely different scenarios.

[oligarchy]

Being here for 1 year - 15.2 million -- possibly trade midseason, or wave buh-bye at the end of the season.

Being here for 4 years - 40 million -- 4th year fully guaranteed at ~11 million. LOL.

Nope. NO difference in those two scenarios.

[DPG21920]

So they weren't handcuffed but RJ was still going to be here. Geez, I can how RJ being here and RJ being here are two completely different scenarios.

If you can't see how an expiring RJ being here for the perceived one year window at 15M is different than him being here for 4 years/40M, I can't help you.

[MannyIsGod]

I didn't say illegal. I said against CBA policy/rules.

Why would John Hollinger write following?
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/insid...winners-100726

Oh you didn't say it was illegal you said it was illegal.

What exactly did you think I meant by illegal? Its not like I was saying the FBI was going to come tear down Pops door.

If there's no CBA problems, why couldn't they have said it was pre-arranged from the beginning? Why would Hollinger even worry about a smoking gun if they are free to discuss contracts before July 1st?

Or if there are CBA problems perhaps you can direct me to the part of the CBA that was violated? There very well may be a clause but I'm not familiar with it and it would seem rather ridiculous. You can't negotiate with a player to opt out and resign a longer term deal? That seems like a pretty stupid rule if true.

AFAIK, there was nothing that violated any league rules with Boozer.

[MannyIsGod]

If you can't see how an expiring RJ being here for the perceived one year window at 15M is different than him being here for 4 years/40M, I can't help you.

Its obviously different but you're ignoring that fact that for half of Duncan's remaining tenure (maybe the entire duration if there is a work stoppage) Richard Jefferson was going to be here.

[MannyIsGod]

As far as Joe Smith and Carlos Boozer, the only thing that was illegal was Joe Smith and the Twolves being stupid and signing an agreement regarding the 3 one year deals.

[oligarchy]

Are you arguing for the sake of arguing? If you want to argue, call your mom on the phone and say, "I know who my dad is." Then when she says, "nuh uh," you say "uh huh." Continue on with this diatribe for a few minutes. It'll be like you posting here a few times.

[MannyIsGod]

Are you arguing for the sake of arguing? If you want to argue, call your mom on the phone and say, "I know who my dad is." Then when she says, "nuh uh," you say "uh huh." Continue on with this diatribe for a few minutes. It'll be like you posting here a few times.

Butthurt poster is butthurt.

Its not my fault you were wrong.

Better luck next time.

[Obstructed_View]

Butthurt poster is butthurt.

Its not my fault you were wrong.

Better luck next time.

No, confused poster is confused, because you're not making any sense at all. Do you have a point?

[oligarchy]

lol, calling someone butthurt, when they are really butthurt because they can't refute anything. "I win!"

You crack me up stubby. "I WIN! I WIN!" "I don't prove anything, I WIN!"

Now, go do your homework and find out why Hollinger would use the term "smoking gun."

[MannyIsGod]

lol, calling someone butthurt, when they are really butthurt because they can't refute anything. "I win!"

You crack me up stubby. "I WIN! I WIN!" "I don't prove anything, I WIN!"

Now, go do your homework and find out why Hollinger would use the term "smoking gun."

Oh I missed the part where you proved that what the Spurs and RJ did was against the CBA. Hollinger used the term smoking gun to point out they didn't have any evidence that the Spurs had a prearranged agreement with RJ.

Is reading comprehension that difficult? At what point does Hollinger state that what the Spurs did was against the rules?

[MannyIsGod]

If there was a handshake agreement between RJ and the Spurs, I can't see any difference between the Boozer/Cavs agreement which was a violation of the rules.

If the NBA decides to investigate, they'll look at what the Spurs got for their 40 million dollars and decide they've been punished enough.

My point is that you're both wrong. Its not a violation of the rules. The Boozer situation was not a violation of the rules and this situation was not a violation of the rules.

You think Gund was going to violate the rules then go on the record and say in the media "Hey Boozer just renigged on our agreement that violated the rules - I just figured I'd throw that out so I can lose draft picks like my friend McHale!"?

[DPG21920]

Its obviously different but you're ignoring that fact that for half of Duncan's remaining tenure (maybe the entire duration if there is a work stoppage) Richard Jefferson was going to be here.

No I am not. The entire reason I don't like it is bc he is here 4 years instead of 1.

[oligarchy]

Yes. Reading is apparently difficult for you. Scoreboard!

[MannyIsGod]

No I am not. The entire reason I don't like it is bc he is here 4 years instead of 1.

I understand that, but this segway was in reference to the handcuffed comment. The Spurs were always handcuffed by RJ. I get that people wanted them to go out and get someone this off season but if they had a deal with RJ lined up then that was never a possible situation.

We can argue day and night about possible trades but neither are scenarios were the Spurs are necessarily free to do whatever they want. You needed either a team willing to trade for Jefferson who has someone better or a better fit.

They weren't going to be able to bring anyone in the following offseason because if they extend Tony they'll have no room and if they don't extend Tony then we're ed either way.

The only scenario lost is the possible trade due to his expiring but that was never a sure thing to bring back a more talented player or a better fit.

[Muser]

[dbestpro]

Being here for 1 year - 15.2 million -- possibly trade midseason, or wave buh-bye at the end of the season.

Being here for 4 years - 40 million -- 4th year fully guaranteed at ~11 million. LOL.
.

To be fair..

1 year 15.2 + 7.6 mil tax penalty = 22.8 mil or
4 year 40 mil = 17.2 mil for 3 years above 22.8 existing due......

Average real cost for new contract 5.7 mil for 3 years.

[gilmor]

Second year. That is all.

Yup.. Just 2 years and Spurs will go lottery. Actually I would think is just 1 year unless Splitter proves me wrong.

[oligarchy]

I understand that, but this segway was in reference to the handcuffed comment. The Spurs were always handcuffed by RJ. I get that people wanted them to go out and get someone this off season but if they had a deal with RJ lined up then that was never a possible situation.

We can argue day and night about possible trades but neither are scenarios were the Spurs are necessarily free to do whatever they want. You needed either a team willing to trade for Jefferson who has someone better or a better fit.

They weren't going to be able to bring anyone in the following offseason because if they extend Tony they'll have no room and if they don't extend Tony then we're ed either way.

The only scenario lost is the possible trade due to his expiring but that was never a sure thing to bring back a more talented player or a better fit.

So, they couldn't use the MLE on someone next year? ~6 million is less than the ~9 million they will pay to Jefferson to next year. That's 3 more million to put on Tony's contract. Seems logical.

[oligarchy]

To be fair..

1 year 15.2 + 7.6 mil tax penalty = 22.8 mil or
4 year 40 mil = 17.2 mil for 3 years above 22.8 existing due......

Average real cost for new contract 5.7 mil for 3 years.

You are calculating a tax penalty and salary they did NOT have to pay. He opted out on July 1st. I'm not sure if you saw that. They didn't owe him a salary. They could've signed MannyIsGod for a min contract and saved 8 million.

[anonoftheinternets]

Yes. Reading is apparently difficult for you. Scoreboard!

u dint answer the question... why is "smoking gun" = illegal? can u pull up the CBA and show the clause where it said its against the rules?