RJ's Contract Details

[DPG21920]

So, can you please summarize what you are trying to say Chump. I honestly have lost track.

[ChumpDumper]

So not only do you argue when you don't have the facts, you fail to observe every point in the argument.

But we were talking about the same post.

If you have another post that says the fourth deal is fully guaranteed, by all means post it. You just proved you had the same information as I did.

[ElNono]

Not really. That remains to be seen. I already said it might just be kicking the can down the road, but it might not.

So how do you know it doesn't change much if it remains to be seen?

[Chieflion]

Except for the game blogs, I wonder which thread has gone up to this many pages before. It is incredible, tbh.

Of course ElNono and DPG combined for 260 posts, which is about 10 to 11 pages. Chill, guys.

[ChumpDumper]

So how do you know it doesn't change much if it remains to be seen?

Three or four years does not change much because Tim and Manu's deals will be gone.

If you are going to argue they will be there and as large or larger than before, go ahead. I don't think they will be.

[ElNono]

Except for the game blogs, I wonder which thread has gone up to this many pages before. It is incredible, tbh.

Of course ElNono and DPG combined for 260 posts, which is about 10 to 11 pages. Chill, guys.

Thanks for extending it. We just can't wait for the games.

[DPG21920]

Wii Ballin. But Chump, can you please summarize your take the RJ situation.

[ElNono]

Three or four years does not change much because Tim and Manu's deals will be gone.

If you are going to argue they will be there and as large or larger than before, go ahead. I don't think they will be.

I'm of the opinion that if RJ ends up repeating seasons like the last one, then you want to get rid of him as soon as possible, regardless of available cap space (or whatever the rules are at the time).
In that sense, the earliest you can have him as a tradeable asset the better.

[ChumpDumper]

Wii Ballin. But Chump, can you please summarize your take the RJ situation.

I already did. It was pretty clearly stated.

[ChumpDumper]

I'm of the opinion that if RJ ends up repeating seasons like the last one, then you want to get rid of him as soon as possible, regardless of available cap space (or whatever the rules are at the time).
In that sense, the earliest you can have him as a tradeable asset the better.

Sure, but if they had that agreement in place before he opted out (who knows when), they had to stick to it or never be trusted by any player or agent in any negotiation ever again.

RJ's leverage was not opting out. After that, it was all a matter of trust.

[Chieflion]

Sure, but if they had that agreement in place before he opted out (who knows when), they had to stick to it or never be trusted by any player or agent in any negotiation ever again.

I see Chump knows about the political side of the argument.

[Blackjack]

Chump's what 'argue' meant.

[DPG21920]

We all know the political side of the argument. Hence my handcuffed comments.

[DPG21920]

I already did. It was pretty clearly stated.

Can you link me to the summary post?

[Chieflion]

We all know the political side of the argument. Hence my handcuffed comments.

So you are just arguing for the sake of rehashing your opinions? It sure looks like it from this thread.

[ChumpDumper]

Can you link me to the summary post?

Did you miss this?

As I see it, RJ did do the Spurs a favor by opting out and the Spurs rewarded him with probably one more year than they really wanted to give him. They may have only kicked the can down the road when it comes to luxury tax payments, but having the time to figure something out has its own value.

[ElNono]

Sure, but if they had that agreement in place before he opted out (who knows when), they had to stick to it or never be trusted by any player or agent in any negotiation ever again.

RJ's leverage was not opting out. After that, it was all a matter of trust.

Right, and my opinion is that what was offered as part of that agreement was more than it should have.

[ChumpDumper]

Right, and my opinion is that what was offered as part of that agreement was more than it should have.

Great.

[DPG21920]

So you are just arguing for the sake of rehashing your opinions? It sure looks like it from this thread.

Nope, the arguments were brought in a different direction. Are you in here to rehash about me rehashing?

[DPG21920]

As I see it, RJ did do the Spurs a favor by opting out and the Spurs rewarded him with probably one more year than they really wanted to give him. They may have only kicked the can down the road when it comes to luxury tax payments, but having the time to figure something out has its own value.

So what is your basketball take, since this is basketball.

[Chieflion]

Nope, the arguments were brought in a different direction. Are you in here to rehash about me rehashing?

How was it different? Summarize your opinion, thanks. Basically, all you said was that 4 years and 38.8 million was too much, which I agree with but it was based on maximizing RJ's wants and the Spurs trying to reduce luxury tax hit.

On the basketball court, Bobby Simmons? I can't comment on that seriously. Has that guy even got a contract offer yet?

[Blackjack]

Right, and my opinion is that what was offered as part of that agreement was more than it should have.

I'm not a fan of RJ and not ecstatic about him being here for another 4 years but I can't fault the Spurs too much for the number they offered. I think they were pretty well aware RJ was the best they could do because of the cap and short window in which they have to win (not to mention counting on an expiring contract to net you the right piece midseason to put you over the top has to be in the same percentage of landing Bosh this summer). I don't think that contract probably looked all that outlandish with the knowledge of all the people that were going to miss out on free agents and how the Spurs would more than likely be left without a legitimate player to replace RJ with.

Don't like, but I can't hate them for doing it, either. Rock and and hard place ... kinda is what it is -- a big ol' MEH . . .

[ChumpDumper]

So what is your basketball take, since this is basketball.

Why should I pretend professional basketball isn't a business?

[Chieflion]

I'm not a fan of RJ and not ecstatic about him being here for another 4 years but I can't fault the Spurs too much for the number they offered. I think they were pretty well aware RJ was the best they could do because of the cap and short window in which they have to win (not to mention counting on an expiring contract to net you the right piece midseason to put you over the top has to be in the same percentage of landing Bosh this summer). I don't think that contract probably looked all that outlandish with the knowledge of all the people that were going to miss out on free agents and how the Spurs would more than likely be left without a legitimate player to replace RJ with.

Don't like, but I can't hate them for doing it, either. Rock and and hard place ... kinda is what it is -- a big ol' MEH . . .

You wanted a battle between the underrated. You got it now.

[DPG21920]

How was it different? Summarize your opinion, thanks. Basically, all you said was that 4 years and 38.8 million was too much, which I agree with but it was based on maximizing RJ's wants and the Spurs trying to reduce luxury tax hit.

On the basketball court, Bobby Simmons? I can't comment on that seriously. Has that guy even got a contract offer yet?

Because this is the first time the talks turned more into the Spurs saving money along with more details on how it impacts their future.

LOL at acting like I just said "that is too much money!" and did not explain my thinking.

Why do you care that we are discussing RJ, in an RJ thread, on SpursTalk?

Again, please tell me what you think the difference is in having RJ vs not having RJ from a regular season win perspective and a playoff wins perspective.