Ludden: Tim Duncan re-signs (3 years, $30M), Patty Mills re-signs, De Colo signs

[bklynspursfan]

Props to TD. So he basically took the same two-year, $20 million that David Robinson got ... plus a third year option.

My thoughts as well. Now if he could go out the same way that would be freaking awesome....

[TD 21]

Just going off the averages of what each re-signed player reportedly received, adding that to what the previously signed players already received and hypothesizing that Mills got a bump up to about $1.5M, they're at about 65.7M for next season. No one can say for certain exactly where they're at, because we don't know the year one salaries for some of the re-signed players and we don't know the salary period for Mills. That number could be and probably is off, but it's also probably close to the real number.

So the question is: What would him taking $12M annually changed? Either way, they were going to be able to re-sign Green, Diaw, Mills and sign De Colo and either way, they were going to be well over the cap, but under the tax. It's not as if by him taking well below market value he'd pave the way for them to add a significant player. Next off season, depending on a variety of factors, they may well be able to, but they would have been had he got $12M annually anyway. And they probably won't land anyone significant even if they have the space to do so. So he just took less for the of it?

[slick'81]

Just going off the averages of what each re-signed player reportedly received, adding that to what the previously signed players already received and hypothesizing that Mills got a bump up to about $1.5M, they're at about 65.7M for next season. No one can say for certain exactly where they're at, because we don't know the year one salaries for some of the re-signed players and we don't know the salary period for Mills. That number could be and probably is off, but it's also probably close to the real number.

So the question is: What would him taking $12M annually changed? Either way, they were going to be able to re-sign Green, Diaw, Mills and sign De Colo and either way, they were going to be well over the cap, but under the tax. It's not as if by him taking well below market value he'd pave the way for them to add a significant player. Next off season, depending on a variety of factors, they may well be able to, but they would have been had he got $12M annually anyway. And they probably won't land anyone significant even if they have the space to do so. So he just took less for the of it?

somehow dont think timmy cares baout an extra mil or 2

[Mel_13]

Just going off the averages of what each re-signed player reportedly received, adding that to what the previously signed players already received and hypothesizing that Mills got a bump up to about $1.5M, they're at about 65.7M for next season. No one can say for certain exactly where they're at, because we don't know the year one salaries for some of the re-signed players and we don't know the salary period for Mills. That number could be and probably is off, but it's also probably close to the real number.

So the question is: What would him taking $12M annually changed? Either way, they were going to be able to re-sign Green, Diaw, Mills and sign De Colo and either way, they were going to be well over the cap, but under the tax. It's not as if by him taking well below market value he'd pave the way for them to add a significant player. Next off season, depending on a variety of factors, they may well be able to, but they would have been had he got $12M annually anyway. And they probably won't land anyone significant even if they have the space to do so. So he just took less for the of it?

Regarding Spurs salary situation for 2012-2013:

Ginobili: $14.1M
Parker: $12.5M
Jackson: $10.1M
Duncan: $9.6M
Diaw: $4.5M
Splitter: $3.9M
Bonner: $3.6M
Green: $3.5M
Lenoard: $1.8M
De Colo: $1.4M
Mills: $1.1M
Joseph: $1.1M
Blair: $1.1M
Neal: $0.9M

So a total of $69.2M for 14 players. Spurs should have no problem staying below the tax. The apron isn't a concern.

[TD 21]

Not sure where he got the year one salaries from the recently signed players from, but suffice it to say I'll take his word for it.

Well, that explains it. Him taking roughly $10M instead of $12M does keep them just below the tax. But he gave up 11M over 2 years on his last extension, for what? Jefferson. And now he's helping to keep them under the tax, for what? Were they really going to let anyone go because of that? I doubt it. Not when we all knew the range they were going to be in for each individual. So he's essentially doing Holt a favor for nothing. It's still perplexing, just in a different way.

[dunkman]

Not sure where he got the year one salaries from the recently signed players from, but suffice it to say I'll take his word for it.

Well, that explains it. Him taking roughly $10M instead of $12M does keep them just below the tax. But he gave up 11M over 2 years on his last extension, for what? Jefferson. And now he's helping to keep them under the tax, for what? Were they really going to let anyone go because of that? I doubt it. Not when we all knew the range they were going to be in for each individual and not when they could always waive Byars and go with 13. So he's essentially doing Holt a favor for nothing. It's still perplexing, just in a different way.

The FO did well the off-season, they could have left Diaw or Green walk. There are still chances for a good run or two.

[Mel_13]

Not sure where he got the year one salaries from the recently signed players from, but suffice it to say I'll take his word for it.

Trade checker function on realgm.com. Apparently their numbers are from league sources and reliable.

[racm]

The Lakers had a healthy Bynum and Kobe playing pretty well when they added Gasol at the deadline. 57-25 record and a Finals berth.

The next year with the chemistry improved they had a 65-17 record and won it all.

[Dr. John R. Brinkley]

So Tim makes less than Captain Jack. I love Jack and I'm thrilled he's back on the team, but that should shut him up if he starts yammering for a contract extension.

Pop: "Dude, you're making more than Tim Duncan. I don't see what you're complaining about."

[Ice009]

Not sure where he got the year one salaries from the recently signed players from, but suffice it to say I'll take his word for it.

Well, that explains it. Him taking roughly $10M instead of $12M does keep them just below the tax. But he gave up 11M over 2 years on his last extension, for what? Jefferson. And now he's helping to keep them under the tax, for what? Were they really going to let anyone go because of that? I doubt it. Not when we all knew the range they were going to be in for each individual. So he's essentially doing Holt a favor for nothing. It's still perplexing, just in a different way.

I'm wondering the same thing TD21. Why would Tim take the pay cut again if it doesn't really help them get anyone else? I can only guess that it was to be able to resign the current players. Maybe the FO told him that if he took more they wouldn't be able to bring back Green, Diaw and all those guys?

The Lakers had a healthy Bynum and Kobe playing pretty well when they added Gasol at the deadline. 57-25 record and a Finals berth.

The next year with the chemistry improved they had a 65-17 record and won it all.

I'm pretty sure Bynum was out, which is the reason they made the Gasol trade (That and the fact it was a complete rip off of a trade).

[timvp]

Well, that explains it. Him taking roughly $10M instead of $12M does keep them just below the tax. But he gave up 11M over 2 years on his last extension, for what? Jefferson. And now he's helping to keep them under the tax, for what? Were they really going to let anyone go because of that? I doubt it. Not when we all knew the range they were going to be in for each individual. So he's essentially doing Holt a favor for nothing. It's still perplexing, just in a different way.

Very good point. Duncan is a better man than me. Giving Holt a ~$20 million discount over his career is pretty damn generous considering Holt's CBA crusade in 1999 cost Duncan at least $100 million in lifetime earnings -- if not much more. On top of that, Duncan's presence has at least doubled the value of the franchise.

In a business sense, there's no way Duncan should have settled for three years and $30M. But as a Spurs fan, I'm appreciative. At the very least it gives Holt less excuse to be cheap in the next few seasons since he won't have to worry about the repeater's penalty.

[Gagnrath]

Very good point. Duncan is a better man than me. Giving Holt a ~$20 million discount over his career is pretty damn generous considering Holt's CBA crusade in 1999 cost Duncan at least $100 million in lifetime earnings -- if not much more. On top of that, Duncan's presence has at least doubled the value of the franchise.

In a business sense, there's no way Duncan should have settled for three years and $30M. But as a Spurs fan, I'm appreciative. At the very least it gives Holt less excuse to be cheap in the next few seasons since he won't have to worry about the repeater's penalty.

The other thing is you can be fairly sure Duncan is going to get a fairly well compensated front office position of good will for life. Considering his major expenditures are out of the way, and he doesn't live super extravagantly that means he pretty much leaves the majority of his cash from his playing days as his legacy to family, charity, and island.

[TD 21]

Very good point. Duncan is a better man than me. Giving Holt a ~$20 million discount over his career is pretty damn generous considering Holt's CBA crusade in 1999 cost Duncan at least $100 million in lifetime earnings -- if not much more. On top of that, Duncan's presence has at least doubled the value of the franchise.

In a business sense, there's no way Duncan should have settled for three years and $30M. But as a Spurs fan, I'm appreciative. At the very least it gives Holt less excuse to be cheap in the next few seasons since he won't have to worry about the repeater's penalty.

And me . . . and I think damn near everyone one. Honestly, I can't remember a professional athlete giving up money for no real reason. And that's not not me calling them greedy or selfish. I don't think anyone in their position would. He's either tighter with Holt than we realize or he's just flat out doing this out of the goodness of his heart, I guess.

The other thing this does is it sets the bar for Ginobili; he now can't get more than $9M annually.

Ice, like I said, the majority of us knew the range each individual player was going to make within'. It wasn't like Splitter a few years back, where the range was pretty wide. And even if they had to go over what they preferred for one or two, they could have always just traded Neal for a draft pick (they'll probably do this anyway) and went with 13. If that still put them slightly into the tax, well, are we to believe they were really going to lose one of these guys (all of whom, other than De Colo, figure to be in the rotation) over pennies? When they've made a commitment to Duncan to continue to attempt to contend until he retires? I don't buy it. He did them a favor for no apparent reason.

[Mel_13]

He did them a favor for no apparent reason.

I said it somewhere, maybe in this thread, that it's truly remarkable for a franchise player like Duncan to willingly accept being the 4th highest paid player on the roster. (I wonder if he would have have done so if RJ still had Jackson's place on the roster.)

The only explanation that makes any sense to me is that sees himself as a true partner and not an employee, primarily due to his relationship with Pop. I'm sure that I can't think of any comparable situation in American sports.

[dunkman]

True to be said, Holt paid luxury tax during various seasons. The last time when they added RJ and Dice. This time the Spurs kept Diaw, Green, added DeColo, I guess they will add another player.

KG was earning too much in Minny and they couldn't pass the first round. LeBron made discounts as the best NBA player.

[dunkman]

And me . . . and I think damn near everyone one. Honestly, I can't remember a professional athlete giving up money for no real reason. And that's not not me calling them greedy or selfish. I don't think anyone in their position would. He's either tighter with Holt than we realize or he's just flat out doing this out of the goodness of his heart, I guess.

The other thing this does is it sets the bar for Ginobili; he now can't get more than $9M annually.

Ice, like I said, the majority of us knew the range each individual player was going to make within'. It wasn't like Splitter a few years back, where the range was pretty wide. And even if they had to go over what they preferred for one or two, they could have always just traded Neal for a draft pick (they'll probably do this anyway) and went with 13. If that still put them slightly into the tax, well, are we to believe they were really going to lose one of these guys (all of whom, other than De Colo, figure to be in the rotation) over pennies? When they've made a commitment to Duncan to continue to attempt to contend until he retires? I don't buy it. He did them a favor for no apparent reason.

Manu was underpaid during his prime, but he got a better deal in the second contract. Tbh, with all the unfortunate injuries, Manu should get something around the MLE. He's still a great player, however misses a lot of games every season.

[TMTTRIO]

The other thing this does is it sets the bar for Ginobili; he now can't get more than $9M annually.

At this point I could possibly see Manu retiring after this season if the Spurs don't get to the top again. He's won everything he could possibly win so what's really left for him to compete for? Besides he has kids now who want and need his time.

[DesignatedT]

Manu will play as long as he's feeling good imo. If he has a substantial injury that ruins this season then maybe I could see that but if he's feeling well then I see him playing another year or 2 with Tim.

[spurraider21]

can i ask how you deduce player salaries from realgm's salary ratio thing? what is the ratio relative to?

[rascal]

So Tim makes less than Captain Jack. I love Jack and I'm thrilled he's back on the team, but that should shut him up if he starts yammering for a contract extension.

Pop: "Dude, you're making more than Tim Duncan. I don't see what you're complaining about."

They are paying Jackson too much. He is getting paid like he is an all star. That money would have been better utilize on a big.

[rascal]

Manu will play as long as he's feeling good imo. If he has a substantial injury that ruins this season then maybe I could see that but if he's feeling well then I see him playing another year or 2 with Tim.

3 more years with the same core team with no significant upgrades. It is going to get ugly in the final years.

[rascal]

I said it somewhere, maybe in this thread, that it's truly remarkable for a franchise player like Duncan to willingly accept being the 4th highest paid player on the roster. (I wonder if he would have have done so if RJ still had Jackson's place on the roster.)

The only explanation that makes any sense to me is that sees himself as a true partner and not an employee, primarily due to his relationship with Pop. I'm sure that I can't think of any comparable situation in American sports.

How much money does someone need? At this point having a chance to put together a team capable of winning is more important to Duncan.

[Mhak]

How much money does someone need? At this point having a chance to put together a team capable of winning is more important to Duncan.

No such thing as a lot of money!

[therealtruth]

They are paying Jackson too much. He is getting paid like he is an all star. That money would have been better utilize on a big.

Let's see how the FO plays their cards this season. As good as Jackson has been for the team if his expiring contract can work some magic you have to use it.

[Mel_13]

3 more years with the same core team with no significant upgrades. It is going to get ugly in the final years.

You've said as much for years. Perhaps one day you'll be right

How much money does someone need? At this point having a chance to put together a team capable of winning is more important to Duncan.

Not the point of this discussion, but then you already knew that.