Is that extra money that they gave to Pau though, money that they could have instead used to retain Simmons? They let Simmons as a restricted FA walk while giving Gasol this deal.superunknown said:
Yeah once i slept on it and realized the cap implications (ie, money spent on Pau is NOT money we could have thrown at another FA) it made me feel a little better. I just have to remind myself $16m a season is not for Pau Gasol's production on the court, its a contract/asset we can flip that we wouldn't have had access to otherwise.
*****Spurs 2017 Offseason Thread*****
206,962 Views |
1963 Replies |
Last: 7 yr ago by LawHall88
Two are unrelated. They could have paid Simmons more than Orlando paid him and still given Pau this contract.
superunknown said:
Yeah once i slept on it and realized the cap implications (ie, money spent on Pau is NOT money we could have thrown at another FA) it made me feel a little better. I just have to remind myself $16m a season is not for Pau Gasol's production on the court, its a contract/asset we can flip that we wouldn't have had access to otherwise.
The issues are:
1. They let Simmons and Dedmon walk. I'd rather have both those guys for three years (even if partially guaranteed) than Pau for the same time frame. Hell, they probably could have gotten all three.
2. The three year deal for Pau. Okay, great, you gave him sixteen million this year that soaked up our cap space to make the other exceptions doable. That doesn't excuse you from having his deal on the books next summer when you'd want more cap space.
Popsuckers like Tynan can try and spin this all they want, but the second and third (while only partially guaranteed) years of this deal for Pau are terrible and the type of idiocy usually reserved for the ****ty front offices of the league.
Spurs apparently didn't really want Simmons. I think Simmons signed a pretty fair deal considering his age and experience.
Simmons wanted to go somewhere where he could get more playing time. He wasn't getting that in SA behind Kawhi no matter what.
Simmons wanted to go somewhere where he could get more playing time. He wasn't getting that in SA behind Kawhi no matter what.
AG 2000' said:superunknown said:
Yeah once i slept on it and realized the cap implications (ie, money spent on Pau is NOT money we could have thrown at another FA) it made me feel a little better. I just have to remind myself $16m a season is not for Pau Gasol's production on the court, its a contract/asset we can flip that we wouldn't have had access to otherwise.
The issues are:
1. They let Simmons and Dedmon walk. I'd rather have both those guys for three years (even if partially guaranteed) than Pau for the same time frame. Hell, they probably could have gotten all three.
2. The three year deal for Pau. Okay, great, you gave him sixteen million this year that soaked up our cap space to make the other exceptions doable. That doesn't excuse you from having his deal on the books next summer when you'd want more cap space.
Popsuckers like Tynan can try and spin this all they want, but the second and third (while only partially guaranteed) years of this deal for Pau are terrible and the type of idiocy usually reserved for the ****ty front offices of the league.
Well you are disregarding one huge element here and that is player evaluation. They let Simmons and Dedmon walk but brought in Paul and Lauvergne. Pop obviously likes Pau and thinks he's a major contributor better than other options. You can disagree and say they suck at evaluation, sure. But at least admit the Spurs front office has more information than we do and also a pretty decent track record.
Pau was actually a pretty big part of winning that Houston series. And during the season he moved to the bench and the team really got rolling based in large part on having a great second unit. He wasn't washed up last year so why assume he's done?
Maybe Pau will bring in Marc when it becomes obvious that Memphis is going to be another 48 win do nothing team again next year.
Ag Natural said:AG 2000' said:superunknown said:
Yeah once i slept on it and realized the cap implications (ie, money spent on Pau is NOT money we could have thrown at another FA) it made me feel a little better. I just have to remind myself $16m a season is not for Pau Gasol's production on the court, its a contract/asset we can flip that we wouldn't have had access to otherwise.
The issues are:
1. They let Simmons and Dedmon walk. I'd rather have both those guys for three years (even if partially guaranteed) than Pau for the same time frame. Hell, they probably could have gotten all three.
2. The three year deal for Pau. Okay, great, you gave him sixteen million this year that soaked up our cap space to make the other exceptions doable. That doesn't excuse you from having his deal on the books next summer when you'd want more cap space.
Popsuckers like Tynan can try and spin this all they want, but the second and third (while only partially guaranteed) years of this deal for Pau are terrible and the type of idiocy usually reserved for the ****ty front offices of the league.
Well you are disregarding one huge element here and that is player evaluation. They let Simmons and Dedmon walk but brought in Paul and Lauvergne. Pop obviously likes Pau and thinks he's a major contributor better than other options. You can disagree and say they suck at evaluation, sure. But at least admit the Spurs front office has more information than we do and also a pretty decent track record.
Pau was actually a pretty big part of winning that Houston series. And during the season he moved to the bench and the team really got rolling based in large part on having a great second unit. He wasn't washed up last year so why assume he's done?
Because he can't play against Golden State.
If the argument is Pau is great for regular season minutes and against teams not named Houston, okay, cool, pay him like it. Not $48 million for an old non-defensive center when you paid Tim Duncan $30 million for the same years.
I agree with you on that. Just that the argument by those defending Pop and the front office in the press is that they could only spend that money on re-signing their guys. Well, you had two walk in Simmons and Dedmon, didn't have to give Pau the king's ransom for three years that he got.Guitarsoup said:
Spurs apparently didn't really want Simmons. I think Simmons signed a pretty fair deal considering his age and experience.
Simmons wanted to go somewhere where he could get more playing time. He wasn't getting that in SA behind Kawhi no matter what.
Well you may have to beat several teams to win a ship and they all aren't built like GSW or Houston. Pau is useful against Utah, Minnesota, New Orleans, OKC, Memphis and Clips.
Don't get me wrong, I expected less money and I don't like how it locks up more space next year. But don't act like Pau isn't still good.
Don't get me wrong, I expected less money and I don't like how it locks up more space next year. But don't act like Pau isn't still good.
Pau is getting about 13.8% of the cap for the next two years. For your starting center and most consistent post player that is a good teammate (voluntarily going to bench to help the team rather than pouting because he doesn't get to take enough ISO mid range jumpers), that isn't a bad deal.Quote:
Not $48 million for an old non-defensive center when you paid Tim Duncan $30 million for the same years.
In 2015, when Duncan made 10mm, he was making about 15% of the cap.
Gasol basically gets 30mm for two years, then 1mm for the third year if we cut him. Not the greatest deal in the world, but not terrible, either.
Letting Simmons and Dedmon walk said a lot about how PATFO felt about them. Seemed like Dedmon was in the doghouse from about game 60 till the end of the playoffs and Simmons...he was always going to be the 5th guard at best.
superunknown said:
Letting Simmons and Dedmon walk said a lot about how PATFO felt about them. Seemed like Dedmon was in the doghouse from about game 60 till the end of the playoffs and Simmons...he was always going to be the 5th guard at best.
Dedmon didn't "get over himself" as Pop would put it. When he stood up to the cheap shot crap in the Rockets series, his time as a Spur was done.
Yeah that was a bit disappointing. I guess Pop doesn't want any more nasty.
Also, im reading some analysis that says with the 3rd year (the partial guaranteed one) it allows Gasol's deal to be stretched over 5 years if waived instead of stretching over 3 years if it was a shorter contract. That's Larry Coon levels of CBA understanding and a bit over my head though, so I'll take the word of the writers.
Also, im reading some analysis that says with the 3rd year (the partial guaranteed one) it allows Gasol's deal to be stretched over 5 years if waived instead of stretching over 3 years if it was a shorter contract. That's Larry Coon levels of CBA understanding and a bit over my head though, so I'll take the word of the writers.
So if Gasol's contract is for 16mm next year and he has 1mm guaranteed the following year and the Spurs waive him next summer, they get to stretch his contract for number of years left*2+1. So 2y left = 5 year stretch.
3.4mm/year if he is owed 17mm guaranteed.
3.4mm/year if he is owed 17mm guaranteed.
FWIW the three way team trade idea that has been floating around with Phoenix for Irving is a lot more unlikely now (not that it was a real possibility to begin with). Brandon Knight is out for the entire year with an ACL injury.
They have the same nose.
Ok, I gotta ask: is Manu ever NOT awesome? 
First thing I thought of when I saw the eagle photo.
Manu the photochopper
It is a questionable contract for a 37-year old who is a defensive liability vs the better teams in the West, and I suspect this wasn't something the Spurs were excited about doing, but Gasol should be excited about it.Guitarsoup said:
So if Gasol's contract is for 16mm next year and he has 1mm guaranteed the following year and the Spurs waive him next summer, they get to stretch his contract for number of years left*2+1. So 2y left = 5 year stretch.
3.4mm/year if he is owed 17mm guaranteed.
Guitarsoup said:
Two are unrelated. They could have paid Simmons more than Orlando paid him and still given Pau this contract.
Per articles like this, had they signed Simmons (or landed a target they missed on) then Gasol probably does not get as much.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.poundingtherock.com/platform/amp/2017/7/24/16022898/pau-gasol-san-antonio-spurs-new-contract-make-sense
Good lord.
Who made this deal for Gasol ? Same guy who got Sumlins contract ?
Like I said (post deleted for whatever reason), this Gasol 3-year deal will go down as one of the worst moves in the Pop/Buford era.
Silver lining... Fair enough.
It'd be a heckuva lot more moveable with a $1m guarantee in the third year though. Dang.
Do yall really think the Spurs front office would just screw the teams future up over old man Gasol? Non of yall actually understand the salary cap. Keyboard GMs need to take a deep breath and relax
Malcolm52 said:
Do yall really think the Spurs front office would just screw the teams future up over old man Gasol? Non of yall actually understand the salary cap. Keyboard GMs need to take a deep breath and relax
Here's the part I don't understand...You could have given him 2y, 32M and it would be just as movable if not moreso. And Gasol couldn't have gotten that good of deal anywhere. And it would still be a rich reward for helping out the team. Win me over on that part.
I agree it seems like an overpay, but I don't pretend to understand the full mechanics of the salary cap or how all of these personnel moves come into place. The Spurs front office has proved to be one of the best in the league, so at this point I just decide to trust them. There is no way they would throw away the team's future over Gasol.flashplayer said:Malcolm52 said:
Do yall really think the Spurs front office would just screw the teams future up over old man Gasol? Non of yall actually understand the salary cap. Keyboard GMs need to take a deep breath and relax
Here's the part I don't understand...You could have given him 2y, 32M and it would be just as movable if not moreso. And Gasol couldn't have gotten that good of deal anywhere. And it would still be a rich reward for helping out the team. Win me over on that part.
I don't understand the cap either and I'm sure there are ways to mitigate the amount, I just have a hard time believing a 37 year old with 44,000 NBA minutes plus 3 years as a pro in Spain and appearances on 10 international teams could demand 1/6 of the cap.
From what i understand, the 3rd year makes that contract stretchable to 5 years if he is waived or retires. So that probably saves a few million per season if it comes to that.
I dont see Gasol suiting up in 2020 for anyone. Maybe Spain for the Olympics.
I dont see Gasol suiting up in 2020 for anyone. Maybe Spain for the Olympics.
Watching this makes me angry sad that the Spurs let go of J Sims....
Featured Stories
See All
27:26
8h ago
3.9k
5 Thoughts: No. 8 Texas A&M 69, Georgia 53
by Luke Evangelist
19:50
23h ago
8.3k
4:28
8h ago
810
Game Highlights: No. 8 Texas A&M 69, Georgia 53
by Matthew Dawson
3 Days 'til: Outlining what Texas A&M's 'best version' looks like in 2025
by Ryan Brauninger