Shams: Fox gets max extension.

[zimpy27]

Kings did well out of this trade in hindsight.

They were either paying him this same max or losing him to Spurs maxing him.

[DanishLakerFan]

Fox is a high character player who can be a solid mentor for Castle, Harper and Vassel in the backcourt. And while the max is kinda steep for someone who is a top10 / fringe all-star caliber PG i think he'd be relatively easy to trade, unless his production falls off a cliff. Which it probably wont.

[OGSactownballer]

Glad we traded him before this.

Speed guards never last into their thirties.

[BoogieTime]

If this was from a promise upon his acquisition, so be it.

It almost has to be, because in their current situation, this is insanely stupid.

Fox is an undersized PG with the defensive issues that come from his stature. He’s good finisher, solid from midrange, and weak as you get further out. Solid passer, solid on turnovers, good not great from the line, and his draw rate is declining as he ages and pulls up more.

He’s had one year ever above league average TS, and probably a few others slightly above average for a PG. So, pretty good volume scorer, below average defense at his position, average playmaker. That’s not worth a 30% max extension today. It might have been worth one five years ago, but it DEFINITELY isn’t today.

He’ll be moveable in the sense that teams will take him, but not in the sense that he’ll return real value like Bane did. Lavine-ish. It’s too much money.

Who cares if its "for a pg". Above league average ts% helps teams win games, and like most pgs offensively worth their salt (or a contract close as this) generally volume score at solidly above league average ts%, thats how they help their teams win

[jayjaysee]

Barnes and Wagner are 5 year contracts not 4 year. Fox is making on average 9 million more a year than those guys during that extension.

And those guys have been in the league 4 years less than Fox.. seems a random comparison to me.

I don’t really see why Fox is a 30% max guy. I would’ve understood a 3yr max though honestly. Or a 2+po if Fox wanted that instead..

But I do think Fox is talented enough that he’ll be flipped similar to LaVine in 3 years? So not actually worst contract in the league, just never an asset unless Fox plays his best ball.

He's not worse contract in the league now. But he could become that if he doesn't make the most of the spacing the Spurs will have. There is a world where Harper-Castle are a perfect fit and Fox plus-minus drops.

Even in that world - I think same as LaVine there will be some desperate team that’s willing to offer a combination of salary relief and a lower end asset for him imo…

Just looking at next offseason..

Brooklyn - will be trying to improve due to not owning their own pick

Utah -if Lauri is still in Utah you can look at Kessler/Lauri/Bailey/Peterson/Fox as an affordable group for 3 years.

Ishbia will have a first to trade and Fox/Book feels a lot better than Green/Booker

Dumars might still have a job..

don’t think Fox will ever be seen as a great asset or really worth the contract at all, but do think they’ll be able to trim money and get a minor asset when Dylan shows he is ready.

[tmorgan]

If this was from a promise upon his acquisition, so be it.

It almost has to be, because in their current situation, this is insanely stupid.

Fox is an undersized PG with the defensive issues that come from his stature. He’s good finisher, solid from midrange, and weak as you get further out. Solid passer, solid on turnovers, good not great from the line, and his draw rate is declining as he ages and pulls up more.

He’s had one year ever above league average TS, and probably a few others slightly above average for a PG. So, pretty good volume scorer, below average defense at his position, average playmaker. That’s not worth a 30% max extension today. It might have been worth one five years ago, but it DEFINITELY isn’t today.

He’ll be moveable in the sense that teams will take him, but not in the sense that he’ll return real value like Bane did. Lavine-ish. It’s too much money.

Who cares if its "for a pg". Above league average ts% helps teams win games, and like most pgs offensively worth their salt (or a contract close as this) generally volume score at solidly above league average ts%, thats how they help their teams win

Uhh, that’s a weird take. Fox also doesn’t rebound or block shots at a league average rate, am I supposed to hold that against him, too?

Bigs score more efficiently, but generally don’t create much of their own offense. Point guards create offense, but generally don’t score as efficiently, so comparing Fox’s scoring prowess to other PG on a TS basis is appropriate.

Honestly, I sprinkle in a positive comment in a post that is still generally critical of this extension and you want to focus on that? Sounds like a bitter Kings fan thing to me, which is odd, because you have nothing to be bitter about. At this price, Fox isn’t much of an asset to lose, and Sacramento got a reasonable return on him before it happened. Spurs fans should be the ones taking issue here if anything.

[louc1970]

Spurs finally make an idiotic play. Fox is nowhere near that valuable.

[jbk1234]

Other teams would have paid Fox this, so it's his market rate. Nobody complained at the time of the trade. You can't expect the Spurs to double-cross him, especially not after he was the first guy ever to force his way to the Spurs.

Not sure about the bolded. One of the reasons I don't like max extensions on players who aren't at least top-20 is that the team assumes all the risk. None of the risk of injury, a down year, or fit/chemistry issues that could arise this season are being assumed by Fox here. It's all been pushed off onto the Spurs. This was absolute best-case scenario for Fox including, but not limited to, the bigger raises. He got the financial commitment a year and gave up nothing to do it.

The Kings were literally trying to pay him, and he refused to extend and demanded a trade to SA. It's clear other teams would have paid him too.

As neither of us were in the room, I'm not sure what is or is not clear. We don't know what the Kings were offering.

[BoogieTime]

If this was from a promise upon his acquisition, so be it.

It almost has to be, because in their current situation, this is insanely stupid.

Fox is an undersized PG with the defensive issues that come from his stature. He’s good finisher, solid from midrange, and weak as you get further out. Solid passer, solid on turnovers, good not great from the line, and his draw rate is declining as he ages and pulls up more.

He’s had one year ever above league average TS, and probably a few others slightly above average for a PG. So, pretty good volume scorer, below average defense at his position, average playmaker. That’s not worth a 30% max extension today. It might have been worth one five years ago, but it DEFINITELY isn’t today.

He’ll be moveable in the sense that teams will take him, but not in the sense that he’ll return real value like Bane did. Lavine-ish. It’s too much money.

Who cares if its "for a pg". Above league average ts% helps teams win games, and like most pgs offensively worth their salt (or a contract close as this) generally volume score at solidly above league average ts%, thats how they help their teams win

Uhh, that’s a weird take. Fox also doesn’t rebound or block shots at a league average rate, am I supposed to hold that against him, too?

Bigs score more efficiently, but generally don’t create much of their own offense. Point guards create offense, but generally don’t score as efficiently, so comparing Fox’s scoring prowess to other PG on a TS basis is appropriate.

Honestly, I sprinkle in a positive comment in a post that is still generally critical of this extension and you want to focus on that? Sounds like a bitter Kings fan thing to me, which is odd, because you have nothing to be bitter about. At this price, Fox isn’t much of an asset to lose, and Sacramento got a reasonable return on him before it happened. Spurs fans should be the ones taking issue here if anything.

ok, we can. I'm a bit lazy to do it now, but if you would analyze the top ten pgs who are good at offense, I would think most would have a ts% solidly above league average (not Ja, who I also see as inefficient). Cade too, but I see this as a knock on their games. I think the pg ts% is weighted down by the non offensive guards

I don't mind the spurs, I was always a Fox naysayer going back years on our board. I got into a lot of convos with fans on here about it lol

[daoneandonly]

I mean the Spurs gave up jack squat to get him, so they should have to pay this max to him to balance the scales to some degree

[Devilanche]

I wouldn’t pay that much for him but IF spurs think he’s their guy then contract wise it can always be arranged / fit to other contract in his latter year depending on what happen to castle/harper or they can always pay the luxury tax if all of them are “worth” it.

My only issue is that if you want to go all in now . The spurs 2nd or 3rd option is kind of mid. Should have tried to upgrade their starting lineup more.

Need someone better than whoever is the 3rd best (currently) with wemby / fox.

[tmorgan]

Career TS by some notable PGs:

Cade — .539, (but clearly trending up)
Ja — .559
Fox — .557
CP3 — .581
Westbrook — .526
Brunson — .591
Scoot — .513
FVV — .544
SGA — .607 (and even better lately, tho not exactly a PG)
Luka — .588
Trae — .579
Jrue — .546
Dame — .590
Steph — .625 (insane, tho not exactly a PG either)

Fox certainly isn’t remarkable as a scorer, and is decidedly mediocre as a shooter. Still, rim pressure is a skill, as is drawing fouls. He’s very similar to Ja, just not as spectacular while doing it.

He doesn’t stack up on a list if the best scoring PGs of the last 20 years, certainly, but I still think “pretty good volume scorer” is appropriate, tho perhaps “reasonably solid” fits better. I could list a bunch of guys besides Brodie and Jrue and Cade that he’s more efficient than, but those are mostly JAG types.

[BoogieTime]

Career TS by some notable PGs:

Cade — .539, (but clearly trending up)
Ja — .559
Fox — .557
CP3 — .581
Westbrook — .526
Brunson — .591
Scoot — .513
FVV — .544
SGA — .607 (and even better lately, tho not exactly a PG)
Luka — .588
Trae — .579
Jrue — .546
Dame — .590
Steph — .625 (insane, tho not exactly a PG either)

Fox certainly isn’t remarkable as a scorer, and is decidedly mediocre as a shooter. Still, rim pressure is a skill, as is drawing fouls. He’s very similar to Ja, just not as spectacular while doing it.

He doesn’t stack up on a list if the best scoring PGs of the last 20 years, certainly, but I still think “pretty good volume scorer” is appropriate, tho perhaps “reasonably solid” fits better. I could list a bunch of guys besides Brodie and Jrue and Cade that he’s more efficient than, but those are mostly JAG types.

Cade is young, I would suspect he will hit a better ts% in his prime. I think we know FVV isn't a scorer, but he does other things - D. Jrue was hitting well above average ts% in his prime.

The problem is Fox doesn't do much but score volume on a ts% that isn't remarkable, like the anomalies on your list. He doesn't playmake as a pg, fights to stay in the zone of average on D, and has one of the worst motors I've seen - guy is talented as heck but literally does not show up for games and swaths of seasons..

He just doesn't bring much to the table

[wemby]

Not sure about the bolded. One of the reasons I don't like max extensions on players who aren't at least top-20 is that the team assumes all the risk. None of the risk of injury, a down year, or fit/chemistry issues that could arise this season are being assumed by Fox here. It's all been pushed off onto the Spurs. This was absolute best-case scenario for Fox including, but not limited to, the bigger raises. He got the financial commitment a year and gave up nothing to do it.

The Kings were literally trying to pay him, and he refused to extend and demanded a trade to SA. It's clear other teams would have paid him too.

As neither of us were in the room, I'm not sure what is or is not clear. We don't know what the Kings were offering.

So you're claiming the very weak and desperate Kings' GM was lowballing him and he chose to immolate himself by demanding a trade rather than coming clean and putting pressure on them? That would have to be among the most stupid strategies in NBA history.

[esvl]

Fringe or not, he is still an elite pg in his prime

[jbk1234]

The Kings were literally trying to pay him, and he refused to extend and demanded a trade to SA. It's clear other teams would have paid him too.

As neither of us were in the room, I'm not sure what is or is not clear. We don't know what the Kings were offering.

So you're claiming the very weak and desperate Kings' GM was lowballing him and he chose to immolate himself by demanding a trade rather than coming clean and putting pressure on them? That would have to be among the most stupid strategies in NBA history.

I think it's very possible that the Kings were lukewarm or noncommital on a max extension, or at least noncommital on a max extension at the earliest possible opportunity, and Klutch immediately began exploring the trade market.

[hugepatsfan]

Not really a fan of Fox and overall where that archetype fits into a winning team concept. Instantly because the top candidate for "good player but I would never want him on my team for that contract" type of player for me.

[SkyHook]

Fringe or not, he is still an elite pg in his prime

FAR from elite, he's a top-100 player. Looking at per 100 possession numbers he's surprisingly comparable on the offensive end to Collin Sexton, though far less efficient than him last year. And while he's not nearly as godawful on defense as Collin, he's still subpar on that end.

[esvl]

Fringe or not, he is still an elite pg in his prime

FAR from elite, he's a top-100 player. Looking at per 100 possession numbers he's surprisingly comparable on the offensive end to Collin Sexton, though far less efficient than him last year. And while he's not nearly as godawful on defense as Collin, he's still subpar on that end.

He played for the crap teams so far. I trust my eyes.

[SkyHook]

Fringe or not, he is still an elite pg in his prime

FAR from elite, he's a top-100 player. Looking at per 100 possession numbers he's surprisingly comparable on the offensive end to Collin Sexton, though far less efficient than him last year. And while he's not nearly as godawful on defense as Collin, he's still subpar on that end.

He played for the crap teams so far. I trust my eyes.

Good luck with that.