Newz wrote:Turk Nowitzki wrote:Have you seen the extension Ginobili just got though? If Salmons has a good agent he's going to start there and point out that Salmons is a few years younger as well. I'd love to lock him up for $6 mil a year just as much as you, I just don't think that's being realistic.
1. They overpaid Manu, big time. That was a terrible deal for the Spurs... But they think they can still compete with the Parker/Manu/Duncan core. I disagree, Manu is no longer in his prime.
2. Just because another team gives a 2-guard a bunch of money, that doesn't mean we should be tricked into doing the same thing.
3. We just traded nothing for John Salmons. If he was in that high of demand, we would have had to give up more.
4. If $6 million isn't "realistic", then I would let him go. There are plenty of guys out there that we can get to replace John Salmons. I doubt he can do what he has done for us for an entire season. No doubt he will be productive, but I doubt it is this productive. Even if he is, it won't last his whole contract, IMO. He's already thirty and he will be out of his prime as early as next season.
Newz forgive me but you dont have a clue son. That was a
'Contract of Continuity' friend, like GM Larry Harris treated Michael Redd as.
They paid extra to keep team continuity and open a 3 year window with Duncan and Parker to chase a ring.
That is nothing like the Bucks and Salmons...stop comparing it. That is why the Spurs paid him. That is not a terrible contract at all. To pay Salmons over $7 million, or to bring him back at all would be a terrible decision for the Bucks if they are using him as a stopgap instead of looking at him as the missing piece (which he is not...) or heir apparent to Redd. Salmons best role is as a sixth man as is Redd's! Production wise history has shown he comes a dime a dozen and can get you so far.
LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT TO YOU....Manu is worth every damn penny he got in that deal! Wake up man. That is is title team with a proven core!
That is exactly what I am talking about...The Spurs can make a run for three more years with Parker and Duncan...the BUCKS CANNOT!
Salmons is nowhere near Manu. He is playing for that paper (money) so what you see is skewed and marred through dollar $ign$. And here is another news flash for you....THAT WAS A GREAT DEAL FOR THE SPURS are you kidding me!?
Manu who is in great shape could have double that if he went unrestricted are you are nuts? He did well to stay in S.A. and they got a hometown discount on him. Salmons is nowhere near Manu's value at all.
Yes he had done well for us and helped us get to the playoffs along with Bogut. But THE BUCKS ARE NOT A TITLE CONTENDER....the Spurs are! That is the difference. And other teams like Orlando would have jumped on Manu if he became availible.
That is why the Spurs did it then. So no no no. The Spurs got off easy IMHO. Manu actually could have gotten more then that on the open market. I dont think you know your players son...Manu is a beast!
Stop thinking every player in their 30's is old!!! All of you keep saying that! 30 to some players is not old!!! Just because a player reaches 30 ish does not mean that they lose their productivity when on certain team in proven systems with strong veteran leadership and coaching!
Guys like Billups, Nash and Manu who know how to play and keep themselves in great shape and play with their heads and heart can play longer and more effective then a younger players who plays dumb or and doesn't take care of their bodies and don't know the game instinctively like they do.
You need to rephrase your statement my friend...the Spurs got a bargain with the Manu deal are yo you kidding? Manu and Salmons...two different kind of players my friend. Do not even compare them!