trying to find contract history on Manu

[SPURSX3]

read, "the love" "the  knock" "the hate" on manu...


http://probasketball.about.com/cs/players/...uelginobili.htm

[Guest]

:rofl: Oh, man, don't let Reality read that!    :rofl:

I do have to say I can't agree with that -- Manu and Jeff Hornicek have VERY different games.  First, Manu isn't deadly from the arch -- Horny (I've always felt this nickname was sooo wrong) was.  Second, Horny was as good at freestyling as Manu is -- Horny had a GREAT teardrop (that always looked off-balance) shot that was always great but you definately didn't have to worry about him creating his own shot (you just had to worry about him shooting from outside).  

The biggest difference is that I don't think they are giving Manu enough props on his defensive abilities and this is where you can't compare Manu and Horny.  Jeff was never a great defensive player -- and he definately wasn't an athlete.  He managed to hold his own but he wasn't a great defender.  While Manu isn't a tremendous defender, I do think he is better than average (it's obvious that Pop agrees with that assessment, if Manu was a great defender, Pop would have put Manu on Billups in game #7 instead of Bowen).  

I think that website underrates Manu.  Manu IS still wildly inconsistent -- he was in the playoffs and he was throughout the year.  And he continues to look better than he is because teams have to double (and some triple) on TD -- that gives Manu a lot more room to operate.  IF Manu can get his 3 point percentage up, that would be tremendous for his game as well as for the Spurs.

[SPURSX3]

:rofl: Oh, man, don't let Reality read that!    :rofl:

I do have to say I can't agree with that -- Manu and Jeff Hornicek have VERY different games.  First, Manu isn't deadly from the arch -- Horny (I've always felt this nickname was sooo wrong) was.  Second, Horny was as good at freestyling as Manu is -- Horny had a GREAT teardrop (that always looked off-balance) shot that was always great but you definately didn't have to worry about him creating his own shot (you just had to worry about him shooting from outside).  

The biggest difference is that I don't think they are giving Manu enough props on his defensive abilities and this is where you can't compare Manu and Horny.  Jeff was never a great defensive player -- and he definately wasn't an athlete.  He managed to hold his own but he wasn't a great defender.  While Manu isn't a tremendous defender, I do think he is better than average (it's obvious that Pop agrees with that assessment, if Manu was a great defender, Pop would have put Manu on Billups in game #7 instead of Bowen).  

I think that website underrates Manu.  Manu IS still wildly inconsistent -- he was in the playoffs and he was throughout the year.  And he continues to look better than he is because teams have to double (and some triple) on TD -- that gives Manu a lot more room to operate.  IF Manu can get his 3 point percentage up, that would be tremendous for his game as well as for the Spurs.

I think the article is from back in 2003.  not sure though, but this should help Reality deal with "why did they draft them in the second round."   Nobody really knkw about them here.

[SPURSX3]

Look what I found....Spurs paid 300k Manu only had to pay 200k 350k on his own to buy out.  

*******************************************************************
By Johnny Ludden
San Antonio Express-News

Web Posted : 07/17/2002 12:00 AM

Emanuel Ginobili, the flashy Argentine guard who the Spurs hope will add some life to their sometimes lethargic offense, bid farewell to his Italian team Tuesday before leaving for San Antonio to begin his NBA career.

Ginobili, taken by the Spurs with the 57th overall pick in the 1999 draft, will receive a two-year contract — the maximum allowed using the league's $1.4 million salary-cap exception — totaling $2.94 million. He is scheduled to arrive in town tonight, and the Spurs will announce his signing at a news conference Thursday afternoon.

Danny Ferry also has reached an agreement in principle on a two-year contract with the Spurs.

The NBA on Tuesday released its salary-cap and midlevel exception figures for the 2002-03 season. The cap will decrease for the first time in its 18-year history next season, falling 5.2 percent to $40.271 million. The midlevel exception reportedly will be $4.545 million.

Because of the new numbers, the team may need a few days to complete the paperwork for the signings of Ferry, Malik Rose and Bruce Bowen. Rose has agreed to a seven-year contract worth $42 million, and Bowen reportedly will receive a three-year deal totaling about $11 million.

Ginobili will complete the buyout of his contract with Kinder Bologna, the Italian team for which he starred the past two seasons, after signing with the Spurs. The Spurs will contribute the NBA maximum-allowed $350,000 to the buyout, which reportedly totals between $500,000 and $650,000. Ginobili will then receive a clearance letter from FIBA, which oversees the European leagues, to officially join the Spurs.

"I'm a little scared of everything going into my NBA career," Ginobili told Italian reporters Tuesday. "I've never been in the U.S. longer than a week in my life and that was on vacation.

"It's a big challenge but I'm just about starting to face it. I have doubts but I also have great confidence in my ability; whenever you go up one level, it's going to be difficult, but my motivation will go up one notch, too."

Since the Spurs drafted him three years ago, Ginobili has developed into one of the top European players. He was named the 2001 Euroleague Finals MVP after leading Kinder Bologna to the 2001 championship. This past season, he averaged 15.2 points, 3.6 rebounds and 3.1 assists in the Euroleague, and 19.9 points, 4.3 rebounds, 2.2 assists and 4.3 steals in Italian League play.

An athletic 6-foot-6 guard with considerable leaping ability, Ginobili finishes well at the basket, possesses 3-point range and can create off the dribble. Spurs coaches and scouts believe he will be able to contribute immediately.

"I do not have one single goal for my San Antonio career," Ginobili said. "I'm not setting any minimum of minutes I'd like to play, but I just want to gain my teammates' confidence. I hope I can reduce my settling period to a minimum and show I can play at that level, then perhaps achieve a little more than that."

Ginobili, who turns 25 on July 28, believes he will benefit from playing on a veteran team. He's already joined Tim Duncan, David Robinson and Tony Parker as a Nike representative after signing a four-year endorsement contract with the shoe company.

"When I joined Kinder in 2000 I was not supposed to be a leader; other players were, but I worked my way to the top," he said. "In San Antonio it might be a good thing that I'm not expected to be the star of the team. It may help take some pressure off me."

Notable: Stephen Jackson, Amal McCaskill and Jason Hart all played well in the Spurs' 70-66 loss to Orlando on Tuesday in the Shaw's Summer Pro League.

Jackson led the Spurs with 18 points, seven rebounds and four steals. McCaskill added 14 points and nine rebounds before fouling out. Hart totaled seven points, six assists and five rebounds.  

[SPURSX3]

and more from Scola...I am wondering if this has anything to do with Tim NOT wanting to play center.  surely we could still use Scola here...hell trade Rasho to Tau for scola...LMAO!


********************************************************************

19/07/2005
ARG - Scola still has NBA aim

BUENOS AIRES (ACB) - Argentina international Luis Scola still hopes to play in the NBA next season but is aware his chances of joining the San Antonio Spurs have vanished.

The Tau Ceramica power forward was keen to join Spurs this summer but the club have opted to sign his national team-mate and former Pamesa Valencia player Fabricio Oberto instead.

Scola, who was selected by Spurs as the 56th player in the second round of the 2002 NBA Draft, cannot hide his disappointment.

"Oberto's signing has hindered my chances," admitted Scola in an interview with Argentinian sports newspaper Ole.

"They (Spurs) hold my rights but they don't want me for their team.

"I have been discarded by them, as they have already spent all their money and all the available spots have been taken.

"Spurs didn't have to promise me anything. This is, after all, a business and each party does what is convenient to them.

"They don't have a debt with me. I imagine that they will try to find other solutions in order to get something out of me."

Scola has played a big role for club and country in recent years, helping ACB giants Tau Ceramica reach the play-off finals and the Euroleague final this season.

He was voted the most valuable player of the 2004-2005 ACB campaign, having previously guided Argentina to gold at the Olympics in Athens.

With these achievements in mind, he still believes he can play in the best league in the world.

"This is the time to make that leap," said the 25-year-old.

"Many of my dreams have already come true, with Tau and the national team, and now I want to complete another dream which is to play in the NBA.

"I told Tau that I want to play in the NBA this year," added Scola.

"There are 29 other teams (in the NBA), but if it doesn't happen, I am equally happy to stay at Tau."

Scola revealed that he has a $14.5m (£8.3m) buyout clause if he wanted to play for another European team but that the fee to take him to the NBA is lower.

 

[SPURSX3]

Can someone tell me if this is true.  I read somewhere that it was rumored that the Spurs could have used a LLE (lower level exception) to sign Oberto.  Is there such a thing as a lower level exception?   Oberto was signed for a about 5 to 7 million, so there might be some truth to that, if that is the cae could the Spurs still use the mid level for Scola?  I read this as a rumor of course, but someone on another board was saying they were trying to push rasho of on some team to help make this happen.  Just curios if this could be true or not...

[Reality]

:rofl: Oh, man, don't let Reality read that!    :rofl:



 

 :rofl: Is that you Randy?  If not, get Randy to read that.

Xs3 wrote:  <I think the article is from back in 2003. not sure though, but this should help Reality deal with "why did they draft them in the second round." Nobody really knkw about them here.>

Easily explains Manu but still zero explaination why Scola was drafted in 2nd.  That's what i really want to know.

 

[SPURSX3]

:rofl: Oh, man, don't let Reality read that!    :rofl:



 

:rofl: Is that you Randy?  If not, get Randy to read that.

Xs3 wrote:  <I think the article is from back in 2003. not sure though, but this should help Reality deal with "why did they draft them in the second round." Nobody really knkw about them here.>

Easily explains Manu but still zero explaination why Scola was drafted in 2nd.  That's what i really want to know.

Easily explains Manu but still zero explaination why Scola was drafted in 2nd. That's what i really want to know.

Reality, sorry, but that is the DUMBEST thing you could say.  SCOUTS DID NOT HAVE A CLUE ABOUT HOW GOOD SCOLA WOULD BECOME!!!  The Spurs picked who they though was better at the time.  Is that hard to understand???  If it is then maybe you should get a job as an NBA scout basing all your suggestions on thier future greatness, especially when they are untested, and not developed.  Scola was just that when he was drafted, untested.  nobody KNEW he would be the best in Europe - had they known - they just might have drafted him earlier....


 :nonono:  

[Reality]

Easily explains Manu but still zero explaination why Scola was drafted in 2nd.  That's what i really want to know.

Easily explains Manu but still zero explaination why Scola was drafted in 2nd. That's what i really want to know.

Reality, sorry, but that is the DUMBEST thing you could say.  SCOUTS DID NOT HAVE A CLUE ABOUT HOW GOOD SCOLA WOULD BECOME!!!  The Spurs picked who they though was better at the time.  Is that hard to understand???  If it is then maybe you should get a job as an NBA scout basing all your suggestions on thier future greatness, especially when they are untested, and not developed.  Scola was just that when he was drafted, untested.  nobody KNEW he would be the best in Europe - had they known - they just might have drafted him earlier....


 :nonono: [/quote]
 You know the Spurs scout(s) thought Scola would be just average/above average for a fact?  You talked to the scout(s) who scouted Scola?

You're just spewing.  You don't know squat what for a fact came down in the scouting of Scola.  Spurs scout(s) certainly may have seen signs he would become one of the best in Europe.  

What was the exact report from the exact scout(s) who scouted GNob for the Spurs?  I don't have it, i havent talked to the Spurs scouts who scouted GNob nor have I seen it posted on a website.  I don't know.  I'll bet someone assigned to scout GNob for the Spurs saw NBA All Star in him and not just average player.

[SPURSX3]

This reminds me of an episode of "Mr. Show" - I think I saw it on Comedy Central.

These two competing college scouts for small no name lower divisions colleges were out trying to sign new talent since the best were heading to the big name schools out of high school.   They were out trying to toddlers and new borns.  Promising the parents full scholarships no matter how the kid did in school, etc.  It was hilarious.  


It is just amazing Reality cannot grasp that concept....

[SPURSX3]

Easily explains Manu but still zero explaination why Scola was drafted in 2nd.  That's what i really want to know.

Easily explains Manu but still zero explaination why Scola was drafted in 2nd. That's what i really want to know.

Reality, sorry, but that is the DUMBEST thing you could say.  SCOUTS DID NOT HAVE A CLUE ABOUT HOW GOOD SCOLA WOULD BECOME!!!  The Spurs picked who they though was better at the time.  Is that hard to understand???  If it is then maybe you should get a job as an NBA scout basing all your suggestions on thier future greatness, especially when they are untested, and not developed.  Scola was just that when he was drafted, untested.  nobody KNEW he would be the best in Europe - had they known - they just might have drafted him earlier....


 :nonono:

You know the Spurs scout(s) thought Scola would be just average/above average for a fact?  You talked to the scout(s) who scouted Scola?

You're just spewing.  You don't know squat what for a fact came down in the scouting of Scola.  Spurs scout(s) certainly may have seen signs he would become one of the best in Europe.  

What was the exact report from the exact scout(s) who scouted GNob for the Spurs?  I don't have it, i havent talked to the Spurs scouts who scouted GNob nor have I seen it posted on a website.  I don't know.  I'll bet someone assigned to scout GNob for the Spurs saw NBA All Star in him and not just average player. [/quote]
 so you cant fathom that they may have actually done what was best for the team?  You really NEED to see a memo saying that the draft was done to BETTER a team?  Or do you need to see a memo stating that the intent of the draft choice was to chose a future GARBAGE player?  do you REALLY NEED to see that Reality?  Yeah I may be Spewing, but the fact it is spewing something you seem to be lacking - which is COMMON SENSE.  Ask yourself if you really believe ANY scout for ANY team would waste a DRAFT selection on a player when there was a better choice out there?  Do you REALLY believe any team would waste thier resources that way?   :nonono:  :crazy:  :nonono:  :puke:  

[Reality]

....

This is a Randy tactic.  

Everything you know about the scouting of GNob, Parker, Scola and the Center in the above box.  

In the real world, they were not scouted by Mr Show.

[SPURSX3]

....

This is a Randy tactic.  

Everything you know about the scouting of GNob, Parker, Scola and the Center in the above box.  

In the real world, they were not scouted by Mr Show.

No reality, in the real world, a team will go for the best selection in a draft situation, if they think one player is better then another they will pick the better player, not waste time on someone else.  by the way, thinking a player as being better INCLUDES whether or not any scout, GM, Execs, etc think whether or not "they may be a future all star" or even if they think they may be a very solid player in time, etc.  they would chose by that standard - YOU JUST TYPED THAT ABOUT MANU AND A SCOUT THINKING HE MIGHT BE AN ALL STAR SOMEDAY.  But maybe, Reality, just maybe, they thought thier first round selection would have been a BETTER all star.  the fact that Manu has BECOME an all star is just very good luck by the Spurs to grab him ion the second round.  Who is to say we would even have Manu if some other teams ahead of us had NOT selected the way they did in the draft, prhaps the Spurs would have had another player on thier list of draft choices BEFORE Manu.  Do you know how many scenarios a team will go through getting ready for draft day?  I remember how the SPurs would make a big show of thier "War Room" on draft day, even inviting people to the dome to see who they would pick, Pop would talk about how they have a list of players and as the draft went along they would scratch off the names of players on thier list that were already selected, when the Spurs turn came they would review the remaining names and chose who they thought was the best player from that list.  That's closer to any damn memo that you could have GUESSED Reality.  Common Sense.  Spurs got lucky with Manu and Scola in the draft, nothing more than that.  Ask anyone else if they think there might be some sort of conspiracy going on that has NBA teams chosing better talent last and risking losing that tallent to other teams in a draft situation.   :nonono:  :moon: