Red Tiger Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 So much for LeBron potentially going to San Antonio. Kawhi going is bad enough, but Pop possibly retiring in 2020 completely kills that. LA or Houston then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Tiger Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 The most epic Stephen A Smith meltdown ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 Looks like 1 and done might be on the way out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperry Posted June 17, 2018 Share Posted June 17, 2018 19 hours ago, James Arryn said: Looks like 1 and done might be on the way out. This is good, but it ups the need on reform for small markets being able to keep their players for longer. Guys going straight from high school just means 1 more year of the cheap rookie contract is basically spent training the player. Which is fine, unless they can bolt to New York/LA/San Fran/Miami as soon as they hit their prime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briantw Posted June 17, 2018 Share Posted June 17, 2018 2 hours ago, sperry said: This is good, but it ups the need on reform for small markets being able to keep their players for longer. Guys going straight from high school just means 1 more year of the cheap rookie contract is basically spent training the player. Which is fine, unless they can bolt to New York/LA/San Fran/Miami as soon as they hit their prime. I mean, teams already get players for basically nine years, provided they are star-caliber players worth the max. When's the last time a star player turned down a full max at the end of his rookie contract? Your only real recourse is to sign the qualifying offer, and have we ever seen a guy worth a max do that? The closest I can think of is Wade, Bosh, and LeBron all signing three year extensions from their rookie deals, and even that was unprecedented at the time and it certainly hasn't happened again, and we also know with the benefit of hindsight that the three of them obviously colluded with Miami on those deals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperry Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 1 hour ago, briantw said: I mean, teams already get players for basically nine years, provided they are star-caliber players worth the max. When's the last time a star player turned down a full max at the end of his rookie contract? Your only real recourse is to sign the qualifying offer, and have we ever seen a guy worth a max do that? The closest I can think of is Wade, Bosh, and LeBron all signing three year extensions from their rookie deals, and even that was unprecedented at the time and it certainly hasn't happened again, and we also know with the benefit of hindsight that the three of them obviously colluded with Miami on those deals. Guys will sign it, and then demand out half way through. We've now seen Kyrie, Jimmy Butler, Paul George, and Kawhi do it in recent years with UFA upcoming. Not sure what the answer for it is, but it's a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briantw Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 3 hours ago, sperry said: Guys will sign it, and then demand out half way through. We've now seen Kyrie, Jimmy Butler, Paul George, and Kawhi do it in recent years with UFA upcoming. Not sure what the answer for it is, but it's a problem. To be fair, one of those guys was traded from Chicago to Minnesota. Another was traded from Indiana to Oklahoma. It's not as if those guys were jettisoning small markets for big. They just wanted better teams and were stuck on ones going nowhere with no end in sight. As for Kyrie, it was less a desire to go to a big market for him and more a desire to get out of LeBron's shadow and have his own team. Kawhi seems to be the only one who is forcing his way to a big market, although we have yet to see if he'd entertain a trade to a smaller market as well. We've heard Lakers, but nothing seems official yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 On 6/15/2018 at 3:59 PM, briantw said: LeBron chose to head the Players' Association. Personally, I think it was a short-sighted move, as is demanding a max contract every year. Yes, he's absolutely worth a max. He's worth double the max for the impact he has on your team. However, in a world where a bunch of other top stars are taking less to keep a superteam together, LeBron can't demand the max every year and expect his teams to beat a Golden State where guys are sacrificing. I don't think that players should feel obligated to take less than they are worth, but when the team that keeps beating you does it repeatedly, you either have to start doing it too or accept that you're probably not winning against them. And what I said about LeBron is that his insistence on only taking max contracts, along with making sure the guys his agent represents get overpaid by the Cavs, has left the Cavs in luxury tax hell. I believe they're staring down the barrel of a 140 million tax payment alone this year, and that's a sum that even a deep-pocketed man who has been willing to burn money like Dan Gilbert may balk at paying for a team that has zero chance of being favored against Golden State. That's why, as I said, repeatedly demanding the max is a short-sighted move by LeBron. He may be worth it, but if I were him I'd have been more concerned with my legacy these last couple of years, not making sure the Player's Association is adequately represented. And taking less money so the Cavs could have build a better team around him would have done a hell of a lot more for his legacy than making a few extra million, money he'll be able to make back through endorsements after he's retired. LeBron took a discount in 2010, he signed a contract worth $15 million less than the max over its lifetime; so did Bosh and Wade. And he got two titles out of it. But no one takes discounts forever, eventually its time to get paid. Which is why Klay Thompson (assuming his dad is speaking on his behalf) is saying he won't sign an extension until his current contract expires at the end of next season and he wants the max then; which will mean the end of the current configuration of the Warriors unless Durant agrees to a much larger discount than he already has (Curry meanwhile signed for a max deal just last summer), and even then I don't know if the math works out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Relic Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 It's easy to give away money when it's not yours. Anyone saying that LeBron, or any NBA player for that matter, should take less money than they might be able to get is not looking at this realistically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperry Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 31 minutes ago, Relic said: It's easy to give away money when it's not yours. Anyone saying that LeBron, or any NBA player for that matter, should take less money than they might be able to get is not looking at this realistically. Not only should players not take less money than they could, they shouldn't be allowed to. Salaries exist for competitive balance purposes. KD taking less than market value is one of the three failings that allowed this monster to be built. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Tiger Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 1 hour ago, sperry said: Not only should players not take less money than they could, they shouldn't be allowed to. Salaries exist for competitive balance purposes. KD taking less than market value is one of the three failings that allowed this monster to be built. Then how would you decide how much a player is worth on the market? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperry Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 19 minutes ago, Red Tiger said: Then how would you decide how much a player is worth on the market? Some sort of bidding/matching process is how it would be done. It's probably not feasible for all players, because teams could start gaming the system. But where it's critical is for the max players, as those are the guys who really impact the competitive balance, and also they're the guys who have the outside income opportunities to make it not a big deal to sign lesser contracts. The way the numbers work out in the salary cap, you should be able to put together 3 max level players. But if you choose to do that, you'll have to fill out the roster with a bunch of minimum guys everywhere else. KD taking less than the max intentionally, combined with Steph's completely laughable below market contract are what got the league into this mess. KD again resigning this offseason for less than he was worth is what allowed the Warriors to resign Iguodala and Livingston. It's not a sacrifice for KD to take less money from the Warriors; it's just creating a competitive imbalance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted June 18, 2018 Author Share Posted June 18, 2018 18 minutes ago, Red Tiger said: Then how would you decide how much a player is worth on the market? Did you already forget how I fixed the NBA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Tiger Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 2 hours ago, chiKanery et al. said: Did you already forget how I fixed the NBA? It was horrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Tiger Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 2 hours ago, sperry said: Some sort of bidding/matching process is how it would be done. It's probably not feasible for all players, because teams could start gaming the system. But where it's critical is for the max players, as those are the guys who really impact the competitive balance, and also they're the guys who have the outside income opportunities to make it not a big deal to sign lesser contracts. The way the numbers work out in the salary cap, you should be able to put together 3 max level players. But if you choose to do that, you'll have to fill out the roster with a bunch of minimum guys everywhere else. KD taking less than the max intentionally, combined with Steph's completely laughable below market contract are what got the league into this mess. KD again resigning this offseason for less than he was worth is what allowed the Warriors to resign Iguodala and Livingston. It's not a sacrifice for KD to take less money from the Warriors; it's just creating a competitive imbalance. Not really. Teams spend max money on players that don't deserve it all the time. This can easily blow up in your face. Max money players doesn't mean "the best of the best", in most cases it just means "scores a ton of points" (hello, Rashard Lewis). If you implement this system then teams will avoid high-volume scorers and instead focus on building teams with guys who are good at everything else and those guys will be underpaid (going by history). The CP3s of the world will not get max money, whereas the Carmelo Anthony-type players will. Owners will realize that getting well-rounded players won't cost them as much and they will underpay them, which will cause another shitstorm and lockout before you can say "what the fuck was Otis Smith thinking?". TLDR, it will cause more problems than it will fix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperry Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 2 minutes ago, Red Tiger said: Not really. Teams spend max money on players that don't deserve it all the time. This can easily blow up in your face. Max money players doesn't mean "the best of the best", in most cases it just means "scores a ton of points" (hello, Rashard Lewis). If you implement this system then teams will avoid high-volume scorers and instead focus on building teams with guys who are good at everything else and those guys will be underpaid (going by history). The CP3s of the world will not get max money, whereas the Carmelo Anthony-type players will. Owners will realize that getting well-rounded players won't cost them as much and they will underpay them, which will cause another shitstorm and lockout before you can say "what the fuck was Otis Smith thinking?". TLDR, it will cause more problems than it will fix. This isn't true at all. Preventing max guys from taking under market value doesn't change a thing about guys getting overpaid. Because guys who don't deserve max contracts aren't turning down max contracts under the current system. It's not like Blake Griffin said to the Clippers, ya know, my knees just aren't what they used to be you really shouldn't pay me 5 years $150 million. What this prevents is top guys who earn most of their money from shoe contracts and outside investments from taking below market contracts to allow their teams to load their roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted June 18, 2018 Author Share Posted June 18, 2018 16 minutes ago, Red Tiger said: It was horrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Tiger Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 59 minutes ago, sperry said: This isn't true at all. Preventing max guys from taking under market value doesn't change a thing about guys getting overpaid. Because guys who don't deserve max contracts aren't turning down max contracts under the current system. It's not like Blake Griffin said to the Clippers, ya know, my knees just aren't what they used to be you really shouldn't pay me 5 years $150 million. What this prevents is top guys who earn most of their money from shoe contracts and outside investments from taking below market contracts to allow their teams to load their roster. Simple yes or no answer. So if we implement your system then Griffin with his weaker knees is not legally allowed to take less than that 5 year, 150 million deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperry Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 10 minutes ago, Red Tiger said: Simple yes or no answer. So if we implement your system then Griffin with his weaker knees is not legally allowed to take less than that 5 year, 150 million deal? The $$$ per year figure is what matters, not the contract length. He could do a 1 year deal, as long as the $ per year was the max for the upcoming season. I also don't think this changes anything. If your'e a guy with bad knees, you're jumping at the contract offer when you get it. Griffin's behavior isn't going to change at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Tiger Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 59 minutes ago, sperry said: The $$$ per year figure is what matters, not the contract length. He could do a 1 year deal, as long as the $ per year was the max for the upcoming season. Which owners could take advantage of by not giving these max players security over multiple years. What could possibly go wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.