Owners don't want to deal, want to destroy players

[AE23]

Nobody deserves a guaranteed contract. If you play, you get paid, if you get hurt, you have arguably the best medical coverage in the world. How on earth do you get a bad deal by making MILLIONS?

I bet the rest of the world would LOVE to have that kind of a deal, where they can make money within the top 5% of the world within their first season.

Here is an idea, if owners have to provide their expenses, so do the players. Fair right? So far, the owners expenses are being presented within maybe a 7% margin of unaccountability/privacy. Its not perfect, but it's on the table. The players should take out their "feeler" ideals of what they think they should make, and provide proof to justify the costs.

What am I advocating for? Better venues and lower ticket costs. Why? Because I'm a fan of the game. How do we get there? Sure as hell not by giving into the players crying about their $10 million not being $15.

except for D-Rose , I dont have the numbers but the Arenas, Lewis and Stojachovic contracts are ridiculous, just to name a few. Greg Oden was given a 9M offer sheet if i remember correctly, thats some bullshit.

 

[Shawon0Meter]

So for we're 2/2 on the road to 45 of 60

edit: wrong thread but I'm gonna keep it here anyway lol

No NBA season next year

 

[clonetrooper264]

Well I think Peja is making a far smaller deal now, but yeah his contract was insane. Injuries robbed him from trying to even remotely play up to it though. Not really his fault.

 

[BNB]

I do think things like Bird rights are fair because if a team is at or near or over the cap they wouldn't otherwise be able to resign their star player. Imagine if we couldn't extend Rose because there was a hard cap. What would we blame? Probably the CBA first and then Boozer's contract. xD But seriously, the reason a lot of teams are probably losing money is because they are overpaying the crap out of their players. There is no reason Joe Johnson should be making that much money...or Brenden Haywood, or lots of other players.

I don't think Bird rights are that fair.

Teams like LA/Boston/Dallas are going 30+ million over the cap because they have to money to do so.

Teams like Minny, TOR, etc. don't have an extra 30 million a year to give out each year to keep their players.

 

[BNB]

Imo not paying an injured player is like kicking him out onto the street. It just makes them seem more and more like tools for owners to make a profit (which is pretty much how the owners see them I think).

But if the contracts were partially guaranteed, that wouldn't be as bad.

Instead of giving a guy 5 years 25 million all guaranteed, he gets 5 years 25 million with 10 mill guaranteed. So if he has a serious injury his first year, he still gets some money.. which is still a lot.

Except a lot of pro athletes are stupid so they do waste their money on random crap. Look at Scottie, he lost all his money in some way. Randy Brown wanted to sell his championship ring. There's tons more examples I'm sure. Players need an education so that they won't be freaking idiots once they start making more money than all the people that aren't blessed with that kind of talent...

That's the athletes fault then.

If I was an owner, I wouldn't wanna give out a shit load millions more just to watch a player blow it all.

If a player can manage to blow 50 million, he can manage to blow 100 million. It would just take him longer.

 

[clonetrooper264]

I don't think Bird rights are that fair.

Teams like LA/Boston/Dallas are going 30+ million over the cap because they have to money to do so.

Teams like Minny, TOR, etc. don't have an extra 30 million a year to give out each year to keep their players.

Why do LA, Boston, and Dallas have money? Because they WIN. Why don't Minny, Toronto, Cleveland, etc have money? Because they LOSE.

I agree that the Lakers and whoever else's payroll is pretty ridiculous (but a lot of the Lakers money is going to Kobe). However, you must also remember that they have a player who's salary is making up about 1/4 of the cap.

 

[clonetrooper264]

But if the contracts were partially guaranteed, that wouldn't be as bad.

Instead of giving a guy 5 years 25 million all guaranteed, he gets 5 years 25 million with 10 mill guaranteed. So if he has a serious injury his first year, he still gets some money.. which is still a lot.



That's the athletes fault then.

If I was an owner, I wouldn't wanna give out a shit load millions more just to watch a player blow it all.

If a player can manage to blow 50 million, he can manage to blow 100 million. It would just take him longer.

Yeah I agree with all that, just saying that if someone gets in a freak accident and can't play for the season (ala Blake Griffin) to not pay him a dime would be completely unfair. That partial guarantee idea is perfectly fine to me.

And most athlete's are dumb. They probably didn't get a good education due to the nature of the inner city school system (which a shame) and they probably never tried anyway. So of course when they're getting paid millions upon millions a year in pro sports, what do you think they're going to do? That's definitely not the owner's fault by any means.

 

[daddies3angels]

not really a basketball fan but to me NBA players should want 100% guarnteed. NBA players dont get hurt like NFL players do. What i think needs to be changed is how much these bench players are getting. I have read where 10-12th man are making 2 mil +...There should be a league min. like baseball where players make only 450K

 

[BNB]

Why do LA, Boston, and Dallas have money? Because they WIN. Why don't Minny, Toronto, Cleveland, etc have money? Because they LOSE.

I agree that the Lakers and whoever else's payroll is pretty ridiculous (but a lot of the Lakers money is going to Kobe). However, you must also remember that they have a player who's salary is making up about 1/4 of the cap.

but the other teams CANT win because they don't have the money to get to the point where the KEEP winning. that's the problem

LA/BOS/Etc. have the money to keep staying on top.

Also, playing in a big market will help you get money no matter what. NY is a big market and they still made a shit load of money even when they were losing because they could still sell a lot of seats, etc.

Minny can't get people to do that because they're in a smaller market, which puts them in a disadvantage.. when it shouldn't.

Smaller markets aren't effected in the NFL at all.

 

[clonetrooper264]

not really a basketball fan but to me NBA players should want 100% guarnteed. NBA players dont get hurt like NFL players do. What i think needs to be changed is how much these bench players are getting. I have read where 10-12th man are making 2 mil +...There should be a league min. like baseball where players make only 450K

There is a league minimum. Then there's also a minimum for players with x amount of years in the league. That's probably where you're getting that 2 million number from.

 

[Crystallas]

Instead of allowing/disallowing birds rights, the league needs to look harder at why teams get into those positions in the first place. I think star players that stick around should have options for revenue sharing that aren't used to penalize against the cap. Options that are voided if they break their streak of being exclusive to a NBA team.

I'm all about incentives. That's the best way to make the game better for everyone, and justify costs fairly. It's not perfect, but no other alternative will be.

 

[clonetrooper264]

but the other teams CANT win because they don't have the money to get to the point where the KEEP winning. that's the problem

LA/BOS/Etc. have the money to keep staying on top.

Also, playing in a big market will help you get money no matter what. NY is a big market and they still made a shit load of money even when they were losing because they could still sell a lot of seats, etc.

Minny can't get people to do that because they're in a smaller market, which puts them in a disadvantage.. when it shouldn't.

Smaller markets aren't effected in the NFL at all.

Well it's not really the owners' or players' faults that people in that area don't like basketball. Thing about big markets is that there aren't that many of them.

The problem is two fold. Small market teams don't win because they don't get players. Players don't want to play there because they don't win. It's a cycle. Once in awhile you'll get an OKC or Spurs who drafts really well and is able to make a profit in a small market area because their young talent blossoms, but most of the time you'll end up with Minny, Clippers, and Warrior type teams. The big market teams will always have money. That's just how it is and that's why those teams set up shop there. Plus they win games so that makes that area a more desirable option for players to go to if they want to win. Thus you have another cycle.

 

[BNB]

Well it's not really the owners' or players' faults that people in that area don't like basketball. Thing about big markets is that there aren't that many of them.

The problem is two fold. Small market teams don't win because they don't get players. Players don't want to play there because they don't win. It's a cycle. Once in awhile you'll get an OKC or Spurs who drafts really well and is able to make a profit in a small market area because their young talent blossoms, but most of the time you'll end up with Minny, Clippers, and Warrior type teams. The big market teams will always have money. That's just how it is and that's why those teams set up shop there. Plus they win games so that makes that area a more desirable option for players to go to if they want to win. Thus you have another cycle.

it's not that people in those areas don't like basketball, it's that they don't have enough people to buy tickets even when the team sucks. La, NY, chi, have millions of people that can buy tickets. Minny, Memphis, etc. don't have as many people.

and players go where the money's at. That's how it is in every sport.

Watch, if the NBA switches to a hard cap, a player won't care if a team sucks. If that team sucks but is now able to offer him more money because LA can't afford him, he'll go over there. And that's how talent starts to spread across the league and make it better for fans everywhere.

 

[CODE_BLUE56]

luke walton got paid 5.4 million this year and played as much nba basketball as i did

nick collison gets paid 13 million a year

DO YOU SEE THE ISSUE HERE?

 

[clonetrooper264]

it's not that people in those areas don't like basketball, it's that they don't have enough people to buy tickets even when the team sucks. La, NY, chi, have millions of people that can buy tickets. Minny, Memphis, etc. don't have as many people.

and players go where the money's at. That's how it is in every sport.

Watch, if the NBA switches to a hard cap, a player won't care if a team sucks. If that team sucks but is now able to offer him more money because LA can't afford him, he'll go over there. And that's how talent starts to spread across the league and make it better for fans everywhere.

Yeah I'd say that'd be a bit more fair in terms of spreading talent out, but if you're gonna spread out talent, you have to break up Miami, LA, Boston, us, and a few more teams because they have talent at most positions. Not every team is going to have it's own superstar. Talent brought together wins championships (or at least more games) and that's going to bring in the money no matter where you are.

Of course, I'm against a hard cap because it would screw the Bulls over, so perhaps my opinion is a bit skewed...

 

[clonetrooper264]

luke walton got paid 5.4 million this year and played as much nba basketball as i did

nick collison gets paid 13 million a year

DO YOU SEE THE ISSUE HERE?

It's as I said, overpaying massively for mediocre talent...

Collison makes 13 million a year? Seriously? Makes Deng's and Boozer's contracts look like values.

 

[97Bulls]

The NBA owners just don't want 100% of the contracts to be guaranteed... just a portion of it.

When you sign a guy for 5 years 100 million dollars and he either get sinjured or stops caring and you HAVE to pay him all of that 100 million dollars, it can really screw over a team.. like it has already done so many times in the past.

Oh come off it. How many players do that? I can only think of one and that's eddie curry. Im sure there's more but not to the point that you can use it as a point of reference.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

This is a more complex issue than just saying the players are 100% wrong or the owners are 100% wrong.

 

[RamiTheBullsFan]

They absolutely need to pay the injured players and there is no if's, and's, or but's about it.

 

[houheffna]

it's not that people in those areas don't like basketball, it's that they don't have enough people to buy tickets even when the team sucks. La, NY, chi, have millions of people that can buy tickets. Minny, Memphis, etc. don't have as many people.

and players go where the money's at. That's how it is in every sport.

Watch, if the NBA switches to a hard cap, a player won't care if a team sucks. If that team sucks but is now able to offer him more money because LA can't afford him, he'll go over there. And that's how talent starts to spread across the league and make it better for fans everywhere.

Parity won't work in the NBA, the NBA is a superstar driven league...leave parity to the NFL. You need stars and great teams for the league to thrive. Spreading talent by force like that will only hurt the league in the long run. I don't like that idea at all...