Regretting DWade

[Gustavus Adolphus]

Yes they all took pay cuts to play together but because of the no state income tax, it made their decision to take those cuts easier.

I'm sorry, but that logic doesn't make sense to me. Assuming Florida would be like Illinois and just charge a flat rate of income (again, assuming) they would pay less in state taxes by taking a pay cut.

 

[TheStig]

I actually think the Miami thing makes the league more interesting. I don't like parity. But why should these guys care about competitiveness? They care about winning, so what is wrong with that?

What would be boring is if some "superstar cap" was put on teams for the sake of competition, that is about as horrible an idea as it sounds. Let the players go where they want as they are legally obliged to do, and let the chips fall where they may. There might be a fallout when Madison Avenue gets involved, but that is just a consequence for their actions...

i wish the nba was more like the nfl in that respect. It puts more emphasis on management and internal development. You still have superstars who dominate but a team like the bulls from a few years ago could still win it. You can also get rid of bad contracts too.

 

[houheffna]

i wish the nba was more like the nfl in that respect. It puts more emphasis on management and internal development. You still have superstars who dominate but a team like the bulls from a few years ago could still win it. You can also get rid of bad contracts too.

If an NBA player heard you say that you might get shot in the foot. While the NFL is the most lucrative of all sports, their contracts are not guaranteed. A team like the Bulls from a few years back WERE NOT GOOD ENOUGH to win a title. That was not even a "very good" team. You are obviously talking about parity, where good teams, not great teams, win titles.

At one time in the NFL, teams dominated for a decade. The Steelers, Raiders, Packers in the 60's...they built great teams through the draft. The NBA tried its best to dissuade free agency to a certain degree by allowing teams to sign their own players to larger amounts of money. Well, people found a way to circumvent that system and do things they way they wanted to do them which is why you have sign and trade moves all the time. I like the NBA system the best.

But let me ask you...if the Bulls had enough room to sign Miami's three, with Rose and Noah...you would object?

I think you would be in the minority there.

 

[TheStig]

Of-course I wouldn't object. I wouldn't object if someone handed me a check for a million dollars either. But without winning the lotto with the big 3, I'd prefer that system overall. I think a bad contract shouldn't ruin a team long term financially and rookies shouldn't make peanuts. Overall, I think its much fairer for all involved. I also like Parity and having good but not great teams having the opportunity to win it all. Clearly that bulls team was not a very good team but in the nfl they had much better odds imo. On any given sunday, anyone can win.

 

[houheffna]

Of-course I wouldn't object. I wouldn't object if someone handed me a check for a million dollars either. But without winning the lotto with the big 3, I'd prefer that system overall. I think a bad contract shouldn't ruin a team long term financially and rookies shouldn't make peanuts. Overall, I think its much fairer for all involved. I also like Parity and having good but not great teams having the opportunity to win it all. Clearly that bulls team was not a very good team but in the nfl they had much better odds imo. On any given sunday, anyone can win.

Of course you wouldn't object? You have successfully nullified your own argument. Everything is rosy if the same players sign with the Bulls...but they sign with the Heat and its sour grapes.

And you can keep that "any given Sunday" stuff...that works in football, not in basketball. Especially when you admit a lack of objectivity in your argument...

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

Of-course I wouldn't object. I wouldn't object if someone handed me a check for a million dollars either. But without winning the lotto with the big 3, I'd prefer that system overall. I think a bad contract shouldn't ruin a team long term financially and rookies shouldn't make peanuts. Overall, I think its much fairer for all involved. I also like Parity and having good but not great teams having the opportunity to win it all. Clearly that bulls team was not a very good team but in the nfl they had much better odds imo. On any given sunday, anyone can win.

So you're ok when a top five NFL draft pick doesn't sign right away with the team he is drafted by because he wants more money?

 

[TheStig]

So you're ok when a top five NFL draft pick doesn't sign right away with the team he is drafted by because he wants more money?

Yes, why should he have his earning power limited? Don't you think Bron was worth more than 5-6 mill a year for his first four years? Maybe this will stop people from taking long shot prospects with top picks.

 

[houheffna]

Yes, why should he have his earning power limited? Don't you think Bron was worth more than 5-6 mill a year for his first four years? Maybe this will stop people from taking long shot prospects with top picks.

The NBA just stopped using that system. You don't remember Glen Robinson in Milwaukee and his wanting a $100million dollar contract?

History shows your theory doesn't work. The NFL and MLB have serious problems signing draft picks because of the open system used instead of slots like the NBA have.

In the scenario that you speak of, do you really think Carmelo Anthony would accept less money than Darko Milicic? And what is wrong with teams taking long shot players if they actually think the player will be good? NO way the players union would agree to your ideas, because they are old and outdated and have been proven not to work.

 

[Lex L.]

I like how the Scarecrow always likes to hype his connection to Chicago like he's its prodigal son.

People dont like him. He can be in as many commercials as he wants. All those guys are in the same boat. People dont respect them anymore. Their BS spin isnt going to change that. Id also like to know how much had to be edited out. Id like to know how many times they had to edit out, "hey, Diane, you suck!!!".

 

[JCM]

Lex L sighting!

 

[TheStig]

The NBA just stopped using that system. You don't remember Glen Robinson in Milwaukee and his wanting a $100million dollar contract?

History shows your theory doesn't work. The NFL and MLB have serious problems signing draft picks because of the open system used instead of slots like the NBA have.

In the scenario that you speak of, do you really think Carmelo Anthony would accept less money than Darko Milicic? And what is wrong with teams taking long shot players if they actually think the player will be good? NO way the players union would agree to your ideas, because they are old and outdated and have been proven not to work.

Agree to disagree, the nfl is the most profitable league in the world. Also rookie deals in the nfl aren't guarnteed so while someone may sign for 8/80 he wouldn't get it unless he worked out.

 

[houheffna]

Agree to disagree, the nfl is the most profitable league in the world. Also rookie deals in the nfl aren't guarnteed so while someone may sign for 8/80 he wouldn't get it unless he worked out.

If a player gets an 80mil contract, he will most likely get a 25+mil bonus up front at least.

The league is the most profitable...it also has the worst players union of the three major sports and does the least for former players. All is not what it seems with the NFL.

 

[TheStig]

If a player gets an 80mil contract, he will most likely get a 25+mil bonus up front at least.

The league is the most profitable...it also has the worst players union of the three major sports and does the least for former players. All is not what it seems with the NFL.

25 is not 80. Its not the same as your glenn robinson example. Glenn got all 80 guaranteed, even if he sucked.

I like the nfl system because dead weight doesn't stay around and only the best really get paid. You also don't have an value on contracts that are only beneficial because they are expiring. Unguarnteed deals are the key here.

Lastly, it might not be good for the players but its better to watch and puts out the best product. As a fan, I really don't care if its better for the players, in the end its a bunch of guys getting millions to play a game. I don't feel bad if they make a few mill less.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

25 is not 80. Its not the same as your glenn robinson example. Glenn got all 80 guaranteed, even if he sucked.

That is the point of the slotting system in the NBA though. All of that money is guaranteed.

 

[houheffna]

25 is not 80. Its not the same as your glenn robinson example. Glenn got all 80 guaranteed, even if he sucked.

I like the nfl system because dead weight doesn't stay around and only the best really get paid. You also don't have an value on contracts that are only beneficial because they are expiring. Unguarnteed deals are the key here.

Lastly, it might not be good for the players but its better to watch and puts out the best product. As a fan, I really don't care if its better for the players, in the end its a bunch of guys getting millions to play a game. I don't feel bad if they make a few mill less.

What "dead weight" kept the Bulls from getting Lebron James? How would the NFL system have made the Bulls any more competitive? I don't get it...

The NBA has the best system of all the major sports in my opinion. The cap is a bit complicated, but it DOES reward teams for development and drafting their own players.

At the end of the day, it comes down to the players having a choice. I think its up to you to have an objective perspective. You choose not to. Lebron picks the Bulls, you ready to have a parade, he chooses another team, he is a detriment to the league?

I appreciate Mike Meraz's view more because he never wanted Lebron to begin with. One reason? He felt Lebron's antics were bad for the game. That is the wrong view based on Lebron's talents, but at least he is consistent.

The league wasn't boring when the Bulls won 6 of 8 years...but now the chances of Miami duplicating such feats means the league is boring now? I don't think so. The NBA doesn't revolve around Chicago...thank God...

 

[TheStig]

What "dead weight" kept the Bulls from getting Lebron James? How would the NFL system have made the Bulls any more competitive? I don't get it...

The NBA has the best system of all the major sports in my opinion. The cap is a bit complicated, but it DOES reward teams for development and drafting their own players.

At the end of the day, it comes down to the players having a choice. I think its up to you to have an objective perspective. You choose not to. Lebron picks the Bulls, you ready to have a parade, he chooses another team, he is a detriment to the league?

I appreciate Mike Meraz's view more because he never wanted Lebron to begin with. One reason? He felt Lebron's antics were bad for the game. That is the wrong view based on Lebron's talents, but at least he is consistent.

The league wasn't boring when the Bulls won 6 of 8 years...but now the chances of Miami duplicating such feats means the league is boring now? I don't think so. The NBA doesn't revolve around Chicago...thank God...

Loul Deng is the dead weight keeping the bulls from getting Bron. If we don't have Deng, we can offer the same three deals the heat did but with Rose and Noah over Mike Miller and Haslem. But I don't like having that much talent concentrated on one team.

I disagree, having unguaranteed contracts are major point in any salary structure for keeping the best talent out there. Matching salaries also is nonsense. If you had a hard cap, you either have the money or you don't. That coupled with the most profitable league, make them have the best salary structure.

If you had understood my point I wanted Bron and Bosh but not three stars. Call me hypocritical but I wanted very good team but non invincible. Its also a bit different when its your team but in whole it still would be detrimental.

 

[TheStig]

That is the point of the slotting system in the NBA though. All of that money is guaranteed.

I understand the point, I just don't like the system. If the guy sucs, you have them on a similar salary schedule and if he is very good, you have him locked in at a reasonable rate.

 

[Gustavus Adolphus]

Loul Deng is the dead weight keeping the bulls from getting Bron. If we don't have Deng, we can offer the same three deals the heat did but with Rose and Noah over Mike Miller and Haslem. But I don't like having that much talent concentrated on one team.

I disagree, having unguaranteed contracts are major point in any salary structure for keeping the best talent out there. Matching salaries also is nonsense. If you had a hard cap, you either have the money or you don't. That coupled with the most profitable league, make them have the best salary structure.

If you had understood my point I wanted Bron and Bosh but not three stars. Call me hypocritical but I wanted very good team but non invincible. Its also a bit different when its your team but in whole it still would be detrimental.

Luol Deng's contract has 100% absolutely nothing to do with the slotting system in the NBA.

 

[TheStig]

Luol Deng's contract has 100% absolutely nothing to do with the slotting system in the NBA.

Didn't say it did. I said it prevented us from being able to fiscally sign the big 3. Which it did. But if he didn't have a guaranteed deal like in the nfl.......

 

[houheffna]

Didn't say it did. I said it prevented us from being able to fiscally sign the big 3. Which it did. But if he didn't have a guaranteed deal like in the nfl.......

So let me get this straight...you think Deng's contract is dead weight, and it kept the Bulls from getting the Big three, which makes the system detrimental to the league, because you can't get the big three on one team...which would also be detrimental to the league....


OK!!!!