If doing so makes it realistically possible to sign a F/A during Harden's max contract that otherwise wouldn't be possible, then yes that's being loyal to the franchise. Can you please link me to a balance sheet or income statement that shows that the Rockets are making 100 million in profit per year?
Nah, we're not watching Tilman drive a Bentley, we're choosing to eat in one of his restaurants. And if he wants as many people as possible to eat there, he'll spend whatever it takes to give us the best food he can. If $50M is so critical to him, he shouldn't have spent $2B on an NBA team. Unless his plans were about making profits at the expense of winning titles. @TheresTheDagger, I don't have a balance sheet, but I have this from Forbes as of last week: Revenue: $326 M Operating Income: $103 M Player Expenses: $130 M
I think it depends on the sport. Like in basketball I tend to side with the teams/owners just bc there is a salary cap and bc players can be compensated fairly similarly no matter the team, they leverage that into "I will only play (fill in the blank)." Baseball I side with the players. Anyone can pay them what they want to pay them. Let the player go get what the market dictates.
I don't think he bought the team to help his restaurants. . . . I'm sure Fertitta would prefer to win a championship. But, no matter who he could get on the team through unlimited spending, even Jimmy Butler or whoever, the Warriors would still be favored to win it all. I bet that's how he sees it. Then the next thought: "I spent $121 million on payroll: make it work."
Respectfully disagree, you can feel that way about players but I do not. I will root for these guys to suceed even after they leave the Rockets and if Harden/Paul cant win a chip here I will root for them after they leave(of course not at the expense of the Rockets but you get what I mean). Guys like Gordon Capela, Tucker, Green, Bev etc are our guys to me even after they leave. And franchise loyalty is a two way street, Tilman is cheeping out on his once in a generation player. Doesnt come to life without the dudes wearing it.
lol. I never said I thought Tilman bought the team to help his restaurants. Not sure where you got that idea.
He invested $2bn and a lot of it is borrowed. I have zero idea whether the "profitability" figures include all revenue such as merchandise, concessions, etc. But, if it does, there are posts on this board that seem to indicate a pretty narrow margin between servicing his debt and his expected profits. I don't think we can simply say we don't care about the owner's money because the owner's money naturally drives decisions. I have no real facts, but I can see how ending up in the punitive repeater tax could create problems (read "default") in servicing the massive debt. You may be 100% right that winning it all takes care of all of the problems, but I do know that even making all of the right moves in no way guarantees or even makes it more likely than not that we win it all. I am a true believer in the Rockets, but it is hard to win a championship -- particularly when somehow one team keeps collecting all-stars. We are literally counting on our best player being so much better than their players that it makes up the difference. I believe. But, I am also glad that the FO is planning for the future and not just assuming we win it all.
He invested 2bn in an asset that always appreciates, everyone borrows at an interest rate that doesn't outpace their earnings, and in fact regarding the income numbers: 1) It does NOT include many lines of business, like what you receive from owning the arena in terms of non-basketball income. For example, concerts and events at the arena. 2) Teams notoriously under-report their profits, this has been known for years. They do it to share less revenue with the league and players.
I get managements desire to avoid the tax this year for two reasons - Its not likely they topple the Warriors this year … really not worth going all in this season , the odds are too slim. Next year its likely impossible to avoid as they are up against it with 7 players on the roster. Those 7 players and 5 cap holds put them ~$2.55m under the tax. I think it's pretty safe to say that they are paying the tax next season and probably again in 2020. My only gripe comes if they don't retain Shumpert beyond this season … as they would have used that pick and contract and have nothing to show for it other than avoiding the tax and little in the way of salary maneuverability to replace him with a player of similar value. Resigning Shumpert at his current figure puts the about $9m into the tax with 8 players under contract. So yeah , I understand the desire not to pay the tax this season as they'd most likely be in the repeater tax in 2020 otherwise. If Durant does in fact leave GSW this coming offseason , I'd much rather be in the tax the next two years over this one …. You have much better odds with him elsewhere. I think we all as fans would prefer that they spend like drunken sailors …. Tax be damned.
Count me in on the players side. Just not a fan of the CP3 contract. From the standpoint of staying competitive, he is navigating toward damaged goods territory.
It is weird. It is almost like the players are looking out for themselves.. And the owners are doing the same for themselves. Weird times we are living in.
Im with the team. I wish players would stay longer with the team, even role players. I think the league went out of balance with the power and money goes to the superstars and it affects us as fans of teams (opposite of fans of players), and they dictate everything that is happening in the league. Not all teams are equal and not all owners are equal, and it comes down to 'who pays more-wins'. That is a ****ed up situation in sport in my opinion. So ye, I undersrand why an owner dont want to pay 100 milion in luxury tax, on the other hand its necessary in the current environment which is what bothering me. The solution is simple- Hard cap. This is the best way to make things equal between teams. The players will get their share, not worried about them.
I side with the players. But the reason I might say "DAMN! I wish that guy took less money!" is because the owner sides with the owner. If Player A takes up a huge chunk of the cap, it's good for him. I'm happy for him. But, it's bad for the team, because certain owners refuse to lose money for a team, even a title-contending team. And there's nothing we can do to change that. So, knowing that Tilman doesn't want the Rockets to lose money, we have to hope we can get good value out of our players. When we don't get good value (that is, when we overpay) it's easy (if lazy) to look at that bad value and wish that player would have taken a cheaper deal.
