How do people feel about this? My initial reaction was that he didn't do much worthy of talking about and as the coattail rider should take less since he wanted to join the party. Based on the 2nd underlined part I still feel like that. He never seems to open up to the fact they didn't need him to win, he joined a complete team and he wasn't some missing part to put the Warriors over the top. He thinks it's all hate for the Warriors, which is just part of it. People want to see parity and by taking a pay cut you are undermining that. If all players start doing that, then there's going to be 2-3 super teams soon with about 4 all-stars on each one. That's my opinion at least and a reason why for example I don't want Lebron, because it would mean all guys taking less than their value aside from gutting our team. On the other hand, who can blame him since it is his indeed his money and it is admirable to want to take a pay cut so the guys he mentioned could be kept. In the end I feel though he did the thing he should do, since HE would've been the reason for Iggy and potentially Livingston to leave and Curry to get paid less than what he deserves if he had taken the max. That would've been a dick move since he would've broken up a championship team just because he wanted that ring. That would've been selfish so taking less is just a nice gesture to his teammates as a thank you for accepting him. Not just that, since Curry took a step back so he could be the #1 guy on the team. It takes character and a lot of balls and swallowing of pride to do that. Durant simply paid back for everything the Warriors did for him. Also by saying they are underpaid and would want to get paid at some point he is kind of saying the Warriors didn't treat them right and he's making sure they do, not realizing if they had gotten / had bigger contracts he could not have joined them the way he did.
I feel like he is another star player that has been mind-tricked by ownership and he doesn't realize his power/leverage. Those guys still could have gotten paid if the owner just had a bigger tax bill. If Durant, a free agent, told ownership "pay them or I'm out", then they still would've gotten their money. But I guess it's easier for him to just do the owner a favor and take a paycut. I agree that it's his right and if he's cool with it then that's all that matters. But it's not like he took less to fit folks under the cap. He just let the owner shift the burden of paying to win to him.
Did he really take a pay-cut? I mean honestly, I'd say there's a very high possibility he's making up that 'pay-cut' in a brown paper bag somewhere far from the eyes of the NBA.
KD is great. I'm sure the Warriors will win 5 championships in a row if they can keep all the main four around.
This is not really the right way to look at it. Livingston's contract of $24m/3yr is fine. He was paid market value. Iguodala's $48m/3year contract was ridiculously overpaid. And had the Warriors refused it and Iguodala walked no way would any other club be foolish enough to pay that. I mean if the Rockets signed him to that contract, everyone here would be ripping on Morey and rightfully so. The thinking was always that they would pay Durant his mini-max of $31.8m which would have given them cap space to re-sign Livingston and Iguodala. He could have even certainly asked for his max-max of $34.5m and Warriors would have paid it without question and then renounced Livingston and Iguodala (they would HAVE to in that case due to no cap space). Durant's money was never an issue and owners would have paid him what he wanted, whether max-max or mini-max. And if Iguodala had been willing to take around $41.2m/3 years which even then would be somewhat overpaid, then Durant would have gotten his mini-max as expected and no one would be complaining at all. The thinking (rightfully so) is that if Iguodala walked, he wouldn't get anywhere near $48m and its just stupid to way overpay, especially considering tax bill. Why? Iguodala is important but not at $48m. Had Durant insisted on $31.8m AND $48m for Iguodala, and Durant walked after Iguodala walked (and signed for much less elsewhere), it would have just made Durant look like an idiot. There is no one anywhere that could have supported Durant's position that Iguodala was worth $48m and now Durant is making himself into a Lebron-type diva demanding ridiculous contracts for teammates. What happened wasn't the owners going to Durant, instead Durant went to the owners and said, in effect, pay him what he wants, take it out of my pay. In fact, if you read articles, owners were shocked by his offer and said okay if you really are willing to do that, we'll way overpay Iguodala to get him to stay. Ultimately Durant was "mind-tricked" by Iguodala and not the owners.
His pay cut this year was (relatively) inconsequential to him and to the team. A nice goodwill gesture though. Let's see what he does next year. If he's going to keep signing $20 million one year contracts, the league will need to do something... but I dunno what they can do. And the thing is... he might do it. That's how much he values those trophies. He'll do anything to keep them rolling in... even if the rest of the league suffers.
It is absolutely, 5000% the right way to look at it. There were two options for GS to keep every player they currently have, as is was aout resigning current players and using exceptions for free agents (they weren't trying to squeeze anyone under the cap). Either Durant or another player could take a paycut or the owner could pay a higher lux tax bill. The player took a paycut. He saved the owner money and accepted the responsibility of keeping the team together. The owner, who is the one responsible for paying to keep the team together, could have paid a higher tax bill. Durant volunteering to take a haircut doesn't change that fact. If he wants to take less to save his owner money, or to not challenge his owner to spend to compete as opposed to him taking a paycut to compete, that's his money and his choice. But that's absolutely, 5000% what happened. The owners are running Jedi mind tricks on these dudes.
Simple question: Is a 33.5 year old Iguodala, now with a history of health issues, worth $48m/3 years? Was any other team going to give him anywhere close to that? Yes or No??? If the answer is clearly no, then why would the owners agree to it unless they are Knicks/Nets level incompetent, which they aren't? The Warriors were more than ready to call his bluff and let him walk rather than be saddled with a bad contract like that. And Iguodala would be forced to back down because again no other team was going to give him anywhere close to $48m period. If Durant insisted on forcing Warriors to sign a bad contract wrt Iguodala, again, he would just make himself look stupid to fans everywhere. You're threatening to walk unless Iguodala gets a ridiculous contract that no one else would offer, really??? Imagine if Harden insisted on Rockets way overpaying for another player for 3 years or he'd walk. How well do you think that would go over with Rockets management or fans??? Exactly! They overpaid for Iguodala simply because Durant shocked them by effectively saying to take it from him so just give him what he wants. It became an offer they couldn't refuse and cancelled out Iguodala's ridiculous contract.
Because overpaying them keeps your underpaid (since the cap restricts star salary) star SF on the roster, which keeps you competing for titles. This is the leverage Durant had that he chose not to use. We have seen LeBron use this leverage to get to three straight Finals, winning one. He told his owner pay or I'm gone, so he pays. Durant has the same leverage. And no, he doesn't look stupid forcing the owner to pay $$ to keep a title team together. Does keeping Iggy and the others help GS compete for another title? If the answer is yes then they are clearly worth whatever it cost GS to keep them. The player is just paying that cost in this instance.
If Durant let it be known that he walks unless they overpay for Iguodala, I really don't see how it could possibly look good. Its beyond obvious that if they keep the core 4 of Curry, Durant, Green and Thompson are fill out the rest with good role players, they are favorites with or without Iguodala. And while Iguodala is a good player, he is aging and injury prone and on the downside. They could have easily replaced him with someone else. Let's say it plays out like this. Durant makes it known that he will re-sign for $31.5m the max possible that leaves cap room to sign Iguodala. Warriors say fine, let's sign it right away. Iguodala then asks for his ridiculous $48m/3yr. Durant says I won't sign unless you massively overpay Iguodala. How is it possible for Durant not to look bad? Again they don't need Iguodala to be a contender. So it becomes the case of Durant making ridiculous unreasonable demand. Maybe if we were talking Green or Thompson, but Iguodala is very replaceable. So in effect Durant is refusing to re-join the Warriors even though they would still be prohibitive favorites over Iguodala??? Also no other teams were paying Iguodala $48m/3yr. So likely he re-signs for less once Warriors call his bluff anyway.
What other teams would pay Iggy or the other players is not relevant. If KD thought they deserved to get paid their salary, then the owner could have been the one to pay them and he simply would have paid more in tax. Instead KD decided to make less so they could make "that kind of money". And if paying them that money gives you better title odds and keeps KD in town, then you pay it (see the Cavs). You seem to be moving the goalposts. Players not named Durant got contracts to keep the team together. The owner could have paid them, which you say is foolish. KD decided to take a paycut so they could get "that kind of money". How is it foolish for the owner to pay them but not for Durant to take less to pay them the same amount of $$?
What other teams are willing to pay Iguodala is extremely relevant. If he isn't getting that offer elsewhere and isn't irreplaceable, why do it? Bottom line is that if they keep the core four, they are contenders if they fill out the rest with good solid role players. They don't need Iguodala! The plan had always been to pay Durant his $31.8m then use the rest to try and retain Livingston, Iguodala or sign other players if they asked for too much. The plan and expectation by owners and fans was NEVER for Durant to take anything less and his offer to do so genuinely shocked them. If you want to say that it was foolish for Durant to give Iguodala his money, I actually agree. But without Durant's unexpected gesture, they would just call Iguodala's bluff or let him walk and sign a quality replacement with a much better contract. I don't know why everyone thinks that they needed to sign Iguodala at any cost??? I don't see how it doesn't look bad for Durant to insist on overpaying Iguodala or walking when: 1. No one else is paying him $48m/3yr. So he would be forced to take market value. 2. They could use that money to sign a productive player on a much better contract if he walks. 3. As long as Durant re-signs, Iguodala could be replaced with a scrub and they'd still be a top contender. 4. Thus even without Iguodala, where else could Durant go that's better than the Warriors??? Taking all these points together, Durant insisting on Iguodala being massively overpaid or leaving is many levels of stupidity!
funny he mentions that taking a paycut helped dirk nowitzki.....ya it helped overpay chandler douchebag parsons lol
