I'm pretty sure he's mocking the Church of Spursentology and those who walk the Bridge to Total Freedom by professing their admiration everytime L.Pop breaks wind.
You also can't ignore the value Kobe brings to a franchise off the court. Teams would sell more tickets and merchandise for signing Kobe than for signing Duncan or Dirk.
Would you complain if that is what a Rockets player did? Were you complaining about Barkley? Why shouldn't someone take less money if it makes them happy?
Pop is a brilliant coach and maximizes his players' abilities with intelligent scheming. But, yeah, it is quite a competitive advantage when the best power forward to ever play the game re-signs for so little. Completely eliminates the salary cap as a means of competitive balance.
I actually wonder why not more stars players do that after two max contracts. You have already made about 200 million dollars playing basketball. Getting 10 or so more isn't really that important, right?
I don't recall the Barkley situation. That was a long time ago. I don't mind star players taking minor pay cuts but, when it is significant, I don't agree with it. I think there should be limits. Whether I believed it in the 90s or not, I believe it now. I don't like it. And, that goes for the Rockets as well. I don't want know player discount championship. If you can't win it with players making what they deserve, then so be it.
He's probably going to be in the Spurs organization for the next 10 years as an "associate coach" or "scout" or "advisor"...
Pop's real genius getting their big 3 for half of market value. Duncan would be making 30 million this year if he were a Laker or Knick.
It's not just that they're taking huge pay cuts. They're also willing to take on a reduced role and allow the younger talent to be the stars of the team. When LaMarcus Aldridge asked Kobe how he envisioned him fitting in with the Lakers, Kobe reportedly likened it to how Gasol fit with the team. Which is to say, he envisioned Aldridge playing second fiddle to him even at this stage in his career. And that's the biggest difference. Duncan, like Robinson before him, is willing to step aside and be a role player on the team if it means the team will win.
I actually wonder why in question of allocating resources between billionaires, most of whom were either born rich or got lucky, vs millionaires, most of whom were born poor and worked their way up, people like you always wonder why the millionaires are so greedy.
So if a player really wants to play for a certain team but that team can't or won't pay, he should be forced to play for someone else for more money that he doesn't necessarily want? We're penalizing the player and preventing him from making the best choice for himself? Who's going to be for this? The owners have no reason to support it. The players have no reason to support it.
Nice contender, but not the winner Too many subpar shooters... FTs and 3's We're only 1 or 2 moves away though. Namely, a PG who can shoot, playmake, and defend
