Comparison of Anti-dumping laws to superstars taking salary cuts.

No. Intrinsic value of living where you want + playing on the team you want + with teammates you want to play with.

And they're not putting anyone out of business. Terrible and ridiculous argument.

 

No. How are they putting other teams out of business? There's revenue sharing.

 

As someone who thinks that anti dumping laws are the b*stard step child of tariffs, the last bastion of financial nationalism, I find it pretty hard to agree with it being an issue anywhere, but in a professional sport, it's basically a non-event

PS Anti dumping laws are not about predatory pricing, they're about selling volumes or prices lower in overseas markets, **** the labor unions

 

This isn't slavery, it's a job. It's already a little uncomfortable how guys are forced to play for only one team (who drafted them) when they first come into the sport. Understandable, but uncomfortable at the same time.

There is no need to make it way worse by forcing FREE AGENTS (the one time players get a choice in the matter) to choose certain teams.

 

so what?
does the benefits you recieve justify unjustifiable use of force, killing and imprisioning people?(i.e. behind each law there is a gun pointed to those not willing to obey)

btw here's an enlighteneeing piece of literature for you, from one of the gretest economics minds of all times- Frederic Bastiat:

That Which is Seen, and That Which is Not Seen

http://bastiat.org/en/twisatwins.html

 

Get rid of max salaries. Lebron may be willing to except 1-2 million less a year, but would he be will to give 20 million a year?

 

Analogy does not fit in the slightest... Miami is not putting the rest of the league out of business... Lebron didnt take that much less either..

 

Need to even know the situations of where a player gets offered the locked-in max salary rate.

UNRESTRICTED free agents can go anywhere they want at any price. No one owns his rights, only "Bird rights". If the 1st thing an All Star player wants to do without even testing the market is sign up for $1 million to be a 4th wheel on the Milwaukee Bucks, he can do that. He doesnt have to sign a contract anywhere, can take a year off, or go to Europe.

What you're wanting is basically restricted free agency, or free agency with more restrictons.

If you mean the player's current team shoves the max at him before he goes on the market, the player refuses, but it still means it sets the price for the NEXT team, it means everyone involved is locked into that price. There'd seem some improprieties involved in that method too.

Might as well have franchise tags like in the NFL. A rule that prohibits a player from bailing, you keep him at a steep price. It might not stop all super teams, but it can hold them off a little longer, where the players will be more past their primes when the tags expire. A franchise tag like the NFL mighta made THIS past summer "The Decision".

If you mean players union, yeah maybe. They might not go for that rule. Would need another extensive owner lockout. Maybe players wouldnt object to getting the max, but they'd object to the limitation of options.

 

It doesn't happen very often at all. Players don't leave money on the table. Superfriends taking slightly less than the max doesn't really count. Barkley did it once, take only $1m so the Rockets could improve the roster. Sometimes, the old fogies go to the Lakers to ride their coat-tails. But, it never works out. Barkley didn't get a title. Payton and Karl Malone didn't get a title. Why fix a problem that doesn't exist?

 

If lebron wants to go to go play for the heats for a dollar than go do it. Other veterans take the minimum. And thats below market value

 

GP just picked the wrong coattails to ride the first time around.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/MIA/2006.html

 

If you can't compete you deserve to go out of business.

 

I guess OP meant out of business of winning championships?

 

Sports leagues are much different guys, you need your opponents in order to stay in business

 

Agreed.

 

Payton did get a title with the Heat so in the right situation it does work.

 

Doesn't make sense at all.

Lebron's business competitors are other players, not teams. Players are selling their service: basketball ability. If he takes a cut, he is still selling one, single, unique service and it's gone. There are still 29 other customers in the market for player X. If Lebron could clone himself 500x and dictate they all take $1 million than he could run other players out of the business.

Basically it has little bearing on how much another player makes on the market once Lebron already decides where he wants to go. In fact he probably helps drive the price up for them.

More apt would be if Fuji's suppliers sold their materials much lower to them than to Kodak to help Fuji put Kodak out of business.