Wekko, I have to agree with Icehouse. If my employees transferred 20% of their salary to me for a year, I would call them winners. If they transfer $300 million/yr for the next 10 years, I would call them 10X winners. If they transfer $600 million/yr for the next years, I'll tell them that they hit the jackpot!
adande J.A. Adande Tidbit from NBA memo posted by @sam_amick: no more trading player then re-signing him that same season after new team waives him. So no more Zynduras Illguaskas traded to Washington then bought out and re-signing with the Cavs. Good, hated that thing.
You need to weigh the magnitude of the concessions made by the owners against the money the players lost. What did the owners really give up? From the looks of it, not much. Conversely, the players gave up 20% of their salary this season.
ESPNSteinLine Marc Stein Now that we can talk bout actual hoops issues again: Anyone remember Bynum must sit first 5 games of Laker season for playoff foul on Barea? Completely forgot about that. Bynum can't play against the Bulls on Christmas.
ZachLowe_SI Zach Lowe Wrinkle that got in the deal, via @sam_amick snagging NBA memo: $3M ANNUAL total cap on cash a team can send out in trades.
You can't draw that analogy because the nba is not like other businesses. If the players dont like it they can sign elsewhere, but they won't until other leagues can pay them more and offer them what the nba offers, elite competition.
I can't wait 2 see wat Morey is goin 2 do now the lockout is over and I can't wait 4 mchale 2 get started coaching!
i suppose that depends on your definition of fan. for a fan of a specific team getting the player with more experience? i suppose yes. for a general fan of the nba, i don't see it. as an nba fan, i'd personally like to see the nba be as close as possible to being the best 450 basketball players in the world. and if my choice is an 18 year old kobe bryant averaging 8 points but showing flashes or some 15th man on the bench who wears nice suits to the game, then i'm picking the 18 year old and the 15th man can go to the nbdl. knocking the 450th best guy out of the league for a rookie who might only be in the top 250 is still an upgrade as far as i'm concerned. true, but has anyone ever left? at least, has anybody who has even remotely lived up to their potential not at least signed their second deal with their original team? off the top of my head i can't think of anyone. it certainly can't be a big number. but this is my problem. everyone wants to have their cake and eat it, too. which i suppose is a natural desire, but it becomes more and more unfair to the players. if you want a more developed kobe at 21, then you shouldn't be able to underpay him for 4 or 5 years. part of the reason for rookie deals was that as players were entering earlier and earlier, people weren't sure what they were getting and didn't wanna pay huge salaries to unknowns. well if you're going to increase the age limit to the point you know what you're getting, then artificially depressing the new players' salaries stops making sense. not paying market rates by the time a player is 22 or 23 is pretty much crazy. in this world where everyone wants competitive balance and fairness through everyone paying market value with the same payroll, trying to not pay market value for a whole subset of players stops making any sort of sense. in fact, in an nba world where every team has to spend 90% of the cap and where young players are even more underpaid than now, you necessarily end up with a whole bunch of even more overpaid older players. i bet if you got them off the record, a lot of GM's would probably tell you they actually like this from a long-term rebuilding perspective. after you gut your team, lower salaries to get some cap room, and basically tank to get a good draft pick, not only do you get that good draft pick to sell the future of your team to the fans, but since he's not quite developed enough to instantly make you good, you actually get rewarded with another really good draft pick. now your foundation is even stronger than it would have been if you just drafted the 21 year old version of your 1st draft pick. then you use your cap space and you are set. that's pretty much what the thunder were able to do with durant and westbrook and it's probably worked out better than durant and "insert random 13th pick." granted, an imcompetent gm who is about to get fired if the team isn't instanly good after all of his mistakes would probably like the older, more developed rookie, but i'm not too concered with saving his job.
They would be best served going to Europe for 2 years. There they can get paid really well, play with professionals who are GOOD, they play tough defense, they coaches and teams are run like college teams but the talent and game is just higher and better. It is professional so you get paid and you train all day. MOST importantly, your development will be better off because you will not be coddeled. If lebron went to europe for a year instead of that first year in the NBA, they wouldn't forcefed him like they do here, he would have that jump shot, better foot work, more discipline, and understanding to listen to coach. I think college is just corrupt here, they just use it for money, they barely make them actually study, and make millions while surefire players wait around and people try to use this illusion of an education when they dont even get educated there. I dont think 18-20 years odl should be in teh NBA, because Including the success lebron, kobe, KG, bynum, ALL of them took one or two years to develop nad were forcefed and inefficient the first two years, i'd rather see them go through that hump in Europe or the Dleague and then come ready to shine. MJ had it perfect, he developed and refinded his game in college, came out as after 2 years and was just ready to take over.
i'll admit, i thought the players were being stupid. i wasn't on anyone's side but i thought the players didn't know what they were doing and were going to lose the season for us. it appears they had a good read on the situation (or maybe they just got lucky, i don't know) and called the owner's bluff and got a few concessions and then a deal. the owner's appeared to be doing what i was hopeful they were doing. namely giving the players an ultimatum to see if they could get a great deal but if the players showed some guts they would give a few concessions and then get the show on the road. luckily that's how it all played out and neither side was truly going for the nuclear option. the only thing i can really hope is that michael jordan really was as hardline as everyone said he was and already hated the ultimatum deal and thus really hates the deal that they've now agreed to. that would make me happy. if it also leads to players not wanting to sign with the bobcats, that would be even better.
<iframe width="853" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/iOTQzo5ZUBA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
while i knew $$$ was more important than competitive balance, i'm glad that it ended up winning out even more than it looked like it would. i generally like the old system and didn't want to see it move too much toward the nfl model. let teams stay together. parity is boring.
I think the age restriction is garbage. If there are too many busts from drafting men straight out of high school. Then the onus is on the owner. He needs to hire better front office staff.
If the NBA really wants to win back the fans, they should offer league pass for free for the remainder of the shortened season.
