How is he not really overpaid. He's getting max money but he's not a max player. How could you see his performance in the playoffs this year and still say he deserves a max contract.
I think his reasoning is that more players deserve max money than just the top few superstars. Joe Johnson was the best player on the #3 seed in the East. Some people would argue that he's worth max money because of that.
Joe also had an excellent run in Phoenix, when they were consistently among the best. Reshard Lewis, had just one "break out" season and fizzled after that, didn't accomplish anything.
http://www.nba.com/playerfile/rashard_lewis/career_stats.html Look at those career stats again and tell me Rashard Lewis had one break out season.
that would be tmac, he got paid and didn't play at all last year. well, he didn't play for real only for testing his knees.
Rashard Lewis over Joe Johnson for me. Right now because Lewis' contract is a couple years in it is better only because it is only 3 more years, but at the time of the signing, what is worse, Lewis or Johnson? In terms of what the player brings to the team on the court, what is worse? Say what you will about Johnson, but he is a decent defensive player and can create shots for others. What does Lewis do? Defense? no, Create shots? no. Just just shots 3 ptrs. For 20M a year? Make the case that at the time of the signing that Johnson's contract is worse that Lewis for the production.
THIS. People are just saying Joe Johnson right now, because that signing is fresh on their minds. Rashard Lewis gets paid just as much as Joe Johnson and does significantly less.
Let's not forgot that flurry of 6-year deals we gave to terrible players back in the late 90's/early 2000's. Mo Taylor, 6 yrs $48 million Kelvin Cato, 6 yrs, $42 million Moochie Norris, 6 yrs, $22 million Brent Price, 6 yrs, $18 million Matt Maloney, 6 yrs, $18 million
