PDA

View Full Version : If you are a STAR PLAYER in the NBA on a Bad Team, how long should you give ......



JordansBulls
07-08-2009, 05:07 PM
If you are a STAR PLAYER in the NBA on a Bad Team, how long should you give management to get you better players?

Is 2 years enough time? 3 years? 4 years? 5 years? 6 years? 7 years? etc

abe_froman
07-08-2009, 05:11 PM
2 or 3 years

Hellcrooner
07-08-2009, 05:12 PM
none, if you like the team you stay, if you dont play your rookie contract and then walk

JordansBulls
07-08-2009, 05:13 PM
I say it depends on where you are at. If you are a rookie, I think 5 years is a good measurement time, whereas if you are in your prime that 3 years is a good measuring stick.

Because more than likely if you are a star player as a rookie then you more than likely are on a horrible team from the get go.

Raps18-19 Champ
07-08-2009, 05:13 PM
Depends how long you've been bad before that.

If you just had 1 bad season, then I'd give it atleast 2-3 years but if you were in someones situation like Michael Redd whos been on a bad team for a while then I give it a year.

ARMIN12NBA
07-08-2009, 05:14 PM
2 years at most.

ARMIN12NBA
07-08-2009, 05:14 PM
I say it depends on where you are at. If you are a rookie, I think 5 years is a good measurement time, whereas if you are in your prime that 3 years is a good measuring stick.

Because more than likely if you are a star player as a rookie then you more than likely are on a horrible team from the get go.

Pretty much. Depends on where you are at in your career. If you are declining, then management better hurry up quick and surround the star player with talent.

TheHoopsProphet
07-08-2009, 05:24 PM
If nothing seems to be developing in the first 3 years, you can start looking forward to signing with a new team. Not to say you should demand a trade. I hate that trend so much. Your loyalty to a team should remain until you are a free-agent, you signed a contract, for better or worse.

Hawkeye15
07-08-2009, 06:53 PM
play out you're current deal, unless you are an aged vet that has been killin it for years. The whole notion that anyone owes something to a 28 year old kid making $14 million a year is ridiculous.

carter15
07-08-2009, 06:54 PM
3 years..the team doesnt have to be amazing after that..but just that the organization has shown signs of improvement.

still1ballin
07-08-2009, 06:56 PM
diez aņos

theuuord
07-08-2009, 07:03 PM
diez aņos

Imagine if the Lakers sucked for a decade, 1996-2006. You think Kobe would want to stick around for his prime years?

IDB Josh M
07-08-2009, 07:04 PM
If nothing seems to be developing in the first 3 years, you can start looking forward to signing with a new team. Not to say you should demand a trade. I hate that trend so much. Your loyalty to a team should remain until you are a free-agent, you signed a contract, for better or worse.

What about when the team just decides to trade you out of nowhere, ala Chauncy Billups to Denver last year? If a player wants out, I think it should be tactifully done, with the utmost respect. Not simply demanding a trade.

GspLAL
07-08-2009, 07:09 PM
It depends on the franchise, big market or small market, there are bigger expectations from a bigger market so I would say around 2-3 years. Also depends on your age, if you're up and coming or in your prime etc.

arkanian215
07-08-2009, 08:45 PM
career

Vinny642
07-08-2009, 09:00 PM
2-3

DODGERS&LAKERS
07-08-2009, 09:27 PM
I think it depends on the players goals. If the player is all about money. He wont care if his teams are no good for numerous years. He wont make a fuss about it because he is still getting payed. (Vince Carter) Or, you he might be a player that is not satisfied with just money. And will go out of his way to let management know, that losing is not acceptable. (Kobe or Wade)

J_M_B
07-08-2009, 09:33 PM
Around 2-4 years

IndiansFan337
07-08-2009, 10:46 PM
Money speaks in the NBA.

DCSportsIsPain
07-08-2009, 10:51 PM
It takes three to know how good any draft class is, and it usually takes more than one draft class to improve a team. Two draft classes and one good free agent per season should have a team ready to contend in five years.

I think a star player should make every reasonable effort to take care of the team and the fans that take care of him, but everyone wants a chance to win sooner or later.

Tommyh1331
07-08-2009, 11:02 PM
2 years maybe 3 depending on how young the team is, like Dwight Howards situation, it took the Magic a couple of years to put the pieces around him and he was very patient...I love that kid

geoffizfoshiz
07-08-2009, 11:12 PM
IMO there aren't star players on bad teams, just very good players who haven't found a way to make their team better. It is easy to complain, it is difficult to do something about it. I find it hard to respect people who take the easy route.

dee279
07-08-2009, 11:18 PM
I say about 3 years unless i see the team vastly improving.

desertlakeshow
07-08-2009, 11:19 PM
If I was a star and was drafted by the Clippers, I would sign the shortes deal I could and then run like hell to a team I wanted to play for.

No offense to the clippers, as it also applies to every other team in the NBA accept the Lakers.

kswissdaf
07-08-2009, 11:21 PM
Stupid Question

sanfranfan1210
07-08-2009, 11:31 PM
I would say about 3 years

Lakersfan2483
07-09-2009, 02:19 AM
If you are a STAR PLAYER in the NBA on a Bad Team, how long should you give management to get you better players?

Is 2 years enough time? 3 years? 4 years? 5 years? 6 years? 7 years? etc

3 yrs. tops.

Mile High Champ
07-09-2009, 02:21 AM
too many factors that go into a decision like this. Its hard to set an exact time frame, each situation and player is different.

JordansBulls
07-09-2009, 10:31 AM
too many factors that go into a decision like this. Its hard to set an exact time frame, each situation and player is different.

True, but after a certain amount of time you will know if management is trying to get you better players or not.

capecodcrusher
07-09-2009, 10:46 AM
2 to 3. If your ownership doesn't wanna win, why hang around.

Ace33Bone
07-09-2009, 10:50 AM
3 years should be enough time for the team to show some promise and make sure that they are headed in the right direction. Anything more would just be wasting time that you could spend making your run with another team

S-Dot
07-09-2009, 10:52 AM
KG is the perfect example...keep me as the highest paid player in the league and I'll stay. Once u officially start rebuilding though, look to trade me

JordansBulls
07-09-2009, 04:02 PM
KG is the perfect example...keep me as the highest paid player in the league and I'll stay. Once u officially start rebuilding though, look to trade me

The reason they couldn't get anyone is because he had the highest salary in the league every year in a small market.

DrDEADalready
07-09-2009, 04:14 PM
4 years.

CELTICS4LYFE
07-09-2009, 04:40 PM
I would walk if my team wasnt improving after 2 seasons

RiLoc
07-09-2009, 05:31 PM
Honestly, if I was a star player in a mid-length contract, unless I was truly miserable, I don't think I'd try to bully out a trade because it tends to make you look like a jack ***.

If my top concern was getting a championship and my 1-year option was up, then the answer would be: 1 year.

theuuord
07-09-2009, 05:57 PM
The consensus seems to be 2-3 years.

Toadman
07-09-2009, 07:23 PM
How many years did Kobe have to endure guys like, Kwame Brown, Smush Parker, Slava
Medvedenko, Brian Cook, Jennero Pargo, Vlade Radmonivich? And these guys were starters on the Team. No wonder he had to average 35 a game!

uncleben989
07-09-2009, 07:36 PM
play out you're current deal, unless you are an aged vet that has been killin it for years. The whole notion that anyone owes something to a 28 year old kid making $14 million a year is ridiculous.

:clap: