PDA

View Full Version : Carmelo Rule



hgtiger32
10-01-2011, 02:29 AM
Maybe this has been posted already, maybe not. I don't know.

http://www.hoopsworld.com/nba-owners-want-carmelo-rule/



NBA owners are seeking a rule preventing a team from signing a player acquired in a trade to an extension in the final year of his deal, ESPN.com reported Friday.

The report calls the proposed item the “Carmelo Rule” in reference to superstar Carmelo Anthony, who was traded to the New York Knicks last season and immediately signed a contract extension.

According to the report, owners want to prevent teams from using the Larry Bird Exception – which allows teams to exceed the salary cap to retain their own impending free agents – on any player in the final year of his existing deal acquired in a trade.

In the summer of 2010, Anthony was entering the final year of his contract with the Denver Nuggets – he had an option for the 2011-12 season – and refused to sign a three-year, $65 million contract extension offered by the club.

That led to the widespread belief that Anthony wanted out of Denver. The Nuggets had to trade Anthony to avoid losing him in free agency and getting nothing in return, and they were limited in where they could send him because the team looking to acquire him had no assurance he would stay.

The report also said owners are looking for the elimination of sign-and-trade deal and the bi-annual exception worth $2 million. Owners and players are meeting Friday in New York.

Cal827
10-01-2011, 02:33 AM
I guess we will see more sign and trades in the middle of the season now lol

Cause if Denver signed him to the extension, then dealt him, that would be ok right?

I think another good name for this rule would be the "Rent-a-Player"

airforceones25
10-01-2011, 02:34 AM
sounds like a good rule to me... if a player wants to dictate where he goes he shouldn't be rewarded with the premium deal. let him sign at the FA max instead of letting him benefit from extra years and dollars..

DodgerBulls
10-01-2011, 03:02 AM
I actually like it. Let the player enter the free agency pool rather than being locked up on the team he can potentially go to, a la Melo.

C_Mund
10-01-2011, 04:22 AM
This is a change I can get down with

bholly
10-01-2011, 06:53 AM
I like the general idea, but I'd want to see the final version before really making up my mind.

LakersIn5
10-01-2011, 07:39 AM
let the players do what they want. take off the salary cap. allow teams to sign whoever for as much as they want. :P

SteBO
10-01-2011, 08:41 AM
sounds like a good rule to me... if a player wants to dictate where he goes he shouldn't be rewarded with the premium deal. let him sign at the FA max instead of letting him benefit from extra years and dollars..
Um, this. I'd hate for any other fanbase to have to suffer through what the Denver fans had to with the 'Melodrama. It's a very tough thing to whether as a die hard fan of a team.

Hellcrooner
10-01-2011, 09:11 AM
lol, yeah great let melodramas start 2 years before it expires instead of 1.

because in teh end the situation is the same, a player saying **** you!!! im going out of here!! get something or lose me for free.

btw slavery was abolished a long time ago, someone should tell the ****ing stupid owners.

gwrighter
10-01-2011, 09:25 AM
good rule.

likemystylez
10-01-2011, 10:04 AM
lol, yeah great let melodramas start 2 years before it expires instead of 1.

because in teh end the situation is the same, a player saying **** you!!! im going out of here!! get something or lose me for free.

btw slavery was abolished a long time ago, someone should tell the ****ing stupid owners.

First of all- I do think the Owners are in the wrong in this whole negotiation, but your last comment is not only wrong... its kind of offensive.

Slavery- Please. If I am an owner and currently paying a player a max contract which he agreed to at the signing, I think I do have the right to tell him he is working for me through this contract and his actions should not be detrimental to my organization.

Carmello was going to the public media about his desire to go somewhere else constantly, to the point where the team was paying a max contract for a player who was nothing more than a distraction. I mean the rest of the team was affected too because they didnt know what direction the organization was going to go in, and they didnt know if they were going to be packaged in some trade with Melo. Expecting a player to be a somewhat profesional for your organization while you are honoring your end of the contract is a far cry from slavery.

Hellcrooner
10-01-2011, 10:21 AM
First of all- I do think the Owners are in the wrong in this whole negotiation, but your last comment is not only wrong... its kind of offensive.

Slavery- Please. If I am an owner and currently paying a player a max contract which he agreed to at the signing, I think I do have the right to tell him he is working for me through this contract and his actions should not be detrimental to my organization.

Carmello was going to the public media about his desire to go somewhere else constantly, to the point where the team was paying a max contract for a player who was nothing more than a distraction. I mean the rest of the team was affected too because they didnt know what direction the organization was going to go in, and they didnt know if they were going to be packaged in some trade with Melo. Expecting a player to be a somewhat profesional for your organization while you are honoring your end of the contract is a far cry from slavery.

no what im talking bout is owners trying to tie players FOR LIFE in a place they MIGHT NOT LIKE by adding rule over rule over rule to make them IMPOSIBLE to move somwhere else.

likemystylez
10-01-2011, 10:31 AM
no what im talking bout is owners trying to tie players FOR LIFE in a place they MIGHT NOT LIKE by adding rule over rule over rule to make them IMPOSIBLE to move somwhere else.

its not impossible, its just a lot tuffer to get a max contract. If a player is a free agent he can go anywhere he wants, but if he goes to a team that doesnt have enough cap space... he wont get a max deal.

likemystylez
10-01-2011, 10:32 AM
^ basically, a player shouldnt be rewarded for being unprofesional

arkanian215
10-01-2011, 10:33 AM
no what im talking bout is owners trying to tie players FOR LIFE in a place they MIGHT NOT LIKE by adding rule over rule over rule to make them IMPOSIBLE to move somwhere else.

How would it be impossible? They can still get traded to the team they want to join. They'll have to sacrifice the difference between a max contract and a UFA max contract.

PrettyBoyJ
10-01-2011, 10:33 AM
lol, yeah great let melodramas start 2 years before it expires instead of 1.

because in teh end the situation is the same, a player saying **** you!!! im going out of here!! get something or lose me for free.

btw slavery was abolished a long time ago, someone should tell the ****ing stupid owners.

What does slavery have to do with this.. You do realize that owners pay the players millions of dollars to play and that Melo was under contract..

MiamiLoyal926
10-01-2011, 10:35 AM
no what im talking bout is owners trying to tie players FOR LIFE in a place they MIGHT NOT LIKE by adding rule over rule over rule to make them IMPOSIBLE to move somwhere else.

He is not tied down!? He could take the lebron route and actually play out his contract (that he agreed to) and then sign elsewhere for the regular max deal as a "free"agent.

daleja424
10-01-2011, 10:36 AM
Im okay with this...

But hy not just adjust the Bird Rule to say you have to play for a team for 2 years to get bird rights...and they are non transferable...

theheatles
10-01-2011, 10:38 AM
how does this rule help the little guys? if this rule was in effect the knicks wouldn't have traded for melo and would have just waited for free agency and signed him then and denver would have only received a couple draft picks for compensation

arkanian215
10-01-2011, 10:41 AM
Im okay with this...

But hy not just adjust the Bird Rule to say you have to play for a team for 2 years to get bird rights...and they are non transferable...
Part of what makes the NBA exciting is player movement. I think something like that would stifle that.

arkanian215
10-01-2011, 10:42 AM
how does this rule help the little guys? if this rule was in effect the knicks wouldn't have traded for melo and would have just waited for free agency and signed him then and denver would have only received a couple draft picks for compensation

I think the point was that Melo wouldn't have gotten the same money he got if he were to sign with the Knicks outright in FA 2011. I'm pretty sure that whole fiasco was to go somewhere he wanted AND get paid the max amount. He'll still go where he wants to if he signs outright but lose a bit of money.

daleja424
10-01-2011, 10:46 AM
Part of what makes the NBA exciting is player movement. I think something like that would stifle that.

But that is what the owners are trying to accomplish...

NYman15
10-01-2011, 10:47 AM
I understand what the rule is supposed to do, but it could also backfire. You could have had Melo stay a Nugget through the season and then make it to FA, and then while he lost money, he still could have went to the Knicks and then the Nuggets would have been left with nothing and not gotten anything in return for Melo. It could go both ways.

daleja424
10-01-2011, 10:51 AM
Except melo doesn't strike me as the kind of guy that would have given up a massive amount of money...

And really... What did Denver get out of it?

likemystylez
10-01-2011, 10:54 AM
I understand what the rule is supposed to do, but it could also backfire. You could have had Melo stay a Nugget through the season and then make it to FA, and then while he lost money, he still could have went to the Knicks and then the Nuggets would have been left with nothing and not gotten anything in return for Melo. It could go both ways.

they would have had melos contract space.

arkanian215
10-01-2011, 10:58 AM
But that is what the owners are trying to accomplish...

I think collectively they get more money from all the pub. How much have owners been hurt by midseason demands for trades in the final year of their contract? Not much significant comes to mind. There have been a couple of guys who were speculated to leave but didn't. Melo was one of those who did, and probably the most high profile out of all of them. I think the money the league as a whole generates from the possibility that a star will be traded by the deadline in the last year of their contract outweighs any damage financially a Melo has done to a single franchise.

arkanian215
10-01-2011, 11:01 AM
I understand what the rule is supposed to do, but it could also backfire. You could have had Melo stay a Nugget through the season and then make it to FA, and then while he lost money, he still could have went to the Knicks and then the Nuggets would have been left with nothing and not gotten anything in return for Melo. It could go both ways.

There is a reason why Melo was trying to force his way out of Denver before the deadline and did not wait until free agency.

daleja424
10-01-2011, 11:06 AM
I think collectively they get more money from all the pub. How much have owners been hurt by midseason demands for trades in the final year of their contract? Not much significant comes to mind. There have been a couple of guys who were speculated to leave but didn't. Melo was one of those who did, and probably the most high profile out of all of them. I think the money the league as a whole generates from the possibility that a star will be traded by the deadline in the last year of their contract outweighs any damage financially a Melo has done to a single franchise.

Didnt say I disagree... but they also make a ton of money off of super teams...

They don't care... they want "competitive balance" which is a joke of a concept...

theheatles
10-01-2011, 11:14 AM
There is a reason why Melo was trying to force his way out of Denver before the deadline and did not wait until free agency.

the reason why melo wanted out was that he wanted a new deal before the lockout and new CBA...that's the reason, so if this rules goes into effect it doesn't do anything for the small market teams going forward

Hellcrooner
10-01-2011, 11:14 AM
How would it be impossible? They can still get traded to the team they want to join. They'll have to sacrifice the difference between a max contract and a UFA max contract.

nope.

they are trying to abolish

1 sign and trades
2 bird rights if you get traded in your last year.


translation , no bynum for dwight swap for rxample, because lakers woul only be able to offer him an Mle , instead of having his bird rights to resign.

NYman15
10-01-2011, 11:39 AM
I didn't just mean Melo. I meant any player. Melo was a special case. He knew a lockout was coming and he was gonna most likely lose money. Now with guys like Cp3 and Howard among others don't have to worry about that. Would a guy like Cp3 ,who wants to win, would he take a little less money and try out FA? I think it's a possibility. I just meant that it could affect other players.

NYman15
10-01-2011, 11:42 AM
If a team like the Thunder or Clippers wanted Cp3, but they wouldn't know/be able to sign him to an extension and they would have to wait and see what happened in FA would they give up a lot? Knowing that, would they give up Westbrook or would the Clipps give up the Minny pick not knowing if they would be able to keep him longterm? That could hurt the Hornets.

ManRam
10-01-2011, 11:42 AM
crooner...slavery? Really? Come on man.


I'm all for it.

ManningToTyree
10-01-2011, 11:50 AM
There is a reason why Melo was trying to force his way out of Denver before the deadline and did not wait until free agency.

Ya but if Denver didn't trade him, he would have been a FA. Nothing he could do about it. Then he would have still left Denver for another team and Denver would have gotten nothing

People say it is about superstars choosing where they go, but the reason teams give in and trade the superstars is because it benefits their team as well.

If LeBron had assured the Cavs he was leaving, you don't think they would have traded him for as great a return as possible?

jrm2054
10-01-2011, 11:55 AM
i hate naming rules after players

llemon
10-01-2011, 01:13 PM
Except melo doesn't strike me as the kind of guy that would have given up a massive amount of money...

And really... What did Denver get out of it?

Andre Miller, Wilson Chandler (RFA) Gallinari, Mozgov, cash, two 2nd rd picks, one 1st rd pick and a good amount of capspace.

Tony_Starks
10-01-2011, 01:20 PM
Im all for it. The only reason Melo was able to force Denvers hand is because he knew NY would max him out. I don't think players should be rewarded for forcing their way out of town. If they want to walk and take a paycut thats on them.....

imagesrdecievin
10-01-2011, 01:37 PM
I agree with the idea that it won't accomplish it's goal. The hoopla will just start earlier and the decisions will be even tougher on GM's because a lot can change over time.

faze38
10-01-2011, 02:11 PM
Andre Miller, Wilson Chandler (RFA) Gallinari, Mozgov, cash, two 2nd rd picks, one 1st rd pick and a good amount of capspace.

Except now they lost Chandler to China! Man they really got screwed thanks to the new CBA. Thank god my team was on the other side of the deal because I would have lost my mind if that happened to the Knicks

Colts2180
10-01-2011, 02:13 PM
I see the pros and cons of these possible rule changes. I think it would be better for the league as a whole if they did implement these rules. What Melo did was not right and really hurt his public image. I feel for Denver to have to go through that but as much as they did get in return for him they would have much rather of kept Melo. If he wasnt going to get as much money would he have left? I dont think it would have been as clear cut to him. Would NY of even traded for him? I dont know if they would have. Denver could have payed him more which over time would have made him sway his decision to possibly staying in Denver. Thats what the leagues try to accomplish. This all comes from the original pairing of Lebron with Bosh and Wade. While it wasnt originally a trade they did end up turning it into a trade later on. They are trying to stop this super team pairing that they started last year and make the rest of the league have a fighting chance instead of having 4 or 5 teams that even have a shot of winning it all. What fun is it to be a fan of a team that you know will never win it all? I like the efforts to make it more like the NFL. Any1 can win it in the NFL. Thats what makes them the best league in the world.

llemon
10-01-2011, 02:14 PM
Except now they lost Chandler to China! Man they really got screwed thanks to the new CBA. Thank god my team was on the other side of the deal because I would have lost my mind if that happened to the Knicks

I put the (RFA) there because Nuggets still own his rights as a Restricted Free Agent.

Tony_Starks
10-01-2011, 02:29 PM
Except now they lost Chandler to China! Man they really got screwed thanks to the new CBA. Thank god my team was on the other side of the deal because I would have lost my mind if that happened to the Knicks


I was just thinking that the other day, the lockout really screwed Denver over. They've already lost Smith, K Mart, Chandler, and I believe Gallo and Mosgov are either gone or on the verge of going......

NBAfan4life
10-01-2011, 02:49 PM
I don't want to see players basically only play for the team that drafts them. Movement is exciting.

arkanian215
10-01-2011, 10:51 PM
the reason why melo wanted out was that he wanted a new deal before the lockout and new CBA...that's the reason, so if this rules goes into effect it doesn't do anything for the small market teams going forwardMelo was motivated by money. That's why he was desperate to create the situation where Denver would be forced to trade him before the deadline. He would not wait until FA. If guys are not willing to sacrifice salary and teams that acquire him are not allowed to sign him to an extension, then the team he's leaving has greater power. In more instances, that team that he's leaving is a small market team.


Ya but if Denver didn't trade him, he would have been a FA. Nothing he could do about it. Then he would have still left Denver for another team and Denver would have gotten nothing

People say it is about superstars choosing where they go, but the reason teams give in and trade the superstars is because it benefits their team as well.

If LeBron had assured the Cavs he was leaving, you don't think they would have traded him for as great a return as possible?
I'm not saying Denver had to trade him but Melo and his people were not going to let him sign for anything less than max. Had he left Denver via straight FA, that's a fail on their part considering their motivations. To me this says, superstars can no longer dictate where they go unless they leave via FA and sacrifice salary.

This situation doesn't really apply to Lebron because his motivations are different and the situation he put himself in was different. Money wasn't the priority there whereas the "Melo rule" targets players who are seeking that extra bit as well as dictating where they go.

nope.

they are trying to abolish

1 sign and trades
2 bird rights if you get traded in your last year.


translation , no bynum for dwight swap for rxample, because lakers woul only be able to offer him an Mle , instead of having his bird rights to resign.
How does the "Carmelo rule" prevent sign and trades? Melo was traded and then signed an extension. They wouldn't call it the Melo rule if they were trying to stop sign and trades because that's not what happened with Melo.

IDunknown
10-01-2011, 11:44 PM
I was just thinking that the other day, the lockout really screwed Denver over. They've already lost Smith, K Mart, Chandler, and I believe Gallo and Mosgov are either gone or on the verge of going......

Smith and Martin are unrestricted free agents,but Chandler is restricted.Gallinari has an out clause in his contract.A Nuggets fan would be crazy to not like sign and trades.

llemon
10-02-2011, 12:03 AM
Smith and Martin are unrestricted free agents,but Chandler is restricted.Gallinari has an out clause in his contract.A Nuggets fan would be crazy to not like sign and trades.

What is Gallinari's out? He's a RFA in '12-'13, no?

daleja424
10-02-2011, 08:56 AM
Andre Miller, Wilson Chandler (RFA) Gallinari, Mozgov, cash, two 2nd rd picks, one 1st rd pick and a good amount of capspace.

and which of those players makes a difference like Melo did? Which of those guys gets them over the top?

My point is this... sure they got some guys back for Melo... but who cares? None of the guys they got are difference makers. Non of those guys sell tickets/gear like Melo did. None of those guys sell tickets like Melo did. None of those guys will win games like Melo did.

The Nuggets went from a scary upset playoff team to a first round sweep at best...

Giants88
10-02-2011, 09:15 AM
I find it funny how everyone misunderstands the players side to this situation. If the player doesn't want to sign an extension with a team then that's their right. Yes it's a clear indication that the player doesnt wanna be there anymore but it's the teams choice to trade him.

likemystylez
10-02-2011, 10:12 AM
and which of those players makes a difference like Melo did? Which of those guys gets them over the top?

My point is this... sure they got some guys back for Melo... but who cares? None of the guys they got are difference makers. Non of those guys sell tickets/gear like Melo did. None of those guys sell tickets like Melo did. None of those guys will win games like Melo did.

The Nuggets went from a scary upset playoff team to a first round sweep at best...

Also without a marquee player like Melo, they were fortunate to make the play offs last year... and their own players are going to be harder for them to retain. Does Nene want to waste the best years of his carreer waiting for Galinari to develop his game?

likemystylez
10-02-2011, 10:17 AM
I find it funny how everyone misunderstands the players side to this situation. If the player doesn't want to sign an extension with a team then that's their right. Yes it's a clear indication that the player doesnt wanna be there anymore but it's the teams choice to trade him.

Of course it is their right to not sign an extension, but the fact that they are able to disrespect their team mates, their current employers, and to a lesser extent the NBA by acting completely unprofessional and still get themselves a max deal on the team of their choice..... that doesnt seem completely fair.

The bird rights were designed for the player to have an incentive to stay with the same team.... and give teams a way to retain their own players.

The purpose of the original exception has been lost for the last few years, and it warrants modification.

IBleedPurple
10-02-2011, 11:08 AM
This will force more players to be traded before their final season. The link doesn't fully explain it. Basically forces teams to either trade a player before the final year of their contract, or get "Lebron-ed".

While this would help prevent teams stacking up for the playoffs, it will only assist the unhappy players in going where they want, which isn't the best for the league. Not surprising this would get worse in the NBA instead of other sports.

da ThRONe
10-02-2011, 11:20 AM
All these laws and bi-laws in sports are ridiculous and over done. Just keep it simple. These kinds of things aren't the problem with pro basketball. Until we get a definitive cap on spending we will always have issues with player salaries, trades, and free agency.

The league needs to stop overreacting and just make the right rules instead of trying to mirco-manage every little thing. I'm sure the league will be crying about this rule in the future if this gets in the new CBA.

IBleedPurple
10-02-2011, 11:22 AM
How does the "Carmelo rule" prevent sign and trades? Melo was traded and then signed an extension. They wouldn't call it the Melo rule if they were trying to stop sign and trades because that's not what happened with Melo.

Because a player would have to be traded by July before their last season to be able to sign an extension with the same team.

If this rule were in effect, Melo would've had to been traded before the season, or lost a fair amount of money and sign in FA. Otherwise the team he was traded to during the season couldn't have signed him.

llemon
10-02-2011, 11:49 AM
Because a player would have to be traded by July before their last season to be able to sign an extension with the same team.

If this rule were in effect, Melo would've had to been traded before the season, or lost a fair amount of money and sign in FA. Otherwise the team he was traded to during the season couldn't have signed him.

'10-'11 was not Carmelo's last year of his contract. He has a player option for this season which he picked up when he was traded.

He could have picked up his '11-'12 option with Nuggets if he hadn't been traded, and made their season miserable.

IDunknown
10-02-2011, 02:56 PM
What is Gallinari's out? He's a RFA in '12-'13, no?

I was talking about his contract in Italy.He went to play for his old team.

IDunknown
10-02-2011, 03:09 PM
crooner...slavery? Really? Come on man.


I'm all for it.

You're for slavery.That's messed up.

TheNumber37
10-02-2011, 03:29 PM
Fair.

KnicksorBust
10-02-2011, 03:34 PM
Despite the fact that my team benefitted, I'd like to see the rule changed as well. We need more players like Durant who get drafted to a team and commit themselves to turning that franchise around.

topdog
10-02-2011, 03:41 PM
lol, yeah great let melodramas start 2 years before it expires instead of 1.

because in teh end the situation is the same, a player saying **** you!!! im going out of here!! get something or lose me for free.

btw slavery was abolished a long time ago, someone should tell the ****ing stupid owners.

This is the absolute, most ignorant thing I have seen on this forum.

THE MTL
10-02-2011, 05:00 PM
I think small market teams are screwing themselves on this deal. S&T are the reason why teams get compensated for losing their players. If you get rid of that, then Cleveland & Toronto would not have gotten anything for Lebron & Bosh (cause remember those teams technically received draft picks).

And DEN would have lost Melo without gaining half the Knicks roster.

THE MTL
10-02-2011, 05:08 PM
Despite the fact that my team benefitted, I'd like to see the rule changed as well. We need more players like Durant who get drafted to a team and commit themselves to turning that franchise around.

I disagree these players have the right to go where they want to go and its not like they 'book' it at the first chance they get.

Lebron gave Cleveland 7 years!
Bosh gave Toronto 7 years!
7 years is a LONG TIME!

And I like how everyone hops on Durant like he is some saint. Lets see if he is still happy in OKC after 7 years of nothing with a closing championship window.

And we also have many players who remain with their team:
Paul Pierce
Kobe Bryant
Kevin Garnett (eventhough he was traded he honestly gave Minny his all)
Steve Nash (multi-year extension even when team cant make playoffs)

likemystylez
10-02-2011, 05:21 PM
I disagree these players have the right to go where they want to go and its not like they 'book' it at the first chance they get.

Lebron gave Cleveland 7 years!
Bosh gave Toronto 7 years!
7 years is a LONG TIME!

And I like how everyone hops on Durant like he is some saint. Lets see if he is still happy in OKC after 7 years of nothing with a closing championship window.

And we also have many players who remain with their team:
Paul Pierce
Kobe Bryant
Kevin Garnett (eventhough he was traded he honestly gave Minny his all)
Steve Nash (multi-year extension even when team cant make playoffs)

Lebron and Bosh are not really relavent to this rule or this thread. They were technically sign and trades, but they both played out their contracts with their respective teams. They had every right to go to Miami when they became free agents....

They didnt force their team into an awkward position while they were still under contract.

Tony_Starks
10-02-2011, 07:11 PM
I think the spirit of the rule is to force teams to have to make some sort of decision before the last season of the players contract, and also limiting that players options in that final year so he can't just make a wishlist of teams to go to knowing financially they can make it happen.

In theory I like the idea but at the end of the day it still boils down to them saving the owners from themselves. If you had more owners willing to stand up and say "Im not trading the guy, if he wants to walk thats on him" then they wouldn't get in these predicaments. People always talk about letting a guy walk and getting nothing in return but if the guys making a ton of money and walks just that financial flexibility gained is something in itself if used properly.....

arkanian215
10-02-2011, 08:04 PM
Because a player would have to be traded by July before their last season to be able to sign an extension with the same team.

If this rule were in effect, Melo would've had to been traded before the season, or lost a fair amount of money and sign in FA. Otherwise the team he was traded to during the season couldn't have signed him.

Nothing in the article says that they can't sign and trade a player.

According to the report, owners want to prevent teams from using the Larry Bird Exception – which allows teams to exceed the salary cap to retain their own impending free agents – on any player in the final year of his existing deal acquired in a trade. That says right there that you can't trade for a player and then sign him to an extension. That's different from a sign and trade.

Rego247
10-02-2011, 08:16 PM
I disagree these players have the right to go where they want to go and its not like they 'book' it at the first chance they get.

Lebron gave Cleveland 7 years!
Bosh gave Toronto 7 years!
7 years is a LONG TIME!

And I like how everyone hops on Durant like he is some saint. Lets see if he is still happy in OKC after 7 years of nothing with a closing championship window.

And we also have many players who remain with their team:
Paul Pierce
Kobe Bryant
Kevin Garnett (eventhough he was traded he honestly gave Minny his all)
Steve Nash (multi-year extension even when team cant make playoffs)

2 different scenarios though. Lebron actually accomplished things in Cleveland, while Bosh floundered around like a pansy for 7 years.