View Full Version : When is it appropriate to give a player a Max Contract?

08-24-2012, 04:06 PM
When is it appropriate to give a player a Max Contract?

A) When they have proven they can led your franchise and Win a Title with them.

B) When they show that they are MVP caliber Player

C) When they consistently are in the Allstar Game

D) When they produce good numbers statistically for a few years.

Of all the options which order would you rank them, which one is also the one that is most logical in awarding a player a Max Contract?

08-24-2012, 04:16 PM
You already answered your own question. No need to even change the order.

08-24-2012, 04:17 PM
Obviously Title bringer. It will always be that way. Stop asking these types of questions.

08-24-2012, 04:23 PM
B) unless your the Raptors, and in that case a rising star who doesn't deserve it

08-24-2012, 04:25 PM
When he brings in money

08-24-2012, 04:26 PM
All of them

08-24-2012, 04:31 PM
If your consistently an allstar you deserve a max contract

08-24-2012, 04:34 PM
If you read the poll options from bottom to top it is basically the description of a players progression in his first 4-6 seasons toward stardom, if they are in fact that good. Only options A & B warrant a Max contract IMO.

08-24-2012, 04:35 PM
When the market thinks he is worth it and your team doesnt want to lose him

08-24-2012, 04:36 PM
as Chronz said, when they bring in the money.

08-24-2012, 05:05 PM
When he brings in money

Does Lin fall under that category as well?

08-24-2012, 05:26 PM
E) When you get HCA.

08-24-2012, 05:40 PM
E) When you get HCA.


Your posts are always great :laugh2:

08-24-2012, 06:15 PM
have to be an allstar and sell tickets

08-24-2012, 08:20 PM
If the player brings in money, they are worth a max contract. If they put up MVP caliber seasons and don't attract an audience, you're doing something terribly wrong.

08-24-2012, 08:20 PM
Seems like Chronz and JB are having a war through threads

flatbush knicks
08-24-2012, 08:55 PM
when he's an asian money making machine and puts up great stats for twenty games :D

08-24-2012, 09:02 PM
A. Championships.

08-24-2012, 09:08 PM
According to Stephen A. Smith, only if they're skills levels are that of a superstar and they are BOX OFFICE (must see!) !!!!

08-24-2012, 09:29 PM
I don't think bringing in money is worth a max contract. Don' forget you also have a cap space, you give a player a max deal when he is worth basketball-wise, which all the options in the poll describe.

08-27-2012, 09:40 AM
None of these really its when a player shows his skillset is truthfully 100% irreplaceable from anyone else in the league when they do somthing good well enough to draw fans to the area and bring them to the edge of there seats players who brings something only THEY can bring to the table. so imo WAY to many people are getting max deals

08-27-2012, 09:59 AM

08-27-2012, 10:18 AM
When market says so.

Lakerfan In NY
08-27-2012, 01:08 PM
If your name can fill any arena anywhere at anytime. You deserve max money. So, there like two or three players like that. Those are the true superstars.

08-27-2012, 02:12 PM

When you want a player on your team bad enough that you are willing to give him as much money as you can to achieve that goal.

08-27-2012, 03:12 PM
I'd go with B & A, you have to be a top superstar talent to receive max dollars.

08-27-2012, 03:36 PM
Seems like Chronz and JB are having a war through threads


08-27-2012, 03:45 PM
When market says so.


Max contract is all made up BS anyway because the owners can't police themselves so they have to put limits on everything or they would go over it in their stupidity.

08-27-2012, 05:08 PM
E. When they make Sports Center top 10. Show them the MONEY!!!

08-27-2012, 05:16 PM
To me, A and C fall into B. I have to go with B.

D is a trap to me. Fans in the seat dont equal wins.

08-27-2012, 05:21 PM
When he brings in money

This. /thread

08-27-2012, 05:29 PM
I can only think of a couple players that are worth a "max" deal. One is Yao Ming, not because he is that good, but because the NBA is a business, and that dude moves merchandise. The other player: LBJ. The Cavs were actually making money when they had this guy on their roster. Thier value increased so much by having him, that the owner sold them and turned a huge profit. Now that he's gone, that team is unsellable. Like Yao, he moves product, but unlike Yao, he is also that good on the basketball court to deserve that kind of money.

Other players that deserve a max deal: Jordan. He STILL moves merchandise and he's been retired for a decade. And he is that good on the court. Jordan was literally worth $100 million a year. The Bulls made WAY more than that via ticket sales and merchandise each season because of Jordan.

Bird and Magic were also worthy of the "max" deal as well.

But, the market dictates who gets a max deal, so it turns out that apparently Joe Johnson (who is a good player, but not that good, and nor does he move merchandise) is a "max" player, as well as Brook Lopez (SMMFH).

08-27-2012, 05:31 PM
E) When you get HCA.

:laugh2: awesome

08-27-2012, 05:31 PM
Personally, I think one way the CBA may be able to bring competitive balance to the league is to establish rules for how much a player is eligible to earn based primarily off of personal win-loss record, playoff appearances, all-star appearances, and apparel sales.

This would eliminate fear that a player will bolt when some other team with capspace throws some ridiculous offer on the table.

Seemingly fair...