PDA

View Full Version : PSDiscussion: holding your franchise hostage



DitchDat
07-02-2014, 05:44 AM
I'm just gonna flat-out say that LeBron inspired this thread, even though I don't want this to be about him per se.

From what I'm reading, he wants A) max money and B) a better, more "stacked" roster.

Which is kind of mutually exclusive, if you think about it.

This is something that has been bothering me for many years: do some players deserve more money for their amazing accomplishments? Yes, sure they do. Superstars should make more money than other players.

However, the salary cap is a restrictive reality when building a roster. It baffles me that to this day, star players ask for nearly 1/3rd of their team's "roster-building resources". To me, this is just being plain greedy. I understand that 20 million is more than 10 million, but if you are a star athlete with plenty other streams of income, why wouldn't you "sacrifice" and take less money? It's not like there would be less food on your plate :confused:

The salary cap is there, and still I feel that star players don't acknowledge its existence, asking big bucks (which I agree they deserve!) and crippling their team in the process.

You can't demand max money and splashy moves. That's just being unreasonable I believe.

Or am I seeing this completely wrong?

DitchDat
07-02-2014, 05:45 AM
If you take max money, you're not in it to win titles. You need a balanced roster and for that you need to distribute the money evenly.

Quinnsanity
07-02-2014, 05:56 AM
I don't believe max salary demands and wanting to play for a great team are mutually exclusive. It's just about being strategic about it. Playing with a star on a rookie contract to capitalize on the Bird Rights loophole to go above the cap is one example, with Cleveland being the most obvious LeBron suitor with this advantage. However, there is a far more obvious solution to LeBron's current... predicament... that isn't being discussed. If he really wanted to create the best possible situation for winning while still being paid the max, he would jettison Dwyane Wade from the team. It will never happen, and I think that's Miami's biggest problem. At least paying LeBron $20 million is worth it. Keeping Wade at eight figures is what's going to prevent this team from winning championships going forward. However, Wade knows how much of a PR hit it would be if the team cut him loose and he'll use that to extort the team for a contract he doesn't deserve. In that way I'd say he's the one holding that franchise hostage.

Quinnsanity
07-02-2014, 06:07 AM
As for stars taking significant paycuts: the reason it never happens in a star's prime has nothing to do with the star at all. It's the union. If LeBron were to take $15 million instead of his full $22 million, what kind of message does that send to other stars? It essentially says, "you should only take $15 million as well." If the stars are only making $15 million, then the guys who were making $15 million start making $13 million because "they shouldn't be paid as stars," and so on in that fashion. It's not a direct cause and effect relationship, but the union oversees star contracts very closely for this reason in particular. They HAVE to make sure that stars set the market as high as possible to make sure that their own pay cuts don't trickle down to the rest of their ranks. The difference between $22 million and $15 million for LeBron might be nothing, but the difference between $5 million and $3 million for a midlevel guy is incredibly significant. The union would never compromise their bargaining positions by setting a precedent of stars taking less in their prime. They're fine with symbolic pay cuts, as the Miami trio did the first time, and they're fine with later career cuts, as has been the case in San Antonio (nobody ever mentions that Duncan made the max well into his 30's), but they'd never let someone like LeBron truly dip that low. It sets a terrible precedent. They elected Chris Paul as union president for this reason specifically, they needed someone to police this among star caliber players and he's someone who can do it. This is a fairly new phenomenon as the individual max salary is as well, so it's really the union's natural evolution to deal with a changing league. Not surprisingly, Chris Paul took his full max rather than taking a paycut to help the Clippers. This is why.

WadeKobe
07-02-2014, 08:42 AM
My opinion is that championship teams are built with high efficiency shooters, high percentage rebounders, a lack of turnovers, and good ball movement. Championship teams are not built around high usage scorers... Unless you happen to get a guy like LeBron or Durant.

For the specific example, Miami doesn't need lots of money to field a good team. They need to wisely invest in low-cost 3-point shooters and rebounders to surround the big3 with, and Bosh and Wade need to take pay cuts.

Lebron's max salary won't get in the way if miami spends it's resources wisely. If they go after another star, it will kill them.

They don't need a Melo or a Lowry. Those would be bad signings that would hurt this team. They need good, affordable shooters and rebounders.

IndyRealist
07-02-2014, 09:18 AM
As for stars taking significant paycuts: the reason it never happens in a star's prime has nothing to do with the star at all. It's the union.

Untrue. The union has nothing to do with individual contract negotiations. They negotiate the CBA, that's it. The people responsible for players never taking paycuts are the AGENTS. By standard practice, agents make a percentage of the player's income. Therefore it is in the agent's best interest to get their players as much money as possible on their contracts, so that the agent makes as much money as possible. Agents don't go into the Hall of Fame, they don't have legacies, they don't get rings. Agents are there to make money.

ManRam
07-02-2014, 09:27 AM
Let's see how it all works out, eh?

Hawkeye15
07-02-2014, 09:49 AM
I agree with the OP's premise, because I think WAAAAAAAAAY too many max deals are handed out to players that have zip business getting them. However, LeBron is easily worth that money.

The issue the Heat have, is they have an aging, fairly useless star (relative to what he is being paid and will be paid), that will kill their ability to really surround LeBron with the talent he desires.

I will add, we are all acting like the Heat suddenly turned into my Wolves after SA dismantled them. The Heat are just a step or two away from being right back on top in all reality.

Sactown
07-02-2014, 11:30 AM
Wades contract is going to **** it all up
Dudes worth maybe 10 Mil this season probably 7 Mil next season and it'll just get worse from there... He's playing on borrowed time and he's demanding checks his knees can't cash

Quinnsanity
07-02-2014, 05:01 PM
Untrue. The union has nothing to do with individual contract negotiations. They negotiate the CBA, that's it. The people responsible for players never taking paycuts are the AGENTS. By standard practice, agents make a percentage of the player's income. Therefore it is in the agent's best interest to get their players as much money as possible on their contracts, so that the agent makes as much money as possible. Agents don't go into the Hall of Fame, they don't have legacies, they don't get rings. Agents are there to make money.

They only DIRECTLY negotiate the CBA. You don't think they act behind the scenes to ensure their negotiating position for the next CBA? Go look into the Jim Thome story if you still don't believe me. THE MLBPA practically forbade him from returning to Cleveland because Philly's offer was slightly bigger. The union is far more present than anyone else realizes. The agents play a role, but they look at the whole picture. They understand that it's good for an athlete's brand if he takes a slight cut, so he'll stomach it. The union cares solely about player contracts, as most of their constituency does not get endorsements or care about brand recognition. You treat it as if the union negotiates the CBA then goes away for the next seven years. Trust me, as someone who works with players, this is absolutely not the case.

Miltstar
07-02-2014, 10:36 PM
As a Raptor fan I know what you're talking about we catered head over toe to VC and CB4 and they still walked away. I feel you should never give one player that kind of power, everybody is replaceable yes even Lebron James, heck they just pulled Wiggins from the draft

slashsnake
07-02-2014, 10:46 PM
If you take max money, you're not in it to win titles. You need a balanced roster and for that you need to distribute the money evenly.

What other superstar players in their 20's took less than max amounts like Lebron? He left 15 mil on the table.

Jordan took HUGE money when the Bulls wouldn't rework his deal which was huge when he signed it but fell off as years went along. So MJ wasn't about winning? first deal took him up to 1/3 of their cap space.


Kind of funny that he gets destroyed for taking less than the max which allows them to build a good team around him, and for taking the max which doesn't help that.

DitchDat
07-03-2014, 03:57 AM
What other superstar players in their 20's took less than max amounts like Lebron? He left 15 mil on the table.

Jordan took HUGE money when the Bulls wouldn't rework his deal which was huge when he signed it but fell off as years went along. So MJ wasn't about winning? first deal took him up to 1/3 of their cap space.


Kind of funny that he gets destroyed for taking less than the max which allows them to build a good team around him, and for taking the max which doesn't help that.

He's asking for the max now though and asking for a better roster. I know that he took a paycut to come to Miami, but if it was all about winning, he would make sure that they'd have money to spend. About the MJ situation you brought up: the past is the past, I'm talking about star players from now taking less money to build more balanced rosters.

Leftcoast_yg
07-03-2014, 07:52 AM
The question i think people should ask themselves is would you take a paycut for your employer to help the hiring of personnel? Knowing that around tour thirty fifth birthday you will not see anymore "max salary" contracts for the rest of your life and God forbid you might suffer a work related injury from ever performing again??? I say get your money now because you will not see those figures after your career is over. As far as demanding for help and yet not willing to sacrifice your pay is a bit hypocritical.

The Flash
07-03-2014, 09:17 AM
The question i think people should ask themselves is would you take a paycut for your employer to help the hiring of personnel? Knowing that around tour thirty fifth birthday you will not see anymore "max salary" contracts for the rest of your life and God forbid you might suffer a work related injury from ever performing again??? I say get your money now because you will not see those figures after your career is over. As far as demanding for help and yet not willing to sacrifice your pay is a bit hypocritical.

At this point it's all speculation and "sources" talk. All we know for sure is that they all met before leaving for vacation.

Miltstar
07-03-2014, 09:33 AM
Kind of funny that he gets destroyed for taking less than the max which allows them to build a good team around him, and for taking the max which doesn't help that.

Lebron gets destroyed because people don't like him. The minute he made his "decision" He was no longer Michael Jordan or Kobe Bryant. Those dudes never hurt their fan base like that and have more love because of it. Lebron has a lot of bandwagon fans but some seriously loyal haters. Of course you'll find a few out there who absolutely love the guy but the haters definately have the numbers

DitchDat
07-04-2014, 05:15 AM
The question i think people should ask themselves is would you take a paycut for your employer to help the hiring of personnel? Knowing that around tour thirty fifth birthday you will not see anymore "max salary" contracts for the rest of your life and God forbid you might suffer a work related injury from ever performing again??? I say get your money now because you will not see those figures after your career is over. As far as demanding for help and yet not willing to sacrifice your pay is a bit hypocritical.

Except that it doesn't work that way. These are million dollar athletes dealing with the reality of a salary cap. You could argue that it sucks that it's there, but the fact remains that it is there. You need flexibility to build something special. I'm not trying to single out LeBron, and I'm not saying that it's not a natural reflex to pick 25 million over 15 million, but I always wondered why they couldn't be more flexible about their salaries. During interviews, every player in the league is "all about winning", even though their moves indicate otherwise. Don't say "winning" is your top priority when it is obviously money. It's insincere.