| Forum Index > General Games |
|
il0seonpurpose
Korea (South)5638 Posts
On July 16 2009 13:06 testpat wrote: A few years ago. He's been a max contract player at every renewal. For his class, that's James, Melo, Bosh & himself. http://hoopshype.com/salaries.htm Oh right. I'm confused though, why did those players get a 7 year contract from the 2003 class? I thought the max was like 2 years | ||
|
testpat
United States565 Posts
On July 16 2009 13:24 il0seonpurpose wrote: Oh right. I'm confused though, why did those players get a 7 year contract from the 2003 class? I thought the max was like 2 years Rookie contracts are two years/ two year extension @ teams option. I'm a little fuzzy after that. Im not sure how long the first contract after rookie can be written. I think the 2003 class comes up in 2010. So maybe a 2 year with 1 year team option? [edit] What i wrote made little sense, so I had to go look it up. In general, teams can sign players up to 5 years. However, the class of 2003 becomes unrestricted at 2010, so all the big names have negoiated contracts such that they get new contracts when the become unrestricted. For example, James signed a 3 year extension after his rookie contract. | ||
|
TheMusiC
United States1054 Posts
| ||
|
il0seonpurpose
Korea (South)5638 Posts
On July 16 2009 13:42 TheMusiC wrote: lol @ tracy mcgrady, holy shit what an awful contract Haha, is that accurate? Kobe makes less than him? | ||
|
il0seonpurpose
Korea (South)5638 Posts
Wow. | ||
|
SK.Testie
Canada11084 Posts
18. Zach Randolph LA Clippers $16,000,000 19. Carmelo Anthony Denver $15,779,912 -. LeBron James Cleveland $15,779,912 -. Chris Bosh Toronto $15,779,912 -. Dwyane Wade Miami $15,779,912 23. Kenyon Martin Denver $15,363,636 24. Dwight Howard Orlando $15,133,800 25. Joe Johnson Atlanta $14,976,754 26. Elton Brand Philadelphia $14,858,471 27. Predrag Stojakovic New Orleans $14,202,000 28. Richard Jefferson San Antonio $14,200,000 29. Deron Williams Utah Jazz $13,785,000 | ||
|
SK.Testie
Canada11084 Posts
| ||
|
SK.Testie
Canada11084 Posts
| ||
|
igotmyown
United States4291 Posts
He's made 11, 12, 13 and 14 million the last 4 years. Nobody's going to offer more than 6 million? Maybe they're more cautious these days, but teams have thrown a lot more money at worse players. Would it be surprising if an owner thought he was 15 million the next two years, 10 million the next year, 5 million the next 2, and decide to just even it out at a $50 million contract? Of course they could the ship off the contract the last year or two to some team wanting to prepare for a salary dump. Both parties are doing exactly what's in their interest, and I don't see why any of this should be surprising. | ||
|
il0seonpurpose
Korea (South)5638 Posts
igotmyown is right too, first of all Lamar Odom is in la la land half the time so you never know what to expect from him. And second, he will get older | ||
|
b_unnies
3579 Posts
On July 16 2009 05:51 Xeris wrote: Odom is being dumb. He wants 50mil/5 years (aka 10/year), the Lakers were initially offering about 8, and their actual offer was 27/3 years (9/year) and he doesn't want to take that... when the most he can get anywhere else is less than 6. Odom is talking about being a business man, in these times you need to maximize your money, and the Lakers are offering more than anybody else possibly can.. why is he being so stupid? Sure it's 3 years instead of 5 years, but fuck it... take the 9 million per year and stop being a douche. Some background information on the Ariza deal will help a bit in understanding LO situation How Ariza/Artest situation went: (Nothing under the spoilers is exaggerated) + Show Spoiler + Ariza's Exit Interview with Phil/Kupchak: Ariza: I feel loved and appreciated, I want to come back. I'm happy. Before Free Agent Negotiations begin: David Lee: No hometown discount, We/I want 8-9M per year(note the "I") Free Agent Negotiation begin: Kupchak: How's MLE sound? Lee: How's going to another team sound? Kupchak: Get offers from other teams, if they're reasonable we'll match them Lee: Media, talks are going no where. Lakers are lowballing us. Lee: Ariza, they don't like me, they dont appreciate you. Kupchak: Got any 8-9M offers from other teams? Lee: Media, we don't feel appreciated. Lee: Pay Ariza or we walk. Kupchak: Screw him, let's get Artest Artest's agent: Artest, Lakers called you Artest: What for? Artest's agent: To get you a championship of course. For MLE though Artest: Done. Lee: Crap. Lee: Media, We just wanted to feel appreciated, it wasn't about the money Lee: Ariza, to get revenge on the Lakers, let's sign with Rockets for LESS than Lakers offered. Days after Agreement with Houston: Media: What happened? Ariza: I don't know Media: Why not? Ariza: I wasn't part of the negotiations. Media: Would you have changed anything with your strategy? Ariza: I have no control over the situation Quotes from the man himself: "All we're looking for is a little appreciation for what Trevor has done," Lee said Wednesday. "I don't think they believe Trevor is serious about leaving, and that's too bad. I didn't think we'd be in this situation. I am disappointed and surprised by what I thought would be some feelings for the people who have given you everything they've got." "It was never about the money," Lee said. "It was about going someplace where you felt appreciated." What can be deduced from the Ariza situation? 1. Agents shouldn't be screwing around. - Lee came out and wanted Ariza paid, using the media to achieve his goals. In the end it backfired severely. 2. Don't call out the Lakers, especially publicly. - Very little was said to the media from the Lakers side, iirc the first statement released from Kupchak was regarding the Artest agreement. 3. Lakers aren't going to wait for you all summer. - In a matter of hours, Ron Artest was in PnG 4. Every party needs a Plan B. - Lee came out guns firing, the guy's a rookie agent he didnt know any better, he played hardball with the Lakers and expected Lakers to pay up after seeing what happened with Bynum(Lee is also Bynum's agent), Vlad, Luke, and Sasha. (IIRC, Artest was the back up plan if Lakers didn't get Gasol) Evident by the fact that in a matter of hours, Kupchak dropped the negotiations and went all out on Artest (seperate meetings held with Artest from people including Buss, Magic Johnson, and Kobe, even phone calls from LO). 5. Clients trust their Agents too much. - These NBA players needs to take control of the situation and their life, NBA players don't know any better. Ariza had absolutely no idea what was going on during the negotiations, everything Ariza knows was directly from his agent How does Shannon Brown factor in all of this? He signed the BAE with an average of 2.1M for his contract, starting at 1.9M for 1st year, adding additional burden to already heavily burdened payroll. Why would the Lakers franchise argue with an important player for a few millions difference? Along with Shannon Brown/Ron Artest/Bynum's contract kicking in this year, Lakers are already at 98/99M payroll. Buss's entire profit depends on the Lakers franchise, if Lakers go under, so does Buss. He's not like the other billionaires out there where their sports team are a means of secondary income. In short, an additional million to the payroll means two million less in his own pockets (Luxury tax). What exactly is the point of comparing Ariza's situation to Lamar? 1. Jeff(Lamar's agent) is trying to screw the Lakers by not compromising. Agent's aren't always looking out for their client's best interests. (Artest's agent is one of those few who does, by specifically telling Artest that Lakers are offering him the championship before telling Artest about the MLE). Agents wants to get paid just as much as players do. Agents are paid by a percentage of their client's contracts. 2. It's true that Odom/Laker negotiations have been kept quiet, until recently. In the Ariza situation, Lakers wouldnt be using the media unless necessary. Right now, Lakers are taking the battle to the media by leaking the contracts discussed. 3. Lakers have gone on record saying negotiations won't last as long as Sasha's did. At the moment the Laker FO are increasingly pissed, as shown by Buss withdrawing the offer. Although I'm pretty sure this is done to pressure Lamar's camp and Lamar's agent aren't returning recent calls regarding the 10M deal. (John Black, Lakers public relations, has hinted negotiations may certainly continue, Jeannie Buss, Buss's daughter, is confident Lamar will be signed.) 4. It's unclear what Laker's Plan B is, if they even have one(don't really have anything to offer to free agents), biggest possibility is S+T. Lamar's Plan B is either the full MLE with the Heat for 5 years, S+T with Mavs, or the deal Portland offered Turkoglu if they fail to get Millsap. 5. Lamar Odom needs to start doing the bossing instead of the other way around. He doesn't want a situation like Ariza(Because of his agent, Ariza got forced to run out of his own hometown) The Lakers organisation and people within Lamar's camp believe Lamar wants to sign the 10M contract, but has been unable to convince their agents. Why doesn't Lakers want to offer more than 3 years? Most importantly, Lakers are planning something to happen in 2011/2012 off-season, something big's going down. (Hint: Kevin Durant?) Only players with guranteed contracts by then are Kobe(3 year/81M extension kicks in during 2011 offseason), Bynum, Luke, and player option for Artest. This means that potentially, Lamar/Artest can be gone during the 2012 off-season. Gasol is expected to resign. Lakers also received two 2nd round draft pick from 2011 from selling 2009 off season picks. Secondly, having too big a contract would make it hard for LO to be traded. If need be. What does Lamar want? First and foremost: Lamar wants to retire as a Lakers. He wants stability. He wants the LA lifestyle. He doesn't want a short contract. He wants to be part of Laker's long term plans. Portland can sign Lamar to 5yr/50M(apparently Lamar has a verbal commitment from Portland), Miami can give Lamar a full MLE of 5 years, which is actually a bigger contract than what Lakers are offering Lamar. Although Ron Artest took a paycut, both Artest and what the Lakers offered to Ariza is a bigger contract than what Lamar is getting. Bynum has a 12M contract kicking in this season. Even Luke and Vlad received bigger contracts from Lakers. Kobe is getting a 5M extension that he will sign. Lamar is looking for a Marion type deal (5yr, 38.6) Sure, Lamar could take the 3yr contract now and worry about future later. However what this means is that in 3 years time, he will have to go through this fiasco yet again. Potentially if something happens in 3 years, he may be out of a job and be getting paid less in the long run as a result. In short, Lamar is looking out for his future. A 3 year deal also means Lamar is more easy to be traded. (Which championship contender teams are Kwame, Chris Mihm, and Vlad in?) Lamar's thinking :he's willing to take a lesser role on the Lakers, he's willing to come off the bench, he's willing to facilitate more and do less on a contract year, and he's willing to do whatever it takes to get that ring, and now he's expected to take a contract thats less than what lots of his teammates are getting. If Lamar is so much trouble to the Lakers, why continue negotiations? Although lots of people think otherwise, Lamar is an important player. Ariza was huge for the Lakers last year, and in a matter of hours, he was ran out of his own hometown. Phil Jackson and Pat Riley, two of the GOAT coaches, have gone on the record saying they want Lamar Odom. Kobe Bryant is holding out on signing his contract extension just so Lakers FO can finish the LO/Lakers negotiations. (Even though it's already agreed Kobe will get a 3 year/81M extension). Even Buss is willing to pay 20M (10x2 for luxury tax) for Lamar's services. What it means is that Buss is going to be poorer by 4M after LO is signed. Quote from Buss himself: "The family, and this came up in the meeting on July 1st, we ended up talking financial terms for an hour or two," said Kupchak. "At the end of the conversation, [Buss] looks at [me] and says 'But we're so damn competitive.' Kupchak Quote: "So, yes, we do have contingency plans, but you're not going to find a Lamar Odom at the end of August sitting around waiting to be signed by the Laker or anybody else. Those types of players, they're commodities. We'll do the best we can and we'll move on, but there is no replacement for Lamar Odom." If Lakers wants Lamar, and Lamar wants to remain Lakers, why haven't they signed? Leverage. Although Portland can give Lamar 50M, most are hoping they get Millsap. Even then, it's unsure of they will acquire Lamar simply because of chemistry problems. Both Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge have gone on the record saying they don't like LO. Lamar doesn't want that S+T with Mavs as he prefers that place such as LA/Miami for obvious reasons. Essentially Lamar's camp is going to draw this out and seeing what other teams does. Although Lakers doesn't want to draw it out, they might have no choice. The move by Buss to take the 10M offer "off the table" is to try and force Lamar's camp to make a decision, and make it fast. Even a S+T is unlikely because they still have to take on a contract similar to Lamar's anyways, and even then it's unlikely they will get a trade which makes Lakers clear winners in the trade. | ||
|
il0seonpurpose
Korea (South)5638 Posts
How did you know how the negotiations went down? | ||
|
Xeris
Iran17695 Posts
| ||
|
b_unnies
3579 Posts
On July 16 2009 16:47 il0seonpurpose wrote: Epic post b_unnies How did you know how the negotiations went down? Mainstream media such as yahoo/espn are usually quite slow than reporting things. things are often leaked out during negotiations, or sometimes you read more and more quotes and you'll get a bigger understanding of whats going on On July 16 2009 17:21 Xeris wrote: Well, it was pretty public knowledge that's basically what happened with Ariza. The only real thing is the long term stability. Odom doesn't want 9/year in the short term for obvious reasons, but more likely than not it's better off that he take that rather than nothing. Portland is the only team that can give him close to what he wants O_O Actually from a purely money standpoint, Lakers is offering the least out of Portland and Miami, and perhaps even Mavs. If Millsap deal to Portland falls apart, they may perhaps get desperate and offer LO quite a lot of money. The best situation for Lakers is Utah won't match Portland's offer(they have until Friday) and Millsap goes to Portland. Miami's offering 34M compared to Laker's 30M. While if Mavs S+T with Lakers, Mark Cuban can easily afford to keep Lamar on a long term contract. So really it's not like Lamar was stupid for not taking the Laker's offer because the thing Lamar wants the most is the years. Lamar's asking for 5 yr/38.6M, which is only 7.72M yearly average. Although that's fair to the Lakers, Lakers doesn't want a long contract so it's easier to trade Lamar if needed be By the way, the offer that was taken off the table yesterday is reportedly 3yr/30M or 4yr/36M, that was given like Monday/Tuesday. The 9M offer yahoo is talking about is what the Lakers offered last Friday. | ||
CTStalker
Canada9720 Posts
| ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
On July 16 2009 17:21 Xeris wrote: Well, it was pretty public knowledge that's basically what happened with Ariza. The only real thing is the long term stability. Odom doesn't want 9/year in the short term for obvious reasons, but more likely than not it's better off that he take that rather than nothing. Portland is the only team that can give him close to what he wants O_O hmmmmm Portland has so many fucking options I expect them to go so far for the next 2-3 years. Too bad they don't like Lamar Odom v_v | ||
|
testpat
United States565 Posts
On July 16 2009 16:27 b_unnies wrote: ... Why would the Lakers franchise argue with an important player for a few millions difference? Along with Shannon Brown/Ron Artest/Bynum's contract kicking in this year, Lakers are already at 98/99M payroll. Buss's entire profit depends on the Lakers franchise, if Lakers go under, so does Buss. He's not like the other billionaires out there where their sports team are a means of secondary income. In short, an additional million to the payroll means two million less in his own pockets (Luxury tax). Not that it changes any of your comments, but the Laker's financial situation is a little more dynamic that this. NBA teams do not share gate or local tv revenue, which is why teams like new york risk runnning such huge deficits. I believe the lakers contract includes advertising sharing (higher ratings, more cash). So even an extra few wins a year, bringing in more viewers, can dramatically increase profits. Buss has routinely gone way over the salary cap if he thought he needed it to win. But right now it just reads like the lakers feel they have so much talent, they can save some cash and some long term flexibility. Not many teams would consider offer 9m a year to a non-starter. I'd like to see a happy ending here for both sides but .., from Odom's viewpoint the only reason he's not a starter is the Laker's depth, and he should be getting starter cash. From the lakers they can see the future, and they don't need Odom locked for 5 years. | ||
|
Ace
United States16096 Posts
Also doesn't the NBA have some kind of TV revenue sharing deal where all the teams get paid even if they don't have big market exposure? | ||
|
b_unnies
3579 Posts
On July 16 2009 19:18 testpat wrote: Not that it changes any of your comments, but the Laker's financial situation is a little more dynamic that this. NBA teams do not share gate or local tv revenue, which is why teams like new york risk runnning such huge deficits. I believe the lakers contract includes advertising sharing (higher ratings, more cash). So even an extra few wins a year, bringing in more viewers, can dramatically increase profits. Buss has routinely gone way over the salary cap if he thought he needed it to win. But right now it just reads like the lakers feel they have so much talent, they can save some cash and some long term flexibility. Not many teams would consider offer 9m a year to a non-starter. I'd like to see a happy ending here for both sides but .., from Odom's viewpoint the only reason he's not a starter is the Laker's depth, and he should be getting starter cash. From the lakers they can see the future, and they don't need Odom locked for 5 years. It's true that NBA teams invest in their players to make a profit, and I agree with you that Lakers should just pay that extra millions just to keep the team to get a championship. Some Laker fans argue that because without Lamar, Lakers are already setting a franchise high on their payroll. Lakers are paying an additional 6M more than last year without LO and not counting luxury tax. So although Buss has consistently pay luxury tax, this is many millions more than he has ever paid. I added up the 00 team's salary, and that team's payroll didn't exceed 60M. Although LO comes off the bench, he still averages 30MPG, which is basically starter minutes, so technically that should be considered a starter. If they let Lamar walk, the only thing they can offer is the Vet's Min which is worth 1.3M. As stated in one of my quotes, Kupchak knows there isn't a LO replacement. Vet Min options are basically players like Leon Powe, Chris Wilcox, Drew Gooden, Matt Barnes, Joe Smith. Basically Lakers will be weaker than they were compared to last year. While potentially other championship teams are stronger. (I say potentially since not even summer camp has started) | ||
|
citi.zen
2509 Posts
| ||
| ||
[ Submit Event ] |
|
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Invitational
Epic.LAN
IPSL
eOnzErG vs McRibbed
LancerX vs StRyKeR
AI Arena Tournament
OSC
Yamato Cup
IPSL
Artosis vs RiceHat
Kyrie vs Sony
Map Test Tournament
WardiTV Weekly
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
