|
On November 26 2013 23:47 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2013 19:31 Vindicare605 wrote:
I was just reading something that's worth mentioning about this whole thing.
This new Collective Bargaining Agreement seems to have turned the public against the idea of any superstar taking what they are actually worth. It's driving the value of star players down.
It's doing exactly what the NBA owners wanted.
It's hard to see what kind of long term ramifications this will have on how the league operates, but it's pretty clear that it's already changed the culture of how the public looks at contracts in the NBA. Perhaps not. Kobe has always been a polarizing figure in the league. Maybe it's only HIS contract that spurs this kind of reaction out of people.
Let's just let it play out. At worst it's a 2 year extension where the Lakers aren't title contenders, only in this franchise is that actually viewed as a bad thing, at best it's simply paying a great superstar what he's worth to the franchise and I dunno, in a league where so many teams are more interested in tanking for the draft than actually playing out the season it's refreshing to see some loyalty to the guy that will have played 20 years for the franchise by the end of this contract. If 2 years is the price of loyalty then so be it.
Again, no problem here with paying him like a superstar. But his actual market value was not 25m because no other team would pay him that. You have to agree they could've gotten him back for significantly less and still made him one of the highest paid players in the league. Even if he brings in way more than 48 million over two years for them (which he will), you still should only be paying him 5-10% more than the next highest bidder. The extra income argument is just a rationalization, IMO. It might be to send a message, especially after Dwight. But I think players have short memories as long as the check is big enough.
You keep talking about market value as if his only worth is as a player. Which is not the case. And I don't see Lakers being the kind of team to operate on bad faith by leveraging the fact that no team would pay that much for a marketing tool, but would only value him on a player base. I would say the same about J Lin, overpaid strictly speaking as a player, when the contract was made. But pretty obvious to everyone that he was paid that much to draw in the viewers.
|
Let's be real though. What are the realistic chances that LA can actually get free agents to win a title in the next few years? Aside from Lebron, who could they really get to compete for a championship? They can't get Durant, Paul, George, Westbrook, Harden- who else is a difference maker?
|
|
|
Neither are enough of a difference maker. Especially with Kobe on the books you can barely afford to fill out a roster if you sign one of them.
On November 27 2013 02:58 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2013 23:47 Jibba wrote:On November 26 2013 19:31 Vindicare605 wrote:
I was just reading something that's worth mentioning about this whole thing.
This new Collective Bargaining Agreement seems to have turned the public against the idea of any superstar taking what they are actually worth. It's driving the value of star players down.
It's doing exactly what the NBA owners wanted.
It's hard to see what kind of long term ramifications this will have on how the league operates, but it's pretty clear that it's already changed the culture of how the public looks at contracts in the NBA. Perhaps not. Kobe has always been a polarizing figure in the league. Maybe it's only HIS contract that spurs this kind of reaction out of people.
Let's just let it play out. At worst it's a 2 year extension where the Lakers aren't title contenders, only in this franchise is that actually viewed as a bad thing, at best it's simply paying a great superstar what he's worth to the franchise and I dunno, in a league where so many teams are more interested in tanking for the draft than actually playing out the season it's refreshing to see some loyalty to the guy that will have played 20 years for the franchise by the end of this contract. If 2 years is the price of loyalty then so be it.
Again, no problem here with paying him like a superstar. But his actual market value was not 25m because no other team would pay him that. You have to agree they could've gotten him back for significantly less and still made him one of the highest paid players in the league. Even if he brings in way more than 48 million over two years for them (which he will), you still should only be paying him 5-10% more than the next highest bidder. The extra income argument is just a rationalization, IMO. It might be to send a message, especially after Dwight. But I think players have short memories as long as the check is big enough. You keep talking about market value as if his only worth is as a player. Which is not the case. And I don't see Lakers being the kind of team to operate on bad faith by leveraging the fact that no team would pay that much for a marketing tool, but would only value him on a player base. I would say the same about J Lin, overpaid strictly speaking as a player, when the contract was made. But pretty obvious to everyone that he was paid that much to draw in the viewers.
The marketing/image value of an aging Kobe is not worth nearly as much to any other team. Plus you're acting as if other teams were approaching Kobe with more money. We have no evidence this is the case. So far everything we've heard indicates that the Lakers offered him that much money because they wanted to and not because they felt pressure from outside parties.
|
On November 27 2013 06:14 kidleaderr wrote:
Melo and Love
Can't tell if joking, or doesn't understand basketball.
|
There's no guarantee that Melo will opt out either. There will most likely be no one significant to sign in the offseason. So even if Kobe signs for 10 million less, or if the Lakers let him go for some reason, they would have a a lot of cap space for nothing, that is even if they resign Gasol, and Jordan Hill to 10 mil/a year or something ridiculous. Having Kobe will most likely make LA a decent if not winning team for the next two years, which would make keeping Hill easier as well as attracting other young talent. The extra few million really makes no difference whatsoever. Lakers aren't gonna pay the luxury tax no matter what, and the money saved would just be going to people like Blake/Henry/Farmar.
|
I wouldnt rule anything out when the lakers are involved.
Except the Memo and Love thing
|
I'm just going to go on the record now and say.
I don't want the Lakers to offer Carmelo Anthony a max deal. He isn't worth it. I'd rather go for Kevin Love and perhaps an athletic guard like Westbrook, or Wall.
|
On November 27 2013 07:01 DystopiaX wrote:Neither are enough of a difference maker. Especially with Kobe on the books you can barely afford to fill out a roster if you sign one of them. Show nested quote +On November 27 2013 02:58 wei2coolman wrote:On November 26 2013 23:47 Jibba wrote:On November 26 2013 19:31 Vindicare605 wrote:
I was just reading something that's worth mentioning about this whole thing.
This new Collective Bargaining Agreement seems to have turned the public against the idea of any superstar taking what they are actually worth. It's driving the value of star players down.
It's doing exactly what the NBA owners wanted.
It's hard to see what kind of long term ramifications this will have on how the league operates, but it's pretty clear that it's already changed the culture of how the public looks at contracts in the NBA. Perhaps not. Kobe has always been a polarizing figure in the league. Maybe it's only HIS contract that spurs this kind of reaction out of people.
Let's just let it play out. At worst it's a 2 year extension where the Lakers aren't title contenders, only in this franchise is that actually viewed as a bad thing, at best it's simply paying a great superstar what he's worth to the franchise and I dunno, in a league where so many teams are more interested in tanking for the draft than actually playing out the season it's refreshing to see some loyalty to the guy that will have played 20 years for the franchise by the end of this contract. If 2 years is the price of loyalty then so be it.
Again, no problem here with paying him like a superstar. But his actual market value was not 25m because no other team would pay him that. You have to agree they could've gotten him back for significantly less and still made him one of the highest paid players in the league. Even if he brings in way more than 48 million over two years for them (which he will), you still should only be paying him 5-10% more than the next highest bidder. The extra income argument is just a rationalization, IMO. It might be to send a message, especially after Dwight. But I think players have short memories as long as the check is big enough. You keep talking about market value as if his only worth is as a player. Which is not the case. And I don't see Lakers being the kind of team to operate on bad faith by leveraging the fact that no team would pay that much for a marketing tool, but would only value him on a player base. I would say the same about J Lin, overpaid strictly speaking as a player, when the contract was made. But pretty obvious to everyone that he was paid that much to draw in the viewers. The marketing/image value of an aging Kobe is not worth nearly as much to any other team. Plus you're acting as if other teams were approaching Kobe with more money. We have no evidence this is the case. So far everything we've heard indicates that the Lakers offered him that much money because they wanted to and not because they felt pressure from outside parties.
Yeah, that's what I'm saying. Is Laker are paying him to what he's worth to their team, as a opposed to leveraging negotiation based on what his other options are. They're paying him what he is worth to the team, not what other teams value to him.
|
hmm it's almost like the Wizards dont realize the only way the Lakers can beat them is launching 3s
|
United States22883 Posts
On November 27 2013 02:58 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2013 23:47 Jibba wrote:On November 26 2013 19:31 Vindicare605 wrote:
I was just reading something that's worth mentioning about this whole thing.
This new Collective Bargaining Agreement seems to have turned the public against the idea of any superstar taking what they are actually worth. It's driving the value of star players down.
It's doing exactly what the NBA owners wanted.
It's hard to see what kind of long term ramifications this will have on how the league operates, but it's pretty clear that it's already changed the culture of how the public looks at contracts in the NBA. Perhaps not. Kobe has always been a polarizing figure in the league. Maybe it's only HIS contract that spurs this kind of reaction out of people.
Let's just let it play out. At worst it's a 2 year extension where the Lakers aren't title contenders, only in this franchise is that actually viewed as a bad thing, at best it's simply paying a great superstar what he's worth to the franchise and I dunno, in a league where so many teams are more interested in tanking for the draft than actually playing out the season it's refreshing to see some loyalty to the guy that will have played 20 years for the franchise by the end of this contract. If 2 years is the price of loyalty then so be it.
Again, no problem here with paying him like a superstar. But his actual market value was not 25m because no other team would pay him that. You have to agree they could've gotten him back for significantly less and still made him one of the highest paid players in the league. Even if he brings in way more than 48 million over two years for them (which he will), you still should only be paying him 5-10% more than the next highest bidder. The extra income argument is just a rationalization, IMO. It might be to send a message, especially after Dwight. But I think players have short memories as long as the check is big enough. You keep talking about market value as if his only worth is as a player. Which is not the case. And I don't see Lakers being the kind of team to operate on bad faith by leveraging the fact that no team would pay that much for a marketing tool, but would only value him on a player base. I would say the same about J Lin, overpaid strictly speaking as a player, when the contract was made. But pretty obvious to everyone that he was paid that much to draw in the viewers.
This is the exact rationalization I'm talking about. His market value is not based on what he's worth to the team, his market value is based on what the market is willing to pay for him. Every superstar provides surplus value beyond on-the-court activities (which is what I've been saying all along), but you still don't pay that far above what other teams are willing to play.
"He'll bring in over 48m" is a rationalization, because he'll still bring in more than 48m if you paid him 30m for 2 years. It's an ex posteriori way to justify overpaying for something you could've gotten for cheaper, and earned even greater profits on (while still being very generous to him.)
If it was 2007-8 Kobe, you throw as much money at him as possible not simply because he brings in more money beyond basketball operations, but because you're in competition with other teams in order to land him. In this case, he still brings in more money beyond basketball operations but there was no competition. That's simply throwing away money. And it'd be different if this wasn't actually a crippling move, but it is in fact a crippling move. It gets rid of Pau and keeps them over the tax threshold for increasing penalties.
|
Unless their plan is to say "Kobe, we aren't get jack shit done in the next two years. We're going to give you a boatload of money while we're sitting here doing nothing. You come back and play for peanuts the two years after and we'll try to win another one with you as the 2nd/3rd option."
Poor Pau is probably the most disrespected star to have won 2 championships lol.
|
On November 27 2013 07:01 DystopiaX wrote:Neither are enough of a difference maker. Especially with Kobe on the books you can barely afford to fill out a roster if you sign one of them. Show nested quote +On November 27 2013 02:58 wei2coolman wrote:On November 26 2013 23:47 Jibba wrote:On November 26 2013 19:31 Vindicare605 wrote:
I was just reading something that's worth mentioning about this whole thing.
This new Collective Bargaining Agreement seems to have turned the public against the idea of any superstar taking what they are actually worth. It's driving the value of star players down.
It's doing exactly what the NBA owners wanted.
It's hard to see what kind of long term ramifications this will have on how the league operates, but it's pretty clear that it's already changed the culture of how the public looks at contracts in the NBA. Perhaps not. Kobe has always been a polarizing figure in the league. Maybe it's only HIS contract that spurs this kind of reaction out of people.
Let's just let it play out. At worst it's a 2 year extension where the Lakers aren't title contenders, only in this franchise is that actually viewed as a bad thing, at best it's simply paying a great superstar what he's worth to the franchise and I dunno, in a league where so many teams are more interested in tanking for the draft than actually playing out the season it's refreshing to see some loyalty to the guy that will have played 20 years for the franchise by the end of this contract. If 2 years is the price of loyalty then so be it.
Again, no problem here with paying him like a superstar. But his actual market value was not 25m because no other team would pay him that. You have to agree they could've gotten him back for significantly less and still made him one of the highest paid players in the league. Even if he brings in way more than 48 million over two years for them (which he will), you still should only be paying him 5-10% more than the next highest bidder. The extra income argument is just a rationalization, IMO. It might be to send a message, especially after Dwight. But I think players have short memories as long as the check is big enough. You keep talking about market value as if his only worth is as a player. Which is not the case. And I don't see Lakers being the kind of team to operate on bad faith by leveraging the fact that no team would pay that much for a marketing tool, but would only value him on a player base. I would say the same about J Lin, overpaid strictly speaking as a player, when the contract was made. But pretty obvious to everyone that he was paid that much to draw in the viewers. The marketing/image value of an aging Kobe is not worth nearly as much to any other team. Plus you're acting as if other teams were approaching Kobe with more money. We have no evidence this is the case. So far everything we've heard indicates that the Lakers offered him that much money because they wanted to and not because they felt pressure from outside parties.
one isnt, but one can be used to get other players. real championship teams are rarely built in one year 
|
That was a pathetic fucking pass Steve Blake. Absolutely pathetic. Defenders on either side of you and you telegraph where you want to throw it before softly lobbing it, of course it's going to get deflected. Fucking boneheaded turnovers killed us this game.
|
Holy crap, Nets won a game.
|
On November 27 2013 11:32 Jerubaal wrote:
Holy crap, Nets won a game.
Did their best to throw it, had a 15 pt lead with 5 minutes left then scored 1 pt in the remainder.
|
Why do the fucking Hawks keep inexplicably collapsing? First against Boston, then against Orlando. It's like a miracle of bad defense and cold shooting that should happen like once a month, not twice in less than a week, FUCK!
|
On November 27 2013 11:57 jeeeeohn wrote:
Why do the fucking Hawks keep inexplicably collapsing? First against Boston, then against Orlando. It's like a miracle of bad defense and cold shooting that should happen like once a month, not twice in less than a week, FUCK!
You did not make the required sacrificial appeasements to the Budenholzer.
|
![[image loading]](http://images.ftw.usatoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/jason-kidd-wins.gif)
How I felt after the Warriors game vs the Pelicans.
|
I really feel like the Jason Kidd coaching thing is pretty funny. Its like when I had a 22 year old soccer coach in high school...that hadn't played college. Its like this weird feeling where you are supposed to take "orders" from someone who is your same age, and not really better than you in any way.
Even like Doc Rivers when he first started coaching had a few years away and it seemed weird, and he objectively sucked as a coach for those first few years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
