Author Topic: LeBron James doesn’t think it’s possible to be paid his actual value under CBA  (Read 4098 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ScottHow

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1710
  • Tommy Points: 354
  • It's what I do! It's who I am!
    • Sports Paintings
Poor guy

Offline Fan from VT

  • Bailey Howell
  • ***
  • Posts: 3154
  • Tommy Points: 581
I don't think he was complaining about it, he was complaining about not getting credit for sacrificing his own pay for the good of the team. Still whining, but a totally different sort of whining.

  The issue isn't that he's sacrificing a million a year or whatever, the issue is that he's worth at least double what he gets. It's a huge advantage for teams that have actual franchise players. Think about it, next year Josh Smith could be making comparable money to James. Who would you rather have?

  Imagine if you had the cap but eliminated the max salary. Someone would have offered James well more than the Heat did. Miami may have been able to sign him but would have lost 1 of Bosh or Wade in the process. It would be a more wide open league, with teams that had no superstars able to compete with teams that had those stars because of the quality of the rest of the roster.




This.  I've argued this repeatedly elsewhere that all the stuff about a hard cap increasing parity is BS if you also have increasingly severe individual max contracts. those two principals run in direct conflict of each other.

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11941
  • Tommy Points: 1140
I don't think he was complaining about it, he was complaining about not getting credit for sacrificing his own pay for the good of the team. Still whining, but a totally different sort of whining.

How is he sacrificing his pay for the good of the team? Correct me if I'm wrong, isn't he payed the MAX?

It's one thing to not be paid what you're valued due to rules of the association, is another to leave money on the table that you could have gotten from your team in order to make the team better.

Offline Fan from VT

  • Bailey Howell
  • ***
  • Posts: 3154
  • Tommy Points: 581
Also, in fairness to him, these other "super teams" that are breaking up (OKC), no one there took less than the max to try to keep that team together.

Offline Fan from VT

  • Bailey Howell
  • ***
  • Posts: 3154
  • Tommy Points: 581
I don't think he was complaining about it, he was complaining about not getting credit for sacrificing his own pay for the good of the team. Still whining, but a totally different sort of whining.

How is he sacrificing his pay for the good of the team? Correct me if I'm wrong, isn't he payed the MAX?

It's one thing to not be paid what you're valued due to rules of the association, is another to leave money on the table that you could have gotten from your team in order to make the team better.

No, he is not. He is under the max.

Offline BballTim

  • Sam Jones
  • **********************
  • Posts: 22457
  • Tommy Points: 1030
I don't think he was complaining about it, he was complaining about not getting credit for sacrificing his own pay for the good of the team. Still whining, but a totally different sort of whining.

  The issue isn't that he's sacrificing a million a year or whatever, the issue is that he's worth at least double what he gets. It's a huge advantage for teams that have actual franchise players. Think about it, next year Josh Smith could be making comparable money to James. Who would you rather have?

  Imagine if you had the cap but eliminated the max salary. Someone would have offered James well more than the Heat did. Miami may have been able to sign him but would have lost 1 of Bosh or Wade in the process. It would be a more wide open league, with teams that had no superstars able to compete with teams that had those stars because of the quality of the rest of the roster.




This.  I've argued this repeatedly elsewhere that all the stuff about a hard cap increasing parity is BS if you also have increasingly severe individual max contracts. those two principals run in direct conflict of each other.

  Parity is exactly what you'd end up with. A teams with James wouldn't be able to afford 2 other max players, at least one of Wade and Bosh (if not both) would be spread onto other teams. LeBron's team would be worse (probably closer to the Cavs team that the Heat) so that teams with no superstar but more quality players would be able to compete with them.

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11941
  • Tommy Points: 1140
I don't think he was complaining about it, he was complaining about not getting credit for sacrificing his own pay for the good of the team. Still whining, but a totally different sort of whining.

How is he sacrificing his pay for the good of the team? Correct me if I'm wrong, isn't he payed the MAX?

It's one thing to not be paid what you're valued due to rules of the association, is another to leave money on the table that you could have gotten from your team in order to make the team better.

No, he is not. He is under the max.

OK.

Offline Fan from VT

  • Bailey Howell
  • ***
  • Posts: 3154
  • Tommy Points: 581
I don't think he was complaining about it, he was complaining about not getting credit for sacrificing his own pay for the good of the team. Still whining, but a totally different sort of whining.

  The issue isn't that he's sacrificing a million a year or whatever, the issue is that he's worth at least double what he gets. It's a huge advantage for teams that have actual franchise players. Think about it, next year Josh Smith could be making comparable money to James. Who would you rather have?

  Imagine if you had the cap but eliminated the max salary. Someone would have offered James well more than the Heat did. Miami may have been able to sign him but would have lost 1 of Bosh or Wade in the process. It would be a more wide open league, with teams that had no superstars able to compete with teams that had those stars because of the quality of the rest of the roster.




This.  I've argued this repeatedly elsewhere that all the stuff about a hard cap increasing parity is BS if you also have increasingly severe individual max contracts. those two principals run in direct conflict of each other.

  Parity is exactly what you'd end up with. A teams with James wouldn't be able to afford 2 other max players, at least one of Wade and Bosh (if not both) would be spread onto other teams. LeBron's team would be worse (probably closer to the Cavs team that the Heat) so that teams with no superstar but more quality players would be able to compete with them.

Exactly. Im in agreement, and seconding your sentiment. Having individual max contracts completely undoes the goal of parity because it encourages players to team up or consider other factors (location, etc) over the contract offered. Individual max contracts actually remove any compettitive advantage of a place like minny or indiana from getting a real star, because no one will choose one of those places over LA/NY.

Offline BudweiserCeltic

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11941
  • Tommy Points: 1140
Personally I think there should be some sort of ranking system to evaluate players, and from there extrapolate max amount they'd be able to get. Not sure how you would go about doing that, and what other problems it will make, but I think that's the best way.

You want LeBron? Sure, give him a 30 million (random number, probably low balled) contract... You're going to have a tough time building a roster to surround him with, but hey, you have LeBron.

The current MAX contract structure is too dependent on time served rather on than talent of player.

Offline Fan from VT

  • Bailey Howell
  • ***
  • Posts: 3154
  • Tommy Points: 581
Personally I think there should be some sort of ranking system to evaluate players, and from there extrapolate max amount they'd be able to get. Not sure how you would go about doing that, and what other problems it will make, but I think that's the best way.

You want LeBron? Sure, give him a 30 million (random number, probably low balled) contract... You're going to have a tough time building a roster to surround him with, but hey, you have LeBron.

The current MAX contract structure is too dependent on time served rather on than talent of player.

If you believe in markets, the way to do that is just hav e a team cap and no max caps, so the max contract becomes market driven. 16 million per year in miami or 35 in Minnesota? That's a choice.

Offline JSD

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7958
  • Tommy Points: 372
  • Just So Dedicated
I don't think he was complaining about it, he was complaining about not getting credit for sacrificing his own pay for the good of the team. Still whining, but a totally different sort of whining.

  The issue isn't that he's sacrificing a million a year or whatever, the issue is that he's worth at least double what he gets. It's a huge advantage for teams that have actual franchise players. Think about it, next year Josh Smith could be making comparable money to James. Who would you rather have?

  Imagine if you had the cap but eliminated the max salary. Someone would have offered James well more than the Heat did. Miami may have been able to sign him but would have lost 1 of Bosh or Wade in the process. It would be a more wide open league, with teams that had no superstars able to compete with teams that had those stars because of the quality of the rest of the roster.




This.  I've argued this repeatedly elsewhere that all the stuff about a hard cap increasing parity is BS if you also have increasingly severe individual max contracts. those two principals run in direct conflict of each other.

  Parity is exactly what you'd end up with. A teams with James wouldn't be able to afford 2 other max players, at least one of Wade and Bosh (if not both) would be spread onto other teams. LeBron's team would be worse (probably closer to the Cavs team that the Heat) so that teams with no superstar but more quality players would be able to compete with them.

Exactly. Im in agreement, and seconding your sentiment. Having individual max contracts completely undoes the goal of parity because it encourages players to team up or consider other factors (location, etc) over the contract offered. Individual max contracts actually remove any compettitive advantage of a place like minny or indiana from getting a real star, because no one will choose one of those places over LA/NY.

So what you are suggesting is that you have one or the other or just a hard cap?

Edit - I get it. Just a hard cap. That way a team could send James $40 million then only have $20 left over to fill out the rest of the roster.

Offline Fan from VT

  • Bailey Howell
  • ***
  • Posts: 3154
  • Tommy Points: 581
I don't think he was complaining about it, he was complaining about not getting credit for sacrificing his own pay for the good of the team. Still whining, but a totally different sort of whining.

  The issue isn't that he's sacrificing a million a year or whatever, the issue is that he's worth at least double what he gets. It's a huge advantage for teams that have actual franchise players. Think about it, next year Josh Smith could be making comparable money to James. Who would you rather have?

  Imagine if you had the cap but eliminated the max salary. Someone would have offered James well more than the Heat did. Miami may have been able to sign him but would have lost 1 of Bosh or Wade in the process. It would be a more wide open league, with teams that had no superstars able to compete with teams that had those stars because of the quality of the rest of the roster.




This.  I've argued this repeatedly elsewhere that all the stuff about a hard cap increasing parity is BS if you also have increasingly severe individual max contracts. those two principals run in direct conflict of each other.

  Parity is exactly what you'd end up with. A teams with James wouldn't be able to afford 2 other max players, at least one of Wade and Bosh (if not both) would be spread onto other teams. LeBron's team would be worse (probably closer to the Cavs team that the Heat) so that teams with no superstar but more quality players would be able to compete with them.

Exactly. Im in agreement, and seconding your sentiment. Having individual max contracts completely undoes the goal of parity because it encourages players to team up or consider other factors (location, etc) over the contract offered. Individual max contracts actually remove any compettitive advantage of a place like minny or indiana from getting a real star, because no one will choose one of those places over LA/NY.

So what you are suggesting is that you have one or the other or just a hard cap?

Edit - I get it. Just a hard cap. That way a team could send James $40 million then only have $20 left over to fill out the rest of the roster.


Exactly.

Right now, individual max contracts ENCOURAGES players to team up in the major markets that are fun to live in, because the max contract guarantees that 2-3 franchise players can fit on one team, and there's no benefit that non-desirable locations can offer to outweigh the desirable locations.


Edit - So a Team Cap (not necessarily a hard cap, i like the flex cap so that you can go over to keep players you've drafted, etc.) with no individual restrictions allows non-ideal locations to try to lure big-time players. It still protects a team's profit margin, which is what the owners all want. It does encourage teams to be more intelligently run, too, and punishes bad decisions.

Offline Finkelskyhook

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • **
  • Posts: 2794
  • Tommy Points: 275
While the messiah is probably right...He, along with a very willing media have done a great job rehabilitating his image...

He should probably not screw it up by sounding Latrine Sprewellesque.

Offline Fan from VT

  • Bailey Howell
  • ***
  • Posts: 3154
  • Tommy Points: 581
Here's an interesting thought:

What if Durant and Westbrook had intentionally taken less than the max so that Harden could stay? We would never stop hearing about how great and team-oriented they were. James/Wade/Bosh did this, and it's rarely mentioned. It is so much about the story we want to tell going into a situation rather than the actual story that dictates sports narratives.

Offline JSD

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7958
  • Tommy Points: 372
  • Just So Dedicated
I don't think he was complaining about it, he was complaining about not getting credit for sacrificing his own pay for the good of the team. Still whining, but a totally different sort of whining.

  The issue isn't that he's sacrificing a million a year or whatever, the issue is that he's worth at least double what he gets. It's a huge advantage for teams that have actual franchise players. Think about it, next year Josh Smith could be making comparable money to James. Who would you rather have?

  Imagine if you had the cap but eliminated the max salary. Someone would have offered James well more than the Heat did. Miami may have been able to sign him but would have lost 1 of Bosh or Wade in the process. It would be a more wide open league, with teams that had no superstars able to compete with teams that had those stars because of the quality of the rest of the roster.




This.  I've argued this repeatedly elsewhere that all the stuff about a hard cap increasing parity is BS if you also have increasingly severe individual max contracts. those two principals run in direct conflict of each other.

  Parity is exactly what you'd end up with. A teams with James wouldn't be able to afford 2 other max players, at least one of Wade and Bosh (if not both) would be spread onto other teams. LeBron's team would be worse (probably closer to the Cavs team that the Heat) so that teams with no superstar but more quality players would be able to compete with them.

Exactly. Im in agreement, and seconding your sentiment. Having individual max contracts completely undoes the goal of parity because it encourages players to team up or consider other factors (location, etc) over the contract offered. Individual max contracts actually remove any compettitive advantage of a place like minny or indiana from getting a real star, because no one will choose one of those places over LA/NY.

So what you are suggesting is that you have one or the other or just a hard cap?

Edit - I get it. Just a hard cap. That way a team could send James $40 million then only have $20 left over to fill out the rest of the roster.


Exactly.

Right now, individual max contracts ENCOURAGES players to team up in the major markets that are fun to live in, because the max contract guarantees that 2-3 franchise players can fit on one team, and there's no benefit that non-desirable locations can offer to outweigh the desirable locations.


Edit - So a Team Cap (not necessarily a hard cap, i like the flex cap so that you can go over to keep players you've drafted, etc.) with no individual restrictions allows non-ideal locations to try to lure big-time players. It still protects a team's profit margin, which is what the owners all want. It does encourage teams to be more intelligently run, too, and punishes bad decisions.

I 100% agree. The current system is terrible compared to this idea.

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsBlog Forums.

Welcome to CelticsBlog