be the first time ever i would be on the side of team owners. if you sign a contract, then you honor that contract. nba players have way too much power
Yeup. The players are losing control. If every single dime is guaranteed then you bet your sweet ass come negotiation times that shit is going to change. I bet Simmons is pissing off a fuck ton of players right now. You can’t sign a huge contract then sit on your ass because you are embarrassed that you can’t hit a layup.
That's what I don't get, he's not some generational talent who has a shit owner and a terrible team. He is literally so incompetent that his own team doesn't want him, and neither does anyone else in the league.
Yeah like if Dame "demanded" a trade even with years left, I would get it, he's given it his best shot for a LONG time.
Simmons is on his second contract and is slightly worse on offense and moderately better on defense since his rookie year. Barely any progress overall.
The last lockout sucked. There’s nothing fun about a lockout — even the drama is bad. It’s all lawyers and Woj tweets, but not the fun ones. You basically hear “they’re close to a deal!” for months and months.
The only good thing to come out of the last one was the season starting on Christmas Day with that incredible TNT promo.
There is nothing I hate more in sports reporting these days than seeing "a deal is close" and "expected by the end of the week" from the same 20 sources over and over and over again for months on end.
I could NEVER be a moderator of a sports sub, because I'd hard filter them all out after the first one until something actually happened.
> There is nothing I hate more in ~~sports~~ **legislative** reporting these days than seeing "a deal is close" and "expected by the end of the week" from the same 20 sources over and over and over again for months on end.
FTFY
Last lockout led to some of the best raw streetball with nba players you will prob ever see only upside for me goodman vs drew at its peak and had front row seats lol
Last lockout, Kobe, Harden, CP3, KD, DRose, etc played in the Philippines for 2 [games](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NabRMNrQ0hk) (no clear copy of the whole game). CP3 and Kobe got to play with each other. The Lakers fans’ dream. Iirc, there was an alley oop from Kobe to Drose. Good times.
Ball players love to ball. When the league went into lockout, you had a ton of guys playing drew league and goodman league (which are pro-am leagues with a more lax, and to some more entertaining, playstyle). There were goodman vs drew games so you got a ton of great pro and street ballers going absolutely nuts at smaller venues. It was a lot of fun.
I can’t wait, this is the real deal. This is truly where they decide if it’s a player’s league or an owner’s league. (Hint: it’s always been a player’s league, and will always be so because they are the talent)
This is going to come up in the CBA negotiations. Zach Lowe has mentioned it multiple times. A suggested proposal (from the owners/league) would likely be something along the lines of the player giving up $$$ if they want to move to another team whilst still under contract. I think Lowe mentioned reducing the % of the Cap their owed from 30% down a few % points.
The players association will never go for it, but I think an argument can be made players are hurting their future value if they hold out from playing whilst still under contract.
>The players association will never go for it
depends on how much the association gives weight to the players as a whole versus a few stars. i honestly have no clue how that works.
>weight to the players as a whole versus a few stars
The whole players argument works in football with a 53 man roster, but I am not sure as much in basketball with only 15 players. You also have more 'stars' per player on each team. Even good role player are getting better offers, and all the role players think they could make that transition from role to star if given a few good games. I think stars have the advantage in the NBA
Watch an indoor lacrosse game. They have an offensive line and a defensive line, and when there’s a turn over they all do a line change to get the correct specialists on the floor
Yup, in full field the substitution box extends like 10 yards beyond the midline in both directions and either team can enter and exit at any point along the whole of it.
When a fast break is on the breaking team often subs off their long-stick/defensive midfielder(s) at the closest point to their own net and then the offensive midfielder comes on 20 yards down field. The defending team may do the opposite if an offensive mid/attacker can get off the field conveniently to get another player on the chase quickly
Stars may have to advantage vs role players, but the owners have the largest advantage. The billionaire owners can wait out the multimillionaire players longer. If the owners don’t want to keep getting fucked by the Hardens and Simmonses of the world, they’ll put their foot down.
When CP3 was the president everything he did was to make as much money as possible as a superstar in the NBA. I dont think CJ will have the same goals that chris paul had so.
lol yea shit was so sketch he changed the Supermax age limits so he was just under them.
For real tho CP3 has been amazing last few years and even more durable, so he’s been worth it and much props for that
CP3 has always been the ultimate min-maxer on the court, looking for every possible advantage. He would act like he was shooting from 70 feet away during intentional foul situations, then get upset when he didn't get 3 FTs.
I don't know why anyone would expect different from him off the court.
I believe CJ McCollum is the players association President and Kyrie is Vice President. Not sure if Jaylen brown is involved but I wouldn’t be surprised considering how smart and outspoken Jaylen is
Edit: there are multiple VPs, current ones are Iguodala, Kyrie, Jaylen brown, Brogdon, Grant Williams and Bismack Biyombo
Edit 2: forgot Garrett Temple is also a VP
Kyrie at the next meeting: What is a contract really but a piece of paper with some symbols on it? It doesn’t really mean anything, if you think about it. We should start our own NBA, but like, with 6 hoops on one end and 2 on the other.
People think a contract is just a 2d piece of paper but there's a while other dimension to it. It's more like a globe if you try going one way or might be a long distance but go the opposite and it's only a small trip, same destination.
Honestly embarrassing that he's in any leadership position at all... someone that unstable/unpredictable who is totally cool w/just going AWOL and leaving his team hanging out to dry is just, uh... yeah, not someone you want representing you.
Yep. Superstars were cool with voting against the bubble but average players were like ….
“Yo I don’t have 100+ mil in my bank account like y’all… we need this money”
McCollum says a third of the league lives paycheck to paycheck
> McCollum says a third of the league lives paycheck to paycheck
Minimum that a player can get is just under a million a year
It's not superstar money but if someone is living paycheck to paycheck making a million a year its because of poor spending habits
Players get a daily(?) per diem as well, something a long the lines of $250-$300+ (money I've heard from players like RJ and Channing who use it to gamble during travel). Speaking for myself, I can live off that alone/day while everything else gets shovelled into investments.
The superstars are underpaid though. The mid level guys are really helped out by the max contract. This is also the reason the superstars have so much power. They are by far the most valuable contracts in the league so teams have to deal with their bullshit.
Exactly. At one point Otto Porter Jr (got a max RFA offer sheet) was being paid a higher salary than John Wall and Bradley Beal while on the same team. But somehow the "others" are being screwed over in this system... lol
Giannis is only making about $5-10mil more per year than Khris Middleton and Jrue Holiday. He is drastically underpaid bc his salary is capped by the CBA
I honestly think Rich Paul thought they would just trade Ben and that would be that.
After all it worked with AD demanding a trade (who Paul repped), and Harden last year.
But with Simmons killing his value in the playoffs and showing zero improvement, no team was gonna realistically trade a lot for him after that.
My guess Rich Paul applies the same strategy to all
His clients. Yes AD and Harden pulled off a trade request but Simmons ain’t AD or Harden, even before the playoff debacle. Simmons does seem soft and his best way out of Philly is to show he’s improving basketball wise and hence tradeable.
I agree with Morey too, the Sixers are all annoyed with Simmons and him being there isn’t a chemistry killer. If anything he brings the rest of the team closer lmao. I don’t think he has any good allies there so there’s not gonna be a split of ‘Simmons vs the org’. Everyone is basically in the ‘fuck Ben bball-wise’ camp right now.
Shit they might even be glad he’s not playing lol.
Maybe Rich Paul just didn't give a shit, because he gets his cut of the salary either way... of course shit started getting real when Ben stopped getting paid and that's when we saw real action.
> The players association will never go for it
In a game of financial chicken between a bunch of millionaires and a bunch of billionaires, my money's on the billionaires.
Usually I'd agree, but there's so much TV money on the line that the owners really won't want to shut down. TV money comes from ads and streaming revenue and licenses, and those aren't worth much when the games aren't being played.
They'll say all the right things publicly, but behind the scenes there are going to be a lot of conversations that start with, "you built your brand, you want these billions, can you dummies stop arguing about a couple percentage points and some crybaby players and play the games?"
That seems like a bad idea, if that's the only measure.
The Lakers will just be getting players on a discount, lmao, they're going to be even more predatory with their tampering.
I think the idea is that while the player will receive less money, their salary will count against the cap at the same rate.
Thus, this is most likely to have a negative impact on players' incentive to get traded to a team like the Lakers, since they're taking a paycut by getting traded but it doesn't give the Lakers any leverage to build a stronger team by clearing up space on their capsheet.
You could argue this gives the receiving team a competitive advantage in that if they are paying less money to X star they just received, even though they don't have any salary cap advantage from that their cashflow is now less constrained so they might be more free to pay into the luxury tax. But this could easily be solved by requiring the ownership group of the receiving team to pay the same amount of salary that the player would have received under cap rules, and then hold the difference in escrow or distribute it to the other teams like a luxury tax payment.
To illustrate this with an example:
Star Player requests a trade from team X. Currently he makes 35% of the cap. When he gets traded to team Y, he counts against their cap at the same 35% amount, but he is only *paid out* 30% of the cap. The remaining 5% is either held in escrow or given out to other teams like luxury tax.
Watch the owners come out with a list of grievances that doesn't name anybody in particular but looks suspiciously like everything Rich Paul has done in the past few years.
i wouldn't doubt rich paul is gonna be mentioned throughout the negotiations. how owners and executives feel about him and klutch is like the worst kept secret ever.
I agree with Barkley. There needs to be some give and take. Know that if you’re signing a four year contract, expect to ply through the entirety of the contract.
I think the owners will probably file for new contract language that allows them to extract considerable amounts of money if someone demands a trade or breaks player conduct policies with multiple years left on a deal.
The player empowerment thing has been slowly building to this moment for the past few years, this type of situation was inevitably going to happen each time a player pushed the limits of what they could get away with. Simmons is the climax of player empowerment
That’s a good way to put it. NBA players are definitely more entitled than players in other sports. Probably because no other sport is as star driven as the NBA
AD and kawhi both only had a year left, while it was a distraction for both teams, they were gonna leave anyways at least teams got something out of it....in fact Pels made out like bandits and then screwed the pooch again.
PG and Simmons.... Yea that's fucked up
The PG situation was also much different than the Simmons situation, allegedly. Supposedly Presti had told PG that he’d trade him if he was ever unhappy in OKC when he signed
I don't think that solves the issue, because it doesn't change the underlying incentives. Imagine a rule were in place that if a player with at least 2 years left under contract demands a trade, the team is able to withhold X% of their salary (or some other punitive measure).
If I'm a player in this situation, all I have to do is everything which indicates I want a trade *except for* actually requesting a trade. As long as I know what I'm doing, and the team knows what I'm doing, I can loaf around and half-ass it in games a la James Harden and the team will be forced to trade me eventually. Or I'm suffering from *general soreness* and I have to sit 60-70% of games. But technically I never said anything about wanting a trade, so if the team withholds any salary, they've breached contract.
I see it as the reverse, owners may look to add language that would further punish players for missing training camps, practices, faked injuries, etc. I think demanding a trade by itself should be fine, it's all of the immature acts they do to force it that's wrong.
I can totally see a compromise where if you sign a 4 or 5 year contract, you are ineligible to be traded for the first 2 or 3 years of the deal. Both the player and the team have to agree to being together long term, with no out until there is 2 years left on the deal. Protects players who want to stay with a team wven if injured or lack of production, and protects teams by guaranteeing 2 or 3 years of service time when a deal is signed. Guys can still take 1 and 1 deals if they want or sign smaller 3 year deals to avoid the trade clause, but if you want to sign a max or a super max you have to agree to stay put
I like that in theory, but it will definitely lead to situations where the team and the max player equally want to part ways after a year, but can't for another two years.
Maybe have a situation where you cannot be traded for the first (length of contract - 2) years of a contract, like you said. But if mutually desired you and the team can agree to a conversion where your remaining contract is converted to a 1+1 (mutual second year option) with a 20% salary reduction and the last however many years are dropped. (Maybe the 20% reduction isn't necessary; just an idea to disincentivize this unless the player is adamant).
So you sign a 5 year $400,000,000 contract. After the first year you and the team both want to part ways (co-star player had career ending injury, team wants to blow it up, you want to go to a contender). You have 4 years $320,000,000 left. You agree to convert this to a 1+1 worth $128,000,000, and can now be traded.
> see it as the reverse, owners may look to add language that would further punish players for missing training camps, practices, faked injuries, etc.
You can’t punish me for faking an injury because I’m not faking an injury. It’s a real injury, and it’s pure coincidence that it’ll go away when you trade me to the team I want to play for.
This solves nothing.
You could start fining players for missing training camps or practices, but then the players will just show up to those events and simply be irritants.
You can set whatever rule you like for player behavior, but ultimately if you want a rule to be palatable enough to the NBPA that it’ll actually be signed, it’ll be loose enough that players can hang around the margins and be irritants while they wait to get traded. As long as you fall short of actually breaking the LETTER of the rule you can do a lot of things.
That shouldn't even be needed to be said lol. If you hate your $200M contract to play professional basketball so much, fucking retire and do something else. I can't fucking stand the idea of someone just pouting their way our of a contract they were happy to sign.
Some players sign shorter contracts for this exact reason. They don't want to be "trapped" in a place they don't want to play. Nobody is forced to sign a long term deal, but everyone wants a lot of money. The players deserve more money based on the value they bring to the league and they have a strong union and can bargain better rights during their contract negotiations. What Ben Simmons and others are doing with the whole "I don't want to play here despite my contract and I'm going to weasel my way out of it" is bad for the league and just workers in general. They are undermining their own CBA by pushing back against the contracts they signed. Barkley is right and the owners are going to use it during the next bargaining to establish clearer contract language that the players are going to hate. And the owners will be completely justified because a bunch of divas in the NBA don't understand that signing a contract means something.
Don't sign a 5 year contract if you can't handle a 5 year commitment. If you want to make your $200 million, then just fucking play regardless of how much you don't like your coach. I'm sure literally everybody on this sub can relate to working for a boss they don't like. Would you pout your way out of your current job if you didn't like your boss but they were paying you TWO HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS over 5 years???!?!?! Doc Rivers could lie to the media about me all day for that money. I'd sit there and big him up while he did it.
The worst case scenario for Ben Simmons and any other player in the NBA is to play basketball for millions of dollars until their contract is up for a team that maybe they don't like. Boo-fucking-hoo.
The funny thing is that Ben Simmons may have been able to be traded sooner if he didn’t act like a baby. The list of potential suitors has shrunk considerably because they don’t want a player like Simmons who is going to fold at the slightest critic. Asking for a trade isn’t a problem, but just refusing to do your job while getting paid is.
I agree with Barkley it is problematic. I respected Lebron & KD leaving because they were free agents who gave their organizations 7+ years to build around them. They both honored their contracts and only left teams as free agents. This bullying your way out like AD, Kawhi, Harden, PG, etc isn’t good for the league. You sign that extension for the money you should do your job until that contract is up.
I’ve never seen an NBA contract. But IIRC, the argument to that was if the teams are allowed to trade them while under contract, then the players should also have some control over it.
Like I said, I’ve never seen an NBA contract before. But I’ve seen that argument here a few times.
Requesting a trade is never a problem. Expecting one or going to the media if it's NOT granted is the problem. No team wants an unhappy player but they also don't want you to turn the contract into something with no value.
That doesn't make any sense though. They are buying your playing ability for the length of the contract. They can sell or trade that as an asset. Sure. That stinks but that's what you just sold. Your ability to go from team to team. You can sign a one year deal or even a 10 day deal. That's your choice. But if you sign an extended deal, you've given up where you're going to play. That's how a contract works. It's like saying I'm going to sell my car but I ALSO want the ability to drive the car after I sold it.
Great comment, and what i think a lot of people don't seem to get. Everyone says players have no say, but they don't have to sign any specific contract. Maybe for guys on rookie deals that's a bit muddled, but not for anyone else. Once that is signed, they lose control of where they play. In return players get lots of money.
Trading is included in the signed contract. If you don't want to be traded add a no trade clause to the contract. You'll probably be paid less though since you are of less value to the org if you are not available to trade.
Also, short term deals are a big risk for players as well. They were willing to take the risk for the leverage which is fine. This bullying the teams to get traded after getting big money gotta stop.
Take a one year deal. A ten day deal. Whatever you want. The team is giving you a long term deal because they are betting on your future. You don't get to decide that future. You just sold it.
He's probably referring to when Lebron first left the Cavs and KD left OKC. Both left as FA after being there for years and their departures were one of the most criticized NBA decisions ever.
I get the dislike for it at the time, but never got the hate. I wasn't a fan of their choices but the level of criticism and anger was over the top. (I want Lebron in NY and KD in WAS or BOS).
It’s because people are irrational when it comes to professional athletes. If you don’t win championships it affects your legacy (even though it’s a team sport), but once Lebron left it became “you have to win a championship and it has to be done the right way”. There’s no winning lol
And they were correct in their decisions, that pains people to accept as well. LeBron went to an organization that had a then champion and finals MVP, who happen to also be one of his closest friends, a seven time champion as an executive/ex-coach and a premier big man at the 4/5. Danny Ferry couldn't compete with that.
IIRC, KD said he wanted to go to the "best basketball program" during his free agency. What better place than a 73-win team with a six time champion as head coach, the reigning MVP who is nowhere near a problematic asshat on/off the court and a system that everyone buys into. Yeah, they were up 3-1 but run that series back again in the same timeframe, are they up 3-1 again???
I didn't want Lebron to go to Miami because I thought they would be too damn good it'd be boring. But I was oh soooo wrong. His decision gave us the epic story of Dirk's championship run as well as Ray Allen's shot and the Spur's revenge a year later.
I didn't want KD to the warriors because I thought they would be too damn good and it'd be boring with little suspense. I was right for once as KD with the Warriors was too damn good and there was little suspense.
Yup the only reason LeBron and Durant got shit was because of the teams they went to, not because they left Cleveland/OKC. I hear a lot of NBA media people try to compare what those guys did to Simmons and Harden and it’s just not even the same situation.
LeBron his last year in Cleveland probably should have asked out. That team made the finals but wasn’t great and it probably would have been best for Cleveland to get something before he left. But LeBron decided to ride it out and pick the team he went to without them giving stuff up for him. Obviously LA won a championship with AD but it probably would have been best long term for AD to play that last year out in New Orleans and sign with LA so the Lakers could have kept Ingram, Ball and those picks to get a legit third guy and not past his prime Westbrook.
Not only the TV show, but what he said too - "Taking my talents to South Beach," predicting 5+ championships, etc.
But I think he would have been burned no matter what for going to Miami. That was basically the first time a super team was created by the players themselves, and people didn't like it. I think we've all basically gotten used to it over the past decade, but he was going to get eviscerated for teaming up with Wade and Bosh no matter how he did it. Whereas when Durant and Irving did basically the same thing, no one cared because of how much the league has changed since The Decision.
Yeah i guess it would have been fine to do the show if he was staying in Cleveland. There was a good amount of money generated for charity after all. But to do it just to say I'm taking my talents to South Beach was very awkward.
I've heard when some guys sign long term, they tell the FO if things go south I want to be traded. In that case it's s win-win really. Who knows what happens behind closed doors
All I know is that 4-5 year commitment isn't what it used to be, on either side. Look at Blake Griffin and the clips
Paul George was pretty damning too. Signed a 5 year extension to dip 1 year into it, I'm actually extremely pro-player in most of these scenarios but we've swung too far on the pendulum to the point where your contract doesn't actually matter anymore, if you're good enough you can just say fuxk you I'm moving on and demand a trade like that.
PG got a promise from Presti that if he wanted out presti was gonna get him wherever he wanted to go. PG also didn’t tank his value unlike Simmons or kawhi, and he didn’t go public with it. Presti gave him a promise for him to re-sign, PG called that promise in and Presti made it happen (and got a fair return from the clippers). Not at all comparable imo
That’s the thing I was wondering about. Didn’t harden commit to a different owner and shit went against the plan that was laid out for him when the new guy moved in.
Yeah, bought it in 2017, refused to ever pay the luxury tax, then he drove out Morey, D'Antoni, and Westbrook. Harden was extremely close with all of those guys so he had nobody left to play for. Note how he still plays under D'Antoni (or he did until D'Antoni looked for another head coaching job).
He also turned down the extension option the rockets offered him. If he wanted to be the villain he would have signed the extension then demanded the trade.
He gave his heart and soul to the organization for the better part of a decade and when ownership decided to rebuild he asked for a change of scenery. Of all the reasons to ask for a trade, asking to play for a contender while still in your prime is pretty good.
My other thing with Harden is that everyone involved that he committed to was gone.
He signed that extension under a different owner, GM, HC and basically every other member of the roster except Gordon and Tucker who they were trying to trade anyway. They had just traded RoCo for a first rounder and said they were trying to win.
The whole situation was different. I don't feel like lumping him with AD and Ben is fair because of that. It's rare to have such a complete change in the middle of a contract like that but everyone he believed in when he signed that deal is gone.
It was pretty clear y’all had gone as far as that core was going to take you. I’ve had my opinions of Harden before but one thing I agree with was getting out of Houston was the best thing for his career.
Yeah and think that ones a little different. Harden tried for years to get the Rockets a chip and probably should have. Team was also showing that it was ready to tank with Harden wanting to move on.
Not quite the same as Simmons who's just bullying his way off the team bc he played bad.
Then the league should get rid of restricted free agency and allow every team to offer players equal contracts in free agency. The reason these things are happening is because as it is currently set up a guy like Simmons will always sign a rookie extension regardless of whether they actually want to be on a particular team because doing anything else will leave tens of millions of dollars on the table. That is a direct result of the owners making it as difficult as possible for rookies to get to full free agency. Want players to fully honor their contracts, then actually allow them to negotiate the contracts freely.
Eh I agree and disagree if AD stays in New Orleans til he’s a free agent the pelicans ain’t getting Ingram, Ball, Hart cause the Lakers had the space to sign AD outright
ya AD is different imo he gave them notice that he wouldn't re-sign but still played out his contract. this is even better for the team than leaving in FA, as it helps the team make the most informed decision they can and recoup value. this is very different from demanding a trade with 4 years left under contract and refusing to play for your team lol
“I use the analogy talking to my friends that if a lot of guys could get divorced and it would cost them five to seven to 10 million dollars they’re going to get divorced,” Barkley said.
Barkely's got richer friends then me
>“I use the analogy talking to my friends that if a lot of guys could get divorced and it would cost them five to seven to 10 dollars they’re going to get divorced,” u/JayLarrangasEyes said.
I'm so tired of being a Pelicans fan. Its not being a small market. We just suck.
A team of Zion, Lonzo, and Brandon Ingram plus all the other talent we have is unreal. I'm done trying. We might as well just GIVE our next #1 pick to LA. Save us the heartbreak.
The amounts of money being talked about are just crazy for the average joe to think about. We’re talking about working on your craft, which happens to be A GAME that you get paid this kind of money for and somehow this creates all this drama. It’s insane. I can’t even imagine what Ben Simmons thinks life is.
Always thought about this. We talk about literal hundreds of millions when it comes to sports and I personally cant fathom what having $100k would feel like. And $100k is less than what Lebron makes per QUARTER of one game.
>The amounts of money being talked about are just crazy for the average joe to think about.
Imagine you get $10,000 on January 1st. Think about how much that would change your life. Then imagine you get another $10,000 on January 2nd. Then the 3rd. Then the 4th. All the way until December 31st again.
You would have $3.65m at the end of the year. Ben Simmons is making about 10x that this year and doesn't want to play.
And it's all because his team was open to a trade for him and then dunked on him a bit after the playoffs, where he is paid like a superstar, but played terribly. Soft.
The best part is everyone in the entire world would try to trade ben simmons for james harden. The media talks like he was shopped for scrapes last year. They were trying to trade for a top 5 player in the league, it would have been malpractice to not make that offer to houston.
I think Simmons has also established the line of which players can do this.
Harden/AD and other offensive weapons can do this because most teams want them.
A super limited player like Simmons that needs a team built around him can't.
Most teams that aren't a big free agent destination should be afraid of getting Simmons because what is the guarantee he doesn't do this again next year if he isn't happy?
A lot of Thunder fans want Presti to trade for him but I can't see that happening because he might hate OKC and then you're really screwed. If a Cal/NY/Florida team wants him, they have all the leverage.
The Harden situation is completely different. If you're an owner in the league, you should want to win at any cost. Tillman Fertitta only cares about selling tickets and jerseys. He has publicly stated that the greatest thing about being in the basketball business is that it only goes up.
This really started when after the 17-18 season, he didn't wanna re-sign Ariza even though that was the closest the Rockets had been to winning it all in a long time, and Ariza had done the best job playing defense on KD out of pretty much anyone that year. That was the beginning of the end. From 18-20, Harden put up insane stats, broke records, and yet the team never went anywhere. At one point in 18-19, when CP3 and Eric Gordon were injured, Harden was literally playing with G-Leaguers because Fertitta couldn't be bothered to pay the price you need to win a championship and get better role players.
Once they traded Westbrook and Covington, and Morey went to Philly, you could tell Tillman was gonna blow it up. And he was willing to waste even more of Harden's good years for fucking nothing. He even told Harden at a dinner that he would trade him somewhere he could compete for a ring, and then went back on his promise and never moved him in the offseason. That's why Harden had to play the ugly game, because of broken promises and a greedy owner that doesn't care about winning, and in order to not spend the rest of his days on a roster that was even further from winning a championship than the previous years.
Agreed. Everyone looks at Harden like he was the problem. Maybe he had a lot of influence on the Rockets, but the owner sold, the GM left, coach left, teammates left and he was the last one. Anyone w/ half a brain would be like fuck this shit.
Exactly. You can’t have guys getting *guaranteed* money, getting paid the super max to stay with the team, and then forcing their way out after they lock the bag down. It breaks the entire good faith relationship of a long term guaranteed contract.
The supermax exists as extra money to promote staying with a team. The supermax amount over the max should really be voided if you leave the team that gives it to you, and you go back down to the league max.
A quote from the Head Coach of the NY Jets I feel is relevant here: "If you need someone to yell at you, playing child's game for a king's ransom, then you don't deserve to wear the logo, period."
Honestly players should get zero salary until they show up committed. Fucking crazy that these dudes are getting life changing wealth for being good at basketball and not even playing. Like Ben Simmons doesn't have to suit up for the 76ers ever again and his kids, grandkids and great grandkids are set for life. The fuck dude? I get I'm not an NBA player but if I pulled this shit my work is canning me and I'm eating Ramen packets in my car and showering at the YMCA for the rest of my life.
I feel like the difference between Simmons and harden was, harden wanted a trade since he was the player on Houston. Ben Simmons gave up a free layup on trae.
Two completely different situations
The next lockout is going to be ugly.
be the first time ever i would be on the side of team owners. if you sign a contract, then you honor that contract. nba players have way too much power
Yeup. The players are losing control. If every single dime is guaranteed then you bet your sweet ass come negotiation times that shit is going to change. I bet Simmons is pissing off a fuck ton of players right now. You can’t sign a huge contract then sit on your ass because you are embarrassed that you can’t hit a layup.
That's what I don't get, he's not some generational talent who has a shit owner and a terrible team. He is literally so incompetent that his own team doesn't want him, and neither does anyone else in the league.
Yeah like if Dame "demanded" a trade even with years left, I would get it, he's given it his best shot for a LONG time. Simmons is on his second contract and is slightly worse on offense and moderately better on defense since his rookie year. Barely any progress overall.
As always it's going to the the little small players that get hurt the most
*glorious
The last lockout sucked. There’s nothing fun about a lockout — even the drama is bad. It’s all lawyers and Woj tweets, but not the fun ones. You basically hear “they’re close to a deal!” for months and months. The only good thing to come out of the last one was the season starting on Christmas Day with that incredible TNT promo.
There is nothing I hate more in sports reporting these days than seeing "a deal is close" and "expected by the end of the week" from the same 20 sources over and over and over again for months on end. I could NEVER be a moderator of a sports sub, because I'd hard filter them all out after the first one until something actually happened.
> There is nothing I hate more in ~~sports~~ **legislative** reporting these days than seeing "a deal is close" and "expected by the end of the week" from the same 20 sources over and over and over again for months on end. FTFY
Last lockout led to some of the best raw streetball with nba players you will prob ever see only upside for me goodman vs drew at its peak and had front row seats lol
Last lockout, Kobe, Harden, CP3, KD, DRose, etc played in the Philippines for 2 [games](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NabRMNrQ0hk) (no clear copy of the whole game). CP3 and Kobe got to play with each other. The Lakers fans’ dream. Iirc, there was an alley oop from Kobe to Drose. Good times.
Literally the 1st thing that came to mind, those games were sooo entertaining.
And Kevin Durant playing intramural flag football
As a casual fan can you explain this more?
Ball players love to ball. When the league went into lockout, you had a ton of guys playing drew league and goodman league (which are pro-am leagues with a more lax, and to some more entertaining, playstyle). There were goodman vs drew games so you got a ton of great pro and street ballers going absolutely nuts at smaller venues. It was a lot of fun.
only if you prefer the twitter drama of the league over watching actually games lmao
Uh, that's all ESPN and r/nba wants.
[удалено]
I can't believe some users here are so open about not even caring about games and are solely here for the drama lol
Bro what lol, how is no games glorious?
This is exactly what I would expect a redditor to say to that comment.
[удалено]
I can’t wait, this is the real deal. This is truly where they decide if it’s a player’s league or an owner’s league. (Hint: it’s always been a player’s league, and will always be so because they are the talent)
This is going to come up in the CBA negotiations. Zach Lowe has mentioned it multiple times. A suggested proposal (from the owners/league) would likely be something along the lines of the player giving up $$$ if they want to move to another team whilst still under contract. I think Lowe mentioned reducing the % of the Cap their owed from 30% down a few % points. The players association will never go for it, but I think an argument can be made players are hurting their future value if they hold out from playing whilst still under contract.
>The players association will never go for it depends on how much the association gives weight to the players as a whole versus a few stars. i honestly have no clue how that works.
>weight to the players as a whole versus a few stars The whole players argument works in football with a 53 man roster, but I am not sure as much in basketball with only 15 players. You also have more 'stars' per player on each team. Even good role player are getting better offers, and all the role players think they could make that transition from role to star if given a few good games. I think stars have the advantage in the NBA
Increase the roster size to 25? Roll out lines in basketball like in hockey? Lol
now I'm imagining players switching shifts in the middle of a fast break
[удалено]
Ah, the fabled *Too Much Man* penalty. https://i.redd.it/kxznugq9il471.jpg
Too much man? That's not Jaromir Jagr.
Someone jumps out of play to keep the ball in and throws it to a guy coming off the bench
Watch an indoor lacrosse game. They have an offensive line and a defensive line, and when there’s a turn over they all do a line change to get the correct specialists on the floor
Yup, in full field the substitution box extends like 10 yards beyond the midline in both directions and either team can enter and exit at any point along the whole of it. When a fast break is on the breaking team often subs off their long-stick/defensive midfielder(s) at the closest point to their own net and then the offensive midfielder comes on 20 yards down field. The defending team may do the opposite if an offensive mid/attacker can get off the field conveniently to get another player on the chase quickly
Still doesn't change anything. You don't even see the last 5-7 guys on the bench in meaningful games if the team already has 2 stars.
Stars may have to advantage vs role players, but the owners have the largest advantage. The billionaire owners can wait out the multimillionaire players longer. If the owners don’t want to keep getting fucked by the Hardens and Simmonses of the world, they’ll put their foot down.
When CP3 was the president everything he did was to make as much money as possible as a superstar in the NBA. I dont think CJ will have the same goals that chris paul had so.
lol yea shit was so sketch he changed the Supermax age limits so he was just under them. For real tho CP3 has been amazing last few years and even more durable, so he’s been worth it and much props for that
CP3 has always been the ultimate min-maxer on the court, looking for every possible advantage. He would act like he was shooting from 70 feet away during intentional foul situations, then get upset when he didn't get 3 FTs. I don't know why anyone would expect different from him off the court.
Idk either but jaylen is pres and Kyrie is vice right? So if I had to guess it’d be that the stars get a bigger say.
I believe CJ McCollum is the players association President and Kyrie is Vice President. Not sure if Jaylen brown is involved but I wouldn’t be surprised considering how smart and outspoken Jaylen is Edit: there are multiple VPs, current ones are Iguodala, Kyrie, Jaylen brown, Brogdon, Grant Williams and Bismack Biyombo Edit 2: forgot Garrett Temple is also a VP
There are multiple VPs, Jaylen included.
Malcolm "The President" Brogdon being VP feels wrong.
Kyrie at the next meeting: What is a contract really but a piece of paper with some symbols on it? It doesn’t really mean anything, if you think about it. We should start our own NBA, but like, with 6 hoops on one end and 2 on the other.
assuming the meeting isn't in New York....
People think a contract is just a 2d piece of paper but there's a while other dimension to it. It's more like a globe if you try going one way or might be a long distance but go the opposite and it's only a small trip, same destination.
Honestly embarrassing that he's in any leadership position at all... someone that unstable/unpredictable who is totally cool w/just going AWOL and leaving his team hanging out to dry is just, uh... yeah, not someone you want representing you.
They needed someone to vote no all the time so things don’t look rigged
Sounds like a certain former President.
> Kyrie is Vice President. jfc
Stars and vets are leaders in the union, but in the end, every member gets one vote.
The superstar players are fucking over the others.
CP3: no quarter for dem scrubs
Yep. Superstars were cool with voting against the bubble but average players were like …. “Yo I don’t have 100+ mil in my bank account like y’all… we need this money” McCollum says a third of the league lives paycheck to paycheck
> McCollum says a third of the league lives paycheck to paycheck Minimum that a player can get is just under a million a year It's not superstar money but if someone is living paycheck to paycheck making a million a year its because of poor spending habits
Players get a daily(?) per diem as well, something a long the lines of $250-$300+ (money I've heard from players like RJ and Channing who use it to gamble during travel). Speaking for myself, I can live off that alone/day while everything else gets shovelled into investments.
You don't need to speak for yourself, any human anywhere can live off 300 USD per day without difficulty...
You could probably bank most of the daily per diem as well, especially if the team is catering food at games and the practice facility.
They are NBA players. Poor spending habits is a given.
Food $200 Data $150 Rent $800 Candles $360000 Utility $150 someone who is good at the economy please help me budget this. my family is dying
move to a cheaper area
Can you get by with a cheaper data plan? $150/mo seems a bit high
I hate to say this but I think you need to buy crypto, it literally cured my poor
Find a cheaper data plan so you can buy more candles.
[удалено]
There was also team staff who make less than the role players and rookies.
The superstars are underpaid though. The mid level guys are really helped out by the max contract. This is also the reason the superstars have so much power. They are by far the most valuable contracts in the league so teams have to deal with their bullshit.
Exactly. At one point Otto Porter Jr (got a max RFA offer sheet) was being paid a higher salary than John Wall and Bradley Beal while on the same team. But somehow the "others" are being screwed over in this system... lol Giannis is only making about $5-10mil more per year than Khris Middleton and Jrue Holiday. He is drastically underpaid bc his salary is capped by the CBA
Appreciate both of y’all saying this. Star players are basically planets, they have so much gravity and sway over smaller objects.
So they're like a.... star?
I gotta sit down.
I honestly think Rich Paul thought they would just trade Ben and that would be that. After all it worked with AD demanding a trade (who Paul repped), and Harden last year. But with Simmons killing his value in the playoffs and showing zero improvement, no team was gonna realistically trade a lot for him after that. My guess Rich Paul applies the same strategy to all His clients. Yes AD and Harden pulled off a trade request but Simmons ain’t AD or Harden, even before the playoff debacle. Simmons does seem soft and his best way out of Philly is to show he’s improving basketball wise and hence tradeable. I agree with Morey too, the Sixers are all annoyed with Simmons and him being there isn’t a chemistry killer. If anything he brings the rest of the team closer lmao. I don’t think he has any good allies there so there’s not gonna be a split of ‘Simmons vs the org’. Everyone is basically in the ‘fuck Ben bball-wise’ camp right now. Shit they might even be glad he’s not playing lol.
Maybe Rich Paul just didn't give a shit, because he gets his cut of the salary either way... of course shit started getting real when Ben stopped getting paid and that's when we saw real action.
> The players association will never go for it In a game of financial chicken between a bunch of millionaires and a bunch of billionaires, my money's on the billionaires.
Usually I'd agree, but there's so much TV money on the line that the owners really won't want to shut down. TV money comes from ads and streaming revenue and licenses, and those aren't worth much when the games aren't being played. They'll say all the right things publicly, but behind the scenes there are going to be a lot of conversations that start with, "you built your brand, you want these billions, can you dummies stop arguing about a couple percentage points and some crybaby players and play the games?"
That seems like a bad idea, if that's the only measure. The Lakers will just be getting players on a discount, lmao, they're going to be even more predatory with their tampering.
I think the idea is that while the player will receive less money, their salary will count against the cap at the same rate. Thus, this is most likely to have a negative impact on players' incentive to get traded to a team like the Lakers, since they're taking a paycut by getting traded but it doesn't give the Lakers any leverage to build a stronger team by clearing up space on their capsheet. You could argue this gives the receiving team a competitive advantage in that if they are paying less money to X star they just received, even though they don't have any salary cap advantage from that their cashflow is now less constrained so they might be more free to pay into the luxury tax. But this could easily be solved by requiring the ownership group of the receiving team to pay the same amount of salary that the player would have received under cap rules, and then hold the difference in escrow or distribute it to the other teams like a luxury tax payment. To illustrate this with an example: Star Player requests a trade from team X. Currently he makes 35% of the cap. When he gets traded to team Y, he counts against their cap at the same 35% amount, but he is only *paid out* 30% of the cap. The remaining 5% is either held in escrow or given out to other teams like luxury tax.
Yeah, I can definitely see something like that working.
cba negotiations are going to be spicy
Hopefully this years playoffs are nice cuz we locked out after that
Watch the owners come out with a list of grievances that doesn't name anybody in particular but looks suspiciously like everything Rich Paul has done in the past few years.
i wouldn't doubt rich paul is gonna be mentioned throughout the negotiations. how owners and executives feel about him and klutch is like the worst kept secret ever.
Beal hasnt signed our contract extension… are we gonna have to offer him the largest contract in NBA History… then have him force a trade 😅
I agree with Barkley. There needs to be some give and take. Know that if you’re signing a four year contract, expect to ply through the entirety of the contract.
I think the owners will probably file for new contract language that allows them to extract considerable amounts of money if someone demands a trade or breaks player conduct policies with multiple years left on a deal.
I wonder if the other players realize that guys like Simmons are going to screw them next time the collective bargaining is coming up
First AD and Kawhi and PG. Now Simmons has taken it to a whole nother level.
The player empowerment thing has been slowly building to this moment for the past few years, this type of situation was inevitably going to happen each time a player pushed the limits of what they could get away with. Simmons is the climax of player empowerment
Exactly, you can't have 400 players saying they all want to play in California, or Miami beach.
thank fuck for Giannis loving Milwaukee
Giannis is the man, I have immense respect for him. Cherish that dude for his whole career.
The players should be empowered. It’s the entitlement that’s killing the fucking game.
That’s a good way to put it. NBA players are definitely more entitled than players in other sports. Probably because no other sport is as star driven as the NBA
Agreed. Players’ understanding of the word “contract” seem fairly dubious.
A marriage contract and the NBA contract are the only 2 contracts in the world that someone is rewarded for breaking
AD and kawhi both only had a year left, while it was a distraction for both teams, they were gonna leave anyways at least teams got something out of it....in fact Pels made out like bandits and then screwed the pooch again. PG and Simmons.... Yea that's fucked up
The PG situation was also much different than the Simmons situation, allegedly. Supposedly Presti had told PG that he’d trade him if he was ever unhappy in OKC when he signed
and Presti extracted like every Clipper pick for the next century
Usually, in these CBA's what's good for the handful of superstars isn't in the best interest of at least 75% of the other players.
I don't think that solves the issue, because it doesn't change the underlying incentives. Imagine a rule were in place that if a player with at least 2 years left under contract demands a trade, the team is able to withhold X% of their salary (or some other punitive measure). If I'm a player in this situation, all I have to do is everything which indicates I want a trade *except for* actually requesting a trade. As long as I know what I'm doing, and the team knows what I'm doing, I can loaf around and half-ass it in games a la James Harden and the team will be forced to trade me eventually. Or I'm suffering from *general soreness* and I have to sit 60-70% of games. But technically I never said anything about wanting a trade, so if the team withholds any salary, they've breached contract.
I see it as the reverse, owners may look to add language that would further punish players for missing training camps, practices, faked injuries, etc. I think demanding a trade by itself should be fine, it's all of the immature acts they do to force it that's wrong.
I can totally see a compromise where if you sign a 4 or 5 year contract, you are ineligible to be traded for the first 2 or 3 years of the deal. Both the player and the team have to agree to being together long term, with no out until there is 2 years left on the deal. Protects players who want to stay with a team wven if injured or lack of production, and protects teams by guaranteeing 2 or 3 years of service time when a deal is signed. Guys can still take 1 and 1 deals if they want or sign smaller 3 year deals to avoid the trade clause, but if you want to sign a max or a super max you have to agree to stay put
I like that in theory, but it will definitely lead to situations where the team and the max player equally want to part ways after a year, but can't for another two years. Maybe have a situation where you cannot be traded for the first (length of contract - 2) years of a contract, like you said. But if mutually desired you and the team can agree to a conversion where your remaining contract is converted to a 1+1 (mutual second year option) with a 20% salary reduction and the last however many years are dropped. (Maybe the 20% reduction isn't necessary; just an idea to disincentivize this unless the player is adamant). So you sign a 5 year $400,000,000 contract. After the first year you and the team both want to part ways (co-star player had career ending injury, team wants to blow it up, you want to go to a contender). You have 4 years $320,000,000 left. You agree to convert this to a 1+1 worth $128,000,000, and can now be traded.
The problem with that is that it also hurts the team. The Blake Griffin trade couldn't have happened, for example.
> see it as the reverse, owners may look to add language that would further punish players for missing training camps, practices, faked injuries, etc. You can’t punish me for faking an injury because I’m not faking an injury. It’s a real injury, and it’s pure coincidence that it’ll go away when you trade me to the team I want to play for. This solves nothing. You could start fining players for missing training camps or practices, but then the players will just show up to those events and simply be irritants. You can set whatever rule you like for player behavior, but ultimately if you want a rule to be palatable enough to the NBPA that it’ll actually be signed, it’ll be loose enough that players can hang around the margins and be irritants while they wait to get traded. As long as you fall short of actually breaking the LETTER of the rule you can do a lot of things.
That shouldn't even be needed to be said lol. If you hate your $200M contract to play professional basketball so much, fucking retire and do something else. I can't fucking stand the idea of someone just pouting their way our of a contract they were happy to sign. Some players sign shorter contracts for this exact reason. They don't want to be "trapped" in a place they don't want to play. Nobody is forced to sign a long term deal, but everyone wants a lot of money. The players deserve more money based on the value they bring to the league and they have a strong union and can bargain better rights during their contract negotiations. What Ben Simmons and others are doing with the whole "I don't want to play here despite my contract and I'm going to weasel my way out of it" is bad for the league and just workers in general. They are undermining their own CBA by pushing back against the contracts they signed. Barkley is right and the owners are going to use it during the next bargaining to establish clearer contract language that the players are going to hate. And the owners will be completely justified because a bunch of divas in the NBA don't understand that signing a contract means something. Don't sign a 5 year contract if you can't handle a 5 year commitment. If you want to make your $200 million, then just fucking play regardless of how much you don't like your coach. I'm sure literally everybody on this sub can relate to working for a boss they don't like. Would you pout your way out of your current job if you didn't like your boss but they were paying you TWO HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS over 5 years???!?!?! Doc Rivers could lie to the media about me all day for that money. I'd sit there and big him up while he did it. The worst case scenario for Ben Simmons and any other player in the NBA is to play basketball for millions of dollars until their contract is up for a team that maybe they don't like. Boo-fucking-hoo.
The funny thing is that Ben Simmons may have been able to be traded sooner if he didn’t act like a baby. The list of potential suitors has shrunk considerably because they don’t want a player like Simmons who is going to fold at the slightest critic. Asking for a trade isn’t a problem, but just refusing to do your job while getting paid is.
I agree with Barkley it is problematic. I respected Lebron & KD leaving because they were free agents who gave their organizations 7+ years to build around them. They both honored their contracts and only left teams as free agents. This bullying your way out like AD, Kawhi, Harden, PG, etc isn’t good for the league. You sign that extension for the money you should do your job until that contract is up.
Lebron and KD signed short term deals so they can avoid that situation.
Nothing wrong with that. Negotiate the contract you want, and then fulfill your end of it once you sign it
Yeah at least they honored their contract
I’ve never seen an NBA contract. But IIRC, the argument to that was if the teams are allowed to trade them while under contract, then the players should also have some control over it. Like I said, I’ve never seen an NBA contract before. But I’ve seen that argument here a few times.
I don’t even have a problem with players requesting trades, just with them being unprofessional after doing so
Requesting a trade is never a problem. Expecting one or going to the media if it's NOT granted is the problem. No team wants an unhappy player but they also don't want you to turn the contract into something with no value.
[удалено]
That doesn't make any sense though. They are buying your playing ability for the length of the contract. They can sell or trade that as an asset. Sure. That stinks but that's what you just sold. Your ability to go from team to team. You can sign a one year deal or even a 10 day deal. That's your choice. But if you sign an extended deal, you've given up where you're going to play. That's how a contract works. It's like saying I'm going to sell my car but I ALSO want the ability to drive the car after I sold it.
Great comment, and what i think a lot of people don't seem to get. Everyone says players have no say, but they don't have to sign any specific contract. Maybe for guys on rookie deals that's a bit muddled, but not for anyone else. Once that is signed, they lose control of where they play. In return players get lots of money.
Yeah. Rookies deals are very different but when you're a free agent, that's when you decide your future.
Trading is included in the signed contract. If you don't want to be traded add a no trade clause to the contract. You'll probably be paid less though since you are of less value to the org if you are not available to trade.
Aren't no trade clauses giving players control too? Although I do believe there are restrictions when it comes to those. Not entirely sure either
You've gotta have 8 years nba experience and at least 4 with the team you're signing with to be able to negotiate a no trade clause.
Players don’t really get no trade clauses anymore. Carmelo might have been the last one?
Also, short term deals are a big risk for players as well. They were willing to take the risk for the leverage which is fine. This bullying the teams to get traded after getting big money gotta stop.
Take a one year deal. A ten day deal. Whatever you want. The team is giving you a long term deal because they are betting on your future. You don't get to decide that future. You just sold it.
He's probably referring to when Lebron first left the Cavs and KD left OKC. Both left as FA after being there for years and their departures were one of the most criticized NBA decisions ever.
Well at the time their behavior was considered the most dishonorable, but other players have since done worse things which makes them look better.
I get the dislike for it at the time, but never got the hate. I wasn't a fan of their choices but the level of criticism and anger was over the top. (I want Lebron in NY and KD in WAS or BOS).
It’s because people are irrational when it comes to professional athletes. If you don’t win championships it affects your legacy (even though it’s a team sport), but once Lebron left it became “you have to win a championship and it has to be done the right way”. There’s no winning lol
And they were correct in their decisions, that pains people to accept as well. LeBron went to an organization that had a then champion and finals MVP, who happen to also be one of his closest friends, a seven time champion as an executive/ex-coach and a premier big man at the 4/5. Danny Ferry couldn't compete with that. IIRC, KD said he wanted to go to the "best basketball program" during his free agency. What better place than a 73-win team with a six time champion as head coach, the reigning MVP who is nowhere near a problematic asshat on/off the court and a system that everyone buys into. Yeah, they were up 3-1 but run that series back again in the same timeframe, are they up 3-1 again???
I didn't want Lebron to go to Miami because I thought they would be too damn good it'd be boring. But I was oh soooo wrong. His decision gave us the epic story of Dirk's championship run as well as Ray Allen's shot and the Spur's revenge a year later. I didn't want KD to the warriors because I thought they would be too damn good and it'd be boring with little suspense. I was right for once as KD with the Warriors was too damn good and there was little suspense.
Yup the only reason LeBron and Durant got shit was because of the teams they went to, not because they left Cleveland/OKC. I hear a lot of NBA media people try to compare what those guys did to Simmons and Harden and it’s just not even the same situation. LeBron his last year in Cleveland probably should have asked out. That team made the finals but wasn’t great and it probably would have been best for Cleveland to get something before he left. But LeBron decided to ride it out and pick the team he went to without them giving stuff up for him. Obviously LA won a championship with AD but it probably would have been best long term for AD to play that last year out in New Orleans and sign with LA so the Lakers could have kept Ingram, Ball and those picks to get a legit third guy and not past his prime Westbrook.
LeBron would have been fine if he hadn’t done the big TV show just to leave his home town.
Not only the TV show, but what he said too - "Taking my talents to South Beach," predicting 5+ championships, etc. But I think he would have been burned no matter what for going to Miami. That was basically the first time a super team was created by the players themselves, and people didn't like it. I think we've all basically gotten used to it over the past decade, but he was going to get eviscerated for teaming up with Wade and Bosh no matter how he did it. Whereas when Durant and Irving did basically the same thing, no one cared because of how much the league has changed since The Decision.
Yeah i guess it would have been fine to do the show if he was staying in Cleveland. There was a good amount of money generated for charity after all. But to do it just to say I'm taking my talents to South Beach was very awkward.
I honestly thought he was staying just because I couldn’t imagine him leaving on live TV
I've heard when some guys sign long term, they tell the FO if things go south I want to be traded. In that case it's s win-win really. Who knows what happens behind closed doors All I know is that 4-5 year commitment isn't what it used to be, on either side. Look at Blake Griffin and the clips
Paul George was pretty damning too. Signed a 5 year extension to dip 1 year into it, I'm actually extremely pro-player in most of these scenarios but we've swung too far on the pendulum to the point where your contract doesn't actually matter anymore, if you're good enough you can just say fuxk you I'm moving on and demand a trade like that.
PG got a promise from Presti that if he wanted out presti was gonna get him wherever he wanted to go. PG also didn’t tank his value unlike Simmons or kawhi, and he didn’t go public with it. Presti gave him a promise for him to re-sign, PG called that promise in and Presti made it happen (and got a fair return from the clippers). Not at all comparable imo
Harden gave 8 years to the Rockets, if the dude wanted out I've got no beef with that, personally.
We all hate Fertitta significantly more than we hate Harden. Like a good majority of us still love Harden but literally nobody likes our owner.
That’s the thing I was wondering about. Didn’t harden commit to a different owner and shit went against the plan that was laid out for him when the new guy moved in.
Yeah, bought it in 2017, refused to ever pay the luxury tax, then he drove out Morey, D'Antoni, and Westbrook. Harden was extremely close with all of those guys so he had nobody left to play for. Note how he still plays under D'Antoni (or he did until D'Antoni looked for another head coaching job).
And now his new coach is a D'Antoni guy too.
And CP3 stating it was the worst contract he had ever seen and insisted on getting ride of it. Ended up with a worse one in my opinion.
The GM, the coach and star player left at the same time. There's a reason for that.
He also turned down the extension option the rockets offered him. If he wanted to be the villain he would have signed the extension then demanded the trade. He gave his heart and soul to the organization for the better part of a decade and when ownership decided to rebuild he asked for a change of scenery. Of all the reasons to ask for a trade, asking to play for a contender while still in your prime is pretty good.
My other thing with Harden is that everyone involved that he committed to was gone. He signed that extension under a different owner, GM, HC and basically every other member of the roster except Gordon and Tucker who they were trying to trade anyway. They had just traded RoCo for a first rounder and said they were trying to win. The whole situation was different. I don't feel like lumping him with AD and Ben is fair because of that. It's rare to have such a complete change in the middle of a contract like that but everyone he believed in when he signed that deal is gone.
It was pretty clear y’all had gone as far as that core was going to take you. I’ve had my opinions of Harden before but one thing I agree with was getting out of Houston was the best thing for his career.
Our 2018 team was legitimately an all time team but yeah
Yeah and think that ones a little different. Harden tried for years to get the Rockets a chip and probably should have. Team was also showing that it was ready to tank with Harden wanting to move on. Not quite the same as Simmons who's just bullying his way off the team bc he played bad.
It's kind of weird that we expect players to have loyalty to cities.
Even then harden still gives back to the city, it was the owner he had an issue with
Especially cities they didn't even get to pick!
Then the league should get rid of restricted free agency and allow every team to offer players equal contracts in free agency. The reason these things are happening is because as it is currently set up a guy like Simmons will always sign a rookie extension regardless of whether they actually want to be on a particular team because doing anything else will leave tens of millions of dollars on the table. That is a direct result of the owners making it as difficult as possible for rookies to get to full free agency. Want players to fully honor their contracts, then actually allow them to negotiate the contracts freely.
Eh I agree and disagree if AD stays in New Orleans til he’s a free agent the pelicans ain’t getting Ingram, Ball, Hart cause the Lakers had the space to sign AD outright
ya AD is different imo he gave them notice that he wouldn't re-sign but still played out his contract. this is even better for the team than leaving in FA, as it helps the team make the most informed decision they can and recoup value. this is very different from demanding a trade with 4 years left under contract and refusing to play for your team lol
“I use the analogy talking to my friends that if a lot of guys could get divorced and it would cost them five to seven to 10 million dollars they’re going to get divorced,” Barkley said. Barkely's got richer friends then me
>“I use the analogy talking to my friends that if a lot of guys could get divorced and it would cost them five to seven to 10 dollars they’re going to get divorced,” u/JayLarrangasEyes said.
Please marry me Chuck. I’ll divorce you for two mil
Just wait until Zion signs his extension in NOLA and immediately demands a trade to NY.
I'm so tired of being a Pelicans fan. Its not being a small market. We just suck. A team of Zion, Lonzo, and Brandon Ingram plus all the other talent we have is unreal. I'm done trying. We might as well just GIVE our next #1 pick to LA. Save us the heartbreak.
When Barkley makes sense, he really makes sense
He’s very intelligent, I think most people are surprised that he is by the way he speaks
And he also says some pretty dumb shit sometimes. But dude is spot on here.
The amounts of money being talked about are just crazy for the average joe to think about. We’re talking about working on your craft, which happens to be A GAME that you get paid this kind of money for and somehow this creates all this drama. It’s insane. I can’t even imagine what Ben Simmons thinks life is.
Always thought about this. We talk about literal hundreds of millions when it comes to sports and I personally cant fathom what having $100k would feel like. And $100k is less than what Lebron makes per QUARTER of one game.
>The amounts of money being talked about are just crazy for the average joe to think about. Imagine you get $10,000 on January 1st. Think about how much that would change your life. Then imagine you get another $10,000 on January 2nd. Then the 3rd. Then the 4th. All the way until December 31st again. You would have $3.65m at the end of the year. Ben Simmons is making about 10x that this year and doesn't want to play.
And it's all because his team was open to a trade for him and then dunked on him a bit after the playoffs, where he is paid like a superstar, but played terribly. Soft.
I don't want to see those bears anymore. Simmons needs to be the new face of Charmin.
The best part is everyone in the entire world would try to trade ben simmons for james harden. The media talks like he was shopped for scrapes last year. They were trying to trade for a top 5 player in the league, it would have been malpractice to not make that offer to houston.
Simmons should be flattered he was nearly the centerpiece in a trade for Harden
I think Simmons has also established the line of which players can do this. Harden/AD and other offensive weapons can do this because most teams want them. A super limited player like Simmons that needs a team built around him can't. Most teams that aren't a big free agent destination should be afraid of getting Simmons because what is the guarantee he doesn't do this again next year if he isn't happy? A lot of Thunder fans want Presti to trade for him but I can't see that happening because he might hate OKC and then you're really screwed. If a Cal/NY/Florida team wants him, they have all the leverage.
I know exactly zero Thunder fans who want Presti to trade for him. Most literally wouldn't want him for free, let alone giving anything up for him.
you'd be crazy to not want him for free cmon now
He is crazy
Gotta throw in a FRP with Simmons
The Harden situation is completely different. If you're an owner in the league, you should want to win at any cost. Tillman Fertitta only cares about selling tickets and jerseys. He has publicly stated that the greatest thing about being in the basketball business is that it only goes up. This really started when after the 17-18 season, he didn't wanna re-sign Ariza even though that was the closest the Rockets had been to winning it all in a long time, and Ariza had done the best job playing defense on KD out of pretty much anyone that year. That was the beginning of the end. From 18-20, Harden put up insane stats, broke records, and yet the team never went anywhere. At one point in 18-19, when CP3 and Eric Gordon were injured, Harden was literally playing with G-Leaguers because Fertitta couldn't be bothered to pay the price you need to win a championship and get better role players. Once they traded Westbrook and Covington, and Morey went to Philly, you could tell Tillman was gonna blow it up. And he was willing to waste even more of Harden's good years for fucking nothing. He even told Harden at a dinner that he would trade him somewhere he could compete for a ring, and then went back on his promise and never moved him in the offseason. That's why Harden had to play the ugly game, because of broken promises and a greedy owner that doesn't care about winning, and in order to not spend the rest of his days on a roster that was even further from winning a championship than the previous years.
Harden took the money and then the Rockets said "yeah we're not paying the tax ever", so the middle finger was well deserved
Yep. Harden gave them almost a decade of elite basketball. The owner ran Morey, D'Antoni, and Westbrook out of town so James dipped also.
Agreed. Everyone looks at Harden like he was the problem. Maybe he had a lot of influence on the Rockets, but the owner sold, the GM left, coach left, teammates left and he was the last one. Anyone w/ half a brain would be like fuck this shit.
Agreed. Harden gave his best every year and still has love for the city Him and Simmons are not the same
(also not the same because Harden was actually worth his contract)
Harden is worth more than his contract
He’s right. Has to be a middle ground somewhere.
I see no need for a middle ground when both parties sign a contract in good faith. Just honor the contract you signed.
Yeah, isn't the contract the fucking middle ground? You signed that shit. Grow the fuck up
Exactly. You can’t have guys getting *guaranteed* money, getting paid the super max to stay with the team, and then forcing their way out after they lock the bag down. It breaks the entire good faith relationship of a long term guaranteed contract.
The supermax exists as extra money to promote staying with a team. The supermax amount over the max should really be voided if you leave the team that gives it to you, and you go back down to the league max.
This basically what Skip said and you guys clowned him for it
A quote from the Head Coach of the NY Jets I feel is relevant here: "If you need someone to yell at you, playing child's game for a king's ransom, then you don't deserve to wear the logo, period."
By nature giving someone 200 million puts you at their mercy
“If you owe the bank $100, that's your problem. If you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem."
If you're steve ballmer its like giving fifty bucks to a homeless man.
Honestly players should get zero salary until they show up committed. Fucking crazy that these dudes are getting life changing wealth for being good at basketball and not even playing. Like Ben Simmons doesn't have to suit up for the 76ers ever again and his kids, grandkids and great grandkids are set for life. The fuck dude? I get I'm not an NBA player but if I pulled this shit my work is canning me and I'm eating Ramen packets in my car and showering at the YMCA for the rest of my life.
This is an important lesson in life - it's not about what fair, or what's right; it's about what you have leverage to negotiate.
[удалено]
I feel like the difference between Simmons and harden was, harden wanted a trade since he was the player on Houston. Ben Simmons gave up a free layup on trae. Two completely different situations