Jump to content

Draymond Green's Trade Double-Standard Discussion


AHF

Recommended Posts

  • Moderators

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/nba-warriors-draymond-green-calls-bull-rips-double-standard-treatment-players-trades-153225840.html

Quote

"I got fined for stating my opinion on what should happen with another player, but teams can come out and continue to say, 'Oh we're trading guys; we're not playing you.' And yet we're to stay professional.

"At some point, as players we need to be treated with the same respect and have the same rights as the team can have. Because as a player you're the worst person in the world when you want a different situation. But a team can say, they're trading you and that man is to stay in shape, he is to stay professional, and if not his career is on the line. At some point this league has to protect the players from embarrassment like that."

I've got to say that I'm not overly sympathetic to his perspective on this.  A player's primary obligation to the team as part of his contract is to be ready to play to the best of his abilities.  A team's primary obligation to the player is to pay them every dollar they are owed under the contract.  

If Green wants to call this out as being two-faced with respect to teams not letting players take games off to rest, then I'm more on his side.  That is motivated by providing the fans the best product and they aren't getting it if a player elects not to play or if a team benches them because they are talking trades. 

But as far as the team and players needing to have the same rights, that is kind of b***s*** itself.  This is a one-way street where the player isn't paying the team.  If the player was paying the team for the right to play, then it would be wrong for a team to bench them.  But as long as the checks are cashed, the team is fulfilling its primary obligation to the player.  Conversely, if the player chooses to punish the team by refusing to play that is not the same because the player is getting a significant seasonal salary to play and dogging it when the team wants to compete completely undermines the basis of that contract.  

The Rockets were paying James Harden $40M this season to play.  So it is very much not the same thing to watch him tank the team out of competition for the playoffs or to refuse to play when he doesn't feel like it as it is when the Cavs sit Andre Drummon while continuing to pay him his $28.75M salary.  

Now I will throw in the caveat that there are certainly circumstances where a team could refuse to let a player play and that could be a legit grievance for me.  If Drummond was told he was being shut down for the rest of the season and was going to be traded in the offseason, then that is 100% legit.  If he is being shut down to avoid him triggering incentives in his contract, then 100% legit.  If he is being actively mistreated or retaliated against and benching him without cause is just punitive (say he complained about sexual harassment of a female staffer and they put him on the bench) then that is 100% legit.  But the standard should be different when a star player refuses to give a good faith effort to win games or doesn't want to play and he is getting $40M versus when a team wants to sit a player for a week to finalize a trade without the player getting injured in the meantime.  There is some false equivalency going on to try to pretend it should be looked at the same way.

Curious to see how other Squawkers react to this.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
19 hours ago, AHF said:

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/nba-warriors-draymond-green-calls-bull-rips-double-standard-treatment-players-trades-153225840.html

I've got to say that I'm not overly sympathetic to his perspective on this.  A player's primary obligation to the team as part of his contract is to be ready to play to the best of his abilities.  A team's primary obligation to the player is to pay them every dollar they are owed under the contract.  

If Green wants to call this out as being two-faced with respect to teams not letting players take games off to rest, then I'm more on his side.  That is motivated by providing the fans the best product and they aren't getting it if a player elects not to play or if a team benches them because they are talking trades. 

But as far as the team and players needing to have the same rights, that is kind of b***s*** itself.  This is a one-way street where the player isn't paying the team.  If the player was paying the team for the right to play, then it would be wrong for a team to bench them.  But as long as the checks are cashed, the team is fulfilling its primary obligation to the player.  Conversely, if the player chooses to punish the team by refusing to play that is not the same because the player is getting a significant seasonal salary to play and dogging it when the team wants to compete completely undermines the basis of that contract.  

The Rockets were paying James Harden $40M this season to play.  So it is very much not the same thing to watch him tank the team out of competition for the playoffs or to refuse to play when he doesn't feel like it as it is when the Cavs sit Andre Drummon while continuing to pay him his $28.75M salary.  

Now I will throw in the caveat that there are certainly circumstances where a team could refuse to let a player play and that could be a legit grievance for me.  If Drummond was told he was being shut down for the rest of the season and was going to be traded in the offseason, then that is 100% legit.  If he is being shut down to avoid him triggering incentives in his contract, then 100% legit.  If he is being actively mistreated or retaliated against and benching him without cause is just punitive (say he complained about sexual harassment of a female staffer and they put him on the bench) then that is 100% legit.  But the standard should be different when a star player refuses to give a good faith effort to win games or doesn't want to play and he is getting $40M versus when a team wants to sit a player for a week to finalize a trade without the player getting injured in the meantime.  There is some false equivalency going on to try to pretend it should be looked at the same way.

Curious to see how other Squawkers react to this.

This is the man who said players were modern day slaves. Just to put into perspective the mind boggling volume of dog poo that his craneum is crammed with. 

Edited by Atlantaholic
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/17/2021 at 9:01 AM, Atlantaholic said:

This is the man who said players were modern day slaves. Just to put into perspective the mind boggling volume of dog poo that his craneum is crammed with. 

The culture of self victimization is so toxic and corrosive. It's makes players like Green so unlikable.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/16/2021 at 1:53 PM, AHF said:

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/nba-warriors-draymond-green-calls-bull-rips-double-standard-treatment-players-trades-153225840.html

I've got to say that I'm not overly sympathetic to his perspective on this.  A player's primary obligation to the team as part of his contract is to be ready to play to the best of his abilities.  A team's primary obligation to the player is to pay them every dollar they are owed under the contract.  

If Green wants to call this out as being two-faced with respect to teams not letting players take games off to rest, then I'm more on his side.  That is motivated by providing the fans the best product and they aren't getting it if a player elects not to play or if a team benches them because they are talking trades. 

But as far as the team and players needing to have the same rights, that is kind of b***s*** itself.  This is a one-way street where the player isn't paying the team.  If the player was paying the team for the right to play, then it would be wrong for a team to bench them.  But as long as the checks are cashed, the team is fulfilling its primary obligation to the player.  Conversely, if the player chooses to punish the team by refusing to play that is not the same because the player is getting a significant seasonal salary to play and dogging it when the team wants to compete completely undermines the basis of that contract.  

The Rockets were paying James Harden $40M this season to play.  So it is very much not the same thing to watch him tank the team out of competition for the playoffs or to refuse to play when he doesn't feel like it as it is when the Cavs sit Andre Drummon while continuing to pay him his $28.75M salary.  

Now I will throw in the caveat that there are certainly circumstances where a team could refuse to let a player play and that could be a legit grievance for me.  If Drummond was told he was being shut down for the rest of the season and was going to be traded in the offseason, then that is 100% legit.  If he is being shut down to avoid him triggering incentives in his contract, then 100% legit.  If he is being actively mistreated or retaliated against and benching him without cause is just punitive (say he complained about sexual harassment of a female staffer and they put him on the bench) then that is 100% legit.  But the standard should be different when a star player refuses to give a good faith effort to win games or doesn't want to play and he is getting $40M versus when a team wants to sit a player for a week to finalize a trade without the player getting injured in the meantime.  There is some false equivalency going on to try to pretend it should be looked at the same way.

Curious to see how other Squawkers react to this.

Maybe Draymond should start his own business. A restaurant perhaps. I wonder what he will do when everyone asks for a raise? Or when employees decide they dont like the schedule, the rules, the responsibilities? How will he respond when an employee calls him a slaver? Players act like sports leagues are god given. They really aren't. The fact you can make 20 million a year playing basketball is actually a testament to how successful the NBA is. The money didnt fall out of the sky. It took decades of growth, run by very smart people. Players don't think about things like television contracts, venues, logistics, marketing, and the hard business of making a sports league highly profitable.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...