I hope the Siakam deal fails to go through.

[kg01]

1 hour ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

 

Which is why Ja Morant is such an idiot.

He was easily going to make an All-NBA team this season, with all of the hype he received.  He's thrown at least 100 million away, especially if the Grizzlies feel that they can't trust him as the face of the franchise.

The Memphis fan base will quickly forgive his stupidity, but they may turn toward JJJ as being the guy to rally behind. And Memphis may pay him that way.

Yeah, missing it last year, and likely being disqualified (virtually) by playing too few games this coming year, can come back to bite him.  He'll look back at this 2yr period and regert some things.

His endorsement money is enough to make him not miss it.  But staying healthy enough to keep getting 9-figure contracts is not guaranteed.  Just ask Der. Rose.  And he's not shown sound decision-making that would suggest he's not blowing his money along the way.  Hope he gets it together. 

[Spud2nique]

3 hours ago, kg01 said:

Hope he gets it together. 

[Diesel]

11 hours ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

 

I stand corrected Diesel.  He would not be supermax eligible if he's traded. You are correct.  This is what knocked out Murray from getting a supermax, and probably led him to sign the early extension.

Does he still get the possibility to sign for that extra 5th year with the team he's traded to for a max, as opposed to only a 4 year deal if he hits free agency?

Would that mean he could sign a 5/250 deal with the team that traded for him . . . as opposed to a 4/200 ( estimate ) deal if he's a free agent on the open market?

I calculated a 5 year 242 Million dollar deal being a bit more conservative.   That puts him at just over 50 Million when he's 35. 

 

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Just now, Diesel said:

I calculated a 5 year 242 Million dollar deal being a bit more conservative.   That puts him at just over 50 Million when he's 35. 

 

 

If he's an All-NBA talent, or the Hawks have made a very deep run in the playoffs, I have no problem with the team paying him that sort of number.

In 5 years, someone may be making 65 mill a year, and a 50 mill contract may not even be top 10 in the league.

[Diesel]

10 hours ago, kg01 said:

It's what makes what Lillard is doing so egregious.   If he wanted to go to MIA, he should've done so instead of signing the supermax with POR. 

I don't harbor any hate for Lillard.   Portland basically told him that his time was up when they drafted Scoot Henderson.  It was a slap in the face for him because they had to be planning to trade him.  Look at their young core.   He just decided that if he's traded, he wants to go to Miami. 

 

[Diesel]

1 minute ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

 

If he's an All-NBA talent, or the Hawks have made a very deep run in the playoffs, I have no problem with the team paying him that sort of number.

In 5 years, someone may be making 65 mill a year, and a 50 mill contract may not even be top 10 in the league.

Yeah... I have to see that first.   I don't think that there will be guys who can't contribute well making 50 Million and people will be happy with it.   Right now, Clint is making 20 Million at age 28 and people want him gone because "he's in decline". 

Imagine a 34 year old Pascal Siakam making 48 Million dollars.   About to become a 35 year old Siakam making 52?

 

 

[TheNorthCydeRises]

6 minutes ago, Diesel said:

Yeah... I have to see that first.   I don't think that there will be guys who can't contribute well making 50 Million and people will be happy with it.   Right now, Clint is making 20 Million at age 28 and people want him gone because "he's in decline". 

Imagine a 34 year old Pascal Siakam making 48 Million dollars.   About to become a 35 year old Siakam making 52?

 

 

 

Clint has never been an offensive engine type of player, and he's very limited on offense.

And the only reason why people want Clint gone, is to make room for OO to get major minutes.  Clint in his current role is just fine for us.  But if we keep a guy like Clint, you have to have high level players at the other positions.

Siakam played 35% of his minutes at center last season.  Do you know what that means?  It means we could put a lineup like this on the court

• Trae
• DJ
• Bogi
• Bey
• Siakam

That's a true 5-out lineup in which all 5 positions could knock down a 3.   That group may not be the best defensive lineup in the world, but they would be absolutely lethal on offense.

Siakam's skills aren't declining anytime soon, because his game is not based on athleticism.  It's based off high level skill.

You talk like this dude is a fringe All-Star.  He's not.

He's as legit as they come.

 

 

[kg01]

32 minutes ago, Diesel said:

I don't harbor any hate for Lillard.   Portland basically told him that his time was up when they drafted Scoot Henderson.  It was a slap in the face for him because they had to be planning to trade him.  Look at their young core.   He just decided that if he's traded, he wants to go to Miami. 

 

I dont fault him for wanting to be traded after seeing the writing on the wall.  The issue is threatening to not report if he's sent someplace other than MIA.  F you, that's not how things work.  If he wanted to be there, should've signed there as a free agent and taken the paltry deal they had available since they had no space. 

[Diesel]

18 minutes ago, kg01 said:

I dont fault him for wanting to be traded after seeing the writing on the wall.  The issue is threatening to not report if he's sent someplace other than MIA.  F you, that's not how things work.  If he wanted to be there, should've signed there as a free agent and taken the paltry deal they had available since they had no space. 

It's the old Kareem question.   Why should the Owners get to determine the players future?  These are not pawns on a chessboard.  These are players with livihoods, children, etc. 

The issue here is that after all the years that Dame kept you relevant as a team, all the years you screwed him over with bad draft picks and he still remained loyal.   All the times you went out and brought back coaches who couldn't coach a church league team and he didn't ask out..   When you make the move that suggests that his time with you is coming to an end, why do you also get to pick where you send him?  I mean, if you want to send him to another sh-- team in a sh-- city with another sh-- owner.. why should he report?  In that role, the owner gets everything he wants and the player is told to shut up and dribble. 

Think about it if it were your job.  You signed on with a company.  Put in 15 good years.   Did good work, excellent work and was loyal to the company regardless of what kind of BS that made you to do.  Then in year 16, they ask you to train your replacement because later, they are shipping you to the Ukraine office.  Regardless of how much money the company is paying you...  Do you feel like you should have some say in where you're going?  I mean, there's a nice office in Spain that they could send you to and that office needs a worker like you.. but the higher ups want to see productivity in Ukraine increase. 

Would you say.. this job and this check run my life so I'm going to Ukraine.  or would you say  F this... I'm out?

 

 

 

[AHF]

Big, big difference between being on a guaranteed contract and being an at-will employee.  As long as you are under contract without a no trade clause, a team should be able to trade you where they want just as they are obligated to pay you if your game falls off or you get hurt, etc.  If you value the flexibility to decide where you want to play more than the guaranteed money you have plenty of options when you are an UFA.  When you sign the deal without a no trade clause, you give that flexibility away until the deal expires.

[AHF]

On Siakam, the big question is about impact.  No one on the Hawks is as impactful as LeVron was.  AD when healthy has been more impactful than Siakam.  So if you offered me a championship and conference finals over the next 4 years heck yeah I’m trade JJ or AJ to get Siakam!  But there are no guarantees so how likely is Siakam to translate into a championship?  I’d deal for him but much rather give up Kobe and/or a future pick.

[kg01]

6 hours ago, Diesel said:

It's the old Kareem question.   Why should the Owners get to determine the players future?  These are not pawns on a chessboard.  These are players with livihoods, children, etc. 

What is this nonsense?  Players are not employees.  They're revenue-sharing partners.  They agree on all business practices including the prospect of being traded somewhere they don't wanna be.  

6 hours ago, Diesel said:

The issue here is that after all the years that Dame kept you relevant as a team, all the years you screwed him over with bad draft picks and he still remained loyal.   All the times you went out and brought back coaches who couldn't coach a church league team and he didn't ask out..   When you make the move that suggests that his time with you is coming to an end, why do you also get to pick where you send him?  I mean, if you want to send him to another sh-- team in a sh-- city with another sh-- owner.. why should he report?  In that role, the owner gets everything he wants and the player is told to shut up and dribble. 

Think about it if it were your job.  You signed on with a company.  Put in 15 good years.   Did good work, excellent work and was loyal to the company regardless of what kind of BS that made you to do.  Then in year 16, they ask you to train your replacement because later, they are shipping you to the Ukraine office.  Regardless of how much money the company is paying you...  Do you feel like you should have some say in where you're going?  I mean, there's a nice office in Spain that they could send you to and that office needs a worker like you.. but the higher ups want to see productivity in Ukraine increase. 

Would you say.. this job and this check run my life so I'm going to Ukraine.  or would you say  F this... I'm out?

More nonsense.  POR built multiple teams around Lillard and he never proved good enough, as their centerpiece, to get them over the top.  Recall the GS team that lost 4 times to the Raptors?  Well POR couldn't even get a game off them and they didnt have Durant at all.  How about, instead of blaming the coaches, the teammates, the popcorn guy, as if Lillard was the only part that was 'right', we acknowledge it's a shared failure?

And that supposed loyalty was bought and paid for several times.  He's no victim.  Maybe if he thinks he is, he can be the new Curt Flood and champion doing away with guaranteed contracts so players can move freely whenever they want.  But that comes with consequences too, doesn't it? 

[Diesel]

2 hours ago, AHF said:

Big, big difference between being on a guaranteed contract and being an at-will employee.  As long as you are under contract without a no trade clause, a team should be able to trade you where they want just as they are obligated to pay you if your game falls off or you get hurt, etc.  If you value the flexibility to decide where you want to play more than the guaranteed money you have plenty of options when you are an UFA.  When you sign the deal without a no trade clause, you give that flexibility away until the deal expires.

Indeed.  However, without a trade clause, the player still has the option to retire.   Just because he doesn't have a trade clause, doesn't mean that he's a slave. 

 

[JayBirdHawk]

Just now, Diesel said:

Indeed.  However, without a trade clause, the player still has the option to retire.   Just because he doesn't have a trade clause, doesn't mean that he's a slave. 

 

.

He has a contract paying him $50+ million. The only way he doesn't get that is if he refuses to play regardless of which team he's on.

I take ZERP issue with a player requesting a trade. I take issue with demanding where and refusing to play if not granted your destination. Beal had a NTC and was able to go where he wanted...no issue with him exercising that right.

[Diesel]

2 hours ago, AHF said:

On Siakam, the big question is about impact.  No one on the Hawks is as impactful as LeVron was.  AD when healthy has been more impactful than Siakam.  So if you offered me a championship and conference finals over the next 4 years heck yeah I’m trade JJ or AJ to get Siakam!  But there are no guarantees so how likely is Siakam to translate into a championship?  I’d deal for him but much rather give up Kobe and/or a future pick.

I agree here.   People like @TheNorthCydeRises wants to trade whatever we have for Siakam.   Just get him because he has skills. 

So.. with Scottie Barnes, Fred Van Vleet, & OG... this greatly skilled player couldn't even make the playoffs.  His former coach was fired.  FVV left for greener pastures, and Barnes and OG wants him gone because he's a ball hog and he ruins the offense. 

• Barnes was ROY
• FVV was an allstar. 
• OG is well respected. 
• Nurse was considered one of the smartest coaches and a championship coach.  Even Quin don't have a Chip. 

Why didn't this team make the playoffs??  Couldn't even beat Chicago. 

Nobody wants to talk about that.     With all those players, they should have never been in the 9 vs. 10 game in the first place. 

 

 

[Diesel]

2 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

.

He has a contract paying him $50+ million. The only way he doesn't get that is if he refuses to play regardless of which team he's on.

I take ZERP issue with a player requesting a trade. I take issue with demanding where and refusing to play if not granted your destination. Beal had a NTC and was able to go where he wanted...no issue with him exercising that right.

I don't take issue with the request to be traded or to be traded to a specific team.  Nor do I take issue with him refusing to play.  That's all his prerogative.  The reason there's a contract is because it sets the understanding.  If he understands that him sitting means he no get paid... Good.   They should not have awarded Ben Simmons 1 dime. 

 

[Spud2nique]

I would like the players to have power, as the owners do, that’s a given. Is there any way to just remove the destination and trade requests AFTER you’ve SIGNED with the team?

I mean, the player picked the destination to play, it was initially his decision, that’s empowerment right there, BUT then saying he will go to “one team only” is really the problem.

 

Give the players power just take away the power to move from city to city AFTER the contract has been signed.

 

@AHF could there be a timeline minimum to where a player has to play 1/3 or 1/2 of his contract out before being able to have the option of switching teams. 
 

Say if Harden signs a 6 year new deal with Philly, he HAS to stay there for 2 or 3 years before any type of movement. SAME FROM THE TEAM’S perspective. They have to wait 2  or 3 years to flip him to another team.

Would that work? That way both player and team are SET with a players destination and contract for 1/3 or 1/2 the length of the contract.

[Spud2nique]

4 minutes ago, Diesel said:

People like @TheNorthCydeRises wants to trade whatever we have for Siakam.   Just get him because he has skills. 

He said that? I don’t think he did? We just want Siakam but not at any cost. Again I don’t deal OO and AJ unless it’s a mega deal for Giannis or something.

[Spud2nique]

Players union is getting too powerful. Is it that lil $hit Rich Paul? He’s the problem huh? Seems before him and the Bronskies came to town, players didn’t have this crazy power to decide their destination in a whim like that. 
 

LOOK IT WAS THE PLAYERS DECISION TO SIGN THE CONTRACT, HE HAD THE POWER…

He shouldn’t be able to change his mind like a girl changes clothes… {cue the music}  

 

YOU… CHANGE YOU MIND, LIKE A GIRL, CHANGES CLOTHES..

'Cause you're hot then you're cold
You're yes then you're no
You're in then you're out
You're up then you're down
You're wrong when it's right
It's black and it's white
We fight, we break up
We kiss, we make up
(You) You don't really want to stay, no
(You) But you don't really want to go
You're hot then you're cold
You're yes then you're no
You're in then you're out
You're up then you're down

 

  

[Diesel]

6 minutes ago, Spud2nique said:

I would like the players to have power, as the owners do, that’s a given. Is there any way to just remove the destination and trade requests AFTER you’ve SIGNED with the team?

I mean, the player picked the destination to play, it was initially his decision, that’s empowerment right there, BUT then saying he will go to “one team only” is really the problem.

 

Give the players power just take away the power to move from city to city AFTER the contract has been signed.

 

@AHF could there be a timeline minimum to where a player has to play 1/3 or 1/2 of his contract out before being able to have the option of switching teams. 
 

Say if Harden signs a 6 year new deal with Philly, he HAS to stay there for 2 or 3 years before any type of movement. SAME FROM THE TEAM’S perspective. They have to wait 2  or 3 years to flip him to another team.

Would that work? That way both player and team are SET with a players destination and contract for 1/3 or 1/2 the length of the contract.

If you have that type of deal, then give the player more power by not allowing the team to trade him.

So here's the thing.

I have player X.  I sign him to a 4 year 160 Million dollar deal that is even 40 Million per year.   Right after he signs, I start looking for teams that will give me picks and cap space equal to 40 Million dollars for him. 

So the next thing you know I'm trading Player X for Capela, Jalen Johnson, and 2 first round picks.    Atlanta is going to eat the 16 Million or maybe there is a third team that will eat the 16 Million that's neither here nor there. 

Point is...   Player X would have never signed with Atlanta.   But as the owner of Team X, I get to control his future.   So if you want to administrate how long a player must stay in town, then you should also relieve the owner of his ability to trade said player after signing him. 

And before AHF jumps in...  Every contract should have a trade clause in absence of these measures.   That would be giving equal power to the players.