I've already said I realized it was insulting to you. I would rather not have said it, but you suggested that I never change my mind (which is incorrect, and various posters here have changed my mind) so I was explaining to you why you don't change my mind. It was impossible to be both honest about it and not insult you. So, I regret the necessity, but had you not falsely implied that I can't or won't change my mind, it would never have come up. As for your evaluation of my approach in debate/discussion, I expected you to retaliate in anger. I can accept that and your impressions of me. Are we done with this issue then?
Thanks, Ed. I somewhat follow the brackish analogy. Let me ask this....... What is so different today as opposed to the 'good old days' when players like Magic, Bird, Jordan - and closer to home with DreXler, Porter, Kersey - etc - do most of their career with one team?? I guess I just expect that when you have two young faces like LA and Roy, who have played a significant role in not only being the foundation of a winning franchise, but transforming that team from the lowest of images to a very high one - you (as the GM) humble yourself and kiss their butts to keep them in town. You can't tell me Jordan, Magic, Drexler, Bird and others didn't have their arses kissed by the GM/franchise. IMHO - KP, despite all his talent in putting this team together, is too proud and his ego is too big to do what it takes to bring stability to this team. And, yes, that does mean kissing some arse.
the $$$ have gone up considerably. For most of their respective careers, Magic Bird and MJ were paid a small fraction of what the average NBA player makes these days. But just to show the more things change the more they stay the same, I can recall when the Celts hemmed and hawed forever on paying McHale a couple seasons into his top 50 all time career. After threatening to bolt to the Knicks (I think) he finally resigned for a cool 1 million $ a year making him one of the highest paid players in the game. 10M+ a season seems like a pretty decent arse kissing to me. MJ's 2nd contract bumped him up from just under a Mil to 2M per. I'm sure the Blazers would be fine with a similar % raise for Roy as that would put him around 9M STOMP
I keep reading quotes about this being KP's choice. I can't imagine it is. Why would you think he doesn't want to throw the kitchen sink to keep the guys he draft and supposedly it too attached to? Without having any proof of it, I don't see how it could be anyone but Paul Allen or Vulcan driving this decision.
One party exerting market power over another is rarely pretty. The way the CBA is set up, the Blazers have the majority of the power and the players have much less. Any power Roy or Aldridge choose to exercise will end up with them taking more risk and likely less money in the long run. There is also almost perfect information in this negotiation, which leaves fewer options for the party with less power. The end result will be that both Roy and Aldridge will be re-signed and any implied slights will be forgotten the first time they look at their bank balance. The Blazers will pay retail for their services. The fans will forget all about this dust-up ten minutes after the contracts are signed. In terms of how Paul Allen spends his money, I don't really think it's my business. It's tough for me to have many complaints about the amount of money he's spend on my hobby. Count me as not worried.
That's a good point, and the only real reason this whole thing worries me. I agree with Minstrel - of all the talk coming out of this, the most credible statement is that Allen is tired of losing money and wants the team to break even. The question none of us can answer, is how he views Roy in that equation. Obviously, Roy (and LMA) are huge assets on the court. Does PA also view them as *financial* assets? Filling seats and hosting play-off games generates revenue...but as Sterling (and others) have shown, it isn't the only way to operate in the black. Will Allen's other financial set-backs affect him enough to consider such a drastic change? I'm reminded of an old Yiddish curse: "may you live in interesting times."
Really, I think the decisions are not so much about Roy and Aldridge, themselves. I think Allen knows he needs to keep them and isn't debating whether to keep them or let them go. My guess is that he's looking ahead to players like Oden, Fernandez, Batum, Bayless and knows that they will be questionable keeps (depending on how they pan out and their costs). So he wants to try to save as much money on Roy and Aldridge as possible in order to make those players more affordable. This thought is why I haven't been critical of negotiating hard with Roy and Aldridge. I think they deserve a lot and I'd be somewhat upset if I thought the team was debating whether to keep them or let them go. But I fully understand trying to save as many millions as possible on their deals if it means higher chances of keeping the other players (should they turn out to be good/great). I don't want the "comfort" of having Roy and Aldridge locked up as fast as possible, if it means giving them everything they want and leaves not enough payroll for other players that may turn out to be essential. I thought that was an old Chinese curse. Maybe a curse from Chinese Jews.
Found this link of BlazersEdge: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/othersports/2009588466_regr03.html Apparently, Roy was in P-town over the weekend "completing a contract extension with the Trail Blazers."
I think that (as STOMP discussed) the money tends to be a LOT bigger. Also the rules are different... there were "salary slots" and things that just don't exist in the current collective bargaining agreement. I know you're not a huge fan of KP, but I don't think that he's responsible for the negotiations. I bet he'd PREFER to have a blank check for players... it would let him win as many games as possible, meaning a raise for him and/or job opportunities elsewhere. For better or worse, other aspects of the organization are (probably) in charge of negotiating the extensions. This gives KP the ability to both kiss the asses of the players AND throw his hands up, to some extent, when the negotiations get tough. A good cop-bad cop opportunity. Ed O.
Not just that, but it allows for specialization and reduce conflicts of interest...essentially the same reason most teams prefer to have a separate coach and GM. Having a GM work on making basketball decisions and having another person/group handle the financial issues allows the franchise to have experts on both ends, rather than one person trying to do both jobs as best he can. Obviously, there has to be some interaction...correctly valuing a player in dollars requires knowing their basketball value. But once Pritchard has boiled down their basketball value, the financial team can take over what that value is worth (as a simple example, Pritchard tells the franchise that Player A is likely worth about 4 extra wins to the team and the financial team determines what those 4 wins are worth to the team in dollars).
I read it just the opposite. Roy and LaMarcus will both get max contracts easily from someone, if only they wait til their contracts expire. To paraphrase a line from a GRISHAM novel, The Blazers must be STUPID, STUPID, STUPID!
Roy maybe, but it has been stated quite clearly by LaMarcus that he judges people ultimately and instantaneously on their actions, no apologies accepted. This is the summer of epic bonehead mistakes and blunders by Blazers management. Serious harm has been done on many fronts that will ultimately weaken this team's future hopes.
