http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/02/06/SPVS1BTGLD.DTL What a cute little game you played, Larry. How clever. You know, Larry, there's a reason why GMs are calling you every day with stupid proposals. Since you've already made several stupid moves, GMs around the league probably just figure that that's your kind of thing, yeah? If you want to get good offers, you have to be a good GM, Larry.
LOL . If there is an anonymous NBA GM forum for discussing trades, then I'm sure this post would be under the Warriors thread.
Yeah, sure, that's why you just let a $5.2M contract expire. Yeah, that's the ticket to getting a superstar.
Riley says that he owed it to the team to keep a healthy body on the roster (Tolliver). But by that logic, he could have just gotten another D-Leaguer. I mean, does it really matter if they're familiar with the system or not? What difference does it make? The team is still going to lose. Does a player who is not familiar with the system increase the chances of injury to another player? Riley owes it to the fans to not do stupid shit.
Wow those were actual quotes coming from an NBA GM. He must think he's part of an exclusive fantasy basketball league or something. What a joke!
He's wishing upon a star, not looking for a star. Time to get a real GM who is well grounded, not one with his head in the clouds.
What I am hearing now is that it was not Riley's decision to drop Claxton's $5.2 M expiring contract, but Cohan's. There you go.
A meddling owner doesn't trust his GM. I think we all know Riley is a puppet and is there solely to cut costs and be the human shield for Cohan. Let's just hope the Warriors don't have a major fire sale unless it involves shedding Maggette and some other undesirable contracts.
In the realm of management of professional sports, this is the worst mismanagment decision I have ever heard. Even if you sign someone to an idiotic contract, at least you are trying to get better and bringing in an attempted asset. This is simply flushing away a valuable asset. If it was some small contract like Mikki Moore? Fine, no biggie, just a $1.3M expiring. But a $5.2M expiring deal? Its like the Warriors have no clue about how the NBA game is played. BUT YOU KNOW WHAT... Actually, I'm pretty sure the Warriors know exactly what they are doing but refuse to tell the public because that would mean they are intentionally tanking and would risk ticketholder revolt for 2010-2011. The league is heading for a surefire lockout in 2011. Almost no doubt. And when the league comes back, its going to be under a "hard" cap. That means that say, getting an Igoudala for $16M is stupid. You do get his services for at least a year and a half, if you are willing to pay for it now. Well for the W's, its "no thanks, we'll just wait for the hard cap in 2011, thank you very much" because unlike Sac, the W's are still drawing 18k per night. Well I hope the ticketholders (myself included) abandon the W's until they start acting like they want to win.
Apparently the owners want to have any current contract re-done to the new limits they're attempting to get. So if a player is making 'x' amount for 'y' amount of years, the contract gets reduced. Lockout seems pretty much guaranteed at this point. The owners are really looking to take back control and earn the lion's share of profit. I wonder how many "stars" find their way to Europe while the owners and union fight it out?
I wouldn't mind a lock out at this point. These chumps are getting more greedy and spoiled than any of the other pro athletic organizations. Take for example the highest paid nfl quarterback and guys like Erick Dampier and Michael Redd.... holy crap. Let's show them we don't need them if they're going to be spoiled rich primadonnas. We'll watch college ball. We'll show the pro ballers how out of touch they are with their fans.
As far as the labor thing, I definitely agree with having non-fully guaranteed deals. But I think the amount/years right now aren't an issue they should push so much.
Well, I found out more. What it means is Riley's job is safe and he was not the one who made a dumb decision. The Warriors were getting ridiculous offers because everyone wanted to dump their bad contracts on them. Sure there were guys like Caron Butler and Andre Iguodala who are good, but Riley only wanted one $20 M player, but not Amare. The Amare deal was dead. Basically, what Riley said about not needing the expiring contract it if they're not going to get a $20 M player is true because that deal never went beyond preliminary discussions. I don't think Riley is a great GM, but he's more than you think he is. He is his own man. I'm trying to keep an open mind on him and after hearing what my contact said, it gave me some confidence in Riley. Riley has not made a great trade nor has he screwed up real bad (See link below). IIRC Mullin screwed up the cap his first year, so Warriors management is looking at Riley doing a better job than Mullin already. He also has three years to get the team back to the playoffs. OTOH Warriors management had nothing but complaints about Mullin. Riley mentioned a big time player and I believe he was going after Chris Bosh. This is not what my contact told me, but he did say Riley went after a big named player. I wasn't told what he offered either, but I'm guessing it was Maggette + AR or BWright + $12 M in expiring contracts + the Warriors # 1 pick top three protected. AB, Ellis and Curry were off limits. Bosh was not in play, so I think that's why Cohan took action. Riley's transactions: http://hoopshype.com/general_managers/larry_riley.htm
In full disclosure, I used to be a labor lawyer. But coming down on the players is simply wrong. You are giving the owners a free ride. Think about your employer, are they forced to pay you? No, they decided to hire you at your rate of pay. Its the same in the NBA, or in any other professional sport. No one forced them to sign Dampier. He was a free agent, Cuban could have ignored him but he decided to take that chance. Don't get mad at Dampier, get made at Donnie Nelson/Cuban; just like I do not blame Maggette for his contract, I blame Rowell/Cohan/Nellie. Do not fool yourself into thinking that if there is a "hard" cap, then the prices will go down and we will not be seeing any overpaid players. Look at the NHL, they had a lockout and now have a "hard" cap. Player contracts? Went down some. Ticket prices? High as ever. NFL? Hard cap, those guys lay on the line every play. Pay? Lowest of the big three. Manning? At the top of the heap right now and will be highest paid with a guarantee of "only" $50M. (Biedrins is guaranteed $55M) Ticket prices? Highest and getting even higher.
This makes no sense. You give up on making the big play 3 weeks before the deadline? That's like giving up on the day after Christmas sale on Dec. 1. Who knows how far the prices are going to drop? If Riley is his own man, you do not waive the Claxton contract for nothing, you can at the very least take someone back and get a draft pick and maybe even cash. Its an indefensible move.
The counter argument from your example would be my employer would fire me if I wasn't performing to expectations and the pay they are giving me. If I complain about my boss, the owner, etc. to the media I'm getting fired. I think the players have the right to earn what the market bares, but there has to be consequences when they don't perform or act out of line. Maybe have some incentive bonuses to motivate players based on team success? I'm 100% in favor of non-guaranteed contracts for the NBA players.
That guarantee is something the owner knows when they sign the deal. Its a two way street. That guarantee is part of what the market bears at that time. The owners were willing to pay guaranteed contracts when they signed them. They cannot sign a guaranteed deal then say "I want to fire you for complaining." When they signed that contract, they were told, you cannot fire them for doing that. Even though some of the players are idiots, complainers, and generally bad people, let's not forget, who makes up the product that people are paying to see? The actors/directors/creators are the players, they should get most of the $$$.
Well it's come to a point where this isn't working for the owners anymore and a lot of fans. These albatross contracts have setback franchises and made the net income red for a lot of owners. The current CBA agreement has been a failed model for a majority of owners and I think fans are tired of watching players do well in contract years and then getting complacent after signing a large contract. Or you have a knucklehead incident like Gilbert Arenas and the franchise is handcuffed because of the guaranteed money. Maybe they will still be able to void it through the court system, but if his contract was non-guaranteed it would've been a lot easier and everyone could move on.
Owners are not in the red. Their franchise values have held even after going through the worst recession in the past 50 years. Please do not feel bad for them. I understand the frustration with someone like Arenas, I do. But what's moral/just and what's right are not always the same, those are not the rules we live by. Voiding Arenas' contract will give you some satisfaction but do you think Abe Pollian is giving that $100M back to the ticketholders? No freaking way, it goes right back into the multi-multi-millionaire's pocketbook.
Gotcha. But it does appear basketball players are way overpaid and there needs to be some limits. I know it's hard to find a quick, freakish 7 footer that is coordinated enough to run the floor, but still... Maybe there should be a luxury tax penalty for signing specific players in a down market. Erick Dampier shouldn't get the max simply because there are no good classic centers on the market. So if an owner were to acquire Dampier as a free agent signing, they would have to pay a tax penalty because Dampier simply is useless when unmotivated and he takes way too many games off in non-contract years.
