LaMarcus eligible for no trade clause

I think it's only rare because, as Brian used to always point out, players never stay with the same team long enough.

 

You mean in a non-capitalistic society, none of them deserve it? Because in a capitalistic society, the reality is that they're the engine creating massive wealth and enriching many, many people, inside and outside of basketball. If they don't deserve tens of millions, neither do the owners, TV executives and such. But then you're advocating for a command economy, where "someone" decides what each role is worth. That sounds pretty difficult.

Even as it is, player salaries are artificially limited. In a true market economy, the top-end players would make much more.

In a purely conceptual world, I can sympathize with the idea that people playing a game should make less than firemen or teachers or whomever else you or I deem "more important" but even that is complicated. Entertainment is important, as much as people (not necessarily you) sneer at its importance. Entertainment is pretty much what makes life worth living once you've moved past the subsistence level.

 

You know what else I just realized.... Batum will be eligible for one at the end of his current contract in the following summer of 2016.

So few players stay with the same team for 4 years and sign big money deals after 8 years in the league. Many teams are constantly trading away and signing different players. I think the Blazers should be proud they have multiple players spending their entire career with the Blazers. Stability of roster players and guts of management to stay the course with players already on the team is rare in today's NBA. The Spurs have done it with Parker, Manu and Duncan; the Heat have done it with Wade; the Lakers have done it with Kobe; the Mavs did it with Nowitzki; maybe we should try to follow a similar path with our best guys.

 

Don't say I never listen!