Player contracts in a free market?

Discussion in 'Portland Trail Blazers' started by Denny Crane, May 15, 2013.

Moderators: 6

Moderators

  1. BrianFromWA
  2. Chris Craig
  3. Darkwebs
  4. Ed O
  5. PtldPlatypus
  6. SlyPokerDog
Page 2 of 3
  1. KingSpeed

    KingSpeed Veteran

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2008
    Messages:
    63,198
    Likes Received:
    22,395
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    actor
    Location:
    New York
    LeBron would make at LEAST $75 million a year.
     
    KingSpeed, May 15, 2013
    #21
  2. PtldPlatypus

    PtldPlatypus Let's go Baby Blazers! Staff Member Global Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    34,324
    Likes Received:
    43,686
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not to mention that there was no real free agency until 1980 either.
     
    PtldPlatypus, May 15, 2013
    #22
  3. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    Why would they collude when a rich owner could sign Kareem to a big contract and win championships?
     
    Denny Crane, May 15, 2013
    #23
  4. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    Oscar Robertson's sued the NBA in 1970 for antitrust. It was settled in 1976 with FA rules established but with right of first refusal.

    http://espn.go.com/sportscentury/features/00016428.html

    Although he wasn't playing anymore, Robertson was not out of sight. As president of the players union, his 1970 suit against the NBA contended the draft, option clause and other rules restricting player movement were violations of antitrust laws. The suit was settled in 1976, when the league agreed to let players become free agents in exchange for their old team's "right of first refusal" to match any offer they might receive.
     
    Denny Crane, May 15, 2013
    #24
  5. PtldPlatypus

    PtldPlatypus Let's go Baby Blazers! Staff Member Global Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    34,324
    Likes Received:
    43,686
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Free agency existed in 1976, but teams received compensation from other teams if they lost a player in free agency until after 1980.

    http://www.apbr.org/labor.html

     
    PtldPlatypus, May 15, 2013
    #25
  6. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    ^^^ so what? What kind of compensation could you get for Kareem that makes you whole?

    The Lakers went from 40 to 53 wins his first two seasons.

    The Bucks went from 60 wins his last few seasons to 38 and then 30 after he left.

    kareem was able to "request" a trade and got it, too ...
     
    Denny Crane, May 15, 2013
    #26
  7. PapaG

    PapaG Banned User BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    32,870
    Likes Received:
    291
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Tualatin, OR
    Because the money wasn't there to make championships a good enough investment to make. Revenue was primarily from ticket sales. That's not the case anymore. Kareem didn't win a title in LA until Magic Johnson got to LA, and that was via the draft.
     
    PapaG, May 15, 2013
    #27
  8. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    I don't think that's true. The Blazers' championship generated extra revenues for the team for quite a few years afterward. Same is true for the Warriors and Sonics.
     
    Denny Crane, May 15, 2013
    #28
  9. PapaG

    PapaG Banned User BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    32,870
    Likes Received:
    291
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Tualatin, OR
    Yeah, but not game-changing money. Franchises weren't worth much before TV became heavily invested in the NBA. I understand your point, but the owners at that time didn't invest heavily into player salaries, and as pointed out already, you had to give up part of your future in order to sign a FA prior to the 1980 CBA.
     
    Last edited: May 15, 2013
    PapaG, May 15, 2013
    #29
  10. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    I think Milwaukee traded Kareem because they wanted to control what they got for him instead of letting the commissioner decide.

    Milwaukee got 4 players for him from a 30 win team. Hardly their future.

    The Lakers won 5 championships with Kareem. That's what the future actually held.
     
    Denny Crane, May 15, 2013
    #30
  11. PapaG

    PapaG Banned User BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    32,870
    Likes Received:
    291
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Tualatin, OR
    You mentioned owners basically buying players and paying them whatever. I assumed you meant via free agency, since that's really the only way to 'buy' players. If you're talking trade, well, of course that happened. The problem for the Lakers was that it took them 5 years to win with Kareem, and it took Magic to bring them that title when Kareem was injured for Game 6 against the 76ers.

    I realize that players were traded, but your previous comments made it seem that an owner could just buy a bunch a players, which was almost impossible at the time.
     
    PapaG, May 15, 2013
    #31
  12. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    My previous comment was that there was no salary cap and small market teams won championships and had players like Bill Walton on them.
     
    Denny Crane, May 15, 2013
    #32
  13. RR7

    RR7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2008
    Messages:
    18,684
    Likes Received:
    13,089
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think there's WAY more difference between the 1970s and now in the NBA to say no salary cap was the difference between small markets winning/competing and not. And even then, it was a big market majority.
     
    RR7, May 15, 2013
    #33
  14. SlyPokerDog

    SlyPokerDog Woof! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Messages:
    125,083
    Likes Received:
    145,313
    Trophy Points:
    115
    The NBA was better when slavery was still legal.
     
    SlyPokerDog, May 15, 2013
    #34
  15. PtldPlatypus

    PtldPlatypus Let's go Baby Blazers! Staff Member Global Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2008
    Messages:
    34,324
    Likes Received:
    43,686
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I imagine the "compensation" clause was not so much to make team A whole as it was to reduce team B's incentive to offer a lucrative free agent contract. It was all about keeping salaries down. My point was that "free agency" wasn't really open during the 70's--not until the compensation clause expired.
     
    PtldPlatypus, May 15, 2013
    #35
  16. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    There is a salary cap now. It didn't keep he Lakers from going deep into the LT while making a profit. Meanwhile, teams like NO and OKC have to dump guys like Chris Paul and James Harden.

    I suggested profit sharing to raise NO and OKC's boats, and no cap. The owners are rich businessmen. They don't need to be protected from themselves.
     
    Denny Crane, May 15, 2013
    #36
  17. Rastapopoulos

    Rastapopoulos Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Messages:
    41,809
    Likes Received:
    26,151
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Ballin'
    ...which is more proof of Alex Ferguson's genius than any of his Man U. trophies.
     
    Rastapopoulos, May 16, 2013
    #37
  18. BlazerCaravan

    BlazerCaravan Hug a Bigot... to Death

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2008
    Messages:
    28,071
    Likes Received:
    10,384
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Funny I don't think it's the players clamoring for a salary cap while owners whine about not being able to spend even more on their players... As I recall its generally the other way around.
     
    BlazerCaravan, May 16, 2013
    #38
  19. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    I think the cap is really unfair to LeBron and to Nate Robinson. Both ends of the spectrum, in terms of pay. Nate was clearly worth more than the $800K partially guaranteed contract he got from the Bulls. But teams were handicapped by the salary cap or luxury tax concerns. People in this thread seem to think LeBron would be worth $50M or even a whole lot more, but the max he can get is $17M.
     
    Denny Crane, May 16, 2013
    #39
  20. BlazerCaravan

    BlazerCaravan Hug a Bigot... to Death

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2008
    Messages:
    28,071
    Likes Received:
    10,384
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's not about what you think, or what the players think. The last three CBA negotiation sessions tell me the owners don't want to bid on LeBron that way.

    In my opinion? LeBron's value is somewhere between 50-75 million dollars a year, but in this brave new world, I see LeBron taking his talents to any beach that'll pay him the most for one year. He'd play on 15 teams in 15 years, each offering him more than the others... unless Paul Allen really decided to go for broke and outspend the other billionaires on the list. But by year 6 or 7? LeBron's asking price and his worth would not even be close to the same number due to bidding inflation. That's kind of dystopic to me.
     
    BlazerCaravan, May 16, 2013
    #40
Page 2 of 3

Share This Page