Premium Member sturt Posted June 27, 2014 Premium Member Report Share Posted June 27, 2014 (edited) ...finding guys who ought to command a max or nearly-max salary, and yet, at negotiating time, don't demand it... and actually will take less money to play with each other. You think? Edited June 27, 2014 by sturt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bird_dirt Posted June 27, 2014 Report Share Posted June 27, 2014 what are you, a socialist? that's just unamerican. i guess that's why the spurs draft all them forgieners, cause they don't know any different. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNorthCydeRises Posted June 28, 2014 Report Share Posted June 28, 2014 LOL ... like Sam Mitchell says on NBA Radio ... it's not good when the best players in the league start taking pay cuts. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Posted June 28, 2014 Report Share Posted June 28, 2014 LOL ... like Sam Mitchell says on NBA Radio ... it's not good when the best players in the league start taking pay cuts. Sam Mitchell is an idiot. Why anyone would listen to him rather than simply look at the example set forth by the Spurs is beyond me. Far too long these decent players have gotten grossly overpaid and teams suffered because of it. Now contract amounts and their lengths are much more accurate and you're seeing deeper teams being built because of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators AHF Posted June 28, 2014 Moderators Report Share Posted June 28, 2014 This applies to both the Heat and the Spurs but more so the Spurs. I think this goes back to that dreaded superstar issue. Having a stud for less than market value is a big deal. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Diesel Posted June 28, 2014 Premium Member Report Share Posted June 28, 2014 ...finding guys who ought to command a max or nearly-max salary, and yet, at negotiating time, don't demand it... and actually will take less money to play with each other. You think? Nah.. I say Duncan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benhillboy Posted June 28, 2014 Report Share Posted June 28, 2014 Sam Mitchell is an idiot. Why anyone would listen to him rather than simply look at the example set forth by the Spurs is beyond me. I really enjoy listening to Sam. He's one of the most candid guys you'll hear regularly in the NBA. If I were a max guy who drove attendance, I wouldn't even entertain taking a penny less than that. On the flip, if I were a GM, I wouldn't entertain anybody asking for over 15 per, regarless if I have Milwaukee or NYs payroll. The Spurs clearly scout personality and character first. Guys with a solid upbringing and of considersble intelligence simply don't need or desire excessive riches or attention. Nothing against the guys that do, just saying. It's the military philosophy Pop brings: recruit totally subservient and disciplined guys to mold and shape to your liking. That's simply impossible with a star's mentality who has the GM by the throat making 4 times as much as the coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gray Mule Posted June 28, 2014 Report Share Posted June 28, 2014 Question: Did they or did they not agree to play for less than the best offers that were available to become part of the Miami Heat championship team? This is the type players that finding winning it all is more important than making all the $$$ you can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJHAWK Posted June 28, 2014 Report Share Posted June 28, 2014 (edited) Question: Did they or did they not agree to play for less than the best offers that were available to become part of the Miami Heat championship team? This is the type players that finding winning it all is more important than making all the $$$ you can. They took a little less. Remember Bosh and Lebron wound up being sign and trades so the paycut wasnt that much. Nothing even close to the cuts the Spurs take. Tim Duncun making 10 mil a year, think about that for a second. Edited June 28, 2014 by NJHAWK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 28, 2014 Report Share Posted June 28, 2014 They took a little less. Remember Bosh and Lebron wound up being sign and trades so the paycut wasnt that much. Nothing even close to the cuts the Spurs take. Tim Duncun making 10 mil a year, think about that for a second. Tim Duncan's age 38 is also a factor in his salary amout compared to LBJ (29). But even when TD was in his prime and a free agent (being courted hard by Orl to team up with Grant Hill) he took less. I remember the story that Pop and RC presented TD with two contracts: a max deal and a less than max deal with corresponding info about what they'll be able to do about surrounding him with players depending on which contract he took. He took the less than max deal then and has been doing it ever since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 (edited) It all goes back to getting Tim Duncan in the first place. Part of the "problem' is that contracts are so long. When free agency starts you have a handful of top tier players at most to pick from. If every player was on a one year deal (even if only after their rookie contracts ended) players would not get paid nearly as much. It like water - its worth a lot more in the desert than in the ocean. Edited June 29, 2014 by Randy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 29, 2014 Report Share Posted June 29, 2014 I'm not sure that anyone on the Spurs is paid less than their market value, unless you are a nutjob team like the Pelicans and just throw money at any and everything. But to entertain the thought that the Spurs players are taking less money, I find it infuriating that people (not anyone here as far as I can tell) want to cry that as collusion. The way I've seen it is they look at Miami and hear people call it collusion for taking less money (that isn't collusion) then quickly throw it over to the Spurs: Tweet Added - Refresh Page to see it live! ">If you don't see the Tweet here AFTER REFRESHING PAGE, then it wasn't entered correctly. Please edit and try again.Important: If the Tweet doesn't load, please refresh the page before editing the Tweet as it may need to refresh to parse properly Uhhh, no. Sorry but you missed the boat on this. Collusion is when two or more parties (here they need to be both sellers or buyers, this is not between buyers-sellers) collectively act as one unit. A cartel is collusion, the Teams of the NBA collude, the NCAA colludes, etc. The reason why Miami and the Big 3 is seen as collusion is because all 3 players acted as one. Taking less money is secondary to the idea of collusion. I'm not seeing where Tim Duncan, Tony Parker, Manu Ginobili, etc. said they would only play with those individuals. Hell, those three players have never been free agents at the same time. Parker signed his last contract in 2011, Duncan in 2012, and Manu in 2013. How can they act as one if they aren't even free agents at the same time? It's not really a narrative, it is that some people do not understand concepts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now