If star players are getting $175 million and $200 million...

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Natebishop3

Natebishop3

Don't tread on me!
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
94,246
Likes
57,515
Points
113
Why shouldn't role players be getting $75 million?

If Blake Griffin is worth $173 million dollars, and Steph Curry is worth $200 million dollars, why isn't Evan Turner worth $70 million?
 
BlazerDuckSeahawkFan94 said:
The NBA is a Fucking joke that's why... the extreme cap raise is one of the worst things to happen to basketball in a long time... it should've been brought along slowly.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's really bullshit that the league has kept the salaries at essentially the same level for.... what.... 20 years? Shaq signed with LA in 1996 for $121 million. That was over 20 years ago. Meanwhile the teams are worth billions of dollars and the owners are getting richer.

The players have been getting screwed.

Baseball has been paying their players significantly more money for a long time. Alex Rodriguez signed with the Texans for $250 million back in 2005. The NBA is just barely catching up to that, and there are fewer players on an NBA team. If a star like ARod was worth $250 million on a team of 9 players in the field, then someone like Curry, or Durant, or LeBron should easily be worth that on a team of 5.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Actually, it's really bullshit that the league has kept the salaries at essentially the same level for.... what.... 20 years? Shaq signed with LA in 1996 for $121 million. That was over 20 years ago. Meanwhile the teams are worth billions of dollars and the owners are getting richer.

The players have been getting screwed.

Baseball has been paying their players significantly more money for a long time. Alex Rodriguez signed with the Texans for $250 million back in 2005. The NBA is just barely catching up to that, and there are fewer players on an NBA team. If a star like ARod was worth $250 million on a team of 9 players in the field, then someone like Curry, or Durant, or LeBron should easily be worth that on a team of 5.
Click to expand...
True but baseball doesn't have a salary cap right? You know what? Fuck it, the NBA shouldn't either.
 
BlazerDuckSeahawkFan94 said:
The only problem is it would destroy the league too lol there would be like four dream teams and 26 Chemeketa Community College level teams
Click to expand...

You mean like how it already is?

I'm not saying you take out restricted free agents, but it's not like the current system is doing us any favors.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Why shouldn't role players be getting $75 million?

If Blake Griffin is worth $173 million dollars, and Steph Curry is worth $200 million dollars, why isn't Evan Turner worth $70 million?
Click to expand...

All role-players aren't equal. Teague is going to make around $19M per year. Speculation has Iguodala potentially commanding around $20M per year. High level complementary players are worth ~$80M over 4 years. It's just that Turner, in the opinion of myself and various others, doesn't rise to that level. A lot of it is lack of a three-point shot--his passing and defense are nice, but he's not a game-changing defender. In my opinion, he's more akin to Shaun Livingston (in terms of skillset, not body type) and Livingston just got $8M per year.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Why shouldn't role players be getting $75 million?

If Blake Griffin is worth $173 million dollars, and Steph Curry is worth $200 million dollars, why isn't Evan Turner worth $70 million?
Click to expand...

It's a star driven league. Stars win championships, stars sell tickets and stars sell sneakers. You give your Big 3 or Big 4 the huge bucks and then hope you can fill out your roster with young cheap guys who are just happy to be in the league and veteran ring chasers that have already made their scratch and are willing to play for the vet min in order to to seal their legacy with a title.

It sucks, but that's how it is. No one, that isn't related to him, is shelling out big bucks for court side seats to watch Evan Turner and they aren't buying their kids $200 ET sneakers. Honestly, in that environment, Evan Turner is overpaid, by a lot.

Basketball is a team sport, but the NBA has distorted that for financial gain by creating a star driven league.

BNM
 
Last edited:
I honestly have a hard time seeing how the league will survive long term with the financial situation as it is.
 
Boob-No-More said:
It's a star driven league. Stars win championships, stars sell tickets and stars sell sneakers. You give you're Big 3 or Big 4 the huge bucks and them hope you can fill out your roster with young cheap guys who are just happy to be in the league and veteran ring chasers that have already made their scratch and are willing to play for the vet min in order to to seal their legacy with a title.

It sucks, but that's how it is. No one, that isn't related to him, is shelling out big bucks for court side seats to watch Evan Turner and they aren't buying their kids $200 ET sneakers. Honestly, in that environment, Evan Turner is overpaid, by a lot.

Basketball is a team sport, but the NBA has distorted that for financial gain by creating a star driven league.

BNM
Click to expand...

But I don't see any way that you can pay your stars $200 million and expect your role players to accept $50 million. We are seeing the NBA evolve financially, and people are having a hard time accepting it.
 
If Jordan played in today's game he'd probably be worth around 300 million.
 
Natebishop3 said:
But I don't see any way that you can pay your stars $200 million and expect your role players to accept $50 million. We are seeing the NBA evolve financially, and people are having a hard time accepting it.
Click to expand...

The problem is, when you pay your bench players, like Crabbe and Turner, $70 million to $85 million it actually stands in the way of competing for a title. The teams that will compete for titles will have 3 or 4 max contract guys and a bunch of underpaid role players. The teams that overpay their role players might be good enough to make the playoffs, but once there, they will be sacrificed at the altars of the Super Teams and their $200 million super stars and their min contract role players.

This is today's NBA.

BNM
 
Boob-No-More said:
The problem is, when you pay your bench players, like Crabbe and Turner, $70 million to $85 million it actually stands in the way of competing for a title. The teams that will compete for titles will have 3 or 4 max contract guys and a bunch of underpaid role players. The teams that overpay their role players might be good enough to make the playoffs, but once there, they will be sacrificed at the altars of the Super Teams and their $200 million super stars and their min contract role players.

This is today's NBA.

BNM
Click to expand...

That's a flawed system, and the league is really fucking over the majority of the players. Teams are going to eat up all their cap space with 2-3 guys and then the rest will be bitter and underpaid.
 
Basketball more so then any other major sport in america is about the Stars. In Baseball the stars are great but they don't outweigh the history of the game nor are there names and likenesses as known, NFL is all about the shield and the teams not the players themselves which probably has a lot to do with the fact the NFL teams are so large and have so many key players on them. The NBA has so few players on the court at any given time and it is a league driven by Stars not by smart analytics or team based play. Team Basketball helps to win games but it does not win championships without those star players. The Players get 50% of the revenue, that never made sense to me. The players ARE what makes the NBA, the NBA does not make the players. If all the players banned together and went and made there own league it would be more watched then the remains of the NBA.
 
The cap is not based on multiple years. so why are we using the total number instead of the yearly breakdown? 200 million sounds crazy but 40 is not that bad when Steph was only getting paid 12 mill the last few years.
 
Pinwheel1 said:
The cap is not based on multiple years. so why are we using the total number instead of the yearly breakdown? 200 million sounds crazy but 40 is not that bad when Steph was only getting paid 12 mill the last few years.
Click to expand...

Steph's old contract is such a horrible example that people keep throwing out. It's an outlier.

He signed it in November of 2012. He had just come off a season where he only played in 26 games. He averaged 14.7 ppg, 5.3 assists, and 3.4 rebounds. He took that shitty deal because he was worried about his health. The next year he averaged 23 ppg, 7 assists, and 4 boards. The Warriors lucked the fuck out with him signing that deal. If not for that injury plagued season, they never would have been able to sign Durant.
 
I'm happy with this level of bullshit and paying these guys whatever.

what i want is NON-GUARANTEED contracts.

If we sign you to the super max and u turn into Meyers 2.0 (or is that -1.0?) then fuck having to pay you for the remaining 4yrs when you performat at a 10th of what you were doing and promised to be.

I'm sick to fuckin death of albatross contracts of players who just fell the fuck off.

I'm also more than happy for teams to pay mega cash to the people that keep killin it.
 
BlayZa said:
I'm happy with this level of bullshit and paying these guys whatever.

what i want is NON-GUARANTEED contracts.

If we sign you to the super max and u turn into Meyers 2.0 (or is that -1.0?) then fuck having to pay you for the remaining 4yrs when you performat at a 10th of what you were doing and promised to be.

I'm sick to fuckin death of albatross contracts of players who just fell the fuck off.

I'm also more than happy for teams to pay mega cash to the people that keep killin it.
Click to expand...
There should be an amnesty available more often. We'll call it the MLEC

Meyers Leonard Escape Clause
 
RipCityRyan said:
Then we got Dame for a good ass deal
Click to expand...

That's because he signed his deal before the Designated Player Exception (or "super max") came into existence. Lillard's next contract will be enormous. Curry is basically the first guy to sign one of these. The next superstars to sign will take over as "the highest paid player in NBA history."
 
Minstrel said:
That's because he signed his deal before the Designated Player Exception (or "super max") came into existence. Lillard's next contract will be enormous. Curry is basically the first guy to sign one of these. The next superstars to sign will take over as "the highest paid player in NBA history."
Click to expand...
oh yeah, I know. I'm just saying its great that we got him on a big contract right before it went up. Got some years now before he gets his new contract. Worked out pretty good.
 
Natebishop3 said:
Why shouldn't role players be getting $75 million?

If Blake Griffin is worth $173 million dollars, and Steph Curry is worth $200 million dollars, why isn't Evan Turner worth $70 million?
Click to expand...
Because the salary cap is only 100 million?
 
Some of you are being silly.

The salary cap is a 50/50 split in revenue between owners and players. 50/50 is fair. If the owners are going to enjoy a big jump in money coming in then why shouldn't the players?

If the next wave of TV contracts go down then both the players and owners will suffer (lolz) equally.

A decreasing cap actually hurts teams like Golden State and the Cavs so that is good for the rest of the league including us.

The only thing I think should be done different is that while a contract is 1-5yrs long and there is an amount being paid per year I think the money should be stretched out into equal payments over 20yrs. Far too many players go broke within a few years out of the league. That's an embarrassment. 20 yrs of money coming in hopefully is long enough to save the players from themselves.
 
BlazerDuckSeahawkFan94 said:
The only problem is it would destroy the league too lol there would be like four dream teams and 26 Chemeketa Community College level teams
Click to expand...
No it wouldn't. There's only 30 teams. There's a lot of rich people in this country (and outside this country).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B-Roy
The Blazers should extend Meyers Leonard
2 3
Replies
65
Views
4K
jlprk
jlprk
SlyPokerDog
NBA free agency 2025: Who could be the league's first $82M player?
Replies
5
Views
411
tlongII
tlongII
BrianFromWA
Nice column by Coon about not overpaying role players
Replies
7
Views
933
Blaze01
Blaze01
B
Detailed Blazer's Edge article on Cap and Blazer Options
Replies
17
Views
1K
VanillaGorilla
VanillaGorilla
mike18946
Randolph Will Not Re-Sign If He Doesn't Get Extension
Replies
10
Views
2K
bbwtrench
bbwtrench

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top