Lillard expected to sign a 4 year Super-Max extension in Portland

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
yuyuza1 said:
The level of smugness in this post is startling.

Especially from someone who has still yet to give one valid and non-presumptive reason as to why Dame should take less than what he has earned. I'm a fairly left-leaning person both when it comes to social stuff as well as the financial, but this is just a new level. Not sure how to respond.
Click to expand...

Its not smugness dude. America, for all its great things, was founded on greed and is a greedy country based on our foundation.

I did give valid reasons, you have yet to address them with a rebuttal.

So tell me what part of this doesnt make sense AND WHY....


Dame takes less, providing the team to have flexibility to put more talent around him to allow him a better chance at winning. Dame can try to (and probably would if we win or even make the finals) make the money up in endorsements.

This has been said by some others in here too and as far as I have read, you have diosmissed it.

Until you answer why that doesnt make sense, this conversation will just go round in circles.

Yes, its taking a chance, as we don't know if the talent acquired will be better, but if the chance isn't taken, its almost a guarantee the talent around him wont get any better.


And btw, if its smug to say IF I had 100 mill in the bank and I was offered 190 more, but said Ill take 150 to help put a better team around me, so I can have a better chance of succeeding, then Ill own the smugness.

The only reason to NOT do that would be greed. Please give me another reason why a guy with 250 mill would NEED another 40 mill in the bank vs not taking it to help his career by winning more?
 
Last edited:
This is going nowhere, and I can't follow your train of thought with these long posts with so much random shit. Gonna step away. My point is fairly clear-- you're missing it.
 
yuyuza1 said:
This is going nowhere, and I can't follow your train of thought with these long posts with so much random shit. Gonna step away. My point is fairly clear-- you're missing it.
Click to expand...



My point was VERY clear, and you are missing it. Same point several others made here you also dismissed.

So you don't have an answer. Got it. :)
 
Orion Bailey said:
My point was VERY clear, and you are missing it. Same point several others made here you also dismissed.

So you don't have an answer. Got it. :)
Click to expand...
Next time I'm due for a raise, I'll ask for less so that my company has more $ to hire others to my group.

Who knows? Maybe one day, all these people they hired because I took less will help me get to a better position. Or you know, they could hire morons who don't know how to do their jobs and I took less for no reason. But I should be shamed into taking less because that's greedy if I don't-- that's not idiotic at all.
 
yuyuza1 said:
Next time I'm due for a raise, I'll ask for less so that my company has more $ to hire others to my group.

Who knows? Maybe one day, all these people they hired because I took less will help me get to a better position. Or you know, they could hire morons who don't know how to do their jobs and I took less for no reason. But I should be shamed into taking less because that's greedy if I don't-- that's not idiotic at all.
Click to expand...

I actually JUST did that, but you must not have read that post....

Whoever said shamed? Why you putting words in my mouth?

Do I need to resort to a cliche? Learn to read then post?

I said I wouldn't fault him if he took it.

But for the good of the team and to try to win it all, he should take less.

Yeah, i'm done if you are going to continue to try to put words in my mouth, not read what I post and then try to tell me my stance is idiotic.
Whatever man.
 
yuyuza1 said:
Next time I'm due for a raise, I'll ask for less so that my company has more $ to hire others to my group.

Who knows? Maybe one day, all these people they hired because I took less will help me get to a better position. Or you know, they could hire morons who don't know how to do their jobs and I took less for no reason. But I should be shamed into taking less because that's greedy if I don't-- that's not idiotic at all.
Click to expand...
Maybe a top 5 worst analogy.
 
yuyuza1 said:
Next time I'm due for a raise, I'll ask for less so that my company has more $ to hire others to my group.

Who knows? Maybe one day, all these people they hired because I took less will help me get to a better position. Or you know, they could hire morons who don't know how to do their jobs and I took less for no reason. But I should be shamed into taking less because that's greedy if I don't-- that's not idiotic at all.
Click to expand...
I understand your viewpoint, but this argument fails on so many levels.

This isn't a right/wrong argument, and you're certainly welcome to your POV that Dame - and everyone - should always take as much as they can. But that doesn't "disprove" the opposing viewpoint. There are very real reasons for why Dame SHOULD take less, just as there are very real reasons why he should take every last penny. Nobody is "right" here.
 
TBpup said:
Deserved....but if we had no cap room before, we are really going to be tight going forward. It's great that it allows Portland to keep him but I believe it will somewhat hamstring the franchise going forward.
Click to expand...
How does this change anything other than letting him walk in 2021?
 
Can't believe people are saying Dame shouldn't get or take this.

Players taking small contracts so the team has cap room is trying to circumvent the cap to gain an edge. It's cheating. Yeah we know the Patriots cheat they got caught twice.

I want the Blazers to win a title because we are the best, not because multiple all stars get underpaid. It's as stupid as super teams or Durant signing with the warriors.

Fuck Durant, I hope the warriors sweep the finals with him injured. He's a bandwagon player and a discrace to competitiors. As CJ said he saw his group getting beat up by bullies and jumped to their side then gloats about what he accomplished!

Fuck ring chasers that give up millions to unfairly join teams that shouldn't be able to afford them.

Fuck fans that want someone else to give up millions. Go give your paycheck back to your employer yourself and let others receive what they've earned.

Congrats to Lillard, the Blazers, and the vast majority of fans that want a team built the right way.
 
blue9 said:
I understand your viewpoint, but this argument fails on so many levels.

This isn't a right/wrong argument, and you're certainly welcome to your POV that Dame - and everyone - should always take as much as they can. But that doesn't "disprove" the opposing viewpoint. There are very real reasons for why Dame SHOULD take less, just as there are very real reasons why he should take every last penny. Nobody is "right" here.
Click to expand...

People are right to take what they earn and you are wrong to suggest people should do otherwise.

I believe it's wrong to purposely injure an opposing player to win, no exception; by your logic that viewpoint cannot be disproven.
 
Those of you talking about taking less of a raise from your NORMAL job... (not another company)

61004211.jpg
 
There’s no option but to give him max deal. Without Lillard your talking about being a top 10 team for lottery every year, and bet your ass Almost any-team would give lillard the super max, he is a leader and always improves each year and is durable almost never injured. Now if you were not to pay him and he leaves .....

Who of free agents likes to come to Portland?.....We are not a great destination for free agents, lillard is only hope to try to attract other talent........ The only thing i am disappointed in him is why not take hometown discount so his roaster could be filled with actual shooters around him... because Instead of getting paid 47 mil a year.....Why not take 37?

Lillard is making 28 million per year from Hulu. He is also making at least 15 mil from Addidas....and god knows how much more on other advertisements, in essence Lillard would be making close 90 million per year WITH TAKING hometown discount, but i guess these days players want every penny
 
Orion Bailey said:
I actually JUST did that, but you must not have read that post....

Whoever said shamed? Why you putting words in my mouth?

Do I need to resort to a cliche? Learn to read then post?

I said I wouldn't fault him if he took it.

But for the good of the team and to try to win it all, he should take less.

Yeah, i'm done if you are going to continue to try to put words in my mouth, not read what I post and then try to tell me my stance is idiotic.
Whatever man.
Click to expand...

So Dame takes less, now Klay takes less, then Kawhi takes less, Another Davis takes less?

Where does it end?

Should Dame play for half his value so we have even more cap space?

Maybe you think it would be fun to have 8 all stars join the Blazers on cheap contracts and get a ring. I'd call that cheating and pathetic. If it's Portland this year it's the Lakers next and Knicks after that.

Fuck any players who do that cheap shit, if you are truly a great player you take what you earned and still compete for a ring.

This place is full of a bunch of unmotivated cheating pathetic losers.
 
WesleyMatthews said:
People are right to take what they earn and you are wrong to suggest people should do otherwise.

I believe it's wrong to purposely injure an opposing player to win, no exception; by your logic that viewpoint cannot be disproven.
Click to expand...
So suggesting someone practice financial altruism is the same as suggesting someone physically harm another? Yeah, okay. #hardeyeroll
 
I don't blame Dame for taking it even though I don't think know player is worth that much especially it supposed be a game they love to play. But I blame the system what the players and the owners agree upon. The salary cap doesn't go up fast enough to take on these super contract in the long goal of the NBA. Pretty soon every team will be over the salary cap and every owner will be paying out there ass in luxury tax back to the league. Plus I see in the next negotiate between player and owner this probably will definitely will come especially if the owners start losing money my opinion.
 
dviss1 said:
Those of you talking about taking less of a raise from your NORMAL job... (not another company)

61004211.jpg
Click to expand...


Like I said, My boss came to me last week with a raise and said he needed more from me, and I said I couldn't do it and I don't want the raise, id rather him hire another office person.
He agreed that asking me to do more than 50 hours a week was not fair.

Now, he gave me the raise anyhow, LOL, but the point is I was going to deny it as to help the office get more help(which he said he would do anyhow).

Point being is in the working world, raises typically come with added responsibility. It totally makes sense for people to not want that extra responsibility and thus not take the raise.

Maybe Dame would like to not have to provide soooo much leadership and wants some more self leaders on the team. Maybe he is willing to take a little less for NO to try to find those guys.

This to me, is completely logical.
 
WesleyMatthews said:
So Dame takes less, now Klay takes less, then Kawhi takes less, Another Davis takes less?

Where does it end?

Should Dame play for half his value so we have even more cap space?

Maybe you think it would be fun to have 8 all stars join the Blazers on cheap contracts and get a ring. I'd call that cheating and pathetic. If it's Portland this year it's the Lakers next and Knicks after that.

Fuck any players who do that cheap shit, if you are truly a great player you take what you earned and still compete for a ring.

This place is full of a bunch of unmotivated cheating pathetic losers.
Click to expand...

Where does it end? It ends with a more reasonable payroll for all and paycheck for these athletes.

So all the ring chasers that sign for a one year min to get a ring are also cheaters?

Whatever...

Listen, I get the side that says he should take the max. you don't need to be insulting those who disagree with that and have provided logical reasons why. Take your pathetic loser comment and shove it.

ITs legal. It isnt cheating. Its an option.
 
I'm not the biggest Olshey fan and scoff when he mentions drafting Lillard among his best accomplishments in Portland, when it was clear Buchanan was ready to select him anyway. But I have to give Olshey props. Convincing Lillard to sign TWO extensions with Portland is by far his best accomplishment as GM in Portland.
 
GhostOfPGA said:
Bobby Bonilla points to head
Click to expand...
Genius decision!

yuyuza1 said:
You talk of this as if it's a guarantee that Dame taking less would make us a championship contender. If this is the kind of financial advice you're giving, good luck getting any takers.
Click to expand...
You'll let me know where I said anything about it being close to a guarantee. Not even close to what I said but thanks for the response.

calvin natt said:
Warriors players have taken less than the maximum amount possible in recent years. Just saying
Click to expand...

That seemed to work out well.
 
Lillard would be stupid to ask for less than his max. It's not even clear any less that he takes could be reinvested in the roster--if Durant walks this off-season, the Warriors don't suddenly have $35M to spend on other players, because they're still over the cap. Whether Lillard takes his absolute max or a mild discount, the Blazers will still be well over the cap. Sure, you can invent scenarios where one day that difference actually makes a difference to the roster, but there's certainly no direct and immediate benefit.

Secondly, even if there were some direct benefit, the chances that that gain in resources made a title-winning difference are tiny. Even if Olshey were a great GM, getting from where the Blazers are now to a title with a few extra million dollars a year are low. And Olshey doesn't look like a "great GM"--at best, he's adequate. Taking less money in order to still not win a title would be neither here nor there.

Lillard deserves the supermax and there should be no negative feelings at all about him taking it. Yes, great players cost a lot. Every team wants great players and are happy to pay them a ton.
 
Orion Bailey said:
Like I said, My boss came to me last week with a raise and said he needed more from me, and I said I couldn't do it and I don't want the raise, id rather him hire another office person.
He agreed that asking me to do more than 50 hours a week was not fair.

Now, he gave me the raise anyhow, LOL, but the point is I was going to deny it as to help the office get more help(which he said he would do anyhow).

Point being is in the working world, raises typically come with added responsibility. It totally makes sense for people to not want that extra responsibility and thus not take the raise.

Maybe Dame would like to not have to provide soooo much leadership and wants some more self leaders on the team. Maybe he is willing to take a little less for NO to try to find those guys.

This to me, is completely logical.
Click to expand...

Dog... That's not close to Dame's situation. Dame won't have to play more minutes... We're not asking him to do anything that is unfair either.

You didn't take that raise because fuck working 50 hours a week. Fuck that RIGHT off. Frankly, people should be working around 30 hours a week.
 
dviss1 said:
Dog... That's not close to Dame's situation. Dame won't have to play more minutes... We're not asking him to do anything that is unfair either.

You didn't take that raise because fuck working 50 hours a week. Fuck that RIGHT off. Frankly, people should be working around 30 hours a week.
Click to expand...

But it is. Dame is also the leader of the team. Like I said in the balance of the post. Maybe he can rest a bit more with guys on the roster that don't require as much leadership?

No its not apples to apple,s but the analogy is there.

The end result is I passed up money so the company could have more flexibility to bring in another body to help with the work load.

This is the same thing.

Dame would be willing to take less money to bring in better players to help with his work load.

It's the same.
 
Orion Bailey said:
But it is. Dame is also the leader of the team. Like I said in the balance of the post. Maybe he can rest a bit more with guys on the roster that don't require as much leadership?

No its not apples to apple,s but the analogy is there.

The end result is I passed up money so the company could have more flexibility to bring in another body to help with the work load.

This is the same thing.

Dame would be willing to take less money to bring in better players to help with his work load.

It's the same.
Click to expand...

Your company is fooling you. They could afford to hire someone else to help with a work load because there was a demand for work.

They tried to cut corners by asking you to work over 50 instead of hiring someone new. It's bullshit corporatism. They had enough money to hire somebody bro.
 
dviss1 said:
Your company is fooling you. They could afford to hire someone else to help with a work load because there was a demand for work.

They tried to cut corners by asking you to work over 50 instead of hiring someone new. It's bullshit corporatism. They had enough money to hire somebody bro.
Click to expand...

Sure, and they wanted to give the money to me and ask em to do more. I Instead asked them to give it to someone else who can help with the work load.

Irrelevant that funds are available. Whats relevant is that I chose to take less money to help the company get more help. Thats the point. And the point I'm making that Dame could and in my opinion, should, if he wants a better supporting cast.

AGAIN, I wont fault him if he takes the max, I just dont see it being the optimal decision in the big picture if he wants to win it all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top