Living in the past does not change the present. It's over. Let's stop talking about it.
. |
Living in the past does not change the present. It's over. Let's stop talking about it.
"I'm not going to allow my putative owner to answer that question, this is an NBA related press conference. Paul Tagliabue and Roger Goodell have collectively sung their praises of Tom and if uh ESPN has a problem with that tell Mr. Skipper to call me at my office."
The Thunder didn't offer Harden the max because they have 2 other max players on the roster and could not come close to affording all three and keeping Ibaka and Perkins. The Hornets have no other max players on the roster. That is why we could have just given him a max contract to begin with and kept everyone happy instead of sparking all of this bad publicity. And by the way, 6 mil to Benson is absolutely nothing so please stop treating it like 6 million to one of us.
Thanks for posting this. Saved me some time. The situations are not the same at all.
Also if you would have read the follwoing article, it was 500k not 2 million. Not sure where you're getting your information from. This is EXCETLY where DaThone has a point. He could have just taken off that stipulation and the deal is done.
http://www.nola.com/hornets/index.ss...dona_saga.htmlBefore the surgery, however, the Hornets attempted to sign Gordon to a contract extension, offering him a five-year contract at an average, a source said, of $13 million despite the fact that Gordon had played in only two games.
The deadline to sign was 11 p.m. central time Jan. 25.
βHe wanted $13.5,β said the source.
"I don't know if people know β I dislocated my pinkie finger. And [Tyreke] told me, 'You wanna go home or you wanna be here?' I want to be here. And he said, 'All right, then go tape it up and let's play. Let's go. We not stoppin' at no stores. Straight gas. That's what we do, just keep going.'"
http://thebasketbawlblog.com/
The Thunder had room for the contract. They just didn't want to go that far into the luxury cap. :shrug:
Sent from my DROID3 using Tapatalk 2
Football is different for two major reasons a) there's a hard cap and b) there's no cap on what one player can make. Max deals make it a no brainer contract for NBA GM's. Either he is a max player at his max level or he's not.
Plus one could argue that the Saints should have just given Brees the money. Especially with the whole bounty scandal going on.
All franchise players aren't created equal. LeBron James is worth a ton more to any team than he gets. Danny Granger is probably overpaid. Both guys are or were at the time of signing considered "the franchise" to their team. A couple million a year isn't insignificant unless A. you know you're going to be over the cap going forward (and we aren't next season) and B. You don't care about lux tax, which doesn't describe most teams (New Orleans especially).
We don't know what was said behind closed doors last season. If the Hornets gave Gordon reason to believe they'd max him, then he likely feels lied to and that's on Demps. But we don't know that ... Gordon could have just been annoyed that he wasn't getting the red carpet treatment and if that's the case, the Hornets did nothing wrong. That's the reality of restricted free agency and Gordon just has to suck it up.
Demps never let Gordon hit the open market. Restricted free agency is the furthest thing from the open market, because the team with his rights can match anything. If Gordon were about to become a legit "free" agent, then Demps would have certainly maxed him out. He proved that when he matched Phoenix's offer.
The Hornets took a shot at getting a better deal. Gordon went out and got the best one possible, and we matched.
I'm not even so sure he was that unhappy with the Hornets to begin with. Teams don't like to sign restricted free agents because it ties up all their money for days on a player usually not likely to go unmatched. The Suns might have told him, "We'll take a shot on this, but you've got to do your part to make it plausible that they'd let you go. Talk some junk."
Put it this way: It seems like a trendy tactic. Minnesota signed Nic Batum to a sheet and Batum was saying all the same stuff. His agent told the press that the Blazers should let Batum to go Minnesota, because "his dream is to play in Minnesota." (LMAO). Anyway, the Blazers matched and Batum is having a strong season.
Gordon started doing damage control via Twitter, etc, as soon as the Hornets matched, so the signs are there that the man just wanted to get paid.
I think the Batum comparison is a good one. He and his agent were begging and pleading with the Blazers not to match but they did so anyways. A couple months later, everything is smoothed over and nobody even remembers the whole ordeal anymore.
I guess it's all in how you define "franchise player". Granger IMO isn't a franchise player. He was the best player on his team. Likewise Dwayne Wade and Chris Bosh both are franchise players and neither are the best players on the team.
So while I agree all franchise players aren't the same ie Kevin Love vs LeBron James. Not every player who's getting a max deal is a franchise player. Teams gamble on guys like Granger, Gay, or even Gordon hoping they become franchise players.
My point is if you have a Dwight Howard or Chris Paul the max rule makes it so that you never have to worry about over paying. Plus it limits the damage of missing on a gamble.
You are right the term "open market" didn't fit the situation being he was a RFA. However the premise was the same. Why let the guy you have tag as the franchise shop himself around? It's the principle and the lack of respect that would never happen to a Kevin Love or Dwayne Wade. I guarentee Cleveland won't try to low ball Kyrie Irving.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)