ImageImageImageImageImage

Would Curry have been better off* signing with Nike?

Moderators: floppymoose, Sleepy51, Chris Porter's Hair

cdubbz
RealGM
Posts: 10,992
And1: 1,770
Joined: May 05, 2005
Location: Oakland
 

Would Curry have been better off* signing with Nike? 

Post#1 » by cdubbz » Sun Jun 7, 2020 2:27 am

Steph signed with Under Armour in 2013 after Nike didn't match a deal which was just under $4million annually.

In 2015 Steph's deal with UA got extended through 2024 with stake in the company. Nobody knows how much.

If Nike matched UA deal in 2013 and eventually signed Curry to a signature sneaker deal would he be more loved? MORE global impact? MORE media backing? MORE coverage?

I think Yes strictly because Nike is the Titan in basketball that will never be topped. Their athletes have the best signature sneakers and gear. UA Curry signature line had some amazing shoes (Curry 1, 2, & 4, 5) but most have been mediocre.

The basketball sneaker community is massive thanks to Michael Jordan for lifestyle and performance. Kobe has had a massive performance shoe following followed by Lebron, KD, Kyrie, and now Giannis. Curry if signed in 2013 would have had a line a long with Kobe, Lebron, KD as the headliners followed by Kyrie and himself.

The Nike community, marketing, influence is EVERYWHERE. More NBA players are signed with Nike who don't have signature sneakers and would have the opportunity to rock Curry PEs. Players are loyal to the shoes they play in -- Demar Derozan is known for his Kobe PEs, Mike Bibby & Ray Allen had a wild Jordan PE collection, etc.
Kuya wrote: a good agent collects all the data, including quotes to give them leverage in contract deals.
thinkingwarriors
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,483
And1: 3,529
Joined: May 15, 2006
Location: On the road...
     

Re: Would Curry have been MORE "powerful" signing with Nike? 

Post#2 » by thinkingwarriors » Sun Jun 7, 2020 2:42 am

Nobody is more associated with putting a shoe maker on the map than Curry did with UA, second only to Jordan and Nike. Curry's name will be associated with UA for years in a way that Lebron's name, for instance, never will be associated with Nike.

So Curry without a doubt did far more for UA than they did for him but it's still a point of honor that he was a capable of elevating a shoe company like only one or two have ever done before him.
Bob Meyers, June 7, 2018: "“It’s not in my job description to please NBA fans. It’s to win, end of story. I don’t need to be entertained, I just need to win. That’s all it is. That’s all I was hired to do. Win.”
Little Digger
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,865
And1: 1,857
Joined: Aug 01, 2010
Location: Not sure..does anyone know which universe we’re in?
   

Re: Would Curry have been MORE "powerful" signing with Nike? 

Post#3 » by Little Digger » Sun Jun 7, 2020 5:19 pm

Maybe that’s my problem, I’ve been wearing UA for the last few years and noticed I’ve slowly lost power ever since.
User avatar
The Maestro
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,408
And1: 19
Joined: Oct 03, 2010

Re: Would Curry have been MORE "powerful" signing with Nike? 

Post#4 » by The Maestro » Sun Jun 7, 2020 5:42 pm

The Curry 1’s were really nice. By far his best shoe. They’ve ranged from terrible to ok since.
User avatar
clyde21
RealGM
Posts: 41,653
And1: 47,506
Joined: Aug 20, 2014
   

Re: Would Curry have been MORE "powerful" signing with Nike? 

Post#5 » by clyde21 » Sun Jun 7, 2020 7:10 pm

The Maestro wrote:The Curry 1’s were really nice. By far his best shoe. They’ve ranged from terrible to ok since.


i like the pi day 5s
#BLM #FREEPALESTINE
cdubbz
RealGM
Posts: 10,992
And1: 1,770
Joined: May 05, 2005
Location: Oakland
 

Re: Would Curry have been MORE "powerful" signing with Nike? 

Post#6 » by cdubbz » Sun Jun 7, 2020 8:40 pm

Little Digger wrote:Maybe that’s my problem, I’ve been wearing UA for the last few years and noticed I’ve slowly lost power ever since.


Yeah see?!

Powerful wasn't the right word but was quick posting. INFLUENTIAL? Reach??
Kuya wrote: a good agent collects all the data, including quotes to give them leverage in contract deals.
User avatar
The Maestro
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,408
And1: 19
Joined: Oct 03, 2010

Re: Would Curry have been MORE "powerful" signing with Nike? 

Post#7 » by The Maestro » Sun Jun 7, 2020 8:56 pm

thinkingwarriors wrote:Nobody is more associated with putting a shoe maker on the map than Curry did with UA, second only to Jordan and Nike. Curry's name will be associated with UA for years in a way that Lebron's name, for instance, never will be associated with Nike.

So Curry without a doubt did far more for UA than they did for him but it's still a point of honor that he was a capable of elevating a shoe company like only one or two have ever done before him.


He might’ve put them on the map but it’s been all downhill since he lost the 2016 finals and the chef Curry’s were so widely mocked. UA stock has completely tanked and I don’t see anyone wearing Curry’s other than maybe a few middle school kids. If all he cares about is the money and not the quality then by all means he should stay with UA but his sales will never be the same and his shoes will continue to be crappy.
cdubbz
RealGM
Posts: 10,992
And1: 1,770
Joined: May 05, 2005
Location: Oakland
 

Re: Would Curry have been better off* signing with Nike? 

Post#8 » by cdubbz » Sun Jun 7, 2020 9:12 pm

I would hope Curry gets out of his UA contract. Signs with Nike and gets a short signature series shoe
Kuya wrote: a good agent collects all the data, including quotes to give them leverage in contract deals.
Flash Falcon X
General Manager
Posts: 7,547
And1: 3,310
Joined: Oct 19, 2010
 

Re: Would Curry have been better off* signing with Nike? 

Post#9 » by Flash Falcon X » Mon Jun 8, 2020 2:17 pm

The marketing for Steph during those MVP seasons would have been off the charts. Especially if he didn't get hurt in the 2016 Playoffs and won the championship to finish that 73-win seasons, Nike would have had a field day.
#DubNation
User avatar
KevinMcreynolds
RealGM
Posts: 10,012
And1: 1,746
Joined: Feb 07, 2010
Location: San Francisco
     

Re: Would Curry have been better off* signing with Nike? 

Post#10 » by KevinMcreynolds » Mon Jun 8, 2020 6:53 pm

them UA schitz is straight trash

my man shoulda went with Hoka One One
floppymoose wrote:Too much Vlad. Sixers can't handle it. Solid gold.

"I'm a big proponent of footwork. Believe me." ~Jim Barnett
likashing
Head Coach
Posts: 6,376
And1: 1,902
Joined: Jun 06, 2013

Re: Would Curry have been better off* signing with Nike? 

Post#11 » by likashing » Mon Jun 8, 2020 7:21 pm

cdubbz wrote:Steph signed with Under Armour in 2013 after Nike didn't match a deal which was just under $4million annually.

In 2015 Steph's deal with UA got extended through 2024 with stake in the company. Nobody knows how much.

If Nike matched UA deal in 2013 and eventually signed Curry to a signature sneaker deal would he be more loved? MORE global impact? MORE media backing? MORE coverage?

I think Yes strictly because Nike is the Titan in basketball that will never be topped. Their athletes have the best signature sneakers and gear. UA Curry signature line had some amazing shoes (Curry 1, 2, & 4, 5) but most have been mediocre.

The basketball sneaker community is massive thanks to Michael Jordan for lifestyle and performance. Kobe has had a massive performance shoe following followed by Lebron, KD, Kyrie, and now Giannis. Curry if signed in 2013 would have had a line a long with Kobe, Lebron, KD as the headliners followed by Kyrie and himself.

The Nike community, marketing, influence is EVERYWHERE. More NBA players are signed with Nike who don't have signature sneakers and would have the opportunity to rock Curry PEs. Players are loyal to the shoes they play in -- Demar Derozan is known for his Kobe PEs, Mike Bibby & Ray Allen had a wild Jordan PE collection, etc.


Define “better off”?

If you mean monetarily, Steph’s deal with UA has an equity stake. Hundreds of millions of dollars.

I know many of you guys love Nike more than UA. But Steph made the best business choice for his brand, especially monetarily.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.jacksonville.com/article/20160325/news/801245527%3ftemplate=ampart
Mark Jackson wrote:Playoff preparation is overrated... I’m going to get my rest. I’m not going to grow old and be stressed out and get gray hair.
User avatar
Coxy
RealGM
Posts: 39,265
And1: 9,191
Joined: Jun 17, 2008
Location: Brought to you by the Splash Fam
   

Re: Would Curry have been better off* signing with Nike? 

Post#12 » by Coxy » Tue Jun 9, 2020 4:56 am

Steph is rolling in squillions of dollars, he could have signed with Crocs and done well.
Chris Porter's Hair wrote:but in a startling development the General board didn't agree.
DAWill1128
Analyst
Posts: 3,206
And1: 843
Joined: Jun 17, 2004
   

Re: Would Curry have been better off* signing with Nike? 

Post#13 » by DAWill1128 » Tue Jun 9, 2020 5:13 am

Jordan is still the dominant name with Nike. I guess Kobe and LeBron have done pretty well with Nike for branding. Everyone wants an alternative option to the pair of Nikes they have. Remember the T-Mac Addidas line? They sold a ton of units and produced good basketball shoes. Problem is T-Macs back issues tanked his game and the line. Addidas signed Rose but his injury ruined that taking off like it would have. Remember how big Iversons line was with Reebok? Marbury has done well with his own line. Who knows maybe Klays shoe nets him massive endorsement money and coverage in China.

Nike as a business for basketball is above every athlete except Jordan. Does anyone know a KD shoe? I don’t. Does Harden have one? We all know Currys, T-Macs, Iversons, and Starburys because the athlete was above the basketball shoe line or at least in par in those cases.

Return to Golden State Warriors