Lebron's Max Contract Demands fueled by Union?

[twix2500]

Again that is not a Max deal..

Do you have any source (not the sauces used by ESPN , articles/reports) that talks about Duncan's contract before he took the pay-cut? The only source I could find said he was on a max contract when he decided to take the pay-cut. I am not interested in the argument here, more interested in the exchange of the actual information.

People always trying to bate others to do their work. Here man his last recent contract

"BY MIKE JOHNSONIN NBA — 10 JUL, 2012 The San Antonio Spurs announced Wednesday that they had re-signed Duncan, bringing back the 36-year-old forward for at least a 16th season. Terms were not disclosed, though Yahoo Sports cited anonymous sources in reporting it was a three-year, $36 million deal."


2012-13 San Antonio Spurs NBA $9,638,554
2013-14 San Antonio Spurs NBA $10,361,446


http://network.yardbarker.com/nba/artic ... d_11191192

I dont know what ESPN article you are reading that said he just opted out of a max deal?

"Four days after lifting the Larry O’Brien Trophy for the fifth time, Tim Duncan quietly opted in to make a team-friendly $10,361,446 next season. Which reminds us: Wait, Tim Duncan made roughly three times less than Kobe Bryant did last season? How could this happen?"

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_ ... for-titles

So why dont you go question the Spurs organization to see if they paying Duncan under the table. smh
Now your turn show me your sauces

[PaulieWal]

Again that is not a Max deal..

Do you have any source (not the sauces used by ESPN , articles/reports) that talks about Duncan's contract before he took the pay-cut? The only source I could find said he was on a max contract when he decided to take the pay-cut. I am not interested in the argument here, more interested in the exchange of the actual information.

People always trying to bate others to do their work. Here man his last recent contract

"BY MIKE JOHNSONIN NBA — 10 JUL, 2012 The San Antonio Spurs announced Wednesday that they had re-signed Duncan, bringing back the 36-year-old forward for at least a 16th season. Terms were not disclosed, though Yahoo Sports cited anonymous sources in reporting it was a three-year, $36 million deal."


2012-13 San Antonio Spurs NBA $9,638,554
2013-14 San Antonio Spurs NBA $10,361,446


http://network.yardbarker.com/nba/artic ... d_11191192

What the.......

How am I trying to bait you into doing my work? I actually did my own research and found a source that said he was on a max deal before he took the pay-cut in 2012-2013 (which I also provided in my first reply to you). You said, no, no that still doesn't show that he was on a max deal. So then I try to find his old contract information and that's the only source I can come up with. Then I ask you to find a source that shows he was NOT on a max contract as you are claiming. You just gave us his 13/14 contract numbers which everyone knows were not a max deal.

Making accusations like that when I have been very genuine with you and am more interested in the exchange of information rather than winning an argument is very weak.

I have been talking about his contract before he started taking the pay-cuts in 12-13, not sure what you are talking about. I thought that much was clear.

[twix2500]

Do you have any source (not the sauces used by ESPN , articles/reports) that talks about Duncan's contract before he took the pay-cut? The only source I could find said he was on a max contract when he decided to take the pay-cut. I am not interested in the argument here, more interested in the exchange of the actual information.

People always trying to bate others to do their work. Here man his last recent contract

"BY MIKE JOHNSONIN NBA — 10 JUL, 2012 The San Antonio Spurs announced Wednesday that they had re-signed Duncan, bringing back the 36-year-old forward for at least a 16th season. Terms were not disclosed, though Yahoo Sports cited anonymous sources in reporting it was a three-year, $36 million deal."


2012-13 San Antonio Spurs NBA $9,638,554
2013-14 San Antonio Spurs NBA $10,361,446


http://network.yardbarker.com/nba/artic ... d_11191192

What the.......

How am I trying to bait you into doing my work? I actually did my own research and found a source that said he was on a max deal before he took the pay-cut in 2012-2013 (which I also provided in my first reply to you). You said, no, no that still doesn't show that he was on a max deal. So then I try to find his old contract information and that's the only source I can come up with. Then I ask you to find a source that shows he was NOT on a max contract as you are claiming. You just gave us his 13/14 contract numbers which everyone knows were not a max deal.

Making accusations like that when I have been very genuine with you and am more interested in the exchange of information rather than winning an argument is very weak.

I have been talking about his contract before he started taking the pay-cuts in 12-13, not sure what you are talking about. I thought that much was clear.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/duncan-les ... --nba.html

October 29, 2007 11:46 PM
Yahoo Sports
But what is notable about the deal are the terms: Although Duncan is eligible to receive a two-year extension worth about $51 million under the NBA's collective bargaining agreement, he agreed to nearly $11 million less because it could afford the Spurs greater flexibility to pursue free agents after the 2009-10 season

Duncan will be 34 when the extension begins. Tony Parker is the only other player currently scheduled to be under contract following the 2009-10 season, but the Spurs also will be in position to re-sign their third star, Manu Ginobili, that summer if they want.

End of story........... Argue if thats collusion??

[PaulieWal]

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/duncan-less-maximum-salary-034600085--nba.html

"But what is notable about the deal are the terms: Although Duncan is eligible to receive a two-year extension worth about $51 million under the NBA's collective bargaining agreement, he agreed to nearly $11 million less because it could afford the Spurs greater flexibility to pursue free agents after the 2009-10 season"

End of story...........

Okay....

That's all I asked for. The accusations when it had been a genuine conversation throughout and I had provided whatever I could find in my research to you were not cool.

Anyway...

Two things:

It talks about a two year contract extension when he was already under contract and that does show that he did not take the max for those two years.

Secondly, it still doesn't clarify for us if his contract before the extension was a max deal or not. I guess we are back to square one lol.

[twix2500]

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/duncan-less-maximum-salary-034600085--nba.html

"But what is notable about the deal are the terms: Although Duncan is eligible to receive a two-year extension worth about $51 million under the NBA's collective bargaining agreement, he agreed to nearly $11 million less because it could afford the Spurs greater flexibility to pursue free agents after the 2009-10 season"

End of story...........

Okay....

That's all I asked for. The accusations when it had been a genuine conversation throughout and I had provided whatever I could find in my research to you were not cool.

Anyway...

Two things:

It talks about a two year contract extension when he was already under contract and that does show that he did not take the max for those two years.

Secondly, it still doesn't clarify for us if his contract before the extension was a max deal or not. I guess we are back to square one lol.

OHHH JESUS!!! the point was that the Spurs collectively big 3 together took less money to for the Spurs to be able to be players in free agency. No their contracts didnt end or begin the same year. But Yes they spoke with each other and the organization about their contracts in the future.

[PaulieWal]

OHHH JESUS!!! the point was that the Spurs collectively big 3 together took less money to for the Spurs to be able to be players in free agency. No their contracts didnt end or begin the same year. But Yes they spoke with each other and the organization about their contracts in the future.

Let's backtrack a little. HIF said that TD/Dirk took pay-cuts to help their franchises. I said TD/Dirk played for the max in their primes (as far as I know). You came in and said TD has never played for the max. Then we started doing the research.

Now the latest article your found said that the extension that kicked in for TD at age 34 was not a max extension. Nice straw man arguments BTW. Nobody ever denied or brought up anything about the Spurs' Big 3 helping their team. We were talking specifically about TD playing for the max in his prime. Age 34 clearly was not his prime. In fact, he had one of his worst seasons during the 2 year extension.

You seem to be more interested in winning an argument than specifically exchanging information about TD's prime contract numbers, nothing less nothing more. Feel free to reply, or not.

[twix2500]

Published: August 3, 2000

Tim Duncan, the National Basketball Association's most valued free agent, re-signed with the San Antonio Spurs yesterday after turning down an offer to join the Orlando Magic. Duncan was signed to a reported three-year deal worth $32.6 million that includes a fourth-year option that would make it worth $45.9 million.

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/08/03/sport ... spurs.html

IN the year 2000! He took less to stay in San Antonio instead of going to Orlando Magic to play with Grant Hill, who Grant thought Duncan was going to team up with him otherwise Grant would of stayed in Detroit. Magic offered him the Max deal in his PRIME!

CMon man, look at his contract numbers those are not MAX deals. So ask yourself why did he take less?

[PaulieWal]

Published: August 3, 2000

Tim Duncan, the National Basketball Association's most valued free agent, re-signed with the San Antonio Spurs yesterday after turning down an offer to join the Orlando Magic. Duncan was signed to a reported three-year deal worth $32.6 million that includes a fourth-year option that would make it worth $45.9 million.

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/08/03/sport ... spurs.html

IN the year 2000! He took less to stay in San Antonio instead of going to Orlando Magic to play with Grant Hill, who Grant thought Duncan was going to team up with him otherwise Grant would of stayed in Detroit. Magic offered him the Max deal in his PRIME!

CMon man, look at his contract numbers those are not MAX deals. So ask yourself why did he take less?

Again, nobody is denying that Duncan has helped his franchise a lot over his career. We are specifically looking at his contract numbers (researching whether or not he played for max during his career).

The link you posted doesn't say that he took less to stay in SA.

The Magic offered him 6 yrs 67.5 million, the Spurs gave him 4 yrs 46. Seems to me both contracts were the same value and the Spurs gave him fewer years but max value nonetheless.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1141 ... ando-magic

Duncan was close to signing with the Magic. The team offered him a six-year $67.5 million deal.

[twix2500]

Published: August 3, 2000

Tim Duncan, the National Basketball Association's most valued free agent, re-signed with the San Antonio Spurs yesterday after turning down an offer to join the Orlando Magic. Duncan was signed to a reported three-year deal worth $32.6 million that includes a fourth-year option that would make it worth $45.9 million.

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/08/03/sport ... spurs.html

IN the year 2000! He took less to stay in San Antonio instead of going to Orlando Magic to play with Grant Hill, who Grant thought Duncan was going to team up with him otherwise Grant would of stayed in Detroit. Magic offered him the Max deal in his PRIME!

CMon man, look at his contract numbers those are not MAX deals. So ask yourself why did he take less?

Again, nobody is denying that Duncan has helped his franchise a lot over his career. We are specifically looking at his contract numbers (researching whether or not he played for max during his career).

The link you posted doesn't say that he took less to stay in SA.

The Magic offered him 6 yrs 67.5 million, the Spurs gave him 4 yrs 46. Seems to me both contracts were the same value and the Spurs gave him fewer years but max value nonetheless.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1141 ... ando-magic

Duncan was close to signing with the Magic. The team offered him a six-year $67.5 million deal.

Uggghhh you want me to have an article for everything i said. Look man iv been following basketball for a long time, i even played. Back in 2000, it was shocking that he stayed in San Antonio and it was talked about that he even took less to stay. I think he opted out in 2003 and again took less then the max. He never signed for a MAX deal. Has he gotten paid very well, yes.

[PaulieWal]

Uggghhh you want me to have an article for everything i said. Look man iv been following basketball for a long time, i even played. Back in 2000, it was shocking that he stayed in San Antonio and it was talked about that he even took less to stay. I think he opted out in 2003 and again took less then the max. He never signed for a MAX deal. Has he gotten paid very well, yes.

Whatever, man. We all know he has been taking pay-cuts relative to his market value the last few years. From what I remember he was playing for the max. You disagreed with me which is fine but I simply asked for anything that says he didn't take the max in his prime. How did he take less to stay? The contract numbers were identical except for the years and I showed that to you. 4 yrs 46 vs 6 yrs 67.5

Best to leave this conversation since this isn't going anywhere, you are making it about something it's not. I am simply interested in learning if he really did not ever play for the max.

[twix2500]

Uggghhh you want me to have an article for everything i said. Look man iv been following basketball for a long time, i even played. Back in 2000, it was shocking that he stayed in San Antonio and it was talked about that he even took less to stay. I think he opted out in 2003 and again took less then the max. He never signed for a MAX deal. Has he gotten paid very well, yes.

Whatever, man. We all know he has been taking pay-cuts relative to his market value the last few years. From what I remember he was playing for the max. You disagreed with me which is fine but I simply asked for anything that says he didn't take the max in his prime. How did he take less to stay? The contract numbers were identical except for the years and I showed that to you. 4 yrs 46 vs 6 yrs 67.5

Best to leave this conversation since this isn't going anywhere, you are making it about something it's not. I am simply interested in learning if he really did not ever play for the max.

LOL sorry man i got a little hyped up lifting weigths lol.

[mh_3]

OP - Change the title to "LeBron's Max Contract Demands fueled by False Media Reports"