Nate505 wrote:michaelm wrote:Why do they have the free agent rule then?
Probably because players don't want to be stuck in one place for their career, or at least want the option to not be stuck in one place for their career. In most cases it's irrelevant, as most players in basketball don't affect the competitive balance of the league on their own. 5-10 players do though, and Durant is one of them. Especially when he joins a team that won 70+ games the season before and didn't get rid of any significant pieces.
This is the crux of the argument for me.
I understand the distress of long term fans of Durant at OKC, and to some extent fans of other teams who have concerns about the competitiveness of the NBA, although in regard to the latter I have a strong belief in sport in general that if the rules are the same for everyone there shouldn't be too much complaint, and I certainly believe that the rules shouldn't be changed to handicap competitors who are operating/have operated within them once the contest is underway.
Essentially the argument seems to be that Durant shouldn't have a free choice when in exactly the situation for which the free agent rule was devised having given the franchise which drafted him 9 years because he is too good, and I don't see much fairness for the individual in that, particularly when some who are of this opinion claim LeBron's situation was/is different to Durant's because he is better than Durant, and others are Spurs adherents, for whom the Spurs signing LMA as a free agent was presumably OK because he is not as good.