State of the Roster

[rocketsballin]

for 6.5 million dollars hell no. we need to clear cap for dwight

[inquisitive]

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/5-o ... e-valuable

Some high-profile names are up for free agency after the 2012-13 season comes to a close. But which players should teams be going after? Our panel breaks down the value of some of the summer's top commodities.


1. Dwight Howard or Chris Paul: Which '13 free agent is more valuable?

Israel Gutierrez, ESPN.com: Howard. Even in his worst season since he was 20 years old, Howard is putting up nearly 17 points, 13 rebounds and 2.5 blocks. In a system that actually has a defensive system in place, he'd still be the most dominant defensive presence in the league.

Andrew Han, Clipper Blog: Howard, largely due to the fact that, when healthy, he is still the best center in the league, a noted position of dearth. Additionally, Howard's free-agency inclinations have been a bit more nebulous as he completes a rocky season with the Lakers, whereas Chris Paul has given positive indications that he'd like to remain in "the other Los Angeles."

James Herbert, HoopSpeak: Howard, though I'm as excited about this pick as I'd be about picking out a new doorknob. Paul's been more impactful in L.A. by miles and miles, but they're both the class of their respective positions when healthy and finding a star at center is much more difficult than at point guard.

Jack Winter, Warriors World: Paul. When healthy, happy and motivated, Howard can be the second-most valuable player in the NBA. But back injuries are notoriously fickle, and Howard hasn't exactly quelled growing notions that he's something of an off-court cancer. Paul, on the other hand, is a model teammate and fierce competitor. He's not averse to future injury concerns, either, but his perfect disposition wins out here.

Danny Nowell, Portland Roundball: Howard. Considering Dwight's back problems, and the fact that Paul is currently the more valuable, this is not an easy call. But as Howard rounds into form, this is a question of the game's best center at age 28 versus a 6-foot point guard with a history of knee trouble. I'll take Dwight, by a nose.

2. Andre Iguodala or Josh Smith: Which '13 free agent is more valuable?

Gutierrez: Smith. If I had to pick a player to win with in 2013-14, I'd take Iguodala. But if I was signing one to a multiyear deal, I'm taking Smith and crossing my fingers. He just offers a tiny bit more all-around, and is two years younger. Iguodala would be silly to bypass $16 million next season when he won't get close to that annually in free agency.

Han: Iguodala. Both are magnificent defenders and superb athletes, but the edge goes to Iguodala as he is a slightly more complete player on offense. And again, Iguodala can play a position that lacks elite-level depth in the league, shooting guard. Andre gets the nod.

Herbert: Smith. While both are proven defensive forces, Smith is younger. This is crucial because it just takes one team to think he has some untapped potential in him to warrant something close to a max deal.

Winter: Iguodala, but it's all about context with these guys. If Smith lands in a place with a respected coach and a cemented system that can help mask his many deficiencies, he could be a true impact player on both ends of the floor. But that's a big if, and one that makes Iguodala's two-way talents and far superior self-awareness more valuable in a vacuum.

Nowell: Smith. Again, this is an extremely narrow margin, and I love Iguodala, but Josh is slightly more valuable. These days, a defender close to the basket is worth more than one on the perimeter, and Smith has the power to lift a team defense the way Iguodala doesn't quite.

3. Andrew Bynum or Al Jefferson: Which '13 free agent is more valuable?

Gutierrez: Jefferson. What can you honestly expect out of Bynum, other than a certain controversy and some potential for wig sales? Jefferson has yet to elevate a team despite impressive numbers, but toss in 17 and 9 in the right system, and Jefferson could finally be an impact player on a very good team. Bynum could be the centerpiece of a good team. Or he could be a sideshow on crutches.

Han: Jefferson, even though Andrew Bynum is the better player. Bynum can absolutely be a franchise cornerstone, but carries the dreaded "if healthy" tag. And with his health concerns, his value is cloudy at best. Jefferson is a known quantity that is, in relation, quite reliable.

Herbert: Bynum. It feels forever ago now, but pre-injury Bynum was on his way to being a franchise-caliber center. Those almost never come along. Jefferson, while very skilled and certainly more reliable than Bynum, possesses defensive flaws that prevent him from being seen the same way.

Winter: Bynum. Despite his unique, old-school offensive talents as a true low post threat, Jefferson's net impact is still something close to zero. Bynum, though, presents tremendous influence on both ends as a space-eater with soft touch and great hands. Seriously alarming injury history notwithstanding, that makes him the better commodity.

Nowell: Bynum. This could blow up in my face, but if Bynum gets healthy, he's a two-way talent Jefferson can't match. Of course, if Bynum's knees never repair themselves, Jefferson is better then by default, but Bynum could still anchor a team; Jefferson is more ballast than anchor.

4. Monta Ellis or Brandon Jennings: Which '13 free agent is more valuable?

Gutierrez: Jennings. At 23, he's four years younger than Ellis, with more potential to play like a true point guard. He's a slightly better distributor, and a more consistent 3-point shooter, even if it's not all that consistent. Besides, we've seen Ellis in a couple of different settings. We've only seen Jennings as a Buck. He could very well emerge into an All-Star elsewhere.

Han: Jennings. If the last pairing was about taking the more reliable entity, this is definitely about potential. Jennings is only 23 years old compared to Ellis' 28. And this year they have nearly identical PER (16.01 v. Ellis' 16.17). Youth wins out.

Herbert: Jennings. Both are similar players in that they can put up plenty of points but too often do so inefficiently. When they put emphasis on passing and select better shots, their value goes way up. Youth wins the day here -- Jennings is four years younger and it's easier to imagine a new situation bringing out the best in him.

Winter: Jennings, but be wary of both. By now we know exactly what Ellis is; he'd be best served in a reserve role. The question now is whether he gets the chance to prove it. Jennings, meanwhile, may still have room to improve and has recently shown a pass-first penchant. If his contract isn't outlandish he could be a steal. But if a team overpays as history suggests is likely, Jennings' salary could doom a franchise.

Nowell: Jennings. Not wild about either player here, but if one or the other must lead your offense, you take the one with the slightly better passing instincts. That's Jennings, and he's just slightly less likely to shoot his team out of a game.

5. O.J. Mayo, Tyreke Evans or J.J. Re$#@!: Which '13 free agent is more valuable?

Gutierrez: Evans. Only because he still seems to have the most potential of these three. Granted, you'd prefer that Evans were more suited to play off the ball as a scorer, rather than a ball-dominating point guard, which he was as a rookie. But if a team is willing to hand him the ball, he'd have a bigger impact than either Mayo or Re$#@!.

Han: Mayo. All three provide tantalizing skills, but Mayo offers the best combination of shooting (Re$#@!) and slashing/finishing ability (Evans). Coupled with the defensive acumen developed from his Memphis days, Mayo figures to be the most versatile of the three, and the most valuable.

Herbert: Evans. He's the only one of the three who still has serious star potential. He's also the riskiest choice, and at this point it's sort of difficult to even picture him playing on a good team. It almost feels unfair, the least polished player holding the most value. But everyone still remembers that rookie season, and promise has a price.

Winter: Re$#@!. Evans is a serious question mark, a talented player without a true position. Mayo's had a very good season for Dallas, but has hardly been dependable. Re$#@! remains a consistent, rock-solid piece on both ends, and deserves the opportunity to play for a winner. Sure, things matter when major money is involved, so he's this trio's best bet.

Nowell: Evans. I love the season O.J. has put together, and there are few bigger fans of Re$#@!'s dedicated reinvention than I, but Evans is the only one of these players who has the talent to swing a franchise. He's a reclamation project, but could still be a first-rate player in the right situation.

[moofs]

Just saw this in a Grantland article.

Carlos Delfino, forward, Houston Rockets

Houston signing Delfino to a two-year, $6 million deal7 barely registered, even though Delfino is a heady player with a proven 3-point stroke. Age had sapped Delfino of quickness toward the end of his time in Milwaukee, making it difficult for him to defend both wing positions seamlessly — once a key chunk of his value. Houston appeared to be adding a nice spot-up shooter, good locker-room guy, and bit player to a team overcrowded with tweener power forward types.

Nope. Delfino is logging a solid 25 minutes per game as both a backup wing player and a key part of Houston's prolific small-ball lineups. Delfino is bulkier than Chandler Parsons, so he usually takes on the burden of defending power forwards when Houston goes small, and the Rockets have allowed him to do more on offense than just spot up; he has permission to work as a secondary pick-and-roll ball handler, and to drive-and-kick when defenders close out on him.

But he's still shooting a ton — a whopping 8.9 3s per 36 minutes. That would be the largest figure ever for any player who logged at least 1,500 minutes in a season. Only George McCloud and Michael Adams, both famous chuckers, have ever cracked the 8.5 mark; Antoine Walker only got above seven triples per 36 minutes in one season!

The first two paragraphs get mentioned during broadcasts all the time, but somehow, I wasn't aware of the last bit.

[Guy986]

I dont know about you but everytime i see Delfino turn down a 3 point shot(be it covered or open) i'm surprised.

The dude has no conscience.

[Viatical]

The man knows who he is and knows his role on the team. That said, any time a player has surpassed even Antoine Walker in chucking stats, it might be time to scale things back a bit...

[madbucky]

The man knows who he is and knows his role on the team. That said, any time a player has surpassed even Antoine Walker in chucking stats, it might be time to scale things back a bit...

LOL

[inquisitive]

The man knows who he is and knows his role on the team. That said, any time a player has surpassed even Antoine Walker in chucking stats, it might be time to scale things back a bit...

he has scaled back a bit the past two games...

[inquisitive]

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/ ... as-houston

Does Dwight Fit In Houston?
Pros and cons of potential free agent heading to Rockets, Mavs or Hawks
By Chris Broussard


With Jeremy Lin and the Rockets, Dwight Howard could find more room to operate.
A few weeks ago, I wrote that Dwight Howard should re-sign a long-term contract with the Los Angeles Lakers this summer. I believe it would be good for his suffering image, a sign that he's decided to take responsibility for winning rather than blaming his coaches and teammates. And of course, who in the world leaves the Lakers?

That said, I wouldn't blame Howard for exiting after one year in SoCal. After all, playoffs or not, this season has been a disaster. If either Jerry -- Buss or West -- was still running the Lakers, Howard staying would be a no-brainer. But with Jim Buss (Mike D'Antoni over Phil Jackson?) in charge, there's no guarantee the Lakers' incomparable history of reloading with Usain Bolt-like quickness will continue.

Plus, there are some pretty attractive options elsewhere. Here are the pros and cons of his three main suitors outside of L.A.:

Why the Houston Rockets?

Pros: Some would argue that, strictly from a basketball standpoint, the Rockets are Howard's best option. You've got in place a second star in James Harden who averages 26 points on fewer than 17 shots a game. That would leave plenty of offensive action for Howard. To that end, Harden has already proved his ability to play with not only one superstar but two. During his time in Oklahoma City, he showed he's amenable to not only being a second option but even the third.

Besides Harden, under-the-radar small forward Chandler Parsons would also be a nice complement to Howard. Parsons' 38 percent shooting from 3-point range would spread the floor for Howard. And while he isn't star-caliber, you could do worse than Jeremy Lin at point guard. Insert Howard and the Rockets become instant Western Conference contenders, in my opinion. They would have a lot of the same qualities as Howard's Orlando Magic team that took out LeBron James' Cleveland Cavaliers to reach the Finals in 2009.

Harden has all the playmaking skills of Hedo Turkoglu, and Parsons can stretch the floor like Rashard Lewis. Plus, in Harden, the Rockets would have something the Magic did not: a legitimate second superstar. And with Howard, Houston would be free to trade double-double center Omer Asik, who would bring back a nice haul in a trade. Off the court, Houston not only meets the big-market specifications Howard has, but with its connection to Lin and Yao Ming, Howard's already-high popularity in China would only improve.

Cons: It's been widely stated that Houston will be able to offer Howard a max contract, but according to salary-cap guru Larry Coon, that is not the case. Even by releasing their seven players with non-guaranteed contracts for next season, the Rockets can't max out Howard.

While he will be eligible to make $20,513,178 next season, the most Houston will be able to offer him is between $16.7-18.2 million, according to Coon. When coupled with the fact that the Rockets can only offer Howard a four-year deal versus the Lakers' five-year deal, that means Howard would have to leave a significant amount of money on the table to leave L.A. for Houston.

Why the Atlanta Hawks?
Pros: As good as things could be, basketball-wise, for Howard in Houston, they could be just as good in Atlanta. Unlike Houston and Dallas, the Hawks will be able to offer Howard a full max contract (for four years, of course; not five).

Howard and Horford would make an imposing frontcourt duo.
In Atlanta, he would team with Al Horford to form the best center-power forward combo in the league. Horford, who has made the All-Star Game as a center, would move to his natural position of power forward and his soft touch from the perimeter would mesh nicely with Howard.

While Josh Smith is ready to move on from the Hawks, with Howard in Atlanta, I'm betting Smith would change his mind. The Hawks would not be able to offer him the max, but perhaps Smith would take less to play with his childhood pal Howard. The same would have to be said of improving point guard Jeff Teague. With them, the Hawks could become the second-best team in the Eastern Conference behind Miami. Howard has always given the Heat nightmares, so perhaps the Heat would finally have a legitimate competitor in the East. With Howard, the Hawks would certainly want to find a way to keep Kyle Korver, who would be the much-needed sharpshooter an offense featuring Howard needs.

Cons: Lots of players don't want to play in their hometowns, and indications are Howard feels that way about returning to Atlanta. Though his relationship with his father, Dwight Sr., is not nearly as bad as reported (the two speak regularly and are not estranged from one another), Dwight Jr. has enjoyed being outside the shadow of his parents, who live in Atlanta.

To be honest, a people pleaser like Howard who finds it hard to say no to folks might run into all types of distractions in his hometown. If Chris Paul were to phone Howard and say "Let's team up in Atlanta," Howard would do it. But no matter how good the prospects in Atlanta are, it's probably a long shot that Howard goes home unless Paul is at his side.

Why the Dallas Mavericks?

Pros: Mark Cuban is a free-spending owner who will do what it takes to build a championship team. Even at 34 years old, Dirk Nowitzki is still a good scorer in the league, as evidenced by his 19 PPG average over the past two months. Put Howard in the middle in Dallas and Nowitzki would be even more dangerous.

And there would be no power struggle for "top gun" status in Dallas, as Nowitzki would gladly allow Howard to shine. Rick Carlisle is one of the top coaches in the league, and with Howard manning the paint, he would probably turn the Mavericks into a top-three defense in the NBA.

Cons: Even with Howard and Nowitzki, Dallas probably isn't a contender. Nowitzki will be 35 at the start of next season, and he's only got a short time left at a high level. Howard also would have to leave tons of money on the table to sign with the Mavs, who according to Coon will only be able to offer Howard between $13 and $14.5 million next season. All that being the case, there's little reason for Howard to sign with the Mavs.

[moofs]

While he will be eligible to make $20,513,178 next season, the most Houston will be able to offer him is between $16.7-18.2 million, according to Coon. When coupled with the fact that the Rockets can only offer Howard a four-year deal versus the Lakers' five-year deal, that means Howard would have to leave a significant amount of money on the table to leave L.A. for Houston.

Less significant than it might look, maybe.
California State Income Tax.
"For earnings over $1,000,000.00, you'll pay 10.30% plus $90,709.76"
$1,000,000 - $20,513,178 = $1,919,147.574
Federal Income Tax:
10% Up to $8,925 = 892.5
15% $8,926 - $36,250 = 4,098.6
25% $36,251 - $87,850 = 12,899.75
28% $87,851 - $183,250 = 26,711.72
33% $183,251 - $398,350 = 70,982.67
35% $398,351 - $400,000 = 577.15
Sum of Above = 892.5 + 4,098.6 + 12,899.75 + 26,711.72 + 70,982.67 + 577.15 = $116,162.39
39.6% $400,001 - ($20,513,178 - $1,919,147.57) = 7,204,835.65
So in California, Dwighty would take home $13,192,179.95

In Texiland, he'd take home
$16,700,000 - ($16,700,000 - $400,001) * .396 - $116,162.39 = 10,129,038.00
or
$18,200,000 - ($16,700,000 - $400,001) * .396 - $116,162.39 = 11,629,038.00

Potentially, that's $1,563,141.95 after taxes.
Definitely not chump change, but it's not that huge.

[texasholdem]

Was reading about the no state tax benefit on another forum.
I don't know if this is true but
They claim that players pay income tax depending in the state where the game is actually played

So they would have no state income tax on games played
41 in Houston
2 in Dallas
2 in San Antonio
1 in Orlando
1 in Miami
So only 47 of the 82 games would be non taxable.
Maybe 48 with 1 game @ Toronto?
Maybe 49 if Kings move to Washington State.

So would the Rockets player have to file a return in each state?
Say 7 or 8 games in California
2 games in New York State
1 game in District of Columbia (which does have a state tax despite not being a state)
1 game in Michigan
1 game in Illinois
1 game in Indiana
1 game in North Carolina.
about 35 games played in states with an income tax.

[moofs]

Ok, that would suck some serious ass, and definitely throw a wrench in my calculations, but I suppose they don't file their taxes themselves anyways.

I don't see the benefit to that, really. From the states' perspective.

[madbucky]

Was reading about the no state tax benefit on another forum.
I don't know if this is true but
They claim that players pay income tax depending in the state where the game is actually played
So would the Rockets player have to file a return in each state?

Yes, it's true that athletes pay state tax in the state where the game is actually played. So athletes (or rather, their accountants) have to file taxes in many states.
http://www.bankrate.com/finance/taxes/t ... hlete.aspx

The bigger benefit of living in a non-income tax state is that all your endorsements are tax-free, so for athletes that have endorsements as a significant chunk of their income, that's huge.

[Mr. E]

Go ahead and throw the Memphis road games in there as well as Tennessee doesn't collect the "jock tax."

The three Texas teams hold a significant advantage on the tax front.

[Viatical]

:o

Ok, that would suck some serious ass, and definitely throw a wrench in my calculations, but I suppose they don't file their taxes themselves anyways.

I don't see the benefit to that, really. From the states' perspective.

Your math is a little funky, but I for one really appreciate the effort you've put into it.

The best way I can express the benefit of playing for the Rockets instead of the Lakers is this:

1. The state income tax rate of the state in which the game is played is what is used, across the full season schedule.

2. This means that for at least half of the games, 42 games, all home games in Texas, that Dwight would play as a Rocket, he would pay nothing in state income taxes. There is also some benefit to being in the Southwest Division, because it means that more road games are played in the season against division rivals the Mavs and Spurs, two other Texas teams where no tax would be paid. Things are further complicated by the fact that no taxes are paid on away games in Florida against the Heat and Magic, but that gets us even further off track. Anyway, it's safe to estimate the savings at about half of his income: All Rockets home games. If he played as a Laker, all of those Laker home games would be taxed. But as a Rocket? No. Simple.

3. In general terms, this means that across the life of a 4-year, $87 million free agency contract with the Rockets, Dwight Howard would stand to save roughly $4.3 million total against the 10% California tax rate on highest earners. (half of 87 million is 43 1/2, 10% of that is 4.3). Not chump change, but not Difference Making for somebody who is already a multimillionaire, either.

4. The above poster is correct to point out that it's all ancillary income from endorsements, being state income tax free, that is the bigger get. That is a huge deal. However, even then, it would have to be weighed against the lost opportunities to get more generous or more numerous endorsements while playing in a larger market.

The issue with a potential Lakers' 5-year deal over a Rockets 4-year deal isn't just the added year on the deal, it's the more aggressive (7.5%) raises that the Lakers would be allowed to incorporate into the longer deal, compared to 4.5% a year raises if he signed with Houston. It would put the final value of a Lakers 5-year deal at something in the $117 million+ range, or about $30 million more than what the Rockets could offer. In other words, it would be an even richer contract than just what you'd get by tacking on another year to it, the end. Every year after the base year, the Lakers would be allowed to pay him more. And more. And more. It's not the same deal even across a 4 year span, unfortunately.

In the end, it's probably just going to be too much money for Howard to say no to.

[texasholdem]

Go ahead and throw the Memphis road games in there as well as Tennessee doesn't collect the "jock tax."

The three Texas teams hold a significant advantage on the tax front.

Tennessee does collect the jock tax on NBA and NHL players but not NFL players. The Oilers made an agreement not to tax their players or visiting NFL players.

This article was just written today about this topic.
http://wpln.org/?p=46583

Power Play to Lower Pro Athlete Tax Bills in Tennessee
Monday, April 08th, 2013, by Blake Farmer

Hockey players from all corners of the NHL have been hit by Tennessee’s so-called “jock tax,” one of the highest in the country. It effectively costs them $7,500 a year to take the ice in the state. But a power play is in the works to ban the state from the back pockets of professional athletes.

“It’s unfair,” Sen. Jack Johnson (R-Franklin) says of the privilege tax, which also includes NBA players. “It’s very narrow and targeted, and we just shouldn’t be doing that in the tax code.”

Johnson, who says he has constituents who play for the Nashville Predators, has sponsored a bill to repeal the tax on athletes. It was created in 2009 and charges both the home and away teams. As many as 18 states have similar taxes, though at lower rates.

The full weight of the NHL Players Association is behind the legislation. The union called out Tennessee’s privilege tax in the most recent contract and committed to getting the levy repealed.

The tax generates roughly $3.5 million a year, according to a fiscal review. The money is supposed to be used for recruiting events to arenas in Nashville and Memphis.

Johnson’s legislation has been approved by a tax subcommittee. The panel also considered a competing bill from Sen. Stacey Campfield (R-Knoxville).

He wants to lower the rate on NBA and NHL players, while also applying the tax to the National Football League. He asked fellow senators for their support, in what could be a tough sell.

“They are big,” he said. “And they are scary.”

[Zubby]

The income tax on top earners in California is now 13.3%...
Apparently a lot of athletes will look to move.
http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2013/01/30/federal-state-tax-hikes-could-send-athletes-migrating-to-tax-friendlier-states/

Washington DC also has no jock tax too, but the jock tax will be about the same for LAL/HOU so only really look at the 41 home games.

When I calculated it the difference from playing in Texas/Florida to California 1.33 million a year on 20 million a year.

[MaxRider]

The income tax on top earners in California is now 13.3%...
Apparently a lot of athletes will look to move.
http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2013/01/30/federal-state-tax-hikes-could-send-athletes-migrating-to-tax-friendlier-states/

Washington DC also has no jock tax too, but the jock tax will be about the same for LAL/HOU so only really look at the 41 home games.

When I calculated it the difference from playing in Texas/Florida to California 1.33 million a year on 20 million a year.

but you also get more opportunity for endorsement deal in LA compare to Houston, Dallas

[texasholdem]

Peyton Manning has probably the most endorsement deals of any athlete in the past decade and he played in Indiana and Colorado.

[MaxRider]

Peyton Manning has probably the most endorsement deals of any athlete in the past decade and he played in Indiana and Colorado.

i thought it was tiger woods
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/specia ... te50-2012/
FLOYD MAYWEATHER, JR is #1 but $0 endorsement
PHIL MICKELSON 57millions endorsement

anyway highest basketball players
LEBRON JAMES 33millions endorsement
KOBE BRYANT 26millions endorsement
DERRICK ROSE 18millions endorsement
KEVIN DURANT 12.5millions endorsement (you don't think he can double this number by playing in LA or NY?)
DWYANE WADE 12millions
DWIGHT HOWARD 11millions
CARMELO ANTHONY 10millions
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/specia ... index.html
in 2010 he played in denver and he got 6millions
you don't think playing in NY has anything to do with those 4 millions extra?
you can see amare stoudemire money jump up too from 2010 to 2012 and he hardly done anything in those 2 years

[Zubby]

Peyton Manning has probably the most endorsement deals of any athlete in the past decade and he played in Indiana and Colorado.

i thought it was tiger woods
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/specia ... te50-2012/
FLOYD MAYWEATHER, JR is #1 but $0 endorsement
PHIL MICKELSON 57millions endorsement

anyway highest basketball players
LEBRON JAMES 33millions endorsement
KOBE BRYANT 26millions endorsement
DERRICK ROSE 18millions endorsement
KEVIN DURANT 12.5millions endorsement (you don't think he can double this number by playing in LA or NY?)
DWYANE WADE 12millions
DWIGHT HOWARD 11millions
CARMELO ANTHONY 10millions
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/specia ... index.html
in 2010 he played in denver and he got 6millions
you don't think playing in NY has anything to do with those 4 millions extra?
you can see amare stoudemire money jump up too from 2010 to 2012 and he hardly done anything in those 2 years

Melo hurt his endorsement opportunity with the thug image he had in Denver... That video he was in with a drug deal going on.

Also those numbers are wrong Dwight lost endorsements when he went to LA, he is at 7 million now. McDonalds and someone else dropped him.

I'm sure Durant is much higher now... he is everywhere. Also at that time Wall/Jennings were high than Blake even though he got drafted in LA.