Bradley Beal

[barelyawake]

LeBron, Bosh and Wade all took pay cuts. Duncan and MJ took pay cuts to build contenders. Elton Brand went from the Clippers (who were one of the worst teams in the league) to go to a playoff team. Howard twice chose to go to teams he believed were contenders. I can't believe you possibly believe that stars don't consider a team's ability to win when selecting which team they go to in free agency. Is that seriously your position? Because that is nonsense.

[nate33]

LeBron, Bosh and Wade all took pay cuts. Duncan and MJ took pay cuts to build contenders. Elton Brand went from the Clippers (who were one of the worst teams in the league) to go to a playoff team. Howard twice chose to go to teams he believed were contenders. I can't believe you possibly believe that stars don't consider a team's ability to win when selecting which team they go to in free agency. Is that seriously your position? Because that is nonsense.

Sorry barelyawake, but I don't think your position is defensible.

Lebron, Bosh and Wade all took pay cuts to join Miami because they wanted to play together. It had nothing to do with Miami. The only players locked into Miami's roster that offseason were James Jones and Mario Chalmers. Clearly, it had little to do with the talent on the team they were joining, and everything to do with the fact that they wanted to play together.

And Duncan and MJ taking pay cuts is a different thing. Nobody is suggesting that star players on contending teams won't take pay cuts to help their team add more talent to remain in contention. The issue is will free agents sign with a new team at a discounted cost just because the team is half decent. The answer is no.

Whatever extra wins that Okafor provides will do nothing to help us add free agents.

[barelyawake]

Potentially lose Okafor for most, if not the entire year in '13'-14.

That sounds like a very big assumption. One I think is not based in any fact. And, of course, no one could have known that injury at the time. Okafor's injury normally takes 6 to 12 weeks to heal (when surgery is not needed).

[tontoz]

LeBron, Bosh and Wade all took pay cuts. Duncan and MJ took pay cuts to build contenders. Elton Brand went from the Clippers (who were one of the worst teams in the league) to go to a playoff team. Howard twice chose to go to teams he believed were contenders. I can't believe you possibly believe that stars don't consider a team's ability to win when selecting which team they go to in free agency. Is that seriously your position? Because that is nonsense.

Saying that "No star was coming to a non-playoff team to team with an untested Harden and Wall" is just flat dumb. If that was the case JJ wouldn't have left a title contender to go to the worst team in the league. Harden wouldn't have left a title contender to go to Houston who had turned over their roster completely.

Lebron still got a max deal. Miami paid as much as they could. No team can pay a team as much as their current team unless a SNT deal is worked out. And the superfriends were all on their 3rd contracts.

Harden and JJ both left title contenders to go to bad teams. They followed the money. Once a player has already signed a huge deal they are more more flexible on their next deal.

[barelyawake]

LeBron, Bosh and Wade all took pay cuts. Duncan and MJ took pay cuts to build contenders. Elton Brand went from the Clippers (who were one of the worst teams in the league) to go to a playoff team. Howard twice chose to go to teams he believed were contenders. I can't believe you possibly believe that stars don't consider a team's ability to win when selecting which team they go to in free agency. Is that seriously your position? Because that is nonsense.

Sorry barelyawake, but I don't think your position is defensible.

Lebron, Bosh and Wade all took pay cuts to join Miami because they wanted to play together. It had nothing to do with Miami. The only players locked into Miami's roster that offseason were James Jones and Mario Chalmers. Clearly, it had little to do with the talent on the team they were joining, and everything to do with the fact that they wanted to play together.

And Duncan and MJ taking pay cuts is a different thing. Nobody is suggesting that star players on contending teams won't take pay cuts to help their team add more talent to remain in contention. The issue is will free agents sign with a new team at a discounted cost just because the team is half decent. The answer is no.

Whatever extra wins that Okafor provides will do nothing to help us add free agents.

No the issue is do star players only go to where the money is. That was the contention. And obviously if that were the case, Howard would be in Orlando, KG would be in Minnesota, LeBron would be in Cleveland and Bosh would be on Toronto. The fact is stars DO factor in winning ability into their decisions. And to say they don't is nonsensical.

[barelyawake]

Hey tontoz, if you wanta get personal about this and start throwing around names, and I play the dozens all day you smug ass. The point was you said players only go where the money leads them. That is nonsense. Harden left because he felt disrespected and lied to. JJ is a stat hog who demanded a trade because he wanted a larger role. He is in no way a star big or IMO a star at all. He is a stat hog. Neither, btw, were considered superstars at the time.

Again, to say that players only go where the money is is nonsense. Then why do smaller market teams continually complain that they can't sign max free agents? When the money is close, stars go where they think their career will be helped best. That usually means a contending team. You wanta keep doing this or end it?

[tontoz]

LeBron, Bosh and Wade all took pay cuts. Duncan and MJ took pay cuts to build contenders. Elton Brand went from the Clippers (who were one of the worst teams in the league) to go to a playoff team. Howard twice chose to go to teams he believed were contenders. I can't believe you possibly believe that stars don't consider a team's ability to win when selecting which team they go to in free agency. Is that seriously your position? Because that is nonsense.

Sorry barelyawake, but I don't think your position is defensible.

Lebron, Bosh and Wade all took pay cuts to join Miami because they wanted to play together. It had nothing to do with Miami. The only players locked into Miami's roster that offseason were James Jones and Mario Chalmers. Clearly, it had little to do with the talent on the team they were joining, and everything to do with the fact that they wanted to play together.

And Duncan and MJ taking pay cuts is a different thing. Nobody is suggesting that star players on contending teams won't take pay cuts to help their team add more talent to remain in contention. The issue is will free agents sign with a new team at a discounted cost just because the team is half decent. The answer is no.

Whatever extra wins that Okafor provides will do nothing to help us add free agents.

No the issue is do star players only go to where the money is. That was the contention. And obviously if that were the case, Howard would be in Orlando, KG would be in Minnesota, LeBron would be in Cleveland and Bosh would be on Toronto. The fact is stars DO factor in winning ability into their decisions. And to say they don't is nonsensical.

I was not the one talking in absolutes. You were."No star was coming to a non-playoff team to team with an untested Harden and Wall". That was nonsense. There are plenty of examples of stars going to a worse team that was willing to pay them more money. Harden did exaxctly that. So did JJ.

[tontoz]

Hey tontoz, if you wanta get personal about this and start throwing around names, and I play the dozens all day you smug ass. The point was you said players only go where the money leads them. That is nonsense.

Feel free to post the quote you are referring to.

[barelyawake]

Sorry barelyawake, but I don't think your position is defensible.

Lebron, Bosh and Wade all took pay cuts to join Miami because they wanted to play together. It had nothing to do with Miami. The only players locked into Miami's roster that offseason were James Jones and Mario Chalmers. Clearly, it had little to do with the talent on the team they were joining, and everything to do with the fact that they wanted to play together.

And Duncan and MJ taking pay cuts is a different thing. Nobody is suggesting that star players on contending teams won't take pay cuts to help their team add more talent to remain in contention. The issue is will free agents sign with a new team at a discounted cost just because the team is half decent. The answer is no.

Whatever extra wins that Okafor provides will do nothing to help us add free agents.

No the issue is do star players only go to where the money is. That was the contention. And obviously if that were the case, Howard would be in Orlando, KG would be in Minnesota, LeBron would be in Cleveland and Bosh would be on Toronto. The fact is stars DO factor in winning ability into their decisions. And to say they don't is nonsensical.

I was not the one talking in absolutes. You were."No star was coming to a non-playoff team to team with an untested Harden and Wall". That was nonsense. There are plenty of examples of stars going to a worse team that was willing to pay them more money. Harden did exaxctly that. So did JJ.

And you said the exact opposite as an absolute. "Stars follow the money." What is the difference?

[tontoz]

No the issue is do star players only go to where the money is. That was the contention. And obviously if that were the case, Howard would be in Orlando, KG would be in Minnesota, LeBron would be in Cleveland and Bosh would be on Toronto. The fact is stars DO factor in winning ability into their decisions. And to say they don't is nonsensical.

I was not the one talking in absolutes. You were."No star was coming to a non-playoff team to team with an untested Harden and Wall". That was nonsense. There are plenty of examples of stars going to a worse team that was willing to pay them more money. Harden did exaxctly that. So did JJ.

And you said the exact opposite as an absolute. "Stars follow the money." What is the difference?

Where is the quote you are referring to? What was my exact post?

[barelyawake]

Hey tontoz, if you wanta get personal about this and start throwing around names, and I play the dozens all day you smug ass. The point was you said players only go where the money leads them. That is nonsense.

Feel free to post the quote you are referring to.

"Yet another assumption stated as a fact. You are really good at this. Players go to teams that are willing to pay them a lot of money. That is the way that works."

That's an absolute statement that is also absolutely wrong. Money is not the only factor.

[tontoz]

Hey tontoz, if you wanta get personal about this and start throwing around names, and I play the dozens all day you smug ass. The point was you said players only go where the money leads them. That is nonsense.

Feel free to post the quote you are referring to.

"Yet another assumption stated as a fact. You are really good at this. Players go to teams that are willing to pay them a lot of money. That is the way that works."

That's an absolute statement that is also absolutely wrong. Money is not the only factor.

So are you trying to say that Bosh/Lebron/Wade didn't sign for a lot of money in Miami?

[barelyawake]

No I'm saying that is not the only factor. In fact, that was not the main factor. The main factor was to win. Your point was money is the only factor. That is what you said. Are you now trying to alter that ridiculous position? Stars usually have several teams willing to pay them a lot of money. And from those teams, they select the team that best helps their career. THAT becomes the main reason for them picking a team.

[tontoz]

No I'm saying that is not the only factor. In fact, that was not the main factor. The main factor was to win. Your point was money is the only factor. That is what you said. Are you now trying to alter that ridiculous position?

Where did i say money was the only factor? I certainly didn't say it in the post you quoted.

For the record the superfriends are making a combined salary of over $56 million this season. I could certainly live with that kind of "sacrifice".

[barelyawake]

Right. So, now you change your absolute statement and qualify it (because as an absolute statement it is asinine). You are arguing to argue. As I said, I like where we are at. I like that the decisions that were made lead us here. You don't. Fine. No reason to show everybody your ass over it. I'm done with this.

[Dat2U]

Potentially lose Okafor for most, if not the entire year in '13'-14.

That sounds like a very big assumption. One I think is not based in any fact. And, of course, no one could have known that injury at the time. Okafor's injury normally takes 6 to 12 weeks to heal (when surgery is not needed).

Any suggestion that there's a timetable for his return isn't based in fact either. Even Okafor doesn't know when he's coming back. Reading the tea leaves regarding the initial reports of the injury (no retirement planned, hopes to return this year) seems to indicate that this injury is rather serious and beyond a typical 6-12 week scenario.

[tontoz]

Right. So, now you change your absolute statement and qualify it (because as an absolute statement it is asinine). You are arguing to argue. As I said, I like where we are at. I like that the decisions that were made lead us here. You don't. Fine. No reason to show everybody your ass over it. I'm done with this.

How exactly am i changing my statement? The reality is that you made up a strawman or you just lack basic reading comprehension. I never said money was the only factor. I also love the irony of you saying an absolute statement is asinine since you have made one absolute statement after another.

When you are signing for over $15 million/yr, and have already made over $50 million, it isn't hard to give up 1 or 2 million per year in order to play on a winner. They probably figured they could make up that money in endorsements by being on a title team.

My actual point, which obviously flew over your head, is that players aren't automatically going to exclude bad teams from consideration. If bad teams are willing to pay a lot of money then players will definitely consider them. See Harden to Houston, JJ to the Hawks, Amare to NY, Arenas to the Wizards, and on and on.

[Nivek]

When the money is "about the same," stars will choose their team based on an array of non-salary factors -- the ability to win being chief among them. But the money comes first. For example, if Miami had offered Lebron the league minimum, he'd have re-signed with Cleveland or gone to the Nets. Same if they'd offered the BAE or the MLE or some other low-ball number.

Money isn't the only consideration, but it's at the top of the list.

Which leads me to repeat my whine about the league's maximum salary rules, which I hate. For a star player, the money is about the same wherever he goes. So, he picks his team based on "other stuff" like perceived readiness to win, weather, franchise prestige, size of the city, proximity of the beach, quality of the women, number of strip clubs per capita -- whatever.

Plus, it skews the "power" relationship between the team and the star player. The team basically has to pander to the player via non-salary "benefits" to recruit the player. And they have to be careful not to demand too much or the player can pull the kind of manure Dwight Howard did and force the team into a bad trade, or just walk. Because, if the player is perceived as a star, he's going to get basically the same money wherever he goes.

I'd rather have a system with a hard cap set at the luxury tax threshold and then have no maximum salary rules and no exceptions. Lebron might go to Miami for $2-3 million less, but what if Cleveland is offering $30 million? Now the Heat have to choose which of the SuperFriends they really want -- because they can't afford all three.

In addition, my system presents a very real possibility that teams could pursue strategies for building a contender besides hoping to land a top 5 player in the league. Say a team tries to go the SuperFriends route and signs Lebron and Wade for $55 million. That's cool, but then they'd have $16.8 million to fill out the rest of the roster. Meanwhile, another team could spread their dollars around -- avoid paying a huge salary to one or two guys, but instead collect a team with deeper overall talent. Could be interesting.

All of that's a digression from the topic at hand. The primary factor in free agency is money. Players will follow the money until it's about the same. At that point, other factors (like winning) enter the decision.

[barelyawake]

What you said was an absolute statement. Whether you meant otherwise is not the point. It is highly ambitious to think that a star big would have looked at a team with our track record and decided to sign here for the money (without ever making the playoffs) touting a Wall who wasn't living up to his number one selection and a sixth man (who hadn't risen to stardom) in Harden, and a bunch of scrubs. Our chances are much greater attracting free agents as a playoff team with Wall signed long term (and healthy and producing All Star numbers), Beal (signed for 5 million), Porter (signed for five million), and a wealth of expiring contracts. It is also more likely that a player demanding a trade will see a future in such a team. That is my opinion. If you disagree, I could care less.

[barelyawake]

"When the money is "about the same," stars will choose their team based on an array of non-salary factors -- the ability to win being chief among them. But the money comes first. For example, if Miami had offered Lebron the league minimum, he'd have re-signed with Cleveland or gone to the Nets. Same if they'd offered the BAE or the MLE or some other low-ball number."

Conversely, there were many teams willing to offer LeBron the money, and he opted to take less to be with a winning team. There is always more than one team willing to offer money to a star player. And so, the decision doesn't come down to money.