I found his DX profile from 2011 Probably not very helpful at all, although they had nice things to say at the time:
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/William-Howard-6127/
Moderators: Andre Roberstan, HartfordWhalers, BullyKing, Texas Chuck, MoneyTalks41890, Mamba4Goat, pacers33granger, Trader_Joe, loserX
amcoolio wrote:Probably because Rozier will average 18/8/5 if he has his worst season and is also a plus defender. I think you all are underestimating the green light Rozier is about to have
If he won't waive his 2021 P.O., I don't there will be a market for him until next summer.BadWolf wrote:No word on cp3 last couple days.
BadWolf wrote:No word on cp3 last couple days.
jbk1234 wrote:If he won't waive his 2021 P.O., I don't there will be a market for him until next summer.BadWolf wrote:No word on cp3 last couple days.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app
Balkman32 wrote:jbk1234 wrote:If he won't waive his 2021 P.O., I don't there will be a market for him until next summer.BadWolf wrote:No word on cp3 last couple days.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app
As the players union president I don't think its a good look to give back $44 million on a deal when you are going to be 36 years old.
But, stranger things have happened. I wouldn't hold my breath on him terminating his player option.
Yeah, NBCsports has an article up about how the majority of players are none to happy about the max and supermax deals eating up all the cap space.LofJ wrote:Balkman32 wrote:jbk1234 wrote:If he won't waive his 2021 P.O., I don't there will be a market for him until next summer.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app
As the players union president I don't think its a good look to give back $44 million on a deal when you are going to be 36 years old.
But, stranger things have happened. I wouldn't hold my breath on him terminating his player option.
That $44 million won't disappear, most of it will be spent on different players. Most union members that aren't max contract players will be in favor of him doing that.
LofJ wrote:Balkman32 wrote:jbk1234 wrote:If he won't waive his 2021 P.O., I don't there will be a market for him until next summer.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app
As the players union president I don't think its a good look to give back $44 million on a deal when you are going to be 36 years old.
But, stranger things have happened. I wouldn't hold my breath on him terminating his player option.
That $44 million won't disappear, most of it will be spent on different players. Most union members that aren't max contract players will be in favor of him doing that.
LofJ wrote:Balkman32 wrote:jbk1234 wrote:If he won't waive his 2021 P.O., I don't there will be a market for him until next summer.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app
As the players union president I don't think its a good look to give back $44 million on a deal when you are going to be 36 years old.
But, stranger things have happened. I wouldn't hold my breath on him terminating his player option.
That $44 million won't disappear, most of it will be spent on different players. Most union members that aren't max contract players will be in favor of him doing that.
SO_MONEY wrote:LofJ wrote:Balkman32 wrote:
As the players union president I don't think its a good look to give back $44 million on a deal when you are going to be 36 years old.
But, stranger things have happened. I wouldn't hold my breath on him terminating his player option.
That $44 million won't disappear, most of it will be spent on different players. Most union members that aren't max contract players will be in favor of him doing that.
Sadly, if you have ever held a union job, you would come to understand they are there to protect the weaker workers who have seniority, so protecting an aging player who makes a ton of money falls right in line with its agenda. The Union's agenda is not to help out the young or stronger worker, they have to put their time in for them to be valued in the same way.
While on a fundamental level I agree with you, that more deserving players would get the money, no union ever has been in favor of strictly merit pay. It runs counter to why they see themselves to exist regardless of how non-senior members feel or how it might benefit them.
SO_MONEY wrote:LofJ wrote:Balkman32 wrote:
As the players union president I don't think its a good look to give back $44 million on a deal when you are going to be 36 years old.
But, stranger things have happened. I wouldn't hold my breath on him terminating his player option.
That $44 million won't disappear, most of it will be spent on different players. Most union members that aren't max contract players will be in favor of him doing that.
Sadly, if you have ever held a union job, you would come to understand they are there to protect the weaker workers who have seniority, so protecting an aging player who makes a ton of money falls right in line with its agenda. The Union's agenda is not to help out the young or stronger worker, they have to put their time in for them to be valued in the same way.
While on a fundamental level I agree with you, that more deserving players would get the money, no union ever has been in favor of strictly merit pay. It runs counter to why they see themselves to exist regardless of how non-senior members feel or how it might benefit them.
Wasabi_Johnson wrote:SO_MONEY wrote:LofJ wrote:
That $44 million won't disappear, most of it will be spent on different players. Most union members that aren't max contract players will be in favor of him doing that.
Sadly, if you have ever held a union job, you would come to understand they are there to protect the weaker workers who have seniority, so protecting an aging player who makes a ton of money falls right in line with its agenda. The Union's agenda is not to help out the young or stronger worker, they have to put their time in for them to be valued in the same way.
While on a fundamental level I agree with you, that more deserving players would get the money, no union ever has been in favor of strictly merit pay. It runs counter to why they see themselves to exist regardless of how non-senior members feel or how it might benefit them.
Think basketball Union is slightly different. Their focus has been getting the middle class paid at least for the last two decades. I could see Paul giving up money as filling both the seniority and middle class agenda.
HartfordWhalers wrote:Wasabi_Johnson wrote:SO_MONEY wrote:
Sadly, if you have ever held a union job, you would come to understand they are there to protect the weaker workers who have seniority, so protecting an aging player who makes a ton of money falls right in line with its agenda. The Union's agenda is not to help out the young or stronger worker, they have to put their time in for them to be valued in the same way.
While on a fundamental level I agree with you, that more deserving players would get the money, no union ever has been in favor of strictly merit pay. It runs counter to why they see themselves to exist regardless of how non-senior members feel or how it might benefit them.
Think basketball Union is slightly different. Their focus has been getting the middle class paid at least for the last two decades. I could see Paul giving up money as filling both the seniority and middle class agenda.
I don't agree with that at all.
Wasabi_Johnson wrote:HartfordWhalers wrote:Wasabi_Johnson wrote:Think basketball Union is slightly different. Their focus has been getting the middle class paid at least for the last two decades. I could see Paul giving up money as filling both the seniority and middle class agenda.
I don't agree with that at all.
That why they have max contracts.
Wasabi_Johnson wrote:HartfordWhalers wrote:Wasabi_Johnson wrote:Think basketball Union is slightly different. Their focus has been getting the middle class paid at least for the last two decades. I could see Paul giving up money as filling both the seniority and middle class agenda.
I don't agree with that at all.
That why they have max contracts.
tsherkin wrote:Locked due to absence of adult conversation.
penbeast0 wrote:Guys, if you don't have anything to say, don't post.
E-Balla wrote:LeBron is Jeff George.
G35 wrote:Lebron is not that far off from WB in trade value.
HartfordWhalers wrote:Wasabi_Johnson wrote:HartfordWhalers wrote:
I don't agree with that at all.
That why they have max contracts.
Is it? I actually have a lot to say on that, but accepting the premise for now...
Max contracts have been increasing (supermax, designated max, moving to a full 25/30/35% versus the complicated percentage that was different than that, which was a 9 percent increase across the board if I recall.
MLE has been decreasing.
I would argue that the union has most looked after the star players, and be able to cite the contract stats above as evidence even if the personalities weren't clearly having a star bias, which they have had.
NYSixersFan wrote:
the plan is to get as good as quickly as possible....I fully believe we could have been a borderline playoff team last year by adding young veterans....using or draft picks and cap space.....can I specifically tell you who? no.
NYSixersFan wrote:
the plan is to get as good as quickly as possible....I fully believe we could have been a borderline playoff team last year by adding young veterans....using or draft picks and cap space.....can I specifically tell you who? no.
Return to Trades and Transactions