DanH wrote:
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Everything Derozan
Collapse
X
-
Wild-ling#1 wrote: View PostAssuming there's no limit to how much "over the cap" management is prepared to be, right? Otherwise, the DeMar numbers might matter?
Would you take a pay cut to play with the player you want to play with? Sure. Would you take a pay cut to get the owners more money in spite of it not affecting your ability to play with that other player? Not a chance.
Comment
-
-
CB4Champ wrote: View PostOne thing that pisses me about TORONTO Raptors is that The TEAM FINALLY GOOD THEN THE ORGANIZATION RAISES THE PRICES SO THE REGULAR FANS CAN'T AFFORD THE TICKETS
AND THEN THE SUITS GO TO THE GAME AND DRINK THERE TEA AND CRUMPETS!!!
Comment
-
CB4Champ wrote: View PostOne thing that pisses me about TORONTO Raptors is that The TEAM FINALLY GOOD THEN THE ORGANIZATION RAISES THE PRICES SO THE REGULAR FANS CAN'T AFFORD THE TICKETS
AND THEN THE SUITS GO TO THE GAME AND DRINK THERE TEA AND CRUMPETS!!!
Comment
-
http://www.basketball-reference.com/...shooting/2016/
Not sure what to make of it, but looking at shooting by scoring margin, DeMar shoots his worst percentages when the game is close.twitter.com/anthonysmdoyle
Comment
-
Barolt wrote: View Posthttp://www.basketball-reference.com/...shooting/2016/
Not sure what to make of it, but looking at shooting by scoring margin, DeMar shoots his worst percentages when the game is close.
Anyway, DeMar's been shooting very well this month. 46% from the field (and that's with his % at the rim being much lower than his career average).
Comment
-
DanH wrote: View PostIt's no business of the players if the owners are cheapskates. And if they are, they won't be getting both DD and KD. Period.
Would you take a pay cut to play with the player you want to play with? Sure. Would you take a pay cut to get the owners more money in spite of it not affecting your ability to play with that other player? Not a chance.
Comment
-
Wild-ling#1 wrote: View PostDoesn't this scenario assume an ownership indifferent to profit and loss - an ownership that ought to go into the luxury tax to acquire a player (eventually incurring heavy disincentive penalties) without expecting the players to participate financially?
Comment
-
Wild-ling#1 wrote: View PostDoesn't this scenario assume an ownership indifferent to profit and loss - an ownership that ought to go into the luxury tax to acquire a player (eventually incurring heavy disincentive penalties) without expecting the players to participate financially?
Saying to players "Ok we need you to take a paycut so we can get all of you stars on one team" (Pat Riley to LBJ, Wade and Bosh) is very different from saying "We need you to take a paycut so we don't have to pay luxury tax".
One is necessary for the players to make the team better. The other has the sole purpose of lining the owners' pockets and doesn't benefit the players in any way.
Players don't give two fucks if owners are paying luxury tax or not. And why should they? The owners are like 100-1000 times more wealthy than they are. If you want a player to take a paycut there better be a very good basketball reason for why they're doing that. "Wahh wahhh wahh, I'm gonna lose money" isn't one.Last edited by JWash; Fri Dec 18, 2015, 01:05 PM.
Comment
-
JWash wrote: View PostWe're talking about two VERY different conversations here.
Saying to players "Ok we need you to take a paycut so we can get all of you stars on one team" (Pat Riley to LBJ, Wade and Bosh) is very different from saying "We need you to take a paycut so we don't have to pay luxury tax".
One is necessary for the players to make the team better. The other has the sole purpose of lining the owners' pockets and doesn't benefit the players in any way.
Players don't give two fucks if owners are paying luxury tax or not. And why should they? The owners are like 100-1000 times more wealthy than they are. If you want a player to take a paycut there better be a very good basketball reason for why they're doing that. "Wahh wahhh wahh, I'm gonna lose money" isn't one.
... Which is why we might prefer billionaire owners ... oddly ...
Comment
-
Wild-ling#1 wrote: View PostA corporation is entitled to decide to show a profit on their franchise each year - so you'd need to know those numbers to say what you've just said (even if the equity value of the franchise grows significantly), I think.
... Which is why we might prefer billionaire owners ... oddly ...
Comment
-
Wild-ling#1 wrote: View PostA corporation is entitled to decide to show a profit on their franchise each year - so you'd need to know those numbers to say what you've just said (even if the equity value of the franchise grows significantly), I think.
... Which is why we might prefer billionaire owners ... oddly ..."My biggest concern as a coach is to not confuse winning with progress." - Steve Kerr
"If it's unacceptable in defeat, it's unacceptable in victory." - Jeff Van Gundy
Comment
Comment