ESPN's take on it
- Thread starter chemdude1232
- Start date
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
I'll bet the anonymous WC team official is from Portland just trying to stir us up. Blazers have tried to screw Utah the last couple of seasons and have had KOC-envy ever since the brilliant trade he made to move up and get Deron. KOC stole Deron, matched for Millsap and let the Blazers have a good player at an absolutely horrible price. Jazz 3 Portland 0!
Hitman
Well-Known Member
It's a good theory. I have heard that Pritchard had a rep for spreading destabilising rumors like this (e.g the alleged three-way trade discussions last year with the Blazers and Bulls involving Boozer and Hinrich and I forget who else, which was news to both the Chicago and Utah front offices), but perhaps it is the standard M.O. for the organisation.
Another rule that could become part of the new CBA in is the franchise player rule (which apparently NFL has but I don't follow it so don't really know how it works.. can someone fill me in?).
Apparently this rule would make it possible for a team to choose 1 player to be the franchise player which would solve this issue quite easily.
I'm sure most if not all of the owners will be in favour of it - winning teams with good players would want to keep their star and losing teams can keep their lottery picks forever.
Just hope this rule comes in before 2012 and we'll be sweet as!
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
And remember their posturing and threatening a lawsuit if/when another teamed signed Darius Miles. Grizz almost made up for the Gasol trade when they told Portland to go pound sand and signed him anyway.
was it pritchard tho? same stuff seems to still be going down
I'm starting to wonder if ESPN themselves are starting to make up this crap just to get the conversation of "some great player isn't playing for a major market and isn't happy about it for some reason" started and to stir up a story to increase viewership. It's not the craziest thing to imagine, this isn't exactly a real news organization or anything.
I believe you have to offer some sort of near-maximum contract, but it's been years since I read up on the rule. I can see the players union agreeing to the franchise tag being an offer of a maximum contract with a maximum percentage as a signing bonus, in exchange for other concessions.
billyshelby
Well-Known Member
I think the Franchise would be pretty difficult to implement in the NBA, or it would at least have to be significantly modified to work. Forgetting the particularities, the Franchise Tag in the NFL allows a team to retain a UFA for one year at the average of the Top 5 salaries at his position. But NFL contracts are largely not guaranteed. So 'Franchise' players are losing substantially less money even with signing bonuses (and how they prorate to make it harder for teams to cut them.) In the NBA, forcing, say, Lebron to a Franchise Tag under the same provisions costs him 80 million dollars up front. And you'd theoretically get to keep Lebron on one year contracts for the rest of his career. If the Players Association signed off on this they'd be killed by ninjas. As long as NBA contracts are guaranteed, Franchise Tags would be very difficult to make work.
Fishsticks
Banned
This is also my belief. They made a bundle off this offseason. Why not try to make every summer the off season of superstar movement regardless of truth.
shadler
Well-Known Member
If they don't solve it now markets like the jazz,n.o., denver, cleveland, toronto and all the other smaller markets will never win a title. The new age nba player is all about themself and this summer has done nothing but prove it. I am pretty sure that most owners would want it, because most owners have not won a ring will want a cap. The funny thing is that as you see all these big markets get these players that they don't know it is going to back fire on the players one day. You think L.A won all those rings by chance or do you think it is because of the market? Feels more like a bcs system going around.