If you were a NBA Superstar

[~LikeWater~]

here is maybe one thing you guys all know but don't take into account on why players want $$$$$$$... most of the players in the NBA have leeches on them. their friends, families, posies... even people they don't know benefit from them.

I can understand earning money for ur family becuz of all their sacrifices and stuff, maybe ur friends to, but nothing else. Also I would understand needing the money for security, but man, you dont need 20Mil a year plus endorsements for that. Its overkill.

[Matt]

at some point near the end of my career i would be willing to drop all the way down to league min with my current team if we were 1 player away from being a championship contender.

problem is, by then you most likely woulndt be a superstar anymore.

[Christopherson]

Problem is, most of those guys still want to get paid like a susperstar, even though they are a shadow of thier former self.

[Indy]

I remenber back in the 90's MJ was getting paid 2-3.8 millions for the most part of his career. Did he do that in purpose sacrifying his own salary which allowed the Bulls to get good players thru the free agency?

MJ made over 30 million a year for his last few seasons with the Bulls.

He made 65 million dollars in 2 years simply from his NBA contract. Also made hundreds of millions from endorsements.

While you are correct that his salary was low compared to today's standards for much of his career, he is partially responsible for player salaries being so high these due to his massive contract late in the 90s.

[LakersRule24]

I remenber back in the 90's MJ was getting paid 2-3.8 millions for the most part of his career. Did he do that in purpose sacrifying his own salary which allowed the Bulls to get good players thru the free agency?

Anyways, if you were a superstar would you sacrifice your own salary and won't demand a max by the end of your rookie contract?

If it were me and I knew my team was struggling I think i would and by doing so it'll allow my team to get better players out of the free agency.

I give u some example: KG is getting paid 21 millions, Shaq's 20 millions, Kobe's 17.7 millions so on and so forth. Well how do u expect your team to get good players if your salary is like 30% of the team salary?

I give you a better example: Lebron James almost 100 millions endorsement contract with Nike and who knows how many more millions he's getting thru endorsements and whatnot. Then why demand a max contract and limit your team's future?

So would you do it? say you're a big time superstar and by the time of your rookie contract sign for like a 4 millions contract with say .25% increment every year, or whatever the case may be but not demand a max?

Hell yes. The object of playing in the NBA is to have fun, not money. That is a lost art these days.

[Indy]

Hell yes. The object of playing in the NBA is to have fun, not money. That is a lost art these days.

The object of the NBA is to have fun? What other multi-billion dollar business can you name that has the object of having fun?

The object of the league itself is to make money, and that's always been the case. The number 1 object of the teams is to make money and win a championship. That's 1a and 1b, and one of the reasons they want to win a championship is to make money. Without money there is no NBA.

[Bruce]

haha, anyway... these days most fading stars goes out to get the hefty contract, and demands a buyout when the old team sems to be getting nowhere. effectively screwing up their old team's salary cap options. IMHO, contracts should never be 7 yrs long, or at very least have should guarantee that the player is still performing at a certain level to get that salary. giving aging players lengthy contracts to gurantee their future, that is flat out lame.

Anyway, I think MJ's 30mil per yr contracts were well worth every cent. the bulls could have probably brought in penny or hill at their prime plus another player by trading away jordan. But I highly doubt that would have brought them a championship.

[bigh0rt]

I remenber back in the 90's MJ was getting paid 2-3.8 millions for the most part of his career. Did he do that in purpose sacrifying his own salary which allowed the Bulls to get good players thru the free agency?

Anyways, if you were a superstar would you sacrifice your own salary and won't demand a max by the end of your rookie contract?

If it were me and I knew my team was struggling I think i would and by doing so it'll allow my team to get better players out of the free agency.

I give u some example: KG is getting paid 21 millions, Shaq's 20 millions, Kobe's 17.7 millions so on and so forth. Well how do u expect your team to get good players if your salary is like 30% of the team salary?

I give you a better example: Lebron James almost 100 millions endorsement contract with Nike and who knows how many more millions he's getting thru endorsements and whatnot. Then why demand a max contract and limit your team's future?

So would you do it? say you're a big time superstar and by the time of your rookie contract sign for like a 4 millions contract with say .25% increment every year, or whatever the case may be but not demand a max?

Hell yes. The object of playing in the NBA is to have fun, not money. That is a lost art these days.

Is the object of your desk job to have fun? What about the object of being a teacher, architect, or police officer? Sure, the game of basketball is fun, but lest not forget, for players in the NBA, this is their career, and they should treat it as such.

[Laxation]

Didnt some guy from Dallas in NFL sign a lower contract to help the team, only to get fucked in the ass - watching the team sign NO ONE...

I can't see myself taking a massive paycut to save the team, unless i was 100% sure it was the way to help the team.

If the GM sucks enough to need you to do that in order to win, chances are that taking the paycut will do fuck all, except allow the GM to sign some shitting "role" players at premium contracts...

[jonthefon]

What about John Stockton? He's one of the guys I remember who took a lower salary to stay at a team, and he's one of the greatest point guards ever. Then again, he was one of those quiet hard-working types, and his assist total pretty much screams unselfishness.

[beau_boy04]

Didnt some guy from Dallas in NFL sign a lower contract to help the team, only to get fucked in the ass - watching the team sign NO ONE...

I can't see myself taking a massive paycut to save the team, unless i was 100% sure it was the way to help the team.

If the GM sucks enough to need you to do that in order to win, chances are that taking the paycut will do fuck all, except allow the GM to sign some shitting "role" players at premium contracts...

you need to find out the name of this player so i could laugh at him

[Andrew]

What about John Stockton? He's one of the guys I remember who took a lower salary to stay at a team, and he's one of the greatest point guards ever. Then again, he was one of those quiet hard-working types, and his assist total pretty much screams unselfishness.

That was during the latter stages of his career though. As I recall he was still handsomely paid in his prime, according to the standard of the time at any rate. However, he never tried to hold the Jazz to ransom for a bigger salary as far as I can remember.

[jonthefon]

What about John Stockton? He's one of the guys I remember who took a lower salary to stay at a team, and he's one of the greatest point guards ever. Then again, he was one of those quiet hard-working types, and his assist total pretty much screams unselfishness.

That was during the latter stages of his career though. As I recall he was still handsomely paid in his prime, according to the standard of the time at any rate. However, he never tried to hold the Jazz to ransom for a bigger salary as far as I can remember.

I guess you're right about that. Then again, that year, the Jazz made it to the NBA Finals, didn't they?

Stockton to Malone=greatest combo ever.

[beau_boy04]

Jonthefon, I would have to slightly disagree with you on that one. We all know what the greatest combo was. Now do we?

[Riot]

Jonthefon, I would have to slightly disagree with you on that one. We all know what the greatest combo was. Now do we?

Kevin Garnett and Ricky Davis?

[Indy]

In 97, Jordan made over 30 million dollars a year, while Stockton made 6. In 98 Jordan made more then 33 million, while Stockton made 5. Don't forgot Stockton was in the finals both of those seasons.

Karl Malone made 4.6 million in 97, and 5.1 million in 98.

If you combine what Stock/Karl made in those 2 years in which they made back to back finals apperances it doesn't even come close to MJ's salary in either one of those years.

[dada]

Seeing that teams always look out for their best interest, players should do so as well. I dont like it personally but it provides balance.

[Andrew]

In 97, Jordan made over 30 million dollars a year, while Stockton made 6. In 98 Jordan made more then 33 million, while Stockton made 5. Don't forgot Stockton was in the finals both of those seasons.

Karl Malone made 4.6 million in 97, and 5.1 million in 98.

If you combine what Stock/Karl made in those 2 years in which they made back to back finals apperances it doesn't even come close to MJ's salary in either one of those years.

That's true, but Jordan was also in the Finals both of the years with the Bulls winning both times. It wasn't exactly a Grant Hill situation.

Jordan was also negotiating one year contracts at the time while Stockton and Malone were still under long term contracts. Had they been free agents around the same time they may have sought similar deals. Indeed, beginning with the 1999/2000 season both were being paid over $10 million per season ($14 million for Malone, $11 million for Stockton)...and rightfully so. In Malone's final year with the Jazz he earned over $19 million though Stockton had signed a $7 million per year deal for his final stint.

[NNpF]

Let's say that you take the 4 million dollars... The money they had reserved for you was around 15 million... Now they got 11 million extra... And they bring in some washed up veteran with an 11 million dollar paycheck on him... Or better yet, they bring in someone who will take your place as the leader of the team... You can say it's all alright, but with time, you'll be sorry... After partying and blowing off that 4 million a year, you might end up with a 10 year career and you have nothing to show for it... Except that huge house that you can no longer afford. That you will have to sell... With no education to get a real job, you would be lost after your playing days were over.

That's exactly the problem...

Lets say a player makes $10 million a year, why do they feel the need to buy a house so big they probably havn't been to parts of the house in years, buy 20 cars and probaably only actually drive 2 or 3 and spend 2 million on a birthday party.

Some of these players spend all this money on all that crap and then bitch about only making 10 million when they want to be making 20. It's getting absolutely ridiculous, most players have millions upon millions sitting in their bank accounts that they probably won't spend in a life time, yet they always want more.

Honestly, if I made 4 million a year, I wouldn't buy the biggest house I can get and then as much fancy cars as I can get.

Somone said a lot of players know what it's like to be poor, well in that case they should be happy with what they have, and not keep asking for more. It makes me sick to see how much some of these players make, and I'm sorry but most of them don't deserve it.

As much as I love Jason Kidd, the contract he got was enormous. Now he has got to face the fact that unless he gets moved or takes a paycut, a championship is out of the question.

When a team offers you 100 million over 6 years and show you how much they want to keep you, don't take that money and laugh your way to the bank. You're never going to spend 100 million in a lifetime.

I have so much more I want to say, topics like this get me fired up

[beau_boy04]

100 millions is very well spendable. Do you know of Mike Tyson's case? only his cell phone bills was well over 3000 dollars, and now he's facing bankrupcy and last thing I heard he was getting into the porn industry to get some money.

With 10 millions a year, I would probably invest half of that. Give 20,000 to my very loves ones and about 5000 to my very best friends. Buy a nice house for my parents and one for me, buy me 2 sport car and buy one or two for my wife if i'm married and that's about it I think after all that I will still have plenty of money left on my pocket.

[Andrew]

When a team offers you 100 million over 6 years and show you how much they want to keep you, don't take that money and laugh your way to the bank. You're never going to spend 100 million in a lifetime.

In all fairness though, how many of us would actually turn down a payrise? It's also worth noting that a player earning $100 million over six years isn't going to see every cent of that figure; the salary of a player like Jason Kidd is going to place him in a high tax bracket.

[Matt]

he'll get 47% or so of that 100 million........still that's a lot of money.

[Sauru]

i think a big thing people fail to think about when considering player salaries is taxes and the agent. 100 mil deal does not mean the player receives 100 mil, not even close. now even if they only received 50 mil of a 100 mil deal with good investment you and your family are set for life. most players get it though and go buy a 5 mil house without considering the cost of maintaining a house of that size. then if they get hurt they run out of cash and work in some sports store. oh well, blow 50 mil and you deserve it imo.

[NNpF]

When a team offers you 100 million over 6 years and show you how much they want to keep you, don't take that money and laugh your way to the bank. You're never going to spend 100 million in a lifetime.

In all fairness though, how many of us would actually turn down a payrise? It's also worth noting that a player earning $100 million over six years isn't going to see every cent of that figure; the salary of a player like Jason Kidd is going to place him in a high tax bracket.

If your team can afford the pay raise and still be a contender year after year? I wouldn't. But I'm saying if two players want to win a championship sooo badly but their team can't sign anyone who can help them win because your contracts are killing the team.

Then you have no reason to to complain that you can't win it all.

[Sauru]

now that i agree with. if you are killing your teams cap dont go and blame the team and demand a trade cause you cant win.