NY fans build website to lure LeBron

A group of New York fans has started a Web site aimed at raising money to attract LeBron James to New York when his contract ends in 2010. The site says the donations will be used to give him a ''New York gift basket'' with the goals of giving James ''his own suite at Yankee Stadium, additional salary, Gloria James courtside seats, and a Ferrari.''

Source

The "additional salary" is what caught my eye. Somehow, I don't think fan donations are a viable exception to the salary cap.

Do they really think LeBron needs money?

New York is a nice market to play in so I don't think they'll need a lot of tempting to bring in LeBron James. Although I wouldn't join the Knicks if they remain as bad as they are right now.

Unless, of course, they offer me a contract like Jerome James' one and have me do what he does. I would love free money.

this is crazy
hope they could make it, i would love to see the knicks in the playoffs.

If I were him, I'd go as long as Isiah is fired by 2010.

Even if this doesn't violate any tampering rules - and I guess it technically doesn't, since it's not actually the Knicks who are making the pitch - I highly doubt they'll raise enough money to reach those goals, which don't seem much of an incentive for LeBron to sign considering he can afford the things in "gift basket" anyway, and would still be able to even if he took a paycut to join the Knicks.

Something is really wrong with the Knicks fanbase when a group of people think that one of the richest athletes today need a "donation".

I don't like the idea of switching teams, especially when the other team is in the shithole right now. If LeBron goes, he's basically starting all over again as the Knicks are going to have to build pieces around him. He's already on a team that is close to being a contender.

i think you are all looking at the wrong. the money is not being raised to give to lebron, its being raised to hire a hitman to kill off isiah which will then make the knicks more attractive to any free agent

I dont think that a NBA Franchise actually need money from donations to sign a superstar.

Only way lebron would leave cleveland is if they can't accumlate a championship contender team...which they haven't yet..they have two years to do so. When 2010 reaches..we New Yorkers will rejoice as he join's Jay-Z's brooklyn NETs....

Probably the dumbest way to lure in a superstar.. LeBron has it all in Cleveland.
He's gonna kick it in his city like Reggie Miller, David Robinson and Willis Reed all did.

...and not win a championship like one of the guys you mentioned there? I think lebron is going for more than just being a top 50 player...I think he's gonna go for top 5

...and not win a championship like one of the guys you mentioned there? I think lebron is going for more than just being a top 50 player...I think he's gonna go for top 5

Are you talking about my last post?
Cause I remember Reed and Robinson winning titles for San Antonio and New York.

personally if i was a big time player i would rather stay my entire career with 1 team and fight for the ring that way. imo winning a ring means so much more when you play for 1 team you entire career(this is for superstars only and does not count trades made early in career, like pip). i mean am i the only one who honestly though that both malones and paytons rings would be pretty pointless if they ended up winning it all? ok maybe not pointless but they would not mean enarly as much if they won them in utah and seattle.

I think that's true to a certain extent. Winning a championship would still be a major accomplishment and something that nobody could take away from them and I doubt they'd feel it was tainted in any way, though history might not remember the same way. "After more than a decade as teammates, Stockton and Malone finally led the Jazz to a championship" would sound more impressive in a biography than "Malone would finally win a ring alongside Shaquille O'Neal and Kobe Bryant", even if it does downplay the accomplishment a little.

...and not win a championship like one of the guys you mentioned there? I think lebron is going for more than just being a top 50 player...I think he's gonna go for top 5

Are you talking about my last post?
Cause I remember Reed and Robinson winning titles for San Antonio and New York.

Did you read my post? I said "one"....

personally if i was a big time player i would rather stay my entire career with 1 team and fight for the ring that way. imo winning a ring means so much more when you play for 1 team you entire career(this is for superstars only and does not count trades made early in career, like pip). i mean am i the only one who honestly though that both malones and paytons rings would be pretty pointless if they ended up winning it all? ok maybe not pointless but they would not mean enarly as much if they won them in utah and seattle.

I think if shaq wins it with the suns this year it would mean more than if he won 5 with kobe bryant. Why? His legacy would be that he won it with kobe and people would be stuck arguing who meant more to their team forever. If he helps nash and the crew...I think it will pretty much settle the debate about who was a better nba player and laker mvp between shaq and kobe....if it hasn't be settled already that is.

Its not like Reggie stayed in Indiana because he didn't care about rings, he stayed because he did want one. The Pacers were finals contenders for most of 94-2004.

I think it will pretty much settle the debate about who was a better nba player and laker mvp between shaq and kobe....if it hasn't be settled already that is.

I'm pretty sure the burden is on Kobe. It's always been said that Kobe couldn't have won a ring without Shaq leading the way (and getting Finals MVPs) in LA, and it's up to Kobe to prove his worth when Shaq left (never did, until finally this season). Shaq widened that gap when he won with Miami. I don't think there really was any contest that Shaq was the primary reason why LA won those titles.

There was a debate? Shaq was the runaway best player in the league for five years, Kobe's never been that even once. Shaq dominated as completely as any all-time great in 2000.

personally if i was a big time player i would rather stay my entire career with 1 team and fight for the ring that way. imo winning a ring means so much more when you play for 1 team you entire career(this is for superstars only and does not count trades made early in career, like pip). i mean am i the only one who honestly though that both malones and paytons rings would be pretty pointless if they ended up winning it all? ok maybe not pointless but they would not mean enarly as much if they won them in utah and seattle.

I think if shaq wins it with the suns this year it would mean more than if he won 5 with kobe bryant. Why? His legacy would be that he won it with kobe and people would be stuck arguing who meant more to their team forever. If he helps nash and the crew...I think it will pretty much settle the debate about who was a better nba player and laker mvp between shaq and kobe....if it hasn't be settled already that is.

i can agree with this, but i should have been more clear i guess. usually when a player switches teams to go for the ring they become a secondary, or third, or even bench player. when shaq changed from orlando to the lakers and from LA to Miami he was the main man, not just catching a ride. i think if he stayed with orlando and won a ring there it would mean more to me anyway but since he was always the go to guy i dont feel any of his rings are tarnished. another example would be KG if the celts do infact win it all

i can agree with this, but i should have been more clear i guess. usually when a player switches teams to go for the ring they become a secondary, or third, or even bench player

I'd further qualify that with signing on with an established contender (or demanding a trade to one) and becoming more of a role player. That description definitely doesn't fit KG since the Celtics remained unproven even if they had started to put together a formidable group on paper. KG also stuck it out in Minnesota for over a decade and didn't force his way out of town with public trade demands and mudslinging, which is admirable.

Given that Shaq had already won three titles as the top player on the Lakers earlier this decade, winning further titles as the secondary player in Miami (or potentially more of a role player in Phoenix) doesn't tarnish any subsequent rings. It just demonstrates he's still capable of being a valuable player as his career winds down.

Of course, tarnish is a harsh word to use, especially if a former All-Star is still a productive key player for a championship team. As I said, to me it's more about history remembering them as a player who led their team to a championship as opposed to a great player who ultimately found success playing a lesser role on a championship team, the former sounding more impressive.