or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › NBA 2016-2017 Season Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

NBA 2016-2017 Season Thread - Page 1401

post #21001 of 27243
Thread Starter 
I have no idea, it's like both haven't returned from their All Star break.
post #21002 of 27243
Quote:
Originally Posted by indesertum View Post

but the salary cap surge only benefits the free agents making more than minimum right? it seems like it hurts aging players with a long contract and minimum players who aren't affected by salary cap. all players could've gotten a little bit of money instead of only a subsection getting a ton

I don't know anything about the negotiations, but could that be in part a result of the differing interests of the union members impacting the union's bargaining positions? Generally speaking, the players who individually have the most perceived value (and thus can be argued to contribute the most to the union's negotiating leverage) are going to be those who are in line to get big free agent contracts. From an economic self-interest perspective, the high-value players don't care much more about the interests of the league minimum guys than the owners do.

Contrast this with the dynamics (again, somewhat oversimplified) of a more "traditional" unionized industry, where wages for people in similar job classes and at similar points in the seniority ladder tend to be comparable or lock-step. It tends to make the interests of individual union members more homogenous, and make it easier for the union to negotiate for something that seems a little more "something for everyone".
post #21003 of 27243
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnFacconable View Post

I don't think this is quite right - didn't the owners propose to take the delta (the amount they were essentially taking out of max contracts) and give it to the union for distribution to all players? The players would still be getting all the money but not distributed in quite the same way. The owners plan would more fairly compensate all the players in the league, as opposed to those getting new contracts and would prevent all these short term deals and the glut of free agents in a few years. It's going to be a mess ...
You might be right - I haven't kept up with all the counterproposals - but that doesn't work either. Unless the players are all ideologically communist. How would that proposal sound to someone like Damian Lillard, who's watched everyone get paid while he makes rookie scale, and now it's his turn and he has to redistribute some of his upside to these guys?
post #21004 of 27243
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawyerdad View Post

He's a heroin addict?

lol8[1].gif unexpectedly hilarious... good one. But hey, not all us jazzers are smack heads… some prefer only the herbal jazz cigarette nod[1].gif
post #21005 of 27243
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brothersport View Post

uh the reason vucevic doesn't count is because he was out a grand total of two games. it's painfully obvious you can't reach any sort of conclusion based off of that.

and you're very much misrepresenting what lowe said. he would never agree that elite/star players don't have as large an impact on team performance as we think. once again you hear only the data you want to hear (blake and dwight) and ignore the historically unprecedented impact that russ is having, or the mvp-candidate-impact that paul is having. obviously sometimes the loss of stars doesn't impact a team like you might think. very different from saying that they don't impact a team.

your "question" about howard is something that i addressed in the post you quoted. even if they're doing surprisingly well w/o him, having a healthy dwight would theoretically push them into true contender status, which they don't seem to have reached w/o him. as in, you're paying a lot for maybe not a ton more wins, but it's much harder to reach the top than it is to improve from bad to good.

Thought Vucevic was out longer. Must have mixed him up.

I never said Lowe was making that implication. He was just expressing surprise. The rest is my interpretation, which does not include saying "stars don't impact a team". What I'm saying is that stars aren't always as valuable as they're made out to be. Not that they aren't good players, it's just that there is more parody of talent across the NBA now, and that vacuum is filled with guys that people are somehow surprised step up, and I'm not.

Regarding Howard, sure, they may win more games with him, but is it worth such a large investment? It's a valid question. For Howard money, you can bring in 2 or even 3 very solid players, would that combined impact be greater than Howard? There is a case to be made that it can.
Quote:
Originally Posted by indesertum View Post

also i dont know why brothersports bothers. i am off the debating with idfnl island

So now petty name calling is debate. I'd welcome never having to bypass another one of your boring replies to me again.
post #21006 of 27243
i think lawyerdad put it best when he said idfnl was intellectually dishonest. either that or just too obtuse to see his own dishonesty. logic, evidence, common sense are all useless and i'm tired of the "this one counter example disproving your idea" argument
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawyerdad View Post

I don't know anything about the negotiations, but could that be in part a result of the differing interests of the union members impacting the union's bargaining positions? Generally speaking, the players who individually have the most perceived value (and thus can be argued to contribute the most to the union's negotiating leverage) are going to be those who are in line to get big free agent contracts. From an economic self-interest perspective, the high-value players don't care much more about the interests of the league minimum guys than the owners do.

Contrast this with the dynamics (again, somewhat oversimplified) of a more "traditional" unionized industry, where wages for people in similar job classes and at similar points in the seniority ladder tend to be comparable or lock-step. It tends to make the interests of individual union members more homogenous, and make it easier for the union to negotiate for something that seems a little more "something for everyone".

yeah. apparently it was an unanimous decision with the NBPA but i'm wondering if it was something like group think or if the minimum wage players never really spoke up or something
post #21007 of 27243
Quote:
Originally Posted by indesertum View Post

i think lawyerdad put it best when he said idfnl was intellectually dishonest. either that or just too obtuse to see his own dishonesty. logic, evidence, common sense are all useless and i'm tired of the "this one counter example disproving your idea" argument

You continue to adopt the fallacy that I care about standing here. You're mainstream, repetitive, and boring, and you're using me as a phony counterpoint. If you weren't, you'd put me on ignore. Someone who really meant what you say would have done it long ago.
post #21008 of 27243
I only recently realized I don't care enough to continue.

If anything I think you're the only one who cares about your standing here cuz you talk so much about how you don't care. It's less about social standing and more about how consistently pointless it is to talk with you about anything.
post #21009 of 27243
Quote:
Originally Posted by indesertum View Post

I only recently realized I don't care enough to continue.

Bullshit. You've been mechanically repeating yourself for 3 years, maybe more. Have some conviction, put me on ignore.
post #21010 of 27243
Quote:
Originally Posted by idfnl View Post

Bullshit. You've been mechanically repeating yourself for 3 years, maybe more.

Sure
Quote:
Have some conviction, put me on ignore.

I'll do whatever I want to do
post #21011 of 27243
Quote:
Originally Posted by indesertum View Post

yeah. apparently it was an unanimous decision with the NBPA but i'm wondering if it was something like group think or if the minimum wage players never really spoke up or something
That proves my point ( that I know nothing about the negotiations).
post #21012 of 27243
Quote:
Originally Posted by indesertum View Post

I'll do whatever I want to do

You'll do whatever you want to.
post #21013 of 27243
Sure
post #21014 of 27243
yes yes you're right. thank you for the buddy system reminder not to engage.

here is your reward, from i think my least favorite player in the league
post #21015 of 27243
at first i thought westbrook was your least favorite player. just realized he's dripping from his nose

hawks have weird losses to bad teams but unexpected wins to good teams. getting owned by denver somehow
Edited by indesertum - 3/11/15 at 9:03pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Entertainment, Culture, and Sports › NBA 2016-2017 Season Thread