Al Horford is averaging 12.8/7.4/4.8 he is on a max contract and he signed that contract coming off a season where he averaged 17.1/8.2/3.6. Michael Conley signed the largest contract in NBA history coming off a season where he averaged 15.3 points and 6.1 assists. Before signing that contract his career bests were 17.2 and 6.5 so it wasn't like that was a fluke down year. Marc Gasol signed a max contract coming off a season of 17.4/7.8/3.8.
Those aren't abnormal. In fact, they are pretty typical. It appears you have no concept of what players on max contracts actually perform like.
And you can't predict wear and tear injuries because the reality is not everyone gets them. Kareem played 74 games his final season at the age of 41. He played 80 games when he was 40. 78 games when he was 39. Malone's last season was the only time he played less than 80 games in his career. Stockton played 82 games at the age of 40 (28 mpg). He had 1 season in his career where he missed more than 4 games. Jason Kidd played 76 games at the age of 39. He missed 18 games his 2nd to last year at age 38, but from 32 to 37 never missed more than 2 games in a season.
There are countless examples of great players not getting those wear and tear injuries, and not missing much time at all.
Sure the "going rate" for max players is inflated, but one thing to note is that older players cannot play defense well due to decrease in lateral quickness (well all quickness, really). The 3 players you cited are all above average defenders which is a significant component of their value. Marc Gasol was actually a DPOY. So you can't say 37 year old Shaq who was hobbling around and couldn't make it back on defense deserved a max deal because he posted the same numbers as 29 year old Marc Gasol.
Anyways that was off topic. Let's get back to the real point:
"There are countless examples of great players not getting those wear and tear injuries, and not missing much time at all. "
Are there? I'll make it even easier for you. They don't even have to be great. Name 150 players, period of any skill level and any kind of mileage (Scalabrine included). 3,000 people have played in the NBA over the last 50 years. Show me that 5% of them have had nearly uninjured careers all the way to 40 since it's countless according to you. Obviously you don't need to because we all know that 27 players out of 3,000 have made it to 40 and only a subset of them would meet your criteria, so your post is hyperbolic.
Again, I am approaching this from a "most likely" perspective while you guys are approaching it from the "anything can happen" perspective. You aren't arguing against me. You are arguing against statistical improbability. For that reason, I am not offended at all, just like I'm not offended when people play the lottery. I'm just a bit surprised, that's all.
I would give LeBron a 2 year max contract. After 2 years, based on a ton of data, he will not be worth it. Giving a 4 year max deal to a 34 year old means you are going the Brooklyn Nets route and putting all your chips on the table for a 2 year window. It may not be a terrible deal, but I don't personally think that it's a good idea to risk a fantastic young core on a Hail Mary. I don't think LeBron on the Sixers gets them a title and they could sign a free agent like Kahwi in 2019 that better fits their timeline.
Your comparison to BKN is hyperbole. Signing Lebron is not equivalent to a Haily Mary. Again, hyperbole.
I thought I already brought the point up that Lebron is not a player that fits along a trendline. No regression analysis in the world will be a good predictor for a player that is unlike the players that preceded him. While it is often useful to look at the past as a useful predictor, I believe that in this instance, it is not very relevant. The players that you mentioned were not as devoted to their bodies. You could have made the same argument for Tom Brady starting when he was 33.
It's actually not hyperbole. If the player is max worthy at ages 34 and 35 but not max worthy at 36 and 37 (if even still playing meaningful minutes), you're sacrificing a lot of salary on the back-end for 2 shots at a title roughly around the time that the Sixers would be ready to begin to compete for a title (where the Celtics are now). It's a waste of 2 years of LeBron and a waste of 2 years of the Sixers' title chances. It's not a good fit at all. Why not just try to lure more of a sure thing like Anthony Davis or Kahwi Leonard?
"I thought I already brought the point up that Lebron is not a player that fits along a trendline.
No regression analysis in the world will be a good predictor for a player that is unlike the players that preceded him. While it is often useful to look at the past as a useful predictor, I believe that in this instance, it is not very relevant."
In what sense? He's a human being, isn't he? You can tell by his interviews, play style, and workout routine that he will be a statistical outlier? While we're at it, could you tell me the price of Bitcoin in 2022, Noah?
"The players that you mentioned were not as devoted to their bodies."
And you know this how? Are you their doctor?
"You could have made the same argument for Tom Brady starting when he was 33."
Different sport, statistical outlier. Again, it's not that he CAN'T. It's just very unlikely.
Sorry, but your entire post is devoid of a cogent argument.