Players playing with only one franchise

[CelticConcourse]

I just couldn't find a way to shorten the title. Oh well.

What do you guys think about one-franchise players? I think they're the "purest in the game" and off my head I can think of a few like Kobe, Pierce, Duncan, Wade. They're all franchise players and wouldn't leave ever, hopefully. (getting drafted by another team but not playing for them does not count)

Also, there's not-so-good players staying with single-teams, like Nick Collison and Udonis Haslem, pretty cool too.

What are you guys's thoughts on this subject? I think it's good to show loyalty to your players (Spurs are especially good), and I was sad when Jose Calderon, Rudy Gay and Tayshaun Prince got moved. All three forced to leave their long-time homes. They're like a link to the past, that will never be mended

[D.o.s.]

Generally I like the franchise player sticking with the franchise, especially when you have a couple on the same team (like the Ginobili,Duncan, Parker trio or more recently Westbrook and Durant).

On the other hand, watching a franchise player languish in mediocrity is probably one of the most frustrating things to see as a fan of the sport (see Garnett, Kevin on the T-Wolves).

[CelticConcourse]

Generally I like the franchise player sticking with the franchise, especially when you have a couple on the same team (like the Ginobili,Duncan, Parker trio or more recently Westbrook and Durant).

On the other hand, watching a franchise player languish in mediocrity is probably one of the most frustrating things to see as a fan of the sport (see Garnett, Kevin on the T-Wolves).

But a team like Memphis shouldn't have screwed with Gay.... but was he a franchise player?

Oh yea, I forgot to put DIRK on my list

[D.o.s.]

Generally I like the franchise player sticking with the franchise, especially when you have a couple on the same team (like the Ginobili,Duncan, Parker trio or more recently Westbrook and Durant).

On the other hand, watching a franchise player languish in mediocrity is probably one of the most frustrating things to see as a fan of the sport (see Garnett, Kevin on the T-Wolves).

But a team like Memphis shouldn't have screwed with Gay.... but was he a franchise player?

Oh yea, I forgot to put DIRK on my list

Dirk's definitely there. Rudy wasn't quite a franchise player in Memphis--though he seems to be doing all right in Toronto.

Which raises another wrinkle--guys that only flourish into franchise players when they end up on a different team.

[mgent]

Generally I like the franchise player sticking with the franchise, especially when you have a couple on the same team (like the Ginobili,Duncan, Parker trio or more recently Westbrook and Durant).

On the other hand, watching a franchise player languish in mediocrity is probably one of the most frustrating things to see as a fan of the sport (see Garnett, Kevin on the T-Wolves).

But a team like Memphis shouldn't have screwed with Gay.... but was he a franchise player?

Oh yea, I forgot to put DIRK on my list

You can't forget Dirk, he's the biggest.  He the one that really stuck it out.  Kobe, DWade, and Duncan all won titles really early.

As Celtics fans we kinda have to like that.  No other team has had better players that only played for their franchise.  I think it's embarrassing when guys like Ilgauskas and Malone give up great careers with a team to try and freeload on somebody else's title.  I think they might regret that later on.

[PhoSita]

I think it's an old fashioned concept.  Mostly it's just a nice thing if it makes sense for the player and the team throughout the player's career.

As a fan, I'd rather my team make smart moves to be as competitive as possible.  Whether a player is on the team for 10 years or their entire 15 year career, they're still a major part of the team's history.

[celts10]

Rodney Stuckey.

[CelticConcourse]

Yeah, I hate when I see

Player X
(Team A 1980-2003)
(Team B 2003)

Not pure!