Dame Lillard to demand trade shortly per Henry Abbott of True Hoop

[BudweiserCeltic]

Dame still has 3 years in his contract, he's not going anywhere unless another team overpays.

[Ogaju]

You must legislate playing out your contract otherwise players will continue to force their way to preferred destinations.

I mean, you say that, but ask New Orleans if they'd prefer to have Ingram and the six or seven first-rounderS they got for AD and Jrue or to watch them walk for nothing. Is the league going to prohibit teams trading players on max deals with two or fewer years remaining? I doubt anyone wants that.

Teams will still be able to make trades but they have to be the driving force not the players.

[Ogaju]

This is about to be a moment of reckoning in the player empowerment era if true. Dame is about to start a 4 year extension, 3 years guaranteed. If a player can request out with that much time remaining on his deal, do contracts even matter anymore?

For the record, I think players should be able to do what they want given they drive the revenue and a team can trade them at any moment no matter how dedicated they are to the organization & city. But I can't help but think owners are going to be up in arms if this comes to pass.

I disagree on this take.  The whole point of the supermax deal that Dame signed was to allow teams that had developed a franchise player to not lose him in free agency for nothing, and be taken by surprise when that occurred.  Dame could have walked as a free agent a year ago, but he didn't, probably because Portland could offer him this special deal that no one else could.  Portland will get a chance to restart their franchise with a bevy of picks from a team like the Knicks that otherwise might have signed Dame in free agency.  I'm not going to call it a win-win, but the Blazers won't be left high and dry, and that was part of the bargain teams took on when they created the supermax.

At some point, it's going to make it impossible for a team to build anything. And it all generally goes against small market teams. If a small market team gets a star like Lillard or Freak and then they force their way out, what's the point in being a fan of that team? They can't add a 2nd star nearly as easily as one of the big franchises.

If your team isn't competitive because you're nothing but a farm system for bigger franchises, it's eventually going to cripple the fan base for those teams. The NBA will inevitably have to deal with this issue. Letting a handful of stars control personnel is going to cause a lot of franchises to crash and burn, and revenue will crash along with it.

Yup….the players don’t seem to care…they are going to kill the goose that laid the golden egg.

I have mentioned it for a couple of years on different threads, the league really needs to incentivize staying with a franchise both for the team and the player.

The league tried to do it with money. It obviously has not worked. The league did not consider that money is not an end in itself. The greatest value of money is the options it provides. You can’t pay the players so much money and think they will sacrifice the options their wealth provides. You must legislate playing out your contract otherwise players will continue to force their way to preferred destinations.

I don't think that would work, let alone get past the NBPA. I think removing max contracts and making contract size unlimited would be more helpful. That way the best of the best would have to take discounts to team up, but teams can still be rewarded for good drafting as they would have their Bird Rights

I like your idea. Something needs to be done. My suggestion brings some sanity to the process. The NBPA will not like it, but that is how you know it is a good plan.

[radiohead]

What if a max player can only be traded on the last year of his contract? That way both the team and the player would be committed to at least make the relationship work before cutting bait. There will be a lot of loopholes for sure but maybe it’s a good starting point.

[gouki88]

What if a max player can only be traded on the last year of his contract? That way both the team and the player would be committed to at least make the relationship work before cutting bait. There will be a lot of loopholes for sure but maybe it’s a good starting point.

What if both player and franchise want to move on? Would it be like a no-trade clause for both parties up until the last year?

[radiohead]

What if a max player can only be traded on the last year of his contract? That way both the team and the player would be committed to at least make the relationship work before cutting bait. There will be a lot of loopholes for sure but maybe it’s a good starting point.

What if both player and franchise want to move on? Would it be like a no-trade clause for both parties up until the last year?

Probably something to that effect? Then maybe put in a clause wherein if both parties are amenable, then that “no trade clause” can be waived earlier.  The downside though is players might start going for 1-2 year contracts instead of the longer 3-4 year extensions.

[RJ87]

This is about to be a moment of reckoning in the player empowerment era if true. Dame is about to start a 4 year extension, 3 years guaranteed. If a player can request out with that much time remaining on his deal, do contracts even matter anymore?

For the record, I think players should be able to do what they want given they drive the revenue and a team can trade them at any moment no matter how dedicated they are to the organization & city. But I can't help but think owners are going to be up in arms if this comes to pass.

lol…pick a side,

I know reading is hard but I literally said I believe the players should do what they want since they're the product and franchises aren't held to the same standard of "loyalty", I think owners will push back though.

[bogg]

You must legislate playing out your contract otherwise players will continue to force their way to preferred destinations.

I mean, you say that, but ask New Orleans if they'd prefer to have Ingram and the six or seven first-rounderS they got for AD and Jrue or to watch them walk for nothing. Is the league going to prohibit teams trading players on max deals with two or fewer years remaining? I doubt anyone wants that.

Teams will still be able to make trades but they have to be the driving force not the players.

Well why shouldn't teams be required to honor the contracts they sign? Maybe if you're going to do that all the players involved should have to sign off on a trade happening.

[SHAQATTACK]

I think Ball +Brown adds more overall to the team .   They have youth as well. 

Lillard would be difficult to stop with Tatum on the floor .  It would be a lot of fun seeing them pile on the points as long as  Lillards body holds up anyway.   Have to win now , small window.

Ether of these ways work for me ….but a real pass first star point guard would be cool.

[Ogaju]

This is about to be a moment of reckoning in the player empowerment era if true. Dame is about to start a 4 year extension, 3 years guaranteed. If a player can request out with that much time remaining on his deal, do contracts even matter anymore?

For the record, I think players should be able to do what they want given they drive the revenue and a team can trade them at any moment no matter how dedicated they are to the organization & city. But I can't help but think owners are going to be up in arms if this comes to pass.

lol…pick a side,

I know reading is hard but I literally said I believe the players should do what they want since they're the product and franchises aren't held to the same standard of "loyalty", I think owners will push back though.

Yeah, that is my point..you have always believed players should do what they want, so it is really inconsistent to see you raise an issue with Dame. Why shouldn’t he do what he wants. Why are you asking if contracts matter anymore when you have already argued that they don’t. Players can do what they want is totally inconsistent with the spirit and letter of their contracts. It is funny that you do not see the inconsistency in your position. What exactly did you expect to happen in your fantasy world where parties to a contract can breach the contract at will without repercussion.

[Ogaju]

You must legislate playing out your contract otherwise players will continue to force their way to preferred destinations.

I mean, you say that, but ask New Orleans if they'd prefer to have Ingram and the six or seven first-rounderS they got for AD and Jrue or to watch them walk for nothing. Is the league going to prohibit teams trading players on max deals with two or fewer years remaining? I doubt anyone wants that.

Teams will still be able to make trades but they have to be the driving force not the players.

Well why shouldn't teams be required to honor the contracts they sign? Maybe if you're going to do that all the players involved should have to sign off on a trade happening.

The teams usually retain the right to trade the players, it is their contractual right. Players that have enough leverage get no-trade clauses. If you want the right to move at anytime to predetermined destinations put it in the [dang] contract.  Otherwise honor your contract.

[Who]

If Portland wanted Lillard to stay loyal to them, they should have done a better job surrounding him with talent.

You do not get loyalty if you do not give players an opportunity to play for a Championship. That is bottom line. That is the real takeaway from all of this.

Players will give you time to build the team up but at certain they expect to see results. To see a team built that can contend. Lillard gave Portland 9 good years -- too long in my opinion. Too loyal. More loyalty than that mismanaged team deserved.

[Ogaju]

If Portland wanted Lillard to stay loyal to them, they should have done a better job surrounding him with talent.

You do not get loyalty if you do not give players an opportunity to play for a Championship. That is bottom line. That is the real takeaway from all of this.

Players will give you time to build the team up but at certain they expect to see results. To see a team built that can contend. Lillard gave Portland 9 good years -- too long in my opinion. Too loyal. More loyalty than that mismanaged team deserved.

The truth is Portland does not owe Dame anything but to perform their obligations under the contract. There is not much to argue here without actually seeing the contract. But to argue that the team is obligated to do certain things without reading the contract is sheer speculation. I doubt that there is any NBA contract that obligates the team to provide a certain caliber of player for the superstar player who in most cases has taken up so much of the cap that his very contract makes it difficult if not impossible for his team to field a competitive team.

[RJ87]

This is about to be a moment of reckoning in the player empowerment era if true. Dame is about to start a 4 year extension, 3 years guaranteed. If a player can request out with that much time remaining on his deal, do contracts even matter anymore?

For the record, I think players should be able to do what they want given they drive the revenue and a team can trade them at any moment no matter how dedicated they are to the organization & city. But I can't help but think owners are going to be up in arms if this comes to pass.

lol…pick a side,

I know reading is hard but I literally said I believe the players should do what they want since they're the product and franchises aren't held to the same standard of "loyalty", I think owners will push back though.

Yeah, that is my point..you have always believed players should do. What they want, so it is really inconsistent to see you raise an issue with Dame. Why shouldn’t he do what he wants. Why are you asking if contracts matter anymore when you have already argued that they don’t. Players can do what they want is totally inconsistent with the spirit and letter of their contracts. It is funny that you do not see the inconsistency in your position. What exactly did you expect to happen in your fantasy world where parties to a contract can breach the contract at will without repercussion.

I didn't raise an issue with Dame.  I think he should absolutely bail on Portland if he wants a championship. It's another KG where he'll waste his prime away and by the time he gets a team that can win, his knees will be toast. Cry me a river with "the spirit and letter of their contracts". GM's won't hesitate to boot a player even if he wants to be there. Danny traded IT after he played on a bad hip, his sister died and he played lead recruiter for Al Horford and Gordon Hayward, Washington traded John Wall a week after management publicly said they weren't. Demar Derozan wanted to spend his entire career in Toronto, but there was a shinier player on the market. But management is just doing whats best for the team, right? So why can't a player do what's in his best interest?

And contracts clearly don't matter anymore. The cap structure in place doesn't have the effects owners intended and I expect them to kick and scream over it, but the NBPA isn't going to cede power at this point. Frankly, the NBA should do away with the cap altogether. Let owners and GMs who talk a big game put their money where their mouth is.

[liam]

Denver could make a trade for Lillard in a win now move. They could send out Gordon and Porter Jr. and filler for Lillard. That's a championship team for Denver and a good star at a rebuild for Portland.