D. Williams 1 yr, 5 million with immediate out clause

[bdm860]

This is the real risk for owners...if there is another viable market for NBA players. Yeah, there are some problems with player salaries that probably need to be fixed (probably with a reasonable hard upper and lower cap), but the owners are also manipulating their books a little to "lose money". Plus...there's just something wrong with them telling players they need to lower their salaries to prevent owners from making stupid FA decisions. Sorry, Joe Johnson's contract isn't Joe Johnson's fault, it's the moronic owner that agreed to it.

It's the moronic marketplace, not specific owners, that cause that sort of dumb contract.  If Atlanta didn't pay Joe Johnson, some other team with cap space would have.  So the only way for Atlanta to escape your ridicule would have been to let their best player go in free agency last summer and effectively begin rebuilding.  Does that sound like a decision that GM / owner would be praised for?

While I can see blaming some things on the market, there is no way I can see blaming Joe Johnson’s contract on the market.  That was purely management’s fault.  

The market was not offering Joe Johnson $119 million.  Now I’m not 100% sure about this, but I’m pretty sure that was more than anybody else got last summer.  More than LeBron, Wade, Bosh, Stoudemire, Boozer, Gay, Dirk, and Pierce.  The market definitely didn’t value Joe Johnson above those guys.  I would imagine that the actual market for Joe Johnson was more like $90m, maybe less.  Granted, he does not even appear to be worth anywhere close to that right now, but the Hawks were only bidding against themselves.  I imagine they could have easily gotten him for $20m less with no negotiation, maybe even $30-40m less if the Hawks played hardball.  What other team was willing to pay Joe Johnson more than that?

It was the same thing with Allan Houston’s $100m contract back in 2001.  The market wasn’t paying a player like Houston that much, and I remember reading how many experts said the Knicks were only bidding against themselves and nobody else was prepared to offer more than $60m for Houston (though memory is a little fuzzy on this, it may have been more).  Some things just aren’t the market’s fault.

If Joe Johnson signed for $90m last year, it would still be viewed as a terrible contract now, but you could blame that on the market.
Joe Johnson signing for $119m and getting the largest contract in the most active free agent market ever, that’s just terrible management.

He signed for a maximum deal.  The 90 million you cite is essentially the maximum any other team could sign him (without a sign and trade).  The Knicks and Bulls both offered him contracts, and it was rumored that both were for maximum contracts 5 years, 93 million.  Which means Johnson's value was the max and that is what he signed for.  Atlanta's max was just bigger then any other team could offer, but the max is the max.   

So you think it was the market’s fault, and Atlanta had no choice but to give Joe Johnson $119m.  More than LeBron, Wade, Bosh, Boozer, Stoudemire, Gay, Dirk, and Pierce got?

From Kelly Dwyer:

It's never a good sign when, a full week before a player is set to put pen to paper to ink his most recent contract, that a good portion of the NBA community regards that contract as the worst it has ever seen.

Is this really that much of an exaggeration? “a good portion of the NBA community regards that contract as the worst it has ever seen.” 

So if the Knicks and Bulls are offering $93m, the Hawks have no choice but to trump that bid by $26m?  The Bulls and Knicks both could have offered sign-and-trades (since they were under the cap, right?  Unless Atlanta refused to do such deals which I have never heard), but didn’t, that should help tell you where the value is.  I bet those teams offered LeBron sign-and-trade deals though.

If the Hawks only offered Joe Johnson $109m, Joe wouldn’t sign it, would walk away from an additional $16m, because it wasn’t the max, and another team offered a “max” deal even if that other deal is 15% less?

Again the market did not value Joe Johnson at $119m.  Hawks fault, plain and simple.

The Hawks signed Johnson at 1.23 million more per season then the offers he received (19.83 v. 18.6).  Not exactly much above market value, which is what happens when you sign your own free agents under the C.B.A.  Your suggested offer of 109 is actually less per year then the offer of the Bulls/Knicks.  Sure it is a year longer, but it is less per year.  Given Chicago and New York have far more marketing options, Johnson easily would have gone to those cities for one less year, but way more money per year (with increased marketing). 

If you want to do the math, you’d have to guess what a 35 year old Joe Johnson would get in the first year of his next contract to compare 6 years to 6 years.  Just doing average salary for the duration of the contract doesn’t cut it.  A 35 year old Joe Johnson (using today’s CBA) would probably get midlevel or vet minimum, if he’s not retired.  Now do the math.  That 6th year is huge.  Why do you think the players want long contracts?

But regardless, do any math you want.  You say Atlanta had no choice but to offer Johnson $119m.  Anything less than $119m and he walks?  I disagree.

And if you still argue he’s worth $119m, why didn’t another team like Chicago or New York try to work out a sign and trade and pay him that much, or even something close?  They had the cap room to do sign and trades.

[winsomme]

http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nba/news/story?id=6753259

If Besiktas is willing to pay Deron 5 million with no guarantee how long he will be there, I wonder what they would pay a star that they would have the whole season.  Williams sure seems to think they would pay them a lot more then that.

Williams says he has talked to a lot of other players who are considering leaving as well.  Could be very interesting if this thing goes awhile.

this is exactly what the players should be doing. I love it. They need to let the owners know they are not going to let them walk all over them. especially when there is no reason for the owners to lock out the players...

I also hope they decertify and take the owners to court. That is definitely the step that got the NFL owners back to the bargaining table.

[CaptainJackLee]

http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nba/news/story?id=6753259

If Besiktas is willing to pay Deron 5 million with no guarantee how long he will be there, I wonder what they would pay a star that they would have the whole season.  Williams sure seems to think they would pay them a lot more then that.

Williams says he has talked to a lot of other players who are considering leaving as well.  Could be very interesting if this thing goes awhile.

this is exactly what the players should be doing. I love it. They need to let the owners know they are not going to let them walk all over them. especially when there is no reason for the owners to lock out the players...

I also hope they decertify and take the owners to court. That is definitely the step that got the NFL owners back to the bargaining table.

They should be looking for a tv deal, half-a-dozen arenas and an insurance deal for a mini-league featuring the top-80 players or so. Well, they should be looking for someone to look for that for them. The European market is too limited.

[Chris]

http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nba/news/story?id=6753259

If Besiktas is willing to pay Deron 5 million with no guarantee how long he will be there, I wonder what they would pay a star that they would have the whole season.  Williams sure seems to think they would pay them a lot more then that.

Williams says he has talked to a lot of other players who are considering leaving as well.  Could be very interesting if this thing goes awhile.

this is exactly what the players should be doing. I love it. They need to let the owners know they are not going to let them walk all over them. especially when there is no reason for the owners to lock out the players...

I also hope they decertify and take the owners to court. That is definitely the step that got the NFL owners back to the bargaining table.

They should be looking for a tv deal, half-a-dozen arenas and an insurance deal for a mini-league featuring the top-80 players or so. Well, they should be looking for someone to look for that for them. The European market is too limited.

So, I am curious, would this "mini-league" be a short-term thing?  Or something where the players would sign long-term contracts with?

If its short-term, I think it would do a good job of tweaking the owners, although it wouldn't make the players much money at all, because of the overhead involved in starting a league from scratch, particularly when there is no guarantee the league will last more than a year.

If it is a bigger league, and a legitimate competitor for the NBA, thats another thing altogether.  Of course I find it hard to believe that they will be able to put something together that doesn't just lose them a ton of cash, and folds as soon as the NBA returns.

[greenpride32]

They should be looking for a tv deal, half-a-dozen arenas and an insurance deal for a mini-league featuring the top-80 players or so. Well, they should be looking for someone to look for that for them. The European market is too limited.

This takes hundreds of millions of dollars in investment and backing.  Do you really think the players would put their own money into it?  They'd be better off taking reduced salaries from the NBA. 

I don't see how people can think it's so easy to just start a league that can be promoted and appeal on the national level.  It takes a lot of resources; that's realy the role of the owners in this whole picture.  Yes the fans don't care about the guys in the suits, but they do make it happen behind the scenes.

[Moranis]

http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nba/news/story?id=6753259

If Besiktas is willing to pay Deron 5 million with no guarantee how long he will be there, I wonder what they would pay a star that they would have the whole season.  Williams sure seems to think they would pay them a lot more then that.

Williams says he has talked to a lot of other players who are considering leaving as well.  Could be very interesting if this thing goes awhile.

this is exactly what the players should be doing. I love it. They need to let the owners know they are not going to let them walk all over them. especially when there is no reason for the owners to lock out the players...

I also hope they decertify and take the owners to court. That is definitely the step that got the NFL owners back to the bargaining table.

They should be looking for a tv deal, half-a-dozen arenas and an insurance deal for a mini-league featuring the top-80 players or so. Well, they should be looking for someone to look for that for them. The European market is too limited.

I posed this question in another thread, but applies here as well.

Is the European market too limited because it is basketball or because it is minor league basketball?

I mean if Lebron, Kobe, Dwight, Melo, Dwight, etc. all were playing in Europe would the money follow or would it always be below par because basketball just isn't popular enough in Europe?  I actually tend to think if the stars went the money would follow because the American viewing audience would also follow.

[Chris]

http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nba/news/story?id=6753259

If Besiktas is willing to pay Deron 5 million with no guarantee how long he will be there, I wonder what they would pay a star that they would have the whole season.  Williams sure seems to think they would pay them a lot more then that.

Williams says he has talked to a lot of other players who are considering leaving as well.  Could be very interesting if this thing goes awhile.

this is exactly what the players should be doing. I love it. They need to let the owners know they are not going to let them walk all over them. especially when there is no reason for the owners to lock out the players...

I also hope they decertify and take the owners to court. That is definitely the step that got the NFL owners back to the bargaining table.

They should be looking for a tv deal, half-a-dozen arenas and an insurance deal for a mini-league featuring the top-80 players or so. Well, they should be looking for someone to look for that for them. The European market is too limited.

I posed this question in another thread, but applies here as well.

Is the European market too limited because it is basketball or because it is minor league basketball?

I mean if Lebron, Kobe, Dwight, Melo, Dwight, etc. all were playing in Europe would the money follow or would it always be below par because basketball just isn't popular enough in Europe?  I actually tend to think if the stars went the money would follow because the American viewing audience would also follow.

Its a tough question.

First of all, there is one huge hurdle here, and that is whether this is a short term or long term question.  If we are talking about guys going over to Europe just until the CBA is agreed upon, I don't think that is enough time for those guys to be fully integrated.  I think the fans will be slow to come around in large enough numbers, when they know it is really just a bit of a sideshow while the NBA is on hiatus, and not a legitimate building of the euroleague. 

Now, if they really did decide to turn their backs on the NBA and sign long term, guaranteed deals in Europe(which I don't think would ever happen), then I think it would start to bring in some extra money, at least in certain markets, to make it sustainable.

Here's the thing though...I am not sure Stern thinks what is actually happening is a bad thing.  His biggest goal over the last few years has been to globalize the league, and, if not expanding to Europe with new teams, at least taking advantage of more marketing opportunities over there.

So, if these players are going to go over to Europe, and play there for several months, or even a year, and then come back to the NBA, I have a feeling Stern would look at it as a good thing.  Owners might disagree, because it could hurt their negotiation position, but for Stern, I think he is loving this. 

Really, the only huge negative I see is the chance of injury.  But lets face it, these guys are running free right now, and I believe the clauses in their contracts that keep them from doing things like driving motorcycles, etc. are not relevant at the moment, so they may be even more likely to get injured (or arrested) if they are sticking around here, with nothing to do.

[17wasEZ]

They should be looking for a tv deal, half-a-dozen arenas and an insurance deal for a mini-league featuring the top-80 players or so. Well, they should be looking for someone to look for that for them. The European market is too limited.

This takes hundreds of millions of dollars in investment and backing.  Do you really think the players would put their own money into it?  They'd be better off taking reduced salaries from the NBA. 

I don't see how people can think it's so easy to just start a league that can be promoted and appeal on the national level.  It takes a lot of resources; that's realy the role of the owners in this whole picture.  Yes the fans don't care about the guys in the suits, but they do make it happen behind the scenes.

I wouldn't even care to watch that league anyway.  What do I care about 80 of the top players in the league barnstorming or starting their own mini-league?

I watch the NBA because; 1) I am a Celtics fan, 2) I want to watch certain franchises lose and 3) root for/against certain players.

Only #3 would satisfy me enough to watch a game once in a while and I sure many advertisers know that would be the case with many fans.

[Moranis]

They should be looking for a tv deal, half-a-dozen arenas and an insurance deal for a mini-league featuring the top-80 players or so. Well, they should be looking for someone to look for that for them. The European market is too limited.

This takes hundreds of millions of dollars in investment and backing.  Do you really think the players would put their own money into it?  They'd be better off taking reduced salaries from the NBA. 

I don't see how people can think it's so easy to just start a league that can be promoted and appeal on the national level.  It takes a lot of resources; that's realy the role of the owners in this whole picture.  Yes the fans don't care about the guys in the suits, but they do make it happen behind the scenes.

I wouldn't even care to watch that league anyway.  What do I care about 80 of the top players in the league barnstorming or starting their own mini-league?

I watch the NBA because; 1) I am a Celtics fan, 2) I want to watch certain franchises lose and 3) root for/against certain players.

Only #3 would satisfy me enough to watch a game once in a while and I sure many advertisers know that would be the case with many fans.

What if this league was 8 teams of 12 players and one of the them was the Boston Lagers (or whatever) and the other teams were a team from NY, Philly, Miami, LA, Chicago, Houston, and Dallas?  You have two divisions, play each team in your division 12 times (36 games) and the other division 4 times (16 games) for a 52 game season.  The top two from each league make the playoffs in 7 game series.  Now what if each team was essentially comprised of only the 96 best players in the world. 

I'd watch that in a heartbeat.

[17wasEZ]

They should be looking for a tv deal, half-a-dozen arenas and an insurance deal for a mini-league featuring the top-80 players or so. Well, they should be looking for someone to look for that for them. The European market is too limited.

This takes hundreds of millions of dollars in investment and backing.  Do you really think the players would put their own money into it?  They'd be better off taking reduced salaries from the NBA. 

I don't see how people can think it's so easy to just start a league that can be promoted and appeal on the national level.  It takes a lot of resources; that's realy the role of the owners in this whole picture.  Yes the fans don't care about the guys in the suits, but they do make it happen behind the scenes.

I wouldn't even care to watch that league anyway.  What do I care about 80 of the top players in the league barnstorming or starting their own mini-league?

I watch the NBA because; 1) I am a Celtics fan, 2) I want to watch certain franchises lose and 3) root for/against certain players.

Only #3 would satisfy me enough to watch a game once in a while and I sure many advertisers know that would be the case with many fans.

What if this league was 8 teams of 12 players and one of the them was the Boston Lagers (or whatever) and the other teams were a team from NY, Philly, Miami, LA, Chicago, Houston, and Dallas?  You have two divisions, play each team in your division 12 times (36 games) and the other division 4 times (16 games) for a 52 game season.  The top two from each league make the playoffs in 7 game series.  Now what if each team was essentially comprised of only the 96 best players in the world. 

I'd watch that in a heartbeat.

No way.  I'm a Celtic fan. Besides, why would I care to watch a team play another team 12 times only to have them play a 7 game playoff series?  I may watch a half dozen games or so, but I would rather watch college basketball and its rich tradition than watch a bunch of guys playing on made up teams.