shopson67
Well-Known Member
If/when AD extends this summer, his deal would be equivalent to 5 years, $251.4M
Kind of a dick move but I laughed. This is the most creative version of the Jaylon Brown has no left hand joke.
Brown isn't on the same level as Jokic.
The Joker's a 5x all star. A 2x league MVP. A WFC finals MVP. And Finals MVP.
Didn't MJ make about 93 mil from his contracts while playing?
The irony is ... if they didn't give it to him, some other dumbazz team would have.
Other teams could only offer like 100m less
Agreed. In the end this will cost some other veterans some money, if not their jobs.This is just another example of why I don't like the concept of the max contract, especially the supermax. The way its written, a team is basically left with little choice but to give it to the player who qualifies whether they are worth it or not. Brown is not worth the numbers the supermax works out to. That's franchise cornerstone level money. He's a fine player but he's not that. Personally, I'm not even sold on him being #2 on a championship team but that's separate discussion. If they had a true market, he wouldn't get this number. Guys like Giannis and Jokic would, they'd likely get even more, but these secondary stars would come in at lesser numbers. The players wouldn't go for it, but it'd benefit everyone involved imo (teams and players as a whole) if they did away with max contracts and just let you bid whatever.
does not really matter, there are dozens of players who got this "max" money that I have to google. Give it a few years and the owners, who are paying this mad money, will eventually lock them out.For a guy that imo isn't worth it. Yes he is good but not that good!
does not really matter, there are dozens of players who got this "max" money that I have to google. Give it a few years and the owners, who are paying this mad money, will eventually lock them out.
I dont want to hear about a no trade clause, I want to hear about a no demand to be traded clause to go play with your friends.
It matters if it hinders a team contending because they can't sign other players
Is that the case with the Celtics? They've come up just short when Brown was cheap with much the same roster.
Is that the case with the Celtics? They've come up just short when Brown was cheap with much the same roster.