2019 Offseason Thread

[msgkings322]

What about penalty for teams who trade players a year after that player signed a 4 or 5 year deal?

But why, the player still gets paid his contract. If a player comes to a team and says I want out, the team can't save any money they have to deal him. The player doesn't lose financially. And that's what no trade clauses are for.

 

[msgkings322]

I get that but players are never going to agree to anything where there is some type of financial penalty if they request a deal a year into a contract while the owners can trade them a few months into a long contract without any sort of penalty.

Owners are fighting a losing battle if they try to do that

See above, it's not symmetrical. The player can really mess up a team not honoring his deal, the team can't cost the player any money trading him

 

[bksballer89]

But why, the player still gets paid his contract. If a player comes to a team and says I want out, the team can't save any money they have to deal him. The player doesn't lose financially. And that's what no trade clauses are for.

I'm against no trade clauses for everyone. You need to be a special kind of player to get a no trade clause. Maybe use the new rules they have for being eligible for super max and use it for a no trade clause instead.

I also think a simple agreement of saying players who signed a max 4 or 5 year deal can't request or be traded in the first 2 years is fine

 

[bksballer89]

See above, it's not symmetrical. The player can really mess up a team not honoring his deal, the team can't cost the player any money trading him

Teams can mess up a players career by trading him to some bum ass team when he just went through the free agency period and selected that team for a reason. Same shit if you ask me.

As a free agent signing a 4 or 5 year deal, you expect to be there for at least 3 years at minimum. You're not expecting to be traded 6 or 7 months after signing that deal

 

[WiggyRuss]

I'm against no trade clauses for everyone. You need to be a special kind of player to get a no trade clause. Maybe use the new rules they have for being eligible for super max and use it for a no trade clause instead.

I also think a simple agreement of saying players who signed a max 4 or 5 year deal can't request or be traded in the first 2 years is fine

but then they can just mope.

I LOVE the idea that a player can whine his way out of town but he has to take a 30% hit on his contract if he does so.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

But why, the player still gets paid his contract. If a player comes to a team and says I want out, the team can't save any money they have to deal him. The player doesn't lose financially. And that's what no trade clauses are for.

Great Point!
Correct, also often a trade kicker.

Original team ends up taking back far less value often times.

 

[bksballer89]

why would players agree to anything that stops them from ever requesting a trade?

For example in AD's case, he HELPED the Pelicans.

Why would owners be against that? The PG situation is extremely weird. Has there been any other recent cases of a player requesting a trade a year after signing a 4 or 5 year deal?

AD could have easily acted like everything was fine which likely means they end up as a .500 team, no Zion, and lose AD for absolutely nothing

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

I'm against no trade clauses for everyone. You need to be a special kind of player to get a no trade clause. Maybe use the new rules they have for being eligible for super max and use it for a no trade clause instead.

I also think a simple agreement of saying players who signed a max 4 or 5 year deal can't request or be traded in the first 2 years is fine

Nah.
If a player wants that type of flexibility, then sign short deals with opt outs like LeBron did.
Sacrifice the super max.

Cant have it both ways.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

why would players agree to anything that stops them from ever requesting a trade?

For example in AD's case, he HELPED the Pelicans.

Why would owners be against that? The PG situation is extremely weird. Has there been any other recent cases of a player requesting a trade a year after signing a 4 or 5 year deal?

AD could have easily acted like everything was fine which likely means they end up as a .500 team, no Zion, and lose AD for absolutely nothing

AD destroyed the Pelicans season last year.

Yes, they got lucky with the lotto balls, but thats not the point.

 

[bksballer89]

AD destroyed the Pelicans season last year.

And I agree. But the Pelicans were not winning a title this past season or next season. He could have easily not said a damn word which means the following 3 things.

1) You end up with a much better record than 33-49

2) You likely miss out on Zion as they would have probably had the best record for a team who missed the playoffs.

3) AD leaves for absolutely nothing next summer.

I would much rather AD be open to me which now gave me 2 top 10 picks including Zion and 3 more solid young players.

They're in a much better position than they would have been if AD told them nothing and left for free in 2020.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

I get that but players are never going to agree to anything where there is some type of financial penalty if they request a deal a year into a contract while the owners can trade them a few months into a long contract without any sort of penalty.

Owners are fighting a losing battle if they try to do that

Owners can live 100 lifetimes without ever making another NBA related dime.

Players gotta pay for those 4 houses, 12 cars, 5 babies, and 3 baby mommas.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

And I agree. But the Pelicans were not winning a title this past season or next season. He could have easily not said a damn word which means the following 3 things.

1) You end up with a much better record than 33-49

2) You likely miss out on Zion as they would have probably had the best record for a team who missed the playoffs.

3) AD leaves for absolutely nothing next summer.

I would much rather AD be open to me which now gave me 2 top 10 picks including Zion and 3 more solid young players.

They're in a much better position than they would have been if AD told them nothing and left for free in 2020.

That case can be made often, but still not the point, unless you think the owners were happy when he pulled that stunt last year.
I doubt it, PLUS, he still had to option to stay after Zion was drafted to help Pelicans win.

If he stays with Pelicans and helps recruit there, they’re prob better then Lakers.

Once he becomes FA, do whatever you want.

 

[tomodach10]

Owners can live 100 lifetimes without ever making another NBA related dime.

Players gotta pay for those 4 houses, 12 cars, 5 babies, and 3 baby mommas.

And you have to work to pay for your trailer park home.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

And you have to work to pay for your trailer park home.

You think?
Keep quiet or I’ll buy the entire trailer park where you reside, and evict you and your 8 dogs.

 

[DJ Fieri]

Monsoon is traditionally defined as a seasonal reversing wind accompanied by corresponding changes in precipitation, but is now used to describe seasonal changes in atmospheric circulation and precipitation associated with the asymmetric heating of land and sea.


Don't @me, Kid.

That pidley Shit we had last night was not a monsoon....lol

#schooled

 

[DJ Fieri]

NBA looking at free-agency process, sources say

10,161

 

[bksballer89]

10,161

Ok......

 

[dtgold88]

Change no trade clause rules.
Without one, owners have every right to trade a player.

Agreed.....but players have every right to request a trade.

 

[WiggyRuss]

Agreed.....but players have every right to request a trade.

why?

 

[dtgold88]

See above, it's not symmetrical. The player can really mess up a team not honoring his deal, the team can't cost the player any money trading him

This is true, but what player has not honored his deal? didn't NO choose to sit Davis? Cavs and SA could have held onto Kyrie/Kawhi

Team chose not to see what would happen if they held onto said player.