He has a no trade clause. He can, contractually, dictate where he goes. That doesn't mean that he will, though.
Trade for Dame?
- Thread starter kazuneko
- Start date
I agree, my suspicion is Dame has gotten bad advice here, in two ways:
1) He would have maximized chance of a trade if he made the request earlier - whether waiting was tactical or true soul-searching for him, good advice likely would have been to force his own thinking to conclusion before FA and draft.
2) Similarly, he maximizes his chance of Miami if he tells Portland privately he won't show up for a physical anywhere else, but recognizes they need to get the best package they can. Playing this out publicly seems likely to me to lock Portland into exploring the market and innoculate them from fan criticism---becasue Dame has now made himself the unreasonable party. If he had told them his preference but kept it legit quite (Not leaking to his mouthpiece Haynes, not making it clear to Miami they are in driver's seat and can play hardball) he'd be better off.
He probably will still get where he wants, but he's going to take a reputation hit deservedly and he may have increased his chance they call his bluff.
So in order for a player to go to his desired destination, he has to accept less money, amounting to tens of millions of dollars over the course of a contract? This is a reasonable expectation to you?
This is what the league signed up for with max contracts and a salary cap and limits on what players can sign for in free agency. They have no choice but to sign the hometown contract and then push their way out, else they lose out on their earnings potential. Blame the incentives, not the people.
I said nothing like that, and I am not sure you really understand the situation.
The league and union jointly agreed to a CBA. That's a fact.
That CBA creates incentives for players to stay with teams. That's a fact, and something they both agreed to.
That CBA also allows players who reach free agency to decide where they want to play, and whether the jointly-agreed incentives to re-sign are worth giving up control over where you go. Players make all sorts of choices about where they play, how long they sign for, and how they balance salary against those. Teams do to. That is what they both signed up for.
Players can ask for a trade; teams can grant that or not. There's a whole set of rules about penalties and such beyond that if a player doesn't show up (and if a team doesn't pay a player)
The players, their union, the teams, and their league commissioner all agreed to all of this.
That's why I don't have a problem wtih a player asking out---league could have sought to prevent it and didn't. But I look at both sides of this equation - so I don't just decide "player good, league bad" or the reverse. Saying "we like the part where you get paid more to be in one place" and "we want to write-in a new term where I get to pick where I go next" is not what was agreed to.
No he doesn't, Bradley Beal is the only player in the entire NBA with a no-trade clause.
Hypothetically the league could say that it's a violation on the CBA provision against publicly asking for a trade or having an agent or other party do so.... for which they can fine him $150k and potentially suspend him.
I’d feel much differently if he just enforced that (don’t trade me) if that’s what he has which I don’t think is true anyway
Trade me to this team only is different to me
On the no-trade: the NBA does not have the equivalent of MLB's 10/5 automatic no-trade. You only have a no-trade in the NBA if you specifically negotiate it in your contact---and as Cellar Door noted, only Bradley Beal did. Dame chose not to seek it (or Portland decided not to grant a request for it, which he would know when signing the contract) so he doesn't have control over trades.
To be clear, I have lots of philsophical and sociological views of all this---but these are sophisticated parties who negotated an agreement (both the CBA and Dame's agreement) so I do think reaosnable to say that agreement matters a bit.
To be clear, I have lots of philsophical and sociological views of all this---but these are sophisticated parties who negotated an agreement (both the CBA and Dame's agreement) so I do think reaosnable to say that agreement matters a bit.
yeah the NBA's rule is similar in some ways, you have to be I think it's 8/4? in order to even get one. Of course nobody has one except Beal and given how that worked out for WAS, probably nobody else will get one for a long time
My thoughts exactly. If allowing stars to hand pick their teams is a big deal to players, strike a different deal. They didn't because these are outlier situations. There is always a give and take here. The star players are very well taken care of financially. Just look at these insane deals being given to guys who have barely made an All-Star team. Now I'm supposed to feel bad for a player who wants to leave for literally only 1 team? No chance. I think most here agree that they don't have an issue with Dame looking for another opportunity - he's earned that right. It's the attempts at killing your current franchise's negotiating power that have turned people off. And I don't blame them.
If, in 3 years, Tatum forces his way out, I'll be bummed. If he forces a trade to LA and the Celtics are left with Austin Reaves and some picks in 2030 and 2032 or whatever, I'll be pretty damn annoyed. I have zero sympathy for stars who are pissed because they don't get everything they want.
That would never happen bc the next move would be the NBAPA appealing once they stopped laughing and the fine/suspension would be dropped. You can fine/suspend a player for a third party leaking information and unless something was added to this CBA you cannot fine/suspend the player even if they did it themselves.
Yeah there's no way to stop this, the only thing the league/CBA could do would be to make it harder, and those ways would be nonstarters (not allowing players with more than 2 years on their contracts to be traded, non-guaranteed deals for players that don't play for any reason, etc).
This really isn't a morality play except for people who choose that narrative. Its simply a business negotiation and both sides have a rational desire to get the best terms possible. Absent an anti-capitalist stance, there really is no reason to demonize either party.
Its just business.
Its just business.
I don't think you do. Players of his caliber make significantly less by not extending. Like tens of millions of dollars - I think Jaylen could lose about $80 million guaranteed if he goes out as a UFA. Also, free agency is not a free market - there were only a few teams with max room this year, and they all sucked. So you're saying that players, who have one limited window to make money, need to choose between essentially a max extension or an MLE to "go where they want to go." That's not a choice, especially when this other avenue of signing an extension and then getting traded when it doesn't work out is available to them. Yeah, I'm sure people would cheer on Dame if he left Portland and signed a Max with, like, Houston after a 20 win season. There would just be some new reason created to complain about him.
By the way, that is not only much better for the player, it's much better for the team. In your world, Dame leaves Portland instead of extending, and leaves them with no assets when he signs elsewhere in free agency. This enables Portland to at least get something back for the player. Will it equal Dame? I don't know, but it's significantly more than the nothing in the scenario you're advocating for.
This is just how the league likes it, for better or worse, and you can't fault Dame for using his leverage when he can.
I'm constantly amazed at how we want these guys to be ultra-competitive athletes and then think that kind of mindset should have no correlation with their personalities. They're supposed to want to get everything - that's what we ask of them. That's what we mold them into from the time they're 12.
Why aren't more star athletes doing this then? We're talking about one, maybe two guys a year. Everyone else seems to be doing just fine, even those in crappier situations. I don't think personalities have anything to do with it.
1 - not many star athletes have the leverage of star basketball players. It’s a unique sport.
2 - what is your definition of more? In the last year we’ve had kyrie, kd, Aaron Rodgers, harden, Russell Wilson if you go back further. Idk - who is this everyone else?
Again, you are just not aware of the how a CBA works or comes to be. The rules you are talking about was jointly negotiated and jointly agreed. Every single one of them. It is not "just how the league likes it" Similarly, it is simply not true he had a choice of "MLE or a max extension". That wasn't true this offseason, or when he signed. It is not 1920 and this is not baseball's reserve rule we are talking about.
I am pretty confident I know everything the players and league have agreed the player cannot get if they sign with someone other than their currrent team - and also that you are not well-equipped to have a discussion about the NBA or the CBA. I get you want players to have more choice; I respect that, but it really is a lot more complicated than that. If you don't want to take the time to undestand that complexity, at least have the decency not to question the knowledge of those of us who have.
Section 18. Trades.
Any player (or, for clarity, any player representative or person acting with
authority on behalf of a player) who publicly expresses a desire to be traded
to another Team shall be subject to a fine and/or a suspension. The
maximum fine that may be imposed by the NBA on a player pursuant to the
foregoing shall be $150,000.
Now the NBAPA would argue that sending a text to Chris Haynes and having him say that you demanded a trade isn't the same as publicly doing it, but... that's at least a question for the arbitrator.
This is an NBA discussion. Why are you dragging NFL players into this? They operate under different rules and CBA. We’ve only had a couple of NBA guys doing this most years, if that.
Would you be good with Tatum forcing a trade and the Celtics getting 30 cents on the dollar? He certainly has that leverage. And it doesn’t bother me that stars have to make a choice based on the CBA they agreed to.
They have fined guys for making trade requests---but it's such a small number (of players, and the fine amount) it's pretty clearly just in there to mollify some owners not to actually change any of the underlying dynamics.
Teams leaked that they would seek a much higher penalty (one story was they suggested 70% of salary) if a player made a public trade request, but unsurprisingly that was not something that changed to that degree in the new CBA
Teams leaked that they would seek a much higher penalty (one story was they suggested 70% of salary) if a player made a public trade request, but unsurprisingly that was not something that changed to that degree in the new CBA
I understand the CBA. I have no idea what you’re talking about here. You’re making the case that Damian Lillard can sign “where he wants to go” - not me - and that’s a completely false statement considering the limitations of max contracts, the salary cap, and free agency. The only way for him to go “where he wants” at the salary he’s worth is to request a trade.
I also understand that the CBA is collectively bargained. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think the players are the ones negotiating for a salary cap, max contracts, and luxury tax. Those are ownership positions. I’m sure players would much rather be able to leave their teams with no restrictions and sign elsewhere with no restrictions.
so when I say this is how the league likes it, that is true. This is what owners want, and a select group of star players are able to manipulate the system to their benefit.
you're the one who asked “why aren’t more star athletes doing this?” I took that literally, because a lot of nba players do this. That’s why people don’t like it
“only a couple guys doing this most years” - yeah, only the top tier of players have enough power to pull this stuff. Most top ten-fifteen players have agitated for a trade at some point.
I wouldn’t want Tatum to leave, but I don’t have a weird parasocial relationship with him where I get offended when he makes a career decision. If the celtics suck for a period and the time is up, I wouldn’t drag him for it.
again, they just traded smart like he didn’t do anything for the franchise. It’s not that hard to see the players as humans making the same kind of business decisions that Gms do
That's not what I said about Lillard; what I said, and is true, is he had various options with various tradeoffs for contract length, amount, and situation. Your complaint seems to be "he can't get the same money everywhere at all points in time" which is fine as a sociological commentary, but irrelevant to the actual CBA the actual NBA and actual NBAPA both agreeed to.
Both sides get things they want in a negotiation and both sides give up things. That is true of the CBA, and of Dame's contract. The owners would much rather have fewer/no guaranteed contracts, smaller mandatory roster sizes, longer rookie deals, and lots of other stuff they don't get too. Wishing that whoever you like more could get everything they want may make you feel warm and fuzzy, but is not how the CBA works or, for that matter, the real world.
Where you and I part company (other than recognizing the details of the CBA) is that I think mature parties can make agreements that constrain their choices and still live with the constraints. Dame can ask for a trade, the Blazers can meet that demand or not. Dame can sign a max deal with them to get security, or he can go year-to-year to get maximum control over his destiny. The team can suspend him or try to trade him. I think they are all able to make these choices, and the stuff going on now is all part of the choices they've made.
Nobody cares about star players angling for trades, they care when they limit their destination to literally one city. And no, a lot of stars haven’t done what Lillard is currently attempting to do. You listed the handful that have.
Don’t think we’re going to find common ground here, which is fine.
again, I understand the CBA. I’m saying that if Dame never signed his extension and was a UFA this off-season, he could not simply “go where he wants to go”(Miami) without taking a $40 million paycut. That’s just so unreasonable for a person in his position that it is not a choice and I’m not the one who’s trying to feel “warm and fuzzy” because I’m recognizing the reality of human nature.
and I’ll add again, what we’re going through right now is optimal for dame and the blazers. He gets money and destination he wants, they get assets. If he were to leave in an off-season via signing for a minimum somewhere, they wouldn’t get anything.
Yeah, so, like I said all along you are simply noting that he had choices, and you wish he had different ones. Welcome to the real world.
Out of curiosity, in your imaginary world, what happens to the non-star players? Because hoping that the owners simply pay a much higher % of total revenue is not realistic. Dame getting more money for wherever he wants to go has implications for other players, too....which is why the NBAPA went along with the system you're now learning about.
This is not not good guys and bad guys. This is a really complex intersection of interests, including within each 'side' of the negotiating table.
except.... they could trade him before he became a FA. It's silly to argue that it's GOOD for teams to pay a guy a bunch more money, and then get "assets" instead of what they paid for. And of course the assets are worse because he makes more money, and then worse again because he threatens to pout if he goes anywhere else. If Dame didn't sign his last extension he'd still be under contract for 2 year, and the Blazers would probably get more for him in trade.
Listen, Dame wanted to make the absolute most money he could as early as he could and to extend that as often as he could... good for him. The tradeoff of getting all that extra money is he doesn't have any control on where he plays basketball.
Why are we assuming that what's optimal for the Blazers is to lose their franchise star and defining player of this generation for the relative shit salad Miami is offering?
Dame had a choice and he made the one that maximized his income. That's fine, but the known trade off was that you only get that money by staying in town unless the team is willing to send you off. If you want to posit that it's anti human nature that's fine, but we all recognize that's the deal here.
I feel like you're gaslighting me. I'm saying the exact same thing, except I'm admitting that we shouldn't expect Dame to make a decision that literally no player in the history in the league has made (forego maximum income for a minimum contract to "go where he wants to go"). You're the one in a fantasy world thinking that it's logical to expect players to do that on the regular.
The market for Dame isn't suppressed because of his contract, it's because not many teams are looking for a point guard like him, or what they'd have to give up would prevent them from being a contender.
Both parties had an interest in extension (the Blazers to retain a star player, the player to get more money). Their interests are no longer aligned. He asked for a trade. These alternatives weren't what the Blazers wanted, either.
Because some posters have an issue with the way Dame is going about this and pretending like if he just didn't extend and signed somewhere else as an unrestricted free agent, then he wouldn't be such an asshole. But in that scenario, the Blazers get nothing. How is that any better for the team or playe?
If the argument is that he shouldn't have extended and asked for a trade instead of an extension, then that's kind of nonsense too and we'd be having this discussion anyway, just earlier. Sorry, "Players aren't timing their trade requests optimally for the team" isn't compelling to me.
I've said nothing at all like that. You are not reading at all carefully - maybe that's the source of your confusion. I have never said a minimum contract--I don't understand why you keep raising that.
He could have gone several places at max money along the way as a FA; he could have tried to engineer a trade at different points in time. You seem to think anything other than "most possible money" is unreasonable to ask of him---guys make choices annually to leave a team, to take fewer years, etc. to get to where they want to play. Choices are not perfect in the NBA.
Most of us get that he chose to forego lots of ways to have more control over where he played in order to get the biggest contract; more power to him. Now, he's trying to push for his preferred location...that's his choice, but it is not some "league won't let him" thing, he chose this situation today.
Last edited:
At the end of the day, the NBA (and the players) have decided that having some semblance of competitive balance across many US metropolitan areas is good for the financial viability of the owners and the players. If we had a situation where all the best players just went to LA and Miami and created a couple of super teams, the league (and eventually the players) would make less money. So, that is why players can't just play wherever they want - or actually - they can they just can't have their cake and eat it, too. Dame doesn't have the right to make $42 million/year, guaranteed, wherever he wants. If he wants $42 million/year, he's got to play for Portland, or where Portland wants him to play. He could have signed for less money to play somewhere else. That's the tradeoff. So, don't accept the max deal and not be willing to accept the restrictions that come with it.
I get that it's a big pay cut in terms of pure dollars, but you can still make insane amounts of money without locking yourself in the same place for a decade plus. Lebron is basically the force behind the player empowerment era, yet he's never really been traded (not counting that Cleveland technically did trade him to Miami for a couple of picks way back in 2010 for cap purposes). He's kept his contracts short, signed in 3 different places as a free agent, and will retire having been paid the most in NBA history (over half a billion in salary).
Can you provide some backup that Dame would have lost $ if he went to UFA as opposed to extending?
Because I have a pretty good handle on Jaylen's situation. He's a special case b/c he's Supermax eligible but the variety of options he has are something like: (i) Supermax = 5/$300M; (ii) UFA = 4/$240M (30% of cap starting salary); and if JB is traded and then extends, the extension would be 4/$190M (starting salary =140% of current).
All numbers approximate. I've posted links before.
Every SoSH thread is a morality play ... except the one about Saran Wrap
8% raises for staying in POR, 5% raises if signing elsewhere comes out to about 14M for the last 2 years
People act like pricks in standard business negotiations all the time. But that doesn’t mean that everyone acts like a prick when money is on the line. I think it’s okay to note that.
Somewhat relatedly, this is an entertainment product so how you are perceived by the fans is important. Lillard can do what he wants, and fans can still retain the right to criticize him for whatever it is he chooses to do.
Somewhat relatedly, this is an entertainment product so how you are perceived by the fans is important. Lillard can do what he wants, and fans can still retain the right to criticize him for whatever it is he chooses to do.
Last edited:
Lol Dame had tons of chances to control his destiny over the past 5 years. He could have done a normal trade request, signed in FA, or set up a S&T to a contender.
He wanted to get his big extension, and then wanted the perks of FA/S&T in addition (choose destination; they don't part with many assets).
He has had tons of leverage at many points throughout his career, and traded it for a big payday in PDX. As is his right!
Sure. And he's using more leverage now, as is his right. And that's ok too. He isn't the first and won't be the last.
I don't think Dame's gone too far yet. But let's see what he does when and if he doesn't get his way. Holding out, getting fined and not getting paid is ok too.
Putting in a poor, disruptive effort with Portland while trying to agitate and still get paid would be going to far in my mind.
I support him trying to get his way within reason, but I think Portland is totally right to try and get the most possible too. It's all just business.
I think Dame is ok staying in Portland if he can't get Miami. What I don't know is if and how much Portland wants to move on. Dame is the one who asked to be traded, sure. But I wonder if there is more to it behind the scenes.
I'd still like to see him play with Butler, but I'm still entertained whatever happens.
I don't think Dame's gone too far yet. But let's see what he does when and if he doesn't get his way. Holding out, getting fined and not getting paid is ok too.
Putting in a poor, disruptive effort with Portland while trying to agitate and still get paid would be going to far in my mind.
I support him trying to get his way within reason, but I think Portland is totally right to try and get the most possible too. It's all just business.
I think Dame is ok staying in Portland if he can't get Miami. What I don't know is if and how much Portland wants to move on. Dame is the one who asked to be traded, sure. But I wonder if there is more to it behind the scenes.
I'd still like to see him play with Butler, but I'm still entertained whatever happens.
If I'm Portland, I'd just bench him if a trade doesn't develop. It keeps his value higher given his age (OKC AL), no risk of injury, and you avoid disruptive antics on a young team.
He has about the same value with 3 years on his deal as he does with 4, particularly if he's not putting mileage on. You can credibly bluff that he'll have to waste 1-2 years of his prime sitting at home.
No risk of fan backlash, because sounds like Portland fans are incredibly pissed at how he's handling this. Little risk of league office backlash, because he's the one playing the "only trade me to one team" game.
And, as always, Miami can get him at any point if they just include Bam in the deal.
Maybe Portland will do that.
If Dame is willing to play in Portland if things don't work out, I don't think he'll be a distraction. With regard to the fans, I think if Dame says something like "I love Portland, but it was clear to me that the organization was moving on. If I can't go where I want, I'd rather play for you", they'll mostly be forgiving and will want to see him play. And that might be the way Dame actually feels. And the Blazers will probably play him.
All that assumes Dame doesn't act like a disruptive asshole in Portland if he doesn't get his way. We'll see.
If Dame is willing to play in Portland if things don't work out, I don't think he'll be a distraction. With regard to the fans, I think if Dame says something like "I love Portland, but it was clear to me that the organization was moving on. If I can't go where I want, I'd rather play for you", they'll mostly be forgiving and will want to see him play. And that might be the way Dame actually feels. And the Blazers will probably play him.
All that assumes Dame doesn't act like a disruptive asshole in Portland if he doesn't get his way. We'll see.
I am with you on this entire sage except I do think Dame will fall their bluff and not report. Think about it....he doesn't need the money, if he can force a trade of his liking by the deadline a guy his age is probably going to be ok playing half or little less than half a season including playofs. He's in a great position to utilize his leverage which is his right. People forget sometimes how hardcore of a business this game is.
Where will Miami be 40 games into the season? That’s expecting a lot from Jimmy and Bam with no supporting cast. If one gets hurt they could be an outside the play-in. At that point maybe Dame wants to go somewhere else.
What if Tyler Herro gets injured, just into the season? Miami doesn't have much to make an enticing deal, and if any of that products falters - it will be tough for them.
Yeah, I could see that. I think he'll report, but I won't be surprised either way.
If Portland really wants to move on, I think they'd prefer that Dame sits out without pay and stays healthy, focus on the new kid, and make it easier for the fans to move on from him too. Dame knows if they want to move on or not. He might make it a little harder for them by showing up and playing if they do.
Isn't it fine for Portland if Dame doesn't report? Keeps his body fresh for trade value, and it's fine for an acquiring team if they get him at the deadline (KD to Phoenix), or next summer (3 years left on deal; no wear on his body this season).
Also, as others mention, Miami could look quite bad with a thin roster.
Dame may play hardball, but Portland's leverage seems stronger to me, and I'm sure their front office has gamed it out similarly.
They were 11-14 after 25 this past season when Jimmy and Herro both missed some time. I mean sure they could all be injured but that isn't a great likelihood. It's always a risk I suppose but playing for Portland while scoreboard watching doesn't seem to be what I'd expect an aging PG to do on an awful team.
Dame wants Miami for much more than basketball but even if he expands his list playing during this time reduces his leverage to force Portlands hand.
Im not so sure. It seems like it’s really important to Dame to look like the good guy. All of the stuff so far has been conjecture and reports of what his agent is doing and he still sent out some tweets to the effect of “this is all not true”.
If he chooses not to report, he loses all plausible deniability and he becomes the bad guy. I don’t think that’s something Dame wants to do