PR-wise, isn't the winning move for Lebron to sign for MLE or less and have Bosh join Cleveland in the max slot they can create? Nike will probably make up the difference and it's a heck of a story.
Miami Heat: Pat Riley's Grease Fire
- Thread starter CaptainLaddie
- Start date
If any of these reports are correct and he returns to Cleveland, I have no problem saying he will be one of the easiest non-Boston/non-local-to-my-zipcode athletes to root for. He is amazing to watch and if he wins a championship for Cleveland after all this, he will only add to his legendary status.
No.PedroKsBambino said:
People understand taking a little less to play with people you like. A guy who is worth at least 20M playing for 5 so he can get rings in the prime of his career and getting a kickback from his shoe company just makes him look like an asshole who is manipulating the system in a gross way.
Cellar-Door said:
I don't think that's how most people think about the situation. For example, can you find an article that calls Tim Duncan an asshole for taking less money? He's getting paid by his shoe company, too
He didn't take $4M he took a paycut from 15 to 12 then to 10, he stayed in the same city and they kept the same team together (didn't go out and sign someone at the max), and he's old. The situation is completely different.PedroKsBambino said:
If in 2004 Duncan had taken the MLE to go to Miami (who had just gotten Wade and Shaq) then yeah, people would think he was an asshole.
As Zach Lowe noted today, the Duncan thing isn't really a good parallel. I don't think LeBron would get too villanized, but I think we'd see a few pot shots at the max salary thing for encouraging this.Cellar-Door said:
Cellar-Door said:
Going to Cleveland, his hometown, to a team that didn't make the playoffs is nothing like the scenario you describe. I think you're projecting your hate for Lebron on a lot of others who are unlikely to feel the same way.
Also, if the reference is to Lowe's Grantland article, that point does not appear there. If it's a podcast, have not listened yet so cannot confirm.
I disagree. I don't hate Lebron at all, and I hope he goes back to Cleveland. I do think that if a player who even at the max is massively underpayed took 4M in his prime people would think it was ridiculous. It would be even worse if Nike "made it up to him" as you suggested. A player essentially taking a bribe from a shoe company to circumvent the salary cap rules would and should cause outrage from NBA fans.PedroKsBambino said:
bowiac said:
In that data is there anyone on Cleveland who is good defensively? I think Varejao is probably the only good defensive player on that team and while they were 19th in DRTG the 2 previous years they were 27th and 26th and that sums up what he has been working with defensively. I dont think he is a great defensive player today, but the way I see it if you are a PG on defense you need to stay in front of your man and fight through picks and then switch when needed. Unless you are super slow those are all effort things, there is skill involved but effort can get you 80% of the way there. Once Lebron is next to him and Kyrie sees what he is doing I think Kyrie will get the message.
Also, is there a PG in the NBA who is good offensively and is also 'good' defensively? I really cant think of a PG who is a real difference maker on defense, so really we just want Kyrie not to suck.
Cellar-Door said:
Rather a lot more extreme than I suggested, and again you're creating a different situation and then attacking the straw man.
Which player that has taken less, in any sport (and there have been many) suggests to you that LeBron would be hated for doing so?
Chris Paul would like a word.wutang112878 said:
Also Russell Westbrook, and maybe Tony Parker.
PedroKsBambino said:
Umm these are your exact words:
PedroKsBambino said:
The MLE if they are offerring Bosh the Max would be about 4.3M or so? Unless they can get a way to give him the 5.3M MLE, but really does the $1M difference really matter.
How am I creating a straw man? You suggested he sign for a tiny fraction of his value so that the team could sign someone else for their actual value, then Nike would "make up the difference".
You then brought in Duncan which is a totally different scenario and I tried to build a closer situation for Duncan.
As to who has done it..... Nobody. Literally not a single top 5 player in any major sport has signed for 20-25% of their market value in the prime of his career with a new team, so that team could then throw a ton of money at an inferior player. That's the point, it is so absurd, that it has never happened.
Cellar-Door said:
Because no one has been in position to do it before, but LeBron doesn't need help from Nike to do this if he wants. He makes $40M per year in endorsements, he should play where he wants. Fuck the CBA and the owners who are seeing their investments go up by hundreds of millions of dollars while artificially limiting the earnings of the top players in the league. If I were LeBron, I would sign for whatever team I wanted to play for, whether or not they had cap space.
well even at a max deal, LeBron is only taking like 60% of his on-court value, because the CBA literally makes it illegal for anyone to pay him what he's really worth.
Lebron is motivated by money. He's said publicly & recently that his goal is to become a billionaire. So, i believe he will be looking to maximize his total earnings (salary + endorsements + ?), which is a complicated calculation b/c have to factor in what narrative makes him most attractive to advertisers & what other income opportunities he would have. That's why he has a team of advisors by the way to help him sort through these tough decisions.
Lebron is motivated by money. He's said publicly & recently that his goal is to become a billionaire. So, i believe he will be looking to maximize his total earnings (salary + endorsements + ?), which is a complicated calculation b/c have to factor in what narrative makes him most attractive to advertisers & what other income opportunities he would have. That's why he has a team of advisors by the way to help him sort through these tough decisions.
ALiveH said:
Not sure how to split your post into 2 parts, so:
1) This article from a few days ago thinks it's much more than that:
"Our running tally on the worth of LeBron on a three-year deal hits $143.3 million."
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/11168967/nba-lebron-james-real-value
2) Pretty much everyone is motivated by money to one degree or another, it's a necessity for virtually everyone in the world (except monks and maybe a few other exceptions). You make it sound like that is his sole motivation, when my impression is that it's just one of his goals and quite possibly not the most important. He has his whole life to try to become a billionaire if he wants, but his playing career won't last forever.
To me Lebron's decision is ultimately driven by two parameters.
1. The Miami Heat cannot get better without either significantly cutting Wade's contract or letting him go and replacing him with players that suit Lebron's talent better, like let's say a rim protector and a spot shooter, or even a different superstar like Carmelo Anthony.
I think it's highly unlikely that Wade will accept a significant paycut and Lebron can't pressure explicitly for this to happen because... it's not the decent thing to do to a friend/former co-conspirator and because it's going to be a PR disaster. I sense that this is the reason that a certain passive aggressiveness is coming off Lebron's camp. It feels as if he wants Riley to do the dirty work for him, but that won't happen.
This leads to Lebron's realization that the better choice for winning is moving elsewhere but:
2. Lebron can't go anywhere else but Cleveland because he's going to be branded a mercenary if he chooses a third destination.
For these two reasons it seems to me that Lebron is going to end up there, even though the situation is going to be far more from ideal.
1. The Miami Heat cannot get better without either significantly cutting Wade's contract or letting him go and replacing him with players that suit Lebron's talent better, like let's say a rim protector and a spot shooter, or even a different superstar like Carmelo Anthony.
I think it's highly unlikely that Wade will accept a significant paycut and Lebron can't pressure explicitly for this to happen because... it's not the decent thing to do to a friend/former co-conspirator and because it's going to be a PR disaster. I sense that this is the reason that a certain passive aggressiveness is coming off Lebron's camp. It feels as if he wants Riley to do the dirty work for him, but that won't happen.
This leads to Lebron's realization that the better choice for winning is moving elsewhere but:
2. Lebron can't go anywhere else but Cleveland because he's going to be branded a mercenary if he chooses a third destination.
For these two reasons it seems to me that Lebron is going to end up there, even though the situation is going to be far more from ideal.
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/11193663/adidas-signed-cleveland-cavaliers-draft-pick-andrew-wiggins-shoe-deal-according-sourcesbowiac said:
Manziel still a possibility, but Wiggins is Adidas
@Chris_Broussard: In addition to Pat Riley, it is believed Miami's Erik Spoelstra, Mickey Arison and Dwyane Wade will attend today's meeting with LeBron James
Ira Winderman with a short article on some of the ramifications of the Heat being hard-capped: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/miami-heat/sfl-miami-heat-nba-free-agency-s070814,0,1367099.story. One thing I don't think anyone has mentioned is that - if I understand things correctly - they cannot bid on amnestied players like Carlos Boozer.
Interesting fact I just ran across: Arison for some reason has sold over $470M of Carnival stock in the last few months. http://www.cruiselawnews.com/2014/06/articles/worst-cruise-line-in-the-world/in-last-week-micky-arison-sells-over-78000000-of-carnival-stock-hes-sold-over-473000000-of-carnival-stock-in-3-months/.
Would be interested in hearing his answer when LBJ asks, "So why did you guys hard cap the team?"
RedOctober3829 said:
Interesting fact I just ran across: Arison for some reason has sold over $470M of Carnival stock in the last few months. http://www.cruiselawnews.com/2014/06/articles/worst-cruise-line-in-the-world/in-last-week-micky-arison-sells-over-78000000-of-carnival-stock-hes-sold-over-473000000-of-carnival-stock-in-3-months/.
Would be interested in hearing his answer when LBJ asks, "So why did you guys hard cap the team?"
They mention it in there, but it has been rumored that he want to buy Villa in the EPL. Probably a reason he didn't want to pay the tax last year as well.wade boggs chicken dinner said:
Cellar-Door said:
I think "bribe" is a little bit of an odd term. He'd be getting compensation from one entity for taking less compensation from another entity. That's about it.
He makes about twice as much from endorsements as he could from a max contract . So if Nike said they'd give him that extra cash, why wouldn't he take it?
If it's about the money (as opposed to status within the league) he should look at the sum total of what is on the table for him in the coming years. If Nike is willing to make up the difference, what moral calculus compels him to take less money overall, in the name of taking more money from one specific source?
I am NOT saying it will happen, because it's pretty damned unlikely. But that's not the same as saying it's "wrong".
Would it outrage NBA fans? I'm not sure why it would, that much. He's already opened that door, taking $10million or so less per year in Miami. So he'd double-down on that. So what? If Nike says "take $20million less per year from that guy, and we'll pay you an extra $30million per year" why shouldn't he do it?
Also: maybe it would add some scrutiny to the overall CBA and salary cap issue. He may feel that
a. Nike will compensate him more in the next few years, thus netting him more overall compensation
b. there would be pressure for revisiting the CBA in 2017 and he might think that the team cap and player max numbers could be noticeably increased, and he'd be able to net more in a future contract than he would if the cap/max stayed as is until 2021 (when he'd be 37).
Again, not saying this will happen, just that it's not a moral/ethical quandary.
In response to this, from the RAPM point of view, Varejao grades out very strongly defensively, while Matthew Dellavedova, CJ Miles, and Tyler Zeller all graded out fine. As far as PG defense goes, Kyrie does seem to really (consistently) suck. There are also some strong two way PGs. Just from last year, Bledsoe, Paul, Hill, Lowery, Conley, Holiday, and Parker all graded out strongly defensively.wutang112878 said:
But sure, if LeBron can get Kyrie to not suck, then that'll help a lot. Garnett always grades out super strong in RAPM, even this year when everyone agreed he was slow. That may just be Garnett's "motivational" techniques at work however, rather than his actual play.
Cellar-Door said:
You called it a bribe---as others have noted that is not reasonable, and also not what I said.
The Duncan scenario is a lot closer than anyone you have come up with to suggest there'd be this wave of hate---so, odd to criticize it when you haven't made any rational case for your proposition. It's preposterous to suggest no player has taken significantly less money to play for their 'hometown' team; Duncan is at half or less of his theoretical max contract. I think it's ridiculous to say that going to a new team for less money will somehow make it a negative perception wise; again I'd ask for an example of why.
He left like 4mil a year on the table I believe. Not 10.
I'd be pissed myself. Nike could basically form a superteam anywhere they wanted if they "paid the difference." The Union would be pissed too.
I'd be pissed myself. Nike could basically form a superteam anywhere they wanted if they "paid the difference." The Union would be pissed too.
Broussard on the radio this morning said he thinks LBJ is going to sign with Cleveland and it's going to be announced before he heads to Brazil on Saturday.
There's a lot of smoke surrounding Cleveland, and not just the river this time.
Not sure why, but he immediately becomes more likeable to me if he goes back.
There's a lot of smoke surrounding Cleveland, and not just the river this time.
Not sure why, but he immediately becomes more likeable to me if he goes back.
Bron left less than that on the table when you factor in the 7.925% city and state tax on his 41 home games for the Cavs minus the select games Bron does have to pay on.bosox79 said:
PedroKsBambino said:
Let me preface this by saying that I don't actually care one way or another, and I think that all of the wrangling over LeBron's mindset etc. is silly. However, the argument people would make against LeBron if he went to Cleveland for less money so that they could add Bosh, or whoever, is that he's "stacking the deck." It's already been mentioned here plenty, and there's a certain segment of folks who feel that true stars should want to play against other stars, not with them. So if LeBron signed for the MLE in Cleveland allowing them to sign Bosh people would go off on him for not being competitive enough and wanting to stack the deck and not win the right way, or whatever. People hate LeBron. It's not really rational, as evidenced by the fact that there are folks who would be annoyed if he takes the max and folks who would be annoyed if he doesn't take the max.
This Jarrett Jack trade sure makes it seem like LeBron is going to Cleveland. No reason to deal assets yet unless it's gonna happen. It's Cleveland's 2016 pick going to the Celtics, which without a LeBron acquisition being in the bag is too much to give up.
bowiac said:
Wow, hadn't seen that yet; it certainly does bode well for the Cavs.
Terry Pluto, a reporter from Cleveland, makes a good point to how Arison has not spent a ton to keep the Heat going, particularly when compared to what Gilbert spent when LBJ was in CLE. http://www.cleveland.com/pluto/index.ssf/2014/07/heres_what_cleveland_cavaliers.html#incart_river
This would be the biggest nut punch ever if he spurns Cleveland now.
I'd pay $20 to see LeBron telling Riley he's outta there. $50 for Wade.
I'd pay $20 to see LeBron telling Riley he's outta there. $50 for Wade.
This isn't exactly Heat related, but this seems to have turned into the defacto LeBron thread, so:
It occurs to me that playing alongside LeBron is probably the absolute best case scenario for Wiggins' development. The Cavs can now allow Wiggins to focus on his strengths, and there's much less onus on him to develop into a scorer immediately. There's a real chance that he could turn into a Scottie Pippen type player alongside James. He projects to be a very good defender, his shot isn't broken, and he does a lot well. It'll be really interesting to watch his career if LeBron does indeed choose Cleveland.
It occurs to me that playing alongside LeBron is probably the absolute best case scenario for Wiggins' development. The Cavs can now allow Wiggins to focus on his strengths, and there's much less onus on him to develop into a scorer immediately. There's a real chance that he could turn into a Scottie Pippen type player alongside James. He projects to be a very good defender, his shot isn't broken, and he does a lot well. It'll be really interesting to watch his career if LeBron does indeed choose Cleveland.
Won't somebody think of Shabazz Napier? He's going to be like the dog one of the couple keeps after they break up.
bosox79 said:
Sorry about the $10mill...I think it was Lebron and Bosh combined for ~$10mill per year?
In any case:
The union might indeed be pissed.
And thus revisit the CBA in 2017. With all the news that a big Lebron pay-cut would make, it might be good ammunition for a significant change in the cap/max structure in the CBA.
I don't see it happening. But if it did, since the "superteam" was already constructed, the line has been breached, and I tend to care less about it now than I did then. Also because the new construct would stick it to Wade, which pleases me.
Would it be so bad if Nike picked up the slack that the monopoly is leaving on the table? The NBA monopoly is partly structured to try to create some parity. If Nike subverts that, what of it? Everyone already talks about how the nature of a city affects the structure of a team ("free agents don't want to play in Boston, or Cleveland, or DO want to play in NYC or MIami or LA"). Why not? Put some pressure on the owners to step up.
What if Nike tried to buy a team? I'm sure there are reasons they cannot, but....?
It's worth noting, we don't yet know the protection on the 2016 pick. It's possible this is just Cleveland being antsy, and this pick is lottery protected or something.
EDIT - it's top 10 protected. I guess maybe this doesn't mean it's "done".
EDIT - it's top 10 protected. I guess maybe this doesn't mean it's "done".
Every dollar LeBron gives up goes to other players in the union - that's why the union isn't freaking out about discounts.
Im pretty shocked how everyone has openly embraced this decision to go back.
He goes to miami for 4 years and they go to the finals every year. He's going back to Cleveland to try and win 1 title in the last what 8 years of his career? I know the talent disparity between the heat and the cavs, but lets be real. The chances of him creating a basketball dynasty in Cleveland are pretty low. They just become one a handful of teams that can win it.
But then I realize we are talking about lebron, a supreme narcissist, and that everyone else is rejoicing because they know this opens up the race again in the east.
I mean what is Riley's pitch today? "Hey lebron, im sorry we only went to the finals 4 times in the 4 years you were here. We will do better, I promise"
He goes to miami for 4 years and they go to the finals every year. He's going back to Cleveland to try and win 1 title in the last what 8 years of his career? I know the talent disparity between the heat and the cavs, but lets be real. The chances of him creating a basketball dynasty in Cleveland are pretty low. They just become one a handful of teams that can win it.
But then I realize we are talking about lebron, a supreme narcissist, and that everyone else is rejoicing because they know this opens up the race again in the east.
I mean what is Riley's pitch today? "Hey lebron, im sorry we only went to the finals 4 times in the 4 years you were here. We will do better, I promise"
ElUno20 said:
Is that really what you think he's trying to do? If so, how do you reconcile that with his being, as you say, "a supreme narcissist"?
ElUno20 said:
This is crazy, the Cavs will probably be better than the Heat would have been. I'm very much not a fan of Lebron, but going back to Cleveland and winning a different way would force me to respect him more. I'm certain that he doesn't give a shit, but returning to Cleveland and winning there as well doesn't open up the East at all, it would make the NBA far more interesting, though. Right now the Lebron show is tiring, it would at least be interesting to see if he could do it in Cleveland.
He was treated like a god in Cleveland. They did everything but throw rose pedals at his feet. When they struggle to attract real nba free agents and he has to scratch and claw his way to 2nd round appearances, he will still be treated like a god. A large part of this is about ego. Riley's end of the season press conference wasnt about kissing his ass it was about maning (sp?) up.Grin&MartyBarret said:
Which is part of my point that I failed to get out cleanly. The lebron show is tiring because he has been in the finals every year. Now he goes to Cleveland and it isnt a certainty. Of course people are going to like him a bit more. It opens it up for their teamsteddykgb said: