If you have a 500 dollar car then you need the money more than he does.
So the billionaire really really wants your car and says "name your price" and you jokingly say "300K" and he says "deal". Do you say "no no, I was kidding, I will take 600"?
The billionaire had master mechanics go over your car with a fine toothed comb and he's seen your car in action for a few years. He wants it, and he knows the score.
That Dallas game last year was special. Really makes you wonder what could have been.
KB8 with a more refined game, pretty much.
Yes, I'd take the deal. I predicated my initial response on the idea that both sides are trying to make a fair deal. If it's done openly and it's just some rich guy throwing away money just because he can even though he knows the car's true worth, I have no issues with it.
But let me flip it on you then. A guy approaches you about your car under the assumption that it's a classic. And that if he does a liitle bit of work on it, he could flip that $300,000 into $600,000. You know no matter how much he fixes it up, it will never be worth even $3,000. He offers to buy the car for $300,000 which is his entire life's savings. You have no regrets or misgivings about taking that sucker's money? Well I do.
It's just too bad that DMC's scenario was much more relevant than yours, huh?
Well for me, if I could make anyone pay me 63 milllion dollars for lying about my ty knees, I would. And I'd sleep like a baby
DMC's scenerio involves a billionaire throwing away money despite knowing the true worth if the product. Are you suggesting it's more relevant because Paul Allen's ownership if the Blazers involves throwing away money without regard of the player's true worth, thus preventing the Blazers from making sound business decisions, and ultimately hurting his team? You're suggesting Allen doesn't even care about the product of the team or winning or losing because it's just about him as a rich guy throwing around money. Is that why it's more relevant?
That's not the case in Portland with Roy. The guy in your example would have a court case for fraud if I sold him a car under the pretense that it was a classic. He would be an idiot, for sure, and a fool and his money are soon parted, but you basically created a hypothetical that doesn't, in any way, reflect the truth.
1. Paul Allen couldn't spend all his money even if he bought the NBA
2. The Blazers know Roy's condition better than Roy does
3. If Roy's worth was misrepresented, it was by the Blazers to the fans
4. The Blazers could have Yao Ming'ed Roy for a couple of years instead of amnestying him. They chose their path.
Sorry, but your attempt to portray a Tebow like honesty has actually made you look dishonest, as that last one was way out there. If you really believe your analogy is accurate, you need to do more research.
You're overlooking a critical point: The Blazers knew Roy's worth, period, end of story. To say otherwise is to really put in question the integrity of the Blazers' trainers and team physicians.
Teams have the right to make bad decisions. Players have the right to profit from those. The reverse is also true and has been happening for decades.
Your ing re ed. <<<<<<fellow Pistons fan......
Roy seemed like a class act. Hopefully he spent wisely, and he can live comfortably with his family for the rest of his life.
Fair enough. But for the record, when I proposed my scenario, I was not specifically relating it back to Roy and the Blazers. I'm just saying in general, when making a deal, I go on the premise that both sides are trying to make a fair deal for both sides. That's all.
As it does relate to Roy and the Blazers, I'm in no way saying the Blazers organization itself isn't accountable or not irresponsible in its own right. The Blazers absolutely are to blame as well. And as it benefits Roy, more power to him. Back to my initial posts on this topic, my issues are geared more towards what I remember at the time that Roy was campaigning and ing in the media that he was worth a max extension. That's what I find pretentious, on the assumption that he knew his knees were shot and there was a good likelihood he wouldn't be able to live up to the extension for the life of the contract. There are also reports now that Pritchard didn't want to offer Roy that max extension because of the knees and he was basically overruled by Allen. Of course Allen can afford it and he has every right to pay a bad contract, make a bad deal if that's what he wants to do. His money, his team. I still think it was stupid. I mean, who was going to offer Roy a max extension, especially as what's been alluded that physicians checking him out would explain the risks involved with the condition of his knees? Roy had one more year left on his rookie contract. Why not wait to give him the extension? Why not offer less than the max extension? Poor business decision. And yes, both sides are to blame.
I also took issue with tlongII's notion that Roy is worth the remainder of the of his contract for "turning around the culture of the Blazer." I still contend that's horse . Those are my issues with it.
That's cool if you think that. Doesn't affect me more or less whether you're a Pistons fan or not. Don't know why that was necessary to add. You have your opinion. I'll have mine. Fine by me. You calling me re ed doesn't change my opinion. You being a Pistons fan certainly doesn't change it either. Good for you.
Roy didn't know any more than the team doctors who evaluated him and xrayed his knees. They felt that he would be able to keep playing basketball or they wouldn't have resigned him. The big mistake was electing to remove his meniscus in an attempt to get him back quickly for the playoffs. Roy took their advice and it ended his career. It doesn't really get any simpler.
Jammie, you're not a Blazer fan and I still love you. However, you don't know what B-Roy meant to our fanbase. I think we'll retire his number. I know most fans think that's crazy, but that's just the way it is here.
You have to make it relate to the topic. We can discuss morality and business ethics in the Club if that's your thing.
So? Do you think the owners listen to the media to make their decisions? Everyone thinks they are worth the max. To say you aren't is foolish.As it does relate to Roy and the Blazers, I'm in no way saying the Blazers organization itself isn't accountable or not irresponsible in its own right. The Blazers absolutely are to blame as well. And as it benefits Roy, more power to him. Back to my initial posts on this topic, my issues are geared more towards what I remember at the time that Roy was campaigning and ing in the media that he was worth a max extension. That's what I find pretentious, on the assumption that he knew his knees were shot and there was a good likelihood he wouldn't be able to live up to the extension for the life of the contract.
It was a stupid move in retrospect, but then Chris Paul might not play a game in LA, he might get injured. Same is true for Bynum and same is true for a lot of players. Captain Hindsight isn't really a superhero.There are also reports now that Pritchard didn't want to offer Roy that max extension because of the knees and he was basically overruled by Allen. Of course Allen can afford it and he has every right to pay a bad contract, make a bad deal if that's what he wants to do. His money, his team. I still think it was stupid. I mean, who was going to offer Roy a max extension, especially as what's been alluded that physicians checking him out would explain the risks involved with the condition of his knees? Roy had one more year left on his rookie contract. Why not wait to give him the extension? Why not offer less than the max extension? Poor business decision. And yes, both sides are to blame.
All you have to do is put TlongII there and it's instantly horse , but he believes it.I also took issue with tlongII's notion that Roy is worth the remainder of the of his contract for "turning around the culture of the Blazer." I still contend that's horse . Those are my issues with it.
The problem here is that you are not debating the topic, or at least you don't seem to be. You've gone all over the road on this.
In short: I highly doubt Roy prefers to retire than play. It takes more than money to make a person an all world athlete.
Sad...should have been STD-Wade, tbh.
Or Kobe Brapist.
Act like somebody, for once.
retire roys number wow
Bend over, I'll act like your father.
lol Roy.
sad... he could have been one of the greats.
yea hes gettin paid, but i guarantee you he would give it all back for a pair of healthy knees to play the game loves.
Giuseppe.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote