Reply With Quote
I remember having a discussion similar to that with the folks running the Minnesota Timberwolves 11 ½ years ago. The whole concept of max guys was in its infancy, born in the nasty 1998-99 lockout that wiped out hundreds of games and millions of dollars for folks on all sides of that NBA labor dispute. You might not recall it now -- commissioner David Stern's lockout beard and some silly quotes attributed to Patrick Ewing and Kenny Anderson seem to be the most indelible images of that owners vs. union schism -- but the Wolves were in the middle of the lockout, both before and after.
It was Minnesota owner Glen Taylor who agreed in October 1997 to a staggering $126 million contract extension for Kevin Garnett, a second-year player, signing at the time the richest multi-year contract in pro sports history. That was a last-straw move to management, who battened down in 1997-98 for what suddenly looked inevitable: No NBA business until a new world order was imposed. It took nearly seven months and a curtailment of the 1998-99 season to 50 games -- Phil Jackson's "asterisk" version -- to get there.
After the lockout, fans were introduced to the concept of maximum salaries, the tippy-top of new pay scales. Players who were already earning more than the new limits -- such as Michael Jordan, Shaquille O'Neal, Alonzo Mourning, Juwan Howard and, of course, Garnett -- were "grandfathered" in, but for those who would sign new contracts from that point on, the best they could hope for was to "max out."
The Wolves felt the impact of that immediately -- and in some ways still are feeling it. The new salary scale shoved a glass ceiling between Garnett and his presumed sidekick, Stephon Marbury, the brash Coney Island point guard who was drafted one year after the 7-foot power forward. Uh-oh: Marbury's next contract could not exceed $86 million, a huge gap from what Garnett would be paid, creating an untenable situation for the proud and headstrong Marbury. He demanded and (because Minnesota believed the kid truly would walk away from a budding Malone-Stockton situation) got, 18 games into the truncated season, a trade to the New Jersey Nets.
But wait, there was more: Forward Tom Gugliotta, the Wolves' first All-Star, was offered a "max" deal to stick around as a versatile frontcourt option and big brother to the two young stars. But Gugliotta had tired of Marbury's act and, after being shuttled from Washington to Golden State to Minnesota in trades, wanted some say over his whereabouts. So he signed with Phoenix for about $67 million, the "max" at that time for players who changed teams.
The Wolves, in a scramble to replace Gugliotta, signed Joe Smith. And we all know how that worked out for them (salary-cap cir vention = irate Stern = loss of three first-round Draft picks = irrelevancy ever since).
http://www.nba.com/2010/news/feature...uys/index.html
is your argument that garnett should have known the rules would change a year after signing his contract? in fact, i dont know if KG ever signed a "max" contract because they didnt exist when he got that one, then he got extensions on that contract, and im pretty sure his contracts after that with boston were for less than the max. the wolves FO sucking balls may have had a little something to do with the wolves sucking balls too.
as for dirk... i think its highly commendable to take a cut to win. but taking a huge cut to lose sounds kind of stupid, and at least from here thats what it looks like dirk is doing, i also immediately thought there must be something happening under the table.
No one with any business sense would turn that down over almost the same amount of time playing.
