Knicks · OT: [Kobe's Take on Paycuts and Greed] (page 2)

NardDogNation wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Splat wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Splat wrote:Nowitzki's salary concessions are amazing compared to other top players in the league.

"Stupid", not "amazing".

Enlighten us

Because the owners made their bed, now they have to sleep in it.

Dirk didn't lobby for a salary cap. Dirk didn't lobby for the concept of a "max" contract. So why should he sacrifice money that he earned, so that his team owner could build a winner? If Cuban was so terribly concerned about that, he should've lobbied for the right to play his players whatever thd market dictated.

But doesn't winning increase everyone's Brand-Value

Let me ask you, how much money do you think Melo

Could make off the court if he won 1 chip in New York

How about multiple championships what would that monetarily

Equate to, towards the Melo brand and Knicks brand overall

No, winning doesn't magically increase someone's NBA base salary; not without a renegotiated contract on renegotiated terms. And even then, most NBA stars are being cheated of their true net worth. So they are already receiving an unequal share of profits they work for and now owners use public pressure to further depreciate their salaries.

And no, endorsement deals don't negotiate that fact. I use to work two jobs. What you're suggesting is like having my primary employer, lower my wage and then telling me to make it up by working harder at my evening job. But if I am an essential employee and my company is more profitable than ever, why the hell should I take that sitting down?

This is one of the dumbest analogies I've ever heard

And isn't close to applicable here

Melo would make a crap load of money off the court

Simply by winning at his day job

There's no 2 job factor here and if you're going

To be hellbent stubborn to deny this, in a mass market like New York

Then embrace being a lunatic fool

NardDogNation wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

Splat wrote:Nowitzki's salary concessions are amazing compared to other top players in the league.

Lakers are 3-9 and Mavs are 9-3

Lakers had cap space no one wanted to go there

Mavs had cap space and Monta showed up

Calderon showed up and O.J. Mayo showed up

And Parsons showed up and Jameer showed up

And Al Farouq showed up

The Lakers had to trade for player

Sign players off waiver wires and pay their

Own free agents above market value

It's humorous to me that you think Kobe is overpaid, then have the audacity to laud Chandler Parsons. who is making $16 million/yr as the 3rd best player on the Mavs. I also find it hilarious how you are choosing to revise history of portray Monta Ellis and OJ Mayo as coups in the Mavs favors. The reality is that both guys had burn bridges at their previous destinations and even became known as net negative players, Monta moreso than OJ. The reality is that those signings were last resorts by a floundering franchise who had missed out on their primary and secondary targets, Deron Williams and Dwight Howard. The difference between the Mavs and Lakers doesn't have anything to do with their stars; it has everything to do with Rick Carlisle being one of the best coaches of the modern error and Jim Buss being a moron.

Lakers can't even get malcontents to sign there

The only player even remotely in the vicinity of name rec

Is Swaggy P, face it the guy you're nut munching

Is going down in shameless fame, yeah he's wealthy

But a lot of players in this league are

Dirk and Duncan are relevant today on the court when it comes to winning

Kobe is only relevant in checks and balances

What malcontent were the Lakers trying to get and missed out on? Seems it took them all of a week after LeBron and Melo's decision to trade for Jeremy Lin, lock up Carlos Boozer and come to terms with re-threads from the year before, which put them over the cap. So I ask again, who were they pursuing that they missed out on?

I mentioned malcontents as a means to say

Those are the only players who were available to sign

They were interested in Deng-Parsons-Stephenson-Kyle Lowry

Whiffed on all of them, why

I already stated they went the route you rehashed because

They couldn't get done what a prized organization like them should get done

And no it took them a while to get things accomplished

The Melo dilemma took almost 2 and half weeks

Then the Bulls didn't get the Boozer situation resolved until

Gasol made up his mind, it took a while for them to shape their

Roster after listening to all the

HELL NOS

The Lakers were never once linked to Kyle Lowry or Lance Stephenson. They expressed passing interest in Deng and made a concerted push for Parsons but the franchise was reluctant to add any long-term salary, which is why they are the way they are. NONE of their contracts extend beyond 2016 and that is by design, not coincidence.

Again, you are literally making shit up. Free agency started July 1st and players could sign by July 10th. Aside from Lowry almost immediately re-signing with the Raptors, the league was basically in gridlock until LeBron made his decision on the 11th. Flash-forward just two days later, Jeremy Lin and his $15 million contract was acquired.

If the Lakers were really pursuing the guys you said, why take on Lin's contract and take on Boozer's $3 million cap hit? Between the guaranteed deals they already had in Kobe, Nash, Lin, Boozer and Randle's contract as well as cap holds for vacant roster spots, the Lakers were already committed to $58 million, just two days into free agency and so many "malcontents" unsigned/uncommitted. You honestly think they were looking to pursue Stephenson and the like with only $5 million left of cap space? Come on, be serious.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/21072...

I trust David Aldridge not you

http://www.si.com/nba/2014/07/07/lance-s...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba...

I trust Sam Amick not you

Not in case you have legit links that say they were never

Interested in any of these players, you're just rebuffing to play the role

F500ONE wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Splat wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Splat wrote:Nowitzki's salary concessions are amazing compared to other top players in the league.

"Stupid", not "amazing".

Enlighten us

Because the owners made their bed, now they have to sleep in it.

Dirk didn't lobby for a salary cap. Dirk didn't lobby for the concept of a "max" contract. So why should he sacrifice money that he earned, so that his team owner could build a winner? If Cuban was so terribly concerned about that, he should've lobbied for the right to play his players whatever thd market dictated.

But doesn't winning increase everyone's Brand-Value

Let me ask you, how much money do you think Melo

Could make off the court if he won 1 chip in New York

How about multiple championships what would that monetarily

Equate to, towards the Melo brand and Knicks brand overall

No, winning doesn't magically increase someone's NBA base salary; not without a renegotiated contract on renegotiated terms. And even then, most NBA stars are being cheated of their true net worth. So they are already receiving an unequal share of profits they work for and now owners use public pressure to further depreciate their salaries.

And no, endorsement deals don't negotiate that fact. I use to work two jobs. What you're suggesting is like having my primary employer, lower my wage and then telling me to make it up by working harder at my evening job. But if I am an essential employee and my company is more profitable than ever, why the hell should I take that sitting down?

This is one of the dumbest analogies I've ever heard

And isn't close to applicable here

Melo would make a crap load of money off the court

Simply by winning at his day job

There's no 2 job factor here and if you're going

To be hellbent stubborn to deny this, in a mass market like New York

Then embrace being a lunatic fool

Blake Griffin doing KIA commercials has nothing to do with his ability to win ball games. After all, the Clippers have been putrid in the playoffs. Griffin endorsing KIA has everything to do with his magnetic personality that resonates well with key demographics. The same is true for guys like John Wall, Damien Lillard and Kyrie Irving who haven't won shit in their careers but are their face of their respective shoe brands. That being said, "winning" doesn't have anything to do with an NBA player's "night job".

And even if this dumb argument of yours was true, it doesn't negate the fact that the players are being cheated out of their due share with their NBA contracts. It also doesn't change the fact that owners are the ones who decided to handicap what they could spend to build a winner and it is the owners who should bare the consequences of that.

NardDogNation wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Splat wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Splat wrote:Nowitzki's salary concessions are amazing compared to other top players in the league.

"Stupid", not "amazing".

Enlighten us

Because the owners made their bed, now they have to sleep in it.

Dirk didn't lobby for a salary cap. Dirk didn't lobby for the concept of a "max" contract. So why should he sacrifice money that he earned, so that his team owner could build a winner? If Cuban was so terribly concerned about that, he should've lobbied for the right to play his players whatever thd market dictated.

But doesn't winning increase everyone's Brand-Value

Let me ask you, how much money do you think Melo

Could make off the court if he won 1 chip in New York

How about multiple championships what would that monetarily

Equate to, towards the Melo brand and Knicks brand overall

No, winning doesn't magically increase someone's NBA base salary; not without a renegotiated contract on renegotiated terms. And even then, most NBA stars are being cheated of their true net worth. So they are already receiving an unequal share of profits they work for and now owners use public pressure to further depreciate their salaries.

And no, endorsement deals don't negotiate that fact. I use to work two jobs. What you're suggesting is like having my primary employer, lower my wage and then telling me to make it up by working harder at my evening job. But if I am an essential employee and my company is more profitable than ever, why the hell should I take that sitting down?

This is one of the dumbest analogies I've ever heard

And isn't close to applicable here

Melo would make a crap load of money off the court

Simply by winning at his day job

There's no 2 job factor here and if you're going

To be hellbent stubborn to deny this, in a mass market like New York

Then embrace being a lunatic fool

Blake Griffin doing KIA commercials has nothing to do with his ability to win ball games. After all, the Clippers have been putrid in the playoffs. Griffin endorsing KIA has everything to do with his magnetic personality that resonates well with key demographics. The same is true for guys like John Wall, Damien Lillard and Kyrie Irving who haven't won shit in their careers but are their face of their respective shoe brands. That being said, "winning" doesn't have anything to do with an NBA player's "night job".

And even if this dumb argument of yours was true, it doesn't negate the fact that the players are being cheated out of their due share with their NBA contracts. It also doesn't change the fact that owners are the ones who decided to handicap what they could spend to build a winner and it is the owners who should bare the consequences of that.

I don't have problems with players getting paid

I don't expect players to take paycuts

I don't care what the owners and players agreed to

What I do know is winning creates a girth of wealth

For all parties involved and when a player said that winning

A championship is important//// then sacrifices should be made

Those may include financial sacrifices to make up what was lost down the road

Matter of this somewhat applies to Kobe but without him making sacrifices

Because he is a champion and helped the Lakers win several championships recently

They bartered that into a massive T.V. deal with Fox

And rewarded a 36yr old with $50mil, a rare thing not seen in this league

Argue all you want about they should have given $100mil

I won't dispute player value to a franchise

What I will dispute a player feeding "I'm all about championships bullchit"

In the media but not doing the things necessary to come closer to securing the goal

And calling taking paycuts a coup, He's an idiot and you're not smart backing an idiot

F500ONE wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Splat wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Splat wrote:Nowitzki's salary concessions are amazing compared to other top players in the league.

"Stupid", not "amazing".

Enlighten us

Because the owners made their bed, now they have to sleep in it.

Dirk didn't lobby for a salary cap. Dirk didn't lobby for the concept of a "max" contract. So why should he sacrifice money that he earned, so that his team owner could build a winner? If Cuban was so terribly concerned about that, he should've lobbied for the right to play his players whatever thd market dictated.

But doesn't winning increase everyone's Brand-Value

Let me ask you, how much money do you think Melo

Could make off the court if he won 1 chip in New York

How about multiple championships what would that monetarily

Equate to, towards the Melo brand and Knicks brand overall

No, winning doesn't magically increase someone's NBA base salary; not without a renegotiated contract on renegotiated terms. And even then, most NBA stars are being cheated of their true net worth. So they are already receiving an unequal share of profits they work for and now owners use public pressure to further depreciate their salaries.

And no, endorsement deals don't negotiate that fact. I use to work two jobs. What you're suggesting is like having my primary employer, lower my wage and then telling me to make it up by working harder at my evening job. But if I am an essential employee and my company is more profitable than ever, why the hell should I take that sitting down?

This is one of the dumbest analogies I've ever heard

And isn't close to applicable here

Melo would make a crap load of money off the court

Simply by winning at his day job

There's no 2 job factor here and if you're going

To be hellbent stubborn to deny this, in a mass market like New York

Then embrace being a lunatic fool

Dude, this is almost too easy. The Bleacher Report article you found was time-stamped June 23rd, 8 days before teams could even negotiate with free agents. The USA Today article was time-stamped July 1st, which is before most teams even meet face to face with a player or his representatives. Do you understand the difference between due diligence and teams ACTUALLY pursuing a player?

Again, I have established the timeline. The Lakers committed themselves to $58 million, in effect, 2 days after players could sign contracts and several days before most of the guys you mentioned even made a decision. If the Lakers were actively pursuing any of those players, wouldn't they have kept their cap space open BEFORE those guys made any verbal/contractual commitments? Put your pride aside and let ration be your guide.

F500ONE wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Splat wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

Splat wrote:Nowitzki's salary concessions are amazing compared to other top players in the league.

"Stupid", not "amazing".

Enlighten us

Because the owners made their bed, now they have to sleep in it.

Dirk didn't lobby for a salary cap. Dirk didn't lobby for the concept of a "max" contract. So why should he sacrifice money that he earned, so that his team owner could build a winner? If Cuban was so terribly concerned about that, he should've lobbied for the right to play his players whatever thd market dictated.

But doesn't winning increase everyone's Brand-Value

Let me ask you, how much money do you think Melo

Could make off the court if he won 1 chip in New York

How about multiple championships what would that monetarily

Equate to, towards the Melo brand and Knicks brand overall

No, winning doesn't magically increase someone's NBA base salary; not without a renegotiated contract on renegotiated terms. And even then, most NBA stars are being cheated of their true net worth. So they are already receiving an unequal share of profits they work for and now owners use public pressure to further depreciate their salaries.

And no, endorsement deals don't negotiate that fact. I use to work two jobs. What you're suggesting is like having my primary employer, lower my wage and then telling me to make it up by working harder at my evening job. But if I am an essential employee and my company is more profitable than ever, why the hell should I take that sitting down?

This is one of the dumbest analogies I've ever heard

And isn't close to applicable here

Melo would make a crap load of money off the court

Simply by winning at his day job

There's no 2 job factor here and if you're going

To be hellbent stubborn to deny this, in a mass market like New York

Then embrace being a lunatic fool

Blake Griffin doing KIA commercials has nothing to do with his ability to win ball games. After all, the Clippers have been putrid in the playoffs. Griffin endorsing KIA has everything to do with his magnetic personality that resonates well with key demographics. The same is true for guys like John Wall, Damien Lillard and Kyrie Irving who haven't won shit in their careers but are their face of their respective shoe brands. That being said, "winning" doesn't have anything to do with an NBA player's "night job".

And even if this dumb argument of yours was true, it doesn't negate the fact that the players are being cheated out of their due share with their NBA contracts. It also doesn't change the fact that owners are the ones who decided to handicap what they could spend to build a winner and it is the owners who should bare the consequences of that.

I don't have problems with players getting paid

I don't expect players to take paycuts

I don't care what the owners and players agreed to

What I do know is winning creates a girth of wealth

For all parties involved and when a player said that winning

A championship is important//// then sacrifices should be made

Those may include financial sacrifices to make up what was lost down the road

Matter of this somewhat applies to Kobe but without him making sacrifices

Because he is a champion and helped the Lakers win several championships recently

They bartered that into a massive T.V. deal with Fox

And rewarded a 36yr old with $50mil, a rare thing not seen in this league

Argue all you want about they should have given $100mil

I won't dispute player value to a franchise

What I will dispute a player feeding "I'm all about championships bullchit"

In the media but not doing the things necessary to come closer to securing the goal

And calling taking paycuts a coup, He's an idiot and you're not smart backing an idiot

You're rambling at this point. I'm not even going to attempt to decipher it all but will make these two points:

1.) Kobe has played hurt. He has played injuried. He is the first player in the gym and the last to leave according to his detractors and fans. He has gone across the world and had a number of procedures performed to get his body to the point where he can perform on an all-star level. The man cuts no corners. Kobe is a rare breed of dude. So for you to suggest that he isn't about "winning" makes you an idiot.

2.) When your employer cuts your salary and asks you to be a team player, as he/she gives himself/herself a raise, be sure to be a good soldier! Hell, you should even work for free because it's all about sacrifice....that is, YOU sacrificing!

Sam Amick admitted players had been contacted

July 1 3:41am

Which means players were contacted July 1st 12:00am you know

When it's legal to contact players lol @ you

They were interested in those players but spent

A good chunk of time chasing pipe dreams in Melo and waiting Leron decision

About time they got traction to pursue those players

Things were already in motion but on the other hand

Gasol clearly waiting for the Bulls-Melo

Saga to end, as he passed on Lakers/OKC/Knicks

Because he wanted to play in Chicago

Meanwhile all those other free agents the Lakers

Were interested in did not wait nor gave

Them serious consideration besides Isiah Thomas(sorta)

Because they don't want to play with Kobe

F500ONE wrote:Once again more idiocy from you

Sam Amick admitted players had been contacted

July 1 3:41am

Which means players were contacted July 1st 12:00am you know

When it's legal to contact players lol @ you

They were interested in those players but spent

A good chunk of time chasing pipe dreams in Melo and waiting Leron decision

About time they got traction to pursue those players

Things were already in motion but on the other hand

Gasol clearly waiting for the Bulls-Melo

Saga to end, as he passed on Lakers/OKC/Knicks

Because he wanted to play in Chicago

Meanwhile all those other free agents the Lakers

Were interested in did not wait nor gave

Them serious consideration besides Isiah Thomas(sorta)

Because they don't want to play with Kobe

Dude, I'm done with you. Just out of curiosity: do you vote Republican?

TripleThreat wrote:http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bryanko01/gamelog/2015/

vs

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/n/nowitdi01/gamelog/2015/

Well, it's not just the money issue, look at the efficiency. Kobe Bryant can't possibly help his team win clanging at under 40 percent shooting, mostly long 2s, propped up by getting to the line. You just can't take 30-35 shots a game like that, inefficiently, and help your team.

Dirk, in contrast, is under 30 minutes a game and makes every shot count. He's producing but still leaving room for Ellis and Parsons to get theirs and give their offense balance. Efficient offense allows Dallas to run out guys like Chandler and Crowder, guys who might not be plus offensive options, but can give you some lock down defense and give Dirk some rest.

Kobe Bryant is a volume player, but for that type of money, he's got to shift to be more of what the Lakers need, not what he wants.

Well its just not the efficiency, its the Finals MVPs and NBA Championships.

NardDogNation wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bryanko01/gamelog/2015/

vs

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/n/nowitdi01/gamelog/2015/

Well, it's not just the money issue, look at the efficiency. Kobe Bryant can't possibly help his team win clanging at under 40 percent shooting, mostly long 2s, propped up by getting to the line. You just can't take 30-35 shots a game like that, inefficiently, and help your team.

Dirk, in contrast, is under 30 minutes a game and makes every shot count. He's producing but still leaving room for Ellis and Parsons to get theirs and give their offense balance. Efficient offense allows Dallas to run out guys like Chandler and Crowder, guys who might not be plus offensive options, but can give you some lock down defense and give Dirk some rest.

Kobe Bryant is a volume player, but for that type of money, he's got to shift to be more of what the Lakers need, not what he wants.

Well its just not the efficiency, its the Finals MVPs and NBA Championships.

Dirk has that too

F500ONE wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

TripleThreat wrote:http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bryanko01/gamelog/2015/

vs

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/n/nowitdi01/gamelog/2015/

Well, it's not just the money issue, look at the efficiency. Kobe Bryant can't possibly help his team win clanging at under 40 percent shooting, mostly long 2s, propped up by getting to the line. You just can't take 30-35 shots a game like that, inefficiently, and help your team.

Dirk, in contrast, is under 30 minutes a game and makes every shot count. He's producing but still leaving room for Ellis and Parsons to get theirs and give their offense balance. Efficient offense allows Dallas to run out guys like Chandler and Crowder, guys who might not be plus offensive options, but can give you some lock down defense and give Dirk some rest.

Kobe Bryant is a volume player, but for that type of money, he's got to shift to be more of what the Lakers need, not what he wants.

Well its just not the efficiency, its the Finals MVPs and NBA Championships.

Dirk has that too

Yeah...just not as many. But whatever floats your boat, bro.

NardDogNation wrote:

F500ONE wrote:lol @ this D-Bag trying to Carmelize

His contract as a paycut and making things easier

For the Lakers to put a winning product on the floor

This clown is quite possibly the most delusional athlete in all of sports history

Dude you tore your achilles to shreds

You blew out your kneecap afterwards and missed almost a season and a half of basketball

And still got $50mil at the age of 36

Yet you mention you took a paycut

All because you didn't take the full cap figure

You were entitled to and went down a couple mil from your ending previous salary

Then he wants to degrade what Dirk did by

Saying it's a coup on the owner's to pressure players

Kobe is such an A-Wipe, Dirk took even less

Than what the Mavs originally offered him, he's done this twice

Because that's what TEAM players do

http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/story...

DALLAS -- Kobe Bryant considers the public pressure for longtime NBA stars to take hometown-discount deals, such as Dirk Nowitzki's contract, "a big coup" for NBA owners.

"It's the popular thing to do," Bryant said after the Los Angeles Lakers' shootaround in preparation for Friday's game against Nowitzki's Dallas Mavericks. "The player takes less, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. I think it's a big coup for the owners to put players in situations where public perception puts pressure on them to take less money. Because if you don't, then you get criticized for it.

"It's absolutely brilliant, but I'm not going for it. I know the new head of the players' association ain't going for it, either."

Bryant, 36, agreed to a two-year, $48.5 million extension with the Lakers last season, when he was recovering from a torn Achilles tendon. The deal is for less than Bryant was eligible to make on a maximum contract but still makes him the highest-paid player in the league.

Nowitzki, 36, re-signed with the Mavs this summer for $25 million over three years, taking far less than his market value to leave Dallas owner Mark Cuban enough salary-cap space to make roster upgrades.

What does Bryant think about Nowitzki, who has never used an agent, taking such a steep hometown discount?

"I think it means he's not playing in Los Angeles," Bryant said with a laugh.

Nowitzki, who has made more than $200 million during his career, has said several times that the chance to win a second championship is much more important to him than money during his basketball golden years. The Mavs, whose offseason acquisitions included center Tyson Chandler and small forward Chandler Parsons, are off to a 9-3 start.

Bryant, who had almost $280 million in career earnings entering this season, has won five championships and believes the Lakers can contend again with him as the league's highest-paid player. The Lakers, who are off to a 3-9 start after winning their last two, had enough cap space to pursue Carmelo Anthony and Chris Bosh in free agency this summer but weren't able to sign either player.

"This is where players get themselves in a lot of trouble, which me in my 19th year I really don't care, so I'll kind of say what I need to say," said Bryant, who indicated that he would retire at the end of this contract. "But I think you've got to look at the business of basketball. I think for a lot of writers, for a lot of fans, they have a very tough time distinguishing the two.

"This is a business, and you have to look at individuals and what they generate and the market that they're generating revenue in. And you can't separate those. People have a hard time separating that stuff. From a business perspective, you have to take that stuff into account and you have to try to, as a player, be in situations where it can be a win-win for everybody.

"So did I take a discount? Yeah. Did I take as big a discount as some of you fans would want me to? No. Is it a big enough discount to help us be a contender? Yeah. So what we try to do is be in a situation where they take care of the player and the player takes care of the organization enough to put us in a championship predicament eventually."

Bryant addressed some of the same issues before the start of the season, saying at one point that players "are overpaid but so are the owners."

Why should Kobe penalize himself for a system that the owners fought for? There shouldn't be a salary cap or "max" contracts to begin with. The entire thing is little more than a farce for owners to pad their pockets even more than they've been able to do in the past. And last I checked, they aren't the ones soldiering through knee injuries, broken fingers, absence away from their kids, etc. Kobe is one of the rare few to realize what the game is and is not dumb enough to play it.

P.S., if Kobe is making $20 million/yr, how much do you think the Buss family is making off of pimping his name and legacy?

The best solution would be to separate these 2 dynamics. The salary cap should be its own entity while a players value to the teams finances should be a separate entity. This allows front offices to build teams without worrying about stars eating up cap space by having to pay them for outside of the court value. While allowing players to negotiate there proper value and getting the money they deserve from the money they bring in.

newyorknewyork wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

F500ONE wrote:lol @ this D-Bag trying to Carmelize

His contract as a paycut and making things easier

For the Lakers to put a winning product on the floor

This clown is quite possibly the most delusional athlete in all of sports history

Dude you tore your achilles to shreds

You blew out your kneecap afterwards and missed almost a season and a half of basketball

And still got $50mil at the age of 36

Yet you mention you took a paycut

All because you didn't take the full cap figure

You were entitled to and went down a couple mil from your ending previous salary

Then he wants to degrade what Dirk did by

Saying it's a coup on the owner's to pressure players

Kobe is such an A-Wipe, Dirk took even less

Than what the Mavs originally offered him, he's done this twice

Because that's what TEAM players do

http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/story...

DALLAS -- Kobe Bryant considers the public pressure for longtime NBA stars to take hometown-discount deals, such as Dirk Nowitzki's contract, "a big coup" for NBA owners.

"It's the popular thing to do," Bryant said after the Los Angeles Lakers' shootaround in preparation for Friday's game against Nowitzki's Dallas Mavericks. "The player takes less, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. I think it's a big coup for the owners to put players in situations where public perception puts pressure on them to take less money. Because if you don't, then you get criticized for it.

"It's absolutely brilliant, but I'm not going for it. I know the new head of the players' association ain't going for it, either."

Bryant, 36, agreed to a two-year, $48.5 million extension with the Lakers last season, when he was recovering from a torn Achilles tendon. The deal is for less than Bryant was eligible to make on a maximum contract but still makes him the highest-paid player in the league.

Nowitzki, 36, re-signed with the Mavs this summer for $25 million over three years, taking far less than his market value to leave Dallas owner Mark Cuban enough salary-cap space to make roster upgrades.

What does Bryant think about Nowitzki, who has never used an agent, taking such a steep hometown discount?

"I think it means he's not playing in Los Angeles," Bryant said with a laugh.

Nowitzki, who has made more than $200 million during his career, has said several times that the chance to win a second championship is much more important to him than money during his basketball golden years. The Mavs, whose offseason acquisitions included center Tyson Chandler and small forward Chandler Parsons, are off to a 9-3 start.

Bryant, who had almost $280 million in career earnings entering this season, has won five championships and believes the Lakers can contend again with him as the league's highest-paid player. The Lakers, who are off to a 3-9 start after winning their last two, had enough cap space to pursue Carmelo Anthony and Chris Bosh in free agency this summer but weren't able to sign either player.

"This is where players get themselves in a lot of trouble, which me in my 19th year I really don't care, so I'll kind of say what I need to say," said Bryant, who indicated that he would retire at the end of this contract. "But I think you've got to look at the business of basketball. I think for a lot of writers, for a lot of fans, they have a very tough time distinguishing the two.

"This is a business, and you have to look at individuals and what they generate and the market that they're generating revenue in. And you can't separate those. People have a hard time separating that stuff. From a business perspective, you have to take that stuff into account and you have to try to, as a player, be in situations where it can be a win-win for everybody.

"So did I take a discount? Yeah. Did I take as big a discount as some of you fans would want me to? No. Is it a big enough discount to help us be a contender? Yeah. So what we try to do is be in a situation where they take care of the player and the player takes care of the organization enough to put us in a championship predicament eventually."

Bryant addressed some of the same issues before the start of the season, saying at one point that players "are overpaid but so are the owners."

Why should Kobe penalize himself for a system that the owners fought for? There shouldn't be a salary cap or "max" contracts to begin with. The entire thing is little more than a farce for owners to pad their pockets even more than they've been able to do in the past. And last I checked, they aren't the ones soldiering through knee injuries, broken fingers, absence away from their kids, etc. Kobe is one of the rare few to realize what the game is and is not dumb enough to play it.

P.S., if Kobe is making $20 million/yr, how much do you think the Buss family is making off of pimping his name and legacy?

The best solution would be to separate these 2 dynamics. The salary cap should be its own entity while a players value to the teams finances should be a separate entity. This allows front offices to build teams without worrying about stars eating up cap space by having to pay them for outside of the court value. While allowing players to negotiate there proper value and getting the money they deserve from the money they bring in.

That's a pretty good idea. But what do you do on a team like OKC, LAC or CLE where you have multiple stars? I could see it causing major chemistry issues, since there would be an incentive to "get mine".