If im a player, i have a problem with this. We are getting to the point that you cant even compete unless you have stars take paycuts below their market value. If you are a star, you cant get a max and still expect to be competitive. At least thats the way this is trending
Absolutely not. Think about it - Curry is the one out of the 4 all stars who isn't a two-way threat. I would argue that Durant and Green are most integral to GS' success this past season, with Durant being instant offense and great help defense, and Green being the valuable facilitator and defensive cog that anchors the entire defense. Thompson's value is in his elite perimeter defense and shooting. Which leaves curry, who is probably the greatest shooter of all time but without him, GS would still have taken the title easily.
Ha I didn't know they were Ayn fans. How many players on the Warriors know what those books are all about ya think?
i think we're agreeing with each other. the owner could spend as much as possible because he's a billionaire and give kevin durant a great team, but he instead told durant he wouldn't spend and that kevin had to choose between kevin's own money and a great team (not a normal great team, kevin durant's beta idea of a great supporting cast). billionaire acting like he doesn't have the money. lacob probably sold him on the "team" and future tech endorsements. blaynded him with the bRand and durant fell for it. lebron would've told gilbert to give iggy his money and then, just out of spite for gilbert's insolence, made him give maverick carter a full MLE to be the 15th man just to increase the tax.
I wonder if Durant is deriving some "under the table" benefits beside just getting a stronger team for doing this from some Silicon Valley wealthy Warriors fans. What if Apple Music's Eddie Cue signs Durant to an endorsement deal and throw in a few extra million bucks on top of what they would have paid? Obviously would likely totally violate the CBA if discovered, but the incentives would seem to be there. Think about it, let's say Durant giving up $5M would save the Warriors that $5M + say, $10-15M more in luxury tax. Economically there is some way for these two sides to divide up the extra benefit for not having to pay the NBA all this extra money.
Wow, KD is as spineless as it gets. Taking pay cuts to ensure he doesn't have to break sweat in the playoffs. He doesn't act like he was raised with his father in the picture. Surely he would've taught him the importance of standing on your own to 2 feet as a man and to not depend on others like a female. All I sense from him is pure estrogen and a lack of competitiveness. I can smell the p***y on him from here to Oakland. Who knows, maybe his father was a b!tch too? See, he's a, he's a, he's a— B!tch, his hormones prolly switch inside his DNA Problem is, all that sucker **** inside his DNA Daddy prolly snitched, heritage inside his DNA Backbone don't exist, born onside a jellyfish, I gauge
He should play for min wage $7.25 per hour. Now that would show he really cares about all this BS of taking less to keep stars together
While they are billionaires, much of their wealth is illiquid. In fact a good portion is tied up in the Warriors valuation itself. They don't have hundred of millions of dollars in cash lying around. And regardless, look at these numbers: http://uproxx.com/dimemag/warriors-kevin-durant-steph-curry-free-agency-contracts-luxury-tax-cost/2/ Warriors were looking at payrolls on the order of 200-300 million dollars a year if everyone wanted to max out. At that rate in 4 years, Warriors would have spent $1.4b, about or more than owner Lacob's entire net worth! Even with Durant's ~6m one year discount, Warriors will have one of the highest if not the highest payrolls. So can't really say they are being cheap. You make it sound like the owners tried to squeeze Durant but I really doubt it. No smart owner would risk alienating a player like that. I mean they signed Curry to the supermax literally the first minute they could. Curry made it clear he took enough past mega-discounts, wouldn't sacrifice, and they said okay, let's sign supermax the first minute we can without hesitation. Durant could have done the same thing as Curry and demanded near max of $31.5m. If Durant told them this you really think owners would mess around??? In that case, they would have just announced the 31.5m deal right away with zero hesitation as well. Let's say that happened. Then the question becomes how much to pay Livingston and Iguodala. If both wanted to max out, then when you factor in lux tax, you'd basically be paying each of them Curry or Lebron level money!!! In that case, its not an issue of being cheap, it's an issue of not being stupid. Paying Curry and Durant max or near max is fine. Doing that for Livingston and Iguodala means your FO is operating at Knicks or Kings level. The reality is that at his age and back issues, Iguodala's 3/48m contract is a bad deal. It has nothing to do with unwillingness to spend. Would you have supported that deal for Rockets? In fact I think the Warriors were about to wisely let him walk. His bad deal only happened because Durant offered to partly pay for it himself rather than let him walk. Had Iguodala signed for $42 million (which even then is somewhat overpaid IMHO), Durant would have been paid his $31.5m. Then no one would be complaining at all.
Kevin Durant to decline player option, rework deal with Warriors Golden State Warriors All-Star Kevin Durant plans to decline his player option for the 2018-19 season and become an unrestricted free agent this summer, league sources told ESPN. His time on the open market, however, will be brief. A nine-time All-Star and the reigning NBA Finals MVP, Durant will be turning down a salary of $26.2 million, a figure well below that of a player of his caliber, in order to restructure a new deal with the Warriors, sources said. Last offseason, Durant inked a discounted two-year, $51 million deal that included an opt-out clause. He took close to $10 million less than what he could have earned on a max salary. Agreeing to such terms allowed the team to retain forward Andre Iguodala and backup point guard Shaun Livingston. It has yet to be decided what contractual route Durant will take, sources say, but there are no real incentives -- for himself or for the team -- to take such a drastic reduction in pay this time around. Durant and business partner Rich Kleiman will go over the scenarios in great detail at the conclusion of the Warriors' postseason run. ESPN Front Office Insider Bobby Marks dissected Durant's options for this upcoming offseason. Option A: He can sign a two-year deal with a 2019-20 player option in which the first-year earnings would be $30 million and the option year worth $31.5 million. The only benefit in signing this contract is that the salary cap is expected to jump from $101 million (2018-19) to $108 million (2019-20). Durant could then opt out after the 2018-19 season and sign a five-year, $219 million contract. It would be the largest deal in NBA history if San Antonio forward Kawhi Leonard doesn't sign a super max this summer. Nonetheless, the Warriors' luxury tax bill in 2019 would be astronomical. Durant's five-year income breakdown would be $37.8 million, $40.8 million, $43.8 million, $46.8 million and $49.9 million. Option B: He can sign a four-year max contract valued at around $158 million. His annual pay would be $35.3 million, $38.2 million, $41 million and $43.8 million. Option C: He can agree to a three-year deal with a player option after the second season. His income would go from $35.3 million to $38.2 million, and the option year would be $41 million. The salary cap in 2020-21 is expected to be approximately $112 million. Or, in this scenario, Durant could opt out and sign a five-year, $228 million contract with a starting salary of $39.4 million -- the same contract Anthony Davis is eligible to sign with New Orleans in 2019. Under Option C, Durant would be eligible for a no-trade clause because he would have played four seasons with the Warriors and been in the NBA for eight seasons. But the Warriors' negotiations with Stephen Curry last summer showed that the team's ownership is reluctant to put a no-trade clause in a contract. In early March, Durant told The Athletic: "It made sense to do the one-year deal. I'm sure here soon I'll want to sign a long-term deal just to feel stable. But I'm enjoying every moment of it, so I'm not trying to look too far down the line."
