www.weedguru.com

This year marks the last season of the class of 03 as restricted free agents. The class includes the likes of LeBron, Bosh and Wade among many others.
These players are franchise players and can single handedly turn around the fortunes and success of organisations (Think Wade's teaming with Shaq to bring Miami their first title in 2006.

Im not sure if there are many people on here who follow the NBA.
I have a deep passion for the game of basketball, and the upcoming trade deadline and free agency at the end of the season
will heavily shape the next 5-10 years of the NBA.

I have also recently pondered an article i read about LeBron taking a minimum salary, to ensure he would be able to team up with two other superstars (in the same, albeit, younger style of the Boston Celtics with Garnett, Pierce and Allen). He has often spoke about playing for the love of the game, and surely does not need the millions he would make each season from a team, as his endorsements and sponsorship undoubtedly triple, quadruple, these payments. Is his priority to win championships? Would any other superstar contemplate this move? Is this morally incorrect as it could possibly lopside the competition so drastically that there would be little competition? Or is it just a repeat of the 80's Celtics? or the 90's bulls? or the 00's Lakers? Dynasty's that have been recorded as some of the greatest teams of all time? I suppose this could apply to any sport... What if Drogba and Terry took minimum offers in the EPL? Or Peyton Manning took a minimum offer to ensure the best lineman he could have?

If people read this i would like to hear your thoughts!

You have grabbed my interest, mate...not just by mentioning the premiership footballers. Because its an interesting idea, but as some of the basketball jargon, like 'franchise player' and references to 'boston celtics' throw me a little, my response may be somewhat less than you had hoped for, or anticipated.

From what I understand, a special player, has the intention of heading to a team where he will complete a team which will be literally the very best of the best, all together, and virtually unbeatable, but at the same time, from a fan's point of view, beautiful to watch. As I am sure there is art to the sport...Its akin to getting Thompson, Bukowski, Dostoyevsky, Miller and Burroughs, to all write a book together...What I have failed to understand is WHY a true star would have to take a minimum pay cheque if he was playing for an all star team???

This may be a little off topic Scarf, but Joe Mauer just took an 8 year 184 million dollar no trade clause deal with the Minnesota Twins. He said he took the deal because he wanted to remain a Twin for the rest of his career. Estimates are that he could have had up to 250 million dollars if he would have joined the red sox or yankees over the course of 8 years. So I believe his intentions were sincere, in that he stayed with Minnesota (who will probably never win a world series again) rather than joining a team with more cash. But 184 million over the course of 8 years is no small sum either.

As for Lebron, I hope the Knicks pay out as much money as possible to get him and then turn there once great franchise around, which is now the one of the laughing stocks of the NBA.

I've always wondered how someone can live with themselves for earning 23 MILLION dollars in ONE YEAR for playing baseball. A sport that many beer drinking weekend warriors hit the local school yard fields to play with joy...and for nothing.

Or any major sport, for that matter. I understand the fact that these people have sunk their entire lives into the sport of their choice. I also understand the entertainment value a lot of these player draw. And I even enjoy seeing these guys doing good by donating money to underprivilaged children, etc. I wlll NEVER be able to fathom how someone can be handed 10, 20, 30, 100 million for one year of work...in an entertainment industry.

Am I wrong in feeling this way? I think these athletes DO deserve to get paid more than your average joe considering if they retire at 40 and playing hockey is all they've ever known, I doubt they'll make it in the real working world. Though, I have heard numerous stories about retirees going off in other business ventures.

I can't really think straight at the moment. Just smoked my last bowl of kief after not smoking a single THC crystal for 2 days.

weedguru_animal wrote:What I have failed to understand is WHY a true star would have to take a minimum pay cheque if he was playing for an all star team???

Simply put... because of salary cap conditions.
Each team is placed at an approx 60 million limit to contract 15 players.
so if you have for example three superstars at 15 million a season each,
that only leaves 15 million for the next 12 players.... but if one player takes a minimum
of about one million, then it leaves you 29 million for the rest of these players...
so you can essentially sign another big contract player or a number of medium level
contract players...

I applaud Joe Mauer for sticking with the team he has made his name with...
whether he sees it through is another thing. I think back to another Minnesota
stallwart named Kevin Garnett who was as loyal as loyal comes, and it wasnt until
the Timberwolves gave their blessing, that he moved teams to chase that elusive title,
which he secured in boston

Gore i agree with you- they are paid way too much money for a single year salary, but
you could say that about many jobs. A lot of CEO's earn much more and probably do less for the world.
My argument is that for the salary they recieve, their privacy is limited or doesnt exist, constantly scrutinized
day in day out by the media and the public.
I admire guys like Garnett, Duncan, Wade, and Paul. who can stay out of the limelight while still
helping the community in enormous ways.