I wonder who's going to trade for Markkanen this offseason. 200m contract, coming off a down year and it's even more obvious now he's not in their future plans. MasterASS from Danny Ainge
One of my favorite quotes arise from Andor where they rage against a seemingly impossible struggle. Where they stand “dwarfed by the scale of the enemy.
Where they remember “. . . that even the smallest act of insurrection pushes our lines forward. That tyranny requires constant effort. It breaks, it leaks. That the day will come when all these skirmishes and battles, these moments of defiance will have flooded the banks and then there will be one too many. One single thing will break the siege”.
Even if it amounts to nothing, doing something means something because all it takes for evil to win is for good men to do nothing.
I invite you to the ICE protests in LA. I accept the ban for political speech, I just hope you leave my post up. It’s been fun guys!!!
The Bay has been so extra blessed that Kerr and Curry have been such thoughtful stand-up men with an actual practice of inclusive and caring politics. Maybe all-time shooters can see more clearly?
FWIW Bay Resistance is a mailing list of events and more - a loose aggregation of labor and activist organizations and folks. I'm doing arts and crafts with 'em.
I think he’s saying that there is error in every step of the shooting process, which increases with more stress (time, distance, emotion) there is and also multiplies step to step. Since a ballistic body is free moving, that’s only concerned about what happens after release.
The ballistic body only becomes freely moving after receiving a specific initial force. Taking the analogy further, the explosion of gunpowder used to create the force that propels the bullet out of the muzzle must be precise, as must the sturdiness of the holder of the gun be well grounded, as must the barrel of the gun be smooth and straight. This is indeed similar to a shooter needing good balance for their footwork, precise force generation, and proper off hand guidance. As the range increases, more precision in all phases is needed.
Ahhh, okay. Although to me the shooting motion looks to me more like an example of a complex system striving to coordinate disparate parts to eliminate deviation and produce an optimal solution than an application of chaos theory -- though, to be fair, chaos theory plays a part in complex systems theory.
I’m curious, if you were Kuminga, would you accept a larger contract offer by the Warriors knowing that you’ll get traded OR would you accept the tendered 7.9 million offer and go to free agency next year?
Honestly, I’d rather go the 7.9 million/ restricted fa because after my Warriors tenure I’d consider it essential to sign with a coaching staff/organization that believed/fits with my skillset. I don’t want to be sent to another team in a trade and have no control over my future.
Honestly, I feel like Kuminga might do that which would be worst case scenario for us because our ability to secure a return is more limited on an 8 million contract.
But if he ends up an UFA after the '25-26 season, someone has to have cap space if he's going to get his bag. If he's so set on finding an organization that fits best with his skill set, they'll also have to have cap space (or an available TPMLE, which won't give him much of a raise over the $7.9 million). Given what we're seeing this year (only the Nets with cap space thus far), he might not have too many suitors.
I'm guessing the Dubs will oblige with a $100 million/4 year extension and then hope to use his salary as ballast once JK can be moved.
I think if Stephen Jackson taught us anything, the way to go is to get the bag and then force a trade. In this case, JK has a little leverage since a crappy offer might have him sign the QO.
Also, depending on the year, it could severely limit your team options to try to get a FA offer, rather than get a sign-and-trade. For instance, right now literally only BRK has cap space to sign JK and they don’t want him.
It is a good question that I haven’t thought hard about, though… which team would actually be perfect for JK?
Yeah no one ever does the QO. I literally can’t think of a single player other than Miles Bridges and that was due to being an abuser.
JK’s market is probably at least the MLE which opens a decent market of options. I’d guess he goes for a 3y deal with a player option.
So at worst it’s something like 3y/45M with an option to get out after two. He delays a free market but guarantees himself at least 45M. Year 1 he gets about $15M instead of 8. There’s a good chance the Warriors
The Warriors would probably match that and very good chance offer even more just to have a more substantial salary to move later
Talk about unintended consequences ... offering a guy more than market, just because he's one of the very few exceptions you have to keep a large salary. Bet that's not what the owners had in mind for the caps.
Yeah. Though I don't think its "true" market. It's just his market due to a limited number of teams with cap space, and restrictive sign and trade rules. So if it ends up at 3y/60-65M there's still teams that would see it as a value and worth trading for.
that's kind of where I think it will end up. Maybe $18 - 20 mil a yr. Two or three years, perhaps with an additional year as a player option.
I'd rather it was 3 years plus a team option for the fourth, but MDJ and the current FO seems to be OK with short contracts and taking chances on the future market.
You can't really lose if it's in that range. If JK doesn't perform well by the trade deadline, that's a very tradeable contract. If he does, you've got a good player on a bargain contract for a few years.
I find the whole Would You Rather game when played with obscene wealth absurd, no offense to you, more like I'm offended by the whole thing.
Whether it's ballplayers, team owners, musicians, hedge fund managers, they all get to levels that make meaningful discussion of money absurd. We have lost our way when we are SO PROUD of Taylor Swift for giving truck drivers a 100K bonus on her Eras tour, while keeping a billion for herself. She does NOT get a good for you from me for doing the bare minimum, or rather less than the bare minimum decent thing. Just because other artists are even more scandalously thrifty doesn't mean she's done all she possibly could have and we need to worship her generosity.
Bezos, Musk, Ellison, these tirades of mine are headed your way any second, don't you worry.
Unless he is injured and unable to play at all, Kuminga will make in the next decade more money than anyone could possibly spend without being an utter moron. Set financially for generations to come. Yes, I know that he has to pay taxes and agents and that his earning power is quite limited upon retirement. But he will also have endorsement opportunities.
I'm not Kuminga, I can't tell him what to do. But let us recall that he grew up in rather dire poverty. 8 million dollars itself is ludicrously above that; let alone the (let's just say) 200 milliion he will make in his career.
Personally, it's a super easy call. I would take the work situation I liked best, the money is obscenely too much, no matter what he chooses.
I like much of this except the comment about Taylor Swift (and I'm not a pop fan so it's not about liking her music), which I think is way off base. Sure she makes a pike of money but her generosity with her crew (and it was far more than "truck drivers") was a difference maker for them, and that sort of thing almost never happens in the music industry. It clearly wasn't a publicity stunt, although obviously the media made a thing of it.
Having spent most of my life in the music industry, including quite a few years of touring, I can tell you that the crew works insane hours of heavy work under unrelenting deadlines and with constant travel and rarely enough rest. The pressure is very intense because there's so much money on the line and so many fans who have their hearts set on attending a great show. There's not much margin for error. They fully deserved that bonus, and they wouldn't get anything close to that anywhere else (except maybe the GratefuI Dead's crew back in the day). It was praiseworthy indeed, and you can bet pretty much every crew in the industry wishes they worked for someone that generous.
We agree entirely. The crew works very hard, and deserves so much more.
I'm specifically mentioning Taylor Swift not because she is less generous than others, but because she is more -- and yet it falls so short.
It's like if you worked really hard and sacrificed to make a huge dinner for a whole group of people; and we know when we're eating, you only get a small amount. We all know you're very hungry, but no one around you is giving you any fries off their plates. Except me,! I give you THREE WHOLE FRIES.
I am not ready to take a bow for that.
Being generous and sharing in life's bounties is a privilege not a punishment, and should be standard expectation. I'm not going to pat Taylor Swift on the head for doing far less than she really could have and should have, just because her peers do as little as possible.
That still misses the mark by a whole lot. Taylor Swift also has earned what she gets. She is extraordinarily talented, and she has worked incredibly hard to build her career to this point. The money is there because of her. She has a great crew, and they're well paid. She has a reputation as being great to work for. But the bonus was absolutely unexpected. Far less than she SHOULD have? To my knowledge, and I have been in the music industry for more than 50 years, nobody, I mean NOBODY in the industry has come close to her generosity — ever. . If you were to ask any of that crew, I guarantee you they are thrilled with that bonus and do not at all see it the way you do. Also, I daresay she would not appreciate your patronizing pat on the head.
We live in a world where someone writes songs and performs them and as a result has more money than an average 8,300 households, by my brief ChatGPT query. I don't think that's just. It doesn't matter if she worked hard or not very hard. It doesn't matter if she's the most generous artist in the business -- which I find believable. It's still not just.
It's a straw man argument to suggest that I think the crew were not thrilled with the bonus. That was never in doubt.
I'm saying that obscene wealth disparities are at the root of a great many societal problems. I have a feeling you agree with that. It's just not right, what's going on. The same is true of Michael Jordan. He played ball, does that mean it's just for him to sit on a couple of billion while people sleep in the streets? I very much doubt you think that and I am not accusing you of so saying.
We live in a world where one person can now create something that can be quickly and easily shared with 99% of living humans. Whether you like it or not, that's an access level that allows a lot of asymmetric rewards for those that achieve a broad reach and convince people to voluntarily give them money.
Don't get me wrong, there's plenty of other deplorable factors that lead to the obscene wealth assymetry, like monopolies, fraud, money in politics, and the like, but the ability to create something millions of people enjoy is not particularly deplorable in my book.
I interpreted Asher's comment as less of a Taylor Swift diss, but instead as a comment on the tour industry as a whole: treating and paying your employees very well for the hard work they do should be the bare minimum, especially for artists/bands that make loads of $$$ from their tour.
Ironically, I disagree with his Kuminga contract opinion. Because he grew up in poverty, I would (expect is a strong word, anticipate?) that he would sacrifice some personal/professional happiness so that he could help as many people as possible. Like Asher said, I'm sure he'd be more than happy with 8 million. But he could live a great life and help more people with more guaranteed money. Besides, what if he got injured, and got nothing after that $8 million?
I’m not sure how much his desire to help others back home plays into how much money he wants. Unless he’s made this point, I’d hesitate to assume he’s taking the Manute Bol route and devoting most of his money to those less fortunate.
Exactly right on the Taylor Swift. See my reply on it just above.
If you're saying that Kuminga's personal agenda includes a great deal of philanthropy, which may or may not be true, I have no idea; then absolutely it makes sense to maximize income. And I do think that the injury thing weighs very heavily for athlete evaluation of their futures, no doubt.
I'm not sure I agree with this... it all depends on so many factors ...
What will that person do with their max income? Bezos, Musk, Ellison as an example maybe compared with Gates?
When one person maximizes their income how does that effect the income of others? Often in a business world some profit immensely often while others work in part to gain those profits yet don't realize the same.
I do think that a desirable work environment is worth a lot in term of general well being... if the financial compensation is sufficient... which I think it probably is for most NBA veterans.
I didn't phrase the JK part very well, I was just trying to say that there are a lot of valid reasons to put aside some discomfort for the bag (IMO a lot more than for taking the QO): but only because it's JK's 1st shot at a huge contract (>15 mil per). Having said that, he has made over $24 mil so far lol, which is a lot.
I wonder a bit why more players don't do this. Yes, there is some risk, but surely there are insurance mechanisms so the player can protect himself financially, if he has a serious injury during that one-year deal.
Interesting idea, though it’s hard to imagine an insurance company covering a player against injury that would pay lost earnings of say $150m. The premium would have to be enormous given the risk and it just doesn’t sound worth it to an insurer.
I seem to recall that some player contracts are insured from the team side, though, which is a very close analogue to a player buying the insurance (same risks).
IIRC, a large chunk of Chris Bosh's payout, when it was determined he shouldn't play again, came from insurance.
It is quite possible that the premiums are too steep for a player to normally afford, but I suspect there is some vehicle for doing it.
Also, I think others with special skills (concert pianists is who I'm thinking of) are able to insure their hands (or whatever).
I did a bit of looking around and found this good 2015 article on loss-of-value insurance.
[[
The insurance is expensive, normally around $10,000 per $1 million in coverage. Since an NCAA player shouldn't have $100,000 lying around the dorm room, the premium is usually delayed and will be paid by the player's first professional contract. If a player is unable to be signed, the premium is deducted from the benefit at the time of payment.
While availability of these policies has been around for years, it is very difficult to meet all the conditions to receive the benefit. A player not only has to be injured while playing football, but he also has to have a demonstrable loss of value, specifically due to the injury. A player like Lee could have slid to the second round on production or his team having a poor season, which has always been the previous argument.
A lot could have changed since then, but at that rate, if JK wanted to insure against losing a $150m contract, it would cost $1.5 million. That might be worth it to him. However, reading between the lines of the article, it might be hard to force the insurer to pay out as they will haggle what is provably lost value.
Insuring against a complete loss of income might be extreme. Aren’t career-ending injuries pretty rare in the NBA? Seems like he might only want to insure against a lost a season or two, which would still provide him with $30-60M in the event his career ends.
Kuminga could play like shit or be benched again and probably needs to take a minimum/mini MLE deal just to retain his value. his value will never be higher tbh
Nah unlrss he has an injury, FOs know to consider the limitations incurred with playing in this offense and will value accordingly. I think he gets an offer of no less than 18 milly per either this offseason or next one regardless of his potentially inconsistent playing time
No you take as much guaranteed money as possible every time. You don’t know what kind of injury might be in your future, or whether a bigger contract will even exist. Look at what happened to Schroeder with the lakers.
Not necessarily. There's the matter of fit and, with a young player, development. The wrong team can impede his career growth. There can be other factors, such as going to a large market where, if successful, endorsements can make the player a lot more money, and going to a winning or rising team where the player could help push them over the top. Although this wouldn't apply to JK, some players want to go to their home town team.
Aside from good enough athleticism, and good mechanics, Steph has an elite computer for calculating distance, arc, and force. You can call it muscle memory, but almost every shot is at least a little bit different and his brain is doing a ton of unconscious calculations in a fraction of a second.
Thank you Eric and Marc for Part 2. Here's what comes through loud and clear. Talent isn't enough...it will get you only so far. Work ethic and putting the time in, are critical. Its hard for some players with lots of raw talent, to take it to the next level.
You see this in academics as well. Resting on your laurels isn't enough in todays NBA or WNBA. You need raw talent, work ethic AND team work. A lot of young stars want attention and $$$ but there's an entitlement that creeps in and that's a team killer. Think of all the Warriors supporting cast, Loon, Dray, Moody, GP2, PODZ etc then look at those who wanted their own limelight: Poole, eventually Klay, DiVincenzio. It's hard for some to be on Steph's team. Unfortunately I have a hunch JK falls in this camp.
Anyone who isn't happy making our dreams come true with a 5th ring with Steph, please go. I wish you well. I defy anyone in the league to do what Steph does with defenders hanging all over him and getting 1 out of 10 calls he should be getting. The man is amazing. But it isn't just talent. He's a David in a league of Goliaths. Most players do not have Stephs patience. And that is as big a compliment as I can give. Patience comes from confidence.
I think you're being a little harsh with DDV. He came to the Dubs, played hard, rehabilitated his career, and then followed the money as the Dubs simply couldn't afford him.
yeah. DDV wanted to stay, we wanted to keep him. But, cap rules kept us from offering him market value, and that's just life in the NBA. No harm, no foul anywhere.
His deal with the Dubs was to rebuild his value after an injury, so it's not like the team didn't know he would be moving on in a year.
I have no problem w. DDV. He was better off trying somewhere else. I think JK will also want too much and he wants to be a star now. Poole helped us win a championship but he was also entitled. People are free to disagree. I'll take a MOSES MOODY over a just plain Moody, any day.
I thought at the time and still think the Warriors overpaid for Poole. I've was critical of Poole in several respects when he was here. But at age 23, he was offered the bag and took it, and why shouldn't he be delighted? Wouldn't you be, especially at that age? Even more so because in the NBA, money = respect (to a point). The trade that followed was not up to him.
Man I love this two-part series, great great job Eric.
Marc blessed us with a visit last time and I'm hoping will this time as well, because I have some questions:
1. To your recollection, did any of the high school refs call defensive three seconds on Steph? Because in the video he several times parks his Schwinn in the paint, has a PBJ, and plays Nintendo. Or were all the refs in Dell's pocket? Probably that.
2. I can't remember if I asked this last time -- to what extent does aim come into the ultimate success of top level players. I hear you saying, and I believe you, that so much of it is down to mechanics, kinetic flow from toe to finger, timing, footwork, all that. But is there such a thing as just bad aim or good aim at the top levels? I had a friend who was phenomenal at all carnival aiming games, no matter how unusual the setup, and how poor the odds. Is Steph that guy, just otherwordly hand eye coordination who knows exactly how far and how hard to throw any possible thing?
3. What do you think of LeBron's shooting mechanics? Because he is a perfect example of what you were talking about -- a guy who came in the league with otherwordly physical gifts, and in fact didn't shoot well early. But now? Did his form change in ways you talk about?
Well, that explains it. I never watch any of the non NBA leagues. Serves me right. I could delete the question but people who typically think I'm a moron deserve this moment in the sun.
Let's hope the Warriors' management/coaches/players who come over read DubNationHQ decide to engage Marc to raise our team's collective 3-point shooting by 6%.
Wow - thank you @EA - that was an amazing interview. Mark is brilliant and your questions get out the best - I loved the high school segment and the shooting mechanics when it comes to the NBA!!
Now - chaos theory?? Really !!! Maybe get in self-organization or the butterfly effect next:-)
I wonder who's going to trade for Markkanen this offseason. 200m contract, coming off a down year and it's even more obvious now he's not in their future plans. MasterASS from Danny Ainge
Possibly us at the deadline?
I don't know that's a contract we're willing to take on now after paying Jimmy.
DMC getting into it with a fan.
https://youtube.com/shorts/cUx2EHR6OiU?si=_k5zN3mb4rmq9Ndf
And then it got worse for DMC:
https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/1l7pxto/alternate_angle_fans_throw_drinks_on_demarcus/
Crowd being assholes.
One of my favorite quotes arise from Andor where they rage against a seemingly impossible struggle. Where they stand “dwarfed by the scale of the enemy.
Where they remember “. . . that even the smallest act of insurrection pushes our lines forward. That tyranny requires constant effort. It breaks, it leaks. That the day will come when all these skirmishes and battles, these moments of defiance will have flooded the banks and then there will be one too many. One single thing will break the siege”.
Even if it amounts to nothing, doing something means something because all it takes for evil to win is for good men to do nothing.
I invite you to the ICE protests in LA. I accept the ban for political speech, I just hope you leave my post up. It’s been fun guys!!!
The Bay has been so extra blessed that Kerr and Curry have been such thoughtful stand-up men with an actual practice of inclusive and caring politics. Maybe all-time shooters can see more clearly?
i wish I was there!!! Supporting them in my thoughts. The bay area, especially SF, is also seeing resistance!!!
FWIW Bay Resistance is a mailing list of events and more - a loose aggregation of labor and activist organizations and folks. I'm doing arts and crafts with 'em.
Yes.
Yes sir! I've already looked up protest in SD this weekend and will be there.
Fascist need to know will oppose them and this will end eventually.
Also, I totally forgot pedro Pascal was in rouge one while watching both seasons of andor.
Yeah count me in. Fk that 🍊 pos.
Thanks, Arash. Keep dissenting!
But that's not chaos theory; it's simple ballistics. Within a gravitation field, the greater the range, the greater the initial force needed.
I think he’s saying that there is error in every step of the shooting process, which increases with more stress (time, distance, emotion) there is and also multiplies step to step. Since a ballistic body is free moving, that’s only concerned about what happens after release.
The ballistic body only becomes freely moving after receiving a specific initial force. Taking the analogy further, the explosion of gunpowder used to create the force that propels the bullet out of the muzzle must be precise, as must the sturdiness of the holder of the gun be well grounded, as must the barrel of the gun be smooth and straight. This is indeed similar to a shooter needing good balance for their footwork, precise force generation, and proper off hand guidance. As the range increases, more precision in all phases is needed.
Ahhh, okay. Although to me the shooting motion looks to me more like an example of a complex system striving to coordinate disparate parts to eliminate deviation and produce an optimal solution than an application of chaos theory -- though, to be fair, chaos theory plays a part in complex systems theory.
I’m curious, if you were Kuminga, would you accept a larger contract offer by the Warriors knowing that you’ll get traded OR would you accept the tendered 7.9 million offer and go to free agency next year?
Honestly, I’d rather go the 7.9 million/ restricted fa because after my Warriors tenure I’d consider it essential to sign with a coaching staff/organization that believed/fits with my skillset. I don’t want to be sent to another team in a trade and have no control over my future.
Honestly, I feel like Kuminga might do that which would be worst case scenario for us because our ability to secure a return is more limited on an 8 million contract.
But if he ends up an UFA after the '25-26 season, someone has to have cap space if he's going to get his bag. If he's so set on finding an organization that fits best with his skill set, they'll also have to have cap space (or an available TPMLE, which won't give him much of a raise over the $7.9 million). Given what we're seeing this year (only the Nets with cap space thus far), he might not have too many suitors.
I'm guessing the Dubs will oblige with a $100 million/4 year extension and then hope to use his salary as ballast once JK can be moved.
I think if Stephen Jackson taught us anything, the way to go is to get the bag and then force a trade. In this case, JK has a little leverage since a crappy offer might have him sign the QO.
Also, depending on the year, it could severely limit your team options to try to get a FA offer, rather than get a sign-and-trade. For instance, right now literally only BRK has cap space to sign JK and they don’t want him.
It is a good question that I haven’t thought hard about, though… which team would actually be perfect for JK?
Detroit Pistons? They have Tobias Harris at PF right now, but he isn't getting any younger and he is only under contract for next season.
Yeah no one ever does the QO. I literally can’t think of a single player other than Miles Bridges and that was due to being an abuser.
JK’s market is probably at least the MLE which opens a decent market of options. I’d guess he goes for a 3y deal with a player option.
So at worst it’s something like 3y/45M with an option to get out after two. He delays a free market but guarantees himself at least 45M. Year 1 he gets about $15M instead of 8. There’s a good chance the Warriors
The Warriors would probably match that and very good chance offer even more just to have a more substantial salary to move later
And the less we can lock him down for, the more teams will presumably be interested in trading for him.
Not necessarily - if Dubs have to match salaries to do a trade, a lower JK salary limits the trading possibilities.
Talk about unintended consequences ... offering a guy more than market, just because he's one of the very few exceptions you have to keep a large salary. Bet that's not what the owners had in mind for the caps.
Bizarre. But, you're probably right.
Yeah. Though I don't think its "true" market. It's just his market due to a limited number of teams with cap space, and restrictive sign and trade rules. So if it ends up at 3y/60-65M there's still teams that would see it as a value and worth trading for.
I'd see it as a good value.
that's kind of where I think it will end up. Maybe $18 - 20 mil a yr. Two or three years, perhaps with an additional year as a player option.
I'd rather it was 3 years plus a team option for the fourth, but MDJ and the current FO seems to be OK with short contracts and taking chances on the future market.
You can't really lose if it's in that range. If JK doesn't perform well by the trade deadline, that's a very tradeable contract. If he does, you've got a good player on a bargain contract for a few years.
I find the whole Would You Rather game when played with obscene wealth absurd, no offense to you, more like I'm offended by the whole thing.
Whether it's ballplayers, team owners, musicians, hedge fund managers, they all get to levels that make meaningful discussion of money absurd. We have lost our way when we are SO PROUD of Taylor Swift for giving truck drivers a 100K bonus on her Eras tour, while keeping a billion for herself. She does NOT get a good for you from me for doing the bare minimum, or rather less than the bare minimum decent thing. Just because other artists are even more scandalously thrifty doesn't mean she's done all she possibly could have and we need to worship her generosity.
Bezos, Musk, Ellison, these tirades of mine are headed your way any second, don't you worry.
Unless he is injured and unable to play at all, Kuminga will make in the next decade more money than anyone could possibly spend without being an utter moron. Set financially for generations to come. Yes, I know that he has to pay taxes and agents and that his earning power is quite limited upon retirement. But he will also have endorsement opportunities.
I'm not Kuminga, I can't tell him what to do. But let us recall that he grew up in rather dire poverty. 8 million dollars itself is ludicrously above that; let alone the (let's just say) 200 milliion he will make in his career.
Personally, it's a super easy call. I would take the work situation I liked best, the money is obscenely too much, no matter what he chooses.
I like much of this except the comment about Taylor Swift (and I'm not a pop fan so it's not about liking her music), which I think is way off base. Sure she makes a pike of money but her generosity with her crew (and it was far more than "truck drivers") was a difference maker for them, and that sort of thing almost never happens in the music industry. It clearly wasn't a publicity stunt, although obviously the media made a thing of it.
Having spent most of my life in the music industry, including quite a few years of touring, I can tell you that the crew works insane hours of heavy work under unrelenting deadlines and with constant travel and rarely enough rest. The pressure is very intense because there's so much money on the line and so many fans who have their hearts set on attending a great show. There's not much margin for error. They fully deserved that bonus, and they wouldn't get anything close to that anywhere else (except maybe the GratefuI Dead's crew back in the day). It was praiseworthy indeed, and you can bet pretty much every crew in the industry wishes they worked for someone that generous.
As an aside, I hope her generosity makes other artists look at their own crews and decide to be more generous.
We agree entirely. The crew works very hard, and deserves so much more.
I'm specifically mentioning Taylor Swift not because she is less generous than others, but because she is more -- and yet it falls so short.
It's like if you worked really hard and sacrificed to make a huge dinner for a whole group of people; and we know when we're eating, you only get a small amount. We all know you're very hungry, but no one around you is giving you any fries off their plates. Except me,! I give you THREE WHOLE FRIES.
I am not ready to take a bow for that.
Being generous and sharing in life's bounties is a privilege not a punishment, and should be standard expectation. I'm not going to pat Taylor Swift on the head for doing far less than she really could have and should have, just because her peers do as little as possible.
That still misses the mark by a whole lot. Taylor Swift also has earned what she gets. She is extraordinarily talented, and she has worked incredibly hard to build her career to this point. The money is there because of her. She has a great crew, and they're well paid. She has a reputation as being great to work for. But the bonus was absolutely unexpected. Far less than she SHOULD have? To my knowledge, and I have been in the music industry for more than 50 years, nobody, I mean NOBODY in the industry has come close to her generosity — ever. . If you were to ask any of that crew, I guarantee you they are thrilled with that bonus and do not at all see it the way you do. Also, I daresay she would not appreciate your patronizing pat on the head.
We live in a world where someone writes songs and performs them and as a result has more money than an average 8,300 households, by my brief ChatGPT query. I don't think that's just. It doesn't matter if she worked hard or not very hard. It doesn't matter if she's the most generous artist in the business -- which I find believable. It's still not just.
It's a straw man argument to suggest that I think the crew were not thrilled with the bonus. That was never in doubt.
I'm saying that obscene wealth disparities are at the root of a great many societal problems. I have a feeling you agree with that. It's just not right, what's going on. The same is true of Michael Jordan. He played ball, does that mean it's just for him to sit on a couple of billion while people sleep in the streets? I very much doubt you think that and I am not accusing you of so saying.
We live in a world where one person can now create something that can be quickly and easily shared with 99% of living humans. Whether you like it or not, that's an access level that allows a lot of asymmetric rewards for those that achieve a broad reach and convince people to voluntarily give them money.
Don't get me wrong, there's plenty of other deplorable factors that lead to the obscene wealth assymetry, like monopolies, fraud, money in politics, and the like, but the ability to create something millions of people enjoy is not particularly deplorable in my book.
I interpreted Asher's comment as less of a Taylor Swift diss, but instead as a comment on the tour industry as a whole: treating and paying your employees very well for the hard work they do should be the bare minimum, especially for artists/bands that make loads of $$$ from their tour.
Ironically, I disagree with his Kuminga contract opinion. Because he grew up in poverty, I would (expect is a strong word, anticipate?) that he would sacrifice some personal/professional happiness so that he could help as many people as possible. Like Asher said, I'm sure he'd be more than happy with 8 million. But he could live a great life and help more people with more guaranteed money. Besides, what if he got injured, and got nothing after that $8 million?
I’m not sure how much his desire to help others back home plays into how much money he wants. Unless he’s made this point, I’d hesitate to assume he’s taking the Manute Bol route and devoting most of his money to those less fortunate.
Exactly right on the Taylor Swift. See my reply on it just above.
If you're saying that Kuminga's personal agenda includes a great deal of philanthropy, which may or may not be true, I have no idea; then absolutely it makes sense to maximize income. And I do think that the injury thing weighs very heavily for athlete evaluation of their futures, no doubt.
'makes sense to maximize income'
I'm not sure I agree with this... it all depends on so many factors ...
What will that person do with their max income? Bezos, Musk, Ellison as an example maybe compared with Gates?
When one person maximizes their income how does that effect the income of others? Often in a business world some profit immensely often while others work in part to gain those profits yet don't realize the same.
I do think that a desirable work environment is worth a lot in term of general well being... if the financial compensation is sufficient... which I think it probably is for most NBA veterans.
I didn't phrase the JK part very well, I was just trying to say that there are a lot of valid reasons to put aside some discomfort for the bag (IMO a lot more than for taking the QO): but only because it's JK's 1st shot at a huge contract (>15 mil per). Having said that, he has made over $24 mil so far lol, which is a lot.
Right???? I literally don't know what I would do with 24 million dollars -- except give it away which sort of begs the question.
I wonder a bit why more players don't do this. Yes, there is some risk, but surely there are insurance mechanisms so the player can protect himself financially, if he has a serious injury during that one-year deal.
Interesting idea, though it’s hard to imagine an insurance company covering a player against injury that would pay lost earnings of say $150m. The premium would have to be enormous given the risk and it just doesn’t sound worth it to an insurer.
I seem to recall that some player contracts are insured from the team side, though, which is a very close analogue to a player buying the insurance (same risks).
IIRC, a large chunk of Chris Bosh's payout, when it was determined he shouldn't play again, came from insurance.
It is quite possible that the premiums are too steep for a player to normally afford, but I suspect there is some vehicle for doing it.
Also, I think others with special skills (concert pianists is who I'm thinking of) are able to insure their hands (or whatever).
I did a bit of looking around and found this good 2015 article on loss-of-value insurance.
[[
The insurance is expensive, normally around $10,000 per $1 million in coverage. Since an NCAA player shouldn't have $100,000 lying around the dorm room, the premium is usually delayed and will be paid by the player's first professional contract. If a player is unable to be signed, the premium is deducted from the benefit at the time of payment.
While availability of these policies has been around for years, it is very difficult to meet all the conditions to receive the benefit. A player not only has to be injured while playing football, but he also has to have a demonstrable loss of value, specifically due to the injury. A player like Lee could have slid to the second round on production or his team having a poor season, which has always been the previous argument.
]]
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2052089-marquis-lee-injuries-drop-him-in-nfl-draft-but-lead-to-insurance-payout?utm_source=chatgpt.com
A lot could have changed since then, but at that rate, if JK wanted to insure against losing a $150m contract, it would cost $1.5 million. That might be worth it to him. However, reading between the lines of the article, it might be hard to force the insurer to pay out as they will haggle what is provably lost value.
Insuring against a complete loss of income might be extreme. Aren’t career-ending injuries pretty rare in the NBA? Seems like he might only want to insure against a lost a season or two, which would still provide him with $30-60M in the event his career ends.
Thanks ... a really informative article from Bleacher Report. I guess it happens. :)
Kuminga could play like shit or be benched again and probably needs to take a minimum/mini MLE deal just to retain his value. his value will never be higher tbh
Nah unlrss he has an injury, FOs know to consider the limitations incurred with playing in this offense and will value accordingly. I think he gets an offer of no less than 18 milly per either this offseason or next one regardless of his potentially inconsistent playing time
No you take as much guaranteed money as possible every time. You don’t know what kind of injury might be in your future, or whether a bigger contract will even exist. Look at what happened to Schroeder with the lakers.
Not necessarily. There's the matter of fit and, with a young player, development. The wrong team can impede his career growth. There can be other factors, such as going to a large market where, if successful, endorsements can make the player a lot more money, and going to a winning or rising team where the player could help push them over the top. Although this wouldn't apply to JK, some players want to go to their home town team.
Aside from good enough athleticism, and good mechanics, Steph has an elite computer for calculating distance, arc, and force. You can call it muscle memory, but almost every shot is at least a little bit different and his brain is doing a ton of unconscious calculations in a fraction of a second.
And Steph says he sometimes suffers from imposter syndrome. Lol. Can you imagine??
Thank you Eric and Marc for Part 2. Here's what comes through loud and clear. Talent isn't enough...it will get you only so far. Work ethic and putting the time in, are critical. Its hard for some players with lots of raw talent, to take it to the next level.
You see this in academics as well. Resting on your laurels isn't enough in todays NBA or WNBA. You need raw talent, work ethic AND team work. A lot of young stars want attention and $$$ but there's an entitlement that creeps in and that's a team killer. Think of all the Warriors supporting cast, Loon, Dray, Moody, GP2, PODZ etc then look at those who wanted their own limelight: Poole, eventually Klay, DiVincenzio. It's hard for some to be on Steph's team. Unfortunately I have a hunch JK falls in this camp.
Anyone who isn't happy making our dreams come true with a 5th ring with Steph, please go. I wish you well. I defy anyone in the league to do what Steph does with defenders hanging all over him and getting 1 out of 10 calls he should be getting. The man is amazing. But it isn't just talent. He's a David in a league of Goliaths. Most players do not have Stephs patience. And that is as big a compliment as I can give. Patience comes from confidence.
I think you're being a little harsh with DDV. He came to the Dubs, played hard, rehabilitated his career, and then followed the money as the Dubs simply couldn't afford him.
yeah. DDV wanted to stay, we wanted to keep him. But, cap rules kept us from offering him market value, and that's just life in the NBA. No harm, no foul anywhere.
His deal with the Dubs was to rebuild his value after an injury, so it's not like the team didn't know he would be moving on in a year.
I have no problem w. DDV. He was better off trying somewhere else. I think JK will also want too much and he wants to be a star now. Poole helped us win a championship but he was also entitled. People are free to disagree. I'll take a MOSES MOODY over a just plain Moody, any day.
Absolutely; also Poole, the Warriors traded HIM.
Jordan "MONEYTIME!" Poole?
I thought at the time and still think the Warriors overpaid for Poole. I've was critical of Poole in several respects when he was here. But at age 23, he was offered the bag and took it, and why shouldn't he be delighted? Wouldn't you be, especially at that age? Even more so because in the NBA, money = respect (to a point). The trade that followed was not up to him.
I'm about to get a BAG
Man I love this two-part series, great great job Eric.
Marc blessed us with a visit last time and I'm hoping will this time as well, because I have some questions:
1. To your recollection, did any of the high school refs call defensive three seconds on Steph? Because in the video he several times parks his Schwinn in the paint, has a PBJ, and plays Nintendo. Or were all the refs in Dell's pocket? Probably that.
2. I can't remember if I asked this last time -- to what extent does aim come into the ultimate success of top level players. I hear you saying, and I believe you, that so much of it is down to mechanics, kinetic flow from toe to finger, timing, footwork, all that. But is there such a thing as just bad aim or good aim at the top levels? I had a friend who was phenomenal at all carnival aiming games, no matter how unusual the setup, and how poor the odds. Is Steph that guy, just otherwordly hand eye coordination who knows exactly how far and how hard to throw any possible thing?
3. What do you think of LeBron's shooting mechanics? Because he is a perfect example of what you were talking about -- a guy who came in the league with otherwordly physical gifts, and in fact didn't shoot well early. But now? Did his form change in ways you talk about?
As far as I know, the defensive 3 seconds rule only exists in the NBA/WNBA and not in college, high school or internationally (FIBA).
Well, that explains it. I never watch any of the non NBA leagues. Serves me right. I could delete the question but people who typically think I'm a moron deserve this moment in the sun.
Great stuff. Want more.
Let's hope the Warriors' management/coaches/players who come over read DubNationHQ decide to engage Marc to raise our team's collective 3-point shooting by 6%.
Wow - thank you @EA - that was an amazing interview. Mark is brilliant and your questions get out the best - I loved the high school segment and the shooting mechanics when it comes to the NBA!!
Now - chaos theory?? Really !!! Maybe get in self-organization or the butterfly effect next:-)