Posted by Bippity10:

Posted by sebstar:

Posted by Bippity10:

Posted by sebstar:

Posted by Bippity10:

Posted by sebstar:

Posted by Bippity10:

As for the interest level in these players. I think the financial situation is making some of these guys look less wanted than they really are. I think in a normal market guys like David Lee, Nate, Sessions not only would be signed, they probably would have been overpaid

Eh, thats too speculative and is sort of a cop out. Regardless of the circumstances, the results are the results. Teams found ways to give money to the guys they wanted to give it to i.e, Charlie V, Gordon, Miller, ext.

Perhaps the economic climate has made them more judicious with their money that's why guys like Lee and Sessions, whom they are suspicious of, are on the outside looking in. They dont feel they have the money to waste on guys they dont believe in.

It appears that you are speculating as much as I am

[Edited by - bippity10 on 28-07-2009 4:42 PM]

Way to completely miss the point and go the snippy route.

snippy? I was snippy? How did you get snippy from my post?

You pointed out that I was speculating and coping out. You were too, just thought I'd point that out.

What is your point? Guys don't want Sessions/Lee/Nate?

Of course that's what I am trying to say. You ignored my whole post and keyed in on one word to try to frame it as a: " I know you are but what am I" battle between you and me. You "speculating" wasnt the thrust of my post, but rather challenging your views on why people arent showing interest in Lee.

So if it wasn't the "thrust" of your post save yourself some words and leave it out and get to your point. You called my point speculation, that was your challenge. Then you raised an alternate point which was equal parts speculation. That was my point.

We don't know why these guys aren't getting offers, but I can speculate. Part of my personal business is to work with companies on setting salary levels within their organizations. In the real world, what companies/candidates are currently wrestling with is the market conditions verse the actual long-term worth of the candidate. Some companies feel they can pay less because of the current market conditions. They know that people are out of work and are desperate for jobs, so many companies in turn offer less. They also may be victims of budget constraints which force them to pay less. Candidates are accepting positions for less pay because they need the money. They know their worth in a level economy and they know that when the economy turns around they will get it. So they accept the lower money, settle into their jobs, with full intentions of finding a new job when the market straightens out and they can get their true value. What does this have to do with basketball?...........

Teams are businesses and run no different than companies in "the real world". They want some of these midlevel players but feel they can get the players for less then they are asking, or they have budget constraints which force them to avoid offering the asking price. Players however are in a different situation then you and me. First unlike you and me, they have to sign a contract. If it's for a few years they can't just opt out when the economy straightens out. If they sign for less, they are locked into that salary for a period of the contract. Number two, if a player signs for a shorter contract(anticipating economy change) he may be injured or suffer an off year that cuts into the dollar number he was expecting at the end of the contract. It's a risk many players aren't willing to take. So players get an idea of what they are worth, they dig their feet into the sand and they try to stick to it no matter what the economy says. Management just may not agree with them.

My last point is something that we all seem to miss from time to time here. We don't know everything that's going on. These players are talking with teams every day/week. This is not speculation, it is happening. Teams are talking to their agents trying to make deals, we just don't hear about it in the papers. When they all get on the same page offers will go out. If they don't, offers will not. I don't know if you are saying that Lee and Nate and Sessions are European players or what? But I'm pretty sure they are wanted around the league, just not at their asking price.

Alright...point proven. LOL.

But what you are saying sounds awfully close to collusion if there was some sort of plot against Lee and Sessions specifically. Point is, why has everybody else seemed to secure a deal and those two have had trouble? If there is an overall tightening of the financial waists...and there is no doubt there is...then why are THESE two players left out in the cold and not say, Hedo and Andre Miller?

You seem to be suggesting that they are just victims of circumstance. Well Lee, perhaps, but Sessions is just asking for a straight MLE deal. I maintain that there is something in their games that is promoting this, right or wrong.

To me, you are overplaying the money hand. GM's are going to get what they want. All the other desirable players secured deals. This is a basketball issue, more than a money issue. Money is just informing GM's to be a little more prudent and that glare is poking holes in the games of Sessions and Lee.

Posted by sebstar:

Posted by Bippity10:

Posted by sebstar:

Posted by Bippity10:

Posted by sebstar:

Posted by Bippity10:

Posted by sebstar:

Posted by Bippity10:

As for the interest level in these players. I think the financial situation is making some of these guys look less wanted than they really are. I think in a normal market guys like David Lee, Nate, Sessions not only would be signed, they probably would have been overpaid

Eh, thats too speculative and is sort of a cop out. Regardless of the circumstances, the results are the results. Teams found ways to give money to the guys they wanted to give it to i.e, Charlie V, Gordon, Miller, ext.

Perhaps the economic climate has made them more judicious with their money that's why guys like Lee and Sessions, whom they are suspicious of, are on the outside looking in. They dont feel they have the money to waste on guys they dont believe in.

It appears that you are speculating as much as I am

[Edited by - bippity10 on 28-07-2009 4:42 PM]

Way to completely miss the point and go the snippy route.

snippy? I was snippy? How did you get snippy from my post?

You pointed out that I was speculating and coping out. You were too, just thought I'd point that out.

What is your point? Guys don't want Sessions/Lee/Nate?

Of course that's what I am trying to say. You ignored my whole post and keyed in on one word to try to frame it as a: " I know you are but what am I" battle between you and me. You "speculating" wasnt the thrust of my post, but rather challenging your views on why people arent showing interest in Lee.

So if it wasn't the "thrust" of your post save yourself some words and leave it out and get to your point. You called my point speculation, that was your challenge. Then you raised an alternate point which was equal parts speculation. That was my point.

We don't know why these guys aren't getting offers, but I can speculate. Part of my personal business is to work with companies on setting salary levels within their organizations. In the real world, what companies/candidates are currently wrestling with is the market conditions verse the actual long-term worth of the candidate. Some companies feel they can pay less because of the current market conditions. They know that people are out of work and are desperate for jobs, so many companies in turn offer less. They also may be victims of budget constraints which force them to pay less. Candidates are accepting positions for less pay because they need the money. They know their worth in a level economy and they know that when the economy turns around they will get it. So they accept the lower money, settle into their jobs, with full intentions of finding a new job when the market straightens out and they can get their true value. What does this have to do with basketball?...........

Teams are businesses and run no different than companies in "the real world". They want some of these midlevel players but feel they can get the players for less then they are asking, or they have budget constraints which force them to avoid offering the asking price. Players however are in a different situation then you and me. First unlike you and me, they have to sign a contract. If it's for a few years they can't just opt out when the economy straightens out. If they sign for less, they are locked into that salary for a period of the contract. Number two, if a player signs for a shorter contract(anticipating economy change) he may be injured or suffer an off year that cuts into the dollar number he was expecting at the end of the contract. It's a risk many players aren't willing to take. So players get an idea of what they are worth, they dig their feet into the sand and they try to stick to it no matter what the economy says. Management just may not agree with them.

My last point is something that we all seem to miss from time to time here. We don't know everything that's going on. These players are talking with teams every day/week. This is not speculation, it is happening. Teams are talking to their agents trying to make deals, we just don't hear about it in the papers. When they all get on the same page offers will go out. If they don't, offers will not. I don't know if you are saying that Lee and Nate and Sessions are European players or what? But I'm pretty sure they are wanted around the league, just not at their asking price.

Alright...point proven. LOL.

But what you are saying sounds awfully close to collusion if there was some sort of plot against Lee and Sessions specifically. Point is, why has everybody else seemed to secure a deal and those two have had trouble? If there is an overall tightening of the financial waists...and there is no doubt there is...then why are THESE two players left out in the cold and not say, Hedo and Andre Miller?

You seem to be suggesting that they are just victims of circumstance. Well Lee, perhaps, but Sessions is just asking for a straight MLE deal. I maintain that there is something in their games that is promoting this, right or wrong.

To me, you are overplaying the money hand. GM's are going to get what they want. All the other desirable players secured deals. This is a basketball issue, more than a money issue. Money is just informing GM's to be a little more prudent and that glare is poking holes in the games of Sessions and Lee.

I don't think it's collusion at all. Think about it, you are saving money because of the economy. I am saving money because of the economy. I'm willing to bet 90% of the people on this site are doing the same thing. Did we get together and decide this, or was it just a common sense decision based on the economy. Lee and Nate are middle of the road players with ability. Lee currently wants too much money. And if you offer Nate something in the area of what he is worth right now, teams know that the knicks will probably match. These free agents out there right now, will be eventually signed/traded for but it's a shell game right now.

If you are of the opinion that nobody wants these guys and they will end their basketball careers in Europe then only time will tell. But I'm pretty confident that most teams do not consider EArl Watson(who just signed) to have more value then unsigned players like Iverson and Lee and Nate and Sessions. He just gave more value for his price point and filled a need for the team that signed him. But we'll see, if they never sign then we will know.

Posted by sebstar:

Posted by Bippity10:

Posted by sebstar:

Posted by Bippity10:

I don't know you and have never stated that I feel I know you. I don't care what your interactions are with the rest of the group, all I know is your interactions with me. Let's just put it this way, you aren't a poster that I've had many light hearted moments with. That could be my fault or it could be yours, or it could be both.

Take it for what you will. From my point of view you could stand to lighten up a bit. You don't have to agree with me, just stating how I feel.

I think this post goes a long way into proving my point that you guys have me pinned up in a box and already have this narrative made up about me. I consider myself one of the bigger jokesters on this board. I'm constantly posting random stuff and having fun with you cats --- but that gets ignored because Sebstar is the "angry black guy" around here.

In this "post-racial" American culture, Black people that are passionate about certain issues are given the lazy label as being: militant, angry, whitey hater, in order to satisfy intimidation levels and reconcile the unease of the dominant mainstream. Why engage intellectually when you can just call me angry and irrational? That's so much easier and it makes one feel so much better about themselves and the issues at hand.

So no matter how much evidence is presented to the contrary, that will always be there. No matter how much fun I come across, deferential I am, or well reasoned I try to be.

Cosmic and Izbyx are just as passionately right wing, yet I dont see them bogged down with the same minutia that I am. Plenty of posters are passionate around here. I'm not going to turn this into a whine fest, because thats just the cost of being Black and having strong opinions. I'm not saying I'm perfect and all of that; I have had my dustups with people, said dumb shyt--- but who is and who hasnt?

It is what it is at this point. Like I said, you got me all figured out.

You ask why you get bogged down with minutia? Let's examine the trajectory of our conversation. I made a point. You said it was speculation. I said I felt yours was equal speculation. At this point we aren't arguing or angry at each other, we are just making our points. You told me not to get snippy. I said I wasn't snippy. I asked you why you always seem to be on edge. Somehow we've now progressed to this conversation being about you being an "angry black man" blah, blah, blah. I don't disagree with you that it is sometimes difficult for black men to make a strong opinion about some topics without it coming off the way you describe, but if you consistently inject race into the conversation(as you jsut did with another opinionated black man) then what do you expect?

Listen, we are both black. Chances are we've both experienced a good amount of racism in our time. We are both opinionated. Yet I've never felt that I've been placed in a box. Is it the approach? The philosophy about life?

I don't know.

[Edited by - bippity10 on 28-07-2009 9:45 PM]

Alright. Well if thats all you take out of that, I guess we're good. Dont know what you were looking for, but its all good.

Posted by BasketballJones:

Uh oh. Guys are getting snippy.

Posted by BasketballJones:

Posted by Bippity10:

Posted by BasketballJones:

Uh oh. Guys are getting snippy.

Snippy? I was snippy? How did you get snippy from my post?

Don't get snippy.

You should change your name to Snippity10.


[Edited by - basketballjones on 07-29-2009 10:35]