sidsanders wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:Why is a ring so important from a player's perspective?

good ?, you dont need to win or play in a big market to get paid well, or sell products.

When everyone in your draft class has a ring except you, and pokes fun of you repeatedly every chance , I guess it matters.

I'm sure a player like a Melo doesn't want to be "that guy" in his class to be ringless. Even Darko has one!

I'm sure CP3 and Dwight don't want to be referred to "Great player but no rings" like a Barkley, Malone, Stockton, Ewing.

It's why paid guys like a Nash or Hill play as long as they do.

It's a stigma that haunts all star athletes.

could score 100 points in any one of your high school games.
most likely never had a real job.
had college coaches sleeping in your driveway.
had as the main concern in life as your "brand"
has an entourage
doesn't wonder why a windshield for your G6 costs $36K.
never gave a flyingfuck about the price of gas. Or milk. Or a mortgage.
would hire an agent even after you figured out you could sign your own name.
wasn't John Stockton.

If we were ballplayers today, we wouldn't be wondering about being ballplayers today on an internet forum.

Next.

NardDogNation wrote:

playa2 wrote:and you knew for a fact that your ownership isn't trying to build for a championship run by adding pieces around you, wouldn't you try and get as much money as you can from that team ? Wouldn't that be a wise businessman approach ?

Comments....

I'd take the money and keep my mouth shut as long as I can maintain my sense of morality/not hurt anyone else (physically, spiritually, monetarily). We live in a self-serving culture so why should we expect athletes, especially dudes that do a great deal of good in their communities and families, to take a stand against it? It is why I've seldom faulted players for their contracts as much as the owners/management for giving it to them.

Just as I thought, not many made an real issue of the OWNERS not trying to field a team to win a championship for their city.

This is where the fans are blinded, fans are the ones that make the owners rich paying astronomical prices to to see games, the owners eventually makes the players rich by giving them insane contracts. Fans put more blame on the players than they do the owners for there team not competing for a title. This my friends is where we have a gross misunderstanding of how players think and how the sport has evolved today.

Narddognation gets it !

playa2 wrote:

NardDogNation wrote:

playa2 wrote:and you knew for a fact that your ownership isn't trying to build for a championship run by adding pieces around you, wouldn't you try and get as much money as you can from that team ? Wouldn't that be a wise businessman approach ?

Comments....

I'd take the money and keep my mouth shut as long as I can maintain my sense of morality/not hurt anyone else (physically, spiritually, monetarily). We live in a self-serving culture so why should we expect athletes, especially dudes that do a great deal of good in their communities and families, to take a stand against it? It is why I've seldom faulted players for their contracts as much as the owners/management for giving it to them.

Just as I thought, not many made an real issue of the OWNERS not trying to field a team to win a championship for their city.

This is where the fans are blinded, fans are the ones that make the owners rich paying astronomical prices to to see games, the owners eventually makes the players rich by giving them insane contracts. Fans put more blame on the players than they do the owners for there team not competing for a title. This my friends is where we have a gross misunderstanding of how players think and how the sport has evolved today.

Narddognation gets it !

playa2 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

playa2 wrote:

knickstorrents wrote:We all have our motivations. Personally after the first 10 million I'm not sure money matters anymore... legacy, championships, and getting into the Hall of Fame would be more important to me.

I definitely don't think the Knicks are a championship organization, so not sure how much money would matter in that case.

Sorry I'm a debbie downer.

No that's ok just looking for honest opinions.

How about if you spend money lavishly because of the exposure to the finer things of life as a young athlete.

Also remember these guys don't have your 50-60 grand a year mindsets.

No one really knows how their goals and motivations would change after ten years of professional basketball and earning $100+ mil. We can't say we know what we'd do. Obviously it's extremely rare for a player to take a huge pay-cut to help his team. I doubt there's any reason to assume we're different.

I asked people to give their opinion, this isn't life or death question. All answers are right , it's a guy or girls opinion. Also I didn't say a player had to be 10 yrs in either. 5 sounds about right 4 yrs rookie contract 5th yr team should be showing you what direction they are going in.

This really is the only way to match up against these owners who refuse to field a team to compete to win a Championship in a reasonable amount of time.