|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ank
Star Player
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 1043
Location: New York, NY
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think the Lakers are blatanetly lying about this. From what I've read by Emplay and LarryCoon, I think that the third year has already been picked up due to Yao/Amares both signing extensions. There's no law that says PR people have to tell the truth. I don't take this as confirmation, but it has opened up a ray of hope for .e It might also explain us not making a move at the deadline for what Sky said "You would not believe what Utah is offering".
That leads to me to believe that Deron and Boozer were offered for Mihm and George. Who knows tho. To turn down a good deal only makes sense if 2007 is alive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Laker's Fan
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jun 2002
Posts: 12861
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Larry (or others who may know),
So can officials from every team get full access to player payroll data from other teams? Is there complete transparency of the contract or perhaps summary data?
The reason I ask is because we are now dealing with a new CBA & I wonder if it is completely understood by all the GMs / Personnel people around the league. I can certainly see teams electing to divulge info and certainly the League Office has all the data but complete transparency is a big deal in such high stakes negotiation.
_________________
Austin Reaves keeps his game tight, like Kobe Bryant on game night. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wolfpaclaker
Retired Number
Joined: 29 May 2002
Posts: 58344
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ank wrote: | I think the Lakers are blatanetly lying about this. From what I've read by Emplay and LarryCoon, I think that the third year has already been picked up due to Yao/Amares both signing extensions. There's no law that says PR people have to tell the truth. I don't take this as confirmation, but it has opened up a ray of hope for .e It might also explain us not making a move at the deadline for what Sky said "You would not believe what Utah is offering".
That leads to me to believe that Deron and Boozer were offered for Mihm and George. Who knows tho. To turn down a good deal only makes sense if 2007 is alive. |
I don't know who to believe, but what makes sense is that Utah wanted more than Murphy. They wanted a SG and that SG's name was Pietrus.
That's where the deal died apparently. GS wasn't willing to deal Pietrus.
And the Lakers, well there only real SG that is NBA caliber is you know who. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 11265
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Laker's Fan wrote: | Larry (or others who may know),
So can officials from every team get full access to player payroll data from other teams? Is there complete transparency of the contract or perhaps summary data?
The reason I ask is because we are now dealing with a new CBA & I wonder if it is completely understood by all the GMs / Personnel people around the league. I can certainly see teams electing to divulge info and certainly the League Office has all the data but complete transparency is a big deal in such high stakes negotiation. |
Complete transparancy regarding player contract information is exactly what they have (could you imagine trading for a guy without knowing all the gotchas in his contract?). Not only do the teams have direct access to a central web site with all of the information, the league is also required to report it all to the nbpa and to the accountants. Certain team executives can look up the complete contract information for any player in the league. This is exactly what one team executive did for me when I verified the guarantee.
BTW, this isn't something new with the new CBA. Teams have always had access to all player contract information.
BTW #2: I don't think Black has direct access to the contract information.
Not that it matters (because I'm sure of my source), but I'll also note that one other person (perhaps two) has verified the guarantee through his own team source (not the same source as my source). I'll let him post about it here if he wants to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
emplay
Site Staff
Joined: 15 Apr 2001
Posts: 25550
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm still digging - but I had another source with another team look it up today verify it (which Larry alludes to above). The timing was funny - cause I then saw Sean's post. I'm not sure what to say at this point.
Either
1) The contract is guaranteed - Black is lying or ignorant of the truth.
2) The contract is not guaranteed - we've been lied to by multiple independent sources who have each proven reliable over time.
3) The contract is not guaranteed - the information these sources are getting is incorrect.
I felt that Jeannie and Rambis refusing to go on record with it on Dave Smith's show the other day was interesting - but Black is pretty straight-forward to Sean in his e-mail.
Then again - one was a public forum and the other private - so who knows the truth?
No one should jump to any conclusion at this point - knowing that it's very possible that Kwame's contract is guaranteed - but that there is a doubt, no matter how small, that the information is somehow incorrect.
I will continue to pursue.
_________________
Salary Cap Strategist and Columnist at Bleacher Report and on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/EricPincus |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laker's Fan
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jun 2002
Posts: 12861
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks Larry. Like so many at LG I am torn between my head and my heart. Just about everyone knows this is true but still holds out hope that it is a misprint or something.
It is just perplexing that a team short on assets tallent wise would diminish the value of a contractual asset for an unknown or dubious reason. On top of that Buss has been content to eat last years and reap the savings. When the Lakers traded Shaquille Oneal there were basically two rationalizations.
1. The one sold to the fans - Shaq signed to a bloated extension will prohibit the flexability to compete as he declines on the court (remember both Kobe & Buss have adamantly denied that Kobe's resigning had anything to do with Shaq being traded).
or
2. Buss saw potential for championship success but no guarantee. What he saw was a guaranteed lux tax bill and decided Kobe could sell out seats in his prime and another title run could be made sometime in the future.
Why is it that Buss is looking more like Sterling than Sterling is?
_________________
Austin Reaves keeps his game tight, like Kobe Bryant on game night. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mjr. Pwnage
Starting Rotation
Joined: 11 Feb 2003
Posts: 472
Location: La Tierra De Los Gauchos
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| emplay wrote: | I'm still digging - but I had another source with another team look it up today verify it (which Larry alludes to above). The timing was funny - cause I then saw Sean's post. I'm not sure what to say at this point.
Either
1) The contract is guaranteed - Black is lying or ignorant of the truth.
2) The contract is not guaranteed - we've been lied to by multiple independent sources who have each proven reliable over time.
3) The contract is not guaranteed - the information these sources are getting is incorrect.
I felt that Jeannie and Rambis refusing to go on record with it on Dave Smith's show the other day was interesting - but Black is pretty straight-forward to Sean in his e-mail.
Then again - one was a public forum and the other private - so who knows the truth?
No one should jump to any conclusion at this point - knowing that it's very possible that Kwame's contract is guaranteed - but that there is a doubt, no matter how small, that the information is somehow incorrect.
I will continue to pursue. |
Regarding number 1, it's quite possibly plausible deniability. The team doesn't technically tell Black the truth, so he technically is not lying to us. When called on it later, he can claim he was unaware.
_________________
You tryin' to say Jesus Christ can't hit a curveball? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
angrypuppy
Retired Number
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 32754
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 1:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LarryCoon wrote: | | Laker's Fan wrote: | Larry (or others who may know),
So can officials from every team get full access to player payroll data from other teams? Is there complete transparency of the contract or perhaps summary data?
The reason I ask is because we are now dealing with a new CBA & I wonder if it is completely understood by all the GMs / Personnel people around the league. I can certainly see teams electing to divulge info and certainly the League Office has all the data but complete transparency is a big deal in such high stakes negotiation. |
Complete transparancy regarding player contract information is exactly what they have (could you imagine trading for a guy without knowing all the gotchas in his contract?). Not only do the teams have direct access to a central web site with all of the information, the league is also required to report it all to the nbpa and to the accountants. Certain team executives can look up the complete contract information for any player in the league. This is exactly what one team executive did for me when I verified the guarantee.
BTW, this isn't something new with the new CBA. Teams have always had access to all player contract information.
BTW #2: I don't think Black has direct access to the contract information.
Not that it matters (because I'm sure of my source), but I'll also note that one other person (perhaps two) has verified the guarantee through his own team source (not the same source as my source). I'll let him post about it here if he wants to. |
I believe you, but it just seems a bit odd the way the organization is handling it. The Laker front office isn't that big, and yet Jeanie and Kurt feign ignorance. They are in a position to know, and may have been asked by others prior to the radio show. Given the size of the contract, the change of strategic direction (2007 plan), and their own seniority, those two would have to know.
And now the PR Director is denying that it was picked-up. Of course he could have just ignored the email... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michlake
Star Player
Joined: 14 Jan 2006
Posts: 3696
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 1:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ank wrote: | | I think the Lakers are blatanetly lying about this. From what I've read by Emplay and LarryCoon, I think that the third year has already been picked up due to Yao/Amares both signing extensions. There's no law that says PR people have to tell the truth. I don't take this as confirmation, but it has opened up a ray of hope for .e |
I agree |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Klassix
Star Player
Joined: 12 Jun 2005
Posts: 1994
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 1:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| eniq 0x00 wrote: | | This is old (bleep) news. It was stated from the get-go that the third year was a team option. |
And then lately there were rumors about it being guaranteed, and when Dave Smith asked Jeanie and Rambis, they wouldn't deny it, which just fueled everything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KA_2
Star Player
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Posts: 1883
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 2:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wolfpaclaker wrote: | | James and Bosh are RFA's in 2007, but they can threaten to take QO's that will send a clear signal to their teams that they are going to lose them for nothing in 2008. Then the Lakers can offer deals through sign and trades. |
Yup, and the Lakers still won't have the pieces to offer to get either player. Pipe.
_________________
Westside |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
oldschool32
Franchise Player
Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 20032
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 2:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Best news I've heard all day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PrplReign
Star Player
Joined: 19 Aug 2005
Posts: 2796
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 2:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| KA_2 wrote: | | wolfpaclaker wrote: | | James and Bosh are RFA's in 2007, but they can threaten to take QO's that will send a clear signal to their teams that they are going to lose them for nothing in 2008. Then the Lakers can offer deals through sign and trades. |
Yup, and the Lakers still won't have the pieces to offer to get either player. Pipe. |
Dude,
How do you manage to remain so upbeat post after post? I mean you never have a bad thing to say about the Laker players, front office, cheerleaders, or concessionaires. I just want to know what gives you such a sunny disposition. It is contagious and you continually brighten my day with your upbeat contributions. Thank you.
_________________
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mu3vkwP3GHQ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LA_Lakers_Rule
Franchise Player
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 19482
Location: The X-Files
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Lakers will NOT want to lose Kwame to free agency and get nothing in return.
Thus they will have to do something regarding Kwame and not sit on their hands.
_________________
Rule = win titles  
Good judgment comes from experience and a lot of that comes from bad judgment. - Will Rogers ...  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laker4life
Star Player
Joined: 26 Nov 2001
Posts: 7320
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Who wants to believe Black? When I last checked, he is the PR director.
In other words, he knows how to stretch the truth. Look at his other answer about the Lakers. We are closed to missing the playoffs for the second year in a row after our owner guaranteed us that we would make it this year and he tells us all of this positive nonesense.
The truth of the matter is that Brown has not played well. We are only a five hundred team. We traded Shaq for an inconsistent player. Bynum is only rookie who has not contributed anything except a few highlights.
Come on. I don't believe a word that they said. Remember when Shaq was traded, Buss said that he was going to sit courtside because he wanted to get close to this young and exciting team.
As usual, another lie. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerJam
Franchise Player
Joined: 02 Aug 2002
Posts: 18410
Location: Sherman Oaks, CA
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 5:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ThePageDude wrote: | | LakerJam wrote: |
<snip>
How about we show a little respect for the defensive end of the court, seeing as that's what has cost us so many games? <snip> |
Jam,
I tend to agree with nearly everything you post, but this is the 1% where I'm not in agreement.
Kwame's defense is strictly 1-dimensional - deny post position, hold ground, use his length to prevent an iso'd opponent shooting over him, period.
He will do best against centers who use their size and strength to get close to the basket - Shaq, Yao. He will bother players who have limited mobility, either due to injury, or due to lack of athleticism - Duncan.
But put him up against any one of the following, and Kwame stinks on defense:
- quicker PFs/centers who use their mobility (e.g. Brand)
- centers/PFs who have range and can simply shoot over Kwame (Miller, Brand, Nowitzki)
- centers/PFs who rely on movement/motion/passing for their offense, rather than iso's
Kwame is a *very* poor help defender, rotates extremely poorly, does not react at all well or anticipate, does not block shots. Watch his game against the Celtics, they were shredding the Laker defense with him and Cook on the floor, it was pathetic. He was always late, out of position to deny penetration, and out of position for the rebound. And this was not an anomaly, watch the Clippers game ... same thing ... any time the opponent fits the profile I describe above, it spells trouble for him.
His current defensive skill set is very specific, and limited. Yes, he does superbly against good teams with high profile centers, but 80% of the NBA teams rely on undersized PFs/centers, and Kwame is mediocre-to-horrid against them.
-ThePageDude |
I'll agree insofar that Kwame isn't a strong weakside help defender, but honestly, that's much easier to teach. Few players have the ability to genuinely and effectively man up the big men in this league. When you have one, they're valuable. Perhaps not 8 mil per season valuable, but when we beat the Rockets directly because of Kwame's manning up a 7'6" inch center, we valued it. When we beat the Heat based in part on Kwame manning up Shaq, it was valuable. When we at least played the Spurs close based in part on Kwame's ability to man up Duncan and keep him off his sweet spots, it was valuable.
Kwame's defense isn't perfect, but it's pretty darn good. If we could keep him at say 4 mil per season, he'd be a great fit for this team. At 8 mil per, however, fans expect more and rightly so. Still, if we had other scorers on this team, Kwame would be a very nice compliment to that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerJam
Franchise Player
Joined: 02 Aug 2002
Posts: 18410
Location: Sherman Oaks, CA
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 5:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aussiesuede wrote: | | Sage_10 wrote: | | Zhengi wrote: | | I suppose the next questions are "How much can we trust in a PR guy's word?" and "How much do the Lakers want to release to the public about this situation?" John Black is, afterall, a PR guy and his job is partly crowd control when there is mayhem in Laker nation. |
Actually I was listening to Matt Money Smith on AM570 post game show a couple of weeks ago and he said the same thing regarding the 3rd year option. |
My tendency is to believe the original reports that he third year is guaranteed. You make an excellent point re: the job of a PR guy and it's obvious that Kwame isn't popular with a lot of the fan base. If you heard the dodge of the question by Rambis and Jeanie in their interview last week (That they had no clue if the third year was guaranteed or not and would have to check back at the office) then it certainly lends more credence to the original rumors that his third year had indeed become guaranteed. No need to dodge such a quaetion otherwise. |
A PR guy will NEVER put a bold faced lie in writing. He might BS you over the phone because he can deny it later, but Black emailed back saying it's not guaranteed. It came from his known email address. It came from his computer, and from his office. Better believe it's true because no way he'd expect the public to believe a phantom person came sneaking into his office and sent out that email. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerJam
Franchise Player
Joined: 02 Aug 2002
Posts: 18410
Location: Sherman Oaks, CA
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 5:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wolfpaclaker wrote: | Interesting.
Larry Coon has very good information on this sort of thing. I would find it very interesting if the Lakers are purposely ignoring this issue or lieing about it so that team's don't worry about the 2007 plan. |
Larry Coon is looking it up and reporting on what it says. In fact, I believe the Laker guaranteed contracts was posted somewhere on this site. That doesn't mean that it's accurate, though. The difference between a contract that was guaranteed and one that wasn't, was the color of the print (red vs. black) and perhaps an asterick next to it.
I don't think that's enough evidence to assume the Lakers are now flat out lying and putting those lies in writing. Seems to me far more likely that the contract isn't guaranteed and reports to the contrary are based upon faulty information. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TEEGUNN
Franchise Player
Joined: 12 Dec 2002
Posts: 18086
Location: rocky mountain high
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 5:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Zhengi wrote: | | I suppose the next questions are "How much can we trust in a PR guy's word?" and "How much do the Lakers want to release to the public about this situation?" John Black is, afterall, a PR guy and his job is partly crowd control when there is mayhem in Laker nation. |
Bingo. This is a spin job IMHO. There are other places that say Kwame's 3rd year is now guarantee'd. It wouldn't surprise me one bit, actually.
_________________
"Why do you think bad things happen, anyway???" "So we have something good to look forward to."
Jake Speed, 1986 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aussiesuede
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 10964
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 6:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerJam wrote: | | Aussiesuede wrote: | | Sage_10 wrote: | | Zhengi wrote: | | I suppose the next questions are "How much can we trust in a PR guy's word?" and "How much do the Lakers want to release to the public about this situation?" John Black is, afterall, a PR guy and his job is partly crowd control when there is mayhem in Laker nation. |
Actually I was listening to Matt Money Smith on AM570 post game show a couple of weeks ago and he said the same thing regarding the 3rd year option. |
My tendency is to believe the original reports that he third year is guaranteed. You make an excellent point re: the job of a PR guy and it's obvious that Kwame isn't popular with a lot of the fan base. If you heard the dodge of the question by Rambis and Jeanie in their interview last week (That they had no clue if the third year was guaranteed or not and would have to check back at the office) then it certainly lends more credence to the original rumors that his third year had indeed become guaranteed. No need to dodge such a quaetion otherwise. |
A PR guy will NEVER put a bold faced lie in writing. He might BS you over the phone because he can deny it later, but Black emailed back saying it's not guaranteed. It came from his known email address. It came from his computer, and from his office. Better believe it's true because no way he'd expect the public to believe a phantom person came sneaking into his office and sent out that email. |
Let's face it. In reality there is no such thing as a guaranteed contract so it's pretty easy to waffle on it's meaning and play a semantics game if one wanted to. Just about every contract has clauses which void it, such as voluntary non-performance on a players part, numerous clauses which immediately void a contract if a player engages in morally reprehensible behaviour, conduct expressly detrimental to the team, criminal activity, and more. Hence the term "guaranteed" has a lot of fairly easy wiggle room, especially for a PR person trained to do just that.
Bottom line is noone in outside of the Lakers front office knows for sure, but I'll persoanally put a bit more credence in Coons sources than I will in an email which offers no more detail than "It's not guaranteed". Pretty easy for the PR guy to cover his arse if it were ever even necessary, but it's doubtful much would ever come of such an email to a singular fan. But of cousre we'll all choose to believe what we do for our own reasons....
_________________
I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RedSnapper
Star Player
Joined: 12 Apr 2001
Posts: 1690
Location: Torrance, CA
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:04 pm Post subject: OK, Maybe so... |
|
|
deleted
_________________
PGP Fgrpnt: 5906 0722 DB5F 5692 CAB1 F93A 04F8 2220 EBBF 18AA
Last edited by RedSnapper on Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:36 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ThePageDude
Star Player
Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 2588
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerJam wrote: |
<snip>
When we beat the Heat based in part on Kwame manning up Shaq, it was valuable. When we at least played the Spurs close based in part on Kwame's ability to man up Duncan and keep him off his sweet spots, it was valuable.
scorers on this team, Kwame would be a very nice compliment to that.
<snip>
|
Objectivity dictates that for every victory you count where Kwame played a key role (Heat, SA, Rockets), you also count all the losses where the lack of a reasonable (I really mean average, not elite) paint-defender would have changed a loss to a win. I cited the Celtics game - we lost by a mere point, and gave up 105+ points, I can rattle of at least 10 other games where the loss was largely dictated by our spotty paint defense.
We're not an elite team - at this time, our season record is far more determined by our ability to beat the run-of-the-mill team, rather than the Heats/Spurs/Rockets, that have dominant non-mobile centers. Kwame will be a great role-player on a team that is contending for the division-title or championship, a team that has to go through SA/Heat for the championship. For us, what Kwame provides translates into victory at best 1 out of 5 games.
If what you're saying is that he is not useless, sure I agree. I even agree that he is worth the MLE on most rosters in this league. And I also agree he is a superb man-defender. Where I differ is that a) I dont think he's a good fit for us right now as we face SA/Rockets/Heat-like teams at most 25% of our schedule b) I dont think its likely he will ever be a good help defender - you need basketball smarts for that (see how Turiaf plays) and he hasn't shown any despite having been in the league for 4+ years.
-ThePageDude |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ziggy
Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 12717
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 7:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerJam wrote: | | wolfpaclaker wrote: | Interesting.
Larry Coon has very good information on this sort of thing. I would find it very interesting if the Lakers are purposely ignoring this issue or lieing about it so that team's don't worry about the 2007 plan. |
Larry Coon is looking it up and reporting on what it says. In fact, I believe the Laker guaranteed contracts was posted somewhere on this site. That doesn't mean that it's accurate, though. The difference between a contract that was guaranteed and one that wasn't, was the color of the print (red vs. black) and perhaps an asterick next to it.
I don't think that's enough evidence to assume the Lakers are now flat out lying and putting those lies in writing. Seems to me far more likely that the contract isn't guaranteed and reports to the contrary are based upon faulty information. |
Larry has access to a database that is not open to the public. He has stated that the salaries on hoopshype.com and other websites are not always accurate, but that's not where he's getting his information from. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 11265
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 28, 2006 11:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerJam wrote: | | Larry Coon is looking it up and reporting on what it says. In fact, I believe the Laker guaranteed contracts was posted somewhere on this site. That doesn't mean that it's accurate, though. The difference between a contract that was guaranteed and one that wasn't, was the color of the print (red vs. black) and perhaps an asterick next to it. |
Dang, I've explained it several times, but people keep not hearing what I said.
I didn't look it up anywhere. I didn't rely on any secondary source of information. I do have access to some non-public information, but that's not what I relied on.
The NBA themselves maintain the official contract data for the entire league. (That should be obvious and go without saying, but I want to be clear.) Team executives have access to the league's data, and can look up the complete contract information for any player in the league. The official contract information.
I do not have access to the official information (I asked a league official for access once. Then we both laughed and moved on.) However, as I said, team executives do have access to this information. So I asked one.
As I said the other times I've explained this, I asked a team executive for a team that is not named "Los Angeles Lakers," so any motivation that may or may not exist within the Lakers to keep quiet about this thing does not apply to the individual whom I asked.
So I hope you understand that it is not a case of:
| Quote: | | In fact, I believe the Laker guaranteed contracts was posted somewhere on this site. That doesn't mean that it's accurate, though. |
I'll also point out that compensation protection (i.e., "guarantees") can actually take on one or more of several forms, and can have different kinds of contingencies that can apply in different circumstances. So any assertion such as:
| Quote: | | The difference between a contract that was guaranteed and one that wasn't, was the color of the print (red vs. black) and perhaps an asterick next to it. |
...is simply not based in reality. Seriously -- who told you that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
