Lebron did. Tim Duncan has done it for most of his career too. It's not like anyone is talking about him taking the league minimum (which is still more than most will ever make). The difference between staying with the Knicks and going elsewhere was being extremely wealthy and even more extremely wealthy. The "taking care of his family" line is BS. If he's not a moron, they were taken care of, and then some, with his second contract. He can find a financial adviser with a respected reputation, invest his current earnings conservatively, and make well into the six figures (seven figures is probably more accurate) annually for the rest of his life.
sufandu said:
You're right, it is arm chair analysis, as is everything on this message board. That's the nature of a sports message board. I didn't at any point question his dedication to his family. I'm not sure where you got that. I'd say it's more presumptuous of you to assume half the players in the league have no semblance of a family life. I said his family was financially taken care of by his second contract, and to suggest he required a max contract this time around to do that is silly, considering he's made much more money in his short career than 90% of the population will in their lifetime. That's not presumption, it's math and common sense.
Sure, all of life is a crapshoot. The next charter jet he's on could crash too, but that's no reason to catch a bus. I would say it's less of a crapshoot, however, if you can influence some variables. If winning is the goal, you try to put the odds in your favor. Chicago has been a winning team without Rose. They have one of the current top coaches in the game and team management has been able to put a good team together without their superstar. They win with great defense and lack a top scorer, a hole Melo could've filled. NY has an unproven coach and a President who is one the best coaches ever, but no track record as a President. Was it Phil that put Jordan and Pippen on the Bulls in the 90's or Kobe, Shaq, and Gasol on the Lakers? Nope. He may end up being just as good at running a team as he was at coaching, and Fisher may end up being a great coach, but with the small window Melo has left at his peak, are those the best odds?
I acknowledge you probably have more inside information than me considering your connections. I'm assuming then that your friends know half of these players personally that have no semblance of a family life (your statement not mine). Taking $124 million versus $129 million isn't much wiggle room if the goal is winning. It's $1 million per year. Who is NY drawing with that?
I'm not a Knicks fan. I could care less about them. I don't have a favorite NBA team. How am I deflecting anything? I think I've been pretty clear in stating I think his decision wasn't based on winning. I can't say how much of it was based on family or just liking NYC because I don't know. I do know it was within his power to take more of a pay cut to free up more money to draw other players, if winning was the priority. I posted a link showing that Tim Duncan did it. There are other examples of other players doing it too.
Absolutely true. What's also true is that he had championship rings on his fingers when he took his pay cut. He could've easily said, "I've had got enough of those, time to cash in my final payday," but he didn't.
I don't care so much about the situation from the Knicks point of view. I'd just like to see the best player SU has had since Dave Bing lead a team to an NBA championship, and I don't think he's put himself in the best position to do it. That's where I'm coming from.
I think that was what was reported. I guess what has to be considered then is whether Phil can put a better team together than what's already out there. Maybe he can, but there's no track record to go by, so who knows? If Melo was 25, it would make more sense to me to essentially throw away a year. At 30, he's still got time, but at the end of this contract he'll be older than Garnett was when he went to the Celtics (he's nearly the same age now as when Garnett went there). The end of his peak will fast approaching.
Nobody is leaving $50 million on the table. Chicago's offer was $50 mil less than Knicks.
I don't believe any athlete when they take as much money as possible (I know he only took 96% of it) to go to a currently inferior team and say it's not about the money. It's called public relations. When was the last time any athlete said, "I took the most money I could get. That was the most important thing in my mind?" No athlete has said it, because they and their public relations people are smarter than that. Do you believe everything celebrities state to the public through the media? I can believe he stayed because he believes in Phil Jackson. However, and I'm not sure how many times I have to state this, if winning is the number #1 priority, he could've taken less money. Even if the Knicks offered the $124 million, it was within his power to say, "Listen, I want a championship and I know we need to draw guys here. I've made well over $100 million so far in my career, so I'll take significantly less to get me my ring."
