Artest to the Lakers...

Talk about anything general in the NBA here.

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, hobbes

User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3069
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 2:32 pm
Location: San Jose
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 5:41 pm
Beast mode is right. People complain about guys when it's all about the money. They wish a guy would take less to play for championships. People are mad only cuz its the lakers. If the Warriors had that kind of success and added a big piece for less we would be praisin the hell out of that player
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3244
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:29 am
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 5:53 pm
your right. I am mad cos it's the lakers. Sports fans are not rational people
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3069
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 2:32 pm
Location: San Jose
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 5:58 pm
Quazza wrote:your right. I am mad cos it's the lakers. Sports fans are not rational people


I know how you feel though. It reminds me of the long debate i had with Uptempo. He mentioned Mitch Kupchak as a great GM cuz he learned under Jerry West. But you know, guys like Artest can fall into his lap because it's the Lakers and they have Kobe. I don't blame them for taking advantage, who wouldn't? it stings because it seems like it'll always be an upward climb for the W's. We had a chance to be better than the Lakers at one point but their road to reloading is much shorter than ours, but with an inept front office it's even worse.
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21211
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 25
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 8:25 pm
Quazza wrote:
TMC wrote:
Chum wrote:why they would be against forcing a free agent to take the highest offer


Because it would be downright illegal. It goes against any rule of free market. Once a player reaches unrestricted free agency, he's free to decide what he wants to do, sign anywhere, for how long and what amount, retire if he wants... that's why it's unrestricted.


see it's different in the footy here. When your contract expires, your team still has your rights. So if you want to go somewhere else, you have to be traded



That's why over hee things are even more stupid than in most places in the world. It is quite fascist, as such, in many industries and I'msurprised the sports people, using sport as an example, haven't got together to strike against it years ago
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya

All Star
Posts: 3040
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 11:03 am
Location: san jose
Poster Credit: 17
PostPosted: Sun Jul 05, 2009 8:28 pm
The Artest signing was a good move for the Lakers, specially at that price. Artest just wants to win bad. Am sure he could have gotten a better deal else-where, or like people have said the recession hit the NBA.
But the key component to all the Lakers now Lamar Odom. Hope they don't sign him.
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3244
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:29 am
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 10:07 pm
migya wrote:
Quazza wrote:
TMC wrote:
Chum wrote:why they would be against forcing a free agent to take the highest offer


Because it would be downright illegal. It goes against any rule of free market. Once a player reaches unrestricted free agency, he's free to decide what he wants to do, sign anywhere, for how long and what amount, retire if he wants... that's why it's unrestricted.


see it's different in the footy here. When your contract expires, your team still has your rights. So if you want to go somewhere else, you have to be traded



That's why over hee things are even more stupid than in most places in the world. It is quite fascist, as such, in many industries and I'msurprised the sports people, using sport as an example, haven't got together to strike against it years ago


u would'a got zilch for Judd then:)
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 18461
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:48 am
Location: Somewhere in this site...
Poster Credit: -4
PostPosted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 11:16 pm
migya wrote:
Quazza wrote:
TMC wrote:
Chum wrote:why they would be against forcing a free agent to take the highest offer


Because it would be downright illegal. It goes against any rule of free market. Once a player reaches unrestricted free agency, he's free to decide what he wants to do, sign anywhere, for how long and what amount, retire if he wants... that's why it's unrestricted.


see it's different in the footy here. When your contract expires, your team still has your rights. So if you want to go somewhere else, you have to be traded



That's why over hee things are even more stupid than in most places in the world. It is quite fascist, as such, in many industries and I'msurprised the sports people, using sport as an example, haven't got together to strike against it years ago


Yeah, that's weird. That's something that makes absolutely no sense and wouldn't be allowed in most places. I mean, once you don't have a contract... how can they forbid you to choose what you're going to do with your life?. It's just ridiculous.
User avatar
All Star
Posts: 3244
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 6:29 am
Poster Credit: 0
PostPosted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 11:19 pm
TMC wrote:
migya wrote:
Quazza wrote:
TMC wrote:
Chum wrote:why they would be against forcing a free agent to take the highest offer


Because it would be downright illegal. It goes against any rule of free market. Once a player reaches unrestricted free agency, he's free to decide what he wants to do, sign anywhere, for how long and what amount, retire if he wants... that's why it's unrestricted.


see it's different in the footy here. When your contract expires, your team still has your rights. So if you want to go somewhere else, you have to be traded



That's why over hee things are even more stupid than in most places in the world. It is quite fascist, as such, in many industries and I'msurprised the sports people, using sport as an example, haven't got together to strike against it years ago


Yeah, that's weird. That's something that makes absolutely no sense and wouldn't be allowed in most places. I mean, once you don't have a contract... how can they forbid you to choose what you're going to do with your life?. It's just ridiculous.


It is odd. On most occasions, a player decides to re sign with the current club. If not, he picks a club of his choice. It's then up to his current club, and the one picked to work a deal. If not he A-re signs, or B-goes into the pre season draft
User avatar
Hall of Famer
Posts: 21211
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 7:50 am
Location: Perth
Poster Credit: 25
PostPosted: Tue Jul 07, 2009 12:49 am
Quazza wrote:
migya wrote:
Quazza wrote:
TMC wrote:
Chum wrote:why they would be against forcing a free agent to take the highest offer


Because it would be downright illegal. It goes against any rule of free market. Once a player reaches unrestricted free agency, he's free to decide what he wants to do, sign anywhere, for how long and what amount, retire if he wants... that's why it's unrestricted.


see it's different in the footy here. When your contract expires, your team still has your rights. So if you want to go somewhere else, you have to be traded



That's why over hee things are even more stupid than in most places in the world. It is quite fascist, as such, in many industries and I'msurprised the sports people, using sport as an example, haven't got together to strike against it years ago


u would'a got zilch for Judd then:)



So be it, it's the principal that counts
Image



Image


migya make the ring fall on ya
Previous

Return to NBA Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron