Toucher and Rich& #8207; @Toucherandrich 2h2 hours ago
According to Danny Ainge on our show this morning, Lonzo Ball informed the Celtics that he will not be working out for them.
Ball gets all the attention, and the top talent gets no love. Ball is also a somewhat unorthodox player, with a weird shot, and knack for passing that may not survive in the NBA.
I would stay away, and thats before Dad even comes into the picture.
Without Noel, there is not quite the glut of guards but you're still heavy on bigs and given the injury history...?
I'd do that if I were philly. But Embiid is probably one to stay away from. He's going to get the max in Philly. He's well worth the risk for them if he pans out, they have tons of cap room. Simmons and saric don't hit RFA for another 3 seasons.
But if you're gonna hate Lonzo and defend the Eli move, you're the textbook definition of biased. Hell they're even in the same in that both players' situations are being orchestrated by their dads.
And Elway did it. It no one ever ever fucking mentions it. And Archie and Eli hardly acted like these two assholes. Kid is a pussy and his dad may be the biggest asshole going ever when it comes to sports parents. Ever. Hope he goes to the Lakers and flames out
that Eli did this and it's one reason, other than performance, it took so long for me to warm up to him.
I really don't like players who act this way, Eli, Elway, Lindros, JD Drew, now Ball - and any others.
All of them are in the same class for me. Entitled, bratty, unwilling to accept a challenge. Only want a perfect situation for you to succeed - seems like a loser mentality.
However none of the aforementioned, even Eli with his famous father, had a father that was as abrasive as LaVar Ball. Saying he could beat Jordan 1 on 1, his ridiculous shoe contract demands, racist comments about the UCLA team.
For MiLB to claim it's about racism is about as typical as can get. It says more about MiLB than anyone else, even Ball. And to passive aggressively suggest it is downright chicken shit.
The reason people dislike LaVar Ball and have issues with Lonzo Ball is totally based on the abrasive arrogant nature in which the elder Ball is in everyone's face.
More so than any other athlete who didn't want to play for a specific team. Way more.
But if you're gonna hate Lonzo and defend the Eli move, you're the textbook definition of biased. Hell they're even in the same in that both players' situations are being orchestrated by their dads.
that Eli did this and it's one reason, other than performance, it took so long for me to warm up to him.
I really don't like players who act this way, Eli, Elway, Lindros, JD Drew, now Ball - and any others.
All of them are in the same class for me. Entitled, bratty, unwilling to accept a challenge. Only want a perfect situation for you to succeed - seems like a loser mentality.
However none of the aforementioned, even Eli with his famous father, had a father that was as abrasive as LaVar Ball. Saying he could beat Jordan 1 on 1, his ridiculous shoe contract demands, racist comments about the UCLA team.
For MiLB to claim it's about racism is about as typical as can get. It says more about MiLB than anyone else, even Ball. And to passive aggressively suggest it is downright chicken shit.
The reason people dislike LaVar Ball and have issues with Lonzo Ball is totally based on the abrasive arrogant nature in which the elder Ball is in everyone's face.
More so than any other athlete who didn't want to play for a specific team. Way more.
Especially when MiLB is using the racism card in comparison to the Eli situation, as if Eli escaped any criticism. Eli was absolutely lambasted for that entire episode by many, many people and it has followed him to some extent still to this day. Eli had to answer questions for years and many people still associate him with his refusal to play for San Diego. In fact, I'd say Eli dealt with much, much, much more scrutiny that Ball has so far. So yeah, the racism thing is quite strange in this instance. Though not surprising considering the source. BBIs radar junior.
NBA forces these kids to play elsewhere for a post-HS season. I dont hold it against them that they view it as a waystation year.
I think it says something about you if you act like you don't give a shit during the game. A guy who loves his teammates and hates to lose doesn't act the way he did that night.
You're counterpoint is far from meritless. Im just not sure that we should assume every star prospect "loves his teammates". He was likely at UCLA only because of NBA draft eligibility rules.
It's USA Today's #2-7 and #9 recruits. #1 was Giles who would be the #1 or #2 pick but for his injuries (and how they have changed his game, reportedly). And poor Bam Adebayo was #8. Link - ( New Window )
but to me I see a 6'6" Ricky Rubio, great handle but suspect shot and plays no D. Lakers already have a suspect PG in DRuss who has little trade value, they don't need two. Ball on the Celtics would be better for his future than attempting to play in his hometown near his toxic father. Fultz on the Lakers makes more sense to me.
I thought Mike was alluding to seeing things through blue lenses
But I don't put JD Drew in that category. He was willing to accept consequences for his stand and he did. For an athlete, giving up any time at all in your career is pretty significant.
but to me I see a 6'6" Ricky Rubio, great handle but suspect shot and plays no D. Lakers already have a suspect PG in DRuss who has little trade value, they don't need two. Ball on the Celtics would be better for his future than attempting to play in his hometown near his toxic father. Fultz on the Lakers makes more sense to me.
One might be suspicious of his shot, but he's a better shooter than Rubio ever was or will be. If Rubio shot like Ball shot last season he'd be a super star.
But I don't put JD Drew in that category. He was willing to accept consequences for his stand and he did. For an athlete, giving up any time at all in your career is pretty significant.
True, there is a difference in that Drew didn't pick a specific team he wouldn't play for, he picked a dollar amount he wouldn't play for less than.
I think they were all possibly willing to put up with the consequences but none were forced to like Drew was because those other sports rights were all different than baseball or the player was too valuable for the drafting team to walk away, so we won't really know.
I also acknowledge it's easy for me (and any fan) to have this opinion never been in the situation of playing a sport for a career not just for the love of the game and it's very possibly a difference I am not qualified to opine on, but that's never stopped me before.
All said though Drew was maybe worse, an eligible draftee who says he won't say with anyone for less than $10M just screams arrogance/entitlement.
And to make things worse, he signed the next year with the Cardinals for less than the $10M he wouldn't budge on with Philly.
All said though Drew was maybe worse, an eligible draftee who says he won't say with anyone for less than $10M just screams arrogance/entitlement.
Is your problem the dollar amount? Because the entire basis for the MLB draft is, effectively, dozens if not hundreds of players who are in the draft but not willing to come out unless their salary demands are met. That is why players get drafted 2-3 times, and why you hear about teams taking NCAA seniors so the can cram down a contract on them.
If it is the specific #, I'll concede Im totally on the side of players on this. There is a CBA that unfairly restricts them to a non-market wage. They didnt agree to the CBA, and to be clear, everyone negotiating the CBA knowingly agreed to screw over entry level players to enlarge the pie for everyone else. So he used the leverage he was permitted -- he didnt have to sign, even if it meant he wasnt going to play (Im a bit hazy on the history).
Moreover, $10 million was far from outlandish. When Travis Lee was declared a free agent after the Twins forgot to offer him a contract after drafting him #2 overall in 1996, the DBacks signed him for... $10 million (the #5 overall was also set free, and got over $6 million). It was not the highest offer for Lee. Drew was the #2 overall pick the following season. So I think he probably fairly said "the market wage for the 2nd pick is $10 million so I should have that". Though I dont specifically remember what his argument was.
Yeah, and ex-QB Archie was pulling the strings just like ex-NBA player Daddy Ball is pulling Lonzo's strings.
Basically, the situations are about as identical as you could get between two different sports except Lonzo's dad seems to be reveling in the spotlight, whereas Archie stayed in the background.
Also, I hated how he all but declared for the NBA Draft as he was leaving the court after losing to UK. Contrast that with Fox, who was balling his eyes out after losing to UNC.
I just really can't stand Lavar & it might be impacting how I feel about his son.
for Moncada -- like 60-65 million with tax, for a prospect. Not so crazy to me that JD set his price at $10 million. (obviously there was inflation).
the inequities in baseball between draft picks and IFA's is a completely different topic. I'm actually surprised it's still an open loophole, but being closed gradually.
Can you name another college grad draft pick that sat out a year because he didn't get offered enough money to sign a contract? Serious question, I don't know the answer.
High school players have leverage, they can simply go to college, college eligible draftees do not have leverage IMO, or I guess they do since Drew sat out a year.
for Moncada -- like 60-65 million with tax, for a prospect. Not so crazy to me that JD set his price at $10 million. (obviously there was inflation).
the inequities in baseball between draft picks and IFA's is a completely different topic. I'm actually surprised it's still an open loophole, but being closed gradually.
Can you name another college grad draft pick that sat out a year because he didn't get offered enough money to sign a contract? Serious question, I don't know the answer.
High school players have leverage, they can simply go to college, college eligible draftees do not have leverage IMO, or I guess they do since Drew sat out a year.
Im not sure Im following you. Drew was arrogant/entitled (your terms) because he used leverage? Which was only taken from him by a CBA that was designed to secure his talent at below market wages and prohibit him from selecting any willing employer? When IFAs and high schoolers and Freshman, Sophs, and Juniors all have leverage? When his demand is to make what the guy taken in the same slot he was taken in one year prior made?
Bottom line for me that's not entitled. That's a guy who decided that he didnt just need to concede the plot to take his services at a below market price. It's funny to me when people who advocate for free markets etc. get all cringey when the labor wants to exert its leverage (not specific to you).
(also, he didnt technically sit out. He signed with the independent league)
for Moncada -- like 60-65 million with tax, for a prospect. Not so crazy to me that JD set his price at $10 million. (obviously there was inflation).
the inequities in baseball between draft picks and IFA's is a completely different topic. I'm actually surprised it's still an open loophole, but being closed gradually.
Can you name another college grad draft pick that sat out a year because he didn't get offered enough money to sign a contract? Serious question, I don't know the answer.
High school players have leverage, they can simply go to college, college eligible draftees do not have leverage IMO, or I guess they do since Drew sat out a year.
Im not sure Im following you. Drew was arrogant/entitled (your terms) because he used leverage? Which was only taken from him by a CBA that was designed to secure his talent at below market wages and prohibit him from selecting any willing employer? When IFAs and high schoolers and Freshman, Sophs, and Juniors all have leverage? When his demand is to make what the guy taken in the same slot he was taken in one year prior made?
Bottom line for me that's not entitled. That's a guy who decided that he didnt just need to concede the plot to take his services at a below market price. It's funny to me when people who advocate for free markets etc. get all cringey when the labor wants to exert its leverage (not specific to you).
(also, he didnt technically sit out. He signed with the independent league)
I don't care enough, remove JD Drew from the list then, point still stands and my thoughts on Eli, Elway, Lindros, Ball, and anyone else who does this is still the same.
If you don't want to include Drew in that same class because rather than refuse to play for a specific team, it's his right to want to get paid as much as he can, demanding above and beyond what any draft pick had been paid before, then don't include him but it's really irrelevant to my point and this thread.
My point was more that he didn't force a trade or force
Anyone to do anything. He decided that he needed a specific situation and if he didn't get it, he would find some other line of work. To me, that's different. It's not so much "play by my rules". It more "I won't play by yours".
RE: My point was more that he didn't force a trade or force
Anyone to do anything. He decided that he needed a specific situation and if he didn't get it, he would find some other line of work. To me, that's different. It's not so much "play by my rules". It more "I won't play by yours".
Ok, cross him off my list and add Kobe or any of the other players who publicly said they won't play for the team who drafted them.
I don't care enough, remove JD Drew from the list then, point still stands and my thoughts on Eli, Elway, Lindros, Ball, and anyone else who does this is still the same.
If you don't want to include Drew in that same class because rather than refuse to play for a specific team, it's his right to want to get paid as much as he can, demanding above and beyond what any draft pick had been paid before, then don't include him but it's really irrelevant to my point and this thread.
Ok, I think Drew is different for that reason. Also, he wanted the same # as the guy taken with the same pick one year prior. Im not sure why you're hung up on it being such an outlandish #.
RE: RE: My point was more that he didn't force a trade or force
Anyone to do anything. He decided that he needed a specific situation and if he didn't get it, he would find some other line of work. To me, that's different. It's not so much "play by my rules". It more "I won't play by yours".
Ok, cross him off my list and add Kobe or any of the other players who publicly said they won't play for the team who drafted them.
Maybe Im an outlier. I think drafts are dumb/abusive. The whole industry, employers and competitive laborers, conspire to strip you of your ability to choose the employer you want to work for. Want to play where you grew up? Tough shit, Milwaukee "drafted" you.
We dont draft lawyers. There isnt a McDonalds fry cook draft. But athletes are allocated that way. So be it but I dont blame guys for bucking that system. BTW, given how leagues now cap what draftees can make by pick basically, guys making those demands are putting their money where their mouths are.
Anyone to do anything. He decided that he needed a specific situation and if he didn't get it, he would find some other line of work. To me, that's different. It's not so much "play by my rules". It more "I won't play by yours".
Ok, cross him off my list and add Kobe or any of the other players who publicly said they won't play for the team who drafted them.
Maybe Im an outlier. I think drafts are dumb/abusive. The whole industry, employers and competitive laborers, conspire to strip you of your ability to choose the employer you want to work for. Want to play where you grew up? Tough shit, Milwaukee "drafted" you.
We dont draft lawyers. There isnt a McDonalds fry cook draft. But athletes are allocated that way. So be it but I dont blame guys for bucking that system. BTW, given how leagues now cap what draftees can make by pick basically, guys making those demands are putting their money where their mouths are.
We don't draft lawyers because the professional isn't a monopolistic competition where leagues that control those monopolies thrive when a certain level of parity exists. E.g. they want all franchises to succeed.
To achieve that parity, the teams who do the worst have the first crack (or close to it) at the best players (in theory).
major sports are in no way comparable to the corporate world yet endless analogies comparing them still happen.
And if the "employees" of the major sports don't like it they cannot find other avenues to get paid similarly for their services unless they take drastic measures like Drew - and personally I see no reason to accept player greed any more than I do to accept ownership greed - greed is greed - I removed Drew from my list though anyway.
And maybe (not sure) professional sports are the only allowable monopoly - and I'm squarely out of my element here but I believe they have a legal exemption (at least baseball does).
exist but that doesn't make them any less ridiculous. And the main reason they exist has everything to do with suppressing wages. That they may influence parity is a secondary "benefit". Also, baseball existed without a draft for 60-70 years...so it's not like it's a situation where "this is the way we've always done it". Bonus babies were making too much money and the owners decided to do something about it.
I applaud any player who decides to try and have some say in where they work. The age limits in different sports are ridiculous as well.
and the union negotiates on behalf of it's members, and for baseball specifically it's probably the strongest union of all the major sports.
I don't consider it noble or heroic to buck the system because you want more money any more than I consider it heroic to say you won't play for a specific team.
But again, I removed JD Drew from my list. and who cares about my list anyway, this point is not the point of the thread.
and it goes well beyond his father (because, at the end of the day, who cares about his dad?). Ball has incredible court vision, and is a GREAT shooter...when he's wide open! How is he going to get that shot off in the NBA? He will really struggle to create his own shots, he's not good defensively, he's not an elite athlete, and the way he disappeared v.Fox is very concerning to me.
It goes beyond having a bad game, that can happen to anyone, but Ball looked like he wanted nothing to do with Fox. That, and he looked like he didn't give a shit about a bad loss in the tourney by declaring for the draft minutes after what should have been a devastating loss.
And he is the kind of player that both the Lakers and Celtics have always had success with. I'm a bit surprised that he apparently thinks the Celtics won't take him.
and the union negotiates on behalf of it's members, and for baseball specifically it's probably the strongest union of all the major sports.
Draft eligible players are obviously not part of the union until they get drafted...which is why they get screwed. Same thing in the other major sports.
Quote:
I don't consider it noble or heroic to buck the system because you want more money any more than I consider it heroic to say you won't play for a specific team.
I don't consider it noble or heroic either. I consider it normal to want to have some say in where you live and work.
and the union negotiates on behalf of it's members, and for baseball specifically it's probably the strongest union of all the major sports.
Draft eligible players are obviously not part of the union until they get drafted...which is why they get screwed. Same thing in the other major sports.
Quote:
I don't consider it noble or heroic to buck the system because you want more money any more than I consider it heroic to say you won't play for a specific team.
I don't consider it noble or heroic either. I consider it normal to want to have some say in where you live and work.
Which professional sport offers you say in where you live and work?
if location is that important to you, then you can find another line of work, and not play a game for a living.
there is no right to play a major sport and I do not feel even a little bit sorry for someone who gets stuck playing in a city they don't like or a franchise they don't like.
anyway, not sure why I engaged this line of the discussion so long, I don't feel strongly about this side of it, it is however my opinion.
And he is the kind of player that both the Lakers and Celtics have always had success with. I'm a bit surprised that he apparently thinks the Celtics won't take him.
I don't know if it's as much that as it is that he doesn't want to go there
and the union negotiates on behalf of it's members, and for baseball specifically it's probably the strongest union of all the major sports.
Draft eligible players are obviously not part of the union until they get drafted...which is why they get screwed. Same thing in the other major sports.
Quote:
I don't consider it noble or heroic to buck the system because you want more money any more than I consider it heroic to say you won't play for a specific team.
I don't consider it noble or heroic either. I consider it normal to want to have some say in where you live and work.
Which professional sport offers you say in where you live and work?
if location is that important to you, then you can find another line of work, and not play a game for a living.
there is no right to play a major sport and I do not feel even a little bit sorry for someone who gets stuck playing in a city they don't like or a franchise they don't like.
anyway, not sure why I engaged this line of the discussion so long, I don't feel strongly about this side of it, it is however my opinion.
The counterpoint to saying find another line of work is that you have a permitted conspiracy among employers to eliminate competition for skilled labor. There may not be a right to play a major sport, but you should at least recognize that the reason you are not free to shop your competition to the bidder of your choice is that sports leagues get to operate by rules that no other industry gets.
It's just bizarre to me that you take so much umbrage at a player using what little leverage he has in a system fixed to screw him out of a market-based wage (and that is 100% inarguable). (and I do like that Im taking the greed is good side and you're taking the other)
Which professional sport offers you say in where you live and work?
Also, the answer is all of them. Unrestricted free agents get to make this choice, provided teams want them. Veterans and owners have bargained away the rights of amateurs to enrich themselves.
As for parity, there are other ways to accomplish that if that is really what teams are worried about. A salary cap without a draft makes a whole lot more sense re parity than a draft with no salary cap. And if it is about parity, why do the leagues all have a salary limitation (individual or pool) on picks?
if location is that important to you, then you can find another line of work, and not play a game for a living.
Even by the high standards of bbi, this is an awfully bizarre and silly statement.
Well by the high standards of BBI you fit right in. You took the time to post on a topic and tell someone you disagree with them and they suck but you offer zero substance about what exactly you disagree with or why they suck.
It's almost as chickenshit as the cowardly passive aggressive "this thread has a lot of stupid" posts.
Bravo Mad Mike, Bravo, you are what makes BBI great (again?) way to live up to the high BBI standards. I will hang my head in shame for posting something you find so bizarre and silly.
Which professional sport offers you say in where you live and work?
Also, the answer is all of them. Unrestricted free agents get to make this choice, provided teams want them. Veterans and owners have bargained away the rights of amateurs to enrich themselves.
As for parity, there are other ways to accomplish that if that is really what teams are worried about. A salary cap without a draft makes a whole lot more sense re parity than a draft with no salary cap. And if it is about parity, why do the leagues all have a salary limitation (individual or pool) on picks?
Come on, you're smarter than this, so you're saying players entering the league and those who have earned free agency should be able to negotiate freely and similarly both without constraint?
Because as soon as you say no and impose one single limit you contradict yourself.
and you know that financial model will never work and there will be no sports as we know them. There has to be a cost controlled aspect. Period. Tell me which sport does not have a cost controlled aspect for new players entering the league with rules on how they get paid?
the owners wouldn't mind so much - because there are caps (of varying rigidity) in all major sports, but the union and the other players would because it would mean the rich get richer and the less rich get less richer.
the leagues didnt have cost controls on young players for years. NFL put them in when, for Russell (though they had the draft before that). The MLB system is new as well. NBA put it in I think after Glen Robinson got 80 million to sign.
Im not telling the league/players how to run things. What Im saying is that it makes no sense to me that you think it's greedy and arrogant of Drew to demand a high salary (which btw was consistent with precedent) when the system was rigged against him.
Im not even sure what your objection is other than a dislike of greed (maybe a sense that people should pay their dues?).
you can achieve it thru aggressive revenue sharing. NFL does an enormous amount of profit sharing. Every team can compete on money. I mean, if the leagues are going to be allowed to conspire to eliminate competition for entry level workers, you might as well deem them one entity and tell them to share a pool of revenues.
has put enough time in to "earn" free agency? It's all a bunch of arbitrary bullshit. And your whole take reeks of "they are lucky to have that job and should take what they get". Are you in favor of leagues implementing the reserve clause, which MLB used for decades? Or do you think players should be able to experience unrestricted free agency, but only after a completely random period of time you deem appropriate?
the leagues didnt have cost controls on young players for years. NFL put them in when, for Russell (though they had the draft before that). The MLB system is new as well. NBA put it in I think after Glen Robinson got 80 million to sign.
Im not telling the league/players how to run things. What Im saying is that it makes no sense to me that you think it's greedy and arrogant of Drew to demand a high salary (which btw was consistent with precedent) when the system was rigged against him.
Im not even sure what your objection is other than a dislike of greed (maybe a sense that people should pay their dues?).
We are mixing two things, cost control and the requirement to play for the team who drafted you.
they are sort of entwined though to an extent.
So, while the NFL didn't have a rookie wage scale until 2010, they did have rules about the draft. You don't want to play for the team who drafts you at a contract you can agree on, you have to sit out a year or get traded.
So while you may be able to differentiate JD Drew from Eli because Eli wasn't about money per se (he was before the rookie wage scale) and Drew was about money, the fact remains neither could have or should have been IMO free to negotiate with any team to maximize their earnings or desire to play in a place they prefer.
Period.
Now with regards to Drew, I do find it unseemly, if arrogant or greedy aren't the right words to demand the biggest contract ever awarded to a draftee (Lee was a free agent) before even being drafted. If that to you is entrepreneurial and you admire it, then great, I prefer a more humble approach.
And it's also not lost on me how Boras is at the center of it, I hated Boras because of the Arod negotiations with the Mets (many years after Drew sat out), but I don't think he's good for the game, even if he is good for his clients (most of the time).
has put enough time in to "earn" free agency? It's all a bunch of arbitrary bullshit. And your whole take reeks of "they are lucky to have that job and should take what they get". Are you in favor of leagues implementing the reserve clause, which MLB used for decades? Or do you think players should be able to experience unrestricted free agency, but only after a completely random period of time you deem appropriate?
At the end of the day to adjust the approach and free agency rules without increasing salary thresholds is impossible.
What do you think happens with salaries increase?
Fans pay.
Do you go to games? It's ridiculous there is not give without take and there isn't a ton to take.
the average per sport salaries are below and I'm not saying you should be happy with what you have and take what you can get, but I am saying I feel it's fair - except the NFL which gets hosed - the most injury likely sport and the lowest salary, but that's what happens when you have 53+ people on the roster and 16 games.
NBA: 5.15M average annual salary (4.8 year average career)
MLB: 3.2M average annual salary (5.8 year average career)
NHL: 2.4M average annual salary (5.5 year average career)
NFL: 1.9M average annual salary (3.2 year average career)
but more importantly if the players aren't happy with it they should negotiate a better deal and then live within the parameters of the deal they negotiate.
I would stay away, and thats before Dad even comes into the picture.
I'd do that if I were philly. But Embiid is probably one to stay away from. He's going to get the max in Philly. He's well worth the risk for them if he pans out, they have tons of cap room. Simmons and saric don't hit RFA for another 3 seasons.
And Elway did it. It no one ever ever fucking mentions it. And Archie and Eli hardly acted like these two assholes. Kid is a pussy and his dad may be the biggest asshole going ever when it comes to sports parents. Ever. Hope he goes to the Lakers and flames out
I really don't like players who act this way, Eli, Elway, Lindros, JD Drew, now Ball - and any others.
All of them are in the same class for me. Entitled, bratty, unwilling to accept a challenge. Only want a perfect situation for you to succeed - seems like a loser mentality.
However none of the aforementioned, even Eli with his famous father, had a father that was as abrasive as LaVar Ball. Saying he could beat Jordan 1 on 1, his ridiculous shoe contract demands, racist comments about the UCLA team.
For MiLB to claim it's about racism is about as typical as can get. It says more about MiLB than anyone else, even Ball. And to passive aggressively suggest it is downright chicken shit.
The reason people dislike LaVar Ball and have issues with Lonzo Ball is totally based on the abrasive arrogant nature in which the elder Ball is in everyone's face.
More so than any other athlete who didn't want to play for a specific team. Way more.
You're being ridiculous. Radar would be proud
I really don't like players who act this way, Eli, Elway, Lindros, JD Drew, now Ball - and any others.
All of them are in the same class for me. Entitled, bratty, unwilling to accept a challenge. Only want a perfect situation for you to succeed - seems like a loser mentality.
However none of the aforementioned, even Eli with his famous father, had a father that was as abrasive as LaVar Ball. Saying he could beat Jordan 1 on 1, his ridiculous shoe contract demands, racist comments about the UCLA team.
For MiLB to claim it's about racism is about as typical as can get. It says more about MiLB than anyone else, even Ball. And to passive aggressively suggest it is downright chicken shit.
The reason people dislike LaVar Ball and have issues with Lonzo Ball is totally based on the abrasive arrogant nature in which the elder Ball is in everyone's face.
More so than any other athlete who didn't want to play for a specific team. Way more.
Especially when MiLB is using the racism card in comparison to the Eli situation, as if Eli escaped any criticism. Eli was absolutely lambasted for that entire episode by many, many people and it has followed him to some extent still to this day. Eli had to answer questions for years and many people still associate him with his refusal to play for San Diego. In fact, I'd say Eli dealt with much, much, much more scrutiny that Ball has so far. So yeah, the racism thing is quite strange in this instance. Though not surprising considering the source. BBIs radar junior.
NBA forces these kids to play elsewhere for a post-HS season. I dont hold it against them that they view it as a waystation year.
I think it says something about you if you act like you don't give a shit during the game. A guy who loves his teammates and hates to lose doesn't act the way he did that night.
You're counterpoint is far from meritless. Im just not sure that we should assume every star prospect "loves his teammates". He was likely at UCLA only because of NBA draft eligibility rules.
Please god. I want no part of this train-wreck. Sadly, it seems like MagicBallmania is only getting started.
Link - ( New Window )
One might be suspicious of his shot, but he's a better shooter than Rubio ever was or will be. If Rubio shot like Ball shot last season he'd be a super star.
True, there is a difference in that Drew didn't pick a specific team he wouldn't play for, he picked a dollar amount he wouldn't play for less than.
I think they were all possibly willing to put up with the consequences but none were forced to like Drew was because those other sports rights were all different than baseball or the player was too valuable for the drafting team to walk away, so we won't really know.
I also acknowledge it's easy for me (and any fan) to have this opinion never been in the situation of playing a sport for a career not just for the love of the game and it's very possibly a difference I am not qualified to opine on, but that's never stopped me before.
All said though Drew was maybe worse, an eligible draftee who says he won't say with anyone for less than $10M just screams arrogance/entitlement.
And to make things worse, he signed the next year with the Cardinals for less than the $10M he wouldn't budge on with Philly.
All said though Drew was maybe worse, an eligible draftee who says he won't say with anyone for less than $10M just screams arrogance/entitlement.
Is your problem the dollar amount? Because the entire basis for the MLB draft is, effectively, dozens if not hundreds of players who are in the draft but not willing to come out unless their salary demands are met. That is why players get drafted 2-3 times, and why you hear about teams taking NCAA seniors so the can cram down a contract on them.
If it is the specific #, I'll concede Im totally on the side of players on this. There is a CBA that unfairly restricts them to a non-market wage. They didnt agree to the CBA, and to be clear, everyone negotiating the CBA knowingly agreed to screw over entry level players to enlarge the pie for everyone else. So he used the leverage he was permitted -- he didnt have to sign, even if it meant he wasnt going to play (Im a bit hazy on the history).
Moreover, $10 million was far from outlandish. When Travis Lee was declared a free agent after the Twins forgot to offer him a contract after drafting him #2 overall in 1996, the DBacks signed him for... $10 million (the #5 overall was also set free, and got over $6 million). It was not the highest offer for Lee. Drew was the #2 overall pick the following season. So I think he probably fairly said "the market wage for the 2nd pick is $10 million so I should have that". Though I dont specifically remember what his argument was.
Quote:
In comment 13482071 cokeduplt said:
Quote:
In comment 13482067 GMAN4LIFE said:
Quote:
.
Not really.
Eh, I mean pretty much.
Yeah, and ex-QB Archie was pulling the strings just like ex-NBA player Daddy Ball is pulling Lonzo's strings.
Basically, the situations are about as identical as you could get between two different sports except Lonzo's dad seems to be reveling in the spotlight, whereas Archie stayed in the background.
Also, I hated how he all but declared for the NBA Draft as he was leaving the court after losing to UK. Contrast that with Fox, who was balling his eyes out after losing to UNC.
I just really can't stand Lavar & it might be impacting how I feel about his son.
the inequities in baseball between draft picks and IFA's is a completely different topic. I'm actually surprised it's still an open loophole, but being closed gradually.
Can you name another college grad draft pick that sat out a year because he didn't get offered enough money to sign a contract? Serious question, I don't know the answer.
High school players have leverage, they can simply go to college, college eligible draftees do not have leverage IMO, or I guess they do since Drew sat out a year.
Quote:
for Moncada -- like 60-65 million with tax, for a prospect. Not so crazy to me that JD set his price at $10 million. (obviously there was inflation).
the inequities in baseball between draft picks and IFA's is a completely different topic. I'm actually surprised it's still an open loophole, but being closed gradually.
Can you name another college grad draft pick that sat out a year because he didn't get offered enough money to sign a contract? Serious question, I don't know the answer.
High school players have leverage, they can simply go to college, college eligible draftees do not have leverage IMO, or I guess they do since Drew sat out a year.
Im not sure Im following you. Drew was arrogant/entitled (your terms) because he used leverage? Which was only taken from him by a CBA that was designed to secure his talent at below market wages and prohibit him from selecting any willing employer? When IFAs and high schoolers and Freshman, Sophs, and Juniors all have leverage? When his demand is to make what the guy taken in the same slot he was taken in one year prior made?
Bottom line for me that's not entitled. That's a guy who decided that he didnt just need to concede the plot to take his services at a below market price. It's funny to me when people who advocate for free markets etc. get all cringey when the labor wants to exert its leverage (not specific to you).
(also, he didnt technically sit out. He signed with the independent league)
Quote:
In comment 13482760 Deej said:
Quote:
for Moncada -- like 60-65 million with tax, for a prospect. Not so crazy to me that JD set his price at $10 million. (obviously there was inflation).
the inequities in baseball between draft picks and IFA's is a completely different topic. I'm actually surprised it's still an open loophole, but being closed gradually.
Can you name another college grad draft pick that sat out a year because he didn't get offered enough money to sign a contract? Serious question, I don't know the answer.
High school players have leverage, they can simply go to college, college eligible draftees do not have leverage IMO, or I guess they do since Drew sat out a year.
Im not sure Im following you. Drew was arrogant/entitled (your terms) because he used leverage? Which was only taken from him by a CBA that was designed to secure his talent at below market wages and prohibit him from selecting any willing employer? When IFAs and high schoolers and Freshman, Sophs, and Juniors all have leverage? When his demand is to make what the guy taken in the same slot he was taken in one year prior made?
Bottom line for me that's not entitled. That's a guy who decided that he didnt just need to concede the plot to take his services at a below market price. It's funny to me when people who advocate for free markets etc. get all cringey when the labor wants to exert its leverage (not specific to you).
(also, he didnt technically sit out. He signed with the independent league)
I don't care enough, remove JD Drew from the list then, point still stands and my thoughts on Eli, Elway, Lindros, Ball, and anyone else who does this is still the same.
If you don't want to include Drew in that same class because rather than refuse to play for a specific team, it's his right to want to get paid as much as he can, demanding above and beyond what any draft pick had been paid before, then don't include him but it's really irrelevant to my point and this thread.
Ok, cross him off my list and add Kobe or any of the other players who publicly said they won't play for the team who drafted them.
I don't care enough, remove JD Drew from the list then, point still stands and my thoughts on Eli, Elway, Lindros, Ball, and anyone else who does this is still the same.
If you don't want to include Drew in that same class because rather than refuse to play for a specific team, it's his right to want to get paid as much as he can, demanding above and beyond what any draft pick had been paid before, then don't include him but it's really irrelevant to my point and this thread.
Ok, I think Drew is different for that reason. Also, he wanted the same # as the guy taken with the same pick one year prior. Im not sure why you're hung up on it being such an outlandish #.
Quote:
Anyone to do anything. He decided that he needed a specific situation and if he didn't get it, he would find some other line of work. To me, that's different. It's not so much "play by my rules". It more "I won't play by yours".
Ok, cross him off my list and add Kobe or any of the other players who publicly said they won't play for the team who drafted them.
Maybe Im an outlier. I think drafts are dumb/abusive. The whole industry, employers and competitive laborers, conspire to strip you of your ability to choose the employer you want to work for. Want to play where you grew up? Tough shit, Milwaukee "drafted" you.
We dont draft lawyers. There isnt a McDonalds fry cook draft. But athletes are allocated that way. So be it but I dont blame guys for bucking that system. BTW, given how leagues now cap what draftees can make by pick basically, guys making those demands are putting their money where their mouths are.
Link - ( New Window )
So he won't workout for the Celtics but will workout for the Sixers with Ben Simmons? Go figure.
Quote:
In comment 13482833 Bill L said:
Quote:
Anyone to do anything. He decided that he needed a specific situation and if he didn't get it, he would find some other line of work. To me, that's different. It's not so much "play by my rules". It more "I won't play by yours".
Ok, cross him off my list and add Kobe or any of the other players who publicly said they won't play for the team who drafted them.
Maybe Im an outlier. I think drafts are dumb/abusive. The whole industry, employers and competitive laborers, conspire to strip you of your ability to choose the employer you want to work for. Want to play where you grew up? Tough shit, Milwaukee "drafted" you.
We dont draft lawyers. There isnt a McDonalds fry cook draft. But athletes are allocated that way. So be it but I dont blame guys for bucking that system. BTW, given how leagues now cap what draftees can make by pick basically, guys making those demands are putting their money where their mouths are.
We don't draft lawyers because the professional isn't a monopolistic competition where leagues that control those monopolies thrive when a certain level of parity exists. E.g. they want all franchises to succeed.
To achieve that parity, the teams who do the worst have the first crack (or close to it) at the best players (in theory).
major sports are in no way comparable to the corporate world yet endless analogies comparing them still happen.
And if the "employees" of the major sports don't like it they cannot find other avenues to get paid similarly for their services unless they take drastic measures like Drew - and personally I see no reason to accept player greed any more than I do to accept ownership greed - greed is greed - I removed Drew from my list though anyway.
And maybe (not sure) professional sports are the only allowable monopoly - and I'm squarely out of my element here but I believe they have a legal exemption (at least baseball does).
I applaud any player who decides to try and have some say in where they work. The age limits in different sports are ridiculous as well.
I don't consider it noble or heroic to buck the system because you want more money any more than I consider it heroic to say you won't play for a specific team.
But again, I removed JD Drew from my list. and who cares about my list anyway, this point is not the point of the thread.
It goes beyond having a bad game, that can happen to anyone, but Ball looked like he wanted nothing to do with Fox. That, and he looked like he didn't give a shit about a bad loss in the tourney by declaring for the draft minutes after what should have been a devastating loss.
Draft eligible players are obviously not part of the union until they get drafted...which is why they get screwed. Same thing in the other major sports.
I don't consider it noble or heroic either. I consider it normal to want to have some say in where you live and work.
Quote:
and the union negotiates on behalf of it's members, and for baseball specifically it's probably the strongest union of all the major sports.
Draft eligible players are obviously not part of the union until they get drafted...which is why they get screwed. Same thing in the other major sports.
Quote:
I don't consider it noble or heroic to buck the system because you want more money any more than I consider it heroic to say you won't play for a specific team.
I don't consider it noble or heroic either. I consider it normal to want to have some say in where you live and work.
Which professional sport offers you say in where you live and work?
if location is that important to you, then you can find another line of work, and not play a game for a living.
there is no right to play a major sport and I do not feel even a little bit sorry for someone who gets stuck playing in a city they don't like or a franchise they don't like.
anyway, not sure why I engaged this line of the discussion so long, I don't feel strongly about this side of it, it is however my opinion.
I don't know if it's as much that as it is that he doesn't want to go there
Quote:
In comment 13483219 pjcas18 said:
Quote:
and the union negotiates on behalf of it's members, and for baseball specifically it's probably the strongest union of all the major sports.
Draft eligible players are obviously not part of the union until they get drafted...which is why they get screwed. Same thing in the other major sports.
Quote:
I don't consider it noble or heroic to buck the system because you want more money any more than I consider it heroic to say you won't play for a specific team.
I don't consider it noble or heroic either. I consider it normal to want to have some say in where you live and work.
Which professional sport offers you say in where you live and work?
if location is that important to you, then you can find another line of work, and not play a game for a living.
there is no right to play a major sport and I do not feel even a little bit sorry for someone who gets stuck playing in a city they don't like or a franchise they don't like.
anyway, not sure why I engaged this line of the discussion so long, I don't feel strongly about this side of it, it is however my opinion.
The counterpoint to saying find another line of work is that you have a permitted conspiracy among employers to eliminate competition for skilled labor. There may not be a right to play a major sport, but you should at least recognize that the reason you are not free to shop your competition to the bidder of your choice is that sports leagues get to operate by rules that no other industry gets.
It's just bizarre to me that you take so much umbrage at a player using what little leverage he has in a system fixed to screw him out of a market-based wage (and that is 100% inarguable). (and I do like that Im taking the greed is good side and you're taking the other)
Which professional sport offers you say in where you live and work?
Also, the answer is all of them. Unrestricted free agents get to make this choice, provided teams want them. Veterans and owners have bargained away the rights of amateurs to enrich themselves.
As for parity, there are other ways to accomplish that if that is really what teams are worried about. A salary cap without a draft makes a whole lot more sense re parity than a draft with no salary cap. And if it is about parity, why do the leagues all have a salary limitation (individual or pool) on picks?
Even by the high standards of bbi, this is an awfully bizarre and silly statement.
Quote:
if location is that important to you, then you can find another line of work, and not play a game for a living.
Even by the high standards of bbi, this is an awfully bizarre and silly statement.
Well by the high standards of BBI you fit right in. You took the time to post on a topic and tell someone you disagree with them and they suck but you offer zero substance about what exactly you disagree with or why they suck.
It's almost as chickenshit as the cowardly passive aggressive "this thread has a lot of stupid" posts.
Bravo Mad Mike, Bravo, you are what makes BBI great (again?) way to live up to the high BBI standards. I will hang my head in shame for posting something you find so bizarre and silly.
Quote:
Which professional sport offers you say in where you live and work?
Also, the answer is all of them. Unrestricted free agents get to make this choice, provided teams want them. Veterans and owners have bargained away the rights of amateurs to enrich themselves.
As for parity, there are other ways to accomplish that if that is really what teams are worried about. A salary cap without a draft makes a whole lot more sense re parity than a draft with no salary cap. And if it is about parity, why do the leagues all have a salary limitation (individual or pool) on picks?
Come on, you're smarter than this, so you're saying players entering the league and those who have earned free agency should be able to negotiate freely and similarly both without constraint?
Because as soon as you say no and impose one single limit you contradict yourself.
and you know that financial model will never work and there will be no sports as we know them. There has to be a cost controlled aspect. Period. Tell me which sport does not have a cost controlled aspect for new players entering the league with rules on how they get paid?
the owners wouldn't mind so much - because there are caps (of varying rigidity) in all major sports, but the union and the other players would because it would mean the rich get richer and the less rich get less richer.
Im not telling the league/players how to run things. What Im saying is that it makes no sense to me that you think it's greedy and arrogant of Drew to demand a high salary (which btw was consistent with precedent) when the system was rigged against him.
Im not even sure what your objection is other than a dislike of greed (maybe a sense that people should pay their dues?).
Im not telling the league/players how to run things. What Im saying is that it makes no sense to me that you think it's greedy and arrogant of Drew to demand a high salary (which btw was consistent with precedent) when the system was rigged against him.
Im not even sure what your objection is other than a dislike of greed (maybe a sense that people should pay their dues?).
We are mixing two things, cost control and the requirement to play for the team who drafted you.
they are sort of entwined though to an extent.
So, while the NFL didn't have a rookie wage scale until 2010, they did have rules about the draft. You don't want to play for the team who drafts you at a contract you can agree on, you have to sit out a year or get traded.
So while you may be able to differentiate JD Drew from Eli because Eli wasn't about money per se (he was before the rookie wage scale) and Drew was about money, the fact remains neither could have or should have been IMO free to negotiate with any team to maximize their earnings or desire to play in a place they prefer.
Period.
Now with regards to Drew, I do find it unseemly, if arrogant or greedy aren't the right words to demand the biggest contract ever awarded to a draftee (Lee was a free agent) before even being drafted. If that to you is entrepreneurial and you admire it, then great, I prefer a more humble approach.
And it's also not lost on me how Boras is at the center of it, I hated Boras because of the Arod negotiations with the Mets (many years after Drew sat out), but I don't think he's good for the game, even if he is good for his clients (most of the time).
At the end of the day to adjust the approach and free agency rules without increasing salary thresholds is impossible.
What do you think happens with salaries increase?
Fans pay.
Do you go to games? It's ridiculous there is not give without take and there isn't a ton to take.
the average per sport salaries are below and I'm not saying you should be happy with what you have and take what you can get, but I am saying I feel it's fair - except the NFL which gets hosed - the most injury likely sport and the lowest salary, but that's what happens when you have 53+ people on the roster and 16 games.
NBA: 5.15M average annual salary (4.8 year average career)
MLB: 3.2M average annual salary (5.8 year average career)
NHL: 2.4M average annual salary (5.5 year average career)
NFL: 1.9M average annual salary (3.2 year average career)
but more importantly if the players aren't happy with it they should negotiate a better deal and then live within the parameters of the deal they negotiate.