Lakers Now

Round-the-Clock Purple and Gold

« Previous Post | Lakers Now Home | Next Post »

The ultimate NBA career stat: Money

Richlakers There were two smart stories in The Times on Tuesday about NBA players and money:
Mike Bresnahan’s piece on NBA Players' Assn. president Derek Fisher, and Jerry Crowe’s profile of former Trojans star Harold Miner.

Because of a possible lockout by NBA owners this summer during new labor negotiations, Fisher said he’s advised players all season to conserve their cash in case their paychecks stop coming.

Meanwhile, Crowe’s story pointed out that Miner, who played four seasons in the NBA and retired in 1996, has literally retired from the workforce. Miner has not worked since he stopped playing, thanks to some smart investments. He earned $5.3 million in player salary and $14 million from a Nike deal.

That got me wondering about a career stat rarely talked about: lifetime earnings as a player.

So I went through the Lakers current roster, and using stats from basketball-reference.com assembled the career salaries for each player through this season. The lesson? If you stay in the league long enough, you can build a real fortune.

I warn you, there are some are eye-popping numbers:

Player; NBA seasons; career salary.

--Ron Artest; 12; $58.4 million.
--Matt Barnes; 8; $9.4 million.
--Steve Blake; 8; $20.8 million.
--Shannon Brown; 5; $7.0 million.
--Kobe Bryant; 15; $196.2 million.
--Andrew Bynum; 6; $35.1 million.
--Derrick Caracter; 1; $473,604.
--Devin Ebanks, 1; $473,604.
--Derek Fisher; 15; $57.8 million.
--Pau Gasol; 10; $99.6 million.
--Lamar Odom; 12; $98.9 million.
--Theo Ratliff; 16; $102.4 million.
--Joe Smith; 16; $61.2 million.
--Luke Walton; 8; $22.1 million.

-- Barry Stavro

Photo: Lamar Odom, Kobe Bryant, Derek Fisher, Pau Gasol and Ron Artest catch a breath during against the Phoenix Suns in Game 6 of the Western Conference Finals last spring. Credit: Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times

 
Comments () | Archives (157)

The comments to this entry are closed.

"I'm not saying Luke is at the level of those players. He's clearly not. But the stats that Luke produced in the season right before he was offered his big contract CLEARLY warranted a good contract, and if the Lakers hadn't offered him one, someone else would have."

So you're saying that one good season, regardless of how he performed in prior years, automatically warrants a good contract? I don't think a smart GM would do that. A smart GM would've let the market dictate his value before offering him a contract, instead of jumping the gun out of fear that other teams would offer him a good contract. And I certainly don't share your confidence that other teams would have offered him a deal he couldn't refuse.

Take a look at that Lakers roster for a sec. Saying that he was the third best player on that team really isn't saying much.

Are you suggesting that his injuries are the reason why he mysteriously lost his shooting touch after his lone miraculous season? Does shooting qualify as one of your skills if you've only done it well for one season?

@Mamba – any reason to play Chaka is good enough for me….(right Magic Phil).


@Fan of Mamba – McFadden and Whitehead…yes! Ain’t no stopping the Lakers. Luther did a cool remake, but nothing can touch the original imho.

"Bay to LA

Denial...........ain't just a river in Egypt

Here is a carefully crafted quote from Luke at his 2007 free agency press conference..............as he sought to protect Mitch and mask the strong possibility than there was no interest in him............FROM ANYBODY


Posted by: pfunk36 | March 09, 2011 at 10:52 AM

It's possible that no other team wanted him as much as the Lakers did, but when Luke didn't play, the Lakers didn't win. Luke became much more expendable over the next few years as the roster improved and his injuries slowed him down.


@FAN OF THE MAMBA, One good STOP deserves another!! TO THE LA LAKERS : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMcYoMYOKIk - Luther

Posted by: Mamba24 | March 09, 2011 at 11:18 AM

ALRIGHT!!! Luther in the house!

>>> what may turn out to be THE WORST CONTRACT IN LAKER HISTORY!

Possibly. But the key here is "turn out to be". When you offer the contract, you don't know how things will turn out.

For example, what if Andrew Bynum messed up his knee in the next Memphis game (it always seems to be them) and his career is over. Then the Lakers would be out a lot more money than they owe Luke, so that could challenge Luke's contract for the worst ever.

Or Luke could get healthy and start playing like he did in 2006-07, and actually be worth the MLE level money he's paid. It's not likely, but I'll point out that Grant Hill went through years of not playing or playing badly with multiple injuries, and then he's been playing pretty well for the last couple of seasons.

But when the Lakers offered Luke his contract, they didn't know what would "turn out". They knew what Luke had done in the previous season, and with their limited capacity for hiring other free agents, they made a reasonable offer to Luke.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3M1TvaWkC0w Posted by: Fan of the Mamba | March 09, 2011 at 11:26 AM
*
"Outside I' m masquerading, Inside my hope is fade" Damn sounds like it was written for Princess Jimmy! LMAO!!!!!!

>>>A players worth is directly proportional to his salary since the $, if
>>>unbalanced, can sink a team.

I agree. Are the Lakers sunk? 3 straight finals appearance and 2 championships. Is that sunk?

I'd say no. And that PROVES that Luke's, Fish's, and Bynum's contracts aren't unbalanced. None of the three has produced up to the level they're paid, but each of their contracts are reasonable by NBA standards (or at least were at the time they were signed). If they had paid Luke 10 million a year, that might have sunk the team. They didn't. They gave him the average salary in the NBA (which is what the MLE is).

To continue the Smokey theme, The Lakers leave me with a "Good Feelin",
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiErO4Nvh9E - Smokey & Miracles
I also dedicate this to....Yes Yes Yes The Fabulous Justanothermambafan,
Come on Justa sing it with me!!!

LTLF,

There were plenty of reasons NOT to sign Luke as well.

- The only good season from Luke was his contract year. I DESPISE players who only perform well in their contract year. That's more Eddie Curry and less Kobe if you catch my drift. RED FLAG.

- Most of those stats Luke accumulated were at the beginning of the year, when defenses consistently ignored him and left him WIDE OPEN to double Kobe. Let's remember that nobody in the league believed he could make open shots based on his performance in previous seasons. After a few months into the season, defenses started to adjust, and actually started guarding him. His game took a complete nose dive from that point on. He was struggling even before he got injured that year. RED FLAG.

- He was injury prone, had a history of brittle bones, and took months to recover from minor ailments. RED FLAG.

- He was not a gamer. He would often panic in pressure situations, and was mentally fragile, as was Smush, Cook and Kwame. RED FLAG.

- It's not difficult to accumulate assists when you're the primary ball handler (unless you count Smush), and you have Kobe to pass the ball to.

- At the end of the day, it comes down to this. Luke sucks at basketball, and a few months of elevated play during his contract year does not disprove this notion. The front office called Phil's son at 12:01 AM of free agency to offer him a contract without testing the market, and gave him an injury prone player who takes 6 months to recover from a chipped fingernail, a SIX year contract. Contrast that to the haggling involved when it came to signing Lamar and Trevor, and it becomes apparent that Bill and Phil's son got favorable treatment. This theory was further confirmed when Phil refused to start Ariza over Luke.

- You ask if there is a player who had similar stats to Luke? I ask if there was a contract in Lakers history that was worse than Luke's. Hindsight may be 20/20, but there were plenty of fans who were appalled by his contract at the time, and it's only gotten worse.

LTLF,

Excellent post on Luke. I appreciate when someone takes the time to show the research to support their position. Well done.

LTLF,

Comparing Luke to LO is a stretch since LO would be starting for 90% of the teams in the league. Also, I don’t see comparing Luke's situation to Grant Hill. Grant was one of the top 10 players in the association before his injuries. Yes, he eventually made it back, but he was nowhere near the same player. If Luke is completely healthy and is 50% the player he was then that wouldn’t be good.

We need to show some sensitivity to LeBron James: http://www.worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshhJ8sxi75B2l27Ms2n

Stavro,

Thanks for the post! This is the sort of thing I like talking about (verses celebrating a nice win streak prematurely)...

The only eye popping numbers are Ratliff & Odom with career earnings of $100 mill.

Sorry, but they're not worth that.

Kobe's is too low. How many hundred mill has he earned OTHER players on the Lakers organization and other people in the Lakers organization and other people affiliated with the NBA???
I promise you that if you were to add up these totals, he's made more money for other people than he's made for himself.

Having said that, Kobe cost himself so much money with the whole Kate Faber thing, I shun to think of the amount... another 100 mill perhaps? I don't know. The endorsement well went instantly dry that July. Ouch. Has come back some since then, but no where near what it was.

And why should we be surprised about Harold Baby Jordan Miner?

Give any of us on this blog 19 million, we'll pay our taxes, and then can easily retire ourselves and probably our kids if we wanted.

Smart guy that Derek Fisher - but actually having to tell the players to stop spending is even more telling.

For example, I have a friend that worked at Saks 5th here in Denver. One day, Kmart comes walking in and buys about $10,000 worth of stuff. He would do this all the time. Sad thing?? He makes way more than that per day.

But keep that level of spending up, and he's not likely to have nearly as much when he's done... and when he IS done, his standard of living is going to take a nose dive. That's something that's not easy for many of these guys to do.

So I appreciate Fisher trying to talk some sense into these guys

>>>So you're saying that one good season, regardless of how he performed in
>>>prior years, automatically warrants a good contract?

No. But I'm saying one good season will warrant several teams to offer a good contract. Look at Jerome James. He didn't even have a full good YEAR. One good PLAYOFFS in 2005 and he got a full MLE contract (and produced a hell of a lot less than Luke during that contract).

And yes, previous years don't matter as much to GMs offering contracts. They just look at that and say, "oh, he wasn't getting enough minutes during those first three seasons... now he's playing big minutes and he's blossomed into a quality player". You know what Jermaine O'Neal did his first three seasons? Less than Luke, that's what.

>>>I don't think a smart GM would do that. A smart GM would've let the
>>>market dictate his value before offering him a contract, ...

Except for the fact that Luke was an UNRESTRICTED free agent. The Lakers didn't have the ability to match any offers.

>>>Take a look at that Lakers roster for a sec. Saying that he was the third
>>>best player on that team really isn't saying much.

Okay, I'll re-state the challenge to you:

Name one player in the last 20 years who averaged 4.3 assists and 5 rebounds and got offered less than a full MLE. Name one. All you have to do is find ONE counter example and you'll justify your point. I don't think you'll find one.

The truth is that Luke's production was good during that season, and if the Lakers had let him shop around they might have ended up paying him MORE to keep him.

>>>Are you suggesting that his injuries are the reason why he mysteriously
>>>lost his shooting touch after his lone miraculous season?

Partly. Lack of minutes hurts as well. Hard to get in a rhythm when you're only on the floor for 5 minutes a game.

Oh, and by the way...

Luke shot 45% in 2007-08 (not great, but not terrible for a wing player)

Luke shot 44% in 2008-09 (ditto)

Luke hit 41% of his 3-pointers in 2009-10. Anything over 40% is considered good 3 point shooting.

So Luke's not a TERRIBLE shooter. He's just never been as good as he was in his one best season. Note that he's never approached that level of minutes either.

>>>Does shooting qualify as one of your skills if you've only done it well for
>>>one season?

I have a question for you... How many players shot 80% in the 2009 NBA finals?

Yeah, Luke's contract is up there with trading Butler for Kwame; extending Cookie; trading Vujacic for nothing; swapping Farmar for Blake... actually it's at the top of the list of mistakes (other than Butler for Kwame)

Not a whole lot we can do about it

LTLF

I really admire the fact u can defend luke with such unwaivering support and unbridled passion after all these years of basketball IMPOTENCE but comparing him to grant hill??

Really? You also once also boldly stated lukes a better rebounder than artest... Now isn't that just as whacky and ludicrous as ricky sayin paul gasol is the best PG on the team or even staples24 once saying jordan farmar is the second best PG in the league next to CP3.

Just sayin.. Some things are hard to forget.

But pls keep the love comin.. I'm sure phreds listening.

>>>Comparing Luke to LO is a stretch since LO would be starting for 90% of the
>>>teams in the league.

I think it's a very reasonable comparison.

But it's not comparing REAL Luke to LO.

It's comparing Bizarro world Luke who never got injured to LO.

If Luke had continued to hit in the neighborhood of 40% of 3 pointers (he's only done that one season since) and had continued to get the ballpark of 4.3 assists and 5 rebounds a game, HE'd be a guy that you'd talk about as being a potential starter on most other teams.

Let me ask you this... If Jameer Nelson were a free agent this summer, and the Lakers could get him for a full MLE, would you want him?

Nelson's stats are the closest of any of this year's players to Luke's stats from 2006-07. Luke shot slightly better and rebounded better, Nelson gets a couple more assists.

I'm sure LAKER TRUTH will point out that Nelson has done it for more than one season, but he's also been injury prone, so the possibility exists that he could go into a spiral of injuries and never play at this level again.

So there's the offer... Jameer Nelson for a full MLE. Do you take it or not?

Mamba and Fan of Mamba,

Since we're talking Smokey & the Miracles...I want in. And you know "if you can want", you can need....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-LXF4AwRrU

LTLF,

If Luke is making $6 million a year, than Jameer Nelson is worth at least $35 million per year.

>>>Luke sucks at basketball, and a few months of elevated play during his
>>>contract year does not disprove this notion.

Tell that to the people who made Jerome James a full MLE offer.

Tell that to the people who drafted Darko Milicic ahead of Dwyane Wade and Carmelo Anthony.

Tell that to the people who drafted Greg Oden ahead of Kevin Durant.

Tell that to the people who drafted Marvin Williams ahead of Chris Paul and Deron Williams.

Tell that to the people who drafted Adam Morrison ahead of Brandon Roy, Rudy Gay, Rajon Rondo, Kyle Lowry, Shannon Brown, and Paul Millsap (among others).

Tell that to the people who drafted Martell Webster, Charlie Villanueva, Channing Frye, and Ike Diogu ahead of Andrew Bynum.

Tell that to the Magic, who signed Grant Hill to a gigantic contract in 2001 and never got any real production out of him.

Tell that to the idiots who STILL continue to pay Kwame Brown more than mininum wage.

GMs in the NBA don't always have the foresight to sign or pick the exact right player. They base their signings & draft picks on potential and what someone has done lately. If a player does really well one year and is a free agent, he generally gets paid well the next.

JonK

For the love of humanity how many times do I have to tell you I NEVER ONCE IN MY LIFE was a fan of freakin sunyue and you have me confused with humanolomy!!!
Dude don't make me go to archives... Please I ask you once and for all personally vindicate me from this horrifying accusation and unshackle me from the weight of burdensome LIE

And where the heck are our bio chonos dude? Damn ur slackin!


Since we're talking Smokey & the Miracles...I want in. And you know "if you can want", you can need....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-LXF4AwRrU Posted by: LRob | March 09, 2011 at 12:28 PM
*
Yes, Yes, Yes!! " Ill be standing by not far away let your heart give me a sign cause I'm prepared to wait until that future date when you'll want me all the time"...SWEET JESUS!!! You hear that Justa!! *sniff* *sniff* I think I'm gonna cry!!! LOL!! Good stuff LRob thanks!!

I'll make it even easier.

Find a single player in the last 20 years IN THE WHOLE LEAGUE who averaged at least 4.3 assists and 5 rebounds and was a free agent and didn't get at least an MLE level offer the next season.

C'mon. You keep knocking Luke's stats and saying that NOBODY would have offered him that much money.

Prove it. Show me ONE historical example of that kind of stats not getting that kind of money. I'll give you a head start. I'll find all example from the past two seasons...

LTLF,

I'm not sure what your intent is by comparing Luke's contract to the your list of bone headed moves from GMs around the league. You are simply confirming that signing Luke's contract belongs on your list of mistakes, are you not?

LongTimeLakerFan

Police here; you are saying that because all those other GM's did the wrong thing, Mitch was 'right' to do the wrong thing? Wrong way to prove your point mon ami! RSP, issue him a ticket!

Thanks
PSP Vice President

you have me confused with humanolomy!!! Posted by: yellofever | March 09, 2011 at 12:38 PM
*
ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LAKER TRUTH

Don't you dare take words out my mouth again, lol

Thanks
PSP VP

Dude and Dudettes... The Lakers are playing some outstanding ball at the moment, thanks to Drew. I recall a short time ago over 50% of the blog wanted to trade him for an OLD bag of POTATOES. I said "Trade him to the HEAT" will give you Big Z, surprised there were no takers.

It's downright EMBARRASSING that a player would CRY...DUDE I mean CRY in the LOCKER room after a LOSS. KINGS can't WEEP on the THRONE, get a grip and grow some STONES.

But I expect the HEAT to beat the Lake Show tomorrow, Let Down or Trap Game it does matter.

Police here; you are saying that because all those other GM's did the wrong thing, Mitch was 'right' to do the wrong thing? Wrong way to prove your point mon ami! RSP, issue him a ticket!Posted by: Practice Season Police | March 09, 2011 at 12:40 PM
*
WHAT MANNER OF MADNESS IS THIS!!! Stop this! Stop this I say!! LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!

LTLF,
Statistics doesn't show everything. 95% of the people knows this.
XD

according to Laker Truth:

"Lakers Improvement since the break - Top 10 Reasons:

1. No more minutes for Luke."


What about the fact that they turned it around with Luke in heavy rotation?

2010 free agency:

Two players had averaged at least 4.3 assists and 5.0 rebounds in the 2009-10 season.

LeBron James (7.3 rebounds, 8.6 assists) - could have had a max contract from any of several teams. Accepted slightly less to help get the "big 3" together.

Andre Igoudala (6.5 rebounds, 5.8 assists) - in the middle of a six year, $80 million contract.

Jason Kidd (5.6 rebounds and 9.1 assists) makes $8 million a year toward the end of his career.

Kobe Bryant (5.4 rebounds, 5.0 assists) makes over 20 million a year.

That's it. Four players at least matched Luke's Rebounds/Assist stats from his contract year. The only free agent took his talents to South Beach. The others make much more per year than Luke.

LongTimeLakerFan is owning fools today.

I salute you!

Luke still kills me, though.


DBDH!

For the love of humanity how many times do I have to tell you I NEVER ONCE IN MY LIFE was a fan of freakin sunyue

Posted by: yellofever | March 09, 2011 at 12:38 PM

--------

i'm a huge fan. he has a ring... unlike some people...

...

R.I.P. Mike Starr

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gio8MK_wZEM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gHiR1xeOSs

___________


5' 10", 50' vert.
The boys sick

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/blog/the_dagger/post/Viral-video-could-land-Division-III-player-in-du?urn=ncaab-wp65

Posted by: Magia32 | March 09, 2011 at 09:31 AM

That is just "Sick-ulous!" I suppose some white men "can" jump after all :-)

______

"Our cockiness got in the way early in the season,'' said Lamar Odom. "Now we go into every game knowing if we do the right things as a team, we're going to win.'' T J Simers article

LO, keepin' it real

"Pau Gasol said the team is better because of 'concentration,' while Kobe Bryant attributed it to defense, homework and following the game plan."
T J Simers article

And that about sums up the progress after the All Star break. We all knew they would come out the 2nd half and begin doing "their thing" and the final 2 games of the "roadie" are going to be playoff intense. Miami has an ax to grind within themselves and Dallas has something to prove.

Concentration, defense, homework and following the game plan means they are going to win. Great recipe... Great team.

"It's very important for us to go out here and do what we need to do on this road trip and win these games. Fortunately, there are not back-to-backs, so we have a day to prepare for each of them. So we really want to win these games, not just for the standings, but to send a message and let everybody know we're here and we're serious." A Bynum 3/4/11

"Everything about the Lakers is geared toward winning playoff games. It's what they do." J.A. Adande


"Even when we didn’t make the playoffs, I thought we'd win the championship." Dr. Buss


"WHEN WILL LEBRON TAKE HIS TALENTS TO THE 4TH QUARTER?" LOSO


Go Lakers & In Buss We Trust!!

Mamba and Fan of Mamba,

Since we're talking Smokey & the Miracles...I want in. And you know "if you can want", you can need....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-LXF4AwRrU

Posted by: LRob | March 09, 2011 at 12:28 PM

Ok LRob, you have done gone and did it now! You just knocked it out of the park!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-LXF4AwRrU Posted by: LRob | March 09, 2011 at 12:28 PM
.
Ok LRob, you have done gone and did it now! You just knocked it out of the park! Posted by: Fan of the Mamba | March 09, 2011 at 01:17 PM
*
Of course he did, that's why...HE'S DJ LROB!!! Go ahead on DJ LRob with your bad self!!!!

"WHEN WILL LEBRON TAKE HIS TALENTS TO THE 4TH QUARTER?" LOSOPosted by: frmkt | March 09, 2011 at 01:16 PM
*
Now wait just a minute sir. I think that first, I say FIRST, the 4th Quarter has to prove that it is deserving of receiving Princess Jimmy's!!

all right....how did Gmoney sneak back on the blog?? Aren't you banned AND shunned?? Just because the subject of this thread is money, don't think it changes anything. Shouldn't you be organizing a telethon for Eric's Kids?

LTLF,

I'm not sure what your intent is by comparing Luke's contract to the your list of bone headed moves from GMs around the league. You are simply confirming that signing Luke's contract belongs on your list of mistakes, are you not?

Posted by: LAKER TRUTH | March 09, 2011 at 12:39 PM

Good point. It's a strange argument that LTLF is riding here. Other teams' mistakes in overpaying one-season contract year wonders do not justify your own mistakes.

yellofever,

"And where the heck are our bio chonos dude? Damn ur slackin!"

Correct!

What do we play for? RINGS!!!

Lakers Today... Lakers Tomorrow... Lakers Forever.

GO LAKERS!!!

Hey Phil Jackson,
Don't you remember Fisher and Black Mamba sitting on the bench crying while watching the other team knocking them out of the playoffs. I believe it was the Spurs. And this was on national TV, not in the locker room!

Hey Phil Jackson,
Don't you remember Fisher and Black Mamba sitting on the bench crying while watching the other team knocking them out of the playoffs. I believe it was the Spurs. And this was on national TV, not in the locker room!

Posted by: ronaol | March 09, 2011 at 02:21 PM

------

it was also for the chance at a four-peat as opposed to breaking a 3 game losing streak in the regular season in the beginning of march.

#bicepkiss

LEWSTERS:

What are you tell us that only you recognized Bynum's talent? Most of the bloggers saw first hand as to how good Bynum is but were frustrated by his a) immaturity and b) injuries. When Bynum was drafted some of us even went to summer league to see him play at Long Beach, did you?. I don't remember you bloggin about Bynum 5 years ago? I understand that you want to take credit for something we all know but you insist by repeating your self about Bynum. Please tell us something that we don't know instead of sounding like a broken record.

Happy trails!

Posted by: IFA | March 09, 2011 at 11:09 AM

LEWSTERS,
"Will you doubters/haters listen now???"

Dude, will you ever listen? Most doubters never doubted his abilities when healthy, they doubted his ability to stay healthy for a full season. Big difference. I would love to be wrong and see Bynum have a long and healthy career, and finally shed that injury prone label. A few weeks of dominant basketball does not mean his injury prone label is gone, not even close. Let's
just cross our fingers and hope his knee and achilles issues are behind him.

By the way, the doubters having been saying for years that Bynum should not be concerned about his touches on offense, and he should focus primarily on defense and rebounding, while the Bynum lovers wanted him to get more touches, some even wanted him to get more touches than Gasol. Will you listen now???

Posted by: LAKER TRUTH | March 09, 2011 at 10:35 AM

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Will I listen now? HAHAHAHAHA...ROFLMFAO

Since this summer and till the ASB, I have had to endure and read all the crap from the chicken littles, the negative, the doubters/haters, and the fickle...All the negative and sometimes hateful posts about Andrew Bynum...I had to look at stupid stats, opinions, quotes, trade scenarios, etc...about him...Laker Tom, 888, myself and a few others got attacked, criticized and laughed at defending the kid...Did we get a memory lapse here...we had days and days of AB as the topic...Ask yourself or try to remember what stance you took during those months...honesty is the best policy...

As I figured, now AB has turned it around, these same people are now going to jump on the bandwagon, or do a Laker Truth post where they backtrack and say, "we never doubted his ability."

Well if you didn't why write all the things you did...Because you had to jump on the hate Laker Tom/888/CCX bandwagon???

So you were wrong in your opinion and assessment . Just man up and I said I was wrong about AB...the practice season, the Lakers attitude, whatever...just man up...

But to me back pedaling and twisting your post, and being defensive, is worse than the post of doubt or for not keeping the faith to begin with...

Or just do what you do...

Log on with a different handle to save face...LOL

>>> but comparing him to grant hill??

potentially, and only in a certain couple of senses.

Hill was injured for years and years. Orlando once paid him 9.6 million in a season where he played in 4 games. The next season, they paid him 10.8 million and he played in 14 games. The next season they paid him 12.1 million and he played in 29 games. That's three seasons in a row where he played less than Luke and made more than twice as much as Luke makes.

I think you'll agree that if someone pays you about 10 million a year and you play about 15 games and don't even play at the level you were playing at before you signed the contract, that you're overpaid.

If Orlando could trade three years for 32.5 million of Grant Hill playing a total of 47 games for 3 years of Luke playing an average of 56 games per year and only getting paid a total of 13.2 million, I think they'd take that trade. Both were overpaid, Hill was more overpaid.

And importantly, after seven years of a contract where he only had 2 seasons where he played more than 29 games, Hill eventually got his issues worked out and has managed to play in 70, 82, and 81 games the last 3 seasons.

>>>Really? You also once also boldly stated lukes a better rebounder than artest..

Almost. What I stated was that statistically, comparing them over their careers (to the point where I made the statement), Luke got more rebounds per minute that he was on the floor than Artest did.

That's a statistical fact. (or was, I have no idea if Luke's numbers have slipped since then). It wasn't an opinion. It was just a statement of what the two players had achieved during their careers.

yellofever,

>>>ricky sayin paul gasol is the best PG on the team or even staples24 once
>>>saying jordan farmar is the second best PG in the league next to CP3.

The difference is that I supported my claim with facts.

If Ricky &/or Staples24 could make a statistical argument for either of those claims, maybe they would be more plausible. But the facts in both of those cases would clearly REJECT the claims being made.

I didn't say Luke was a better player than Artest. I said that he was a more efficient rebounder than Artest during their respective careers to that point (I could double check the stats up to today if you'd like).

And I didn't say that Luke deserves his current contract, I said that it was warranted based on his performance during the season before he was offered the contract.

In both cases, I provided facts to support my arguments. So far, though people have provided THEORIES about why Luke shouldn't have been offered his contract, I've provided evidence that his numbers were well above average, and that other players performing equal or better numbers in the league today are very rare (4-5 players a year reach that level of numbers - usually Kobe, LeBron, Igoudala, and Wade), and that those players are much higher paid than Luke is (mostly because they are all much better scorers than Luke).

If what Luke did (4.3 assists, 5 rebounds) in 2006-07 was easy, then you'd expect to see a few random non-star players do it every year. But the truth is that almost everyone to meet or beat those numbers are all-stars. Other than the four I named, the other guys who have done it once or twice recently are guys like Jason Kidd, Chauncey Billups, and Rajon Rondo.

I'm not claiming that Luke is as good as those players. What I am claiming is that when someone puts up some combined stats that are rarely achieved, he's going to get stoopid offers from some team or teams.

There's a difference between saying that Luke's contract is justified now and saying that it was justified at the time it was offered.

>>>If Luke is making $6 million a year, than Jameer Nelson is worth at least $35
>>>million per year.

So by that standard, based on Luke's performance in the 2006-07 season, the Lakers got him at a great discount, since they didn't have to pay him $35 million per.

>>>I'm not sure what your intent is by comparing Luke's contract to the your list
>>>of bone headed moves from GMs around the league.

Several people have said (at least on in this thread) that no other team would have offered as much money to Luke.

The list of bonehead moves was my proof that PLENTY of teams are willing to offer big money to players they THINK will give them good performance, but who turn out to not be worth the value of the contract.

And yes, Luke's contract belongs along with the mistakes.

But when you compare it to the amount paid to some of those other fools (or the potential value of having Chris Paul instead of Marvin Williams), the Luke contract isn't as giant a mistake as some others.

>>>Statistics doesn't show everything. 95% of the people knows this.

LOL.

My favorite is the Mark Twain quote:

There are three kinds of lies... lies, damned lies, and statistics.

>>>Luke still kills me, though.

Me too. I'm not defending his current play. He's been pretty miserably bad this season in the limited minutes he's gotten.

But to say that he could never shoot or could never play basketball is just factually incorrect. And to say that his contract was completely stoopid and never should have been offered is a "hindsight is 20-20" statement. They didn't KNOW he'd suck this bad for most of the contract when they offered it.


>>>i'm a huge fan. he has a ring... unlike some people...

Yes. Sun Yue has as many rings as LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, and Chris Bosh COMBINED!

GO CHINESE LUKE WALTON!!!

EJK,

>>>Good point. It's a strange argument that LTLF is riding here. Other teams'
>>>mistakes in overpaying one-season contract year wonders do not justify your
>>>own mistakes.

Let me spell it out one more time. It's a subtle distinction.

I'm not claiming that Luke's contract is good. He's clearly overpaid for what he has done for the team during the course of this contract. If the Lakers KNEW WHAT THEY KNOW NOW, then they probably wouldn't have offered as much.

What I am claiming is that Luke's contract was justified AT THE TIME. That his performance during the 2006-07 season justified the amount he was offered in the summer of 2007. And also, if the Lakers had not offered him a contract, that some other team likely would have offered him as much, if not more.

The other contracts were examples of teams offering big money (in many cases more than Luke makes) to players based on expectations that were not fulfilled. Almost every team in the league has done it at one time or another (the Lakers did it this year with Theo Ratliff).

Let's go back to the Grant Hill example. Orlando paid Grant Hill 93 million dollars over 7 years. During that time, he only played in more than 29 games for two seasons. If you're looking for the worst contract in the history of the NBA, that would certainly beat out Luke's 30 million over 6 years. I'd also throw in Larry Hughes' 70 million for 5 years from Cleveland. LOTS of players have gotten a full MLE (as Luke did) and performed more poorly than Luke.

While Luke looks very bad by the standard of other current Laker players, in the history of the league, his is just an average bad contract. He's had stretches of a couple of months here and there where he played like someone worth MLE money, but for the most part not.

I'm not claiming that Luke is as good as those players. What I am claiming is that when someone puts up some combined stats that are rarely achieved, he's going to get stoopid offers from some team or teams.

There's a difference between saying that Luke's contract is justified now and saying that it was justified at the time it was offered.

Posted by: LongTimeLakerFan | March 09, 2011 at 03:18 PM

Thanks to Mitch jumping the gun, we'll never know for sure if another team would have offered him a similar contract. I think it was well established even then that Luke wasn't a good fit for other offensive systems other than the Triangle. But assuming for argument's sake that another stupid team would have made the same offer, how, again, does this justify his contract at the time it was offered? Saying that an Isiah Thomas-like GM would have made the same offer doesn't in any way make it more acceptable.

staples24 once saying jordan farmar is the second best PG in the league next to CP3.

Posted by: LongTimeLakerFan | March 09, 2011 at 03:18 PM

That was Todd, I remember because I never read a post of his again.

>>>Police here; you are saying that because all those other GM's did the wrong
>>>thing, Mitch was 'right' to do the wrong thing?

No.

What I'm saying is that GMs don't know whether something is the right thing or the wrong thing until after the contract is played out. When they offer the contract, they have only the knowledge of what the player did in the past, not what the player will do in the future.

So while Mitch's contract for Luke is clearly the wrong thing from the 2010 perspective, it was a reasonable offer from the summer of 2007 perspective.

And the use of the other bad contracts was evidence I was providing that if the Lakers hadn't paid Luke, some other team would have. If a player performs well even for a short period of time in the NBA, he generally gets either paid well or overpaid for his next contract.

If the choice was Luke or Andray Blatche, then maybe the Lakers would have offered Blatche an MLE. If the choice was between Luke or Mo Williams, then I'm sure the Lakers would have loved to have had Williams instead of Smush. If the choice was between Luke and Mickael Pietrus, then maybe the Lakers would have been better off going with Pietrus.

But those weren't the choices. Blatche was a restricted free agent, so he resigned with the Wizards. Williams signed for a contract starting at TWICE what they offered Luke, and the Lakers couldn't possibly have offered that much because they had no cap space. Pietrus might have been a possibility, but that would have come out of the Lakers' MLE, which was all they had to spend.

The Lakers used their free agent money to sign Derek Fisher.

So basically, the choice was to pay what seemed at the time a reasonable salary (Luke's contract is actually LESS than MLE - he started at 4 million per, the MLE started at 5.6 million per that season) or to just let him walk and have one less player.

It's not like they could take the 4 million they offered Luke and offer it to a different player. If they let Luke walk, they could only have offered NBA minimum contracts to any other free agents.

Given a choice of Luke for a 6 year contract starting at 4 million per or hiring someone like Malik Rose or Austin Croshere for a minimal contract, then I'd take the guy who just shot 47% and got 4 assists and 5 rebounds a game.

That's the thing. Most of the current arguments for why Luke's contract was bad totally ignore the Lakers situation in the summer of 2007, which is when the contract was offered.

 
« | 1 2

Connect

Advertisement

In Case You Missed It...

Video

All Things Lakers »

Your database for all things purple and gold.

Find a Laker

Search a name

Select a season

Choose one of our lists



Categories


Archives
 

About the Bloggers


Bleacher Report | Lakers

Reader contributions from Times partner Bleacher Report

More Lakers on Bleacher Report »



Get Alerts on Your Mobile Phone

Sign me up for the following lists:


In Case You Missed It...