Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Extreme butthurt brought to you by Pacers beat writer


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,008 posts

Posted 20 July 2014 - 09:57 PM

http://www.usatoday....rnets/12919801/




In the end, flashing the choke sign at LeBron James and then blowing in the four-time NBA MVP's ear wasn't the silliest thing Lance Stephenson ever did.
The most foolish thing Stephenson and his lawyer/agent, Alberto Ebanks, did was turning down the Indiana Pacers' five-year, $44 million contract.
Do the math.
If he had stayed, he would have earned a guaranteed $44 million, more than enough money and security to take care of his family, his children and their mothers. That comes out to an average of $8.8 million.
Instead, he overreached and found himself doomed by his own pride, accepting a three-year deal, with a third year being a Charlotte Hornets' team option. It guarantees him only two years and $18 million. If he stays for the third year (which is a team option), he will make roughly $27 million. If my math is right, that's $9 million a year, a tad more than the Pacers offered.

So for a couple hundred thousand dollars, a pittance by basketball standards, Stephenson bolted the only home he's ever had in the NBA, a place where he has his biggest supporter in Pacers President Larry Bird, a place where he is loved by fans despite his occasional forays into goofy behavior.
All for a chance to go to a team that earned the seventh seed in last year's Eastern Conference playoffs.
Stephenson got bad advice from his agent and he took that bad advice.
For Bird, it was the ultimate head-scratcher.
What if Stephenson gets injured before he has a chance to re-enter free agency, where he thinks he will be in line for a massive, elite payday? Who turns down security unless the cash value is significantly higher elsewhere?
But Stephenson's people wanted more, wanted $12 million to $14 million from the Pacers, according to the team's president. They were looking for a $55 million contract. When the offer came in at $44 million, they scoffed.
Stephenson accepted the shorter-term deal because it's assumed that in a few years time, the salary cap will increase quite dramatically and he will be in line for the monster raise he thinks he deserves.

Except that according to Bird, the Pacers were willing to offer a shorter-term contract that would have given Stephenson the chance to cash in should his game continue to grow the way both he and Bird believe it will. The Pacers were also willing, however grudgingly, to give Stephenson a player option after four years of a five-year contract so that he could opt-out and test the market once the cap money increased.
The Pacers also will have far less money on the books in the coming years, when Stephenson could have potentially renegotiated.
At the time, though, the numbers didn't add up for Ebanks and Stephenson.
Truth be told, they still don't.
"I really feel bad about losing him,'' Bird said. "I hope it doesn't interfere with our relationship. But I did what I could possibly do to keep him here. Even if he didn't have any other offers, I was committed to giving him that $44 million because I believe in the kid. If you look at our roster, we have five or six guys in the last year of their deals, plus David (West) and Roy (Hibbert) can opt out, so don't you think I wanted to keep Lance and Paul (George) locked into long-term deals?''

But it came down to this.
Stephenson and his agent thought he belonged in eight-figure-a-year territory, $10 million or more, much more, and the Pacers were right to stand firm. Stephenson is a nice player, but he's not a $10-million-plus player, not yet anyway. If the Pacers had met that price, they would have been left with a thoroughly depleted bench and been forced to deal with the luxury tax.
And in the end, Stephenson didn't get his eight figures.
When Bird met with Stephenson, his family and his agent the first night of free agency, he had a couple of five-year options and was sure one of them was going to be acceptable. But a few days later, Ebanks called back Bird and told him, "I don't think this is going to work. I don't believe you have the money available to re-sign Lance.''
Bird was stunned.
They ultimately went back and forth, contemplated different options, but the money was never right.
Of all the head-scratchers, this is the biggest: Why would Stephenson accept a team option in the third year? A player option would make some sense. If he blew up and became an All-Star, he could opt out and hit the lottery. But a team option gives Michael Jordan and the Hornets all the leverage. If Stephenson develops into a top-tier player, Jordan locks him into the last year of the contract. If he struggles or screws up, the team can just drop him.
Bizarre.
Bird could stomach this if Stephenson had left for much greener pastures, a lot more cash. But the argument can be made that he left for a worse deal.
"It's just disappointing,'' Bird said. "When I'd go to practices, when he was on, he was by far our best player. And he worked. If you work as hard as he does, you're going to get better. I'm going to miss the kid, no question. And he's growing up. That stuff he pulled in the playoffs, that was out of the blue. But I knew how good Lance was and the value he brought to our team.''
In the end, he wasn't worth $10 million or more.

 

Not to the Pacers, not to anybody.

 


Edited by teeray, 20 July 2014 - 11:40 PM.


#2 CarolinaNCSU

CarolinaNCSU

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,152 posts
  • LocationRaleigh

Posted 20 July 2014 - 10:05 PM

Hey Pacers fans and this writer...

 

tumblr_mxr7mlnaOj1r2ckpzo1_400.gif

 

 

lance-stephenson-squats.gif

 

Lance isn't going to go broke because he took a shorter contract here. If he plays to his ability, dude is going to get PAID for a long, long time.



#3 lindseyjw14

lindseyjw14

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 242 posts

Posted 20 July 2014 - 10:14 PM

Why would he sign in Charlotte?

Carolinas are a large population market

Gets to wear one of the most recognizable & popular colors/name in all of sports

Gets to play for the GOAT

Gets to play with a fast rising team loaded with talent, including a pair if his NYC buddies

He already has family that lives in NC

He gets to play for a great coach

He gets to play for a rabid fan base that loves their team

He gets to be "the man"

Will make more money, short term & long term


Why wouldn't he play here?

#4 pantherfan49

pantherfan49

    Angry inventor

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,364 posts

Posted 20 July 2014 - 10:18 PM

Actually agree with that article.

#5 TheMaulClaw

TheMaulClaw

    Member

  • ALL-PRO
  • 2,691 posts
  • LocationCharleston SC

Posted 20 July 2014 - 10:25 PM

I just think Lance wanted to be a Hornet. Indiana is not nearly as diverse as Charlotte.  I heard him reference that he felt like he fit in here.   Plus he'll get chance to be the man.



#6 CarolinaPanthers8789

CarolinaPanthers8789

    Alexander SEMIN!!! FTW

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,953 posts
  • LocationNorth Carolina/Virginia

Posted 20 July 2014 - 10:33 PM

*
A WHOLE PIE!

Larry Birds comments in that article got me really excited.

"It's just disappointing,'' Bird said. "When I'd go to practices, when he was on, he was by far our best player. And he worked. If you work as hard as he does, you're going to get better. I'm going to miss the kid, no question. And he's growing up. That stuff he pulled in the playoffs, that was out of the blue. But I knew how good Lance was and the value he brought to our team.''


So when Lance was on, he was better than Paul George according to Bird.

That's exciting!!!

#7 Rules&Regulations

Rules&Regulations

    HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,376 posts

Posted 20 July 2014 - 10:35 PM

Durr, why wouldn't he want to keep playing second fiddle to a guy who has virtually no basketball skills other than height and Paul George who couldn't lead a dog on a walk?

Durr hurr, why would he want to live in Charlotte over Indiana? Close to mountains and ocean in a young city vs. close to...corn.

Durrrrr, 44 million is clearly enough to take care of your family with, while 27 million isn't.

Anybody who bets on themself is stupid! Durr hurr!

#8 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,008 posts

Posted 20 July 2014 - 10:37 PM

If they were "willing to do this" and "willing to do that"They should have put it on the table.

Their stubbornness is our gain. Fug them.

If he was "your best player" pay him accordingly or give him a short contract so you can pay him when other contracts go off the books.

Don't be disappointed with Lance, be disappointed that you didn't close the deal.

They just wanted a potential star on the cheap for 5 years

Edited by teeray, 20 July 2014 - 10:38 PM.


#9 Fan01

Fan01

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 630 posts

Posted 20 July 2014 - 10:41 PM

Everyone keeps saying that 44 million would set him up for life.  Well, guess what?  So does the 27 million from Charlotte.  Not only will he make more money the first 3 years of our deal vs. the first 3 years of the Pacers offer but he will get the ability to get  major payday in 2-3 more years vs. 4-5 more years.  

 

This isn't exactly a big chance he's taking here.  Why did Labron only do a 2 year deal?  Doesn't he want to be set for life with a long term deal?



#10 Porn Shop Clerk

Porn Shop Clerk

    Honky

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,247 posts

Posted 20 July 2014 - 10:53 PM

isn't this one of the 5 stages of grief?

 



#11 Rise of The Hive

Rise of The Hive

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,047 posts

Posted 20 July 2014 - 10:56 PM

Oh he mad!



#12 cbarrier90

cbarrier90

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,458 posts

Posted 20 July 2014 - 11:07 PM

isn't this one of the 5 stages of grief?


Reasoning will be his next article when they still clinch a playoff spot without him.

Problem is they may not even get out of the first round.

#13 ecu88

ecu88

    Junior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,572 posts

Posted 20 July 2014 - 11:14 PM

If they were "willing to do this" and "willing to do that"They should have put it on the table.

Their stubbornness is our gain. Fug them.

If he was "your best player" pay him accordingly or give him a short contract so you can pay him when other contracts go off the books.

Don't be disappointed with Lance, be disappointed that you didn't close the deal.

They just wanted a potential star on the cheap for 5 years


I honestly think Bird though he could get a cheap rental out of Lance due to his past behavior and not court performance. He actually might be a better fit for the Hornets then Gor Don. Lance has potential to be a game changer for the Charlotte area. When is the last time Hornets and Panthers got this much attention, we are getting spoiled.

Sent from my HTC6525LVW using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

#14 Chuckie

Chuckie

    MEMBER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 386 posts
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted 20 July 2014 - 11:19 PM

I don't understand why peop,e keep harping on the turning down 44 million. The offer from Charlotte was considerably better. Lance is making a hell of a lot more in the 3 season here then in Indy. The story they should be writing is the Pacers tried to screw Lance on the contract if you actually look at the structure of it. When you look at the x's and o's it's very obvious why he left.

Do they not teach math in that backward ass town up north?

#15 cbarrier90

cbarrier90

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,458 posts

Posted 20 July 2014 - 11:19 PM

Actually agree with that article.


The problem is his reasoning for why Lance rejected the Pacers is wrong. The writer makes it sound like Lance did everything in his power to leave Indiana and that's simply not true. His agent wanted a shorter deal so Lance could capitalize after the new salary cap on a max deal if he performed well. Bird was trying to lock him in below his market rate for his prime thinking no one would challenge the Pacers for Lance.

You can't max out Hibbert and give George Hill the same 8 million dollars and then try to lowball Lance. Instead of blaming Stephenson, the writer should point the finger at management that capped out the Pacers and stuck them with players that couldn't show up in the playoffs.

Once again, because of his visibility, Lance is the convenient scapegoat.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users