Loyality, where did it go?

[DSouthr]

In some ways it retired yesterday...

Tom Duncan retired yesterday, he wasn't and never has really looked for the spot light, it seemed to always find him without his having to look for it. For all the well deserved things that have been said and will be said about Tim Duncan, I think in some ways he represents a bit of yesterday, a bit of yesterday that many of us wish still existed.

You see Tim Duncan was drafted by the Spurs, played all of his 19 seasons for the Spurs, and yesterday he retired from he Spurs without ever having worn any other teams NBA jersey. His career included national championship rings, many all star seasons, some yesterday were suggesting he may be the best power forward of all time and all of those things are wonderful but to me, 19yrs as a Spur. he showed what loyality is, he began as a Spur, his playing days ended as a Spur, and he will always be remembered as a Spur, maybe as THE Spur!

Lebron jumps from team to team and along the way trys to build a super team to play with, pretty much forces the GMs and owners to bow down to his wishes. Lebron doesn't like the coach, the coach gets fired, Tim Duncan didn't do that. Lebron feels his team does not have enough super stars to win titles then lebron insists the team bring in his list of star players, Tim Duncan didn't do that. Durant feels his team doesn't have enough star power to win and he "interviews" other teams and in the end skips out on the team that gave him his start in all of this, Tim Duncan didn't do that.

No, Tim Duncan stayed with the Spurs, he worked with his coach, he worked with the players his team drafted and brought in and he made his team better. Isn't it amazing by the way, the one team you look at in the NBA and the term team really fits, as opposed to most of the rest and especially the top other teams. IN Cleveland it is Lebron, at OKC it was Durant, the GSW it is Curry about to be joined by Durant. It is individuals more than team, it is team in San Antonio and that was Tim Duncan.

I LOVE LOYALITY to your team, I love college sports because it is about the team more than the individual. I do not like the one & done deal because to me it questions how much are you really loyal to your team. Tim Duncan is the poster for team loyality, take the definition out of the dictionary and just put his picture in to replace it. That is where the hate for lebron & Durant is coming from, a place where they seem dis-loyal to their teams. Jordan played his whole career, except at the very end when he was already done but not yet ready to stop playing, he was a Bull, will always be known as a Bull and a Tar Heel, loyality.

Duncan, like Jordan, did not skip from team to team, they build and worked to build their team better with the players they had, with the players they drafted, and with the players the organization brought in. And they cashed in the benefits that loyality brought them, more so than just money but in ever lasting respect of those that follow the game, a thing money can not buy.

Yeah, in some way that all retired yesterday, the virtues from days gone by seem further away this morning and replaced by something not nearly as enduring. Tick tock, time & change never stop, but sometimes you wish it could...

 

[CanuckChuck]

Ask Dwayne Wade about loyalty. It's not always a two-way street.

CC

 

[mikeirbyusa]

Owners don't help that's for sure.

 

[CanuckChuck]

Owners don't help that's for sure.

There is just sooooooo much money involved. Sometimes one forgets about virtue when looking at all those zeros.

CC

 

[DSouthr]

There is just sooooooo much money involved. Sometimes one forgets about virtue when looking at all those zeros.

CC

Yeah but they realize in time there are some things that money can not buy. Actions have to buy the most important things like vitrues of respect and honor and love.

 

[TPFKAPFS]

While I agree with the sentiment, I have to disagree with the practicality in this age. Jordan often clashed with ownership about taking care of his core players and even threatened to leave if they did not pay Ho Grant at one point. D. Wade showed extreme loyalty and put the team before his own monetary interests many times, and they let him go the moment his skills diminished. Lebron left Cleveland the first time because his owner told him flat out that he wouldn't spend the money necessary to win and then disrespected him on social media. This is, unfortunately, a different age where I is much more important than WE in almost every aspect of society.

I fear that there will be no more Tim Duncans in our lifetimes, but there will be a new paradigm when peeps realize how little depth there is to a life lived entirely for self! (BTW: TD had ownership that was smart enough and willing to build their own super team with 3 lifetime HOF peeps!)

My beloved College BBall has resisted this change more than many institutions, but we are seeing it more and more lately. Transfers are at an all time high; kids are demanding "packages"; mercenary coaches are chasing the dollar instead of rings (looking at you slimey!); the NBA is using it as a de facto minor league; and there is even a movement to let agents pay peeps legally while in school!

I'm old so I love the "Old Days", but I will have to adjust to the new world I live in!

 

[Tom79]

David, it is a different sport, but one can put Tony Gwynn in that very rare group, Duncan & Gwynn, two quality people (although Tony is deceased), they just don't make 'em like that as much anymore.

 

[ChiShankCity]

Duncan was also unbelievably fortunate to play for the best pro franchise in sports (arguably). Let me just argue this part of DSouth's post:

You see Tim Duncan was drafted by the Spurs, played all of his 19 seasons for the Spurs, and yesterday he retired from he Spurs without ever having worn any other teams NBA jersey. His career included national championship rings, many all star seasons, some yesterday were suggesting he may be the best power forward of all time and all of those things are wonderful but to me, 19yrs as a Spur. he showed what loyality is, he began as a Spur, his playing days ended as a Spur, and he will always be remembered as a Spur, maybe as THE Spur!

Lebron jumps from team to team and along the way trys to build a super team to play with, pretty much forces the GMs and owners to bow down to his wishes. Lebron doesn't like the coach, the coach gets fired, Tim Duncan didn't do that. Lebron feels his team does not have enough super stars to win titles then lebron insists the team bring in his list of star players, Tim Duncan didn't do that. Durant feels his team doesn't have enough star power to win and he "interviews" other teams and in the end skips out on the team that gave him his start in all of this, Tim Duncan didn't do that.

Once again, Tim Duncan was extremely fortunate to go to an organization that had won at least 55 games in three prior seasons before David Robinson's injury that led the Spurs to get the #1 overall pick. The Celtics were the favorites to win the lottery that year and didn't win. Extremely fortunate. The other points of Duncan aren't wrong, but sports (especially the NBA) takes a lot of luck.

Put Duncan in LeBron's situation. Gets drafted by one of the 5 worst franchises in the NBA. Cleveland's highest draft pick during the LeBron era was Luke Jackson. Luke Jackson scored a total of 252 points in his NBA career as the #10 overall pick. Just to compare, LeBron scored 208 points in a seven game series against the Warriors. The Cavs best free agent signing was Larry Hughes. Let's compare that to Spurs draft picks in the Duncan era:
Manu (2nd round, 57 overall) - HOF'er
Tony Parker (1st round, 28 overall) - Will get some HOF recognition
Luis Scola (2nd round, 55 overall) - Steady NBA pro
Tiago Splitter (1st round, 28 overall) - Starting quality NBA center
George Hill (1st round, 26 overall) - A player another NBA team ended up respecting enough to trade him for Kawhi Leonard, a top 5 player in the NBA now.

Best draft pick Cavs made after LeBron was arguably Daniel Gibson.

So what's the reason for Duncan to leave? The Spurs were the best organization in sports. Churned out quality draft picks and got HOF caliber players late first and second round. LeBron's franchise constantly botched draft picks.

Also, why the hell would Duncan try to get Popovich fired? There was never a reason to do that. Pop is arguably the greatest basketball coach of all time.

Let's compare LeBron's coaches:
Paul Silas (Career record: 387-488)
Mike Brown (Went 33-49 the year without either Kobe or LeBron)... Also, can't get back into a head coaching position
Erik Spoelstra (Won one playoff series without LeBron)
David Blatt (Can't get back into the NBA despite making the NBA finals)
Ty Lue (LeBron won a title with a rookie head coach taking over mid season)

Tim Duncan didn't have to recruit stars because he already had Tony Parker and Manu and Kawhi the last couple years. The Spurs gave Duncan no reason to ever leave. The Cavs gave LeBron plenty of reasons to leave.

And the loyalty thing interests me. Did the Cavs show LeBron loyalty by continuing to mess up the draft? Where's the Cavs loyalty in not drafting Luke Jackson #10 overall? Why is it only a one way street?

There's one thing I agree with you. I wish LeBron's personality was more like Duncan. There are many factors that almost doesn't allow LeBron to do so, but LeBron antics gets annoying and I'm his biggest supporter. I wish all my superstars acted like Duncan. But the two are not comparable. Duncan was fortunate... If he ended up going to the Celtics or the Grizzles, who knows what happens. Duncan's career was handed to him a lot more than LeBron. Duncan flourished and took advantage of it. But it's really difficult to compare like that. Lot of nuance involved here.

 

[TPFKAPFS]

Wow! SJung has finally posted something that I can agree with wholeheartedly! Well said, Sir! (only quibble is I think Parker is a lock for the HOF)

Tim Duncan is that rare combination of a great athlete; a great human being; and lucky SOB!

 

[dadika13]

The NBA is a business. Owners are loyal to one thing...money. Why should players be loyal?

 

[TPFKAPFS]

Loyality is NOT Reality!

 

[Crimson Ghost]

Ask Dwayne Wade about loyalty. It's not always a two-way street.

CC

Wade made 20 mil last year. He wanted 2 years 50 mil and the Heat offered 2 years 40 mil. They tried to trade McRoberts to get to what Wade wanted but they would have had to give up more picks or players to get any team to take him. Chicago gave him 2 years 47 mil.
Hate to say it but Wade is on the downside of 34. Heat made the right choice for the team in the end, it just didn't look good from a PR stand point.

 

[alabamaheel]

In some ways it retired yesterday...

Tom Duncan retired yesterday, he wasn't and never has really looked for the spot light, it seemed to always find him without his having to look for it. For all the well deserved things that have been said and will be said about Tim Duncan, I think in some ways he represents a bit of yesterday, a bit of yesterday that many of us wish still existed.

You see Tim Duncan was drafted by the Spurs, played all of his 19 seasons for the Spurs, and yesterday he retired from he Spurs without ever having worn any other teams NBA jersey. His career included national championship rings, many all star seasons, some yesterday were suggesting he may be the best power forward of all time and all of those things are wonderful but to me, 19yrs as a Spur. he showed what loyality is, he began as a Spur, his playing days ended as a Spur, and he will always be remembered as a Spur, maybe as THE Spur!

Lebron jumps from team to team and along the way trys to build a super team to play with, pretty much forces the GMs and owners to bow down to his wishes. Lebron doesn't like the coach, the coach gets fired, Tim Duncan didn't do that. Lebron feels his team does not have enough super stars to win titles then lebron insists the team bring in his list of star players, Tim Duncan didn't do that. Durant feels his team doesn't have enough star power to win and he "interviews" other teams and in the end skips out on the team that gave him his start in all of this, Tim Duncan didn't do that.

No, Tim Duncan stayed with the Spurs, he worked with his coach, he worked with the players his team drafted and brought in and he made his team better. Isn't it amazing by the way, the one team you look at in the NBA and the term team really fits, as opposed to most of the rest and especially the top other teams. IN Cleveland it is Lebron, at OKC it was Durant, the GSW it is Curry about to be joined by Durant. It is individuals more than team, it is team in San Antonio and that was Tim Duncan.

I LOVE LOYALITY to your team, I love college sports because it is about the team more than the individual. I do not like the one & done deal because to me it questions how much are you really loyal to your team. Tim Duncan is the poster for team loyality, take the definition out of the dictionary and just put his picture in to replace it. That is where the hate for lebron & Durant is coming from, a place where they seem dis-loyal to their teams. Jordan played his whole career, except at the very end when he was already done but not yet ready to stop playing, he was a Bull, will always be known as a Bull and a Tar Heel, loyality.

Duncan, like Jordan, did not skip from team to team, they build and worked to build their team better with the players they had, with the players they drafted, and with the players the organization brought in. And they cashed in the benefits that loyality brought them, more so than just money but in ever lasting respect of those that follow the game, a thing money can not buy.

Yeah, in some way that all retired yesterday, the virtues from days gone by seem further away this morning and replaced by something not nearly as enduring. Tick tock, time & change never stop, but sometimes you wish it could...

South I agree with most of this post, but I disagree with Labron as the "coach" example. My beef is Duncan started with one of the greatest if not the greatest coaches of all time. Labron? well enough said. Labron does have a lot of pull that he does abuse but it sure would have helped to start out on a bang up team and staff. I do think times have changed though. I'm with u

 

[TarHeelNation11]

My loyality is to the dictionary.

 

[Archer2]

This is, unfortunately, a different age where I is much more important than WE in almost every aspect of society. I fear that there will be no more Tim Duncans in our lifetimes, but there will be a new paradigm when peeps realize how little depth there is to a life lived entirely for self!

My beloved College BBall has resisted this change more than many institutions, but we are seeing it more and more lately. Transfers are at an all time high; kids are demanding "packages"; mercenary coaches are chasing the dollar instead of rings (looking at you slimey!); the NBA is using it as a de facto minor league; and there is even a movement to let agents pay peeps legally while in school!

I'm old so I love the "Old Days", but I will have to adjust to the new world I live in!

I agree with this, TPFKAPFS. But with these 2015 minimum salaries for the three major sports, it's obviously all about the money. Unfortunately, it was inevitable that the monetary factor would eventually control college sports as well.

NBA: $525,000
NFL: $435,000
MLB: $507,500

 

[TarHeelNation11]

My loyality is to the dictionary.

My post may seem flippant, but that's only because IMHO this thread is flippant. As a few folks pointed out, Duncan had everything in place he needed to stay with the same team his whole career. Now don't get me wrong, I love Tim Duncan and have enjoyed watching his career. He's a honorable pro and does things the right way in terms of his public comments to the media and stuff like that. But his loyalty to the Spurs had as much to do with the fortunate circumstances surrounding who drafted him as it did with Duncan's personality and morals.

Loyalty is a two-way street. All the time in pro sports, a player wants to remain at a club, but the GM doesn't see the player as a good fit and will trade or release said player. Or, because of salary cap demands in the modern era, teams will prioritize other players and, as a result, will not offer Player X the full amount he could make on the free agency market. Is Player X disloyal because he decides to seek his market value from a different team who offers a larger salary? IMO, no that's not lack of loyalty. These players -- especially in football -- have a very finite number of years to make money from their playing career. Loyalty to a team is nice, but what about loyalty to family? Don't you think players decide to take more money on a new team due partially to loyalty to their friends and family? (I.E. making more money so they can better setup their family for life).

Loyalty is a tough thing to have in modern day sports. Salary caps don't allow players to stay on the same team for their entire career, save for the very, very best players in the league.

 

[DSouthr]

Interesting comments, I value loyality more than many seem to. For the record, I do not consider loyality to be flippant, I actually feel it is a VERY important trait.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

Interesting comments, I value loyality more than many seem to. For the record, I do not consider loyality to be flippant, I actually feel it is a VERY important trait.

No, it's not that you value loyalty more than me or other posters, it's that you're trying to interject a hard-to-achieve concept of loyalty into a situation where it's very difficult to achieve: pro sports. To be blunt, loyalty is not possible in pro sports, from either the owner or the players. Salary caps prevent it.

Also, you're spelling loyalty wrong.

 

[Tom79]

Loyalty to a franchise many years ago was considered an important trait.
It just happens it isn't considered, IMO, in the same manner in the modern era.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

Loyalty to a franchise many years ago was considered an important trait.
It just happens it isn't considered, IMO, in the same manner in the modern era.

Y'all aren't listening. Players CAN'T be loyal anymore unless they're one of the best players in the league. Pro leagues nowadays are financially structured in such a way that constant trades and cuts and releases are the new norm.

 

[DaSheed]

Duncan was also loyal to Wake Forest. Played all 4 years when he could have easily jumped to the NBA. Duncan and Childress were just an incredible force in that 1995 ACC Tournament.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

Duncan was also loyal to Wake Forest. Played all 4 years when he could have easily jumped to the NBA. Duncan and Childress were just an incredible force in that 1995 ACC Tournament.

So based on that logic, do you consider Gio Bernard, Harrison Barnes, Michael Jordan, James Worthy, Sean May, Raymond Felton, Wayne Ellington as disloyal to UNC?

 

[imajericho]

In some ways it retired yesterday...

Tom Duncan retired yesterday, he wasn't and never has really looked for the spot light, it seemed to always find him without his having to look for it. For all the well deserved things that have been said and will be said about Tim Duncan, I think in some ways he represents a bit of yesterday, a bit of yesterday that many of us wish still existed.

You see Tim Duncan was drafted by the Spurs, played all of his 19 seasons for the Spurs, and yesterday he retired from he Spurs without ever having worn any other teams NBA jersey. His career included national championship rings, many all star seasons, some yesterday were suggesting he may be the best power forward of all time and all of those things are wonderful but to me, 19yrs as a Spur. he showed what loyality is, he began as a Spur, his playing days ended as a Spur, and he will always be remembered as a Spur, maybe as THE Spur!

Lebron jumps from team to team and along the way trys to build a super team to play with, pretty much forces the GMs and owners to bow down to his wishes. Lebron doesn't like the coach, the coach gets fired, Tim Duncan didn't do that. Lebron feels his team does not have enough super stars to win titles then lebron insists the team bring in his list of star players, Tim Duncan didn't do that. Durant feels his team doesn't have enough star power to win and he "interviews" other teams and in the end skips out on the team that gave him his start in all of this, Tim Duncan didn't do that.

No, Tim Duncan stayed with the Spurs, he worked with his coach, he worked with the players his team drafted and brought in and he made his team better. Isn't it amazing by the way, the one team you look at in the NBA and the term team really fits, as opposed to most of the rest and especially the top other teams. IN Cleveland it is Lebron, at OKC it was Durant, the GSW it is Curry about to be joined by Durant. It is individuals more than team, it is team in San Antonio and that was Tim Duncan.

I LOVE LOYALITY to your team, I love college sports because it is about the team more than the individual. I do not like the one & done deal because to me it questions how much are you really loyal to your team. Tim Duncan is the poster for team loyality, take the definition out of the dictionary and just put his picture in to replace it. That is where the hate for lebron & Durant is coming from, a place where they seem dis-loyal to their teams. Jordan played his whole career, except at the very end when he was already done but not yet ready to stop playing, he was a Bull, will always be known as a Bull and a Tar Heel, loyality.

Duncan, like Jordan, did not skip from team to team, they build and worked to build their team better with the players they had, with the players they drafted, and with the players the organization brought in. And they cashed in the benefits that loyality brought them, more so than just money but in ever lasting respect of those that follow the game, a thing money can not buy.

Yeah, in some way that all retired yesterday, the virtues from days gone by seem further away this morning and replaced by something not nearly as enduring. Tick tock, time & change never stop, but sometimes you wish it could...

First of all, Lebron left one time and because he couldn't get a supporting team around him.

Duncan has always had a top notch supporting cast from his rookie year all the way to the end. If he didn't, it is likely he would have very well left. He didn't need to.

 

[DSouthr]

No, it's not that you value loyalty more than me or other posters, it's that you're trying to interject a hard-to-achieve concept of loyalty into a situation where it's very difficult to achieve: pro sports. To be blunt, loyalty is not possible in pro sports, from either the owner or the players. Salary caps prevent it.

Also, you're spelling loyalty wrong.

OK, so I miss-spell it but at least I value it, in ALL things. To be just as blunt, loyalty is possible in anything, but only if it is treasured as a virtue...

 

[DSouthr]

So based on that logic, do you consider Gio Bernard, Harrison Barnes, Michael Jordan, James Worthy, Sean May, Raymond Felton, Wayne Ellington as disloyal to UNC?

I didn't realize any of those guys played college ball for any other program? Know what happens when ya ask a dumb question, you get an answer like this one.

 

[trestyles]

The NBA is a business. Owners are loyal to one thing...money. Why should players be loyal?

EXACTLY....Players get a bad rep but some owners do not help.

 

[TarHeelNation11]

I didn't realize any of those guys played college ball for any other program? Know what happens when ya ask a dumb question, you get an answer like this one.

That wasn't the point of my question. My point was fairly obvious.

OK, so I miss-spell it but at least I value it, in ALL things. To be just as blunt, loyalty is possible in anything, but only if it is treasured as a virtue...

IMO, you're looking at this with a bunch of naivety. Pro sports is a business. Let me ask you this: what if you owned and operated a small manufacturing business and your company had the potential to make a healthy profit, but instead your business routinely made a meager profit each quarter because of one specific, under-qualified employee. Would you remain loyal to that employee, or would you look for a better qualified employee to replace him? GMs of pro sports teams do this all the time. It's not lack of loyalty, it's just business and competitiveness.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

First of all, Lebron left one time and because he couldn't get a supporting team around him.

He left because he wanted to go play with his boys and learn how to win a title - regardless, he didn't have the loyalty to Cleveland until he had gotten what he wanted for himself first. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with putting yourself first, but it's as simple as that.

 

[ChiShankCity]

I didn't realize any of those guys played college ball for any other program? Know what happens when ya ask a dumb question, you get an answer like this one.

I'm not taking anything away from Duncan... But it was easier for him to be loyal to one organization than LeBron. Maybe Duncan is as loyal as he was in San Antonio if he had to play for a failing organization like the Cavs or Grizzlies, but in the history of the NBA, players are typically loyal to great organizations.

David Robinson, Kobe, Magic, Bird, MJ... Those guys made their organizations great but the organizations supported them.

You don't hear of a loyal guy for: Grizzlies, Cavs, Bucks, Nets these days. Why? They're usually train-wrecks that don't deserve loyalty... And especially loyalty from a transcendent superstar.

 

[Sk1310]

He left because he wanted to go play with his boys and learn how to win a title - regardless, he didn't have the loyalty to Cleveland until he had gotten what he wanted for himself first. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with putting yourself first, but it's as simple as that.

Not to mention he forced the gms hand of trading for mediocre talent that took up a lot of the salary cap. Larry Hughes, over the hill Shaq and to some extent Jamison. They could have saved that money and tried to get people through free agency, but LeBron wanted immediate help and wanted those trades.

 

[yrusonvus]

No dog in this fight, but how crazy is it that Duncan played 19 seasons in the league under one coach. I seriously doubt that we ever see that again.

 

[imajericho]

People in this topic are crazy if they think Lebron ever leaves if winning championships in Cleveland. And, he was close enough to winning them with some of the worst supporting casts in the nba.

 

[DSouthr]

That wasn't the point of my question. My point was fairly obvious.


IMO, you're looking at this with a bunch of naivety. Pro sports is a business. Let me ask you this: what if you owned and operated a small manufacturing business and your company had the potential to make a healthy profit, but instead your business routinely made a meager profit each quarter because of one specific, under-qualified employee. Would you remain loyal to that employee, or would you look for a better qualified employee to replace him? GMs of pro sports teams do this all the time. It's not lack of loyalty, it's just business and competitiveness.

Let me ask you, if that employee you refer to has been with your company for 20+ years and was a part of the reason your company became successful but has slowed down in his older years, do you fire him for being less productive than the 25yr old kid you just hired? The answer to that speaks to your core values.

Now great, ya tell me the NBA is big time business and impossible to be loyal to a big business. But ya take a funny twist on it, you are trying to sell me that the NBA makes smart business decisions? Now this is the same business that had to pass a rule to prevent themselves from drafting kids right out of high school, rather than just not drafting them, they had to pass a rule to stop it? This is the same business that was built by usage of a TOTALLY FREE development league other wise known as the NCAA and decided to spend millions to establish a very costly NBADL?

And the impossibility of loyalty in the NBA, the Lakers were loyal to Kobe were they not, well past his prime and yet they pay him a huge final contract knowing he was not at that value any longer. Duncan spent his entire 19yrs as a Spur and yes, it may have been easy because the team strongly supported Duncan but that was easier for them to do by Duncan being loyal to them. Other players gravitated to the Spurs because the star was loyal to the team, to that city, and to those fans. That core group of players came AFTER Duncan was already there, clearly Duncan wanted to play with them but they wanted to play with Duncan as well. They built a chemistry of a band of brothers and that chemistry is what propelled them to the success they had and made it easy for the organization to remain loyal to them. That core group of Spurs achieved much more together and loyal to each other and the team and those fans than they ever would have as individuals that looked to skip here and there as short term mercenaries.

 

[DSouthr]

I'm not taking anything away from Duncan... But it was easier for him to be loyal to one organization than LeBron. Maybe Duncan is as loyal as he was in San Antonio if he had to play for a failing organization like the Cavs or Grizzlies, but in the history of the NBA, players are typically loyal to great organizations.

David Robinson, Kobe, Magic, Bird, MJ... Those guys made their organizations great but the organizations supported them.

You don't hear of a loyal guy for: Grizzlies, Cavs, Bucks, Nets these days. Why? They're usually train-wrecks that don't deserve loyalty... And especially loyalty from a transcendent superstar.

"David Robinson, Kobe, Magic, Bird, MJ... Those guys made their organizations great but the organizations supported them."

^ Those players were loyal to those organizations, made it easier for the organizations to be loyal to those players.

 

[tarheel0910]

the Lakers were loyal to Kobe were they not, well past his prime and yet they pay him a huge final contract knowing he was not at that value any longer.

That would depend on how you are defining value. If you are saying that his play didn’t justify that amount then I agree 100% with you. If you factor in off the court value, then I think he was probably worth it. For the last few years I would say most Laker fans were going to the game to see Kobe (when he was healthy), they didn’t go to see the Lakers. I think that was very true this year since it was his last year. They were also still buying a decent amount of Kobe merchandise as well. He helped them remain relevant off the court. I think that factored into the organization’s decision.

 

[CanuckChuck]

And the impossibility of loyalty in the NBA, the Lakers were loyal to Kobe were they not, well past his prime and yet they pay him a huge final contract knowing he was not at that value any longer. Duncan spent his entire 19yrs as a Spur and yes, it may have been easy because the team strongly supported Duncan but that was easier for them to do by Duncan being loyal to them. Other players gravitated to the Spurs because the star was loyal to the team, to that city, and to those fans. That core group of players came AFTER Duncan was already there, clearly Duncan wanted to play with them but they wanted to play with Duncan as well. They built a chemistry of a band of brothers and that chemistry is what propelled them to the success they had and made it easy for the organization to remain loyal to them. That core group of Spurs achieved much more together and loyal to each other and the team and those fans than they ever would have as individuals that looked to skip here and there as short term mercenaries.

Not impossible but rare. I'll mention Wade again but we had the same situation in hockey with Daniel Alfredsson a couple years ago. Lifetime and greatest Senator ever, when his last contract was negotiated the team asked Alfie if they could tack on an extra year on the cheap for salary cap reasons. He agreed with the understanding that if he still wanted to play after it expired that the team would "take care of him" in his next contract. So after his contract expires he wants to play another year and the team offers something like 2 mill. Fair value for a player at his age and skill but that's not what they agreed upon. Detroit offers 4 mill and he's gone. Sens owner says he would have paid him 4 but he showed his true colors with the first offer and the damage was done. Like I said earlier, it's a two way street.

Plus, look at Parker or Ginobili, also life long Spurs (so far). Add in Robinson and it's pretty apparent that the Spurs are not the norm when it comes to NBA (or pro sports) organizations.

CC

 

[TarHeelNation11]

Let me ask you, if that employee you refer to has been with your company for 20+ years and was a part of the reason your company became successful but has slowed down in his older years, do you fire him for being less productive than the 25yr old kid you just hired? The answer to that speaks to your core values.

Personally, I would think longggg and hard about potentially replacing that guy. Or at least, I'd approach him about perhaps taking a pay cut so that I could afford to extend an offer to the young guy. Business is business. Show me a business owner with an inability to fire an ineffective employee just because they 'like them,' and I'll show you a business that is most likely not operating at its full potential.

Now great, ya tell me the NBA is big time business and impossible to be loyal to a big business. But ya take a funny twist on it, you are trying to sell me that the NBA makes smart business decisions?

Well, let's see....

Now this is the same business that had to pass a rule to prevent themselves from drafting kids right out of high school, rather than just not drafting them, they had to pass a rule to stop it? This is the same business that was built by usage of a TOTALLY FREE development league other wise known as the NCAA and decided to spend millions to establish a very costly NBADL?

Utilizing a free scouting system and then pouring that money into another developmental league, so now they have two avenues to scout/develop players for the price of one? Seems like really good business. Additionally, they put in a regulation to ensure their CEOs (GMs) couldn't make high-risk, high-reward employments that were routinely not working out? Seems like another solid business move to me.

And the impossibility of loyalty in the NBA, the Lakers were loyal to Kobe were they not, well past his prime and yet they pay him a huge final contract knowing he was not at that value any longer.

Yes, the Lakers did do that and it proved to be an extremely dumb business decision from an on-court standpoint (i.e. winning), just like people knew it would be when they proposed that contract to Kobe. Paying someone for their past success when their current skill cannot match their past skill is the epitome of dumb business. Because of that massive "swan song" deal to Kobe, the Lakers perennially could not afford to sign big name guys to put around Kobe the past 4-5 seasons. So because of that deal and your precious "loyalty" to Kobe, the Lakers steadily dropped from one of the top 2 teams in the Western Conference to one of the very worst teams in the NBA, and now they're staring at a complete rebuild.

Loyalty sounds good on paper. It doesn't work in reality. You know who people should be loyal to? Their wife, their dog, their kids, and their church.

 

[UNC71-00]

If you own a small business and one long term employee is dragging down performance you have to make a choice.

Are you loyal to your family and other employees?

Or

Are you loyal to that employee?

Obviously, the best case scenario is to put that long term employee in a position where he can perform to standards, but if not, then what?

 

[TPFKAPFS]

This topic is great one for the off-season to me and it is relevant to our world outside of sports!

I wish I could turn back time to the good old days, but they are dying out in the NBA with the passing of the Old Guard owners like Buss! The Spurs are an anomaly and they had a once in a lifetime player and coach with the same old school values as the ownership. To this core, family and business were parallel driving forces!

I also think it is difficult to reconcile the fact that team sports, while they are businesses, have aspects of family, camaraderie, and togetherness that are not required to the same level in other types of businesses. Unity is required for almost any business, but we feel differently about our teammates than we do about coworkers!

Loyalty IS a virtue this world sorely needs, but extreme amounts of money have made it more and more rare.

What I don't like is if we place blame on any individuals when it is the system that drives these behaviors.

 

[carolinablue34]

OK, so I miss-spell it but at least I value it, in ALL things. To be just as blunt, loyalty is possible in anything, but only if it is treasured as a virtue...

Why on earth did you think there was an 'i' in it? Lmao

I think you're just a tad naive about the concept of loyalty within the sports world. It's a business first and foremost.