Teams being loyal to the players…

In what cases have the teams sacrificed to help out their players without expecting anything in return? Or should I say close to nothing in return since the franchise is a business entity in the end. I’ve seen some players taking tremendous sacrifice to be with the team they prefer to play for. Has vice-versa ever happened?

If so, in which case/team has been the one that suits the word, “loyal”?

Personal thoughts, I think the Knicks, Rockets and the Grizzlies don’t fit into such a category, due to handlings of Alan Houston, McGrady, and Iverson.

What are your thoughts on this, and which city/case/team do you think(or not) has been loyal to the particular player(s) much enough to be mentioned?

The Jazz released Derek Fisher without any compensation, allowing him to return to the Lakers and arrange treatment for his daughter's eye cancer that was available to them in Los Angeles. That was a pretty selfless move on their part.

A whole exception was created so that Larry Bird could remain a Celtic for life. True, the Celtics benefited from that, but it was still a display of loyalty that also allowed them to compensate him handsomely (for the time). Likewise, Michael Jordan received some huge paydays on one year contracts in 1997 and 1998, though the Bulls didn't do too badly out of the arrangement.

Personal thoughts, I think the Knicks, Rockets and the Grizzlies don’t fit into such a category, due to handlings of Alan Houston, McGrady, and Iverson

What the hell, are you smoking pot or day dreaming about your man crush Wade again?

Iverson and the Grizzlies can't even be considered with that loyalty crap. He was a FA hire and didn't even spend one season with the team. It's not like Iverson spent his previous years with the Grizz and that situation happened. Neither Iverson or the team had an obligation to be 'loyal'.

McGrady? Remember where he decided to have surgery mid-season without telling the team? While the Rockets were just waiting for him to heal and be healthy they suddenly find out through the media that McGrady will have surgery? Yeah, real 'loyal' move by T-Mac. He lost the Rockets loyalty when he lost the team's respect. He did it all by himself.

Alan fucking Houston??? I'm so amazed by your thought process ZanShadow but I'm still refraining myself to call you those words in Jackal's sig. What makes you think the Knicks don't fit into your insane loyalty category regarding Allan Houston? Here's a Wikipedia link I Googled, I just fucking hope you can read it. I will even make it more colorful so you'll be interested in reading it.

Allan Houston Rule

In 2005, the NBA agreed on a new collective bargaining agreement (CBA). The most striking innovation granted NBA teams a one-time option to release a player without his contract counting against the luxury tax threshold regardless of how long or how rich the contract was. The provision did not negate the player's contract, a team's obligation to pay the player, or the impact on the salary cap; it merely removed the player's salary when computing the luxury tax. This rule benefited teams that were in danger of facing the "luxury axe" penalty, a tax paid on salaries spent above a certain threshold of total team salary. The correct term is "amnesty clause," but because the team with the worst problems was the Knicks, and their worst financial liability was Houston, it was quickly dubbed the "Allan Houston Rule." Ironically, the Knicks chose not to use the exception for Houston, but for forward Jerome Williams instead, since the Knicks correctly predicted Houston would retire due to lingering injuries over his last two seasons. As a result, Houston's contract counted a total of $40 million against the luxury tax threshold over last two years of the contract even though he did not participate in any games for the Knicks.

Allan Houston is even working with the Knicks today and is even a candidate for the GM job.

My personal thought about this is you're too busy masturbating to Wade's loyalty to the team that you decided to make a topic about 'loyalty' without even doing basic research that's easily accessible by Google or Wiki that you spew out crap statements regarding the situation of players you mentioned.



Or you can just ignore my entire post if I misconstrued the structure of your post.

I don't know if Mark Cuban has sacrificed anything to make Dirk stay in Mavs but I am pretty sure that Dirk cut a large amount (16m?) of money in his resigning to make sure Cuban can sign or trade another player and he agrees to a no-trade clause too.

Mark Cuban? He let go of Michael Finley (even though he was already past his prime) who led the resurgence of the Mavs (along with Dirk and Nash) and he also didn't offer max money to Nash that's why he ended up with the Suns. Good businessman, yes. I don't know about loyal.

It would have been really helpful had the OP included some examples of teams that were loyal to players so we'd just what the fuck he meant.

FFS, will you fucking respond to my comments once without having to include Wade and the sexual shits in it, you perverted sick fuck. Iverson apparently never killed his ego and was told to have a starter or major role on the team. No matter what shits went on behind the closed curtain, Grizzlies's owner Mike Heisley is not the type who'd do anything right for his franchise nor fans nor players. He fucked up Iverson whether it was partially his own fault or not. As for T-Mac, things could have been a lot smoother between both parties. The Rockets definitely showed they weren't the best at handling the situation with the best class. Last but not least, Houston in NYK at one point was blamed heavily for ruining the franchise with his injury/heavy-salary, by Isiah and cos if I remember correctly. Just was referring to it. Now can we please have a normal discussion. If I am wrong, correct me in the manner the Boston would have with Larry.

And Andrew, how could I forget that. for jAzz.

Iverson apparently never killed his ego and was told to have a starter or major role on the team. No matter what shits went on behind the closed curtain, Grizzlies's owner Mike Heisley is not the type who'd do anything right for his franchise nor fans nor players. He fucked up Iverson whether it was partially his own fault or not.

That's how you base your personal opinion on? Unsubstantiated hunches and guesses? Unless I'm mistaken and you're close with Heisley and know him as a person and not a businessman/owner.
Apparently he did 'right' with Rudy Gay giving him that big contract, loyal enough for you? Even though most people think it was a mistake giving him too much.

As for T-Mac, things could have been a lot smoother between both parties. The Rockets definitely showed they weren't the best at handling the situation with the best class.

T-Mac certainly didn't help himself in that situation. If you were the team owner, would you show 'loyalty' to a player who treats you/the team like nothing? The team may have handled it badly but it's not like T-Mac helped his own cause.

Houston in NYK at one point was blamed heavily for ruining the franchise with his injury/heavy-salary, by Isiah and cos if I remember correctly.

Are you stupid or are you allergic to reading?

The correct term is "amnesty clause," but because the team with the worst problems was the Knicks, and their worst financial liability was Houston, it was quickly dubbed the "Allan Houston Rule." Ironically, the Knicks chose not to use the exception for Houston, but for forward Jerome Williams instead

So what the fuck if Isiah said what, bottom line is the team still stuck with him. It's no different of Wade being angry at management when the Heat were losing, except in the Knicks case it was the management that was spouting off. I'll repeat again if you forgot to read - bottom line is the Knicks still stuck with Houston.

Just was referring to it.

So did the two other cases (AI, T-Mac) that we're currently arguing about. Which I say you are wrong. Based on the vague definition of 'loyalty' you gave.

What is your definition of 'loyalty' anyway just to make your topic clear?
For me, loyalty is something that goes beyond the boundaries of business decisions.


I'm not going to take it easy on you either. You managed to last here in the forums for about 3 years, you're not a noob that suddenly decided to stop lurking. You had a decent functioning brain before and pretty much participated in numerous threads. Now that you regressed to an IQ nearing the border of Badger, I definitely will not take it easy on you.

shadowgrin, Wow I don't know you care about others here in NLSC

That's how you base your personal opinion on? Unsubstantiated hunches and guesses? Unless I'm mistaken and you're close with Heisley and know him as a person and not a businessman/owner.

It was a typical case of Iverson’s word vs franchise’s word. Whose side you believe, I don’t care, but I reckon it wasn’t all lies from Iverson as I also thought he was gonna be granted more role than what he’s got there. We’d be lying if we all thought he was gonna rot on the bench. Thus, imo, they didn't really honor what they promised in the first place nor intended to. Now, overpaying Gay was an only option. Nothing to do with loyalty, or doing the right thing, or even, with the point I was making on Heisley.

T-Mac certainly didn't help himself in that situation. If you were the team owner, would you show 'loyalty' to a player who treats you/the team like nothing? The team may have handled it badly but it's not like T-Mac helped his own cause.

There we go. The Rockets didn’t handle it too well, as you said. Wasn’t saying totally T-Mac’s was innocent but was using it as a case how they handled it badly. That also happen to fit your definition well. They didn’t go beyond the boundaries of business decisions.

As for Houston, the Knicks had nothing to lose as insurance covered the loss anyways. Nonetheless, I will give you that the team had stuck by him regardless of criticism he’s received.

shadowgrin, Wow I don't know you care about others here in NLSC

You seem to confuse bitching with caring.

ZanShadow, notice the smiley???

Don't mind it. Just had to add.

So you don't have any examples?

Show him a link to what an "Example" means. Maybe he'll understand. Though I highly doubt he'll even read it.

It was a typical case of Iverson’s word vs franchise’s word. Whose side you believe, I don’t care, but I reckon it wasn’t all lies from Iverson as I also thought he was gonna be granted more role than what he’s got there. We’d be lying if we all thought he was gonna rot on the bench. Thus, imo, they didn't really honor what they promised in the first place nor intended to. Now, overpaying Gay was an only option. Nothing to do with loyalty, or doing the right thing, or even, with the point I was making on Heisley.

You're confusing the Grizzlies 'lying' with the absence of 'loyalty', which is not related in this particular case. Iverson and the Grizzlies had nothing to be talked about in terms of 'loyalty'. The team may have 'lied' to Iverson but the team has no 'moral' obligation to be loyal to him, and vice-versa with Iverson.

It's not like Iverson spent his previous years with the Grizz and that situation happened. Neither Iverson nor the team had an obligation to be 'loyal'.

There we go. The Rockets didn’t handle it too well, as you said. Wasn’t saying totally T-Mac’s was innocent but was using it as a case how they handled it badly. That also happen to fit your definition well. They didn’t go beyond the boundaries of business decisions.

How can loyalty be applied in that case? Since T-Mac treated them like shite and the team handled it like shite. It's basically both parties treating each other shite, 'loyalty' goes out the window in that case. My main point was 'loyalty' went out the window when T-Mac acted like a bitch. What you are talking about isn't 'loyalty', it's proper PR. What has T-Mac done to even deserve the team's loyalty, if we ignore the way he treated the team at the end?


And you still haven't clearly defined your meaning of loyalty. No wonder you're confusing it with other things such as lying.

I don't know about teams but there are loyal coaches/executives. Riley was loyal to Mourning and now Wade. The Van Gundy's have been loyal to Patrick Ewing, both employing him after his career was over. Dumars "forgave" Ben Wallace and called him the instant his contract was bought out.

I'd also consider trading a player to a location he wants to go to, to be something "loyal" or even agreeing to a sign-and-trade. Despite Gilbert's bluster he still made the sign and trade instead of telling Miami and LeBron to "deal with it."

It was a typical case of Iverson’s word vs franchise’s word. Whose side you believe

The franchise at this fucking point. Iverson's only burned bridges with FOUR NBA teams directly in the last two years and the rest indirectly to the point nobody even wants to give him the MINIMUM just one year after he was named as an All-Star starter.

Now, overpaying Gay was an only option.

No, it wasn't, they could have just not paid out that stupid contract. They should have let the market work instead of flushing money down a hole.

As for Houston, the Knicks had nothing to lose as insurance covered the loss anyways.

You realize the Knicks paid for that no matter what, right?

The Jazz have also been pretty loyal to Jerry Sloan, to put it mildly. The Jazz had a couple of rough years following the Stockton-Malone era but they stuck by him and here he is about to begin his 23rd season as the team's head coach.

The Jazz have also been pretty loyal to Jerry Sloan, to put it mildly. The Jazz had a couple of rough years following the Stockton-Malone era but they stuck by him and here he is about to begin his 23rd season as the team's head coach.

Sometimes though i believe this team needs a serious refresh.

Along those same lines (Larry Miller and Sloan basically had an unofficial agreement that superseded the actual operation of the franchise) back in the late 1970s and early 1980s, Don Nelson didn't even have a contract with the Bucks, it was a handshake agreement with the owner for him to be GM and Head Coach. I call that pretty fucking loyal and really hard to ever top.

Was Don Nelson still sober then that an owner would trust Nelson like that?

Has Don Nelson ever been sober? He played in the late 60s, early 70s, spent his career in Boston and Milwaukee. Of course he wasn't sober.

You're confusing the Grizzlies 'lying' with the absence of 'loyalty', which is not related in this particular case. Iverson and the Grizzlies had nothing to be talked about in terms of 'loyalty'. The team may have 'lied' to Iverson but the team has no 'moral' obligation to be loyal to him, and vice-versa with Iverson.

Who are you to set any kind of standard and claim they had no obligation to be loyal anyways. They brought him in the first place on a false reason. That already is a disgrace. It may not be the total case of ‘loyalty’ but it goes to show how the team treats players they bring in and don’t like. If there was any decency I saw from that, I probably would have been led to believe that they’re the team that would offer loyalty to players.

My main point was 'loyalty' went out the window when T-Mac acted like a bitch. What you are talking about isn't 'loyalty', it's proper PR. What has T-Mac done to even deserve the team's loyalty, if we ignore the way he treated the team at the end?

What makes you so sure everything was 100% T-Mac’s fault anyways. If the management were respectful or loyal, it never would have gone to a point where he treated the team at the end and that was my point.

And you still haven't clearly defined your meaning of loyalty.

Your definition was pretty much what I had in mind. Didn’t feel the needs to add on it.

The franchise at this fucking point. Iverson's only burned bridges with FOUR NBA teams directly in the last two years and the rest indirectly to the point nobody even wants to give him the MINIMUM just one year after he was named as an All-Star starter.

Even if so, still doesn’t give Grizzlies a right to false guarantee something they weren’t gonna live up to. Unethical.

Bulls were loyal to Jay Williams after his legs fell off when he got in that motorcycle crash.

I suppose you could say the T'Wolves were loyal to KG by trading him to Boston. I know they were falling to pieces at the time, but a stupid owner could have sat on his superstar until the team totally went to hell.

Miami and Mourning is a good example, aside from the 2-3 year period when they let him leave for New Jersey.

The Fisher-Utah thing is loyal because of the timing of his daughter's problems. I always laugh when the Lakers go back to Utah and he gets booed like crazy; the fans didn't care that he signed with mediocre LA back when he left the team, but now that he's starting on the team that knocks them out of the playoffs every year they aren't so supportive.

The Rockets have stuck it out with Yao these past few years too. I know he's a great player, but when it's an inevitable event that he's going to get hurt somehow it has got to take a lot for the team to continue to feel comfortable building around him.

It may not be the total case of ‘loyalty’ but it goes to show how the team treats players they bring in and don’t like. If there was any decency I saw from that, I probably would have been led to believe that they’re the team that would offer loyalty to players.

Even if so, still doesn’t give Grizzlies a right to false guarantee something they weren’t gonna live up to. Unethical.

What made you jump to the conclusion that the team would offer loyalty to a FA they just signed who had no prior history with the team? It's like buying a hooker and you expect him to be faithful to you for the rest of your life.

Three games. That's how long AI wasn't a starter and the only games he played for the Grizz. As much as I like Iverson as you love Wade, AI was impatient. Three games and he already complained about a broken 'promise' to him by management?
For all we know there may be an instance prior to the season where the coach saw fit that AI would be more effective coming off the bench.
Or AI and the coach had a beef with each other (which I think was the reason, iirc). Management was forced to let one go. Who would it be, the FA they signed who had no prior history with the team or the coach who is with the team since they were still known as the Vancouver Grizzlies?
Management picked the coach. That's pretty loyal I would say.

If the management were respectful or loyal, it never would have gone to a point where he treated the team at the end and that was my point.

Say an instance where management treated T-Mac like crap prior to him getting surprise surgery.
None of us know the definite circumstances of the player-team relationship (unless you're a Rockets insider). If there were previous instances of disagreement, the team and T-Mac had the decency to keep it private and sort it out themselves. If that were the case, T-mac crossed the line by publicly dissing the team with his actions.

Sometimes though i believe this team needs a serious refresh.

They remain competitive though, so there's not much incentive. I think Sloan should be able to go out on his own terms.

But their just that.

Not possible aiming for something great though.