http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_702.shtml
Have any of you heard this? I can't find any more info on this other than the stuff at hoopsworld.
Have any of you heard this? I can't find any more info on this other than the stuff at hoopsworld.
if that its true the kings should make a sign and trade for another pg. 11 millon per year its more than enough for a player like bibby he is not worth the max.Originally posted by naesdj
http://www.hoopsworld.com/article_702.shtml
Have any of you heard this? I can't find any more info on this other than the stuff at hoopsworld.
David Falk can use th arguement to the Kings that Lafrentz isn't even worth 84 million.Originally posted by mindnsoul
Bibby isn't even worth $77mil. The hell is he thinking.
I'm not talking about the big-man thing. I'm talking about the contributions and skills the player's made to his team.Originally posted by bebop
Even though LaFrentz signed for $84 mil, it doesn't mean a thing, cuz big man always get more $$ than the guards. For example, do you know that Karl Malone makes almost $10 mil more PER SEASON than John Stockton?? Yes, all because Stockton is a guard.
I don't know what Petrie is thinking, but I know there is NO WAY I pay Bibby as much $$ as Kidd. Even though I really like Bibby.
Originally posted by CT10
I'm not talking about the big-man thing. I'm talking about the contributions and skills the player's made to his team.
Here's the arguement Faulk will use...
If Lafrentz is worth $84 mil, Bibby will be worth much more, simply because:
-It was Bibby who made clutch baskets for the Kings
-Bibby played a huge role, and was the main reason why the Lakers series went to 7 games.
-Lafrentz was a non-factor in the playoffs, and why should he get more money than Bibby?
-It was Lafrentz, who was afraid to shoot, only attempted 78 shots in the playoffs, while Bibby stepped it up, and attempted 257, making 114 of them.
-It was Bibby, who shot the better 3pt, and FT%, committed fewer fouls, scored more points, gotten more assists than Lafrentz.
-So why should Lafrentz get more money?
Once again, it's not about the big-man thing, it's about the contribution that the player has made to his team.
Yeah, I agree with you about Faulk. He'll invent Bibby virtues that even Mother Bibby couldn't dream of. He'll present stats and comparison that makes you go, "Whaaaooo!?" Faulk can look you straight in the eyes and say the movie 'Like Mike' is about a kid's dream to be 'Like Mike Bibby.'Originally posted by CT10
And Bibby's agent is David Faulk.
And I guarantee he'll use the Lafrentz arguement to get Bibby the money. If the Kings don't offer enough $, Faulk could always get Bibby to sign a one year contract, then next year he could become a Unrestricted FA, and could sign anywhere...a situation in which Bibby, and the Kings don't want to go.
Why wouldn't he? You act as if he hasn't done anything to deserve the money that he is going to get.... He is the team leader, and the Kings need him.Originally posted by hOnDo
I think that Bibby will sign a multi-year contract. The Maloofs will have no choice to offer him the big bucks. I just hope for the Kings's sake that he produces in games with that fat paycheck.
Originally posted by KC
Why wouldn't he? You act as if he hasn't done anything to deserve the money that he is going to get.... He is the team leader, and the Kings need him.
Averages? Blah....Originally posted by hOnDo
He only averaged 13-2-5! I dont think that just because he looked good in the playoffs that he deserves a $77 million dollar contract. I dont think that LaFrentz deserved one either, but thats a different story.
Yes, Bibby only averaged 14 PPG, 3 RPG, and 5 APG during the 2001-2002 season. But I think those stats are a little misleading. Here's why:Originally posted by hOnDo
He only averaged 13-2-5! I dont think that just because he looked good in the playoffs that he deserves a $77 million dollar contract. I dont think that LaFrentz deserved one either, but thats a different story.