I would be curious if they meant a not full super-max at the same value as a normal max for 5 years or if they they meant a regular max, so just 4 years.
Its the $45-50 million when he is 32 and 33 years old which is the issue. Do you even read my posts? I'm fine paying Rudy $38 for 2 years. It's the 3 additional years that will cripple us financially.So at 30M a year you are good but 38M is too much and would cripple the franchise and you’d rather have him walk?
Donovan is 24 and will be going into his prime throughout this deal. He's also a cash cow for marketing off the court.Bro, we just signed Don to a 33M-38M deal with a player option, lol. We pretty obviously give out bad contracts if we're afraid to lose somebody.
I agree.I fear that for Rudy those negotiations are not about the money but giving him appreciation he thinks he deserves. His reaction to allstar snub was telling, he wants to be recognised and I am afraid it may be more important for him that the financial ability of the franchise to build the team. And if he doesnt see himself getting along with Donovan not getting the supermax may be a good pretext to leave without making a big drama about it.
I read your posts but there is inconsistent logic which is why I’m having a hard time understanding.Its the $45-50 million when he is 32 and 33 years old which is the issue. Do you even read my posts? I'm fine paying Rudy $38 for 2 years. It's the 3 additional years that will cripple us financially.
Rudy Gobert is not a supermax player.
Sent from my SM-G970U using JazzFanz mobile app
Don is very marketable... but the biggest cash cow always has and will be winning. Losing Rudy would have a huge effect on that.Donovan is 24 and will be going into his prime throughout this deal. He's also a cash cow for marketing off the court.
Rudy wants more money than Don, doesn't create the financial revenue off the court, and will be past his prime for a majority of the deal.
Sent from my SM-G970U using JazzFanz mobile app