Imagine you work for a company in Phoenix, Arizona. You step into your boss's office to discuss your future with the company one afternoon. You've been a good employee, with no history of poor performance to speak of. As you sit down with your boss, he/she says to you that they are going to send you to one of their regional offices in Milwaukee, a sort of promotion, if you will. You inquire why they are doing this, and the reason given is that, quite simply put, you deserve more money and this division simply doesn't have the means to pay you that next year when you are due for a raise.
Sounds fair enough, right?
Now, imagine the following conversation with your boss:
(You) "Thank you for looking out for me financially, but I'd much rather you send me to the regional office in San Diego instead."
(Boss) "Well, there just aren't any openings in the regional office in San Diego at this time."
(You) "I really don't want to work in Milwaukee. I'd much rather be in San Diego."
(Boss) "I'm sorry, that just isn't possible right now. We can wait until next year to see if something opens, but we just simply won't be able to pay you any more than we are right now."
(You) "I'll tell you what. Work on getting me to San Diego. In the mean time, I don't think it's important for me to be here for the next couple of weeks, at least until you find something out. If you don't find anything out in the by the time our busy time starts, I'll come in and work, but I won't give it 100%, since I'm not really making the kind of money I should be. And actually, now that I think about it, I'd rather work in San Diego, regardless of the money. So, see what you can do and get back to me."
(Boss) "Well, why don't I put a call in and see what openings we have in the regional office in Kansas City. I know they would definitely be able to increase your pay accordingly. That would solve the issue, right?"
(You) "Ehh...not really. Like I said, I really don't want to be here anymore, and neither Milwaukee or Kansas City sound good either. The only place I'd like to work is San Diego. That being said, you've got to get me there by the end of March, otherwise, I'm going to quit and go find someplace else to work."
I think it would be safe to say that, in the real world, had that conversation taken place, it would've resulted in you, the employee, being terminated immediately.
More often than not, in the real world, we don't have the luxury of mandating where we work or how much we get paid. There are a certain few who are able to do that, but the majority of the world isn't given that chance.
So why is it that professional athletes are permitted to hold teams hostage in order to play where they want to play? And, actually, let's be honest about it. The word "play" is the operative word here. Their "play" is actually "work." It's their job.
When the NBA lockout was coming to an end, it appeared that some things may possibly change. There was some hope that players (employees) wouldn't be able to flock to certain destinations of their choosing, just because that's where they wanted to play (work), or who they wanted to play (work) with.
Given the events of this past week, it seems that nothing has changed. The irony of professional sports is that the games (baseball, basketball, football, etc.) became businesses. Sadly, those businesses have now become games. Free agency in sports changed the landscape forever, but it was a concept that was okay by many people. It gave the players an opportunity to finish out their contracts, thus earning the right to play (work) where they wanted to after that. Sad for some franchises who may lose that star player to more money in a bigger market, but great for the bigger markets.
Although all sports have the issue, there is no sport where the issue is as glaring as in the NBA. What is the issue? Rather than waiting for contracts to expire, teams are now forced to "play the game" and trade their stars a year or two before their contracts expire, in order to get some value for them.
When the NBA blocked the trade of Chris Paul from the New Orleans Hornets to the Los Angeles Lakers, sparks flew. Why was the trade blocked? Some said the 26 other owners not involved in the deal vetoed the deal, because it would've sent a "Top 5" talent in Paul to the already stocked Lakers team. Others implied that because the Hornets are actually owned by the NBA itself, that it appeared the league was forcing the move to make a league and fan favorite team better. Yet Commissioner David Stern said he blocked the deal because "the league would be better with Chris Paul on the Hornets."
Assuming the trade does not find a way to go through, and assuming the Hornets do not trade Paul during the season, how does this benefit New Orleans? Come the end of the season, if Paul hasn't been dealt, he will most certainly leave (probably to Los Angeles in free agency) leaving the Hornets with nothing. They will not be able to replace him in free agency because the league's stars don't want to play in New Orleans. If they did, Paul would stay.
Players should be treated like employees.
Employees are not and should not be able to make demands of their employers. You, as an employee, have the right to apply and interview for a job anywhere you would like. Once you are with that employer, you work. You can make the decision to leave and go someplace else if you choose to, but are not able to walk into your boss's office and tell him or her where you would like to work. If a transfer is feasible, then it can be accommodated. If it's not, you can quit or continue working. If you quit, the company will not pay you while you look for another job.
Players are not and should not be able to make demands of their teams. As a player, if you are fortunate enough to be drafted by a team, you are given employment without having to interview for it. You are playing a game in which you love, and given the opportunity to make a living doing it. When your contract is up, you can make the decision to leave and go someplace else if you choose to, but should not be able to walk into the team owner's office and tell him or her where you would like to work. If you no longer want to play for the team which drafted you, you have the option to quit. The only difference is, you signed a contract to play for a certain amount of time, and quitting would put you in breach of contract.
I have not heard it from any other professional league other than the NBA, but the idea of a "plantation mentality" of team owners "owning" players is absurd! Team owners own the team, not the players. As an owner, it is your responsibility to put a product out on the field/court that your fan base wants to see. If NBA players want to cry about being considered "slaves", then NBA fans should cry about being "hostages." Fans are the ones suffering, not the players.
Grow up!
Showing posts with label Los Angeles Lakers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Los Angeles Lakers. Show all posts
Sunday, December 11, 2011
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Love Shaq
There's not going to be too much overly special about this particular post. This is actually a post I never would've thought I would've written if you'd told me 10 years ago that I would be. On Wednesday, one of the greatest players to play the game of basketball decided to call it quits for a career. Shaquille O'Neal announced on Wednesday that, after a 19 year career, he has decided to retire from the NBA.
What made Shaq one of the greatest wasn't always about his talent, but what he brought to the game of basketball both on and off the court. Shaq was one of the most "real" stars of the game. What do I mean by that? Frankly, he let his personality shine through, and wasn't afraid to be who he was. He had other interests outside the game of basketball, and he would pursue those, but never at the expense of his team and teammates. In an era where it's far too common to read about athletes putting themselves in situations they shouldn't be in, Shaq was one that never did. He was flamboyant at times, yet still humble at times. He was the consummate teammate.
I'm not going to go through all of the Hall of Fame caliber numbers, but trust me, they're there. There's absolutely no question that he is one of the greatest big men to ever play the game. In fact, when he broke into the league 19 years ago, he revolutionized the way the game was played. He was nearly unguardable at times, and even spawned a new style of late-game defensive strategy known as the "Hack-A-Shaq." He brought Orlando to an NBA Finals, along with the Los Angeles Lakers and Miami Heat, winning with both the Lakers and Heat. Later in his career, he hung on because he wanted to play the game, because it was a game that had given him almost everything he had...which was fitting, because he did the same. Sure, there were times where he was injured and didn't practice much because of bad feet or leg problems, but his heart was always there.
As a personality, there was almost no one more entertaining in the game. He may have come across as bland at times, but what came out of his mouth was usually great for conversation, and many times, great for a laugh. Kobe Bryant aside, his teammates loved him, and, if he were honest with himself, Kobe did as well. Kobe has proven later in his career that he is "the man", just as Shaq used to be. But without Shaq, Kobe's early success would've more than likely come much later in his career. Whether he wants to admit it or not, Shaq helped Kobe learn how to win, and learn how to lead a team. Putting a team on his shoulders was a Shaquille O'Neal calling card, and that's now been passed on to Kobe.
Over the last two or three seasons, Shaq wasn't close to the player he used to be, but that didn't stop him from trying. I always hated when my team would run up against him, but have learned to respect the talent and overall person that is Shaquille O'Neal. Thanks for the great career!
What made Shaq one of the greatest wasn't always about his talent, but what he brought to the game of basketball both on and off the court. Shaq was one of the most "real" stars of the game. What do I mean by that? Frankly, he let his personality shine through, and wasn't afraid to be who he was. He had other interests outside the game of basketball, and he would pursue those, but never at the expense of his team and teammates. In an era where it's far too common to read about athletes putting themselves in situations they shouldn't be in, Shaq was one that never did. He was flamboyant at times, yet still humble at times. He was the consummate teammate.
I'm not going to go through all of the Hall of Fame caliber numbers, but trust me, they're there. There's absolutely no question that he is one of the greatest big men to ever play the game. In fact, when he broke into the league 19 years ago, he revolutionized the way the game was played. He was nearly unguardable at times, and even spawned a new style of late-game defensive strategy known as the "Hack-A-Shaq." He brought Orlando to an NBA Finals, along with the Los Angeles Lakers and Miami Heat, winning with both the Lakers and Heat. Later in his career, he hung on because he wanted to play the game, because it was a game that had given him almost everything he had...which was fitting, because he did the same. Sure, there were times where he was injured and didn't practice much because of bad feet or leg problems, but his heart was always there.
As a personality, there was almost no one more entertaining in the game. He may have come across as bland at times, but what came out of his mouth was usually great for conversation, and many times, great for a laugh. Kobe Bryant aside, his teammates loved him, and, if he were honest with himself, Kobe did as well. Kobe has proven later in his career that he is "the man", just as Shaq used to be. But without Shaq, Kobe's early success would've more than likely come much later in his career. Whether he wants to admit it or not, Shaq helped Kobe learn how to win, and learn how to lead a team. Putting a team on his shoulders was a Shaquille O'Neal calling card, and that's now been passed on to Kobe.
Over the last two or three seasons, Shaq wasn't close to the player he used to be, but that didn't stop him from trying. I always hated when my team would run up against him, but have learned to respect the talent and overall person that is Shaquille O'Neal. Thanks for the great career!
Thursday, May 19, 2011
Kareem Can't Be Serious
There are some stories you hear that make you just say..."Really?"
How full of one's self would one need to be to believe that the organization you worked for "owed" you something after your career with them was finished? That's the question I'm asking of Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, the former Los Angeles Laker great, and NBA's all-time leading scorer. Abdul-Jabbar very publicly criticized his former team/employer for...get this...not putting up a statue of him outside the home of the Lakers, the Staples Center in Los Angeles. Yup...you read that right.
The Staples Center has five statues outside: Jerry West, Magic Johnson, Wayne Gretzky, Chick Hearn, and Oscar De La Hoya. Although he had an incredible career, and finished as the leading scorer in NBA history, what entitles anyone to state that they deserve anything like that? Hank Aaron was one of the greatest baseball players of all time, and until a few years ago, was baseball's all-time home run king. I've never heard of Hank Aaron demanding anything similar to what Kareem is asking for. I've also never heard the great Mario Lemiuex telling the Pittsburgh Penguins that he deserves a shrine in front of the Consol Energy Center in Pittsburgh.
What makes great players great is the fact that many of them don't act the part. This week, baseball lost one of it's greatest players in Harmon Killebrew. What made Harmon a great player, to me, was that he never wanted to talk about Harmon. He only wanted to talk about you, or the team. Those are the types of players that deserve statues.
When you look at Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, there is no doubt that, had he kept his mouth shut, the Lakers would've eventually erected a statue for him. It's hard not to do something to immortalize the greatest scorer in the game's history. For them to put one up now, it would almost appear that they would be doing it to satisfy him, as opposed to honoring him. Is that really what he's looking for? Apparently, it is. As long as there's a statue of him, he'll be happy. As far as I'm concerned though, Kareem has lost a lot of respect in my book.
How full of one's self would one need to be to believe that the organization you worked for "owed" you something after your career with them was finished? That's the question I'm asking of Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, the former Los Angeles Laker great, and NBA's all-time leading scorer. Abdul-Jabbar very publicly criticized his former team/employer for...get this...not putting up a statue of him outside the home of the Lakers, the Staples Center in Los Angeles. Yup...you read that right.
The Staples Center has five statues outside: Jerry West, Magic Johnson, Wayne Gretzky, Chick Hearn, and Oscar De La Hoya. Although he had an incredible career, and finished as the leading scorer in NBA history, what entitles anyone to state that they deserve anything like that? Hank Aaron was one of the greatest baseball players of all time, and until a few years ago, was baseball's all-time home run king. I've never heard of Hank Aaron demanding anything similar to what Kareem is asking for. I've also never heard the great Mario Lemiuex telling the Pittsburgh Penguins that he deserves a shrine in front of the Consol Energy Center in Pittsburgh.
What makes great players great is the fact that many of them don't act the part. This week, baseball lost one of it's greatest players in Harmon Killebrew. What made Harmon a great player, to me, was that he never wanted to talk about Harmon. He only wanted to talk about you, or the team. Those are the types of players that deserve statues.
When you look at Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, there is no doubt that, had he kept his mouth shut, the Lakers would've eventually erected a statue for him. It's hard not to do something to immortalize the greatest scorer in the game's history. For them to put one up now, it would almost appear that they would be doing it to satisfy him, as opposed to honoring him. Is that really what he's looking for? Apparently, it is. As long as there's a statue of him, he'll be happy. As far as I'm concerned though, Kareem has lost a lot of respect in my book.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)