Watch "ClutchPoints - "Dynasties are made off bad contracts...Because he signed a bad deal at the beginning, it created a back-end dynasty." Gilbert Arenas on how Steph Curry's early contracts shaped the Warriors' Championship teams 🗣️ (via @GilsArenaShow)" on Streamable.
I don’t think Steph thought that contract was a bad deal. Neither did the GM.
Gil means signing a cheaper contract to give the team financial capacity to be further strengthened. He’s wording it in a strange manner and then getting frustrated lol
It wasn’t considered a bad contract at the time either - he was seen as a major injury risk and also not a star (he wouldn’t make his first all-star team until 2013-14, the second season after signing it). People were discussing it in the same breath as the contract Ty Lawson got.
It just so happened that the contract coincided with him making the leap to star and then another leap to all-time great at the exact same time the team took a big jump overall which turned a good contract into a historically great one.
A Great contract for everyone (Fans, GMs, Owners) is a bad contract for a player( if we take out factors outside the court).
Yes Curry was okay with that considering his injuries but in a vacuum, any of us would put his money per stats/awards ratio and see it is among the lowest, that he was underpaid for these seasons and thus it was “bad” from a player’s perspective.
In a similar way, Brunson did take a paycut but but he frequently and openly jokes about where “his money” showing he did take a" bad contract" for the Good of the team.
My take too. Why is it a bad deal? A bad deal for Steph? The others are saying Steph still gets his money on the back end of it AND he gets to be part of a dynasty too. Why is that a bad deal for him?
Bad for the players agency and agents and free market contract negotiations for players as an abstract? Ok maybe in that context yes it’s a bad deal.
I don’t think Steph thought that contract was a bad deal. Neither did the GM.
Gil means signing a cheaper contract to give the team financial capacity to be further strengthened. He’s wording it in a strange manner and then getting frustrated lol
It wasn’t considered a bad contract at the time either - he was seen as a major injury risk and also not a star (he wouldn’t make his first all-star team until 2013-14, the second season after signing it). People were discussing it in the same breath as the contract Ty Lawson got.
It just so happened that the contract coincided with him making the leap to star and then another leap to all-time great at the exact same time the team took a big jump overall which turned a good contract into a historically great one.
He is saying it from a players perspective.
A Great contract for everyone (Fans, GMs, Owners) is a bad contract for a player( if we take out factors outside the court).
Yes Curry was okay with that considering his injuries but in a vacuum, any of us would put his money per stats/awards ratio and see it is among the lowest, that he was underpaid for these seasons and thus it was “bad” from a player’s perspective.
In a similar way, Brunson did take a paycut but but he frequently and openly jokes about where “his money” showing he did take a" bad contract" for the Good of the team.
My take too. Why is it a bad deal? A bad deal for Steph? The others are saying Steph still gets his money on the back end of it AND he gets to be part of a dynasty too. Why is that a bad deal for him?
Bad for the players agency and agents and free market contract negotiations for players as an abstract? Ok maybe in that context yes it’s a bad deal.