SVG & Otis contracts extended

[Ryan the Magic Fan 253]

I just love how the Master of Panic label has stuck with SVG. Since Shaq gave that quote SVG has been the 2nd most successful coach in the league (if we are going off how far a team makes it in the playoffs, 3rd most if were going of win/loss). Meanwhile since then Shaq promised to bring the ring to two different teams. One didn't even make the playoffs in the same season he said the quote, and the second time his team got eliminated in the second round.

 

Long story short, calling Stan the Master of Panic now is irony at it's finest.

[Debonair 106]

yea yea we all know the cartoon is old. it even says 2009. thought it was a nice touch to the post.

 

 

as much as I don't like shaq.......he has 4 rings under his belt and has absolutely nothing to prove in the league anymore. he is a hall of famer. whats bothersome is that everything he's said about stan has been nothing short of the truth.

 

“I know for a fact that he's a master of panic, and when it gets time for his team to go in the postseason and do certain things, he will let them down because of his panic. I've been there before, I've played for him.”

 

 

lets not forget him calling stan a frontrunner before making said quote. so how exactly is stan being an MOP irony? yea that quote pretty much debunked your entire post.

 

and anyone who says stan doesn't panic is quite delusional. they even go as far as put the cameras on him as he spazzes out on the sidelines. then when he fails his team he starts apologizing like crazy and talking about the decisions he SHOULD'VE made.

 

I'm sure next season he'll be so prepared and finally have his anxiety under control because as they say.......3rd time is a charm! *sigh*

[Captain Hi-Top 791]

ooops. forgot the word 'false'

 

i meant a false sense of job security.

 

when teams underachieve the first person that gets blamed is the coach. mike brown's contract was extended until the end of next season....look what happened last month.

 

just because stan got a contract extension doesn't mean at any point in time he wont be subject to being fired. if this team is on the losing end again next year by him panicking instead of running offense plays and putting the right guys on the floor.......I'm pretty sure he's gonna get fired.

 

Okay, just so I have the straight in my mind. You thought coaches contracts weren't guaranteed, that they could be fired at any point with no repercussions, and that the reason for even having a "contract" was to offer a false sense of job security? How would that even work? If you could void the terms of a contract at any point in time, for any reason, there would be no point to the contract. It wouldn't offer any sense of job security (false or not), because, under your assumption, the contract is meaningless. It stops operating as a contract completely.

 

When coaches get fired mid contract, there are financial repercussions to the team. They have to honor the payout (or some negotiated portion there of) of the remaining life of the contract. When a coach is offered a 4 year, 16 million dollar contract (for example), being paid 4 million per year, and is fired after the second year, the team is still on the hook for the remaining 8 million dollars of the contract (or whatever the contractually agreed upon buyout happens to be).

 

Now, I haven't said that Stan can't be fired, so I'm not sure why you are bringing that up other than to mask the fact that your statements and assumptions about coaching contracts have been completely off the mark.

 

then again...........coach contracts aren't guaranteed

 

I thought they can fire your ass with no hesitation and not have to buy out your contract or none of that jazz.

 

obviously to give the coach a [false] sense of job security.

coaches get fired all the time. how is their contracts guaranteed?

 

It's similar to your cell phone contracts with different providers. You might sign up for Sprint under a 2 year contract, but you can leave them at any point in time. It's just going to cost you for breaking the contract early.

[Debonair 106]

Okay, just so I have the straight in my mind. You thought coaches contracts weren't guaranteed, that they could be fired at any point with no repercussions, and that the reason for even having a "contract" was to offer a false sense of job security? How would that even work? If you could void the terms of a contract at any point in time, for any reason, there would be no point to the contract. It wouldn't offer any sense of job security (false or not), because, under your assumption, the contract is meaningless. It stops operating as a contract completely.

 

When coaches get fired mid contract, there are financial repercussions to the team. They have to honor the payout (or some negotiated portion there of) of the remaining life of the contract. When a coach is offered a 4 year, 16 million dollar contract (for example), being paid 4 million per year, and is fired after the second year, the team is still on the hook for the remaining 8 million dollars of the contract (or whatever the contractually agreed upon buyout happens to be).

 

Now, I haven't said that Stan can't be fired, so I'm not sure why you are bringing that up other than to mask the fact that your statements and assumptions about coaching contracts have been completely off the mark.

 

 

 

It's similar to your cell phone contracts with different providers. You might sign up for Sprint under a 2 year contract, but you can leave them at any point in time. It's just going to cost you for breaking the contract early.

 

 

I'm sure they give the coach a very small percentage of whats left on the contract but i doubt its the full the amount. or even half of it. That doesn't really seem "guaranteed" to me. its like the delonte west contract. he was owed $4mil next season but a team could buy out his contract for $500k because he was only guaranteed $500k. who the hell would really considered that guaranteed. 500k from $4mil. c'mon son. I was more so talking about being guaranteed the full amount of their conract (should've specifiied). franchises aren't dumb enough to give big guaranteed contracts to coaches that can't win anything. stan is not exactly phil jackson.or greg pop

[NickAnderson 14]

I am not a SVG hater but he is a great regular season coach but I don't think we can win it all with him at the helm. Just because he is the best coach we have ever had, it doesn't make him the best man for the job with the team that we have. He has made ALOT of questionable decsions. Playing Jameer in the finals, some of his rotations are just horrible (playing the whole bench in the second qtr of games). Not playing Bass much at all during the season and feeding him to the wolves in the playoffs and expecting it to work. Another big thing is ADJUSTMENTS, the playoffs are just about that and he didn't make any until we were down 0-3 in the ECF. Hey I hope he proves me wrong, maybe some more expericence will help

[Captain Hi-Top 791]

I'm sure they give the coach a very small percentage of whats left on the contract but i doubt its the full the amount. or even half of it. That doesn't really seem "guaranteed" to me. its like the delonte west contract. he was owed $4mil next season but a team could buy out his contract for $500k because he was only guaranteed $500k. who the hell would really considered that guaranteed. 500k from $4mil. c'mon son. I was more so talking about being guaranteed the full amount of their conract (should've specifiied). franchises aren't dumb enough to give big guaranteed contracts to coaches that can't win anything. stan is not exactly phil jackson.or greg pop

 

It's not up to them to decide what percentage to pay out, it's defined within the contract, "son". Part of negotiating that contract is negotiating the terms of buyouts versus what amount is guaranteed. Now if you want to argue what portion of Stan's contract is guaranteed, well, you are on your own, because we aren't privy to those kinds of details.

 

 

There is more to a contract than how much is guaranteed. And no matter how much you try to twist and turn your previous words to make it seem as though you were really right to begin with, we all can read the truth. What we do know, is that the average NBA coaching salary is around 3.4 million per year. Jackson was making over 10, Larry Brown was making about 7, and Pop, D'Antoni, and Doc were all around the 6 million range. So, Stan's original deal (4 years, 16 million), was a bargain, especially considering the results that were produced.

 

Also, a lot of times, that buy out of a coach is negotiated. The contract is guaranteed, the team no longer wants the coach there, so they negotiate a buy out. Basically, the team owes the remaining financial obligations of the contract, and they negotiate a particular amount, agreed upon by both the team and the coach, in order to avoid paying the full amount, and letting the coach seek employment elsewhere.

 

In your horrible example of Delonte West (horrible because player contracts are generally structured in a very different manner), the predetermined buy out was defaulted into the contract, not negotiated afterwards, and was most likely an incentive to a marginal role player (be effective or your final year you will be cut).

[crisby pancakes 126]

It's not up to them to decide what percentage to pay out, it's defined within the contract, "son". Part of negotiating that contract is negotiating the terms of buyouts versus what amount is guaranteed. Now if you want to argue what portion of Stan's contract is guaranteed, well, you are on your own, because we aren't privy to those kinds of details.

 

 

There is more to a contract than how much is guaranteed. And no matter how much you try to twist and turn your previous words to make it seem as though you were really right to begin with, we all can read the truth. What we do know, is that the average NBA coaching salary is around 3.4 million per year. Jackson was making over 10, Larry Brown was making about 7, and Pop, D'Antoni, and Doc were all around the 6 million range. So, Stan's original deal (4 years, 16 million), was a bargain, especially considering the results that were produced.

 

Well, you pretty much put what I was going to write and them some.

 

It actually wouldn't suprise me if coach contracts were fully guaranteed due to the high nature of them being sacked. I would have thought all coaches would try and stipulate this but as you stated, we aren't privy. They don't have the luxury that a player has (you can't sack a player if he doesn't play to expectations) I would assume that coaches therefore try and guarantee their contracts to the fullest. I have no idea where Debonair got the idea that an organisation can pay off a coach only a small part of their contract, they would get their backsides sued to high heaven if they tried. If a coach is owed 3 million still then he's going to get paid that 3 million unless the coach and organisation negotiate differently and that only usually happens when the contract is a large sum and both sides want out as the relationship has become untenable.