× The Wrath of the Rose | est. 1970 (an NBA retrospective) ×

[kibaxx7]

[kibaxx7]

Oh, playing without a three-point line is a gamechanger for sure. I remember playing Jerry West's NBA's Greatest game in NBA 2K12. The first time around I fell behind late, and hit a shot at the buzzer that, if the three-point line were in effect, would've tied the game and sent it into overtime. You don't realise how useful it is to spark rallies and cut into deficits until you don't have that extra point!

True! The 3-pointer has always been a rally creator. I still got a few seasons until the ABA merger happens and a couple more until the 3 makes his appearance, so, it's an inside game for now.

[Andrew]

Great win! And without a three-point line to jumpstart it, too!

[kibaxx7]

[kibaxx7]

Great win! And without a three-point line to jumpstart it, too!

Oh we could definitely use some of those right now.

[Andrew]

Growing pains for sure. Like I said though, hopefully Big Bill will still arrive some day!

[kibaxx7]

[kibaxx7]

Growing pains for sure. Like I said though, hopefully Big Bill will still arrive some day!

It's looking painful right now, for sure, but I'd say there's a plan in motion for that.

[Andrew]

Sounds promising!

phpBB [video]

[kibaxx7]

[kibaxx7]

Sounds promising!

We'll see if we can make it happen!

[Andrew]

A knee injury in this time period definitely isn't good news, but here's hoping medical science has progressed a little faster in this reality!

[kibaxx7]

[kibaxx7]

A knee injury in this time period definitely isn't good news, but here's hoping medical science has progressed a little faster in this reality!

He'll be back for next season, we aren't very far away!

Note: Since I totally forgot about free agency last year, I've been searching for some data on the old day's contracts and the records are pretty vague. I just found Petrie had a 6-year deal and Wicks signed a 5-year. Then Basketball Reference doesn't have salaries data until the mid-80's... so I just wrote something that thought would make the story a little more interesting.

[Andrew]

The thing about contracts back in the day is that teams basically held a player's rights until they traded or sold them; even after a player retired! When Bob Cousy and Dave Cowens made their brief comebacks with the Royals and Bucks respectively, the Celtics actually had to agree to trades first. Free agency as it exists today wasn't really a thing until the late 80s. Honestly, the more I've read about it recently, the more it makes me think about what "player loyalty" really means.

[kibaxx7]

[kibaxx7]

The thing about contracts back in the day is that teams basically held a player's rights until they traded or sold them; even after a player retired! When Bob Cousy and Dave Cowens made their brief comebacks with the Royals and Bucks respectively, the Celtics actually had to agree to trades first. Free agency as it exists today wasn't really a thing until the late 80s. Honestly, the more I've read about it recently, the more it makes me think about what "player loyalty" really means.

I've been searching a little more: I found Robertson's suit against the league in 1976. It looks like here is when all things began to change, but nothing really happened until 1988 with Tom Chambers. We keep going like this, then! McKenzie stays! *hammer noise*

Conversations about free-agency hypotheticals must begin with Oscar Robertson's landmark court case, which prompted the start of the modern-day offseason. The Hall of Famer filed the antirust suit in 1970, though it wouldn't reach a verdict until six years later. As president of the players union, his 1970 suit against the NBA contended the draft, option clause and other rules restricting player movement were violations of antitrust laws.

The suit was settled in 1976, when the league agreed to let players become free agents in exchange for their old team's 'right of first refusal' to match any offer they might receive. This eventual ruling marked the beginning of free agency as we know it today, allowing players to move around the league as they saw fit and ending teams' restrictive and lengthy control over their on-court assets with the interminable option clause.

Tom Chambers remembers when an NBA player’s destiny lied with the whims of his team. Before 1988, you could be drafted or traded. Signing with another team after your contract was up, however, was not the wide-open option it is today. Even if your team was willing to let you go, they had to receive compensation. In short: if you were good, chances were you weren’t going anywhere. “There was no such thing as free agency,” Chambers said. “If a team had you, then you had to sign with that team unless they traded you. You really couldn’t move. There was no movement at all. Therefore, contracts were kind of locked into what you could make.”

Seattle, however, appeared less than thrilled with the state of their frontcourt despite Chambers’ presence. They pulled off a draft-day trade to bring up-and-coming forward Michael Cage to the team. They had drafted another long-limbed, athletic forward in Derrick McKey the year before. Days later, it became official. Players whose contracts had concluded would be truly free to choose their teams if they met two conditions -- have been in the league seven years or more and have played through two NBA contracts. As a player who met both requirements and whose talents would be in high demand, Chambers, it turned out, would be the perfect pioneer for the NBA’s new frontier of free agency.

[Andrew]

It definitely took a while for players to get the autonomy they have now, and even then, rookie contracts favour teams with their options and subsequent restricted free agency. One can see it from the teams' perspective of course, as they're taking a chance on a player in the Draft, and then investing in their development and making a financial commitment to them. At the same time, it's treating players like commodities and enforcing restrictions that few of us would consider fair when it comes to employment.

[kibaxx7]

[kibaxx7]

It definitely took a while for players to get the autonomy they have now, and even then, rookie contracts favour teams with their options and subsequent restricted free agency. One can see it from the teams' perspective of course, as they're taking a chance on a player in the Draft, and then investing in their development and making a financial commitment to them. At the same time, it's treating players like commodities and enforcing restrictions that few of us would consider fair when it comes to employment.

Should have done my research a little earlier! Yeah, that's true. I get it from the team's optics, though. Look at Anthony Bennett or Markelle Fultz, for example.

[kibaxx7]

[Andrew]

Seems only appropriate for the Lakers to replicate real history there. The Blazers' time will come!

[kibaxx7]

[kibaxx7]

Seems only appropriate for the Lakers to replicate real history there. The Blazers' time will come!

I think we're up and coming, we still need another couple of pieces.

[kibaxx7]