The Official NBA Season Thread: SFA Prevails

[osh kosh bosh]

Yea, there are tons of NBA guys who won a ring and I’m SURE they’d rather have the money. Def tough to try and pass off your take as fact here .

there’s literally current players in the comments saying they’d choose the money.

lolwut?
people are wrong all the time about the things they think will make them happy.

the evidence we have indicates they are probably wrong.
or they might just be an unusually uncompetitive professional athlete.

which is fine, but Stack would still be correct.

 

[RustyShackleford]

lolwut?
people are wrong all the time about the things they think will make them happy.

the evidence we have indicates they are probably wrong.
or they might just be an unusually uncompetitive professional athlete.

which is fine, but Stack would still be correct.

You do realize the evidence you presented relies on a massive guess by you.

How do we know that winning a championship produces the same level of job satisfaction as someone would get from being happy at a full-time job?

We are just assuming?

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Guys sell their memorabilia when they run out of money.

the wasn't question was "0 million and ring vs 100 million and no rings."

if you are asking me 0 million vs 100 million, yes I agree I will take the 100 million.

Scottie Pippen got 6 titles and was pissed that he wasn’t getting paid enough.

I’ll take the money. I’m going to try to win but not about to sacrifice money doing so

Scottie made 100 million in his career,
you think he would be meaningfully happier as random top nba player who made 200 million?

vs legendary member of one of the greatest and most famous teams of all time?
I think that's crazy.

 

[dman14]

kelce and swift meet on raya?

 

[pmatic]

Stack made pretty good money and got a ring early on in his career. I'm sure if he had a cup of tea in the league instead, he'd feel different.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

You do realize the evidence you presented relies on a massive guess by you.

How do we know that winning a championship produces the same level of job satisfaction as someone would get from being happy at a full-time job?

We are just assuming?

Sure but I think the idea that your happiness is going to meaningfully increase from 50 to 100 is a bigger guess, because it seems to go against the evidence.

professional athletics is a unique job, and winning a ring could be less impactful than a full time job or maybe it's more.
there is uncertainty there I admit.

but it seems pretty clear from what ive read,; the money won't help if yo aren't already happy.
and it's not going to add much increasing from 50-100 million.

seems to me three's a way higher chance of +happiness with the ring.

 

[lawdog1]

Scottie made 100 million in his career,
you think he would be meaningfully happier as random top nba player who made 200 million?

vs legendary member of one of the greatest and most famous teams of all time?
I think that's crazy.

Yes, Scottie for sure seems like a super content and satisfied person. You must be right.

 

[addict4sneakers]

Scottie made 100 million in his career,
you think he would be meaningfully happier as random top nba player who made 200 million?

Scottie hit his lick after he won 6 rings. He signed that bad contract to feed his family and was hot when the bulls wouldn’t renegotiate. Dude didn’t rehab on his own time because he was mad. Even while winning on the most popular team ever.

What were Scottie Pippen's contract details when he signed the infamous Chicago Bulls deal

Scottie Pippen is undeniably the second-best player to ever suit up for the Chicago Bulls next to Michael Jordan. Typically, top NBA players are being paid big figures for their services.

www.sportskeeda.com

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Yes, Scottie for sure seems like a super content and satisfied person. You must be right.

and you believe an extra 100 million would fix...what is currently wrong with Scottie Pippens life?

 

[addict4sneakers]

Stack made pretty good money and got a ring early on in his career. I'm sure if he had a cup of tea in the league instead, he'd feel different.

Stack left SAS to get paid. Brother mouzone is tripping

 

[lawdog1]

and you believe an extra 100 million would fix...what is currently wrong with Scottie Pippens life?

If I said yes it would be just as speculative as you saying it wouldn’t.

 

[dacomeup]

and you believe an extra 100 million would fix...what is currently wrong with Scottie Pippens life?

The rings absolutely are nowhere close to doing so.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Scottie hit his lick after he won 6 rings. He signed that bad contract to feed his family and was not when the bulls wouldn’t renegotiate. Dude didn’t rehab on his own time because he was mad. Even while winning in the most popular team ever.

What were Scottie Pippen's contract details when he signed the infamous Chicago Bulls deal

Scottie Pippen is undeniably the second-best player to ever suit up for the Chicago Bulls next to Michael Jordan. Typically, top NBA players are being paid big figures for their services.

www.sportskeeda.com

Im aware. I don't really know how this refutes my point.

 

[pmatic]

Stack left SAS to get paid. Brother mouzone is tripping

Yep, he lucked out when the Pacers came calling, he was able to get paid and compete for a chip before the big fight.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

If I said yes it would be just as speculative as you saying it wouldn’t.

well not really, we have data that shows life satisfaction platues after 500k
AND for people who are rich and unhappy more money DOESN'T increase life satisfaction.

so we actually have data it's not pure speculation.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Yep, he lucked out when the Pacers came calling, he was able to get paid and compete for a chip before the big fight.

I don't know why you think this refutes what Stack is saying.
no one is saying money doesn't matter at all. no one is saying getting paid the league minimum is the same as making 100 million.
or that NBA players aren't motivated by money.
yes NBA players want to be paid commensurate with their peers. (which is not just about the money but also about competitive standing within the league)


we are talking 50 vs 100. not 1 vs 100. or 0 vs 100.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Scottie Pippen is sitting at home, scrolling through TMZ stories of wife having sex with his teammates son.

and Scottie is like
man what I would do for an extra 100 million...that would solve this. Id be so much happier.

 

[B Sox]

This conversation ends up boiling down to a star vs role player situation most of the time which makes it even more dumb.

 

[addict4sneakers]

Im aware. I don't really know how this refutes my point.

Scottie was a top 10 player on the best team of the decade and was upset about money. He didn’t like being the 91st highest paid player on the best and most popular team in the league. He didn’t like the bulls were paying kukoc more money than him after winning 3 titles.

Like these things are documented. The rings clearly didn’t bring him peace in the 90s

 

[RustyShackleford]

Sure but I think the idea that your happiness is going to meaningfully increase from 50 to 100 is a bigger guess, because it seems to go against the evidence.

You are defining "meaningful" as a nonlinear change.

I meaning I agree there are diminishing returns

But I don't know if the relationship has to be linear, in the short run, to qualify as "meaningful"

professional athletics is a unique job, and winning a ring could be less impactful than a full time job or maybe it's more.
there is uncertainty there I admit.

but it seems pretty clear from what ive read,; the money won't help if yo aren't already happy.
and it's not going to add much increasing from 50-100 million.

seems to me three's a way higher chance of +happiness with the ring.

I think because of the uniqueness of being a professional athlete, combined with the observed behavior of pros, and having no evidence of how to reconcile those things with research most done of people doing jobs completely different than pro sports, looks to me like you are guessing just as much as anyone else here famb.

Which is not a shot at you. I honestly don't think current research paints a clear picture which is the right answer here

 

[lawdog1]

well not really, we have data that shows life satisfaction platues after 500k
AND for people who are rich and unhappy more money DOESN'T increase life satisfaction.

so we actually have data it's not pure speculation.

No, it’s not “pure” speculation.

 

[RustyShackleford]

and you believe an extra 100 million would fix...what is currently wrong with Scottie Pippens life?

Larsa probably took half of that man's fortune.

A fortune he felt should have rightfully been much bigger

And rumor is, she is getting half of his pension

I dunno if it would fix his life.

But given Scottie will not be able to fully enjoy the total fruits of his labor (because of bad contract and divorce law), I think 100 million might make that man feel better.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Scottie was a top 10 player on the best team of the decade and was upset about money. He didn’t like being the 91st highest paid player on the best and most popular team in the league. He didn’t like the bulls were paying kukoc more money than him after winning 3 titles.

Like these things are documented. The rings clearly didn’t bring him peace in the 90s

That is an entirely different question.
Scottie was making like 2 million a year in the middle of his career on the downside of his physical prime with back problems, in an era with far less effective surgical intervention.

If I had already won 5 rings. and I was making 2 million a year coming off of major back surgery.


So the question is maybe like 18 million and 6 rings vs 100 million and 5 rings.

I think at the point you might take the money.
none of this refutes what Stack said tho.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

You are defining "meaningful" as a nonlinear change.

I meaning I agree there are diminishing returns

But I don't know if the relationship has to be linear, in the short run, to qualify as "meaningful"



I think because of the uniqueness of being a professional athlete, combined with the observed behavior of pros, and having no evidence of how to reconcile those things with research most done of people doing jobs completely different than pro sports, looks to me like you are guessing just as much as anyone else here famb.

imo the observed behaviour points exactly towards Stacks conclusion.

Seems like most ringless pros who made big career salaries will forgo mor money at the end of there career for a chance to win a ring.

The reaction James Harden behaviour when it was looking like he was gunna take a supermax from Houston is a perfect example.
its pretty odd for late career players with big career earnings to choose more money of rings.

every year older vet player take buyouts where they give up money to get in a winning situation. nobody thinks this is weird. its pretty much expected.


any prediction of alternate timelines involves some guessing. but the balance of probabilities I think is firmly in favour of Stephen Jackson.

 

[addict4sneakers]

That is an entirely different question.
Scottie was making like 2 million a year in the middle of his career on the downside of his physical prime with back problems, in an era with far less effective surgical intervention.

If I had already won 5 rings. and I was making 2 million a year coming off of major back surgery.


So the question is maybe like 18 million and 6 rings vs 100 million and 5 rings.

I think at the point you might take the money.
none of this refutes what Stack said tho.