Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    Land o' Lakes sammichoffate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    7,109

    Default Did Stars in the 90's stay longer with one team than they do now, if so, why?

    Stockton, Robinson, Ewing, etc.
    vs.
    Kobe, Dirk, Duncan, Pierce, etc.

  2. #2
    Very good NBA starter
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    8,260

    Default Re: Did Stars in the 90's stay longer with one team than they do now, if so, why?

    Yes they clearly did. Most of the big stars where defined by their teams:

    Magic - Lakers
    Bird - Celtics
    Isiah - Pistons
    MJ - Bulls
    Ewing - Knicks
    Hakeem - Houston
    Stockton/Malone - Jazz

    And so on.

    Then there were guys who changed in their prime like Shaq,Barkley, Drexler, Pippen. Shaq's decision was ridiculed.

    I think a reason for fewer changes was lower salaries, you were better off being a big fish in a small pond than a small fish in a Lebron collusion team. Remember MJ played for peanuts all the while through his first 3peat and even his second wasn't that much until he got those 30 mil a year deals. Same with Pip who was underpaid.

    Mitch Ritchmond for example, stayed all his prime with Sac Town who were very bad in the 90s.

    It would be naive to think it was only about such things as 'beat them, not join them', but in a way it was, because stars got popular, not just because they won, but because they stuck it out in their city, they did all they could for that city. Maybe Ritchmond didn't win, but he was THE man of Sacramento and probably got good sponsor and ad deals there. Stockton and Malone are pretty much synonymous with Salt Lake City. MJ made Chicago. Magic MADE the Showtime. Bad Boy Pistons.

    A lot of these cities put a significant part of their identity into those sports stars who stuck around.

    Just different values, more patience. No social media, no cell phones, no 100 TV channels, so a player who jumped around might not make a good name for himself. A 'journeyman' was a derogatory term.

  3. #3
    MH! aj1987's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    22,584

    Default Re: Did Stars in the 90's stay longer with one team than they do now, if so, why?

    Most of them did not actually have a reason to leave their respective teams. Except Robinson.

  4. #4
    Land o' Lakes sammichoffate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    7,109

    Default Re: Did Stars in the 90's stay longer with one team than they do now, if so, why?

    Quote Originally Posted by 90sgoat
    Yes they clearly did. Most of the big stars where defined by their teams:

    Magic - Lakers
    Bird - Celtics
    Isiah - Pistons
    MJ - Bulls
    Ewing - Knicks
    Hakeem - Houston
    Stockton/Malone - Jazz

    And so on.

    Then there were guys who changed in their prime like Shaq,Barkley, Drexler, Pippen. Shaq's decision was ridiculed.

    I think a reason for fewer changes was lower salaries, you were better off being a big fish in a small pond than a small fish in a Lebron collusion team. Remember MJ played for peanuts all the while through his first 3peat and even his second wasn't that much until he got those 30 mil a year deals. Same with Pip who was underpaid.

    Mitch Ritchmond for example, stayed all his prime with Sac Town who were very bad in the 90s.

    It would be naive to think it was only about such things as 'beat them, not join them', but in a way it was, because stars got popular, not just because they won, but because they stuck it out in their city, they did all they could for that city. Maybe Ritchmond didn't win, but he was THE man of Sacramento and probably got good sponsor and ad deals there. Stockton and Malone are pretty much synonymous with Salt Lake City. MJ made Chicago. Magic MADE the Showtime. Bad Boy Pistons.

    A lot of these cities put a significant part of their identity into those sports stars who stuck around.

    Just different values, more patience. No social media, no cell phones, no 100 TV channels, so a player who jumped around might not make a good name for himself. A 'journeyman' was a derogatory term.
    Thanks for answering, fits your name well Just made me wonder how Wade is probably gonna be the last major star to retire with one team in the last decade. NBA has changed a lot, that's for sure.

  5. #5
    NBA Legend Hey Yo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    17,676

    Default Re: Did Stars in the 90's stay longer with one team than they do now, if so, why?

    Quote Originally Posted by 90sgoat
    Yes they clearly did. Most of the big stars where defined by their teams:

    Magic - Lakers
    Bird - Celtics
    Isiah - Pistons
    MJ - Bulls
    Ewing - Knicks
    Hakeem - Houston
    Stockton/Malone - Jazz

    And so on.

    Then there were guys who changed in their prime like Shaq,Barkley, Drexler, Pippen. Shaq's decision was ridiculed.

    I think a reason for fewer changes was lower salaries, you were better off being a big fish in a small pond than a small fish in a Lebron collusion team. Remember MJ played for peanuts all the while through his first 3peat and even his second wasn't that much until he got those 30 mil a year deals. Same with Pip who was underpaid.

    Mitch Ritchmond for example, stayed all his prime with Sac Town who were very bad in the 90s.

    It would be naive to think it was only about such things as 'beat them, not join them', but in a way it was, because stars got popular, not just because they won, but because they stuck it out in their city, they did all they could for that city. Maybe Ritchmond didn't win, but he was THE man of Sacramento and probably got good sponsor and ad deals there. Stockton and Malone are pretty much synonymous with Salt Lake City. MJ made Chicago. Magic MADE the Showtime. Bad Boy Pistons.

    A lot of these cities put a significant part of their identity into those sports stars who stuck around.

    Just different values, more patience. No social media, no cell phones, no 100 TV channels, so a player who jumped around might not make a good name for himself. A 'journeyman' was a derogatory term.
    Jordan's second contract (1988) was 8yrs 25mil. That was very good money at the time considering jut 4yrs earlier there was only 3 players making 7 figures. I bet that whoever advised him to sign for 8yrs wasn't working for MJ much longer. Really dumb move by MJ but just saw $$$ signs for his gambling addiction.

    Magic wasn't going anywhere cause he signed a 25yr deal worth 1mil per year that started in 1984.

    I always thought the term "journyman" was referred to a fringe pro player who got traded a lot or not re-signed and stuck it out in the league as long as he could latch on with a team.
    Last edited by Hey Yo; 05-29-2016 at 07:44 PM.

  6. #6
    3/8 is real Straight_Ballin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    5,224

    Default Re: Did Stars in the 90's stay longer with one team than they do now, if so, why?

    Strong rival write were also prevalent. Players didn't want to collude with each other, they wanted to dismantle each other.

  7. #7
    Local High School Star
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,148

    Default Re: Did Stars in the 90's stay longer with one team than they do now, if so, why?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hey Yo
    Jordan's second contract (1988) was 8yrs 25mil. That was very good money at the time considering jut 4yrs earlier there was only 3 players making 7 figures. I bet that whoever advised him to sign for 8yrs wasn't working for MJ much longer. Really dumb move by MJ but just saw $$$ signs for his gambling addiction.
    Using inflation we could say that Jordan in 1989 received around 6 mil $ a year (today value) and in 1997 he got ... 44 000 000 $, which is way better than any current player nowadays.

    About stars staying longer it is all about contracts. The big money came in early 90s after the globalization - there were the first 100+ contracts and there were some stagnation after lockout season in 1999.
    Kevin Garnet signed some very lucrative deal in the late 90s and according to basketball reference he got ... 327 millions from 1994 tp 2015 !!! I doubt that in near future a player would got so much mooney just from salary. It is more than Shaq who is with 292 millions ...

  8. #8
    3-time NBA All-Star
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    10,694

    Default Re: Did Stars in the 90's stay longer with one team than they do now, if so, why?

    Coz they arent weak

  9. #9
    NBA All-star NBAGOAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    North Korea
    Posts
    9,370

    Default Re: Did Stars in the 90's stay longer with one team than they do now, if so, why?

    Less media and no internet must've helped with less scrutiny. Guys today like Durant/Westbrook are extremely desperate to win a ring and they're not even 28 yet, so much so that if OKC had lost early in the playoffs, Durant leaving was a real possibility.. I'm pretty sure people weren't discrediting guys like Dr. J years ago with this "1/4" shit as much but that's exactly what people would do if he played today.

  10. #10
    SexLand Uncle Drew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    The Land of 1 Championship
    Posts
    11,347

    Default Re: Did Stars in the 90's stay longer with one team than they do now, if so, why?

    Some of those stars were treated like shit once they weren't one anymore.


  11. #11
    Not airballing my layups anymore
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    109

    Default Re: Did Stars in the 90's stay longer with one team than they do now, if so, why?

    Certainly the money and social media in the current climate have an effect on all this. My impression is that back in the '80s and '90s stars took a lot of pride in their team and in their own personal abilities. There was an attitude of besting your peers and trying to be the top dog. I don't think those players ever even considered "joining forces" and would've cringed at the thought. Maybe the '92 Dream Team planted the seed of assembling a super-team.

  12. #12
    NBA Legend Hey Yo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    17,676

    Default Re: Did Stars in the 90's stay longer with one team than they do now, if so, why?

    Quote Originally Posted by groovemachine
    Certainly the money and social media in the current climate have an effect on all this. My impression is that back in the '80s and '90s stars took a lot of pride in their team and in their own personal abilities. There was an attitude of besting your peers and trying to be the top dog. I don't think those players ever even considered "joining forces" and would've cringed at the thought. Maybe the '92 Dream Team planted the seed of assembling a super-team.
    There was no free agency in the NBA until the summer of 1988. So before then, if you went to another team it would be via trade.

    You either played for the team that drafted you and accept what money they paid you or you quit the league if you didn't like it.

  13. #13
    Gif-ted bigkingsfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Land of 1 NBA Championship*
    Posts
    18,524

    Default Re: Did Stars in the 90's stay longer with one team than they do now, if so, why?

    Didn't have the balls to try something new.

  14. #14
    Local High School Star
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,331

    Default Re: Did Stars in the 90's stay longer with one team than they do now, if so, why?

    The stars of the 80's were competitive beasts!!! That's the reason!!! Whether it was NBA Finals, playoffs, 3 point or slam dunk contests, all star games, Magic Johnson's Mid Summer classic game, Kenny Rodgers celebrity 3 on 3 at his ranch, McDonald's European tournaments etc... Those demented ****!ers wanted to beat the sh!t out of each other. All these 80's stars spent 8 to 10+ years with the team that drafted them (or were traded for in case of English) and thus revolutionizing the not only their cities but the ENTIRE LEAGUE!!!

    Lakers- Magic
    Celtics- Bird
    Bulls- Jordan
    Knicks- Ewing
    Sixers- Barkley
    Bucks- Moncrief
    Pistons- Isiah
    Hawks- Wilkins
    Jazz- Stockton/Malone
    Blazers- Drexler
    Rockets- Olajuwon
    Nuggets- English
    Warriors- Mullin

    Honorable mentions to the great teams filled with all-stars like the Sonics, Mavs, Suns and Cavs!

    That's 13 teams in a 23 team league that had a generational hall of fame talent to build around for 8 to 10 years. That's why that era was the Golden Era, hall of famers transforming their teams and cities and going AT EACH OTHER in the playoffs and Finals!

    Today's 30 team NBA can't even muster 5 teams that have a sure fire GENERATIONAL hall of famer in their lineups!!!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •