Nika in Seattle | Page 6 | The Boneyard

Nika in Seattle

Status
Not open for further replies.
Of course you are referencing the fact that DT steamrolled Nika, scoring the basket and earning an “and 1” for a 3-pt play. I suspect that Geno got a kick out of watching that play, both the fact that Nika took on the GOAT, and that the GOAT gave the youngster a lesson.
DT vs NM is classic basketball. Veterans teach not by X's and O's but by showing how it's done. Rookies learn by giving their complete attention to the finer details executed by the best and trying to emulate. It's all part of the game we love.
 
.-.
#HuskySisterhood

9B3279BF-C141-48B9-BD93-A036D0329FEA.jpeg
 
Tell me if this makes sense, I think the W ought to have 2 salary caps. One for an 11 person roster and a second higher cap for a 12 person roster. That way a rookie won't be told that they won't make the team because the team would be a $1.37 over the salary cap. The second cap should be the rookie salary higher than the 11 person cap. We're talking about peanuts here, but I understand the W is not generally profitable...

If a team cannot afford a 12th player at the starting rookie salary they should start a Go-Fund-Me page (which has been known to bring in much more than that). Really, this whole situation is ridiculous. One of the reasons WCBB is more popular than the W.
 
Tell me if this makes sense, I think the W ought to have 2 salary caps. One for an 11 person roster and a second higher cap for a 12 person roster. That way a rookie won't be told that they won't make the team because the team would be a $1.37 over the salary cap. The second cap should be the rookie salary higher than the 11 person cap. We're talking about peanuts here, but I understand the W is not generally profitable...

If a team cannot afford a 12th player at the starting rookie salary they should start a Go-Fund-Me page (which has been known to bring in much more than that). Really, this whole situation is ridiculous. One of the reasons WCBB is more popular than the W.
I think you should forward your suggestion to WNBA Commissioner Cathy Engelbert. :)
 
.-.
Tell me if this makes sense, I think the W ought to have 2 salary caps. One for an 11 person roster and a second higher cap for a 12 person roster. That way a rookie won't be told that they won't make the team because the team would be a $1.37 over the salary cap. The second cap should be the rookie salary higher than the 11 person cap. We're talking about peanuts here, but I understand the W is not generally profitable...

If a team cannot afford a 12th player at the starting rookie salary they should start a Go-Fund-Me page (which has been known to bring in much more than that). Really, this whole situation is ridiculous. One of the reasons WCBB is more popular than the W.
In the situation of the Seattle Storm, it is going to be $17.00; no, not as little as a buck thirty seven, but literally seventeen dollars!
 
In the situation of the Seattle Storm, it is going to be $17.00; no, not as little as a buck thirty seven, but literally seventeen dollars!
Can they pay a “luxury tax” of $6? :p
 
Another solution, completely contrary to the Collective Bargaining Agreement, would be to allow a player to say “Although I was drafted as the fourteenth player overall, I would like to sign a contract for the league minimum salary of $64,154. I recognize that you want to pay me $67,249 because of my draft status, but I will accept the league minimum today and work towards a promotion and a larger salary in future, where do I sign?”
 
Another solution, completely contrary to the Collective Bargaining Agreement, would be to allow a player to say “Although I was drafted as the fourteenth player overall, I would like to sign a contract for the league minimum salary of $64,154. I recognize that you want to pay me $67,249 because of my draft status, but I will accept the league minimum today and work towards a promotion and a larger salary in future, where do I sign?”
Not crazy about that. It would allow unscrupulous owners to whipsaw 2 or more players to accept lower compensation than they are due, and it would also be in violation of the CBA. The goal should be to raise overall WNBA salaries, not reduce them.
 
Not crazy about that. It would allow unscrupulous owners to whipsaw 2 or more players to accept lower compensation than they are due, and it would also be in violation of the CBA. The goal should be to raise overall WNBA salaries, not reduce them.
On the other hand, it empowers players to make a decision as to whether or not they're willing to accept a nominal decrease to play in the WNBA. I accept that it may be violent at the CBA, but I am always partial to treating people like adults.
 
On the other hand, it empowers players to make a decision as to whether or not they're willing to accept a nominal decrease to play in the WNBA. I accept that it may be violent at the CBA, but I am always partial to treating people like adults.
Again, if someone is willing to take less pay than they are due, it presents a whole host of problems, not the least of which includes the potential of players to be referred to as “scabs” as well as the likely opposition of veteran players who would also be subject to whipsawing by owners.

I much prefer Skeets suggestion that teams be allotted 2 salary caps for 11 or 12 players respectively. The other possibility is that teams can pay the league a “luxury tax” similar to MLB if they exceed the salary cap.
 
.-.
Again, if someone is willing to take less pay than they are due, it presents a whole host of problems, not the least of which includes the potential of players to be referred to as “scabs” as well as the likely opposition of veteran players who would also be subject to whipsawing by owners.

I much prefer Skeets suggestion that teams be allotted 2 salary caps for 11 or 12 players respectively. The other possibility is that teams can pay the league a “luxury tax” similar to MLB if they exceed the salary cap.
It is Capitalism. Further, these are professional athletes being discussed, not staff at a hair salon. This is a ‘protection’ that has absolutely ship-wrecked players careers in the past and will continue to do so into the future. In addition to being on the bubble and having to outplay other teammates for the roster spot, if your ‘required salary’ is $652 more than others only because you were drafted a few spots higher, and as a result puts the team over the limit, regardless of whether you’re a better player or not you don’t make the team. What is necessary, is to MAKE THE TEAM!!!

Step 1 – Make the team as a rookie!!!

Step 2 – Be a hard worker, be charismatic, become a crowd favorite, but not just in the women’s basketball stadium but rather become a community favorite! (Nika’s personality and attractive appearance certainly will not hurt her).

Step 3 – Appear in commercials and advertising; be compensated an amount that will make the WNBA Salary nothing but what it really is, a pittance, and the $652 makes no dang difference.

Step 4 – Make the team as a second-year player!!!

Step 5 – Rinse and repeat.


And yet, if a player is not able to get through Step 1, … well, maybe there are alternatives. They could go play in Europe, or put that Psychology degree to practice in the real world.
 
Again, if someone is willing to take less pay than they are due, it presents a whole host of problems, not the least of which includes the potential of players to be referred to as “scabs” as well as the likely opposition of veteran players who would also be subject to whipsawing by owners.
I guess, but shouldn't that be their choice, rather than someone else's? I'm always wary when people who aren't involved decide that "they know what's best" for people who are actually involved and have an economic interest.

I'm not sure that anyone is going to call a member of the union who is working wow there is no strike in progress "a scab."

I'm also not sure what the "whipsaw" would be to veteran players. For what it's worth veteran players often choose to take less to allow other players on the roster. Stewart did this very recently. Why shouldn't a rookie be able to decide to take 3000 less dollars versus not make the team because of salary cap. Again, trust adults to make their own decisions.

That said, it's all theoretical because the CBA is in place and if that means that some marginal rookies are not going to get to play because of the salary cap, well, it is what it is.
 
It is Capitalism. Further, these are professional athletes being discussed, not staff at a hair salon. This is a ‘protection’ that has absolutely ship-wrecked players careers in the past and will continue to do so into the future. In addition to being on the bubble and having to outplay other teammates for the roster spot, if your ‘required salary’ is $652 more than others only because you were drafted a few spots higher, and as a result puts the team over the limit, regardless of whether you’re a better player or not you don’t make the team. What is necessary, is to MAKE THE TEAM!!!

Step 1 – Make the team as a rookie!!!

Step 2 – Be a hard worker, be charismatic, become a crowd favorite, but not just in the women’s basketball stadium but rather become a community favorite! (Nika’s personality and attractive appearance certainly will not hurt her).

Step 3 – Appear in commercials and advertising; be compensated an amount that will make the WNBA Salary nothing but what it really is, a pittance, and the $652 makes no dang difference.

Step 4 – Make the team as a second-year player!!!

Step 5 – Rinse and repeat.


And yet, if a player is not able to get through Step 1, … well, maybe there are alternatives. They could go play in Europe, or put that Psychology degree to practice in the real world.
I guess, but shouldn't that be their choice, rather than someone else's? I'm always wary when people who aren't involved decide that "they know what's best" for people who are actually involved and have an economic interest.

I'm not sure that anyone is going to call a member of the union who is working wow there is no strike in progress "a scab."

I'm also not sure what the "whipsaw" would be to veteran players. For what it's worth veteran players often choose to take less to allow other players on the roster. Stewart did this very recently. Why shouldn't a rookie be able to decide to take 3000 less dollars versus not make the team because of salary cap. Again, trust adults to make their own decisions.

That said, it's all theoretical because the CBA is in place and if that means that some marginal rookies are not going to get to play because of the salary cap, well, it is what it is.
Minimum wage laws were implemented following the Great Depression to protect workers and insure they had an acceptable standard of living. Absent such protections, unscrupulous employers were far more likely to drive down compensation for all employees. I was profoundly impacted by reading “The Grapes of Wrath” in HS, which outlined the cruel exploitation of agricultural workers during the Depression.

I know you’re likely to respond, “But these are professional athletes and college graduates?” This is not the NBA where minimum salaries are $1.1 million. The current minimum salary in the W is $64,154. Try living in LA, Chicago, NY, DC on $64k. WBB players should not have to play year round to make a decent living, putting enormous strain on their bodies, while living in a foreign country.

With just 144 precious roster spots available, many teams only filling 11/12 spots and many talented WBB players desperate to make it in the W, just how low should players be forced to go before we are no longer talking about “Capitalism” but rather “Exploitation?”
 
Last edited:
In the situation of the Seattle Storm, it is going to be $17.00; no, not as little as a buck thirty seven, but literally seventeen dollars!
Hmmm, so if everyone on the 11 man roster takes a $1.60 pay cut, then the team can fund a 12th player under the salary cap (less than a cup of coffee)? No, I don't like that solution. This is beyond ridiculous. The W needs to get their act together. Some of their problems are self-inflicted.

If they cut out the bag of 8 peanuts on their (future) chartered flights would this fund the 12th player?
 
Hmmm, so if everyone on the 11 man roster takes a $1.60 pay cut, then the team can fund a 12th player under the salary cap (less than a cup of coffee)? No, I don't like that solution. This is beyond ridiculous. The W needs to get their act together. Some of their problems are self-inflicted.

If they cut out the bag of 8 peanuts on their (future) chartered flights would this fund the 12th player?

I think it means that they would be $17 over the hard cap if they go with a certain scenario and keep Nika instead of Jade Melbourne, still 11 players, not 12 players.
 
.-.
Here is a link, it was in previous reply(s) earlier: Cohen Article

The article is not current, three players (Davis, Miller and Coates) have been cut since this was written. Those three were not really expected to make the team. There will be two more cut in order to keep under the salary cap, but they will not be allowed to cut three, as they must have at least 11 players on the final roster. Of the remaining players still in camp, four are Point Guards and three Centers; this seems like an excessive number for each of those positions given only an eleven-player roster.

The premises of the ‘Back 2 Sports’ YouTube video, as well as the article within this link, is that the Storm probably wishes to keep Nika and dismiss (1) a fourth string Point Guard (Kiana Williams or Jade Melbourne) and (2) the third string Center (Dulcy Fankam Mendjiadeu). Unfortunately, cutting any two from those three names, would not reduce the team salary enough. The best-case scenario of cutting two from those three names would still leave the total team salary $17 over the cap. One of those three names will almost certainly be cut, however the other must come from a player who is slated to make more money and Nika is among those players.

In essence, Nika is not in a competition against Williams and Melbourne, the other two point guards. Nika, due to salary cap, is in a direct competition against one of the forwards. Due to years of service and/or draft placement, Victoria Vivians, Joyner Holmes, and Nika Muhl would make slightly more money; one of those three will be cut because of it! A further unfortunate for Nika, the team has four forwards in camp, whereas they have six guards. In a team with only eleven players, they probably are going to want to keep the four forwards, but we will have to see.

I sincerely hope that they keep Nika and release one of the forwards, but I have no control of that. It would certainly be nice if she could reduce her salary by just a schmidlin, or even better if I could contribute seventeen bucks. I would wire transfer it right now, but that is not allowed either.
 
Here is a link, it was in previous reply(s) earlier: Cohen Article

The article is not current, three players (Davis, Miller and Coates) have been cut since this was written. Those three were not really expected to make the team. There will be two more cut in order to keep under the salary cap, but they will not be allowed to cut three, as they must have at least 11 players on the final roster. Of the remaining players still in camp, four are Point Guards and three Centers; this seems like an excessive number for each of those positions given only an eleven-player roster.

The premises of the ‘Back 2 Sports’ YouTube video, as well as the article within this link, is that the Storm probably wishes to keep Nika and dismiss (1) a fourth string Point Guard (Kiana Williams or Jade Melbourne) and (2) the third string Center (Dulcy Fankam Mendjiadeu). Unfortunately, cutting any two from those three names, would not reduce the team salary enough. The best-case scenario of cutting two from those three names would still leave the total team salary $17 over the cap. One of those three names will almost certainly be cut, however the other must come from a player who is slated to make more money and Nika is among those players.

In essence, Nika is not in a competition against Williams and Melbourne, the other two point guards. Nika, due to salary cap, is in a direct competition against one of the forwards. Due to years of service and/or draft placement, Victoria Vivians, Joyner Holmes, and Nika Muhl would make slightly more money; one of those three will be cut because of it! A further unfortunate for Nika, the team has four forwards in camp, whereas they have six guards. In a team with only eleven players, they probably are going to want to keep the four forwards, but we will have to see.

I sincerely hope that they keep Nika and release one of the forwards, but I have no control of that. It would certainly be nice if she could reduce her salary by just a schmidlin, or even better if I could contribute seventeen bucks. I would wire transfer it right now, but that is not allowed either.
I wonder whether a player's salary is reduced proportionately if she doesn't return from playing overseas by the start of the season? Also, couldn't the Storm trade a guard for a forward? Or a forward for another forward who is a better fit and earns slightly less? Or go down to 10 players and then pick up someone who is a good match, has been cut by another team, and fits under the salary cap? My overall point is the Storm's management is not as clueless or as helpless as many on this thread are making it out to be. I don't know whether any of my "what ifs" would work, but that is kinda the point. None of us who has weighed in so far understands the CBA on a granular level, much less is privy to the goals, desires, and strategy of Storm management.
 
I wonder whether a player's salary is reduced proportionately if she doesn't return from playing overseas by the start of the season? Also, couldn't the Storm trade a guard for a forward? Or a forward for another forward who is a better fit and earns slightly less? Or go down to 10 players and then pick up someone who is a good match, has been cut by another team, and fits under the salary cap? My overall point is the Storm's management is not as clueless or as helpless as many on this thread are making it out to be. I don't know whether any of my "what ifs" would work, but that is kinda the point. None of us who has weighed in so far understands the CBA on a granular level, much less is privy to the goals, desires, and strategy of Storm management.

I wonder whether a player's salary is reduced proportionately if she doesn't return from playing overseas by the start of the season? Also, couldn't the Storm trade a guard for a forward? Or a forward for another forward who is a better fit and earns slightly less? Or go down to 10 players and then pick up someone who is a good match, has been cut by another team, and fits under the salary cap? My overall point is the Storm's management is not as clueless or as helpless as many on this thread are making it out to be. I don't know whether any of my "what ifs" would work, but that is kinda the point. None of us who has weighed in so far understands the CBA on a granular level, much less is privy to the goals, desires, and strategy of Storm management.
By the way, my previous response to your post, Dugway, was not meant to take issue with anything you said. Your post was well-researched, thoughtful, and carefully presented. I felt a lot smarter after reading it.
 
...

In essence, ... Nika, due to salary cap, is in a direct competition against one of the forwards. Due to years of service and/or draft placement, Victoria Vivians, Joyner Holmes, and Nika Muhl would make slightly more money; one of those three will be cut because of it! ...
if you're right in this analysis, then ... bye, bye V.V. (i'd assume. since cause nika is a far, far more valuable asset to the franchise overall, if not the better ballplayer ... yet.)
 
This link doesn't work unless I add some random stuff, so copy the link and remove the space before ".com"

https://www.thenexthoops .com/wnba/seattle-storm/seattle-storm-notebook-mercedes-russell-nika-muhl-wnba/
Mühl comes to the WNBA ready to contribute, having played for a UConn program that has produced many professionals. The 28-year-old Russell returns to Seattle with renewed confidence after spending the offseason playing in Australia and winning the WNBL alongside Storm legend Lauren Jackson.

You never know how a rookie’s skill will translate to the professional level, but Mühl’s first week with the team has justified the excitement. She will probably take time to adjust fully, but in her first preseason game on Tuesday, she looked unfazed.
UConn pedigree here:
Whenever the whistle blows, Mühl is the first player jumping off the bench to high-five her teammates or gather them in a huddle. She is always encouraging and communicating. Mühl is far more vocal than the average rookie, and that is crucial for a point guard.
In the video, Mühl worried that she might not make the roster. Auriemma responded that she would know exactly what she needed to do after the first day of camp. In hindsight, Mühl feels he was completely right.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,109
Messages
4,553,751
Members
10,436
Latest member
Bovrilandja


Top Bottom