「我離港前到過一間精神科醫院。當時有位病人禮貌地問,一個以作為世上最悠久民主政體而自傲的國家,如何能夠將此地交給一個政治制度非常不同的國家,且既沒諮詢當地公民,又沒給予他們民主的前景,好讓他們捍衞自己的將來。一個隨行同事說,奇怪,香港提出最理智問題的人,竟在精神科醫院。」彭定康 金融時報

“During a visit to a mental hospital before I left Hong Kong, a patient politely asked me how a country that prided itself on being the oldest democracy in the world had come to be handing over his city to another country with a very different system of government, without either consulting the citizens or giving them the prospect of democracy to safeguard their future. Strange, said one of my aides, that the man with the sanest question in Hong Kong is in a mental hospital.”Chris Patten Financial Times

Non Chinese literate friends, please simply switch to English Version provided by LOUSY Google Translation

Please participate in the unregistered demography survey of visitors at the right hand side bar. You are: ?

敬請參與在右下方的不記名訪客分佈調查問卷,你是: ?

Thursday, July 12, 2012

林書豪法則 and JULY 11th Free Agent Date

林書豪法則 and JULY 11th Free Agent Date



【ESPN】The NBA and the players' association have reached a settlement that clarifies some rights that Jeremy Lin and three other players have entering free agency.

The rule will now be that players who are claimed from waivers will have the same "Early Bird" rights as if they had been traded, but will not have full "Bird" rights unless they are claimed through the league's amnesty procedure.

That helps the New York Knicks' chances of keeping Lin, their breakout point guard, and Steve Novak, who led the league in 3-point shooting percentage last season. The Knicks will be able to sign both without being restricted by the salary cap.

Lin and Novak will have "Early Bird" rights. The Knicks repeatedly have said they planned to re-sign Lin, no matter what.



甚麼是“Early Bird” rights 和為何又稱 林書豪法則?


【ESPN中文版】「林書豪法則」已經正式通過,他留在尼克已經沒什麼障礙。

NBA與球員工會的談判最終達成協議,聯盟放棄上訴,承認 林書豪 和 史蒂夫諾瓦克等人的早期伯德條款。

兩人最終成為受益者。此前法官的裁決也正是如此,但總裁 大衛史騰 決定上訴,不過後來他延後上訴,而是選擇與工會談判,最終的結果是放棄上訴。

像 林書豪 這種曾被裁員的球員擁有早期伯德條款的權利,這規則也因此被稱為「林書豪法則」。不過雙方談判的結果也對球員進行了一些限制,球員只有在特赦期間被其他球隊簽下,才擁有完全的伯德條款。

林書豪 過了特赦期後才與尼克簽約,所以只有早期伯德條款。



相信很多留意 NBA 的網友,都很有興趣知道 Jeremy Lin 林書豪的去向,不過最新的消息是 侯斯頓火箭 先開出了合約,利誘 林書豪 加盟,而 紐約尼克隊則給了老油條 JK Jason Kidd 一張合約。


尼克 希望學 雷霆的 韋斯布魯克 配 費沙,有新舊兩位控衛,而且 林書豪的 NBA 經驗尚淺,縱有非凡潛力,也要有位老黃忠從旁指點。去火箭的話,Jeremy 就要獨自擔大旗,因為火箭控衛 Goran Dragic 被挖了去 太陽,有高薪就要有高水準表現,林書豪 如何自處?


大日子 July 11 ~~ NBA Teams May Begin Signing Free Agents,球隊和球員因為 “林書豪法則” Early Bird‘s right 作出的口頭協議,便可作實!不過,先讓我們讀讀對於 林書豪 轉會的正反的評論!


名教練 Larry Brown 就有評論:
【ESPN中文版】林書豪 已經接受火箭提供的 4年 2880萬美元的合約,而據《紐約郵報》報導,尼克方面將會匹配火箭報價,全力留下 林書豪。

東西區兩支球隊為林書豪掙得火熱,究竟值不值?前尼克主帥、NBA傳奇教練 賴瑞布朗 給出了自己的看法,他認為 林書豪 不值 4年 2880萬的合約,在 NBA 定位應該是一位出色的替補球員。

賴瑞布朗 在美國時間周四出息一檔節目時,就尼克和火箭追逐 林書豪 給出了自己的看法,「我覺得 林書豪 是一位非常棒的球員。尼克的體系成就了他。他抒寫的故事很完美。

但是,在我眼裡他在 NBA 應該是一位出色的替補球員。也許我錯了,我也希望他成為超級巨星,但是我覺得如果你僅以對他的興趣,給他超出實際的大合約的話,這不是一件好事。」

老帥這麼說無疑是想給追逐林書豪的球隊提醒,但布朗也十分理解球隊的做法。「尼克是否認為林書豪可以讓球隊更好,讓 小史 更好,讓 安東尼 更好,讓 錢德勒 更好 如果真能這樣,那麼紐約可以盡情的給出大合約。」

林書豪 在今年 2月底開始,將近一個多月的時間裡帶領尼克創造出色戰績,一股「林來瘋」席捲全球,使他成為全球炙手可熱的球星,賽季場均可以貢獻 14.6分 3.1個籃板和 6.2次助攻,並依靠出色的表現入選 2012年奧蘭多全明星新銳賽。林書豪到底值不值 4年 2880萬美元的大合約,新賽季會告訴我們答案。



需知,尼克 的大牌 安東尼 和 史杜達米亞 已經佔去薪酬的大部份,加上要 Match 火箭隊開出給 林書豪 的大合約,尼克 可能要交 豪華稅 luxury tax 給 NBA,這個是否划算呢?


【ESPN中文版】根據 ESPN報導,紐約尼克究竟有多麼喜愛林書豪?ESPN的著名專欄作家馬克斯坦恩給出了答案。

他在自己的推特上表示:即使有球隊給林書豪開出10億美金的合約,他們也會進行匹配。毫無疑問,尼克對匹配林書豪報價將他留在尼克一事,已經沒有任何的猶豫,因為相比 戈蘭德拉季奇(Goran Dragic),他的合約太便宜了。

究竟尼克是否會匹配火箭開出的合約,在美國當地的幾位著名記者或專欄作家看來,這件事情早已經板上釘釘。CBS的著名記者肯-貝爾格就明確表示「尼克已經準備好匹配任何為林書豪開出的合約」。

對於尼克而言,此時林書豪的合約和豪華稅對他們來說並不重要,只要留住林書豪,就是留下了巨大的市場,球隊的未來也將會因此而變得更加光明。

23歲的林書豪上賽季還是勉強獲得在 NBA打球機會的底薪球員,可是憑藉著他先發出戰那一段時間裡的神奇表現,他現在已經成為了萬眾期待的明日新星。相比起鳳凰城太陽從休士頓火箭挖角的 戈蘭德拉季奇(Goran Dragic),林書豪的合約實際上看上去性價比更高,也更加便宜。

上個賽季 德拉季奇 的表現確實很不錯,他的助攻率達到了 32.5%,場均失誤率僅有 18.7%,投籃命中率則高達 46%。然而對於林書豪而言,面對 德拉季奇 他的優勢依然明顯。

他的助攻率為 41%遠勝德拉季奇,這是作為控球後衛最關鍵的環節,此外他的失誤率雖然達到 21.4%,而投籃命中率為 45%略微遜色德拉季奇,但是在個人總效率上,林書豪達到了19.9,相比 德拉季奇 的 18和聯盟平均的 15,都有絕對優勢。

從效率而言,林書豪上賽季可以排在聯盟控球後衛的第八位,這個排名對於 23歲的他來說意義重大。在 史蒂夫納許 27歲之前,他都沒在個人效率方面達到這一級別,德隆威廉斯 也是到了 23歲才能夠實現 林書豪 做到的事情。

整體來看,林書豪 的合約總金額只是 德拉季奇 的一半,而兩人的名氣方面的巨大差距顯而易見。林書豪 將為尼克帶來大量的經濟收益,這足以抵消他第三年 930萬美元年薪和相應的豪華稅給球隊帶來的困擾。

26歲的 林書豪 年薪為 930萬美元,而 德隆 在 30歲的時候,薪水是 林書豪 26歲時年薪的兩倍。從這個角度來說,林書豪的合約仍然很便宜。



有正也有反,誰的評論比較中肯,美國時間七月十一日就是開放日,即香港的十二日,到時口頭協議,就可以付諸白紙黑字,真想急急看看 林書豪 的“錢途”是怎樣呢?


後記:
尼克 沒有在 七月十一日,開出 matching 合約留下 林書豪。
【ESPN中文版】自由球員市場已全面開放,各球隊也都加緊補強腳步,尼克總教練Mike Woodson今天(12日)指出,尼克絕對會跟進火箭之前對林書豪所提的4年2880萬美元的合約。

Woodson也說他上周得知火箭的合約提議後一點也不驚訝,「我一點也不意外,」Woodson在尼克的夏季聯盟比賽中表示,「林書豪永遠都是我們球隊前進的重要拼圖。」

從季後至今當被問到林書豪是否會回到紐約時,Woodson總是語帶肯定,他還在上賽季尼克首輪出局後,說林書豪的未來是一片光明。

上賽季林書豪出賽35場其中25場先發,繳出14.6分、6.2助攻、3.1籃板、1.6抄截的成績,且在他的帶領下,尼克也打出不俗的成績,進而揮軍季後賽,不過他在季末的膝蓋傷勢,使他無緣在季後賽首輪為尼克效力。

不過在今天《紐約每日新聞》報導中指出,林書豪對於尼克未能在火箭前提出合約協議感到生氣,對此林書豪在推特上寫道:「為什麼你們要相信所有的事情?沒有引述我的話等於可能不是真的。」

某消息來源指出,林書豪確實對於尼克沒有立即提出合約協議感到驚訝,但也了解到受限自由球員的林書豪不會離開紐約,因為尼克會為了林書豪對球隊的價值,以及場外的巨大利益而跟進合約。

至於Woodson則說尼克預計會在周五(13日)以中產階級條款的309萬美元簽下Jason Kidd,Woodson也說Kidd與林書豪會是完美的結合。

尼克也於今天確定以新秀基本薪資簽下阿根廷後衛Pablo Prigioni,他將成為林書豪與Kidd的第3號後衛。Prigioni入選這次的倫敦奧運代表隊,目前正在委內瑞拉進行國家隊集訓。


尼克 出口術再拖延,說要等到十三日簽下 JK,卻沒有了下文! 根據 《Early Bird's Right 林書豪法則》 我理解 尼克 是有優先權,看來 林書豪 的經理人要做些事,催催火箭和尼克了。



後後記:林書豪 去 Houston rockets 差不多成事實。
【ESPN中文版】在雷蒙德-費爾頓通過先簽後換加盟紐約尼克之後,越來越多的證據都在顯示尼克將不會匹配休士頓火箭對林書豪的報價。有消息稱,尼克打算放棄匹配,讓林書豪走人。

有球隊消息稱尼克仍在仔細考慮是否匹配林書豪3年2500萬美元的合約,不過ESPN的記史蒂芬-史密斯從尼克內部得到的消息稱,紐約將不會匹配這份合約。

另外ESPN紐約記者伊安-伯格利了解的球隊消息稱,火箭所提供的合約第三年1480萬美元的薪水,讓尼克不可能去匹配。如果尼克匹配了這份合約,他們將在第三年受制於豪華稅,將會因為受到豪華稅處罰,在2014-15賽季為林書豪耗費3000萬美元。

火箭為林書豪提供的合約是第一年500萬美元、第二年522.5萬美元,第三年則直接達到1480萬美元。

ESPN的馬克-史騰得到的消息稱,尼克在當地時間周六晚上(台北時間周日中午)收到了林書豪的報價合約,意味著他們必須在下周二晚上11:59(台北時間周三中午)之前決定是否匹配合約。否則,林來瘋將轉戰休士頓。

在昨天的交易發生後,尼克匹配林書豪的難度加大,情形更加的撲朔迷離。

卡梅羅-安東尼在這件事上,更多的是將問題轉嫁給火箭,「這不由我來決定,而是球隊管理層來決定是否匹配那份荒唐的合約。」

在交易中轉會到拓荒者的賈瑞德-傑弗裡斯則仍然相信林書豪將會留在尼克。「我從來都沒想過球隊會讓他離開,」傑弗裡斯說。

而林書豪在聽說昨天的交易之後,則是非常震驚。

「他感到非常驚訝,」消息說。「他一直都感覺尼克會匹配那份報價合約。」

尼克是否會匹配報價合約?林來瘋能否繼續留在紐約城?周三中午就能見分曉。


furthermore Carmelo Anthony 有以下的 comments

林書豪來年球季落腳何處,近日即將揭曉。被問到紐約尼克會不會跟進休士頓火箭開出的3年2500萬美元合約時,正在美國華府為奧運做準備的尼克前鋒Carmelo Anthony笑說:「這種話輪不到我來說,要不要跟進那張荒謬的合約,是由尼克球團決定的。」

對尼克來說,若跟進火箭的報價,等於合約的第3年要負擔約1490萬美元的薪水,這可能讓尼克超出薪資上限,必須支付豪華稅。而在火箭與林書豪簽約 後,尼克也積極以先簽後換的方式,向波特蘭拓荒者交易回後衛Raymond Felton,似乎也意味著尼克將選擇更便宜的人選,而不留下林書豪。

被問到相關問題時,正參加奧運男籃代表隊集訓的Anthony表示:「這個時間點有很多狀況,我目前不會去想那些事情。我樂見他回來,但我認為他必須要做對他來說最有利的事。」

至於尼克會不會跟進報價,Anthony則笑說:「這種話輪不到我來說,要不要跟進那張荒謬的合約,是由尼克球團決定的。」他也說:「要不要跟是球團決定的不是我。我已經厭煩了尼克可能不會跟大家卻怪罪在我頭上。我想要每個人有機會的時候都能賺錢。」

另一方面,尼克後衛J.R. Smith則在接受《運動畫刊》網站訪問時同意,如果尼克跟進火箭的報價,那麼林書豪的這張合約可能造成隊友之間的問題。Smith說:「這毫無疑問,我認為有些人會放在心上,因為他們打得更久,卻還沒有得到任何回報。」

Smith也說:「我相信這座城市會希望他(林書豪)回來,但球隊決定往不同的方向走。我認為這不是針對個人,只是生意就是這樣,我們只希望大家都得利。我不知道(尼克老闆James) Dolan先生現在對新舊豪華稅的不同有什麼看法,我只希望最後的結果會是雙贏。」。


連 Carmelo 都說是荒謬,尼克 高層想表達甚麽呢?疊埋心水去 休斯頓火箭,有可能變卦嗎?到時兩頭不到岸,哈哈哈!書豪仔最後的個桔!




伸延閱覽:
The 'Bird' rights/Jeremy Lin Rights ESPN
林書豪法則今日通過 ESPN
名帥:林書豪不值3000萬 他只有替補實力ESPN
「斯坦」火箭報價很便宜 10億紐約也匹配 ESPN
林書豪重要拼圖 尼克決定跟進 ESPN
林書豪合約 甜瓜笑稱荒謬 ESPN



9 comments:

Haricot 微豆 said...

SBB:

I always wonder if a top professional sport athlete should earn so much money as compared to say a scientist who has invented something that benefits all of man kind.

BTW, every time I leave a message here, a spam will show up in my email. So, I don't mind if you put in place some sort of anti-spam measures.

Cheers !!

the inner space said...

Dear Hari Big Brother,thank you for your input. Guess the best reply was, I copy from Economics text book about Goods and Competition!

Three levels of economic competition have been classified:

The most narrow form is direct competition (also called category competition or brand competition), where products that perform the same function compete against each other. For example, a brand of pick-up trucks competes with several different brands of pick-up trucks. Sometimes two companies are rivals and one adds new products to their line so that each company distributes the same thing and they compete.

The next form is substitute competition, where products that are close substitutes for one another compete. For example, butter competes with margarine, mayonnaise, and other various sauces and spreads.

The broadest form of competition is typically called budget competition. Included in this category is anything that the consumer might want to spend their available money (the so-called discretionary income) on. For example, a family that has $20,000 available may choose to spend it on many different items, which can all be seen as competing with each other for the family's available money.

the inner space said...

continue 。。。。。

HBB said: YOU always wonder if a top professional sport athlete should earn so much money as compared to say a scientist who has invented something that benefits all of man kind.

Top professional sport athlete 所提供的 sensation 是 unique 還是 可取代的,這要讓消費者來判斷了,而提供這些服務或享用的中間人,又願意投資多少。

from text book:
In economics, a good is something that is intended to satisfy some wants or needs of a consumer and thus has economic utility. It is normally used in the plural form—goods—to denote tangible commodities such as products and materials.

Although in economic theory all goods are considered tangible, in reality certain classes of goods, such as information, may only exist in intangible forms. Goods are contrasted with services, which are intangible commodities.

the inner space said...

furthermore 。。。。。
Economists assume that there are a number of different buyers and sellers in the marketplace. This means that we have competition in the market, which allows price to change in response to changes in supply and demand. Furthermore, for almost every product there are substitutes, so if one product becomes too expensive, a buyer can choose a cheaper substitute instead. In a market with many buyers and sellers, both the consumer and the supplier have equal ability to influence price.

In some industries, there are no substitutes and there is no competition. In a market that has only one or few suppliers of a good or service, the producer(s) can control price, meaning that a consumer does not have choice, cannot maximize his or her total utility and has have very little influence over the price of goods.

A monopoly is a market structure in which there is only one producer/seller for a product. In other words, the single business is the industry. Entry into such a market is restricted due to high costs or other impediments, which may be economic, social or political. For instance, a government can create a monopoly over an industry that it wants to control, such as electricity. Another reason for the barriers against entry into a monopolistic industry is that oftentimes, one entity has the exclusive rights to a natural resource. For example, in Saudi Arabia the government has sole control over the oil industry. A monopoly may also form when a company has a copyright or patent that prevents others from entering the market. Pfizer, for instance, had a patent on Viagra.

In an oligopoly, there are only a few firms that make up an industry. This select group of firms has control over the price and, like a monopoly, an oligopoly has high barriers to entry. The products that the oligopolistic firms produce are often nearly identical and, therefore, the companies, which are competing for market share, are interdependent as a result of market forces. Assume, for example, that an economy needs only 100 widgets. Company X produces 50 widgets and its competitor, Company Y, produces the other 50. The prices of the two brands will be interdependent and, therefore, similar. So, if Company X starts selling the widgets at a lower price, it will get a greater market share, thereby forcing Company Y to lower its prices as well.

There are two extreme forms of market structure: monopoly and, its opposite, perfect competition. Perfect competition is characterized by many buyers and sellers, many products that are similar in nature and, as a result, many substitutes. Perfect competition means there are few, if any, barriers to entry for new companies, and prices are determined by supply and demand. Thus, producers in a perfectly competitive market are subject to the prices determined by the market and do not have any leverage. For example, in a perfectly competitive market, should a single firm decide to increase its selling price of a good, the consumers can just turn to the nearest competitor for a better price, causing any firm that increases its prices to lose market share and profits.

一個頂尖的運動員如:球星,一個頂尖的唱歌者:歌星,一個頂尖的演員:明星 etc etc,跟發明家 inventor,他們是落入那一個 category 呢?

the inner space said...

關於 HBB:every time you leave a message here, a spam will show up in your email. So, you don't mind if I put in place some sort of anti-spam measures.

小弟深表歉意,若情況變壞,就會如我所寫:

IF situation worsen word verification will be resummed. 如情況惡化文字認證將再次啟用。

Haricot 微豆 said...

SBB: The spam problem is not uniquely yours !!

Haricot 微豆 said...

SBB: I understand the supply-demand principle and the resulting monetary transaction. But should our economy be based on consumerism alone (讓消費者來判斷)?

I am not promoting a nanny state in which the govt tells us what we should or should not consume in every aspect of our lives.

But, shouldn't we reward more the scientist who find a cure for cancer thereby saving million, as opposed to a highly skilled athlete who entertains thousands?

the inner space said...

Yes, HBB,I am not alone regarding the “SPAM” problem after releasing the Word verification requirement,the point is for how long I can tolerate with that? 哈哈哈!

the inner space said...

HBB,your point is well taken!for which you have mentioned it falls upon the situation of a monopoly 。。。。。

In the above context,I copied here again for your ease reference
《《 A monopoly is a market structure in which there is only one producer/seller for a product. In other words, the single business is the industry. Entry into such a market is restricted due to high costs or other impediments, which may be economic, social or political. For instance, a government can create a monopoly over an industry that it wants to control, such as electricity. Another reason for the barriers against entry into a monopolistic industry is that oftentimes, one entity has the exclusive rights to a natural resource. For example, in Saudi Arabia the government has sole control over the oil industry. A monopoly may also form when a company has a copyright or patent that prevents others from entering the market. Pfizer, for instance, had a patent on Viagra. 》》

It gave an example:A monopoly may also form when a company has a copyright or patent that prevents others from entering the market. Pfizer, for instance, had a patent on Viagra.

the one or the group who whom which synthesis VIAGRA or as you said,the scientist who find a cure for cancer thereby saving million!

Were they already rewarded by Pfizer? for decades they were paid and supported by their employer i.e. Pfizer just waiting for the successive succesful synthesis of the medication and experimented on human beings! I think they were well compensated by their contract with Pfizer。

Save for million of cases and multiple million of scientists who spent trillions of dollars without success,HOW you account for that?