In the highly commercialized and competitive environment of the NBA, a star's salary is often seen as a reflection of his or her ability and value. Teams are often willing to pay hefty salaries as they try to retain key players, but is the investment really worth it? Especially in a high-pressure environment like the playoffs, the performance of stars directly affects whether they are overrated by the market.
Recently, much of the NBA discussion has focused on two stars of the Boston Celtics, Jaylen Brown and Jayson Tatum. Tatum is particularly concerned because he could sign a record contract of up to $338 million over three years, which could become one of the largest contracts in NBA history. However, after digging into their playoff performances, does such a contract still seem reasonable?
Jayson Tatum, for example, is seen as the heart of the team, but he often doesn't perform as expected in key moments in the playoffs. According to the data, Tatum shot just 39.3 percent from key to the field and even worse from three-point range at 25.7 percent in the playoffs. It's a far cry from the offensive-defensive balance and scoring responsibilities he showed during the regular season. Especially in the finals last year, he struggled against a dense defense and fell far short of expectations!
Jaylen Brown is in a similar situation. Despite his consistent output during the regular season, his performance in the playoffs has been similarly volatile. His offensive strategy is often seen as too direct and aggressive, lacking tactical flexibility and court scheduling, which has become a shortcoming in the tense playoffs. These deficiencies were magnified in key moments, resulting in turnovers or a failure to score effectively.
Considering Embiid, while he's the regular season scoring champion and MVP candidate, his playoff performance is usually underwhelming. His style relies on physical confrontation and foul-making, which is often ineffective under the tight defense of the playoffs. His early exit in the playoffs, especially his failure to make it past the Eastern Conference Finals, clearly showed his inadequacy in crunch time.
These highly-paid stars have had a poor performance in the playoffs, putting a lot of pressure on the team. The NBA's salary structure is centered around stars, and if these players fail to perform in key moments, it will seriously affect the team's tactical layout and salary space. The Celtics are a case in point, and despite the overall strength of the team, Tatum and Brown are often unable to step up when leading players are needed in the playoffs.
Against this backdrop, Tatum and Brown's big contracts stand out in the eye. For teams, contracts should be based on the overall performance of the players, especially in the high-pressure environment of the playoffs. Contracts in reality often reflect the market value of the player
Impressive performances in the regular season while ignoring their possible underperformance in the most crucial moments.
In addition, such high contracts can limit the team's flexibility in salary space and reduce the maneuvering space in the trade market, making it difficult to make adjustments if necessary. Not only does this affect the team's long-term strategy, but it can also make it more difficult to pursue a championship.
When considering a maximum salary contract, team management must consider the player's key performance in the playoffs and his actual contribution to the team. Despite the skill and impact of players such as Tatum and Brown, the question of whether their performance in the playoffs is worth the salary cap is something to ponder.
The decision to award a player to a large contract should be based on a holistic approach, including his technical characteristics, his performance in the decisive moments of the game, and his contribution to the team's culture and long-term success. This is a crucial decision about the signing of the contract and the future direction of the team.
For fans, they want to see stars who step up when it matters most, not just players who excel in the regular season. Therefore, a star's playoff performance, especially in key moments, should be an important factor in evaluating their value and determining their compensation.
In summary, while high-paying contracts are common in the NBA, teams need to be more careful about assessing the true abilities and value of players in the playoffs and key moments before taking on such financial burdens. Only those stars who can perform well when the team needs it most will truly deserve the high contracts and fan expectations. This prudent approach not only protects the team's financial health, but also motivates the team to move forward more steadily on the journey to the championship.