Steve Kerr Would Take A Pay Cut To Shorten The NBA Season, Especially Since It Means He'll Never Have To Take A Pay Cut

Uproxx- Kerr told reporters in Dallas that he would be open to a reduction in games on the schedule, even as small as 82 to 75, in order to give players more time off between games even if it meant he made less money.

“I wouldn’t be opposed to it, even at the expense to my own salary, but it’s something that everyone would have to agree to,” Kerr said. “I think even just going down to 75 games, I think that would make a dramatic difference in schedule. Now I don’t see that happening because there is money at stake for everybody.”

​----

As the overly opinionated head coach of one of the most hated teams in all of professional sports, Steve Kerr may not be the hero we want....but he damn sure is the hero we need right now! Basketball - despite being as popular and profitable as it's ever been - needs saving and the person that would be willing to take a slight pay cut if it meant slightly reducing his workload is just the man for the job! There's simply no one more qualified to offer money to someone they know isn't going to take it than the guy whose wins record would forever remain intact if they did!

Some pessimists may say that this is an empty gesture since NBA owners would never - under any circumstances - sacrifice the revenue collected from 3-4 additional home games. However, could we ever declare that definitively without the spokesperson of the most insufferable franchise in the NBA taking the lead on a fruitless cause and selflessly offering up an undisclosed percentage of his 5 million dollar salary if - and only if - the NBA decides they value their employees wishes over guaranteed capital? I think not. 

We would never truly know whether or not crowd sourcing a league-wide pay cut would be able to cover the costs of violated television contracts and tens of thousands of unsold tickets without one brave soul raising their hand and profoundly stating "I'll do it if everyone else does". Saying that he would take less money if the impossible magically becomes possible doesn't cost Steve Kerr a single cent, but if it did then he would likkkke totally be fine with it. If there is a first step in the players strong arming their way into a shorter schedule then it's having the backing of their lesser paid, less important coaches. That stairway only leads to superstars sitting out more nationally televised games, but that doesn't mean that Steve Kerr isn't (hypothetically speaking, of course) putting his money where his mouth is - even if it is considered nothing more than loose change to a league that's worth billions as currently constructed.