PDA

View Full Version : Are the owners serious? A $45 million hard cap?



Pages : [1] 2

NYSpirit1
03-12-2011, 01:45 AM
The only CBA proposal offered by the owners thus far -- with 3 months to go before the current agreement expires -- calls for a hard salary cap of $45 million.

Later in the article: First, teams may simply have to get rid of players to fit under the hard cap -- and that goes for the Lakers and Celtics, too. This is the model the NHL adopted in 2005, and one that a significant number of NBA owners are pushing.

Credit: Ken Berger of CBS

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/14797731/postups-enjoy-or-hate-this-version-of-heat-while-you-can

How stupid. This is beyond ridiculous. That means every big market team, the Lakers, Mavericks, the Knicks, the Heat, the Celtics, will all have to trade away much of their players just to get under the hard cap and it will fill out every team so they're all even. What a stupid idea.

I can't even believe the owners came up with this. The players will never accept it. This is why small market teams shouldn't be in the league. They need money, they aren't gaining as much revenue and it's just bringing the league down. It's not just in the NBA, it's in the NFL too as all the small market owners are trying to gain more revenue and now there will be a lockout.

I hope the league does downsize and all these owners lose their teams. Things would be much easier to deal with in a potential CBA between big market owners and players. The "number" of NBA owners pushing for it are definitely all the small market teams, because why would any big market team ever want that? Getting rid of the small market teams is way better than splitting teams in Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Boston, Miami, etc. and making the league incredibly boring having superstars in cities like Minnesota, Memphis and Milwaukee. Nobody wants to see them on national television on a weekly basis.

To put that in perspective, the Lakers could trade Gasol, Bynum and Odom for nothing and still be nearly 6 million over the hard cap. They'd likely be left with Kobe and the bench to fit under these measures.

The Mavericks would have to let go of all their free agents this year and then get rid of Terry and Kidd, leaving them with Dirk and nothing. The Bulls would likely have to get rid of Carlos Boozer, sending them back to last year's level and that's before giving Derrick Rose a max extension, meaning they'd probably have to get rid of Deng too. The Celtics would have to get rid of 2 out of 4 of their All-Stars. The Knicks and Heat would have Melo/Amare and LeBron/Wade and nothing.

If this is the Cavs, Raptors, Nuggets, Suns and Jazz way of getting back at their former star players, it's not going to work. Just because they didn't surround their superstars with enough talent to win and they left, doesn't mean the league should suffer for it. Duncan is in a small market, was surrounded by talent, stayed in San Antonio (instead of going to big market Orlando) and won championships. Those teams didn't do that. The players left.

The interest of the NBA is at it's second all-time high (behind the Jordan era), why would Stern allow that to be messed up?

DoMeFavors
03-12-2011, 01:49 AM
Every team would have a star player lol

six
03-12-2011, 01:50 AM
Wow, they are better off keeping the big market players and fans happy......

DoMeFavors
03-12-2011, 01:51 AM
If this is true Lakers are going to be in some serious trouble..

tbone2171
03-12-2011, 01:53 AM
http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/14797731/postups-enjoy-or-hate-this-version-of-heat-while-you-can

How stupid. This is beyond ridiculous. That means every big market team, the Lakers, Mavericks, the Knicks, the Heat, the Celtics, will all have to trade away much of their players just to get under the hard cap and it will fill out every team so they're all even. What a stupid idea.

I can't even believe the owners came up with this. The players will never accept it. This is why small market teams shouldn't be in the league. They need money, they aren't gaining as much revenue and it's just bringing the league down. It's not just in the NBA, it's in the NFL too as all the small market owners are trying to gain more revenue and now there will be a lockout.

I hope the league does downsize and all these owners lose their teams. Things would be much easier to deal with in a potential CBA between big market owners and players. The "number" of NBA owners pushing for it are definitely all the small market teams, because why would any big market team ever want that? Getting rid of the small market teams is way better than splitting teams in Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Boston, Miami, etc. and making the league incredibly boring having superstars in cities like Minnesota, Memphis and Milwaukee. Nobody wants to see them on national television on a weekly basis.

The interest of the NBA is at it's second all-time high (behind the Jordan era), why would Stern everything get messed up?

Yeah what a ****ing idiotic idea ....who would want parity in a sport :rolleyes:

brandonwarne52
03-12-2011, 01:55 AM
Uh, pretty sure the amount of existing contracts would make that impossible, wouldn't it?

DoMeFavors
03-12-2011, 01:55 AM
btw how is it boring having superstars in minnesota milwakuee and memphis? It would be good every team we have a chance and there wouldnt be teams like Cavs this year, Nets last year anymore.

dhopisthename
03-12-2011, 01:55 AM
45 million? they do realize that only team is under 45 million at this time? the only way that would work is if they allowed all contracts to be grandfathered in and then lowered the max to like 10 million

brandonwarne52
03-12-2011, 01:57 AM
Why does every team have to have a chance? The teams that draft better and sign better should flat out BE BETTER.

Rego247
03-12-2011, 01:58 AM
lockout here we come.

$KnicksAndKobe$
03-12-2011, 02:01 AM
The ratings for the NBA would get destroyed ...


I just don't see this happening ...


1. Get rid of buy-outs
2. Hard cap at 55mill
3. No more MLE
4. The ability to somehow void a contract when a player has underachieved drastically like Eddy Curry or Jerome James. Proof would be needed like underachieving in practice, statistics, or games played.

brandonwarne52
03-12-2011, 02:01 AM
Why get rid of buyouts?

papipapsmanny
03-12-2011, 02:02 AM
you cannot have a hard cap that low, that is just ludicrous

I think the lowest hard cap that you can have that is even plausible is like 50 million range

gerber
03-12-2011, 02:03 AM
stop acting stupid people.

It will end up higher then 45 million.

DoMeFavors
03-12-2011, 02:03 AM
If this is true I wonder what Amare and Melo will do.. I mean
Bosh, Wade, Lebron are only a little bit more money than Mr. I need to sign that extension Melo and Amare. Looks like Billups is staying. .500 bball!!

D1JM
03-12-2011, 02:04 AM
hard cap at around 75 million

gerber
03-12-2011, 02:05 AM
If NBA wants to survive they MUST do this, obviously not at 45 but it must happen.

HOW is it that the NHL is taking over the NBA as number 3 sport?

papipapsmanny
03-12-2011, 02:07 AM
If NBA wants to survive they MUST do this, obviously not at 45 but it must happen.

HOW is it that the NHL is taking over the NBA as number 3 sport?

Because the NBA seems fixed and about 4 teams can maybe win the ship each year and the regular season barely means anything anymore

mmmmcheeeese
03-12-2011, 02:16 AM
nba players make a lot more than they should...
they'll still be well off even with the lower cap.

StrandedCub
03-12-2011, 02:16 AM
If NBA wants to survive they MUST do this, obviously not at 45 but it must happen.

HOW is it that the NHL is taking over the NBA as number 3 sport?

I'm sorry but I don't believe that is even close. Most hockey games still aren't even on National TV. Actually, are any constantly on National TV? The idea that the NHL is even remotely close to the NBA seems ludicrous to me.

Chronz
03-12-2011, 02:20 AM
Lowballing eh, either way what happens to all the contract in existence? The average salary in the league is significantly higher than 45M, where do these players go to collect their checks.

oak2455
03-12-2011, 02:23 AM
Notice nobody pays attention to DoMeImajoke....:facepalm:

oak2455
03-12-2011, 02:24 AM
I'm sorry but I don't believe that is even close. Most hockey games still aren't even on National TV. Actually, are any constantly on National TV? The idea that the NHL is even remotely close to the NBA seems ludicrous to me.

agreed and whoever thinks otherwise is clueless...

jmoney85
03-12-2011, 02:25 AM
this would be the best thing for the nba

BALLER R
03-12-2011, 02:27 AM
45 MILL ???? so thats like what 2 superstars max contract and no more players. nawww im not feeling that

justinnum1
03-12-2011, 02:27 AM
this is called negotiation... ask for everything and settle in the middle

Shmontaine
03-12-2011, 02:29 AM
kinda like asking for an extra billion off the top... this will never happen...

arkanian215
03-12-2011, 02:31 AM
They're starting somewhere. If they want a hard cap, it'll have to be somewhere proportional to the max. NHL players don't get paid as much as NBA players but they also need to fit more players under the team budget at the same time. I just can't imagine a hard cap. The league would lose money. There has to be other ways to protect owners from themselves.

Geargo Wallace
03-12-2011, 02:32 AM
Every team would have a star player lol

**** that! i don't want another CB4

GodsSon
03-12-2011, 02:43 AM
It obviously isn't going to remain at 45 mil, the owners are just low-balling at this point to see how the PA responds; that's how you negotiate. Like I've said, a hard cap of around 55-60 mil should be adequate.

Public Enemy #1
03-12-2011, 02:49 AM
I find this all very funny. 45 million is pretty low but screw all the teams that are trying to create super teams. It would be sweet redemption to see the Lakers/Heat/Celtics/Knicks get taken apart. I don't want to see 4-6 heavyweights each year going for a title. I want some parity and surprise. League will get boring and will lose millions of fans if star players keep teaming up on one team.

Car Ramrod
03-12-2011, 02:52 AM
This is long overdue. I agree the current contracts should be grandfathered in but teams should be screwed by bad contracts. The only way to do this is with a hard cap. If someone makes 10 million a year for 5 years and can find a way to make it last the rest of their lives they don't deserve it in the first place.

Parity is good for sports and players staying with teams is also good for fans. Being able to buy players is not good management. You can't tell me Chris Paul in New Orleans, Howard in Orlando and Griffin with the Clippers is not the best for the league as a whole.

I am glad it is not the stars negotiating this time around. If the league wants to keep as many jobs as possible they need the guys who will be affected by contraction to have a voice.

I could see cutting out a few teams for sure, but the owners are the ones taking the risk and should be able to make money. Its not like the players are starving. I say raise the minimum and lower the max.

There is a reason the NFL has the largest draw and for a fan knowing your team has a chance is the reason. Are you going to spend $100 on a ticket to a Wolves or Cavs game........exactly.

What about is Lebron was still in Cleveland?

Rndy
03-12-2011, 02:53 AM
I hope they just give unlimited Cap to teams with 6+ Championships.

MacFitz92
03-12-2011, 02:53 AM
$45 million hard cap is ridiculous.

abe_froman
03-12-2011, 02:59 AM
yeah this pretty ****ed up on the owners part

i will say this.they better remember what happened last time,and baseball and whats going on right now with the nfl.the people are pissed,and while your going to alienate some owners/players/fans in what you'll do,it's better than alienating and pissing off the entire nba fanbase.so they need to pull back because the train their on is headed to hell

JPHX
03-12-2011, 02:59 AM
obviously its not gonna be that low. a median is gonna be reached at probably around $50m. contracts should be restructured to fit the new cba. im still for a franchise tag as well. this would be good for the league.

VikesTwinsWolve
03-12-2011, 02:59 AM
I find this all very funny. 45 million is pretty low but screw all the teams that are trying to create super teams. It would be sweet redemption to see the Lakers/Heat/Celtics/Knicks get taken apart. I don't want to see 4-6 heavyweights each year going for a title. I want some parity and surprise. League will get boring and will lose millions of fans if star players keep teaming up on one team.

Exactly

abe_froman
03-12-2011, 03:02 AM
I find this all very funny. 45 million is pretty low but screw all the teams that are trying to create super teams. It would be sweet redemption to see the Lakers/Heat/Celtics/Knicks get taken apart. I don't want to see 4-6 heavyweights each year going for a title. I want some parity and surprise. League will get boring and will lose millions of fans if star players keep teaming up on one team.

there isnt parity now and your here on an nba forum ,doesnt seem like your that bored with the only 5 realistic title contender system to me

shep33
03-12-2011, 03:12 AM
Lebron back to Cleveland?

nickdymez
03-12-2011, 03:17 AM
Yeah what a ****ing idiotic idea ....who would want parity in a sport :rolleyes:

Lemme guess, your team is ******?

nickdymez
03-12-2011, 03:18 AM
I hope they just give unlimited Cap to teams with 6+ Championships.

7 is better

Public Enemy #1
03-12-2011, 03:18 AM
there isnt parity now and your here on an nba forum ,doesnt seem like your that bored with the only 5 realistic title contender system to me

Well, thats because I'm a big NBA fan. I used to watch every playoff game and be so excited to watch all the nationally televised game every week. But the last couple of years I have been loosing interest. Yes, I still watch a lot of games, but I stick more to watching just my team... Playoff winners are so set in stone.... So to answer your question, I have become bored with 5 realistic title contenders. I won't be watching all the playoff games or even be excited to watch certain series because one team will be widely superior. Anything else? :eyebrow:

JB0B0
03-12-2011, 03:25 AM
45 mill? lol. Anything lower than 55 mill is laughable.

THE MTL
03-12-2011, 03:31 AM
David Stern knows how much money is coming in from BIG MARKETS and how it is better for the league. The NBA would be ruined if this is anything similar was to ever happen. Owners complain how the values of their teams now. Over that rule, every team would be SHOT!

knicks_champ
03-12-2011, 03:53 AM
If this is true I wonder what Amare and Melo will do.. I mean
Bosh, Wade, Lebron are only a little bit more money than Mr. I need to sign that extension Melo and Amare. Looks like Billups is staying. .500 bball!!

You sir = :facepalm:

You bleed the hater juice.

JB0B0
03-12-2011, 04:05 AM
Stupid. No need for a hard cap. Just get rid of the ****ing MLE. IT'S THAT SIMPLE.

bmd1101
03-12-2011, 04:13 AM
Pretty sad, they need to think of the NFL's current situation as an opportunity to make back some ground that they lost over the past few years. Last thing they need is to head to a lockout, get **** done.

Edit:

I'm not exactly sure of all the ins and outs of the cap but according to this: http://hoopshype.com/salaries.htm all but the kings would be over the cap.

TopsyTurvy
03-12-2011, 04:17 AM
This is but one of a LONG list of reasons why the NBA is going to see a lockout. If you think the NFL negotiations are bad, they have nothing on this bargaining agreement.

bmd1101
03-12-2011, 04:20 AM
This is but one of a LONG list of reasons why the NBA is going to see a lockout. If you think the NFL negotiations are bad, they have nothing on this bargaining agreement.

By that extremely low ball figure, i'd imagine so.

LakersIn5
03-12-2011, 04:20 AM
Why does every team have to have a chance? The teams that draft better and sign better should flat out BE BETTER.

THIS. IS IT THE TEAMS LIKE THE LAKERS FAULT THAT THEY HAVE A BETTER MANAGEMENT THAN OTHERS? AND In THE BEGINNING EVERYTEAM HAD A THE SAME CHANCE BUT ONLY THE BETTER TEAMS MADE A WAY TO HAVE A BETTER CHANCE. AND YOURE GONNA PENALIZE THEM FOR THAT? KEEP THE CURRENT CBA. GIVE THE PLAYERS FREEDOM! LET THEM PLAY WHEREVER THEY WANT TO PLAY! DAMN IT!

JayAllDay
03-12-2011, 04:28 AM
45 million? There might be European teams with bigger payroll than that.

Trueblue2
03-12-2011, 04:31 AM
**** that! If the owners aren't willing to spend to lock up stars long term it's thier own damn fault. I bet if the clippers had better ownership/coaching they'd be in the playoff hunt this year. If the twolves got a good #2 option for Kevin love and added solid bench players they'd make the playoffs in a year or two, but instead they're tied for the worst record in the league. If owners spend the fans will come... Who honestly gave a crap about the cabs before lebron showed up? the cap is the same for everyone, if the owners aren't gonna spend to win it's thier own damn fault.

And if they can't afford it they shouldn't be owning a team in the first place.

jeter 2
03-12-2011, 04:32 AM
can't the union just decertify like the NFL?

ragee
03-12-2011, 04:37 AM
I think the owners are being wise on starting it at 45... That's how you haggle guys... Start it with the most ridiculous offer so you can somehow end up at what you really want...

ragee
03-12-2011, 04:56 AM
If NBA wants to survive they MUST do this, obviously not at 45 but it must happen.

HOW is it that the NHL is taking over the NBA as number 3 sport?

3rd? What's second after football?

faridk89
03-12-2011, 05:09 AM
first off it would make the NBA a lot more exciting to watch...second of all 45 is a little low maybe somewhere between 50-55 would work

faridk89
03-12-2011, 05:11 AM
THIS. IS IT THE TEAMS LIKE THE LAKERS FAULT THAT THEY HAVE A BETTER MANAGEMENT THAN OTHERS? AND In THE BEGINNING EVERYTEAM HAD A THE SAME CHANCE BUT ONLY THE BETTER TEAMS MADE A WAY TO HAVE A BETTER CHANCE. AND YOURE GONNA PENALIZE THEM FOR THAT? KEEP THE CURRENT CBA. GIVE THE PLAYERS FREEDOM! LET THEM PLAY WHEREVER THEY WANT TO PLAY! DAMN IT!

lol and its such a coincidence that pretty much every team that competes these days is over the cap...

Trueblue2
03-12-2011, 05:14 AM
Can't other teams go over the cap too? If you're gonna try to pinch pennies in the NBA you're not gonna compete, simple as that.

Mudvayne91
03-12-2011, 05:20 AM
If all these teams like the Lakers have truly great FO's, there should be no reason they can't sustain their success.

I'd be in favor of it. At least the hard cap at a reasonable number. Can't expect it to stay at 45.

faridk89
03-12-2011, 05:23 AM
If all these teams like the Lakers have truly great FO's, there should be no reason they can't sustain their success.

I'd be in favor of it. At least the hard cap at a reasonable number. Can't expect it to stay at 45.

+1 imagine the nhl having a higher hard cap then the nba :p

Wade>You
03-12-2011, 05:31 AM
People point to the NFL and NHL hard caps as proof of parity. Try telling that to teams like the Miami Dolphins and Detroit Lions, for example, that continue to make mistakes in personnel and will continue to suck for years to come because of it.

Hard caps don't take the science out of building a championship contender. And if it did, you wouldn't need a front office.

The (new) owners care more about profit than winning and that's what the CBA discussions are all about

Contraction would be so much better at this point and will actually help teams in the lower echelon improve.

Trueblue2
03-12-2011, 05:42 AM
It's not so much that the lakers have a great FO, it's that the owners of other teams are content with mediocrity. If they want to compete with the lakers/celtics/heat/bulls they have to make the same monetary sacrifices that those teams made, theres absolutely nothing stopping non competitive teams from making moves to netter the future of their franchise. Look at nj, they're in a good position to make a run next year because their owner broke out his check book to get a high caliber player. If Kevin love had a stud pg and some depth behind him the twolves would be scary. You don't need to form a superteam to compete, you just gotta spend the money to put a solid team together top to bottom. Last I checked the lakers aren't the only team that can use the mle. It's time for cheap owners to put up or shut up, and focus on building a competitive team rather than focus on changing the rules so they can compete.

M.Bibby2.0
03-12-2011, 06:08 AM
Trueblue2 Trueblue2 is online now
Standout

Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 155
It's not so much that the lakers have a great FO, it's that the owners of other teams are content with mediocrity. If they want to compete with the lakers/celtics/heat/bulls they have to make the same monetary sacrifices that those teams made, theres absolutely nothing stopping non competitive teams from making moves to netter the future of their franchise. Look at nj, they're in a good position to make a run next year because their owner broke out his check book to get a high caliber player. If Kevin love had a stud pg and some depth behind him the twolves would be scary. You don't need to form a superteam to compete, you just gotta spend the money to put a solid team together top to bottom. Last I checked the lakers aren't the only team that can use the mle. It's time for cheap owners to put up or shut up, and focus on building a competitive team rather than focus on changing the rules so they can compete.

you couldn't be more wrong. a hard cap has become an absolute necessity because players are currently deciding when where and who to play with at will. Big markets have huge advantages here, small market teams are not failing because of cheap owners, the owners cannot afford to pull signings like the Lakers because the teams don't generate enough revenue to cover such costs. I'm sure you and many bandwagon fans would be fine with the league contracting to 10 superteams, and that's what will happen unless stars are forced to take much less money to play with other stars. The lakers for instance have an advantage just being in the LA area, naturally the demographics will support a team and produce higher revenues than a Sacramento team for instance. Additionally in order for smaller markets to compete they have been forced to give ridiculous contracts to players who don't deserve them, (eg, JJ, RudyGay) and the FO's have little to no choice if they want to maintain a legitimate team. I'm not sure you know anything about how a business works but a team cannot operate long term at a negative profit and thats what you are suggesting. Small markets wont make as much money as New York, LA teams based on demographics not FO moves. A horrible NY team the previous decade always maintained attendance and made money.

LakersIn5
03-12-2011, 06:40 AM
lol and its such a coincidence that pretty much every team that competes these days is over the cap...

and its their fault because????

so you want the lakers and wolves have the same chance of winning?? even if the lakers have a better FO and have more will to win? thats just not fair.

Crzycjunx76
03-12-2011, 07:01 AM
45 million? they do realize that only team is under 45 million at this time? the only way that would work is if they allowed all contracts to be grandfathered in and then lowered the max to like 10 million

I suspect they would have a grandfather clause for existing contracts(using their percentage of the old cap to calculate their "value" with the new cap), and then all new contracts signed would be based upon the new cap... by that I mean that since all deals would be adjusted down by the percentage of change in the cap the max deal would be smaller, the MLE would be smaller, draft slotting would be smaller, etc. If anything that would actually be a boon to the big market teams... Just two reasons, hear me out.

1) Yes there would be increased parity among the mid and small tier cities. However this would surely do away with any form of revenue sharing from individual team revenues.

2) With smaller salaries across the board the only way to really get that huge payday is through advertising. There is a definite advantage to being in New York or LA if you want a big endorsement, even middle of the road players on a team with great name recognition stand to make more money from advertising than a good player on in BFE.


BESIDES... this is pre-bargaining. The owners are just setting a mark that I am sure they would love to have, but at the end of the day they are setting themselves up for bargaining, what they likely consider reasonable is a bit different than what they will first come to the table with. My guess would be a soft cap around 50 mil, with triple luxury tax for every dollar over cap without exceptions.

CityofChaos
03-12-2011, 07:34 AM
Dispersion of NBA superstars? Sure why not. The NBA is too predictable...theres TOO MUCH repetition when it comes to the playoffs given the fact that more teams make it than dont.

gilly
03-12-2011, 07:34 AM
I think they should set a hard cap at 50million and release all players and say that you can only have one player at a certain salary (so only one player at the max, roughly 12m/year). That way every team will get a good player and its up to the team to build. Draft picks' contracts don't count towards the cap for 3 seasons and they can only sign a max contract after 5 total seasons in the league.

Antipod
03-12-2011, 08:01 AM
Look out .... the lockout is coming !!

-Kobe24-TJ19-
03-12-2011, 08:09 AM
lmao this is never gonna happen

hard cap will be over 70 millions

-Kobe24-TJ19-
03-12-2011, 08:10 AM
...

NYKalltheway
03-12-2011, 08:15 AM
Lockout just seems closer. Of course this is baiting by the owners but what would please them? Anything under 65m with the current salaries is laughable. If players agree on a 10% or 20% paycut then 55m should be enough. 45m is a joke but we all know it's not the final offer, if even actual.

Knickrocketsfan
03-12-2011, 08:17 AM
these owners are ******. who would go with this logic: Lets reduce player salaries and Rise our Profits. I'm sorry but I hope there is a lock out to teach these owners a lesson. As Kobe said, he will just play in Europe. If a lockout expect most player to do this.

-Kobe24-TJ19-
03-12-2011, 08:20 AM
these owners are ******. who would go with this logic: Lets reduce player salaries and Rise our Profits. I'm sorry but I hope there is a lock out to teach these owners a lesson. As Kobe said, he will just play in Europe. If a lockout expect most player to do this.

If Kobe aka the most popular player goes to Europe, then Stern will commit a suicide.

No joke, NBA would lose billions.

magichatnumber9
03-12-2011, 08:30 AM
I want financial audits for the last 10 years

tmacsc2
03-12-2011, 08:37 AM
Good i want all the super athletes to start taking huge pay cuts! none of these people deseve to be making more than 10 million a year i think they should all get 5 mil a year at the most!

Athletes Contracts are getting ridiculous and all sports are gonna pay for it!

FarOutIos
03-12-2011, 08:48 AM
I think it's funny how most people who complain about a lower cap that would level the playing field of the NBA is a fan of a big market team.

As a fan of the Kings, I can tell you that the NBA is currently built around pleasing the big market teams. And as a result, I have been losing interest in the NBA for years.

Now that the Kings are leaving Sacramento, I can tell you that I will no longer be an NBA fan. End of story. The NBA is burning bridges with many fans like me.

Ask fans in Seattle. Many feel the same way.

Maybe this thread is a sign of hope for the NBA... Hopefully they are trying to save the fans. The NBA should realize, that while the big cities are big markets for the fans, the majority our population does not live in LA, Boston, NY and even the top 10 nba markets combines.

The majority of the US citizens live in smaller cities and media markets. Leveling the playing of the NBA will keep the smaller cities interested in the NBA.

And think of the the televised games. Currently, most televised NBA games seem to be Laker/Heat/Celtic games. The only reason most of us small market fans watch any of these games, is that they are the only games on. I would be just as happy watching a T-Wolves/Grizzles game if Garnet and Pau were still on those teams, and the league was more competitive in general.

The NFL is more competitive and has been gaining popularity in masses in recent years... its about time that the NBA learns a thing or two. And hopefully, the NBA will pass the message along to the refs as well...

BlondeBomber41
03-12-2011, 08:53 AM
3rd? What's second after football?

Baseball....

Blackwater13
03-12-2011, 09:03 AM
People point to the NFL and NHL hard caps as proof of parity. Try telling that to teams like the Miami Dolphins and Detroit Lions, for example, that continue to make mistakes in personnel and will continue to suck for years to come because of it.

Hard caps don't take the science out of building a championship contender. And if it did, you wouldn't need a front office.

The (new) owners care more about profit than winning and that's what the CBA discussions are all about

Contraction would be so much better at this point and will actually help teams in the lower echelon improve.

Actually the Dolphins went from a 1 win team to having home field advantage in the playoffs the very next season. That is the very definition of parity and what make the NFL so interesting. Incompetent management has nothing to do with a hard cap but it does level the playing field for all teams. Weather or not the have not's can capitalize on that is an entirely different question.

TheDiggler
03-12-2011, 09:07 AM
I smell lockout.

But, I'm for even teams. I would love it ... you would have like 20 teams called contenders. Not only 3-5.

TheDiggler
03-12-2011, 09:10 AM
I think it's funny how most people who complain about a lower cap that would level the playing field of the NBA is a fan of a big market team.

As a fan of the Kings, I can tell you that the NBA is currently built around pleasing the big market teams. And as a result, I have been losing interest in the NBA for years.

Now that the Kings are leaving Sacramento, I can tell you that I will no longer be an NBA fan. End of story. The NBA is burning bridges with many fans like me.

Ask fans in Seattle. Many feel the same way.

Maybe this thread is a sign of hope for the NBA... Hopefully they are trying to save the fans. The NBA should realize, that while the big cities are big markets for the fans, the majority our population does not live in LA, Boston, NY and even the top 10 nba markets combines.

The majority of the US citizens live in smaller cities and media markets. Leveling the playing of the NBA will keep the smaller cities interested in the NBA.

And think of the the televised games. Currently, most televised NBA games seem to be Laker/Heat/Celtic games. The only reason most of us small market fans watch any of these games, is that they are the only games on. I would be just as happy watching a T-Wolves/Grizzles game if Garnet and Pau were still on those teams, and the league was more competitive in general.

The NFL is more competitive and has been gaining popularity in masses in recent years... its about time that the NBA learns a thing or two. And hopefully, the NBA will pass the message along to the refs as well...

:clap: Good post. Great read.

Niro
03-12-2011, 09:15 AM
Why does every team have to have a chance? The teams that draft better and sign better should flat out BE BETTER.

this
and i am a warriors fan
why should a team be punished for drafting steals in the draft or rip other teams in trade?? wtf
if teams would do a decent job and not sign every 20ppg player to a max contract their wouldnt be problems like that

Crackadalic
03-12-2011, 09:56 AM
This is so bs. Why is people complaining about big market teams? Last i check NY sucked for 10 years. Boston didnt win jack ish since the 80's before KG and Ray Ray came. Chi wasnt all that special until Derrick Rose. Spurs is a small market team that won 4 chips in a 9 year span. Utah has been a good playoff team for almost 15 years. OKC is dominating and are fun to watch

If managements were able to do a good job instead of making dumb mistakes then a lot of small market teams wouldnt be complaining

torontosports10
03-12-2011, 09:59 AM
The league is a ****ing joke. You have 5 owners happy with it, and 25 that know its a joke and have no way of winning...ever.

What's also a joke is these Laker fans saying "its not our fault our team has a great front office" Give me a break. They made one legit move to get there and that was setting up to sign Shaq.

-Kobe demanded a trade, which as a rookie is ******** and shouldn't happen
-Gasol trade was ******** and was someone doing a favor which shouldn't happen
-Signing Artest to MLE was ********

List can go on and on.

These punk players think they should decide where they want to play right off the bat. At least Bosh and Lebron did there work for the extent of the contract, then earned the right to be a Free Agent.

O, and for those saying hockey isn't becoming the 3rd most popular sports, you must have missed the articles that came out a while back proving it through attendance numbers, profit etc..

I personally pray for a long extended lockout, and some kind of solution to the joke of a league.

The NBA is a joke, always was a joke, and will continue to be a joke.

Knickrocketsfan
03-12-2011, 02:09 PM
Good i want all the super athletes to start taking huge pay cuts! none of these people deseve to be making more than 10 million a year i think they should all get 5 mil a year at the most!

Athletes Contracts are getting ridiculous and all sports are gonna pay for it!

while I agree with this statement I also have to disagree. We are the ones that allow them to have these contracts. We make the Nba and other suports make millions upon millions of dollars. So the only thing that is right is to have the players make a lot of money, b/c the owners are making a ton of money off them.

JLynn943
03-12-2011, 02:20 PM
100% for this. It might actually make basketball interesting again for the fans of the "other" 20+ teams.

FlakeyFool
03-12-2011, 02:27 PM
Yeah parity sucks...please

Hawkeye15
03-12-2011, 02:32 PM
obviously this is their initial demand, and they went low knowing the players will never go for it, and come back. Its called negotiation guys. There is no way on earth they could have a $45 million hard cap. Its impossible unless they cancel all contracts currently, and start over. Which will NEVER happen

I would guess the hard cap will be around $65-70 million when done, with a small period of time for teams that are over that to get under (couple years probably).

Lloyd Christmas
03-12-2011, 02:34 PM
Why are big market team fans complaining about a hardcap? Stern will still hook you up in the draft lottery and you will always have an advantage signing free agents.

Hawkeye15
03-12-2011, 02:34 PM
I honestly can't believe fans, including all of you, wouldn't like to see 10 teams that are contenders a year instead of 3. Obviously Laker fans (since they are ALWAYS good) would hate this idea, but I can't think of a more exciting NBA than having 10 teams that can actually win a ring in the same year.

Hawkeye15
03-12-2011, 02:35 PM
with this post, it may be the first time in PSD history Jim Carrey has been represented in 4 straight posts....

NYKalltheway
03-12-2011, 02:37 PM
I'm all for parity but there's better ways of achieving it. People against this $45m hard cap are not anti-parity fans by definition...

If you want $45m hard cap, reduce ticket prices to at most $100 a night(best seats), reduce all the advertisments and tv timeouts, remove anything that is anti-sport but purely commercial and then talk about the player salaries.

Owners are making a bucket of money, players do too, owners want more, players don't want less... Fans want their teams to be as good as possible.

How does this solve parity? If anything, it will either dramatically reduce the level of the game throughout the league -> less neutral fans therefore less international tv rights etc. And it will create dynasties all over but much less talented. You'll have 3-4 relatively good teams with no superstar that will find their way in the playoffs and say goodbye in the 2nd round, and 3-4 teams with a superstar that will attempt to go all the way. Only thing that changes is 1st round playoffs.

How does this change allow trades and makes it easier? It basically isolates teams to get stuck with 70-80% of their roster year in year out.

It will only work if players accept to reduce the max to some 8m. Never going to happen with guys like Rashard Lewis earning around 20m!!!

Sixerlover
03-12-2011, 02:40 PM
$45 can't be the number that started the conversation. That means a lockout is essentially definite if they are that far apart.

dnewguy
03-12-2011, 02:42 PM
Just let the Bulls, Lakers, Knicks and Celtics miss the play-offs in 1 season and see if there are any NBA fans left. Stupid ideo, this isn't Hockey, no one wants to watch a good player + scrubs play.

dwadefan03
03-12-2011, 02:42 PM
wed be better off contracting sucky teams than trying to get 29 teams under a 45 mil dollar limit

Southsideheat
03-12-2011, 02:44 PM
All existing contracts would get grandfathered in. Relax people.

Flash3
03-12-2011, 02:46 PM
yea seems to far

and miami isnt a big market.

SpeedyRecovery
03-12-2011, 02:47 PM
would be all for a hard cap, maybe not 45mill but something would be better then nothing.
as a fan it really isn't that fun to watch the same teams get to the first 4 spots almost all the time. i am a raps fan and use to watching the playoffs without them, so i usually go for the underdogs, in which they almost always lose.
i'm pretty close to ending my relationship with basketball if all i get to see is superteams and greedy players making more money then they will ever need. of course the owners will make more money but i would sacrifice that in a heart beat if the nba was a little more like the nfl and have different teams vying for position.

C-ross12
03-12-2011, 02:49 PM
Most teams are losing money.. Something has to be done to make the NBA profitable.

Giantwarrior
03-12-2011, 02:55 PM
if they set a hard cap, the will let teams have a few years to get under the cap.

Giantwarrior
03-12-2011, 02:56 PM
they need to get rid of 4 teams in the NBA.

Giantwarrior
03-12-2011, 02:58 PM
Timberwolves, Hornets, Kings, bobcats.

topdog
03-12-2011, 02:58 PM
http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/14797731/postups-enjoy-or-hate-this-version-of-heat-while-you-can

How stupid. This is beyond ridiculous. That means every big market team, the Lakers, Mavericks, the Knicks, the Heat, the Celtics, will all have to trade away much of their players just to get under the hard cap and it will fill out every team so they're all even. What a stupid idea.

I can't even believe the owners came up with this. The players will never accept it. This is why small market teams shouldn't be in the league. They need money, they aren't gaining as much revenue and it's just bringing the league down. It's not just in the NBA, it's in the NFL too as all the small market owners are trying to gain more revenue and now there will be a lockout.

I hope the league does downsize and all these owners lose their teams. Things would be much easier to deal with in a potential CBA between big market owners and players. The "number" of NBA owners pushing for it are definitely all the small market teams, because why would any big market team ever want that? Getting rid of the small market teams is way better than splitting teams in Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Boston, Miami, etc. and making the league incredibly boring having superstars in cities like Minnesota, Memphis and Milwaukee. Nobody wants to see them on national television on a weekly basis.

The interest of the NBA is at it's second all-time high (behind the Jordan era), why would Stern allow that to be messed up?



No offense, dude, but you sound like a major douche. You're attacking "small-market teams" as if they have ruined the league when, in actuality, they have broadened the fanbase (I wouldn't be watching the NBA if I had to choose between LA, NY or Miami) and have provided plenty of good teams that took effort and vision to build rather than just cash and an idiot like say Isaiah Thomas?

Now, am I for a hard cap? No way. I think owners need to restrain their own wallets. What we need is a way to keep young players with the teams who took the time to develop and play them and potentially a Michael Redd clause to reduce the amount of money owed to players who aren't playing. That would make it a better league.

Lloyd Christmas
03-12-2011, 03:08 PM
Hawkeye- My phone won't let me quote your Jim Carrey post but I laughed.

koreancabbage
03-12-2011, 03:09 PM
No offense, dude, but you sound like a major douche. You're attacking "small-market teams" as if they have ruined the league when, in actuality, they have broadened the fanbase (I wouldn't be watching the NBA if I had to choose between LA, NY or Miami) and have provided plenty of good teams that took effort and vision to build rather than just cash and an idiot like say Isaiah Thomas?

Now, am I for a hard cap? No way. I think owners need to restrain their own wallets. What we need is a way to keep young players with the teams who took the time to develop and play them and potentially a Michael Redd clause to reduce the amount of money owed to players who aren't playing. That would make it a better league.

that's not happening and you know it. Hard cap is the best thing to do and roll back salaries to reset the system, which is getting redicuclousy out of hand. Increases in the hard cap every year of course but the salaries for most players out there in the NBA are STUPID. they need a reset on this system ASAP and increase the parity in this league cuz its not fun anymore seeing the Lakers, the end of the Celtics run, run this league in the playoffs. as much as I love the Lakers, i would love seeing small market teams get far in the playoffs and win a championship here and there

B'sCeltsPatsSox
03-12-2011, 03:11 PM
I think taking away teams would be better.

koreancabbage
03-12-2011, 03:13 PM
I'm all for parity but there's better ways of achieving it. People against this $45m hard cap are not anti-parity fans by definition...

If you want $45m hard cap, reduce ticket prices to at most $100 a night(best seats), reduce all the advertisments and tv timeouts, remove anything that is anti-sport but purely commercial and then talk about the player salaries.

Owners are making a bucket of money, players do too, owners want more, players don't want less... Fans want their teams to be as good as possible.

How does this solve parity? If anything, it will either dramatically reduce the level of the game throughout the league -> less neutral fans therefore less international tv rights etc. And it will create dynasties all over but much less talented. You'll have 3-4 relatively good teams with no superstar that will find their way in the playoffs and say goodbye in the 2nd round, and 3-4 teams with a superstar that will attempt to go all the way. Only thing that changes is 1st round playoffs.

How does this change allow trades and makes it easier? It basically isolates teams to get stuck with 70-80% of their roster year in year out.

It will only work if players accept to reduce the max to some 8m. Never going to happen with guys like Rashard Lewis earning around 20m!!!

obivously hard cap is going to be higher but how does this not solve the parity issue? it seems like a winner, there is no other way parity is going to be achieved. Look at MLB, the big spenders are usually the ones competing for the playoff spots anyways and always in the upper echelon of the league (cept the Mets lol)

and you can't force teams to spend more on players. roll back on salaries as well.

-Kobe24-TJ19-
03-12-2011, 03:14 PM
The league is a ****ing joke. You have 5 owners happy with it, and 25 that know its a joke and have no way of winning...ever.

What's also a joke is these Laker fans saying "its not our fault our team has a great front office" Give me a break. They made one legit move to get there and that was setting up to sign Shaq.

-Kobe demanded a trade, which as a rookie is ******** and shouldn't happen
-Gasol trade was ******** and was someone doing a favor which shouldn't happen
-Signing Artest to MLE was ********

List can go on and on.

These punk players think they should decide where they want to play right off the bat. At least Bosh and Lebron did there work for the extent of the contract, then earned the right to be a Free Agent.

O, and for those saying hockey isn't becoming the 3rd most popular sports, you must have missed the articles that came out a while back proving it through attendance numbers, profit etc..

I personally pray for a long extended lockout, and some kind of solution to the joke of a league.

The NBA is a joke, always was a joke, and will continue to be a joke.

that was a bad deal for the lakers actually

Chitownhero14
03-12-2011, 03:23 PM
Idk it almost sounds better for the league! Think about it 1 star per team that means all 30 teams have a star and then have to fill out their bench and starters equally, no more all-star teams. It makes it equal for anyone and everyone to win it just like how it was back in the day!

NYKalltheway
03-12-2011, 03:24 PM
obivously hard cap is going to be higher but how does this not solve the parity issue? it seems like a winner, there is no other way parity is going to be achieved. Look at MLB, the big spenders are usually the ones competing for the playoff spots anyways and always in the upper echelon of the league (cept the Mets lol)

and you can't force teams to spend more on players. roll back on salaries as well.

We agree on this, I was speaking about the $45m hard cap. The hard cap needs to be something like $65-70m if you want to avoid a lockout. And that must be done by 2013 not immediately.

The smaller the salary cap, the less the parity in basketball because one player makes a lot of difference. And out of the under the age of 30, how many of them are there now? 6-7 of them at most? And 4 of them are playing on same teams which might remain the case(and even if it doesn't, not much difference)

A low cap will not give teams trading flexibility. And I suppose a hard cap will mean that salaries cannot increase by % scale either or make it extremely hard for that to happen.

You either re-negotiate all contracts to lower figures with all players or have a lockout, if there's gonna be a low hard cap.
And the players have absolutely no reason to cut their income overnight ;)

Lockout will give them that reason, but it must happen first unfortunately...

mrblisterdundee
03-12-2011, 03:26 PM
That is crazy. The deputy commissioner is already quoted as saying that the league would probably lose approximately $750 million from its $4 billion in 2009-2010 revenues. With the usual cap math, that puts the new cap at $54 million per team. I think the owners and players should subtract all the operating costs and then equally split the rest.

NYKalltheway
03-12-2011, 03:26 PM
Idk it almost sounds better for the league! Think about it 1 star per team that means all 30 teams have a star and then have to fill out their bench and starters equally, no more all-star teams. It makes it equal for anyone and everyone to win it just like how it was back in the day!

Back in what day? Can't remember a day in the NBA that includes both situations at the same time...

NBAfan4life
03-12-2011, 03:31 PM
I guess the owners want to follow the NHL because it is so successful :rolleyes:

Maybe if they adopt a hard cap at like 60 or 70 mill it would work. Not every team has to spend every last dollar.

Ray
03-12-2011, 03:32 PM
they need to get rid of guaranteed contracts! Like the NFL, players can get cut if they dont live up to them, and players can hold out and renegotiate if they out preform. Thats whats really hurting the small market teams. Small market teams like Utah and the Bucks paying guys like Redd and AK-47 way too much. If they were allowed to cut these guys without paying them, these teams can then make more moves to become better.

Chacarron
03-12-2011, 03:35 PM
$60 million hard cap and I'm cool.

Sly Guy
03-12-2011, 03:38 PM
stop acting stupid people.

It will end up higher then 45 million.

seriously...It's the starting point for negotiations.

Chitownhero14
03-12-2011, 03:38 PM
Back in what day? Can't remember a day in the NBA that includes both situations at the same time...

You didnt have the mass amount of star team ups in the 60's and 70's. It started in the 80's, progressed in the 90's and has become the only possible way of winnning in this generation!

It used to be where you can have 1 star, and 4 other guys that are role players, then 2-3 average players on the bench and that was good enough to win as long as they played together,.

lakers4sho
03-12-2011, 03:48 PM
Hard cap at 70 million and a 5 year transition period

Ray
03-12-2011, 03:50 PM
You didnt have the mass amount of star team ups in the 60's and 70's. It started in the 80's, progressed in the 90's and has become the only possible way of winnning in this generation!

It used to be where you can have 1 star, and 4 other guys that are role players, then 2-3 average players on the bench and that was good enough to win as long as they played together,.

And thats when the NBA was at its peak. Does it suck for small market teams? yes. Is it better for the NBA money and popularity wise? Absolutely. It is just an unfortunate reality.

Chitownhero14
03-12-2011, 03:53 PM
And thats when the NBA was at its peak. Does it suck for small market teams? yes. Is it better for the NBA money and popularity wise? Absolutely. It is just an unfortunate reality.

BUt not everyone likes it that way, look at the NCAA, is it better for the NCAA when a team like Duke or North Carolina wins the tournament, yes? Is it better for ratings and for the fans when a team like Butler is in it, hell yes, people want to see the little teams have a chance. I'm a bulls fan and i'd love to see my team win it, but i'd also like to see teams like Minny, Indy, etc have a chance to win it, at the rate we're going its going to be a 8 team league where all 12 players on each rostter is a super star.

sjbirds
03-12-2011, 03:56 PM
they need to get rid of guaranteed contracts! Like the NFL, players can get cut if they dont live up to them, and players can hold out and renegotiate if they out preform. Thats whats really hurting the small market teams. Small market teams like Utah and the Bucks paying guys like Redd and AK-47 way too much. If they were allowed to cut these guys without paying them, these teams can then make more moves to become better.

i completely agree...

GeriatricMoyer
03-12-2011, 03:58 PM
What happened to letting capitalism run it's course? Contraction is what the NBA should be harping for, not parity.

"What? Arresting me for what? Is this a communist country or something? I thought this was America? Oh, I'm sorry, I thought this was America!"

"Say what you will about the tenets of national socialism, dude, but at least it's an ethos."

NYKalltheway
03-12-2011, 04:09 PM
What happened to letting capitalism run it's course? Contraction is what the NBA should be harping for, not parity.

"What? Arresting me for what? Is this a communist country or something? I thought this was America? Oh, I'm sorry, I thought this was America!"

"Say what you will about the tenets of national socialism, dude, but at least it's an ethos."

Do the words "cap" and "trade" show you that the NBA has anything to do with capitalsim?

kenzo400
03-12-2011, 04:13 PM
This is the first real proposal, so it only makes sense that they start off low. It will change and i'm sure if there is a hard cap it would be higher than that in the future.

The hard cap idea is great, but it should be higher.

TheShock45
03-12-2011, 04:13 PM
We need a hard cap and no loop holes, also no buy outs unless you did not sign with that team and then even then, you should give up all future money and incentives that you didnt earn & complete.

KingPosey
03-12-2011, 04:18 PM
If NBA wants to survive they MUST do this, obviously not at 45 but it must happen.

HOW is it that the NHL is taking over the NBA as number 3 sport?

lol no they dont. They make plenty of money.

And HAHAHAHA about the NHl being the #3 sport in the US. Its just not, and it wont be. Didnt the NHL close for a year 2 because it was so utterly unwatched?

Lu's Dynasty
03-12-2011, 04:20 PM
Capitalism is running its course, sort of at least because limiting salaries would be considered anti-competitive and the league has a "draft". It's allowable only because of the existence of a CBA. The league could be subject to an anti-trust suit were the union to de-certify. So, yeah markets are regulated all the time in terms of what can be sold and who can participate for example and they are subject to statutes and bylaws agreed upon. The NBA is private and the owners and players are negotiating an agreement. Whatever agreement they come to will have been decided by private citizens. To a fairly large extent fans decide how much money the NBA generates, but the CBA is the process by which representatives of the players and owners negotiate rules one of which includes what can be done with that pool of money in terms of player salaries. As long as the two sides come to an agreement "capitalism" will have run its course.

M.Bibby2.0
03-12-2011, 04:21 PM
I think part of the solution should be decreasing guaranteed contracts to 4 maybe 3 seasons. Provides players with an incentive to maintain or improve their level of play rather than start underachieving after signing a 6-7 year deal, as in the cases of Lewis and ak47. And then allow contract extensions to be as long as the original contract

jimm120
03-12-2011, 04:21 PM
What happened to letting capitalism run it's course? Contraction is what the NBA should be harping for, not parity.

"What? Arresting me for what? Is this a communist country or something? I thought this was America? Oh, I'm sorry, I thought this was America!"

"Say what you will about the tenets of national socialism, dude, but at least it's an ethos."

capitilism isn't a perfect system.

communism wasn't a perfect system.

jimm120
03-12-2011, 04:24 PM
lol no they dont. They make plenty of money.

And HAHAHAHA about the NHl being the #3 sport in the US. Its just not, and it wont be. Didnt the NHL close for a year 2 because it was so utterly unwatched?

The NHL "closed" because of a strike...not because it was unwatchable.

And I concur that it is the #4 sport (behind Football, Baseball, and Basketball).

Tennis, Soccer, and Golf only go so much....I think the red states also consider nascar a sport too. Those only go so far.

So, nhl didn't "close". it was on strike, just like the NBA and the NFL might be.

Ray
03-12-2011, 04:26 PM
BUt not everyone likes it that way, look at the NCAA, is it better for the NCAA when a team like Duke or North Carolina wins the tournament, yes? Is it better for ratings and for the fans when a team like Butler is in it, hell yes, people want to see the little teams have a chance. I'm a bulls fan and i'd love to see my team win it, but i'd also like to see teams like Minny, Indy, etc have a chance to win it, at the rate we're going its going to be a 8 team league where all 12 players on each rostter is a super star.

I completely agree with the bolded part, but most people don't feel that way. TV ratings and overall league popularity proves it. In the 80's when the NBA got really big, it was no coincidence that LA and Boston dominated the decade. In the 90's the popularity carried on even though they fell off because other big market teams replaced them such as Chicago, New York, Houston, Miami.

Then the "dark" ages of the NBA came (regarding overall NBA popularity), the power shifted out west and a lot of the NBA talent was out west as well. Smaller market teams with the exception of LA dominated. None of the big eastern teams were good (I-95 corridor including, Boston, New York, Phili, even DC and Miami) as well as Chicago.

Now the big market teams are good again, (Boston, New York, Phili, Chicago, Miami, Lakers, and even the Clippers Blake Griffin) and coincidently the NBA is almost back to the same popularity as it was in the 80's and 90's.

We can even look at championship TV viewership (I dont have sources on this so just take it for a grain of salt i guess) but wasn't the LA-Bos championship series the most watched series in recent time? and wasn't the Spurs-Detroit series the least watched series of all time?

If i can find the numbers, i believe they will back my claims on this.

godolphins
03-12-2011, 04:26 PM
This will get ugly in the offseason way much uglier than the the Nfl right now

JerseysFinest
03-12-2011, 04:31 PM
I think there will be a compromise at some point, both parties are not willing to allow an entire season pass like that, losing fans, general interest, creating perceptions, etc.

I have a question for the players though, if a lockout does happen, what are they themselves going to do? Migrate to leagues abroad? Sit at home all day, regretting not finding a solution? Getting part-time jobs at the local Dunkin Donuts? You could venture and say that nearly 1/2 of the players don't hold degrees since they left college early or didn't go to college at all, would there be players going back to school?

Mudvayne91
03-12-2011, 04:33 PM
lol no they dont. They make plenty of money.

And HAHAHAHA about the NHl being the #3 sport in the US. Its just not, and it wont be. Didnt the NHL close for a year 2 because it was so utterly unwatched?

Maybe don't make comments about things you know nothing about.

godolphins
03-12-2011, 04:38 PM
If NBA wants to survive they MUST do this, obviously not at 45 but it must happen.

HOW is it that the NHL is taking over the NBA as number 3 sport?


Nielsen TV ratings

This is the popularity, determined by numbers of TVs watching a particular sports on average, ranks as follows:

NFL (National Football League)

NBA (National Basketball Association)

MLB (Major League Baseball)

NCAA football (college football)

NCAA basketball (college basketball)

NASCAR (stock car racing)

WWE (professional wrestling)

NHL (National Hockey League)

AFL (Arena Football League)

WNBA (Women's National Basketball Association)

MLS (Major League Soccer)

IRL (Indy Racing League)

...Wrench post
:laugh: Fake Wrestling is bigger than the NHL

topdog
03-12-2011, 04:43 PM
that's not happening and you know it. Hard cap is the best thing to do and roll back salaries to reset the system, which is getting redicuclousy out of hand. Increases in the hard cap every year of course but the salaries for most players out there in the NBA are STUPID. they need a reset on this system ASAP and increase the parity in this league cuz its not fun anymore seeing the Lakers, the end of the Celtics run, run this league in the playoffs. as much as I love the Lakers, i would love seeing small market teams get far in the playoffs and win a championship here and there

I just don't know that a hard cap can get done and honestly I say let Cuban and Walsh spend away - does either have a championship to show for it?

I get what you're saying and I can appreciate it, but I feel like the best way to get this done (especially with dealing with the Players' Union) is to make it affordable to keep players drafted by your franchise (which could help bring down salaries long-term) and making contracts more incentive-based i.e. do you play most of the games? does the team make the playoffs, ect.

San Antonio is a small-market and I don't know quite what Detroit is considered in the post-industrial era, but they have some 'ships and my Wolves were a Sam Cassel injury away from the Finals. If teams are able to keep their players, I think we will see a lot more from small-markets.

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 04:53 PM
Good i want all the super athletes to start taking huge pay cuts! none of these people deseve to be making more than 10 million a year i think they should all get 5 mil a year at the most!

Athletes Contracts are getting ridiculous and all sports are gonna pay for it!

So why should owners make hundred of millions off of a sport inwhich people come to see the players play? If it was not for the interest in the players the owners would not make all that money. So yes the players deserve what they are making if the owners do

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 04:58 PM
Just when the NBA's has become the number 2 sport again in the country, the owners pull this bullsh*t. And yes NBA has passed baseball as number 2 sport. Without the Steroids baseball has become pretty boring now. The players can't hit anymore with no roids. I like baseball but they need the roids back now. no one wants to watch pitching duels everygame.

Kingz4L
03-12-2011, 05:02 PM
If Sprewell was in the league he would say "How we gonna feed our families"

Come on guys..look at how much money these fools are making, are you telling me they should make more than doctors or the President of the United States in that matter?

I think they should accept less money, or they can go back to school and get a real job.

ElMarroAfamado
03-12-2011, 05:04 PM
There is something wrong with this thing when Luke Walton is making more than 10 doctors combined a year. LUKE WALTON.

brodawgs
03-12-2011, 05:12 PM
I don't see why anyone would get upset over this, the right for players to carry guns on the court would sooner pass than this would.

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 05:14 PM
If Sprewell was in the league he would say "How we gonna feed our families"

Come on guys..look at how much money these fools are making, are you telling me they should make more than doctors or the President of the United States in that matter?

I think they should accept less money, or they can go back to school and get a real job.

It's the entertainment industry. They make more money because of the fan interest. If there was no interest then they would not make millions. Maybe the doctors and president should try and play sports cause its a better money generating business. Don't blame the athletes. People pay to see them perform just like movie actors and singers. Beyonce make 100g for 1 live performance on an avg. it's called Supply and demand

baghdadbob
03-12-2011, 05:16 PM
Parity is what the small market fans want ad their Owners need to surivive.

But the $$$$$$$$$$$$$ are not there for parity. Parity destroys ratings and makes the league bland..

Hopefully folks look at NBA ratings given the what the Heat did and reali$$$$$e that is where the money is.

Milwaukee versus Memphis for an NBA Championship is a damn disaster.

The owners will regret it if they get it. A shrinking pie won't help them even if they pay the players less.

Dade County
03-12-2011, 05:18 PM
Hard cap 50-59mil
No more mid-level contracts.
1 max contract per team.
A team can cut/release 1 player a season, with out having to pay the rest of that players future salary "meaning" (player will still receive money that is owed to him in that current season only).
Get rid of restricted free agency ( I seriously don't like it )
And give a young super star the option to sign a life time contract with a team (1 player per decade); the team would have to give the player, a 2 % to 5 % ownership of the team (Player can not be traded). Better then a franchise tag, I think.

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 05:22 PM
There is something wrong with this thing when Luke Walton is making more than 10 doctors combined a year. LUKE WALTON.

Well then the nerd doctors chose the wrong profession. don't blame luke walton

Anilyzer
03-12-2011, 05:27 PM
http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/14797731/postups-enjoy-or-hate-this-version-of-heat-while-you-can

How stupid. This is beyond ridiculous. That means every big market team, the Lakers, Mavericks, the Knicks, the Heat, the Celtics, will all have to trade away much of their players just to get under the hard cap and it will fill out every team so they're all even. What a stupid idea.

I can't even believe the owners came up with this. The players will never accept it. This is why small market teams shouldn't be in the league. They need money, they aren't gaining as much revenue and it's just bringing the league down. It's not just in the NBA, it's in the NFL too as all the small market owners are trying to gain more revenue and now there will be a lockout.

I hope the league does downsize and all these owners lose their teams. Things would be much easier to deal with in a potential CBA between big market owners and players. The "number" of NBA owners pushing for it are definitely all the small market teams, because why would any big market team ever want that? Getting rid of the small market teams is way better than splitting teams in Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Boston, Miami, etc. and making the league incredibly boring having superstars in cities like Minnesota, Memphis and Milwaukee. Nobody wants to see them on national television on a weekly basis.

To put that in perspective, the Lakers could trade Gasol, Bynum and Odom for nothing and still be nearly 6 million over the hard cap. They'd likely be left with Kobe and the bench to fit under these measures.

The Mavericks would have to let go of all their free agents this year and then get rid of Terry and Kidd, leaving them with Dirk and nothing. The Bulls would likely have to get rid of Carlos Boozer, sending them back to last year's level and that's before giving Derrick Rose a max extension, meaning they'd probably have to get rid of Deng too. The Celtics would have to get rid of 2 out of 4 of their All-Stars. The Knicks and Heat would have Melo/Amare and LeBron/Wade and nothing.

If this is the Cavs, Raptors, Nuggets, Suns and Jazz way of getting back at their former star players, it's not going to work. Just because they didn't surround their superstars with enough talent to win and they left, doesn't mean the league should suffer for it. Duncan is in a small market, was surrounded by talent, stayed in San Antonio (instead of going to big market Orlando) and won championships. Those teams didn't do that. The players left.

The interest of the NBA is at it's second all-time high (behind the Jordan era), why would Stern allow that to be messed up?

Uh, and you can BET that Denver and Cleveland will be pushing for this... which they wouldn't be if they had kept Carmelo and Lebron. But now that your superstars are gone, hey, F-it, let's get down below $45M and maybe you can force a breakup of that annoying "Big 3" that makes us so mad.

This... is a big joke.

1. It would be totally out of line with current and future revenues.

2. Brady and Brees have launched a powerful anti-trust suit against the NFL that very well could, especially in the new "Tea Party" environment, do a lot of damage. No politicians are going to back the protection of the government anti-trust exemption for the NFL.

3. NBA teams don't need it. You just need to put 5 guys out on the floor, and their are thousands and thousands of good players, in America and all over the world, that you could put on your team. You just need 5 good guys to compete. All this talk of "parity" is a huge joke. It's not like baseball where you need a rotation of all star pitchers, closers, outfielders, hitters, infielders, etc. You just need 12 players, and basically only one or two really good ones, and a coach, and you can compete if your good. And spending $100M is no guarantee of being good. Look at the Knicks the past ten years.

4. Nothing stops the teams from "capping" their own spending at $45M or even lower. Look at the Clippers. If you don't want to spend more, than don't spend more. Simple.

5. This NBA contract negotiation, which is all about distributing revenues and compensating the players and teams fairly, shouldn't NOW be turned in to some kind of device by the small market teams to IMPOSE parity on the league and/or restrict player movement or good teams getting good players.

Honestly, this pisses me off. EVERY year, year after year, we see the very best players drafted by the worst teams and languishing on poorly coached small market teams with no tradition. Occasionally a player like Kobe slips through because he comes directly from high school and the other teams under rate him.

But hey, if ONE or TWO good players (like Carmelo or Lebron) go to some larger market teams, hey, suddenly we have to re-do the entire system to preserve "parity" and protect the small market teams.

Face it: the small market teams get all the good draft picks, unless they foolishly trade them away. AND they get subsidized by the big market teams. AND let's not forget that nobody would care about them and their franchises would be worthless if it weren't for the so called "big market" teams.

FIRST these idiots clamour to get in to the league shelling out hundreds of millions of dollar$$ in an NBA gold rush, expanding the team to 32 teams or whatever. NOW they want everything cheapened, restricted, scaled back and I'm sure will want an even bigger slice of the NBA revenues.

Hey, if your other business is bad, or it's not working out, sell your team to Goldman Sachs or the Chinese and get out of the way. Of maybe the NBA really should just contract some of these chronically bad teams--who would really care, really.

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 05:31 PM
Parity is what the small market fans want ad their Owners need to surivive.

But the $$$$$$$$$$$$$ are not there for parity. Parity destroys ratings and makes the league bland..

Hopefully folks look at NBA ratings given the what the Heat did and reali$$$$$e that is where the money is.

Milwaukee versus Memphis for an NBA Championship is a damn disaster.

The owners will regret it if they get it. A shrinking pie won't help them even if they pay the players less.


I agree 100% Just contract the bullsh%t teams that make no money and that people don't want to see. No one cares if they survive anyway. The ratings are way up for the nba now cause the top teams are more interesting now that they have multiple stars on them. No one cares about a milwa bucks
team just cause you gave them 1 star.

The Flash
03-12-2011, 05:35 PM
Owners also want games played with medicine balls next season

Anilyzer
03-12-2011, 05:37 PM
There is something wrong with this thing when Luke Walton is making more than 10 doctors combined a year. LUKE WALTON.

Everybody in this world, EVERYBODY, makes what they are able to negotiate, and not what they're worth.

Obviously Luke isn't worth $6M, although in terms of PR value he is probably worht something. But there are do-nothing executives on wall street making $100M plus, and morons like Charlie Sheen making $2M an episode to act burned out and stoned on a show that nobody even watches, that generates money via commercials that everybody Tivos past if they do watch. NBA is entertainment, so hey.

Anilyzer
03-12-2011, 05:39 PM
I agree 100% Just contract the bullsh%t teams that make no money and than people don't want to see. No one cares if they survive anyway. The ratings are way up for the nba now cause the top teams are more interesting now that they have multiple stars on them. No one cares about a milwa bucks
team just cause you gave them 1 star.

yeah... it will just kill the league. NBA is about freedom, as well as glamour.

If you restrict the freedom to create glamorous big market teams then you just wreck the whole league, and everybody will tune out and watch cool new sports like MMA until a new commissioner eventually fixes and "revives" the NBA 10 or 15 years down the road.

Sync
03-12-2011, 05:40 PM
Wtf

Anilyzer
03-12-2011, 05:43 PM
I mean of course the owner's proposal is a first step in a hard-line negotiation that will have many phases... still it contains the seeds of their stupidity.

This means that their bottom line is probably $60M, and they will push hard for a hard cap, but be willing to trade that for draconian restrictions on free agency and a franchise tag.

Which virtually insures a lockout that will last at least until training camp and could very well hoze the season.

have a nice day.

$45M. Is this the NBA or a Turkish roller derby league or something

unwantedplayer
03-12-2011, 05:54 PM
The ratings for the NBA would get destroyed ...


I just don't see this happening ...


1. Get rid of buy-outs
2. Hard cap at 55mill
3. No more MLE
4. The ability to somehow void a contract when a player has underachieved drastically like Eddy Curry or Jerome James. Proof would be needed like underachieving in practice, statistics, or games played.

Terrible idea.

papipapsmanny
03-12-2011, 05:56 PM
Nielsen TV ratings

:laugh: Fake Wrestling is bigger than the NHL

dude u know how subjective that is?

If the ESPN only showed Yankees/Sox/and LA games their rating would be through thr roof, but they show tigers vs twins, phillies vs Cubs

NBA televised games are all LA, Boston, NY, and now Miami

NHL is on versus, the networks are going to have a bidding WAR when the NHL's contract with versus is up because the NHL is growing at an incredible rate

mlisica19
03-12-2011, 06:00 PM
This is an AMAZING excellent idea. The best idea since probably the 3 point line.

Without a hard cap, winning a championship is pretty dam easy for anyone with money. You assemble a team with high paid players, who are naturally gifted athletes, and 4/5 times that team is one of the best in the league. All because they live in a big market, a nice area, and can attract other superstars and brings in a family of talent. Thats not fair, nor is fun.

Now teams have to actually assemble a better system on how to form their roster, on how to coach their roster rather than getting the biggest name.

Big market teams will still remain a BIG market. You think LA Lakers are going to lose any of their fan base because they have to get rid of their 3rd star? As long as Boston has Rondo I see Boston remaining a top team to watch and they wont lose a fan base. NY will be fine the same way they have been with or without Melo. Miami will have to let go of one of their MAX players, which wouldnt not stop Miami from watching Wade and James anyway. The big markets wont lose $$$, yet the small markets will see an increase in fan base as more superstars are forced into their arenas. This will give them a much fairer chance to obtain a solid or average roster.

Theres a huge gap in the NBA, and MLB. Because of their current cap. So many teams dont even have a chance in the regular season and its not because their not trying.


45 mil may be too little, but idk how $$ goes in the NBA. Its working great for teh NHL

NYsFinest
03-12-2011, 06:02 PM
Yea sure why not let's have a bunch of boring teams and completely eliminate player movement so every fan gets one star and a bunch of scrubs to root for. Would be real fun to know yohu are locked in with essentially the same team for the next 10 years. Can't wait until owners take advatantage of having a team that can compete without making any improvements because every team sucks and just sit back and collect money.

NYsFinest
03-12-2011, 06:04 PM
The NBA is a star driven league, it can't be treated like the other sports where star players only help the team... and don't make the whole team like in the NBA. There will never be complete parity in the NBA due to that reason. There are only 5-6 upper echelon stars above the rest and the teams that have them as their only star will still be significantly better, only there will be no movement to prevent it. If you think giving one team lebron and scrubs and facing him against a team with joe johnson and scrubs creates parity, you are in for a surprise.

Kevj77
03-12-2011, 06:07 PM
45 mil get ready for no NBA for an entire season. Watch your favorite players going to Europe if they pay better then the NBA. This is from a few hardline small market owners. Those teams should be contracted if they can't afford the cost of owning an NBA franchise. Right now there is one team in the NBA that would be under this cap the Sacramento Kings. The average payroll right now is around 65 mil. That's asking the NBA players to give up around 600 million dollars. Not going to happen.

A hard cap would have to be at least 65 mil or it won't fly.

NYsFinest
03-12-2011, 06:09 PM
This teaming up with your friends idea is very new to the NBA, however lack of parity has always existed. Just the nature of the sport because it rests more on individual players than any of the other sports. Hockey, football and baseball doesn't rely on star power the way that basketball does.

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 06:15 PM
The NBA is a star driven league, it can't be treated like the other sports where star players only help the team... and don't make the whole team like in the NBA. There will never be complete parity in the NBA due to that reason. There are only 5-6 upper echelon stars above the rest and the teams that have them as their only star will still be significantly better, only there will be no movement to prevent it. If you think giving one team lebron and scrubs and facing him against a team with joe johnson and scrubs creates parity, you are in for a surprise.


That was clev past 7 yrs. 1 Star and scrubs. And they were kinda a boring team t watch. especially when lebron went to rest on bench. cavs vs spurs had lowest rating in nba history cause people care bout major markets more. thats reality. Melo in NY HAS melo being a lead figure nationally way more than he was in denver.

Robbw241
03-12-2011, 06:15 PM
Hard cap at 60 million would make more sense. 45 million? Good joke owners.

papipapsmanny
03-12-2011, 06:16 PM
This teaming up with your friends idea is very new to the NBA, however lack of parity has always existed. Just the nature of the sport because it rests more on individual players than any of the other sports. Hockey, football and baseball doesn't rely on star power the way that basketball does.

Thats because those leagues don't overly whore themselves out for the stars

Of course they try and market them, but look at blake griffin, the league would probably murder a couple of other players if they were in the way of blake griffin

papipapsmanny
03-12-2011, 06:17 PM
Hard cap at 60 million would make more sense. 45 million? Good joke owners.

yeah 55-60 million HARD cap would be ideal

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 06:17 PM
dude u know how subjective that is?

If the ESPN only showed Yankees/Sox/and LA games their rating would be through thr roof, but they show tigers vs twins, phillies vs Cubs

NBA televised games are all LA, Boston, NY, and now Miami

NHL is on versus, the networks are going to have a bidding WAR when the NHL's contract with versus is up because the NHL is growing at an incredible rate


NHL is on VERSUS. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 06:19 PM
NHL is on VERSUS. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Soon the NHL will be on PBS Or BCAT. LMAO!!!

mlisica19
03-12-2011, 06:20 PM
Pro wrestling better than the NHL?

Is this even fair? WWE is listed not even as a sport, its a DRAMA ACTION. Its written up for actors.

In 2009, WWE has gotten better ratings but I hardly count this is as fair. Then Friends, Two and a Half men get better views than the NBA. Is that fair to say?

Your right the NHL is the 4th major sport in many cities, its last of the 4 MAJOR sports. Then again, its also #1 in other parts of the country. Its #1 in Canada. Being the 4th major sport in America is still a billion dollar company.

I really dont understand why people cannot simply just love all the sports. Be proud that our country allows all this. I love that we have the choice for 4 major sports, and sub sports. We have teh choice to play any fo these or watch it.

Most of you fans dont even love the sport, you just love the league and thats it has the best players around the world

NYsFinest
03-12-2011, 06:25 PM
Thats because those leagues don't overly whore themselves out for the stars

Of course they try and market them, but look at blake griffin, the league would probably murder a couple of other players if they were in the way of blake griffin

No its because stars in baseball don't have the same influence on the team's success. Having the best player in basketball makes you a title contender, having the best player in baseball means ****.

papipapsmanny
03-12-2011, 06:29 PM
In the last 27 years only 7 different teams have won the Finals

Spurs, Heat, Lakers, Celtics, Rockets, Bulls, and the Pistons

In that same span the NFL has had 15 different SB winners

The MLB has had 18 different winners in that time

NHL 13 different Stanley cup winners

Think about that 7, 7 in nearly 30 years thats why most think the nba sucks

papipapsmanny
03-12-2011, 06:31 PM
NHL is on VERSUS. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

yea their commish is an idiot

but the networks cannot wait until that deal is up, the NHL is growing at an extremely rapid rate

my theory is new rules plus HDTVs have brought the sport soaring back

$ NyC $
03-12-2011, 06:33 PM
Why does every1 act like the Knicks are the Yankees like we been buying the leagues best players and owning every1 for years. We haven't made the playoffs since what..2001? when we got swept by the Nets. We deserve to be as good as any1 else in the league.

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 06:35 PM
In the last 27 years only 7 different teams have won the Finals

Spurs, Heat, Lakers, Celtics, Rockets, Bulls, and the Pistons

In that same span the NFL has had 15 different SB winners

The MLB has had 18 different winners in that time

NHL 13 different Stanley cup winners

Think about that 7, 7 in nearly 30 years thats why most think the nba sucks

MLB-without roids would have never gotton popular like it did for a while. Now its back to being boring again without steroids.

NHL- Is just not a sport that americans care about at all. It's on VERSUS for god's sake! hahahaha!

NFL- only sport on top of NBA at the moment

NBA beating nhl and Baseball at the moment.

NBA ratings have proven my point. Lebrons decision show outrated MLB AND NHL PLayoff games!

NYsFinest
03-12-2011, 06:36 PM
In the last 27 years only 7 different teams have won the Finals

Spurs, Heat, Lakers, Celtics, Rockets, Bulls, and the Pistons

In that same span the NFL has had 15 different SB winners

The MLB has had 18 different winners in that time

NHL 13 different Stanley cup winners

Think about that 7, 7 in nearly 30 years thats why most think the nba sucks

That wont change once theres a hard cap, theres no parity in the NBA because theres a limited amount of players that single handedly carry teams to wins.

its just the way the sports are that allows this, not parity. In the NFL you only have to beat a team once to advance allowing for unpredictability because any team can win on a given night. Baseball a star player can only get three at bats, or pitch once a week or w/e. Hockey is a team sport, stars dont matter nearly as much as chemistry. Basketball on the other hand is just built as a sport, not the league, to be dominated by single individuals. Theres only so many Lebrons, Dwights and Kobes out there and there isnt enough of them to force them to go to places like Minnesota. If you don't like it, pick a different sport.

If anything a hard cap eliminates parity. The only way a team can compete with the 5-6 elite superstar players is by building a team of multiple B level superstars. Amar'e has no chance against Lebron, but Melo and Amar'e do.

Kevj77
03-12-2011, 06:39 PM
yeah 55-60 million HARD cap would be idealThat is getting more realistic. I think a hard cap should be set at the luxury tax limit, but most small market fans wouldn't agree because that is still 70 mil. The salary cap this year is 58 million. The average salary for all teams is around 65 million.

A 45 million cap would be around a 600 million pay cut league wide equal to 30% for the players. A 30% cut in salary is going to be an impossible sell to the players.

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 06:39 PM
Why does every1 act like the Knicks are the Yankees like we been buying the leagues best players and owning every1 for years. We haven't made the playoffs since what..2001? when we got swept by the Nets. We deserve to be as good as any1 else in the league.

And there's a salary cap. They just hate NY cause we are better than them

ChI_ShIzzLe
03-12-2011, 06:39 PM
Hard cap at $55 million and lower max contracts to $15 million. Small market teams can stay happy by keeping their stars and adding possibly another star and a solid roster around the 2. Basically no more "Big 3s". Teams won't commit $45 million to 3 players and have only $10 left to fill out the roster. That'll keep the league competitive.

Havoc Wreaker
03-12-2011, 06:40 PM
stop acting stupid people.

It will end up higher then 45 million.

Acting? You really haven't been in the NBA forum for long. :laugh2:

papipapsmanny
03-12-2011, 06:42 PM
No its because stars in baseball don't have the same influence on the team's success. Having the best player in basketball makes you a title contender, having the best player in baseball means ****.

Albert Pujols says hi

yes you are right its much easier to assemble a good basketball team then any other team in sports

The knicks were a bunch of scrubs for a while up until this year, but you know there are cities across america, not just 5.

The only teams that are angry by are the heat, knicks, lakers, etc fans

Contraction would be so dumb, that doesn't benefit the league at all it hurts it, loses national interest, but that doesn't matter. In all honesty the NBA seems like all it needs is 4 teams

Lakers, Celtics, Knicks, Heat, then maybe a 5th out west to compete with the lakers

papipapsmanny
03-12-2011, 06:45 PM
MLB-without roids would have never gotton popular like it did for a while. Now its back to being boring again without steroids.

NHL- Is just not a sport that americans care about at all. It's on VERSUS for god's sake! hahahaha!

NFL- only sport on top of NBA at the moment

NBA beating nhl and Baseball at the moment.

NBA ratings have proven my point. Lebrons decision show outrated MLB AND NHL PLayoff games!

yea so thats why the MLB makes more money then the NBA? I already explained to you how subjective those rating are, maybe its a concept you do not understand.

If networks only broadcasted yankees, Redsox, and Dodgers games their rating would be through the roof.

The Wizards had one nationally televised game that I know of and that was because they were playing the heat

papipapsmanny
03-12-2011, 06:50 PM
That wont change once theres a hard cap, theres no parity in the NBA because theres a limited amount of players that single handedly carry teams to wins.

its just the way the sports are that allows this, not parity. In the NFL you only have to beat a team once to advance allowing for unpredictability because any team can win on a given night. Baseball a star player can only get three at bats, or pitch once a week or w/e. Hockey is a team sport, stars dont matter nearly as much as chemistry. Basketball on the other hand is just built as a sport, not the league, to be dominated by single individuals. Theres only so many Lebrons, Dwights and Kobes out there and there isnt enough of them to force them to go to places like Minnesota. If you don't like it, pick a different sport.

If anything a hard cap eliminates parity. The only way a team can compete with the 5-6 elite superstar players is by building a team of multiple B level superstars. Amar'e has no chance against Lebron, but Melo and Amar'e do.

So is that why Lebron, and Dwight have won so many championships?

yea stars help, but Kobe and Shaq on a team...

If the Celtics had Allen, Pierce, and KG together like 5 years before they actually came together you know how many they would have won.

Then now you have FAs all talking to each other because they want to make a circus team? Most fans would say the NBA is a joke, especially now that there is a foul called about every 10 seconds.

Im willing to bet more people would rather watch NCAA games then NBA games, I know I sure as hell do

nycericanguy
03-12-2011, 06:50 PM
Hard cap at $55-60m would still be ludicrous unless you dramatically roll back contracts as well.

Most teams are well over $60m so you would have to break up most of the league including pretty much all the contenders. Does anyone really think they will let that happen?...come on now.

Any hard cap would have to be over $70m.

JDMVP
03-12-2011, 06:52 PM
LOCKOUT is coming, haha, but on the serious note though for that to happen there will be a lot of consequences that would have to happen. Too much that I just don't think its gonna happen.

papipapsmanny
03-12-2011, 06:52 PM
Hard cap at $55 million and lower max contracts to $15 million. Small market teams can stay happy by keeping their stars and adding possibly another star and a solid roster around the 2. Basically no more "Big 3s". Teams won't commit $45 million to 3 players and have only $10 left to fill out the roster. That'll keep the league competitive.

exactly the big three crap is getting so stupid

Its just not feasible for a competitive environment

Ray
03-12-2011, 06:54 PM
yea so thats why the MLB makes more money then the NBA? I already explained to you how subjective those rating are, maybe its a concept you do not understand.

If networks only broadcasted yankees, Redsox, and Dodgers games their rating would be through the roof.

The Wizards had one nationally televised game that I know of and that was because they were playing the heat

dont forget that MLB season is longer and they play twice as many games. Which means twice as many tickets to sell etc...

Kevj77
03-12-2011, 06:57 PM
dont forget that MLB season is longer and they play twice as many games. Which means twice as many tickets to sell etc...Not to mention stadiums that can fit over 50 thousand people compared to 20 thousand in arenas.

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 06:58 PM
exactly the big three crap is getting so stupid

Its just not feasible for a competitive environment

Wow! A Redsox fan (high payrole) and MLB fan (no salary cap) here talking bout lack of parity in NBA. I must be living in the twilight zone or something:facepalm:

NYsFinest
03-12-2011, 07:00 PM
So is that why Lebron, and Dwight have won so many championships?

yea stars help, but Kobe and Shaq on a team...

If the Celtics had Allen, Pierce, and KG together like 5 years before they actually came together you know how many they would have won.

Then now you have FAs all talking to each other because they want to make a circus team? Most fans would say the NBA is a joke, especially now that there is a foul called about every 10 seconds.

Im willing to bet more people would rather watch NCAA games then NBA games, I know I sure as hell do

Question is how many will they have when their main competitors are forced to give away half their roster. When guys like Pau Gasol, Ray Allen etc are forced to go to Minnesota and Cleveland because their teams can't afford them. When every team is forced to have one star with no supporting cast the remaining parity the NBA has had will go to complete ****. Sure Minnesota and New Jersey will make the playoffs, but the second rate superstar they got will not only not make them contenders but also weaken the teams that could stop a Lebron or Howard lead team.

papipapsmanny
03-12-2011, 07:00 PM
dont forget that MLB season is longer and they play twice as many games. Which means twice as many tickets to sell etc...

NBA's Season+ Post season goes from the end of october to the end of june

That is 8 months

The MLB goes from April through october so that is about 7 months

more games.... yes longer.... no

Its pretty much a known fact that the MLB and NFL are the top 2 sports by popularity in the U.S. (no I am not counting nascar as a sport)

papipapsmanny
03-12-2011, 07:01 PM
Wow! A Redsox fan (high payrole) and MLB fan (no salary cap) here talking bout lack of parity in NBA. I must be living in the twilight zone or something:facepalm:

yet somehow there is much more parity in the MLB

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 07:05 PM
yea so thats why the MLB makes more money then the NBA? I already explained to you how subjective those rating are, maybe its a concept you do not understand.

If networks only broadcasted yankees, Redsox, and Dodgers games their rating would be through the roof.

The Wizards had one nationally televised game that I know of and that was because they were playing the heat

Nah the NBA make more money than MLB now. Don't know where ya get ya statistics. You must be listening to the NBA owners crying poverty but that's a negotiating tactic used for the new cba. NBA stars are more popular than mlb and way more than NHL stars.

papipapsmanny
03-12-2011, 07:06 PM
Question is how many will they have when their main competitors are forced to give away half their roster. When guys like Pau Gasol, Ray Allen etc are forced to go to Minnesota and Cleveland because their teams can't afford them. When every team is forced to have one star with no supporting cast the remaining parity the NBA has had will go to complete ****. Sure Minnesota and New Jersey will make the playoffs, but the second rate superstar they got will not only not make them contenders but also weaken the teams that could stop a Lebron or Howard lead team.

honestly I don't even know if its the lack of a cap that bothers me, its stern, it how the whole NBA is run

How come Ewing, Jordan, Stockton/Malone Drexler (for the most part), Bird, Magic, Olajuwon, Dave Robinson, all those guys, how come they were fine with staying on their teams and trying to help teams cities win?

Now players if it is at all a challenge just team up with each other. It is a joke, the players themselves are basically contracting the league by making all the cities they leave irrelevant

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 07:10 PM
yet somehow there is much more parity in the MLB

No that's not parity in MLB, that's ya high priced teams choking and sucking B@lls in playoffs. Those small market team win sometimes but then to only have the yankees or redsox take their stars away from them. Yeah thats good for baseball

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 07:13 PM
honestly I don't even know if its the lack of a cap that bothers me, its stern, it how the whole NBA is run

How come Ewing, Jordan, Stockton/Malone Drexler (for the most part), Bird, Magic, Olajuwon, Dave Robinson, all those guys, how come they were fine with staying on their teams and trying to help teams cities win?

Now players if it is at all a challenge just team up with each other. It is a joke, the players themselves are basically contracting the league by making all the cities they leave irrelevant

CRY ME A RIVEEEER. So MLB players don't leave their teams for the money ? The yankees and redsox, and now the phillies are always buying free agents and loading up on stars. but its wrong for the nba to do the same?

papipapsmanny
03-12-2011, 07:18 PM
CRY ME A RIVEEEER. So MLB players don't leave their teams for the money ? The yankees and redsox, and now the phillies are always buying free agents and loading up on stars. but its wrong for the nba to do the same?

Lebron, Wade, and Bosh would have gotten top dollar where ever they would have gone


You didn't see Carl Crawford, Cliff LEE, and Adrian Beltre all call each other up ad say hey lets all be on this team and try and make a dream team

in the last 10 years only one team has won the World series twice in the span, there have been 8 different winners in 10 years thats pretty good parity if you ask me

papipapsmanny
03-12-2011, 07:22 PM
by the way the MLB is a 7 billion dollar business, what revenues does the NBA generate? 4.5 billion

Baseball is clearly the number 2 sport behind football

Don't agree you may inspire me to make a thread about in the general discussions forum

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 07:29 PM
Lebron, Wade, and Bosh would have gotten top dollar where ever they would have gone


You didn't see Carl Crawford, Cliff LEE, and Adrian Beltre all call each other up ad say hey lets all be on this team and try and make a dream team

in the last 10 years only one team has won the World series twice in the span, there have been 8 different winners in 10 years thats pretty good parity if you ask me

8 world series winners that no one cared about. Those world series Ratings were just pathetic and sad. Not to mention a series with MLB flagship team the Yankees had the lowest of all time when they played the Mets. MLB without steroids is dropping quicker than paris hiltons underwear

shizzle09
03-12-2011, 07:34 PM
45 million? I find it hard to beleive that the owners actually have this idea considering 5-10 teams are over the cap purposely. Celtics, Lakers, heat, Mavericks etc etc. the owners of those teams wouldnt propose somethng like this knowing it would make thme dismantle their teams. I agree with the previous poster who suggested 55 million hard cap but they wouldnt be able to just apply that to next year. It would put players out of the league entirely. No way the player accept anything that would force a group of player out of the league.

papipapsmanny
03-12-2011, 07:34 PM
not really (the steroids comment) but Im not going to bother arguing anymore

just have to agree to disagree

king4day
03-12-2011, 07:40 PM
45 mil hard cap is silly.
Make it 65 and I'd be happy.
45 is unrealistic. Players will strike

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 07:40 PM
not really (the steroids comment) but Im not going to bother arguing anymore

just have to agree to disagree

Cause ya can't defend the steroids point. Baseball is nowhere near as popular without the roids. It's headed back to where it was before the Sosa , Mcguire homerun chase. And that is to being the lame #3 sport again.

king4day
03-12-2011, 07:42 PM
45 million? I find it hard to beleive that the owners actually have this idea considering 5-10 teams are over the cap purposely. Celtics, Lakers, heat, Mavericks etc etc. the owners of those teams wouldnt propose somethng like this knowing it would make thme dismantle their teams. I agree with the previous poster who suggested 55 million hard cap but they wouldnt be able to just apply that to next year. It would put players out of the league entirely. No way the player accept anything that would force a group of player out of the league.

Nevermind who's over it now. Most teams are currently built with a bigger cap than 45 mil including the bad teams. They have to come up with something better than this.

Anilyzer
03-12-2011, 07:42 PM
This is an AMAZING excellent idea. The best idea since probably the 3 point line.

Without a hard cap, winning a championship is pretty dam easy for anyone with money. You assemble a team with high paid players, who are naturally gifted athletes, and 4/5 times that team is one of the best in the league. All because they live in a big market, a nice area, and can attract other superstars and brings in a family of talent. Thats not fair, nor is fun.

Now teams have to actually assemble a better system on how to form their roster, on how to coach their roster rather than getting the biggest name.


Hey, HERE'S an idea: if a handful of players are just too good for the NBA (Lebron, Kobe, Wade, etc) and inevitably unbalance the league by dominating the playoffs and gravitating toward big market teams, then we should just BAN THOSE PLAYERS FROM THE NBA.

See? Ban Lebron, Wade and Kobe from the NBA, and *voila* now you have parity. Parity means you want to cut down the tall trees and have an even, uniform landscape. A few players like Lebron that are significantly better than all the other players ruin the dream of conformity and normalcy.

ACTUALLY, if you get right down to it, top NBA franchises in huge markets, such as the Lakers, Knicks and Celtics also don't conform very well... so we should either eliminate them from the league and say... add two or three small market teams in Canada... OR make the top teams start with a handicap in the regular season win column.

Actually, if you get right down to it... the NBA may have overstepped and overbloated itself in the past 20 years. TOOOOOOO much expansion. Every greedy group of venture capitalists who could fill out an application got a franchise. Now we have so many weird unknown franchises in remote small market cities it's impossible to even keep track of them. Where does Chris Paul play again? Who owns that team? I don't even remember. And all those little teams are like hungry mouths to feed--they ALL want big shares and royalties on every dollar the NBA and the big market teams and stars bring in.

So... maybe it's just time for a new league. Lean and mean; effective precision refereeing; action format; pay per view; the top 20 or 30 elite stars; international; 5 month season, play the games in various stadiums around the country or world, players share revenues.

It's like we watch all season and 100,000 commercials and commentaries just to see one golden moment of Wade and Lebron taken on Kobe with 1:00 minute left in the game. I would GLADLY pay a premium for more of THAT if I could cut loose of all the other boring stupid ****, the vast trail of advertising and hype and life-popups that is dragged along by the NBA every where it goes.

Anilyzer
03-12-2011, 07:49 PM
Actually I'm being totally serious about this.

The league is stuck because the owners have a democracy and have to agree on a new CBA.

The small market teams are losing money because they suck and HELLO because they don't have enough customers in their markets to make their business model work. Thus they are "welfare franchises" that big market teams have to subsidize with TV revenues etc. And they still lose money.

But you can't contract them, because you sold them franchises for hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars... money that doesn't exist anymore because it was lost in the financial meltdown, handed to Goldman Sachs or Bernie Maddoff, or spent advertising some new sports drink. Doesn't matter--the money isn't there to buy these franchises out.

And if there is even a HINT about contracting the league. *hooooo boy* Here come the lawsuits from all those small market owners, each one wants $500M or $600M minimum,for their awesome franchises. Why do you think NBA didn't re-sell the Hornets?

In fact, I'd bet that 1/2 of the small market owners would celebrate if the league contracted them and bailed them out.

Anyways... I just want to see the Lakers go for this 3peat. After that, the league can implode for a few years I don't really care.

godolphins
03-12-2011, 07:54 PM
NBA's Season+ Post season goes from the end of october to the end of june

That is 8 months

The MLB goes from April through october so that is about 7 months

more games.... yes longer.... no

Its pretty much a known fact that the MLB and NFL are the top 2 sports by popularity in the U.S. (no I am not counting nascar as a sport)

No the NFL and NBA are the top 2 sports by popularity in the U.S.

KingPosey
03-12-2011, 07:54 PM
Maybe don't make comments about things you know nothing about.

STFU.

They had a problem agreeing on salarfy terms because the league was losing incredible amounts of money.

Anilyzer
03-12-2011, 08:20 PM
Everybody knows hockey is a smaller niche sport that doesn't play well on television. Also that they totally screwed themselves with their new TV deals and everything.

Anilyzer
03-12-2011, 08:21 PM
what Hockey is on like the shopping network now, and ESPN does the highlights cause they're cheap and they are still scared of UFC.

Once UFC gets totally mainstream... I mean just watch.

PrettyBoyJ
03-12-2011, 08:24 PM
looks like theres going to be no football and basketball... Gonna start watching hockey now

pd1dish
03-12-2011, 08:37 PM
http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/14797731/postups-enjoy-or-hate-this-version-of-heat-while-you-can

How stupid. This is beyond ridiculous. That means every big market team, the Lakers, Mavericks, the Knicks, the Heat, the Celtics, will all have to trade away much of their players just to get under the hard cap and it will fill out every team so they're all even. What a stupid idea.

I can't even believe the owners came up with this. The players will never accept it. This is why small market teams shouldn't be in the league. They need money, they aren't gaining as much revenue and it's just bringing the league down. It's not just in the NBA, it's in the NFL too as all the small market owners are trying to gain more revenue and now there will be a lockout.

I hope the league does downsize and all these owners lose their teams. Things would be much easier to deal with in a potential CBA between big market owners and players. The "number" of NBA owners pushing for it are definitely all the small market teams, because why would any big market team ever want that? Getting rid of the small market teams is way better than splitting teams in Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Boston, Miami, etc. and making the league incredibly boring having superstars in cities like Minnesota, Memphis and Milwaukee. Nobody wants to see them on national television on a weekly basis.

To put that in perspective, the Lakers could trade Gasol, Bynum and Odom for nothing and still be nearly 6 million over the hard cap. They'd likely be left with Kobe and the bench to fit under these measures.

The Mavericks would have to let go of all their free agents this year and then get rid of Terry and Kidd, leaving them with Dirk and nothing. The Bulls would likely have to get rid of Carlos Boozer, sending them back to last year's level and that's before giving Derrick Rose a max extension, meaning they'd probably have to get rid of Deng too. The Celtics would have to get rid of 2 out of 4 of their All-Stars. The Knicks and Heat would have Melo/Amare and LeBron/Wade and nothing.

If this is the Cavs, Raptors, Nuggets, Suns and Jazz way of getting back at their former star players, it's not going to work. Just because they didn't surround their superstars with enough talent to win and they left, doesn't mean the league should suffer for it. Duncan is in a small market, was surrounded by talent, stayed in San Antonio (instead of going to big market Orlando) and won championships. Those teams didn't do that. The players left.

The interest of the NBA is at it's second all-time high (behind the Jordan era), why would Stern allow that to be messed up?

there SHOULD be some sort of hard cap. now, idk what the amount of money for the cap would be. you're right about the fact that $45 million probably isnt enough.

although, i would like to see a cap that makes it so you cant pay 3+ players $15 million so that superteams are prevented from being made. i think that teams should be limited to one max contract and a hard cap would not only prevent teams from signing multiple superstars, but it would also take some power away from the players for what they do in FA because there will be a lot less teams that can afford certain players if they already have a superstar.

bmd1101
03-12-2011, 08:53 PM
I think it's funny how most people who complain about a lower cap that would level the playing field of the NBA is a fan of a big market team.

As a fan of the Kings, I can tell you that the NBA is currently built around pleasing the big market teams. And as a result, I have been losing interest in the NBA for years.

Now that the Kings are leaving Sacramento, I can tell you that I will no longer be an NBA fan. End of story. The NBA is burning bridges with many fans like me.

Ask fans in Seattle. Many feel the same way.

Maybe this thread is a sign of hope for the NBA... Hopefully they are trying to save the fans. The NBA should realize, that while the big cities are big markets for the fans, the majority our population does not live in LA, Boston, NY and even the top 10 nba markets combines.

The majority of the US citizens live in smaller cities and media markets. Leveling the playing of the NBA will keep the smaller cities interested in the NBA.

And think of the the televised games. Currently, most televised NBA games seem to be Laker/Heat/Celtic games. The only reason most of us small market fans watch any of these games, is that they are the only games on. I would be just as happy watching a T-Wolves/Grizzles game if Garnet and Pau were still on those teams, and the league was more competitive in general.

The NFL is more competitive and has been gaining popularity in masses in recent years... its about time that the NBA learns a thing or two. And hopefully, the NBA will pass the message along to the refs as well...

I'm a fan from Seattle, I can tell you that you're an idiot. Most of the people in Seattle that are still butthurt over the whole thing weren't much of fans in the first place, fairweather fans for the most part. Yes I want a new Sonics Franchise, but i'm content with Portland/Orlando and the rest of the leauge for the time being.

jmoney85
03-12-2011, 08:56 PM
No the NFL and NBA are the top 2 sports by popularity in the U.S.

lol?

u must be kiddin me bra.... mlb slaughters nba in popularity......

Heater4life
03-12-2011, 09:17 PM
I love the way some of you talk about parity throughout the league yet this the deepest playoff pool the league has had in a long time! Dallas, S.A, L.A, OKC, Miami, Boston, Chicago, Orlando all have legitimate shots at winning a ring, yet you guys want parity? Since when has there been 8 legitimate teams that have a shot at a title? Every team above has the talent to win it, yet you want MORE parity? Name me the last time the league was this competitive.

Punk
03-12-2011, 09:27 PM
It's called negotiating. Everyone knows NY, CHI, LA, MIA, BOS and TOR are markets that require star players that make the NBA better.

There's no way in hell, the NBA is gonna throw away the success they've had this season for a 45 million dollar cap for a bunch of small markets that have never energized the NBA in the last 10 years.

Flash3
03-12-2011, 09:32 PM
I love the way some of you talk about parity throughout the league yet this the deepest playoff pool the league has had in a long time! Dallas, S.A, L.A, OKC, Miami, Boston, Chicago, Orlando all have legitimate shots at winning a ring, yet you guys want parity? Since when has there been 8 legitimate teams that have a shot at a title? Every team above has the talent to win it, yet you want MORE parity? Name me the last time the league was this competitive.

+1

anyone can win this year there isnt a clear favorite and you have new contenders okc,bulls,mia, entering the scene.

godolphins
03-12-2011, 09:37 PM
lol?

u must be kiddin me bra.... mlb slaughters nba in popularity......

:laugh:
NBA>>MLB Baseball is boring as watching paint dry
And the NBA is more popular than MLB especially now when the Knicks, Lakers, Celtics, Bulls are all good plus you also have teams like the Heat, Dallas, San Antonio and OKC who are either elite or good teams

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 09:42 PM
lol?

u must be kiddin me bra.... mlb slaughters nba in popularity......

In what country? Domincan republic? LEBRON's Decision outrated most the MLB playoff games last season. What single baseball player can have a decision show and attract 10 million people to watch? Answer is 0.
NBA Is more popular nowadays. Baseball needs roids back fast. Hell most my friends dont even play baseball anymore

bulldog312
03-12-2011, 09:43 PM
I hate the idea of the hard cap to begin with, but to make one this low would just be stupid. There is no other way to put it. If there is a hard cap it had better be about $60 million or higher.

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 09:45 PM
:laugh:
NBA>>MLB Baseball is boring as watching paint dry
And the NBA is more popular than MLB especially now when the Knicks, Lakers, Celtics, Bulls are all good plus you also have teams like the Heat, Dallas, San Antonio and OKC who are either elite or good teams

Only people who think Baseball is better than the NBA are Latinos and Old People.

Mudvayne91
03-12-2011, 09:45 PM
I like watching baseball. I'm just throwing that out there. I like both though.

lakerboy
03-12-2011, 09:47 PM
:laugh:
NBA>>MLB Baseball is boring as watching paint dry
And the NBA is more popular than MLB especially now when the Knicks, Lakers, Celtics, Bulls are all good plus you also have teams like the Heat, Dallas, San Antonio and OKC who are either elite or good teams

Not only is the NBA more popular in the US, it's more popular around the world too.

Adzman
03-12-2011, 09:59 PM
A lockout really hurts fans- but it also hurts tourism to the USA.

Me and my boys are looking at heading back over there in November this year. But if the NFL and NBA are locked out then we are not going to make the trip.

The NFL and NBA are such unique products than international fans love. A lockout will hurt the tourism $$ in the USA.

I sure as hell hope they can sort this out. I want me some more NBA and NFL live action!!

Punk
03-12-2011, 10:05 PM
+1

anyone can win this year there isnt a clear favorite and you have new contenders okc,bulls,mia, entering the scene.

Exactly. I don't get that logic.

New York, Chicago, OKC, Memphis, Philadelphia are new teams that are legit playoff teams for years to come. I don't see how that makes the NBA less exciting or competitive.

Nobody wants to see Utah every year. We all know Boston vs LA was one of the best rated games since 1999.

ChongInc.
03-12-2011, 10:07 PM
It's easier with the NHL because of the minors.

NYKalltheway
03-12-2011, 10:12 PM
Not only is the NBA more popular in the US, it's more popular around the world too.

Well NBA is the biggest brand really if you think of it that way. Coz NFL is not even as popular as NHL here(ice hockey is very popular in over half of Europe including Russia while the rest of the world doesn't even agree with the NFL name :p )

But honestly NBA is now for softcore basketball fans around the world.
Most hardcore basketball fans in Europe do not like the NBA anymore and prefer the continental competitions. I do prefer the European basketball competitions but I grew up with the NBA and it will take more than a lockout to make me stop following.

moshy2
03-12-2011, 10:20 PM
Not only is the NBA more popular in the US, it's more popular around the world too.

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2011/01/Jan-25/Ratings-and-Research/Harris-Poll.aspx


MLB is 2nd. NBA is 5th behind college football and NASCAR. Even hockey and soccer have almost caught the NBA

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 10:23 PM
WITH STEROIDS= Baseball great
NO STEROIDS= Baseball boring and unwatchable

And I played high school baseball. So i am a fan of baseball but I know when a sport is not as popular as it use to be. Hell in the 90's the NBA was the #1 sport in popularity. It changes from time to time for certain reasons. And steroids is one of them

LOOTERX9
03-12-2011, 10:27 PM
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2011/01/Jan-25/Ratings-and-Research/Harris-Poll.aspx


MLB is 2nd. NBA is 5th behind college football and NASCAR. Even hockey and soccer have almost caught the NBA

HAHA A San fran GIANTS fan that is happy his Giants won the title. That was the 1st worst rated world series in history tied with yanks vs mets in 2000. Too bad no one saw your Giants win the title last season.

bulldog312
03-12-2011, 10:32 PM
The NBA really isn't THAT popular. There are so many people that hate the NBA because its simply iso basketball or the officials are horrible ("there is no traveling in the nba..."). The "younger generation" loves the flash, but a lot of people hate it.

moshy2
03-12-2011, 10:40 PM
HAHA A San fran GIANTS fan that is happy his Giants won the title. That was the 1st worst rated world series in history tied with yanks vs mets in 2000. Too bad no one saw your Giants win the title last season.


All of San Francisco saw it and thats all I care about. I love basketball, i was just proving the people wrong who said that baseball is less popular than the NBA purely on the fact that they dont like it.

NBAfan4life
03-12-2011, 10:41 PM
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2011/01/Jan-25/Ratings-and-Research/Harris-Poll.aspx


MLB is 2nd. NBA is 5th behind college football and NASCAR. Even hockey and soccer have almost caught the NBA

Did you even read that? That was a survey that was conducted and means nothing.

papipapsmanny
03-12-2011, 10:57 PM
So let me get the reasoning down for some of you...

Even when presented with fact proving the what you say is wrong, your logic is I don't like the MLB therefore there is no way it is more popular then the NBA........ ok yea I guess there was a reason I posted mostly in the MLB forum.

Baseball is my favorite sport, yet you do not see me claiming it is more popular then the NFL. I like the NHL a lot more then the NBA, but you don't see me claiming it is more popular then the NBA.... you know why? Because it doesn't bother me that much, and the facts in front of me tell me which league ranks where.

aussie
03-12-2011, 11:30 PM
ahh what a shame that would be for you poor knicks

bringinwood
03-13-2011, 01:01 AM
If they did a 45MM hard cap, they would just allow each team to absolve one contract off the books like they did before...

For example, the Sixers would be able to pay Elton Brand his normal contract but it wouldn't be on the books any longer and he would, essentially, be bought out...

Vikingfan84
03-13-2011, 01:11 AM
This would be a bright idea for the league. Maybe then the pay rate for these athlete's would be more realistic. These players make about 4 times as much as they should make.

Russollini
03-13-2011, 01:20 AM
Actually the more realistic thing to have happen here is that the owners are pushing for a 30-35% pay cut across the boards. So if every player took a cut then this may be feasible.

bringinwood
03-13-2011, 01:29 AM
Actually the more realistic thing to have happen here is that the owners are pushing for a 30-35% pay cut across the boards. So if every player took a cut then this may be feasible.

Why would any person, let alone an NBA player, voluntarily subject themselves to a 30-35% paycut when the owners are contractually obligated to give them the money they agreed to ???

I can understand a 30-35% paycut for future contracts but not for current ones...

No chance that ever happens...

I wouldn't go into work tomorrow and say, "i'll take a 30 percent paycut to make sure that I can come to work tomorrow"... NBA players don't even have to worry about getting paid... They're under contract regardless of whether they get a deal done or not...

mil_radenkovic
03-13-2011, 01:32 AM
hey guys, i know i don't post a lot but im one for the 45mil cap. If you look at what they are trying to really do is that they are trying to lower cap and also lower salaries. I can guarantee you that all players contracts will be lowered by % on how much is to come off the current cap.

It has to happen. 60 mil cap? why would that work? that would be even more crazy as dwight would then join miami. it dosnt make any sense.

I love the NBA, I love the sport and last thing I want to do is see a lockout....here's to a 45mil cap (2 thumbs up)

LOOTERX9
03-13-2011, 02:08 AM
The NBA really isn't THAT popular. There are so many people that hate the NBA because its simply iso basketball or the officials are horrible ("there is no traveling in the nba..."). The "younger generation" loves the flash, but a lot of people hate it.

You mean alot of old people hate it. Check the great ratings the NBA gets. It's not like 2003 anymore. those were the low point days of the NBA. Now the NBA is the 2nd rated sport behind nfl. Lebrons decision out rated MLB playoff games. No baseball player can draw 10 million people to watch a decision show like an NBA player can. NBA IS more popular now than baseball

LA_Raiders
03-13-2011, 05:07 AM
lockout

wtwquietstorm
03-13-2011, 06:16 AM
If you are just taking viewing audience into account; the most popular sports in the US are as follows:
1. Football
2. NASCAR
3. Baseball
4. Basketball
5. Ice Hockey
6. Golf

I did the US only because things change A LOT if you say North America and add Canada and Mexico.

Anilyzer
03-13-2011, 06:57 AM
If you are just taking viewing audience into account; the most popular sports in the US are as follows:
1. Football
2. NASCAR
3. Baseball
4. Basketball
5. Ice Hockey
6. Golf

I did the US only because things change A LOT if you say North America and add Canada and Mexico.

NASCAR #2, that's laughable.

You seriously gonna sit there and say that freakin' NASCAR gets more TV viewership than Basketball? Or more than the NBA even?

Not...even...close.

Look, NASCAR is a fun video game, and believe me I get the cultural statement, but yeah. NOBODY is watching 10 hours of NASCAR a week. If anybody thinks that there are more viewer hours being logged for NASCAR in a day, week, month, season or year EVER... laughable.

Coupon
03-13-2011, 07:13 AM
The salary cap isn't about parity: it's about the owners keeping all the money and not letting the market dictate players' salaries. Stern has never shown any interest in parity before. The fix is always in for the big market teams and "superstars" with the officiating.

Baseball has no salary cap and way more parity than basketball.

Basketball has no anti-trust exemption and most arenas are publicly owned. The players should threaten to form their own league and keep the money they generate themselves. The owners are basically useless eaters here.

mike_noodles
03-13-2011, 07:18 AM
http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/14797731/postups-enjoy-or-hate-this-version-of-heat-while-you-can

This is why small market teams shouldn't be in the league. They need money, they aren't gaining as much revenue and it's just bringing the league down.

First of all, if there were no small market teams, there would only be 8-10 teams in the league, wow, how fun would that be to watch, everyone is in the conference semi's, lol.

Second, a hard cap is likely to happen so get over it. Will it be $48 million, probably not, think about the negotiation process before you freak out about it, of course the owners are gonna low ball it at the start.

Ray
03-13-2011, 12:03 PM
LOL i like how this turned into a NBA vs. MLB discussion. Bottom line is that the NBA popularity is at its highest since the Jordon era, a lockout would kill all that momentum and be disastrous for the league.

kenzo400
03-13-2011, 12:23 PM
lol no they dont. They make plenty of money.

And HAHAHAHA about the NHl being the #3 sport in the US. Its just not, and it wont be. Didnt the NHL close for a year 2 because it was so utterly unwatched?

Nba lost 400 million dollars. This is why they are having negotiations and want to put a hard cap. Too many teams are losing money.

Ray
03-13-2011, 01:01 PM
Nba lost 400 million dollars. This is why they are having negotiations and want to put a hard cap. Too many teams are losing money.

Has the NBA opened their books to the public? I don't think they have, and if they haven't they can say any amount they want. I think thats what the NFL said as well, in their negations they said they lost money, but they wouldn't allow the NFLPA to examine and bring in their own auditors.

kenzo400
03-13-2011, 01:26 PM
Has the NBA opened their books to the public? I don't think they have, and if they haven't they can say any amount they want. I think thats what the NFL said as well, in their negations they said they lost money, but they wouldn't allow the NFLPA to examine and bring in their own auditors.

There are records of this. People don't just randomly say that teams are losing money. You don't need auditors to figure out some of the basics (ex: ticket sales, merchandise sold, television contracts) Mark Cuban says he loses an average of 15 million a year, probably even more now.

This is why they have moved quite a lot of teams in the last decade, because they aren't making money. Yes plenty of people who work in the NBA are making money, but the league as a whole is losing quite a lot.

sunnydayin'zona
03-13-2011, 01:43 PM
http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/14797731/postups-enjoy-or-hate-this-version-of-heat-while-you-can

How stupid. This is beyond ridiculous. That means every big market team, the Lakers, Mavericks, the Knicks, the Heat, the Celtics, will all have to trade away much of their players just to get under the hard cap and it will fill out every team so they're all even. What a stupid idea.

I can't even believe the owners came up with this. The players will never accept it. This is why small market teams shouldn't be in the league. They need money, they aren't gaining as much revenue and it's just bringing the league down. It's not just in the NBA, it's in the NFL too as all the small market owners are trying to gain more revenue and now there will be a lockout.

I hope the league does downsize and all these owners lose their teams. Things would be much easier to deal with in a potential CBA between big market owners and players. The "number" of NBA owners pushing for it are definitely all the small market teams, because why would any big market team ever want that? Getting rid of the small market teams is way better than splitting teams in Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Boston, Miami, etc. and making the league incredibly boring having superstars in cities like Minnesota, Memphis and Milwaukee. Nobody wants to see them on national television on a weekly basis.

To put that in perspective, the Lakers could trade Gasol, Bynum and Odom for nothing and still be nearly 6 million over the hard cap. They'd likely be left with Kobe and the bench to fit under these measures.

The Mavericks would have to let go of all their free agents this year and then get rid of Terry and Kidd, leaving them with Dirk and nothing. The Bulls would likely have to get rid of Carlos Boozer, sending them back to last year's level and that's before giving Derrick Rose a max extension, meaning they'd probably have to get rid of Deng too. The Celtics would have to get rid of 2 out of 4 of their All-Stars. The Knicks and Heat would have Melo/Amare and LeBron/Wade and nothing.

If this is the Cavs, Raptors, Nuggets, Suns and Jazz way of getting back at their former star players, it's not going to work. Just because they didn't surround their superstars with enough talent to win and they left, doesn't mean the league should suffer for it. Duncan is in a small market, was surrounded by talent, stayed in San Antonio (instead of going to big market Orlando) and won championships. Those teams didn't do that. The players left.

The interest of the NBA is at it's second all-time high (behind the Jordan era), why would Stern allow that to be messed up?

a couple of misconceptions...you dont understand the meaning of a big market do you.
suns and raptors have bigger markets than miami. celtics have are big fan base, but as far as being a big market, they are not one either.
also, suns and jazz chose not to resign amare and boozer, not the other way around.
and if you think this is to get back at those guys you are sadly mistaken, its clearly for financial reasons.

but then you are 'tarded because you disregard the most important part of this, the fact that the owners proposed this. are you stupid? a proposal does not happen in spite of the big market owners like buss and cuban, it happens with their support. you're kidding yourself if you think these guys arent running the negotiations

valade16
03-13-2011, 02:01 PM
a couple of misconceptions...you dont understand the meaning of a big market do you.
suns and raptors have bigger markets than miami. celtics have are big fan base, but as far as being a big market, they are not one either.
also, suns and jazz chose not to resign amare and boozer, not the other way around.
and if you think this is to get back at those guys you are sadly mistaken, its clearly for financial reasons.

but then you are 'tarded because you disregard the most important part of this, the fact that the owners proposed this. are you stupid? a proposal does not happen in spite of the big market owners like buss and cuban, it happens with their support. you're kidding yourself if you think these guys arent running the negotiations

Yeah the suns and jazz "chose" not to resign amare and boozer because as small markrt teams they couldn't afford them, which is what he was talking about.

Who's 'tarded now? :eyebrow:

obcha22
03-13-2011, 02:15 PM
I think its sweet how the owners want this cap. That way they don't have to spend more than that and any money they make is theirs. And they can turn to the players and fans and say "gee we'd love to pay you more but we can't" And they would stuff their pockets more and more.
Another example of the owners selling us a bunch of BS. And trying to find ways not to pay for the product from which they so willingly make money.
60 million is fair. 55 is tolerable. Along with rules that make certain of minimum guarantees for low tier players.
If you really want parody , make a max contract limit for two per team. Then you would not have "Big 3's" bought and sold. They would have to be built with mid and low level contracts.
you would then have two guys making 18 mil= 36. that's it, the rest of the 20 to 25 mil is divided between high/medium/low and rookie contracts. (Kind of what they have now, except for the two a team limit on max's)
But the owners crying poor while raising ticket prices is totally F'd up.

SeoulBeatz
03-13-2011, 02:47 PM
I actually wouldn't have a problem with this because we don't have any superstars atm lol.

I can understand how leveling the playing field could be good for the NBA though.

Especially when certain "big market" teams fans don't show up to games anyways, might as well help out the little people.

sunnydayin'zona
03-13-2011, 02:56 PM
Yeah the suns and jazz "chose" not to resign amare and boozer because as small markrt teams they couldn't afford them, which is what he was talking about.

Who's 'tarded now? :eyebrow:

still you, actually.

http://www.sportsmediawatch.net/2011/03/nba-market-size-numbers-game.html

a lot of people are saying teams that should be contracted are teams like golden state, which is the 6th biggest nba media market. it would be stupid t o contract the warriors. philly is the 4th biggest in the country. didnt expect that, huh?

also

the jazz spend about as much on jefferson as boozer would have cost to keep, but boozer wasnt living up to their needs/expectations. but i'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that one, because i'm not as familiar with that situation as i am with the amare situation.

the suns wouldn't give amare a 5 year guaranteed contract. they offered 5 years max contract unguaranteed or 3 years max contract guaranteed because his knees aren't insurable. amare said plenty of times during the negotiations that staying in phoenix was his first choice. when his knees give in 3 years and you have a michael redd or yao ming situation for a year or two in new york, you'll see why phoenix didnt resign amare.

do you think lebron didnt resign in cleveland because "it was a small market team and they couldnt afford him" too? cleveland and miami have about the same market size.

but honestly, do you believe the jazz are a team who are historically not being able to keep the players they want to keep because of their market size?

yeah, as far as who's being stupid, its still you.