PDA

View Full Version : Will the Lockout Force Any Small Market Teams to Fold?



Tony_Starks
07-09-2011, 12:23 PM
The big boys like the Lakers, Knicks, Bulls...etc can afford a lockout because they will always be popular prosperous franchises. What about the OKC's, Memphis, and Bobcats of the world? Or somebody like NO or Sacramento who were already on life support as it is? They literally can't afford to lose any of the fan support they have. Do you see any of them folding as a result of the lockout?

I say that because we know when this is all over there will be, at least temporarily, a pretty big portion of fans that walk away. Not from the game entirely but definitely from buying tickets. It's like "why should we patronize these owners when they obviously don't care about us?" You really can't blame them either, especially in this economy.....

B'sCeltsPatsSox
07-09-2011, 12:42 PM
I wouldn't be surprised it's mostly the small market teams that are losing the money and if they do lose any more I wouldn't be surprised if there is a contraction.

Tony_Starks
07-09-2011, 01:19 PM
Thats why I can't understand their hardcore stance. They must seriously be under the impression that the players will totally cave to their demands. Otherwise what they are doing makes no sense.....

jiggin
07-09-2011, 01:53 PM
why would they fold? they are losing less money now than they were during the season when they had to pay the players...

Tony_Starks
07-09-2011, 02:04 PM
why would they fold? they are losing less money now than they were during the season when they had to pay the players...


Players don't get paid in the summer. They wouldn't start getting paid again until November. As of know they have saved nothing in player salary....

blastmasta26
07-09-2011, 02:14 PM
I don't think a franchise contraction will happen just yet. Stern hasn't overseen a franchise folding during his tenure, so I think he will try his best to ensure it doesn't happen.

Sixerlover
07-09-2011, 02:14 PM
They wouldn't fold. Stern will die before he loses a NBA team.

NYKalltheway
07-09-2011, 02:19 PM
why would they fold? they are losing less money now than they were during the season when they had to pay the players...


So I guess the fans paying to attend matches mean nothing to you?

PrettyBoyJ
07-09-2011, 02:28 PM
Idk bout fold but the Hornets should considering moving the franchise to Chicago, NY & LA both Have 2 teams, CHI should do the same..

MiamiBoy77
07-09-2011, 03:08 PM
Idk bout fold but the Hornets should considering moving the franchise to Chicago, NY & LA both Have 2 teams, CHI should do the same..

no... if anything, Vegas

Tony_Starks
07-09-2011, 03:18 PM
My thing is if you truly believe the owners are losing as much money as they are saying (which I don't) and that's with the attendence they already have, then how in the world can they afford to lose anymore fans whenever the league resumes and still keep their franchise? That doesn't compute to me....

tkshy
07-09-2011, 03:27 PM
Let's hope so.

tyfreaks brotha
07-09-2011, 03:30 PM
no

beasted86
07-09-2011, 03:33 PM
Small market teams were losing money operating. Now they no longer have to pay player salaries or arena employees.

But they do most likely have a nasty arena lease that they are paying in the meantime. I don't know if the difference is enough to have them still losing money. If they can book the arena in the meantime to offset expenses, they might actually profit when it's all said and done.

B'sCeltsPatsSox
07-09-2011, 03:50 PM
no... if anything, Vegas

No if anything Seattle.

gwrighter
07-09-2011, 07:03 PM
Nope, players will go broke before the owners do.

MiamiBoy77
07-09-2011, 07:24 PM
No if anything Seattle.


True... didnt even think of that.

Do you think they would make it the Seattle Sonics again or name it something else?

TRF929
07-09-2011, 07:29 PM
No, owners wont be losing the amount of money they would of by having a season. Fans will be the only ones hurt by this though, and you can blame the greedy players. Having a bench of players being paid 5+ mil and complaining is just sad. I hope we have no bball and players go overseas to get paid a tenth of what they would get paid in the NBA.

beasted86
07-09-2011, 08:42 PM
No, owners wont be losing the amount of money they would of by having a season. Fans will be the only ones hurt by this though, and you can blame the greedy players. Having a bench of players being paid 5+ mil and complaining is just sad. I hope we have no bball and players go overseas to get paid a tenth of what they would get paid in the NBA.

Yeah, players are greedy. :rolleyes:

How about those greedy rookies like Kevin Durant or Derrick Rose getting paid $3M-$5M the first 4 years of his career, despite playing at an MVP caliber level, and there being nothing they can do about it?

Blazers#1Fan
07-09-2011, 09:32 PM
True... didnt even think of that.

Do you think they would make it the Seattle Sonics again or name it something else?

They have to name them the seattle super sonics! Seattle owns the name and history if they didn't they'd probably be called oklahoma city supersonics!

Seattle will get a team in 2-5 years bowing has lots of jobs I think 10,000 in 2012 = richer owners and the starbucks owner and others (in microsoft)are rich also all the key arena needs is parking and a updated arena parking would be easy there's a lot of crappy housing places by there who could be bought out and demolished for a few mill then the arena just needs a updated arena just seating and big screens

I think kings,hornets,bobcats, all could make a lot more there then there homes right now seattle is dying for a NBA team literally! And Sac,NO,Charlotte never make money look at charlotte they root for the team for a year then say screw em they suck happened the first and second moves there

BigCityofDreams
07-09-2011, 10:27 PM
My thing is if you truly believe the owners are losing as much money as they are saying (which I don't) and that's with the attendence they already have, then how in the world can they afford to lose anymore fans whenever the league resumes and still keep their franchise? That doesn't compute to me....

It took the league over ten yrs to regain it's popularity and they are taking a risk of having to do it all over again.

Muttman73
07-09-2011, 10:32 PM
Probably not but a few teams could go away (Charlotte-Sacramento-Washington-New Orleans-Toronto) and nobody outside of those cities would miss them...

NYKalltheway
07-10-2011, 05:36 AM
Are you serious about Sacramento, Washington and Toronto??? Plus Hornets should go back to Charlotte...

jiggin
07-10-2011, 07:04 AM
Yeah, players are greedy. :rolleyes:

How about those greedy rookies like Kevin Durant or Derrick Rose getting paid $3M-$5M the first 4 years of his career, despite playing at an MVP caliber level, and there being nothing they can do about it?

$3-4 MILLION...playing a game! yeah...they are greedy and they should feel lucky they have that available to them as an option. It could be like female athletes and basketball, not much a payday when you leave college...how would that feel? And that payday is only brought to you by the owners WHO MAKE THE NBA POSSIBLE. If the NBA folds, good luck getting paid that if you aren't a superstar, overseas.

PS - one bad signing sets a precedent for another and another and another. At some point, a responsible business person has to break that spiraling out of control cycle, or it will kill the business. Why is everyone mad that they have reach that point after losing over a BILLION dollars the last 6 years since this CBA has been in effect? The players have reaped the rewards of that grave train for a bit now...don't cry for them. But its over...and it has to be if everyone wants the league to continue in a positive way.

I can't believe people would rather kill off low market franchises to keep paying the players ridiculous amounts of money. That's just sad, and to me defeats the purpose of a competitive league. But maybe that is what people want now days...more of a all-star game every matchup over a couple of teams. I don't, but maybe I am in the minority.

TRF929
07-10-2011, 08:56 AM
$3-4 MILLION...playing a game! yeah...they are greedy and they should feel lucky they have that available to them as an option. It could be like female athletes and basketball, not much a payday when you leave college...how would that feel? And that payday is only brought to you by the owners WHO MAKE THE NBA POSSIBLE. If the NBA folds, good luck getting paid that if you aren't a superstar, overseas.

PS - one bad signing sets a precedent for another and another and another. At some point, a responsible business person has to break that spiraling out of control cycle, or it will kill the business. Why is everyone mad that they have reach that point after losing over a BILLION dollars the last 6 years since this CBA has been in effect? The players have reaped the rewards of that grave train for a bit now...don't cry for them. But its over...and it has to be if everyone wants the league to continue in a positive way.

I can't believe people would rather kill off low market franchises to keep paying the players ridiculous amounts of money. That's just sad, and to me defeats the purpose of a competitive league. But maybe that is what people want now days...more of a all-star game every matchup over a couple of teams. I don't, but maybe I am in the minority.

Thank you :clap:

Players need to get a clue, I really hope the owners play hard ball and hold off next season.

TRF929
07-10-2011, 09:11 AM
Yeah, players are greedy. :rolleyes:

How about those greedy rookies like Kevin Durant or Derrick Rose getting paid $3M-$5M the first 4 years of his career, despite playing at an MVP caliber level, and there being nothing they can do about it?

If you play at a high level, your next contract will show it. As Rose/Durant will get more next contract, but I think getting paid 5-6 mil a year is still very good. If rookies didnt have a pay cap, it'd be just like the NFL rookie pay and we know what happened there.

Getting 20 mil in 4 years as a young 20 yr old is just a laugh, no matter how good the play. Ppl need to earn their pay and those few players are but how many are not?

rever
07-10-2011, 09:19 AM
Let's hope so.

This..
they need to lose about 4 teams imo. the league is so watered down.

Kinkotheclown
07-10-2011, 09:49 AM
My thing is if you truly believe the owners are losing as much money as they are saying (which I don't) and that's with the attendence they already have, then how in the world can they afford to lose anymore fans whenever the league resumes and still keep their franchise? That doesn't compute to me....

I agree with your thoughts on the owners honesty in exactly how much they are losing. Especially after reading the NYTimes piece calling them out (whether true or part true it shed some interesting light on possibilities).

Bear with me here.

What if the owners of the big and mid markets want a lockout to force out a couple of small market teams? They could weed out the weak or the weak could bow out and make it look like collateral damage and know one gets blamed.
They could then condense the league which would, as we all know, make the league more competitive. This would add to its popularity and reduce the amount of active players, the operating costs and any shared revenue . End result, making those who remained more money with less overhead
Add this to the present CBA being asked for by the owners, they reduce their cost even more.
Who knows, nothing the majority of these owners would do would surprise me.

Law25
07-10-2011, 09:52 AM
For people saying players are greedy GIVE ME AN BREAK. First its not the players complaining its the owners. Second the owner make so much more off them. Are you saying that an franchise should make 70 to 80 percent and give the scraps to the players despite their worth when they through their play makes the owners their riches. Thats just not to right. Players can easly go over seas and make the Euroleague the standard for professional basketball, whiich would make all the up and comining ballers wanna play their and the NBA would be nothing more then the Dleague with an once glorious past. The owners need to better handle their money, but the player should be willing to give an small portion back for the sucess of the league. Please fans stop hating on what they make and focus on what their worth. This isnt old Rome and they are not gladiators entertaining you for their freedom or becuase of debt, lol. So stop *****ing!!!!!!!

todu82
07-10-2011, 09:54 AM
I hope not. It'd be bad for the NBA to see a team gone. Hopefully the lockout addresses teams losing money and puts the small market teams on an even keel with the Lakers, Knicks and Celtics of the world.

jiggin
07-10-2011, 10:11 AM
For people saying players are greedy GIVE ME AN BREAK. First its not the players complaining its the owners. Second the owner make so much more off them. Are you saying that an franchise should make 70 to 80 percent and give the scraps to the players despite their worth when they through their play makes the owners their riches. Thats just not to right. Players can easly go over seas and make the Euroleague the standard for professional basketball, whiich would make all the up and comining ballers wanna play their and the NBA would be nothing more then the Dleague with an once glorious past. The owners need to better handle their money, but the player should be willing to give an small portion back for the sucess of the league. Please fans stop hating on what they make and focus on what their worth. This isnt old Rome and they are not gladiators entertaining you for their freedom or becuase of debt, lol. So stop *****ing!!!!!!!

but the owners aren't making money, they have actually lost over 1 BILLION DOLLARS (http://www.uploadphotograph.com/?v=austinpowe.jpg) in the last 6 years, when the last CBA was in effect. Which is why they need to change it.

If the players want it so fair...how about they do 100% profit/risk sharing with the owners? So if the owners lose money, the players have to lose money too? And if the NBA makes a bunch of money, then so will the players and the owners. Doesn't work like that? Why not? Cause the owners put up all the risk and thus should have the biggest rewards, since that is how business is run right? Except for in the NBA where currently, the players are making more than the owners of the teams?

Now, in what business outside of the NBA would that financial structure work and keep a business open?

A. NO WHERE.

gwrighter
07-10-2011, 10:15 AM
The last thing the players want are less teams. Less teams = Less jobs which mean's more unemployed workers.

BigCityofDreams
07-10-2011, 10:30 AM
Thank you :clap:

Players need to get a clue, I really hope the owners play hard ball and hold off next season.

Sounds good kill off the season following one of the best seasons they ever had.

jiggin
07-10-2011, 10:42 AM
Sounds good kill off the season following one of the best seasons they ever had.

if it makes for better basketball and competition for the next 6 years (CBA length) then its worth it. Sometimes you got to take a step back to be able to take a couple steps forward in the future.

Maybe that's part of the problem...people can't seem to shake the instant gratification that seems to go with everything these days. Sometimes, it doesn't work like that.

BigCityofDreams
07-10-2011, 11:00 AM
if it makes for better basketball and competition for the next 6 years (CBA length) then its worth it. Sometimes you got to take a step back to be able to take a couple steps forward in the future.

Maybe that's part of the problem...people can't seem to shake the instant gratification that seems to go with everything these days. Sometimes, it doesn't work like that.

I'd rather not kill the momentum they have been trying to build since Jordan left. I don't see any good that can come of that.

Ppl going on and on about competitive balance where was this talk during the Jordan era. Fans think teams are bad now they should take a look at bottom feeders when Jordan was king of the league.

bilodthom
07-10-2011, 11:10 AM
No, owners wont be losing the amount of money they would of by having a season. Fans will be the only ones hurt by this though, and you can blame the greedy players. Having a bench of players being paid 5+ mil and complaining is just sad. I hope we have no bball and players go overseas to get paid a tenth of what they would get paid in the NBA.

haha greedy players.... this is just bad financial management on the GMs and owner's behalves.

No wait, sorry you're right. Chris Duhon is a greedy player because the Magic said "Hey let's pay the worst starting PG in all of the NBA $3.75 million anually for the next 5 years". And Jose Calderon is greedy because Brian Colangelo and MLSE foolishly agreed to pay the 2nd worst starting PG in the league $7.5 million anually for 5 years in 2008.

Chris Duhon and Jose Calderon are the reasons the NBA is locked out right?

Tony_Starks
07-10-2011, 01:32 PM
I agree with your thoughts on the owners honesty in exactly how much they are losing. Especially after reading the NYTimes piece calling them out (whether true or part true it shed some interesting light on possibilities).

Bear with me here.

What if the owners of the big and mid markets want a lockout to force out a couple of small market teams? They could weed out the weak or the weak could bow out and make it look like collateral damage and know one gets blamed.
They could then condense the league which would, as we all know, make the league more competitive. This would add to its popularity and reduce the amount of active players, the operating costs and any shared revenue . End result, making those who remained more money with less overhead
Add this to the present CBA being asked for by the owners, they reduce their cost even more.
Who knows, nothing the majority of these owners would do would surprise me.



Yeah I feel what you're saying. I read that article as well it was very telling about whats really going on. I think there is a division between the big time markets and the small markets but they are just keeping the illusion of a united front going. If you think about it do you really think owners like Jerry Bus, Mark Cuban, and Jim Dolan want a restrictive hard cap? No way. But of course they have to keep the sharade going.

Even though I agree losing a couple teams would make it more competitive and make the league stronger overall its a shame if it would have to result to that because of a few owners complete incompetence. Also the issue the owners keep dodging is that revenue sharing as far as ticket sales would solve a lot of their problems but the big money making teams are against it....

jiggin
07-10-2011, 01:40 PM
haha greedy players.... this is just bad financial management on the GMs and owner's behalves.

No wait, sorry you're right. Chris Duhon is a greedy player because the Magic said "Hey let's pay the worst starting PG in all of the NBA $3.75 million anually for the next 5 years". And Jose Calderon is greedy because Brian Colangelo and MLSE foolishly agreed to pay the 2nd worst starting PG in the league $7.5 million anually for 5 years in 2008.

Chris Duhon and Jose Calderon are the reasons the NBA is locked out right?

you are pointing out EXACTLY why they need a hard cap. Owners, in order to compete with other owners and try and bring talent in to attract fans, have to offer bad contracts to beat out other teams who may have more money to fling around. One bad contract sets a precedent, and the cycle explodes and continues. the players have been making out like bandits because of that...

...now, the owners are saying that with the CBA up this is a perfect time to fix this problem. They can do it and save the league from being so lopsided competition and money wise, as well as make the league profitable again.

the league lost over 1 billion dollars during the 6 years of the last CBA. Its not only the owners right but it is the correct thing to do to stop this from happening. And unfortunately for the players who have been riding that gravy train...its gonna effect them since their salaries make up a large portion of the financial books. they had a good run of making way more than they probably should...but we shouldn't be mad at the owners for smarting up and wanting to change it. Why be mad at them for trying to make the league more competitive via a leveler playing field via a more level financial situation in the league? Seems like that would only make the league better for the fans. Only people it really hurts are the players, yet they already make MILLIONS playing a game. Why all the crying for these players?

JeffG20
07-10-2011, 01:46 PM
Small market teams are actually making money during the lockout, and NO definitly wont fold as the NBA owns them. We actually are the safest team lol

JeffG20
07-10-2011, 01:55 PM
And the ones blaming the owners for the bad contracts....what about players that only play in a contract year? And they play like **** once they get paid. Guarenteed contracts will be the death on the NBA

JeffG20
07-10-2011, 01:57 PM
And like Jiggin said, small markets have to compete with the Miamis and LA's by giving out large contracts to average players. If they dont how are they supposed to get talent? The draft? Oh wait your player will bail the first chance he gets. Small markets are damned if they do, damned if they dont.

Bornknick73
07-10-2011, 02:05 PM
Relocation not contraction is the answer in the NBA.

Memphis should go to San Diego

Milwaukee should go to Seattle

Minny should go to St.Louis

Sacramento should go to Las Vegas


Problem solved.

All of those towns are more than capable of sustaining a NBA franchise. Your new teams are the:

Las Vegas Kings

San Diego Surf

Seattle StarBucks:)

St. Louis Wolfpack

These idiots put teams in cities which dont have the capital to finance a franchise then complain they arent making any money.

C_Mund
07-10-2011, 02:06 PM
No if anything Seattle.

...or Vancouver. I'd like either of these.

KnicksR4Real
07-10-2011, 02:09 PM
good question. i dont think it will happen just because the nba was already becoming more stable. if they contract teams, we will loose the credibility that we were just gaining.

Hangtime
07-10-2011, 02:38 PM
I don't think there will be a contraction in the immediate future. The small market owners know that the risk of losing an entire season will hurt significantly but they are willing to take that risk for the long term viability of the entire league. They simply can't continue under the current agreement and want to negotiate a deal that favors them financially. The biggest gamble for them is that the players will cave and agree to more favorable terms when the season is at stake.

As far as contraction goes, after this lockout ends, in the years that follows is when they will feel the effects of this lockout from the fallout from fans. It's that lack of support from every sector that the NBA will truly suffer from. Merchandising, ticket sales, advertising, corporatate support etc. Only time will tell how that affects many of the teams existence when they will all have to find a way to bring fans back.

Slug3
07-10-2011, 02:38 PM
you are pointing out EXACTLY why they need a hard cap. Owners, in order to compete with other owners and try and bring talent in to attract fans, have to offer bad contracts to beat out other teams who may have more money to fling around. One bad contract sets a precedent, and the cycle explodes and continues. the players have been making out like bandits because of that...

...now, the owners are saying that with the CBA up this is a perfect time to fix this problem. They can do it and save the league from being so lopsided competition and money wise, as well as make the league profitable again.

the league lost over 1 billion dollars during the 6 years of the last CBA. Its not only the owners right but it is the correct thing to do to stop this from happening. And unfortunately for the players who have been riding that gravy train...its gonna effect them since their salaries make up a large portion of the financial books. they had a good run of making way more than they probably should...but we shouldn't be mad at the owners for smarting up and wanting to change it. Why be mad at them for trying to make the league more competitive via a leveler playing field via a more level financial situation in the league? Seems like that would only make the league better for the fans. Only people it really hurts are the players, yet they already make MILLIONS playing a game. Why all the crying for these players?

A hard cap is not goign to fix much, think about it if you were offered 1 million to play in LA or 1 million to play in Minny where wold you go? I dont think it would be Minny. Big market teams are still going to get the better players.

jiggin
07-10-2011, 02:47 PM
A hard cap is not goign to fix much, think about it if you were offered 1 million to play in LA or 1 million to play in Minny where wold you go? I dont think it would be Minny. Big market teams are still going to get the better players.

But if the Lakers want to keep star players in the multiples, then they won't be able to afford to offer much for those role players.

See a hard cap would make all the teams even on how much they can spend. So if the Lakers are shelling out top money for Kobe ect...then they may not be able to compete for other players letting smaller market teams make reasonable offers without feeling like a big market team will come in and trump their offer cause they have so much more money.

One thing is for sure, its obvious that the conditions of the old CBA didn't work and that because it was such an extreme loss they have to take equally as extreme steps to reverse it.

Doing nothing would be the worst business practice of all; business suicide.

Tony_Starks
07-10-2011, 02:48 PM
And the ones blaming the owners for the bad contracts....what about players that only play in a contract year? And they play like **** once they get paid. Guarenteed contracts will be the death on the NBA


so basically the owners dont have to be responsible anymore. They sign a bad deal, no biggie, they can just get out of it. Good solution! Forget about all that actually managing your team properly like the smart teams do stuff. Lets save the guys with the checkbooks from themselves like a wife that cant handle the budget!

jiggin
07-10-2011, 02:51 PM
so basically the owners dont have to be responsible anymore. They sign a bad deal, no biggie, they can just get out of it. Good solution! Forget about all that actually managing your team properly like the smart teams do stuff. Lets save the guys with the checkbooks from themselves like a wife that cant handle the budget!

no one is saying they don't have to be responsible...but one owner can't police the other owners. So...you have to have hard line rules so that the Pat Riley of the world don't abuse the system to stack teams.

The owners ARE trying to take the responsibility back, admitting that the system they signed off on 6 years ago IS NOT WORKING. they are trying to be responsible and reverse that...but the players obviously don't want the cash cow contracts to stop...so...here we are with a lockout.

Every action from the owners indicates that they are trying to correct some major mistakes...and the first step is restructuring that god awful CBA that they lost 1+ billion dollars (http://www.uploadphotograph.com/?v=austinpowe.jpg) following.

KingsPhillies
07-10-2011, 03:06 PM
People who keep saying teams should move to Seattle and/or Vegas need to educate themselves on those markets before they try and argue for relocation. Seattle does not have a viable arena. That's the main reason the Sonics left in the first place(Clay Bennett being a conniving prick being the other reason), and the sole reason my Kings may not play another game in Sacramento if the season is cancelled. Vegas, as I've said many times, is NOT a viable market for any professional sports team. First you have the gambling issue. But even if that could be resolved, it would be nearly impossible to build a fan base there. The majority of the Vegas population are transplants from other areas, and typically don't live there very long. The city's high turnover rate in population would make it very difficult to create a solid fan base. Season ticket sales would be dreadful. People in Vegas would rather spend their money on other things. So as far as professional sports in Vegas goes, I think they need to stick with big ticket boxing/MMA events. I speak from experience on the Vegas issue.

How come no one hardly ever mentions Kansas City as a viable location for an NBA team? They already have a beautiful arena built, a city full of great sports fans and a [brief] history with the league. Being that I am a Kings fan, if they do end up moving, I'd rather see them in KC than anywhere else...unless Seattle gets an arena built; I'd probably be okay with that too. But my fingers are crossed that we can get the funding necessary to build that beautiful arena downtown; in which case the Kings aren't going anywhere.

All-in-all, I don't think any franchises will fold, nor will there be contraction. It would put too many people out of work, and lose a good portion of fan support in the process. David Stern doesn't want to be remembered for that(and he would). He's hated enough as it is, and has now presided over two lockouts. Getting rid of teams is not the answer. IMO, A fair CBA that includes a hard cap and reasonable salary cuts is the first step to fixing this mess.

heattiltheend94
07-10-2011, 03:24 PM
I personally believe contraction will eventually have to occur to lift this lockout.

mzgrizz
07-10-2011, 04:43 PM
Why do some posters still pick on Memphis after our successful playoff run and increase of well over 2000 new season ticket holders?? Dedication of our owner to the team's success? I dont get that tired old attitude.

mzgrizz
07-10-2011, 04:48 PM
Even Tavis Smiley is doing an NPR show about Memphis and mentioning the Grizzlies as I write this! He went to a playoff game with David Porter who is a soul legend here and a huge Grizz fan.

ewmania
07-10-2011, 05:07 PM
do you guys seriously know the pain these guys bodies go through... before they become 40 most of these guys bodies turn into crap

its them who's out on the court every day breaking they bones and being stuffed on pain killers... all these rich greedy owners do is sign contracts and talk on a microphone

lebron james, the kobe's ,etc. they are the ones who put the tickets in the seats, they are the ones people pay to see not james dolan... so they deserve every penny they make and these rich billionair owners just dont want to see these guys become as rich as them and go where ever they want

mzgrizz
07-10-2011, 05:25 PM
Someone should put up a poll on whether or not you actually have a job or own a business and employ ppl and what your take is on these issues.

ccugrad1
07-10-2011, 05:26 PM
I think the NBA is the only sport where contraction would actually be a good thing. There are too many teams in the NBA that have absolutely no chance whatsoever of being a contender anytime soon.

mzgrizz
07-10-2011, 05:33 PM
I think the NBA is the only sport where contraction would actually be a good thing. There are too many teams in the NBA that have absolutely no chance whatsoever of being a contender anytime soon.

I beg to disagree. Just a year ago NO ONE would have given Memphis a shot on the playoffs much less get to game7 in Round 2. How ya like that now?

GSRaider
07-10-2011, 05:40 PM
In a perfect world, all 50 states would have NBA franchises that make income... But IMO, contraction would be the best thing for the league...

mzgrizz
07-10-2011, 05:52 PM
Do you say you would contract to ONE California team? Somehow I dont think so

JeffG20
07-10-2011, 06:19 PM
do you guys seriously know the pain these guys bodies go through... before they become 40 most of these guys bodies turn into crap

its them who's out on the court every day breaking they bones and being stuffed on pain killers... all these rich greedy owners do is sign contracts and talk on a microphone

lebron james, the kobe's ,etc. they are the ones who put the tickets in the seats, they are the ones people pay to see not james dolan... so they deserve every penny they make and these rich billionair owners just dont want to see these guys become as rich as them and go where ever they want

If your willing to go into a business and lose millions and think its no big deal, then please go right ahead.

No owners = no league, and without a league you wouldnt even know who lebron james is.

Dont kid yourselves, both sides need each other.

TRF929
07-10-2011, 06:20 PM
do you guys seriously know the pain these guys bodies go through... before they become 40 most of these guys bodies turn into crap

its them who's out on the court every day breaking they bones and being stuffed on pain killers... all these rich greedy owners do is sign contracts and talk on a microphone

lebron james, the kobe's ,etc. they are the ones who put the tickets in the seats, they are the ones people pay to see not james dolan... so they deserve every penny they make and these rich billionair owners just dont want to see these guys become as rich as them and go where ever they want

I think your in wrong forum, this is NBA not NFL :D

Breaking bones....? Thats not that common, maybe fingers. There are more strains than anything, but your being paid millions of dollars, even a million dollars is worth it. Most median families get 1 mil in a lifetime, let alone per year. Give me 5 mil for life and ill break a bone as often as an average player and they get that money per year.

Yes fans come to see star players play, but if your spending 60 mil a year for a team that only brings in 55 mil a year, its obviously not worth it. These guys can go wherever they want anyways, since they have millions and i dont think the owners feel threatened by players making more than them.

Netslunatic76
07-10-2011, 08:55 PM
but the owners aren't making money, they have actually lost over 1 BILLION DOLLARS (http://www.uploadphotograph.com/?v=austinpowe.jpg) in the last 6 years, when the last CBA was in effect. Which is why they need to change it.

If the players want it so fair...how about they do 100% profit/risk sharing with the owners? So if the owners lose money, the players have to lose money too? And if the NBA makes a bunch of money, then so will the players and the owners. Doesn't work like that? Why not? Cause the owners put up all the risk and thus should have the biggest rewards, since that is how business is run right? Except for in the NBA where currently, the players are making more than the owners of the teams?

Now, in what business outside of the NBA would that financial structure work and keep a business open?

A. NO WHERE.

:facepalm: I wish you would stop saying that.


The following numbers are audited figures. If the projected figures are correct, the NBA will have lost $1.845 billion over the last 6 years- Forbes


The number below, provided to Forbes by “sources close to the NBA labor negotiations,” show financial information for the 2005-06 season through 2009-10, as well as projected numbers for the just-completed 2010-11 season.
- AOL



. . .the Forbes numbers that detail the 2009-10 season show that while some clubs are running in the red, some, such as the Knicks and Bulls are profiting handsomely- Forbes

A source? After the Lebron situation that's laughable. Nobody knows for sure how much the NBA is losing. Not ALL owners are losing money. Those "projected" numbers are based off of the teams losing money. Not the league as a whole.

BTW, on average, each team that is losing money(24 teams) lost 15.4mil in 08-09(the least profitable year). A lot of these owners are billionaires and and wipe their ***** with that kind of money. I don't feel bad for them. Especially for teams over the salary cap. Mikhail Prokhorov's yacht cost him three times that.

BigCityofDreams
07-10-2011, 09:19 PM
And like Jiggin said, small markets have to compete with the Miamis and LA's by giving out large contracts to average players. If they dont how are they supposed to get talent? The draft? Oh wait your player will bail the first chance he gets. Small markets are damned if they do, damned if they dont.

You mean after yrs of seeing the team only make lateral movements. Who in their right mind wouldn't leave if the team doesn't take steps forward.

kidinkkk
07-10-2011, 09:20 PM
they wont fold but u never know

ccugrad1
07-10-2011, 10:23 PM
I beg to disagree. Just a year ago NO ONE would have given Memphis a shot on the playoffs much less get to game7 in Round 2. How ya like that now?

Oh wow, Memphis made the playoffs one year. Come back and talk to me when they make it like 5 or 6 years in a row. Let's be honest, when we look at the NBA right now, I think many would agree with me that teams like the Charlotte Bobcats, Sacramento Kings, Minnesota T-Wolves, Toronto Raptors, Milwaukee Bucks, Washington Wizards are NOT contending for an NBA Title anytime soon. Get rid of teams like that!

JPHX
07-10-2011, 10:32 PM
IMO Owners that are just financially going down the tube in small markets will just treat their teams like the current housing market. They will cut their losses and sell low. A new owner would come in buying the team below market value and look to drive the value up. If it means relocation for some teams or getting back into the playoffs to drive up the revenue. But i dont see contraction happening or small market teams forcing the owners camp to cave into player demands. Unless the players concede, we might be looking at a stalement. somethings gotta give though.

ccg34
07-10-2011, 10:47 PM
I'm hoping the lockout will cause OKC to fold. It would be fair for the city of Seattle to see that f@ggot Bennett fail. Screw David Stern as well. He deserves to be in this predicament. I hope he fails.

scaramantula
07-10-2011, 11:21 PM
Yeah, players are greedy. :rolleyes:

How about those greedy rookies like Kevin Durant or Derrick Rose getting paid $3M-$5M the first 4 years of his career, despite playing at an MVP caliber level, and there being nothing they can do about it?

yeah how could they possibly be expected to live with only 3 mill a year, plus endorsements for an mvp caliber player

mzgrizz
07-10-2011, 11:25 PM
Oh wow, Memphis made the playoffs one year. Come back and talk to me when they make it like 5 or 6 years in a row. Let's be honest, when we look at the NBA right now, I think many would agree with me that teams like the Charlotte Bobcats, Sacramento Kings, Minnesota T-Wolves, Toronto Raptors, Milwaukee Bucks, Washington Wizards are NOT contending for an NBA Title anytime soon. Get rid of teams like that!

Come back to me when you know more about my team. We made the playoffs 3 years in a row then had a 3 year hiatus and then made them this past year. My point is if you think small markets don't have a chance at the playoffs, then the Grizzlies have proved it wrong. If you check out the thread for projected playoffs if the season is played this year, then a vast majority think Memphis will be in the playoffs again. I'm saying you can't count out the small markets. The Spurs being the poster boys of this for the last 14 or so years.

beasted86
07-11-2011, 12:00 AM
I think your in wrong forum, this is NBA not NFL :D

Breaking bones....? Thats not that common, maybe fingers. There are more strains than anything, but your being paid millions of dollars, even a million dollars is worth it. Most median families get 1 mil in a lifetime, let alone per year. Give me 5 mil for life and ill break a bone as often as an average player and they get that money per year.

How about seeing your wife & kids a couple hours some weeks? How about missing a lot of your kids childhood if you are a veteran who has played 12+ seasons? How about not being able to go out in public without somebody bothering you or begging you for money (I'd bet this happens daily)? There are a lot of physical strains, family strains, and general inconveniences with being a ball player.


Yes fans come to see star players play, but if your spending 60 mil a year for a team that only brings in 55 mil a year, its obviously not worth it.
Which is exactly why owners shouldn't be signing the players to the contracts. The owners seem to want a system that protects themselves from themselves. Injuries are unforeseen, and if you have a Jermaine O'Neal situation, there's only so much you can do about it. But on the other hand, a healthy full motivated Rashard Lewis was NEVER worth the money from year 1 of his contract.

JeffG20
07-11-2011, 12:12 AM
You mean after yrs of seeing the team only make lateral movements. Who in their right mind wouldn't leave if the team doesn't take steps forward.


But its pretty much the only thing small markets can do, and that is the problem. They pretty much have to give a James Posey a 40 million dollar deal just to field a decent team when all of the established stars are teaming up. The only option is to overpay

TRF929
07-11-2011, 02:07 AM
How about seeing your wife & kids a couple hours some weeks? How about missing a lot of your kids childhood if you are a veteran who has played 12+ seasons? How about not being able to go out in public without somebody bothering you or begging you for money (I'd bet this happens daily)? There are a lot of physical strains, family strains, and general inconveniences with being a ball player.


Which is exactly why owners shouldn't be signing the players to the contracts. The owners seem to want a system that protects themselves from themselves. Injuries are unforeseen, and if you have a Jermaine O'Neal situation, there's only so much you can do about it. But on the other hand, a healthy full motivated Rashard Lewis was NEVER worth the money from year 1 of his contract.

Players choose to have that life and still have a family. NBA season is what 5 months with limited time seeing family, that leaves plenty of time afterwards with family. It's all their choice but I think being paid a couple million a year is completely worth the not so quiet life. Every job has its highs and lows, you just have to hope there are more highs and being a ball player being paid millions a year, able to support your family, live in a nice area, having medical care at your beck in call, having glamourous items the regular population can only dream of, etc... is well worth it. I never saw my father that much as he was always working trying to support our family but he never got half the year off to do what he wanted, let alone seeing him a couple hours a week. People have a lot more strain that millionaire bball players, the people begging for money I'm sure are going through some strain and a lot more than a player that comes walking out of the most expensive restuarant into what ever expensive car they have, driving to a multi million dollar house.

Yes, besides the few that get injured, lower market teams might feel obligated to sign a player to get more fan fare and hope they come out atleast even for the year. Example, Chris Bosh, he's not worth what his contract is IMO but if he signed somewhere not MIA, owners would just hope he would bring in more fan fare (money) than they would without him and hope to get closer to breaking even in revenue. And I'm sure thats how it is for lots of other players, thats how Rashard Lewis got his big contract. Owners hoping that pairing him with whoever else will bring even more revenue.

I'm not saying its all on players cause its not, The owners are the ones signing them, but the owners are trying to bring more fan fare in their stadiums and the NBA. Who do you think cares more about fans, owners or players? Players can give a hoot since their already getting their money, owners depend on fans and try to get more, so their able to sign these better players. Players care so much about fans that their going to play overseas and lock fans out even more. Also shows how much they care about family,
"Babe I'm going overseas to play ball" "Why, we have enough money and now we have more time with the kids" "I'm going to make a tenth of what i was making in the NBA and put pressure on owners. The kids will understand, plus I can get more action from women overseas with less of a chance of you finding out"

Plus it doesnt help that the economy has been low, so less fans are able to go to games, in which would help owners, in which would help players. There are a lot of factors that affect the NBA, and a lot of those factors are low right now, so why should the owners keep spending high, they shouldnt. Yes there are teams like NY, LAL, BOS, CHI that are fine, but thats not the majority of the NBA. And yes their are exceptions such as SA or OKC but its only a handful of teams on both sides, leaving more than half of the NBA teams dry.

All in all, cutting salaries 20% or so would only be good for the NBA, players still make millions and able to live comfortably.

Tony_Starks
07-11-2011, 02:48 AM
But its pretty much the only thing small markets can do, and that is the problem. They pretty much have to give a James Posey a 40 million dollar deal just to field a decent team when all of the established stars are teaming up. The only option is to overpay


Not true. The whole "small market teams can't compete with the bigs" thing is a myth. Nobody is stopping them from drafting smart. Nobody is stopping them signing role players that actually fit their team. The D league is available. They just have to work harder and smarter than the big teams but they often don't. Most of them can't even get rebuilding right.

But at the end of the day the big city teams will always have the advantage because of location, there's no pay structure that's changing that...

TRF929
07-11-2011, 05:39 AM
Not true. The whole "small market teams can't compete with the bigs" thing is a myth. Nobody is stopping them from drafting smart. Nobody is stopping them signing role players that actually fit their team. The D league is available. They just have to work harder and smarter than the big teams but they often don't. Most of them can't even get rebuilding right.

But at the end of the day the big city teams will always have the advantage because of location, there's no pay structure that's changing that...

I agree bigger cities will always have the advantage but they can atleast shrink the advantage with pay structure. You cant tell me Dallas would have the same $90 mil team if there was a hard cap. Half the guys wouldnt be there and they wouldn't of won IMO.

Theres nothing to stop Bron, Wade and Bosh wanting to team up in MIA. They would just have to take less money in doing so and the FO would have to be creative in filling the rest of the team while staying under the cap. And before you say thats what they did, its only to a degree. Each will still make around 100 mil in the next 5 years.

Not saying they dont deserve the contract but would they still wanna play together if there was a hard cap, say around 60 mil? Where they would have a set contract, say 10 mil a year, leaving with MIA to spend another 30 on 12 other guys. Or would they seperate and go for double the contract on a smaller market team? I would be fine with either way, it just shows how dedicated the players are in wanting to play together and the FO doing some crafty work in building the rest of the team.

Jet Formation
07-11-2011, 07:21 AM
I agree with your thoughts on the owners honesty in exactly how much they are losing. Especially after reading the NYTimes piece calling them out (whether true or part true it shed some interesting light on possibilities).

Bear with me here.

What if the owners of the big and mid markets want a lockout to force out a couple of small market teams? They could weed out the weak or the weak could bow out and make it look like collateral damage and know one gets blamed.
They could then condense the league which would, as we all know, make the league more competitive. This would add to its popularity and reduce the amount of active players, the operating costs and any shared revenue . End result, making those who remained more money with less overhead
Add this to the present CBA being asked for by the owners, they reduce their cost even more.
Who knows, nothing the majority of these owners would do would surprise me.

Following this logic, wouldn't the better pool of players command more money per team? I don't know. That's a heck of a way to accomplish something and lose the trust of the owners. You're talking about owners who have invested much of their capital to get swept under the rug. I don't think it's legal or could happen.

But in reading this small vs large market issue on top of the looming CBA talks, I think you're looking at a serious lockout for much of the season. Both sides will dig in hoping the other blinks and wait until some games are missed assuming the leverage will cave one side in. After about 10 games missed, they'll start talkling and realize they are so far apart that half the season will be missed before any significant headway takes place. The players actually have Europe as leverage unlike the NFL.
The owners don't want transparency and the players want more revenue sharing. Just like most corporations, trimming the fat is the sign of the times. Something will give but I don't see a 2011-2012 season as a result.

Jet Formation
07-11-2011, 07:30 AM
but the owners aren't making money, they have actually lost over 1 BILLION DOLLARS (http://www.uploadphotograph.com/?v=austinpowe.jpg) in the last 6 years, when the last CBA was in effect. Which is why they need to change it.

If the players want it so fair...how about they do 100% profit/risk sharing with the owners? So if the owners lose money, the players have to lose money too? And if the NBA makes a bunch of money, then so will the players and the owners. Doesn't work like that? Why not? Cause the owners put up all the risk and thus should have the biggest rewards, since that is how business is run right? Except for in the NBA where currently, the players are making more than the owners of the teams?

Now, in what business outside of the NBA would that financial structure work and keep a business open?

A. NO WHERE.

That's what the average fan can't seem to fathom. Probably because most don't own a business and employ a entitlement type of mentality. Goes along with unions. That's not how corporate worlds work. Owners put up all the risk, none to the players who demand more. It's got to give.
This is going to get ugly because the players haven't realized that a global economy downturn affects nearly everyone. It'll take a while to sink in for them. They'll probably get the entire season to think about it while they're not collecting a paycheck unless they play for considerably less in Europe. I think the owners to be very patient this time and ride this thing out - it will be better for the health of the sport in the long run.

A side note: it would be smart on the part of all European teams to insist on a multiple-year contract that either the player or team would have to buyout. No temporary, one-year varieties. Insist on a 4-5 year deal as these players will need cash and will have to commit.

jiggin
07-11-2011, 08:05 AM
:facepalm: I wish you would stop saying that.

- Forbes

- AOL


- Forbes

A source? After the Lebron situation that's laughable. Nobody knows for sure how much the NBA is losing. Not ALL owners are losing money. Those "projected" numbers are based off of the teams losing money. Not the league as a whole.

BTW, on average, each team that is losing money(24 teams) lost 15.4mil in 08-09(the least profitable year). A lot of these owners are billionaires and and wipe their ***** with that kind of money. I don't feel bad for them. Especially for teams over the salary cap. Mikhail Prokhorov's yacht cost him three times that.

fine, don't believe their numbers. I am sure the lawyers in the room during these negotiations are forging numbers that will have to pass through a court of law when being signed into effect. :facepalm:

the conspiracy theories are getting a little crazy IMO.

These owners are very wealthy BECAUSE they are smart businessmen. They are not going to let ANY business of theirs (and that is what their NBA teams are to them, a business) lose millions or billions (http://www.uploadphotograph.com/?v=austinpowe.jpg) of dollars collectively. That just isn't in their blood and IS THE REASON they have done so well in the business world and got where they are.

To ask them to suck it up, which they obviously have been doing as a majority for the last 6 years, is completely insane and immature. ITS THEIR BUSINESS TO DO WHAT THEY WANT. Not the players, not yours or mine...but a venture these owners took on to if nothing else, not LOSE money on. They would be crazy to just continue to lose so much money and do nothing about it, no matter what their net worth is...

Its not a matter of feeling sorry for anyone, hell the players make MILLIONS a year for playing a game...who is gonna feel sorry for them? its about thinking logically about the state of the NBA and what needs to happen to make the sport not only better but more competitive in the future. A hard cap HAS TO HAPPEN, imo, if they want to achieve that. Well that, and better consistent officiating. :)

ne3xchamps
07-11-2011, 08:22 AM
no... if anything, Vegas

Nevada is one of the poorest states right now in this economy. Moving to vegas won't happen.

BigCityofDreams
07-11-2011, 10:12 AM
But its pretty much the only thing small markets can do, and that is the problem. They pretty much have to give a James Posey a 40 million dollar deal just to field a decent team when all of the established stars are teaming up. The only option is to overpay

The don't have to overpay for garbage/mediocre players because it just continues the cycle. Let Posey or another guys on his level be some other teams problem.

HuRRiCaNeS324
07-11-2011, 10:22 AM
why would they fold? they are losing less money now than they were during the season when they had to pay the players...

Common sense aint common you say? Good example.

ewmania
07-11-2011, 10:39 AM
I think your in wrong forum, this is NBA not NFL :D

Breaking bones....? Thats not that common, maybe fingers. There are more strains than anything, but your being paid millions of dollars, even a million dollars is worth it. Most median families get 1 mil in a lifetime, let alone per year. Give me 5 mil for life and ill break a bone as often as an average player and they get that money per year.

Yes fans come to see star players play, but if your spending 60 mil a year for a team that only brings in 55 mil a year, its obviously not worth it. These guys can go wherever they want anyways, since they have millions and i dont think the owners feel threatened by players making more than them.

hahaha hey after what happen to rondo's arm, he deserves every penny :rolleyes:

Kinkotheclown
07-11-2011, 11:16 AM
Yeah I feel what you're saying. I read that article as well it was very telling about whats really going on. I think there is a division between the big time markets and the small markets but they are just keeping the illusion of a united front going. If you think about it do you really think owners like Jerry Bus, Mark Cuban, and Jim Dolan want a restrictive hard cap? No way. But of course they have to keep the sharade going.

Even though I agree losing a couple teams would make it more competitive and make the league stronger overall its a shame if it would have to result to that because of a few owners complete incompetence. Also the issue the owners keep dodging is that revenue sharing as far as ticket sales would solve a lot of their problems but the big money making teams are against it....

I don't know if the big market guys want a hard cap or not. One side of me says "the more they can spend the more starts they can bring in and make more money". the other side says "they believe that having that restriction, they can pay players less and still charge the same for tickets so they'll make even more." There are so many ways for an owner to get stars in, they could start to offer profit sharing which wouldn't count against the cap, endorsements, all things the owners don't have to pay for and from which they'll reap the benefits.
And I am on the fence as well about contraction. It would suck to lose teams. It sucks for the fans. But as far as for the players, if they could get a deal where it was set that if there are 2 teams lost, the remaining teams are required to add one player to the bench. This would allow almost all of those players to keep their jobs. But even that might be tough with the owners' claims of loss.
And incompetence is the perfect word. Look at Dolan. Big money team and claiming he's losing money while raising ticket prices through the roof. this is while the Knicks are now the most valuable team in the NBA according to Forbes. You've grown in value yet lost money? These guys books don't make sense. That is the bottom line.
Revenue sharing would be so helpful but you are right. The owners are way too greedy to do it. Its worked pretty well in baseball. But then the problem is, where is the shared money going? Into the pocket or towards improving the team? lol
Bottom line is both sides have to give a little to make this happen. Sadly I doubt it will happen and I truly feel that this league will suffer dramatically if there is an extended lockout.

camador22
07-11-2011, 12:06 PM
Smaller teams benifit with a lockout under the current CBA. They are the ones losing money by paying these huge contracts. Bigger markets are the ones that will suffer the most with a lockout.

jiggin
07-11-2011, 01:01 PM
Common sense aint common you say? Good example.

ok...

...they still have events going on at their arena's and will have even more if they know the season is a bust. They don't have to pay the players or the arena employees that work those games...

so besides the lease on their building and the salaries of their execs...what other MAJOR expenses would they incur during a lockout that would force them to close shop?

TRF929
07-11-2011, 05:18 PM
hahaha hey after what happen to rondo's arm, he deserves every penny :rolleyes:

Yes, I agree as I am a Spurs fan and Manu had the same, but its still not that common to happen