PDA

View Full Version : Labor Talks: Season on the Brink



mzgrizz
10-22-2011, 11:35 AM
http://hangtime.blogs.nba.com/2011/10/21/labor-talks-season-on-the-brink/#

Not so brief overview of what happened THursday.
If this has been posted, mods, feel free to merge.
As a season ticket holder who is still holding ghost tickets, I am getting progressively accepting that we may not have a season.
I am in personal hopes that they will get it together and at least start a partial season by Jan 1.

Hangtime
10-22-2011, 11:46 AM
50 game season. Get ready in Jan/Feb

ink
10-22-2011, 12:24 PM
I am completely OK with missing a season and playing a lot more myself. Anyone I know in the coaching community here thinks the NBA is a sucky league of pampered stars. They've been saying to me for years that I should watch NCAA and forget about the ******** commercial league. Looks like that's exactly what is going to happen.

Hopefully this lockout is effective enough and long enough that fundamental change will happen. I don't want them to go back to the garbage we've seen in the last decade, and especially since 2010 free agency.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 12:28 PM
I am completely OK with missing a season and playing a lot more myself. Anyone I know in the coaching community here thinks the NBA is a sucky league of pampered stars. They've been saying to me for years that I should watch NCAA and forget about the ******** commercial league. Looks like that's exactly what is going to happen.

Hopefully this lockout is effective enough and long enough that fundamental change will happen. I don't want them to go back to the garbage we've seen in the last decade, and especially since 2010 free agency.

People enjoyed that "garbage." How is that lost on you? Highest ratings EVER...by a lot. Highest revenues EVER...by a lot. A season in which basketball soared past baseball in popularity and interest level.

Say what you want about the quality of team basketball being played in the NBA these days... but you cannot deny that the NBA was more successful by almost every measure last year than it has ever been. The money didn't work out... and that needs to be fixed. But to suggest an overhaul to the system is ludicrous and it reeks of envy.

RZZZA
10-22-2011, 12:28 PM
I'd rather shoot myself than watch college sports.

mzgrizz
10-22-2011, 12:34 PM
I'd rather shoot myself than watch college sports.

:laugh: It's like going to the dentist for me......slow and painful!!!

D-Leethal
10-22-2011, 12:37 PM
Last years NCAA championship was just the epitome of great basketball.....Even better than the Mavs playing the ultimate team basketball led by a giant white German assassin to take out the most talented and most hated trio to ever grace the hardwood in the NBA Finals.........yea the NBA sucks :facepalm:

ink
10-22-2011, 12:44 PM
People enjoyed that "garbage." How is that lost on you? Highest ratings EVER...by a lot. Highest revenues EVER...by a lot. A season in which basketball soared past baseball in popularity and interest level.

Say what you want about the quality of team basketball being played in the NBA these days... but you cannot deny that the NBA was more successful by almost every measure last year than it has ever been. The money didn't work out... and that needs to be fixed. But to suggest an overhaul to the system is ludicrous and it reeks of envy.

Sorry but there are more fanboys following the NBA than any other pro sport. I'm not saying you are because I know you are just dedicated to your team, but it does apply to a lot of the new fans. If you have a car crash more people will watch that too. Most of the interest last year was because of the extreme hate and that is not the way to measure fan interest. People love watching petty arguments and whiny reality TV style garbage. Does that mean it's good sport? Hardly.

And the envy argument is always lame.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 12:48 PM
Sorry but there are more fanboys following the NBA than any other pro sport. If you have a car crash more people will watch that too. Most of the interest last year was because of the extreme hate and that is not the way to measure fan interest. People love watching petty arguments and whiny reality TV style garbage. Does that mean it's good sport? Hardly.

So you would rather have really good basketball that no one watches... ya, that seems like a successful business model...

ink
10-22-2011, 12:50 PM
So you would rather have really good basketball that no one watches... ya, that seems like a successful business model...

You can do better than that I'm sure. I don't even think that requires an answer. No one wants a league that no one watches. But it doesn't have to be based on lowest common denominator reality TV standards to be successful either.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 12:55 PM
You can do better than that I'm sure. I don't even think that requires an answer. No one wants a league that no one watches. But it doesn't have to be based on lowest common denominator reality TV standards to be successful either.

Has it ever occurred to you that the sport is simply evolving?

Same has occurred in football. People want to see an exciting product...not a fundamentally sound one.

You are starting to sound like a bitter old man that refuses to accept that things change and it just isn't the "good ole days" anymore.

ink
10-22-2011, 12:58 PM
Has it ever occurred to you that the sport is simply evolving?

Same has occurred in football. People want to see an exciting product...not a fundamentally sound one.

You are starting to sound like a bitter old man that refuses to accept that things change and it just isn't the "good ole days" anymore.

If that's evolving then that's pretty pathetic. It has nothing to do with age, except for the suspicion that most of the NBA posters that were fighting in here all last season were under 15 and possibly under 10. You know yourself how horrible the quality in the NBA forum became because of it.

I want more than a fundamentally sound game, but it has to at least include that. A lot of the teams in the league are very promising and there have been some great championship organizations over the past decade. The issue is with spoiled stars and super team building. That's not evolution; that's the downfall of the league. Sure, there will be millions of fanboys attracted by famous name players, but there's no depth to that. It becomes a shallow, obnoxious league. This is the "evolution" that many see happening.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 01:03 PM
If that's evolving then that's pretty pathetic. It has nothing to do with age, except for the suspicion that most of the NBA posters that were fighting in here all last season were under 15 and possibly under 10. You know yourself how horrible the quality in the NBA forum became because of it.

Haha... I know.

I wasn't alluding to physical age though... but rather mental age. You sound like you are unable to accept change. If you don't like the way NBA ball is played these days... maybe college b-ball is better for you. It is certainly more reminiscent of old school ball. But regardless of system or anything this new CBA says, you are not going to revert back to hard nose old school basketball...that is simply not where the league is going.

ink
10-22-2011, 01:20 PM
Haha... I know.

I wasn't alluding to physical age though... but rather mental age. You sound like you are unable to accept change. If you don't like the way NBA ball is played these days... maybe college b-ball is better for you. It is certainly more reminiscent of old school ball. But regardless of system or anything this new CBA says, you are not going to revert back to hard nose old school basketball...that is simply not where the league is going.

Actually I'm promoting change. :D I'm not necessarily saying that the league has to return to Jerry West standards. I'm saying that it helps to use history to give perspective to a current crisis in order to try to build something more solid for the future. The league needs to improve; right now it is a commercial cesspool where so much of the fan interest is in what some idiot star said to diss some other idiot star, etc, etc, etc. That's not basketball. That's not actually sport. It's shallow entertainment.

That doesn't mean every team last year was that way. I thought OKC and Chicago were especially exciting: coached the right way and constructed the right way. Both of those teams are teams to get behind for a long time. THAT is basketball.

I think it's the players, especially the spoiled superstars, that are afraid of change. They want to hang onto the past in the form of the old CBA that has only driven the league apart.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 01:25 PM
Actually I'm promoting change. :D I'm not necessarily saying that the league has to return to Jerry West standards. I'm saying that it helps to use history to give perspective to a current crisis in order to try to build something more solid for the future. The league needs to improve; right now it is a commercial cesspool where so much of the fan interest is in what some idiot star said to diss some other idiot star, etc, etc, etc. That's not basketball. That's not actually sport. It's shallow entertainment.

That doesn't mean every team last year was that way. I thought OKC and Chicago were especially exciting: coached the right way and constructed the right way. Both of those teams are teams to get behind for a long time. THAT is basketball.

I think it's the players, especially the spoiled superstars, that are afraid of change. They want to hang onto the past in the form of the old CBA that has only driven the league apart.

If you want to use history... show me the historic NBA data that shows that parity is good for the sport. In another thread I just posted an article that claims, as I have, that history actually shows us that the NBA has peaked in moments with the least parity.

And what happens in OKC and Chicago, teams that were "coached and constructed in the right way," when they have to lose their stars b/c rookie deals have ended?

Hawkeye15
10-22-2011, 01:27 PM
I am completely OK with missing a season and playing a lot more myself. Anyone I know in the coaching community here thinks the NBA is a sucky league of pampered stars. They've been saying to me for years that I should watch NCAA and forget about the ******** commercial league. Looks like that's exactly what is going to happen.

Hopefully this lockout is effective enough and long enough that fundamental change will happen. I don't want them to go back to the garbage we've seen in the last decade, and especially since 2010 free agency.

Well, the NBA is at its highest rate of popularity in history. Sure guys like my Dad hate it because its not the Larry-Magic NBA anymore. Sure its a ton of young, tattooed, irresponsible kids getting paid tons of money, but it is drawing in more people than it ever has, so they are doing something right.

As a diehard Wolves fan, obviously I am in favor of missing a season if it allows the league to have more parity. But as a Wolves fan, I also realize my team has done a lot of the damage to themselves. With a brand new coach in Adelman, Rubio and Williams, trust me, the selfish part of me wants NBA now. But if the system still allows stars to just do whatever they want, and teams to be allowed to go $40 million over the payroll in a flawed system, than I am fine with the season being canceled and a real competitive deal come out of this. The longer this lasts, the less leverage the players have, and they barely have any as of now

ink
10-22-2011, 01:40 PM
Well, the NBA is at its highest rate of popularity in history. Sure guys like my Dad hate it because its not the Larry-Magic NBA anymore. Sure its a ton of young, tattooed, irresponsible kids getting paid tons of money, but it is drawing in more people than it ever has, so they are doing something right.

As a diehard Wolves fan, obviously I am in favor of missing a season if it allows the league to have more parity. But as a Wolves fan, I also realize my team has done a lot of the damage to themselves. With a brand new coach in Adelman, Rubio and Williams, trust me, the selfish part of me wants NBA now. But if the system still allows stars to just do whatever they want, and teams to be allowed to go $40 million over the payroll in a flawed system, than I am fine with the season being canceled and a real competitive deal come out of this. The longer this lasts, the less leverage the players have, and they barely have any as of now

I agree with everything you've said here. The one thing I disagree with is the popularity. I honestly think if you look at the quality of the NBA forum over the past couple of years you can see that the lack of knowledge is at an all time low among the often between 8-15 year old fans the sport now seems to attract. The posting numbers were PHENOMENAL in here right? But we all know that the quality was abysmal. Sad but true.

NBA is popular in the same way as Jose Canseco appearances or Mike Tyson appearances on reality TV is popular. Little kids love to tune in to hate on their targeted superstar. More people will watch traffic accidents than a genuine sport. And some of the so-called "super teams" we're seeing are more traffic accident than anything else.

Give me an honestly developed team like OKC or San Antonio any day of the week.

btw, I admire the fact that you see that the good of the league even comes before the excitement of getting Adelman as a coach and bringing in some great young talent this year. I'm behind teams like the Wolves too, hoping a new CBA gives them a fighting chance at developing and retaining championship calibre talent.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 01:42 PM
I agree with everything you've said here. The one thing I disagree with is the popularity. I honestly think if you look at the quality of the NBA forum over the past couple of years you can see that the lack of knowledge is at an all time low among the often between 8-15 year old fans the sport now seems to attract. NBA is popular in the same way as Jose Canseco appearances or Mike Tyson appearances on reality TV is popular. Little kids love to tune in to hate on their targeted superstar. More people will watch traffic accidents than a genuine sport.

And locking out the NBA is the best way to educate these casual fans?

The NBA needs casual fans...there are simply not enough people knowledgeable about basketball to sustain the league. The NBA needs to turn the casual fans into hardcore fans... not make the casual fans lose interest.

ink
10-22-2011, 01:52 PM
And locking out the NBA is the best way to educate these casual fans?

The NBA needs casual fans...there are simply not enough people knowledgeable about basketball to sustain the league. The NBA needs to turn the casual fans into hardcore fans... not make the casual fans lose interest.

Best way to educate fans is to give them quality and cut the reality TV crap. You might think values like loyalty, dedication, team-oriented, fundamental, etc, etc. are old man values lol but they're not. Any coach worth anything will stress the same principles. It's not about the ego and the money; that's just the stuff that attracts the illusory high numbers, or what people are calling "popularity". Fanboys are attracted to big egos. The two things are a perfect fit. But again, the combination doesn't add up to an actual sport.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 01:55 PM
and you are entitled to that opinion...but that analysis is purely subjective.

The numbers say the league was at an all-time high level of popularly... and that is the only objective measure we have...

So while you bemoan the state of NBA basketball...it is better for the growth of the league to piss you off and make 10 other dummies happy...

Hawkeye15
10-22-2011, 01:58 PM
I agree with everything you've said here. The one thing I disagree with is the popularity. I honestly think if you look at the quality of the NBA forum over the past couple of years you can see that the lack of knowledge is at an all time low among the often between 8-15 year old fans the sport now seems to attract. The posting numbers were PHENOMENAL in here right? But we all know that the quality was abysmal. Sad but true.

NBA is popular in the same way as Jose Canseco appearances or Mike Tyson appearances on reality TV is popular. Little kids love to tune in to hate on their targeted superstar. More people will watch traffic accidents than a genuine sport. And some of the so-called "super teams" we're seeing are more traffic accident than anything else.

Give me an honestly developed team like OKC or San Antonio any day of the week.

btw, I admire the fact that you see that the good of the league even comes before the excitement of getting Adelman as a coach and bringing in some great young talent this year. I'm behind teams like the Wolves too, hoping a new CBA gives them a fighting chance at developing and retaining championship calibre talent.


I look at it this way. As the older generations have stopped paying attention to it, because they see the new NBA as a tattooed, overpaid league, a younger generation has now picked up on it. That happens. It happened in the late 80s, when I was 13-14, and MJ was picking up steam and turned the league into what we see today. Its inevitable. Fan bases cycle. When I am 50, I will probably pay less attention than I do now, because all my favorite players will be long gone.

On top of that, sports survive off casual fans. The NFL is a perfect example. I don't think the PSD forums is representative of the fan base of a sport necessarily. And yes, over the past 1.5 years, we have had an influx of terrible young posters now that NY has gotten good again, Chicago and Miami are awesome again, and a few other teams growth/movements. But you also get a lot of young posters/fans who don't know much about the game, but are now ready to learn, because they are involved in basketball now.

Its all a cycle. Yes, looking at today's NBA, its stars, the antics, make basketball purists crings sometimes. But its still the most exciting sport on the planet to me, and the NBA has, and most likely will, always carry the best of the best in the sport.

And yeah, I am more for the competitive balance and a good deal being made than just rushing to get a season and still have the same problem, and Dwight or CP3 forces a trade to NJ/NY or some crap and just pisses fans off. Or if the first amnesty waive is Joe Johnson and Chicago picks him up. Those things are not competitive balance. THey are the same old crap we have had.

ink
10-22-2011, 01:59 PM
and you are entitled to that opinion...but that analysis is purely subjective.

The numbers say the league was at an all-time high level of popularly... and that is the only objective measure we have...

And the numbers in the NBA forum were at an all-time high last year too. You know what the quality level was. I rest my case. ;)

Hawkeye15
10-22-2011, 02:01 PM
Best way to educate fans is to give them quality and cut the reality TV crap. You might think values like loyalty, dedication, team-oriented, fundamental, etc, etc. are old man values lol but they're not. Any coach worth anything will stress the same principles. It's not about the ego and the money; that's just the stuff that attracts the illusory high numbers, or what people are calling "popularity". Fanboys are attracted to big egos. The two things are a perfect fit. But again, the combination doesn't add up to an actual sport.

this requires fixing the same thing that is wrong with everything in America. The media. Every problem a citizen, athlete, or fan has, is the media and their ability to turn anything into a huge deal. And people actually care. That would all need to change to slow down what you view is the problem in the NBA.

VillaMaravilla
10-22-2011, 02:02 PM
to be honest this lockout needs to happen to save the league, its so one sided right now its boring, something needs to happen so we can see other teams compete at a high level. I dont know about you guys but to me it would make for a much better product and also this whole thing about the players dictating where they want to play while their under contract is a joke, just look at the whole Melo drama and im a Knick fan......thing just have to change all around if it means a whole season lost so be it atleast we get rid of D'antoni without having to pay him lmao

daleja424
10-22-2011, 02:03 PM
And the numbers in the NBA forum were at an all-time high last year too. You know what the quality level was. I rest my case. ;)

And yet you know that the powers at be are more interested in quantity than quality... b/c even this place is a cesspool, they will sell more premium ad space if this site has more hits. They would rather have 1000 posts by morons than 100 posts by intelligent posters...

Hawkeye15
10-22-2011, 02:03 PM
And the numbers in the NBA forum were at an all-time high last year too. You know what the quality level was. I rest my case. ;)

that is the cycle I am talking about. When I first became a fan in 1985, I had 1/10000th of the understanding I have now. The younger generation has taken over the fanbase, just like they did during the Bird/Magic to Jordan transition.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 02:04 PM
to be honest this lockout needs to happen to save the league, its so one sided right now its boring, something needs to happen so we can see other teams compete at a high level. I dont know about you guys but to me it would make for a much better product and also this whole thing about the players dictating where they want to play while their under contract is a joke, just look at the whole Melo drama and im a Knick fan......thing just have to change all around if it means a whole season lost so be it atleast we get rid of D'antoni without having to pay him lmao

Again... how can you say it is boring when the leagues popularity hit an all-time high last year....

Hawkeye15
10-22-2011, 02:05 PM
Ink, what made you become a basketball fan? Was it Bill Sharman's book on shooting, or was it Michael Jordan, or Dr. J for example?

We were all fan boys at one point.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 02:07 PM
Ink, what made you become a basketball fan? Was it Bill Sharman's book on fundamentals, or was it Michael Jordan, or Dr. J for example?

We were all fan boys at one point.

Very true.

DerekRE_3
10-22-2011, 02:12 PM
People enjoyed that "garbage." How is that lost on you? Highest ratings EVER...by a lot. Highest revenues EVER...by a lot. A season in which basketball soared past baseball in popularity and interest level.

Say what you want about the quality of team basketball being played in the NBA these days... but you cannot deny that the NBA was more successful by almost every measure last year than it has ever been. The money didn't work out... and that needs to be fixed. But to suggest an overhaul to the system is ludicrous and it reeks of envy.

Maybe a game that isn't dominated by ticky tack ******** fouls? I don't want to watch Lebron James shoot free throws, sorry. Maybe a game that isn't about four teams? The NBA is quantity over quality. Too many games, not enough meaningful ones. That's why the NFL has it beat. Parity and quality.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 02:13 PM
Maybe a game that isn't dominated by ticky tack ******** fouls? Maybe a game that isn't about four teams?The NBA is quantity over quality. Too many games, not enough meaningful ones. That's why the NFL has it beat. Parity and quality.

which one makes money... quanity or quality?

Hawkeye15
10-22-2011, 02:16 PM
which one makes money... quanity or quality?

There does need to be a balance though man. At the rate we are headed it will be very unattractive to own an NBA team in all but 5-10 cities. That is the main reason there is a lockout at this point. Of course small market teams want to see a change so that we don't have to see the Lakers, Heat, Bulls, Knicks, Mavs, and Celtics fight it out for the next 10 years for a title. We want to see the Thunder, Clippers, Wolves :), Kings, Bucks, and many more, make pushes in a fair league.

DerekRE_3
10-22-2011, 02:18 PM
which one makes money... quanity or quality?

Obviously quality. The NFL makes more money than anyone. They make over twice as much in revenue as the NBA does. It's because the regular season actually means something. Every game means so much. The NBA should start it's season in January each year. Cut about 30 games from the schedule.

The NBA is about what city your team is in and how much money you spend. Not how smart your front office is or how good your coaching is. That's starting to not really appeal to me anymore.

Hawkeye15
10-22-2011, 02:21 PM
what we want:

Fans- unless you are a fan of the few superteams in the NBA, you want to see competitive balance, parity, and different teams in the playoffs every few years
Owners- they want to make money on a business, and that goes from the owner of the Lakers to the owner of the Bucks.

A balance needs to happen between these desires.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 02:22 PM
There does need to be a balance though man. At the rate we are headed it will be very unattractive to own an NBA team in all but 5-10 cities. That is the main reason there is a lockout at this point. Of course small market teams want to see a change so that we don't have to see the Lakers, Heat, Bulls, Knicks, Mavs, and Celtics fight it out for the next 10 years for a title. We want to see the Thunder, Clippers, Wolves :), Kings, Bucks, and many more, make pushes in a fair league.

And yet the Thunder, Clippers, Grizzlies, etc have managed to do just fine under the current rules... representing three of the youngest and most exciting teams in the league. Proof that it isn't all or nothing...there is still room for well managed smaller markets at the top.


Obviously quality. The NFL makes more money than anyone. They make over twice as much in revenue as the NBA does. The NBA should start it's season in January each year. Cut about 30 games from the schedule.

LMAO. Wow dude. Quality makes more money than quantity... really? LOL!

So one good game would make the NBA more revenue than ten bad ones... :facepalm:

daleja424
10-22-2011, 02:24 PM
Obviously quality. The NFL makes more money than anyone. They make over twice as much in revenue as the NBA does. It's because the regular season actually means something. Every game means so much. The NBA should start it's season in January each year. Cut about 30 games from the schedule.

The NBA is about what city your team is in and how much money you spend. Not how smart your front office is or how good your coaching is. That's starting to not really appeal to me anymore.

And the NBA could care less if they lose your fanship if they can gain a different two people willing to spend money. And that is the point of any business. Same reason that Directv offers awesome promotions to new customers. They don't care if they lose some existing customers...as long as they can bring in more new customers than old customers they are losing.

Hawkeye15
10-22-2011, 02:27 PM
And yet the Thunder, Clippers, Grizzlies, etc have managed to do just fine under the current rules... representing three of the youngest and most exciting teams in the league. Proof that it isn't all or nothing...there is still room for well managed smaller markets at the top.



LMAO. Wow dude. Quality makes more money than quantity... really? LOL!

So one good game would make the NBA more revenue than ten bad ones... :facepalm:

The Thunder have a great front office. That is the ONLY way a small market team can make it. The Clippers aren't there yet, but you touched on it again- aint many Durants and Griffins for the small market teams to get every year. Grizzlies? They made a little noise, but they will just as soon be out of the playoffs next season.

As a small market team fan myself, of course every now and then your team will get some success when a draft pick turns into a 1st team NBA player for 10 years. But there is no appeal. There is no parity. Look at the championships won over the past 20 years. Its the same damn teams mostly. And its not just because they have the best run front offices. When you can have a $88 million salary cap, and STILL add with mid level's, exceptions, and other bs, it destroys balance.

Many fans don't care at all if the league is more profitable when NY or Chicago are contenders.

I get what you are saying dude. I do. NBA is more popular than ever. But in a business model, when 22/30 businesses are losing money, the system will eventually crash, because investors won't want to take on a project with a 70% fail rate.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 02:36 PM
The Thunder have a great front office. That is the ONLY way a small market team can make it. The Clippers aren't there yet, but you touched on it again- aint many Durants and Griffins for the small market teams to get every year. Grizzlies? They made a little noise, but they will just as soon be out of the playoffs next season.

As a small market team fan myself, of course every now and then your team will get some success when a draft pick turns into a 1st team NBA player for 10 years. But there is no appeal. There is no parity. Look at the championships won over the past 20 years. Its the same damn teams mostly. And its not just because they have the best run front offices. When you can have a $88 million salary cap, and STILL add with mid level's, exceptions, and other bs, it destroys balance.

Many fans don't care at all if the league is more profitable when NY or Chicago are contenders.

I get what you are saying dude. I do. NBA is more popular than ever. But in a business model, when 22/30 businesses are losing money, the system will eventually crash, because investors won't want to take on a project with a 70% fail rate.

Losing money is not a system issue though... that is very seperate. I agree the business model is failing... but the system is not.

I disagree with you assertion about "many fans." The fact is... there are more people living in NY, LA, Chicago, Boston, and San Fran The major 5 NBA markets) than there are in every other NBA market combined.

Having champions from those cities is exponentially better for the league.

I think it is silly to expect that people are going to want to watch Milwaukee duke it out with Minnesota for a title. And that is the point. You make a larger percentage of your fanbase happy when the big market teams are good...

Slimsim
10-22-2011, 02:36 PM
Utah and denver are some good young up coming teams as well. Along with philly Indiana and Sacramento. I really do think this is a problem that isn't fixable From my understanding how can owners stop players from deciding on where they want to go. A guy like Kevin Love might decide to take a pay cut just to play in another city so i really don't know how you can balance things Unless the talent lvl of players from college improve drastically

DerekRE_3
10-22-2011, 02:38 PM
And yet the Thunder, Clippers, Grizzlies, etc have managed to do just fine under the current rules... representing three of the youngest and most exciting teams in the league. Proof that it isn't all or nothing...there is still room for well managed smaller markets at the top.



LMAO. Wow dude. Quality makes more money than quantity... really? LOL!

So one good game would make the NBA more revenue than ten bad ones... :facepalm:

Less games equal a better product, especially if you have the season last the same amount of days it does now. Think about it:

-No more back to back games, where statistics clearly show the road team doing the back to back is a severe disadvantage. You get more competitive basketball.

-No more four games in five nights. With less games more spread out over the season, coaches have more time to actually coach. Not a lot of coaching is able to happen during the season. It's mostly just shootarounds. Again, you'll see better basketball. Younger players can develop and actually get taught during the season.

-Less games is less taxing on players. Again, a better product. Players will be healthier and not as tired throughout the season, leading to once again, a better product.

-You are confusing revenue with profit. It's ok, so does the NBA. Most businesses do profit sharing, not revenue sharing. High revenue doesn't automatically mean you make money. More games equal more expenses. If the players play less games, they should make less money. They won't have to pay refs as much, arena employees, etc. You are assuming that playing less games means expenses will stay the same.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 02:41 PM
No I am assuming that expenses and revenues will increase at the same rate.

If I make 10 dollars selling lemonade... and it costs 8 dollars to make... I make two dollars.

If I do that 10 days in a row... I can make twenty dollars.

Right now in the NBA expenses are higher than revenue... so that is a problem... but fix that problem (which a near 50-50 split should do...) and suddenly you are back in the situation where the more you play...the more you make.

Do you disagree that the NFL would make more money by playing an 18 game season than it does playing a 16 game season?

DerekRE_3
10-22-2011, 02:42 PM
As you produce more product, profit margin decreases. So you would be wrong to assume that.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 02:45 PM
As you produce more product, profit margin decreases. So you would be wrong to assume that.

while that is true... total profit still increases.

even if the profit per additional unit is increasing... you still are still increasing profit until the point where your expenses once again outpace your revenue.

That isn't really an issue in the NBA where the expenses and revenue generated by most games are approximately the same.

JordansBulls
10-22-2011, 02:47 PM
Well, the NBA is at its highest rate of popularity in history. Sure guys like my Dad hate it because its not the Larry-Magic NBA anymore. Sure its a ton of young, tattooed, irresponsible kids getting paid tons of money, but it is drawing in more people than it ever has, so they are doing something right.

As a diehard Wolves fan, obviously I am in favor of missing a season if it allows the league to have more parity. But as a Wolves fan, I also realize my team has done a lot of the damage to themselves. With a brand new coach in Adelman, Rubio and Williams, trust me, the selfish part of me wants NBA now. But if the system still allows stars to just do whatever they want, and teams to be allowed to go $40 million over the payroll in a flawed system, than I am fine with the season being canceled and a real competitive deal come out of this. The longer this lasts, the less leverage the players have, and they barely have any as of now

NBA isn't at it highest popularity. The NBA Finals ratings was not that close to what it was in the 90's. Last year it had a rating of 10.9 while in the 90's the lowest for MJ was 14.2 while the highest ever was 18.7.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 02:52 PM
NBA isn't at it highest popularity. The NBA Finals ratings was not that close to what it was in the 90's. Last year it had a rating of 10.9 while in the 90's the lowest for MJ was 14.2 while the highest ever was 18.7.

The season as a whole experienced the highest ratings in history...

and the HEAT-Bulls series was far more watched than the actual Finals (again affirming that getting the bigger markets involved is better)

thenetslegend
10-22-2011, 03:09 PM
idk how anybody could like the nba last year, it was like a soap opera and only four teams had a chance to win it all, so glad its locked out, they need to fix this ****

RZZZA
10-22-2011, 03:10 PM
idk how anybody could like the nba last year, it was like a soap opera and only four teams had a chance to win it all, so glad its locked out, they need to fix this ****

huh? Only 4?

Did you really pick the Mavs to be one of those 4? lol...

shep33
10-22-2011, 03:14 PM
I have to admit, I've been a lot more productive not worrying about the NBA season, and free agency lol. I swear, I'm gonna have so much more free time with ball not around. So there is that positive to look at.

thenetslegend
10-22-2011, 03:19 PM
huh? Only 4?

Did you really pick the Mavs to be one of those 4? lol...

ok, about 6 but idk how anyone could be a fan of a small market team if the dont fix the current situation.

dtmagnet
10-22-2011, 03:23 PM
The only happy fans right now are the ones of these so called "superteams" (who incidentally didn't win **** last year) You say last year was the highest rated season ever, if the superteam trend continues your short term increase in popularity will dwindle as fans of the other 25 or so teams decide they're sick of being the farm team for the popular teams.

RZZZA
10-22-2011, 03:24 PM
ok, about 6 but idk how anyone could be a fan of a small market team if the dont fix the current situation.

Memphis Grizzly fans, Denver Nugget fans, OKC Thunder fans must be pretty happy with their teams right now. I get what you're saying, but there ARE some small market teams who have made good choices and as a result, have competitive teams now.

Dade County
10-22-2011, 03:33 PM
The only happy fans right now are the ones of these so called "superteams" (who incidentally didn't win **** last year) You say last year was the highest rated season ever, if the superteam trend continues your short term increase in popularity will dwindle as fans of the other 25 or so teams decide they're sick of being the farm team for the popular teams.

Thats because Lbj was following his illuminati orders ... Don't be a tool, actually pay attention to what's going on right in front of eyes.

bledrules
10-22-2011, 03:33 PM
The NBA is a collection of ego maniacs who are all nothing but street punks who are too stupid to hold down a real job
CANCEL THE SEASON PLEASE!!!!!

thenetslegend
10-22-2011, 03:38 PM
Memphis Grizzly fans, Denver Nugget fans, OKC Thunder fans must be pretty happy with their teams right now. I get what you're saying, but there ARE some small market teams who have made good choices and as a result, have competitive teams now.

okc is the only one i would be actually happy with. Grizzlies are the hawks of the east, talent but no true go to guy. Denver got good value in the trade for carmelo but they will have to rebuild again before they want to compete for a championship. those are just 3 examples though, teams like timberwolves, warriors, blazers (they just got very unlucky), rockets, hornets, suns, bucks, bobcats, pistons, pacers, magic (dwight is gone) probably wont win a championship anytime soon.

the bolded ones are the ones in terrible situations

RZZZA
10-22-2011, 03:44 PM
I think The Grizz and the Nuggets are in a great position. They may not have a go-to guy but they have the pieces to trade for one when one becomes available, and they have good teams already that will compete every year. The Warriors, I think, are not in such a great position as the Grizz and Nuggets but still not as bad as some of those others. They have a trade piece (monta) and a guy they want to build around (Steph).

I know you have a bunch of examples of small market teams that aren't doing so good, but for a decade + you could point to Chicago and New York as examples of big market teams that weren't doing so well. I think it's less about market and more about 1) organizational competence and 2) a little bit of luck

ink
10-22-2011, 03:48 PM
NBA isn't at it highest popularity. The NBA Finals ratings was not that close to what it was in the 90's. Last year it had a rating of 10.9 while in the 90's the lowest for MJ was 14.2 while the highest ever was 18.7.

That is going in my signature. Thanks JB! :clap:

thenetslegend
10-22-2011, 03:48 PM
well i like the warriors current team but their no defense mentality wont win them a championship

Slimsim
10-22-2011, 03:51 PM
No one cried when NY sucked for 10 years or Chicago before rose or Boston before the big ticket or even Miami 18 win season. Now that the big markets are finally getting it together Owners want a lock out.

Dade County
10-22-2011, 03:53 PM
I know you have a bunch of examples of small market teams that aren't doing so good, but for a decade + you could point to Chicago and New York as examples of big market teams that weren't doing so well. I think it's less about market and more about 1) organizational competence and 2) a little bit of luck

Don't you mean a little bit of Stern?

RZZZA
10-22-2011, 03:55 PM
maybe, maybe not. Luck comes in a lot of forms. How about when Jay Williams got in that motorcycle accident? Or when Yao Ming proved to be too injury prone for the Rockets to rely on him.

Stern had nothing to do with that

mzgrizz
10-22-2011, 06:01 PM
Memphis Grizzly fans, Denver Nugget fans, OKC Thunder fans must be pretty happy with their teams right now. I get what you're saying, but there ARE some small market teams who have made good choices and as a result, have competitive teams now.

We are happy with our Grizzlies. I just want to see them play this year. Again.

SportsAndrew25
10-22-2011, 06:23 PM
This is painful beyond all comprehension. I just want basketball now. We are being held hostage by this dumb lockout.

Hawkeye15
10-22-2011, 06:46 PM
Losing money is not a system issue though... that is very seperate. I agree the business model is failing... but the system is not.

I disagree with you assertion about "many fans." The fact is... there are more people living in NY, LA, Chicago, Boston, and San Fran The major 5 NBA markets) than there are in every other NBA market combined.

Having champions from those cities is exponentially better for the league.

I think it is silly to expect that people are going to want to watch Milwaukee duke it out with Minnesota for a title. And that is the point. You make a larger percentage of your fanbase happy when the big market teams are good...

and here is where small market fan bases honestly don't give a **** about large fan base opinion, or what is good for the league to maximize profits. Each team needs a chance to make money, or at the very least, they need to run a communist type NBA where they take from the rich and give to the poor if that is the way they want it to be. Otherwise contract, and you large market fans can go play with yourselves.

Sorry if that sounded harsh, I don't mean it to be. But I for one am sick as hell at watching the same few teams duke it out every year, with the lone exception of a small market team who was lucky enough to draft a once a generation player here and there.

Hawkeye15
10-22-2011, 06:49 PM
The only happy fans right now are the ones of these so called "superteams" (who incidentally didn't win **** last year) You say last year was the highest rated season ever, if the superteam trend continues your short term increase in popularity will dwindle as fans of the other 25 or so teams decide they're sick of being the farm team for the popular teams.

bingo. But the few superteams fans honestly don't care about that. They are only interested in getting anything done NOW, so they can watch the same crap we watched last year.

As I said, the NBA will lose fans if Paul goes to NY, Dwight to NJ, or whatever. Will it gain in idiotic fans who know nothing of the game? Yep. Have fun at arenas talking to people only there to be there.

Tony_Starks
10-22-2011, 06:53 PM
There's no such thing as a "superteam" btw. It was a term made up by jealous owners who, if they were able to, would've did the exact same thing Miami did and are still bitter about it. That bitterness is why basketball is being held hostage as we speak......


Teams of the past decades have been stacked and no one used to complain then. It wasn't until Free Agency and expansion watered down the league that we started hearing all this jealousy about who has more talent.......

SteBO
10-22-2011, 06:54 PM
and here is where small market fan bases honestly don't give a **** about large fan base opinion, or what is good for the league to maximize profits. Each team needs a chance to make money, or at the very least, they need to run a communist type NBA where they take from the rich and give to the poor if that is the way they want it to be. Otherwise contract, and you large market fans can go play with yourselves.

Sorry if that sounded harsh, I don't mean it to be. But I for one am sick as hell at watching the same few teams duke it out every year, with the lone exception of a small market team who was lucky enough to draft a once a generation player here and there.
You're 100% correct here, but you are aware that the owners are trying to guarantee/ensure themselves profits as opposed to simply giving themselves a chance to, right? That's where they're in the wrong, for there is no business model that is run that way.

You're a Wolves fan, so let me ask you this: How do you feel your team has been ran this past decade? The answer to this question is just as big if not more of a reason the league as a whole is losing money(even that's debatable to many) than the system is.


bingo. But the few superteams fans honestly don't care about that. They are only interested in getting anything done NOW, so they can watch the same crap we watched last year.

As I said, the NBA will lose fans if Paul goes to NY, Dwight to NJ, or whatever. Will it gain in idiotic fans who know nothing of the game? Yep. Have fun at arenas talking to people only there to be there.
I agree with you here. But the ratings for the NBA will shyrocket, which is all that really matters. I couldn't care less about ratings really to be honest with you, but it's a proven fact.

Dade County
10-22-2011, 06:57 PM
bingo. But the few superteams fans honestly don't care about that. They are only interested in getting anything done NOW, so they can watch the same crap we watched last year.

As I said, the NBA will lose fans if Paul goes to NY, Dwight to NJ, or whatever. Will it gain in idiotic fans who know nothing of the game? Yep. Have fun at arenas talking to people only there to be there.

So where should these players go/stay so the Nba doesn't lose fans?

Some people want these players to stay on teams that are NEVER going to win a championship, so their fan base have a little hope (it's fools Gold).

Man contraction would solve almost all of this crap.... I'm getting tired of this ****.

Blow these ****ing fraznchizses up TODAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The worst teams get 1st dibs.

Now you happy small market fans..... Let start the season already:mad:

NYKalltheway
10-22-2011, 07:06 PM
I am completely OK with missing a season and playing a lot more myself. Anyone I know in the coaching community here thinks the NBA is a sucky league of pampered stars. They've been saying to me for years that I should watch NCAA and forget about the ******** commercial league. Looks like that's exactly what is going to happen.

Hopefully this lockout is effective enough and long enough that fundamental change will happen. I don't want them to go back to the garbage we've seen in the last decade, and especially since 2010 free agency.

100% with you man

ne3xchamps
10-22-2011, 07:10 PM
I called it awhile ago that I doubt there will be a season. good thing there is football and hockey though.. Im good if there is no season. I'm just curious as to how the free agency is going to pan out if there is no season. Will the contracts run out or just be extended? Anyone know?

Hawkeye15
10-22-2011, 07:15 PM
So where should these players go/stay so the Nba doesn't lose fans?

Some people want these players to stay on teams that are NEVER going to win a championship, so their fan base have a little hope (it's fools Gold).

Man contraction would solve almost all of this crap.... I'm getting tired of this ****.

Blow these ****ing fraznchizses up TODAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The worst teams get 1st dibs.

Now you happy small market fans..... Let start the season already:mad:

Its not your right to win a ring if you are really good at basketball. The only fans that want the current system with a few tweaks are those fans that have a team in contention currently, or have always had them in contention.

This lockout is starting to turn fans on each other. Because quite honestly, I could care less if the season gets shut down if a better deal comes out offering a chance at more parity, and the NBA doesn't make quite as much money. Why? Because I am sick of seeing the same damn teams there nearly every year.

Dade County
10-22-2011, 07:16 PM
I called it awhile ago that I doubt there will be a season. good thing there is football and hockey though.. Im good if there is no season. I'm just curious as to how the free agency is going to pan out if there is no season. Will the contracts run out or just be extended? Anyone know?

I hope their contracts run out, so their is a bigger **** storm and more super teams are made....:p

Because losing an entire year is a big deal man; just to have what you tried to stop happen anyway ( the players are going to fire back hard, i can see it).

The owners went about it the wrong way, all they are going to do is create animosity.

Hawkeye15
10-22-2011, 07:18 PM
You're 100% correct here, but you are aware that the owners are trying to guarantee/ensure themselves profits as opposed to simply giving themselves a chance to, right? That's where they're in the wrong, for there is no business model that is run that way.

You're a Wolves fan, so let me ask you this: How do you feel your team has been ran this past decade? The answer to this question is just as big if not more of a reason the league as a whole is losing money(even that's debatable to many) than the system is.


I agree with you here. But the ratings for the NBA will shyrocket, which is all that really matters. I couldn't care less about ratings really to be honest with you, but it's a proven fact.

You can't guarantee you will make money in business. But you can try and make sure over 70% of the businesses in it aren't losing money.

My team was ran poorly. There is no doubt with a few different decisions, we would have been in the finals a couple of times. And I eluded to that very early in this thread.

Miami, NY, Chicago, LA, and Dallas will always be good, therefore the ratings won't slip if all of a sudden Minnesota and Milwaukee are in deep playoff runs. You can attempt to create parity all you want, but at the end of the day, endorsements and nightlife will bring stars to these cities anyways.

Hawkeye15
10-22-2011, 07:20 PM
I called it awhile ago that I doubt there will be a season. good thing there is football and hockey though.. Im good if there is no season. I'm just curious as to how the free agency is going to pan out if there is no season. Will the contracts run out or just be extended? Anyone know?

If your contract ran thru 2011-2012, its over if the season isn't played.

ne3xchamps
10-22-2011, 07:20 PM
I hope their contracts run out, so their is a bigger **** storm and more super teams are made....:p

Because losing an entire year is a big deal man; just to have what you tried to stop happen anyway ( the players are going to fire back hard, i can see it).

The owners went about it the wrong way, all they are going to do is create animosity.

That would cause a mammoth **** storm! :laugh2:

Dade County
10-22-2011, 07:23 PM
Its not your right to win a ring if you are really good at basketball. The only fans that want the current system with a few tweaks are those fans that have a team in contention currently, or have always had them in contention.

This lockout is starting to turn fans on each other. Because quite honestly, I could care less if the season gets shut down if a better deal comes out offering a chance at more parity, and the NBA doesn't make quite as much money. Why? Because I am sick of seeing the same damn teams there nearly every year.

I feeel what you are saying, I'm just saying we don't have to lose a year of basketball... Contract right ****ing NOW!!!!!!!!!!! Go to the players union and tell them 4 teams are gone, as of right now.

The player union wont like that ****... they'll sign anything then ( I am not on either side, I just want to watch my HEAT, thats all).

Have the worst teams over the past 5yrs start picking up the newly free agents/players, and lets get this thing moving...

NOTE:
I really think those players shouldn't be able to play until the season is over; and the league would create a new draft for them.

NYKalltheway
10-22-2011, 07:23 PM
It happened in the late 80s, when I was 13-14, and MJ was picking up steam and turned the league into what we see today. Its inevitable.
On


I'm sorry but I have to disagree to a detail here. Michael Jordan's prime did not change the game. His retirement did. It also happened to coincide with other all time greats that made the league just better with better quality.

His RETIREMENT is what changed the game. He elevated the expectations of the casual fans. Don't blame MJ for today's NBA. It's not MJ's fault that the NBA rules today is not basketball, or players trying to score rather than help their team win.
Blame David Stern for that.

The last really great NBA season I remember is 1996-7. 1997-98 was all about Bulls three-peating again, but 1996-97 was really amazing, top class basketball. Then there was a LOCKOUT that destroyed the game and made Mr. Stern change some rules in order for people to rise to the Air Mike fiction.
We had the best all around player of all time playing and everyone was focusing on some stupid dunks. Don't blame him. You could blame MJ if all he did was dunk, but he didn't.... If someone (player) ruined the league, that's Vince Carter and early Kobe Bryant if you wanna take it to that extreme end.


NBA basketball has not "evolved". If you wanna watch basketball evolution, check EuroLeague from early 1980s till late 1990s compared to 2000s. Now that's basketball evolution. The elimination of the star system.

Hopefully the NBA follows, otherwise I don't see anyone but these "casual fans" daleja is talking about tuning for the NBA in the next 10 years and it's a shame because the existence of the NBA is what makes fanbases of not really great basketball nations follow the sport (Germany, China, United Kingdom and a few other examples come to mind)

ne3xchamps
10-22-2011, 07:27 PM
If your contract ran thru 2011-2012, its over if the season isn't played.

ok thanks man. I wasn't sure.

Hawkeye15
10-22-2011, 07:28 PM
I'm sorry but I have to disagree to a detail here. Michael Jordan's prime did not change the game. His retirement did. It also happened to coincide with other all time greats that made the league just better with better quality.

His RETIREMENT is what changed the game. He elevated the expectations of the casual fans. Don't blame MJ for today's NBA. It's not MJ's fault that the NBA rules today is not basketball, or players trying to score rather than help their team win.
Blame David Stern for that.

The last really great NBA season I remember is 1996-7. 1997-98 was all about Bulls three-peating again, but 1996-97 was really amazing, top class basketball. Then there was a LOCKOUT that destroyed the game and made Mr. Stern change some rules in order for people to rise to the Air Mike fiction.
We had the best all around player of all time playing and everyone was focusing on some stupid dunks. Don't blame him. You could blame MJ if all he did was dunk, but he didn't.... If someone (player) ruined the league, that's Vince Carter and early Kobe Bryant if you wanna take it to that extreme end.


NBA basketball has not "evolved". If you wanna watch basketball evolution, check EuroLeague from early 1980s till late 1990s compared to 2000s. Now that's basketball evolution. The elimination of the star system.

Hopefully the NBA follows, otherwise I don't see anyone but these "casual fans" daleja is talking about tuning for the NBA in the next 10 years and it's a shame because the existence of the NBA is what makes fanbases of not really great basketball nations follow the sport (Germany, China, United Kingdom and a few other examples come to mind)


where did I blame MJ? He helped salvage it. He sure as hell got me into it, and most my age.

He also happened to be one of the reasons foreigners got so into the NBA, and basketball as a sport.

NYKalltheway
10-22-2011, 07:30 PM
Ink, what made you become a basketball fan? Was it Bill Sharman's book on shooting, or was it Michael Jordan, or Dr. J for example?

We were all fan boys at one point.

My team in Greece.... Key word: TEAM
Never been a "fanboy" in my life, though certainly I love some guys.

As for Knicks, well, just clicked with me. My uncle who was an avid NBA fan was apparently a Cavs fan and all I remember was making fun of him :D

As for above, consider it a misinterpretation of my behalf ;)

ne3xchamps
10-22-2011, 07:30 PM
I feeel what you are saying, I'm just saying we don't have to lose a year of basketball... Contract right ****ing NOW!!!!!!!!!!! Go to the players union and tell them 4 teams are gone, as of right now.

The player union wont like that ****... they'll sign anything then ( I am not on either side, I just want to watch my HEAT, thats all).

Have the worst teams over the past 5yrs start picking up the newly free agents/players, and lets get this thing moving...

NOTE:
I really think those players shouldn't be able to play until the season is over; and the league would create a new draft for them.

I wouldn't count on a contraction and a re draft. That will never happen IMO.

Maybe a few teams moving, but I honestly don't see a contraction.

Hawkeye15
10-22-2011, 07:31 PM
I feeel what you are saying, I'm just saying we don't have to lose a year of basketball... Contract right ****ing NOW!!!!!!!!!!! Go to the players union and tell them 4 teams are gone, as of right now.

The player union wont like that ****... they'll sign anything then ( I am not on either side, I just want to watch my HEAT, thats all).

Have the worst teams over the past 5yrs start picking up the newly free agents/players, and lets get this thing moving...

NOTE:
I really think those players shouldn't be able to play until the season is over; and the league would create a new draft for them.

contraction isn't necessary. Protecting GM's and Owners from their own stupid decisions is the answer.

Dade County
10-22-2011, 07:31 PM
Its not your right to win a ring if you are really good at basketball. The only fans that want the current system with a few tweaks are those fans that have a team in contention currently, or have always had them in contention.

This lockout is starting to turn fans on each other. Because quite honestly, I could care less if the season gets shut down if a better deal comes out offering a chance at more parity, and the NBA doesn't make quite as much money. Why? Because I am sick of seeing the same damn teams there nearly every year.

I just notice you never answered my question...

Where should the players go/stay then? You said if Cp3 goes to NY and Howard goes to NJ, the league will lose lots of fans.

Where should they go/stay then? When you answer that question, I will forward to Cp3 and Howard's cap. ( I am not trying to make fun of you or belittle you .... I just need answer so this damn season can start already).

Hawkeye15
10-22-2011, 07:33 PM
My team in Greece.... Key word: TEAM
Never been a "fanboy" in my life, though certainly I love some guys.

As for Knicks, well, just clicked with me. My uncle who was an avid NBA fan was apparently a Cavs fan and all I remember was making fun of him :D

As for above, consider it a misinterpretation of my behalf ;)

well, you understand that is basically how it happens in the US, right? My Dad played basketball thru college and beyond for a bit, and I was raised watching the late 70's games that I don't remember, and Larry Bird in the early 80's. But when I saw Jordan play around age 10, I was hooked.

Cavs? haha. Which team(s)? I mean, I liked Price/Ehlo/Nance/Brad, but they have been the definition of suck mostly

thenetslegend
10-22-2011, 07:46 PM
for the sake if the nba it needs to stay locked out till next year

NYKalltheway
10-22-2011, 07:52 PM
The problem with the NBA is fundamental. People don't care about basketball anymore. They enter the NBA to make money. They don't learn how to play the game, they don't even care to learn from their coaches, and some coaches don't even know how to teach the game or even know the game in two-dimensions.

If the USA teaches real basketball at young age, the Tim Duncan type of game and not the Vince Carter type of game, then you would have a better product in the long run. But it's a society problem anyway.

Hawkeye15
10-22-2011, 08:02 PM
I just notice you never answered my question...

Where should the players go/stay then? You said if Cp3 goes to NY and Howard goes to NJ, the league will lose lots of fans.

Where should they go/stay then? When you answer that question, I will forward to Cp3 and Howard's cap. ( I am not trying to make fun of you or belittle you .... I just need answer so this damn season can start already).

The league will lose intelligent fans if it becomes a 4-6 superteam league. They should honestly stop joining forces, because its girl ball.

I am not dumb. I realize both Paul and Dwight are gone. I just wish they would pick a team that they would be a lead guy, instead of joining forces with another superstar.

I don't need any links to show me a teams payroll. I am resourceful.

Hawkeye15
10-22-2011, 08:03 PM
The problem with the NBA is fundamental. People don't care about basketball anymore. They enter the NBA to make money. They don't learn how to play the game, they don't even care to learn from their coaches, and some coaches don't even know how to teach the game or even know the game in two-dimensions.

If the USA teaches real basketball at young age, the Tim Duncan type of game and not the Vince Carter type of game, then you would have a better product in the long run. But it's a society problem anyway.

Of course that is the overall problem, as is the GM's and Owners giving out horrendous deal after horrendous deal.

But what can fix that? Should they institute Coach Norman Dale rules? The issue isn't coaching at young ages. Its the fact that the media now catches onto a 15 year old, and that kid becomes a spoiled pre-madonna, never being told no. Kids don't go to college anymore. They go and can't wait to get to the NBA. So we have had an influx of non-intelligent, young kids, into a league that overpays everyone.

NYKalltheway
10-22-2011, 08:11 PM
Cavs? haha. Which team(s)? I mean, I liked Price/Ehlo/Nance/Brad, but they have been the definition of suck mostly

I don't remember exactly, but when he moved to the USA and Ohio he went to a few games and saw from first hand what Walt Frazier was like, even during his late years. He keeps saying that Mark Price is the best Cavalier he's even seen, and this guy still likes Lebron James for some reason. His best season of all time is still 1992 followed by 1989. Guess it's true about "old timers".

My favorite season is 1996-7, which was the 2nd NBA season I followed closely and live, while my uncle ensured I'd get a huge archive of playoff and regular season games from basically the time he moved to the USA till early 2000s.

Give me Houston vs Seattle, Houston vs Utah, Seattle vs Phoenix, Knicks vs Miami, Hawks vs Detroit, Miami Vs Orlando and the epic NBA finals between Jazz and Bulls and I can say I've seen one of the best post seasons of all time with my own eyes. (best season has to be 1990 though from the last 20 years, also happens to be the earliest possible :p)

Dade County
10-22-2011, 08:48 PM
The league will lose intelligent fans if it becomes a 4-6 superteam league. They should honestly stop joining forces, because its girl ball.

I am not dumb. I realize both Paul and Dwight are gone. I just wish they would pick a team that they would be a lead guy, instead of joining forces with another superstar.
.

And their is nothing wrong with that...

As long as these teams have a future and their GM's are proven to be competent.

But all of them don't have money like Dallas, to go into the tax.

lakers4sho
10-22-2011, 09:18 PM
superstars run this league period. They are and will continue to be the cash cows of the NBA. Not only here in the US but also abroad. If these guys decided to (permanently) ditch the NBA (hypothetically) and choose to play in say, Europe, people there will cream their pants and will drop the "fundamental basketball" and will rather watch these atheletes. Cmon, you've seen how Kobe is pretty much worshipped in Turkey, China, Italy, Philippines, and all these players. They would kill to see him, and all these guys, play live.

No disrespect to old style basketball. I for one am a fan of it, but let's face, that thing is not gonna generate money for the league. Reason why the NBA was pretty much irrelevant until Magic, Bird, and later Jordan brought it to prominence.

effen5
10-22-2011, 09:42 PM
These so called superstars are a joke in the NBA. Honestly they have no appeal to me and I don't even care if there is a season or not.

SteBO
10-22-2011, 09:49 PM
You can't guarantee you will make money in business. But you can try and make sure over 70% of the businesses in it aren't losing money.

My team was ran poorly. There is no doubt with a few different decisions, we would have been in the finals a couple of times. And I eluded to that very early in this thread.

Miami, NY, Chicago, LA, and Dallas will always be good, therefore the ratings won't slip if all of a sudden Minnesota and Milwaukee are in deep playoff runs. You can attempt to create parity all you want, but at the end of the day, endorsements and nightlife will bring stars to these cities anyways.
Well, that's what the owners want right now. They believe they can guarantee themselves profit by instilling a hard cap or whatever they feel necessary to help them. They are thinking of themselves, and are trying very hard to **** the players over.

It's funny you mention that MIA, NY, CHI, LA, and DAL will always get stars because of endorsements and nightlife, because you'd think owners would know this by now. It tells me what the big elephant in the room really is, and it's very concerning. Parity is good for any sport, but it isn't something that can really happen in the NBA because of what it is.

I think we're at a point now where stars feel the need to team up because of the constant heat they'll catch if they don't win a title but that's a different discussion, even though they're both linked in a way.

Tony_Starks
10-22-2011, 09:58 PM
Well, that's what the owners want right now. They believe they can guarantee themselves profit by instilling a hard cap or whatever they feel necessary to help them. They are thinking of themselves, and are trying very hard to **** the players over.

It's funny you mention that MIA, NY, CHI, LA, and DAL will always get stars because of endorsements and nightlife, because you'd think owners would know this by now. It tells me what the big elephant in the room really is, and it's very concerning. Parity is good for any sport, but it isn't something that can really happen in the NBA because of what it is.

I think we're at a point now where stars feel the need to team up because of the constant heat they'll catch if they don't win a title but that's a different discussion, even though they're both linked in a way.



Very true. The owners position has been that they want A) to guarantee a profit no matter what, and B) ensure that every team has an equal shot at winning. Those are not only unreasonable goals but unrealistic. At the end of the day no matter what system is put in place every franchise is not going to be competitive because every owner/gm is not competent. Some are in fact grossly incompetent, borderline ********.

But at the end of the day the small market owners are the majority and its painfully obvious they are willing to sacrafice fan support to get what they want and the sad part is going by their track record their teams will still suck. The only difference is they will have people watching their horrible team from home instead of at the arenas because they threw the fans under the bus.......

NYKalltheway
10-22-2011, 10:24 PM
People today make a common mistake. The NBA was never a STAR DRIVEN LEAGUE until the 1998 lockout. At least not by definition like it is today. It had great stars with no help like Hakeem for example, but it was always about the team until Jordan's 2nd coming to say the least

You'd see terms like "SHOWTIME LAKERS" See Magic, Worthy, Kareem etc on there??
The "FO FO FO" team. See Moses Malone, Julius Erving or Mo Cheeks' name there?
The "DETROIT BAD BOYS". See Zeke, Laimbeer, Rodman, Dumars etc there??
The "BIG THREE". See Larry Bird, McHale or Parish's name there?
The "RUN TMC". Basically Tim Hardaway, Mitch Richmond, Chris Mullin, but not really called after one of them, nor where they the biggest stars in the day winning championships...


Back in the 50s, 60s and 70s teams didn't even have nicknames. They were just called by their team name though there were stars.

Only team that was nicknamed after a star was Jordan, and iirc that wasn't really common to say back then as it is now.

As for NBA "athletes" ditching the NBA and going to Europe and driving that effect into Europe. I don't think so. They may sell more tickets just because of their names, but their performance will not be really "superstar" worthy in most cases. And no, FIBA won't change their rules to accomodate a circus instead of baskteball and the hardcore fans wouldn't want that either. NBA players can play under their rules in exhibition games in China or non-developed (basketball wise) European countries. They're not going to cause changes in the style of basketball.

European basketball for a long period of time was a mixture between 90s and 2000s NBA basketball. It has evolved into a team styled basketball where the coach is the law. We all love it this way much more I might add. NBA players flooding Europe will definitely have no effect on that. The change has been cemented and Europe won't reverse its progress. If anything, the current NBA players will need to adjust to actual basketball rules if they wanna play in Europe. Which requires fundamental basketball skills.

You can follow the topic on the NBA forum called the "lockout scout report" to check how amazingly bad these NBA players are in Europe so far (exceptions are Europeans who have played before in Europe)

Knowledge
10-22-2011, 10:27 PM
Well, that's what the owners want right now. They believe they can guarantee themselves profit by instilling a hard cap or whatever they feel necessary to help them. They are thinking of themselves, and are trying very hard to **** the players over.

It's funny you mention that MIA, NY, CHI, LA, and DAL will always get stars because of endorsements and nightlife, because you'd think owners would know this by now. It tells me what the big elephant in the room really is, and it's very concerning. Parity is good for any sport, but it isn't something that can really happen in the NBA because of what it is.

I think we're at a point now where stars feel the need to team up because of the constant heat they'll catch if they don't win a title but that's a different discussion, even though they're both linked in a way.

See I don't think you necessarily need stars to win a championship though and at the same time I dont think every team needs to be built like the Heat or Celtics to have a chance to win.

If you could make it so that more teams could build balanced teams and not be punished for one bad decision, I think you could have a league of star driven teams vs more balanced teams like the 04 Pistons and have a pretty good competitive balance. You could even have some teams like Dallas where you have one true superstar and bunch of good to really good players, it would improve the quality of play by a lot from the first round onward. Is there enough talent for all the teams to be good? No. But there should be enough talent to have 8 quality teams entering the playoffs in both conferences. Constantly having teams who are under .500 make the playoffs isnt good for business.

That is not to say every team will be or should be successful. The problem in my eyes is making it easier to build or rebuild a team. Sometimes it can take up to 10 years or more to rebuild back into a championship contender which is too long. Their needs to be a way to allow teams to have enough flexibility so that they can at least attempt to win and not look to tanking for a draft lottery pick.

RZZZA
10-22-2011, 10:35 PM
well fans don't want to see "good teams", they want to see superstars dominate.

How many times last year did I hear that the Spurs were boring? They were the best team in the league for a good long while but hardly ever got the props or the attention, because they were "boring". Everyone wanted to see and talk about the Heat.

You whine about this stuff but you still contribute to it.

ink
10-22-2011, 10:37 PM
People today make a common mistake. The NBA was never a STAR DRIVEN LEAGUE until the 1998 lockout. At least not by definition like it is today. It had great stars with no help like Hakeem for example, but it was always about the team until Jordan's 2nd coming to say the least

You'd see terms like "SHOWTIME LAKERS" See Magic, Worthy, Kareem etc on there??
The "FO FO FO" team. See Moses Malone, Julius Erving or Mo Cheeks' name there?
The "DETROIT BAD BOYS". See Zeke, Laimbeer, Rodman, Dumars etc there??
The "BIG THREE". See Larry Bird, McHale or Parish's name there?
The "RUN TMC". Basically Tim Hardaway, Mitch Richmond, Chris Mullin, but not really called after one of them, nor where they the biggest stars in the day winning championships...


Back in the 50s, 60s and 70s teams didn't even have nicknames. They were just called by their team name though there were stars.

Only team that was nicknamed after a star was Jordan, and iirc that wasn't really common to say back then as it is now.

Great points, excellent post.

ink
10-22-2011, 10:42 PM
well fans don't want to see "good teams", they want to see superstars dominate.

How many times last year did I hear that the Spurs were boring? They were the best team in the league for a good long while but hardly ever got the props or the attention, because they were "boring". Everyone wanted to see and talk about the Heat.

You whine about this stuff but you still contribute to it.

This is the kind of thing that is ruining the sport. BS gets repeated often enough it starts to be believed as fact.

Seriously, I don't think there is another NBA "superstar" I would rather watch than Tim Duncan and it has been that way for his whole career. He is absolutely rock solid reliable, and does so many things that are fundamental and sophisticated at the same time. But every single move the guy makes is for the sake of team success. Effortless, practised, humble, formidable. Those are not adjectives I could apply to many NBA players, though I could to tons of players from other sports who understand that they are there to serve the team.

SteBO
10-22-2011, 11:16 PM
See I don't think you necessarily need stars to win a championship though and at the same time I dont think every team needs to be built like the Heat or Celtics to have a chance to win.

If you could make it so that more teams could build balanced teams and not be punished for one bad decision, I think you could have a league of star driven teams vs more balanced teams like the 04 Pistons and have a pretty good competitive balance. You could even have some teams like Dallas where you have one true superstar and bunch of good to really good players, it would improve the quality of play by a lot from the first round onward. Is there enough talent for all the teams to be good? No. But there should be enough talent to have 8 quality teams entering the playoffs in both conferences. Constantly having teams who are under .500 make the playoffs isnt good for business.

That is not to say every team will be or should be successful. The problem in my eyes is making it easier to build or rebuild a team. Sometimes it can take up to 10 years or more to rebuild back into a championship contender which is too long. Their needs to be a way to allow teams to have enough flexibility so that they can at least attempt to win and not look to tanking for a draft lottery pick.
Well, Dallas just proved that one superstar is enough if you can put the right cast around him. At the end of the day, you need a star though which is something that actually hasn't been discussed enough outside PSD of course haha. '04 Pistons ring a bell as well......

Barkley had the balls to say it himself. He said something to the effect of "we need have stars in small markets because without them there, the NBA as whole will suffer". This isn't something I've denied and I understand wholeheartedly what Charles was getting at. My issue with that notion though, is that if these teams aren't doing their jobs well enough to put a good team around their star, why should he stay? Why is it now all of sudden a problem, when stars want to give themselves a better opportunity to succeed? Isn't that something we as human beings would want? I just don't get it. At all.

I know people will probably right me off as a big market fan, so I'm biased and all that BS, but the fact remains is that stars now feel pressured to win immediately because of social media and alike. Right now, those opportunities lie in bigger markets. As far as finding a way to help the markets without the resources the bigger markets have, I honestly don't know. But a hard cap won't solve it because again, players want to win. It also doesn't help when you have a collection of owners that would much rather be part of the problem than the solution to the problem, Stern especially......

Dade County
10-22-2011, 11:33 PM
Well, Dallas just proved that one superstar is enough if you can put the right cast around him. At the end of the day, you need a star though which is something that actually hasn't been discussed enough outside PSD of course haha. '04 Pistons ring a bell as well......

Barkley had the balls to say it himself. He said something to the effect of "we need have stars in small markets because without them there, the NBA as whole will suffer"..

Dallas doesn't count for anything, look at how much they went into the tax.
After this cba, they are going to have to blow that team up. If a small market team has to speed that much just to compete for a title ( this building around 1 star thing is not going to work out ... if you are trying to copy dallas).

And the owners are doing all this to keep star players from teaming up ( more power to them)... But did they ever think about, what if these star players today, will sacrifice money to when a ring.

SteBO
10-23-2011, 08:25 AM
They were a profitable team last year though. Still, that wasn't really my overriding point. My point was that you don't need multiple stars to win, but there isn't any shame in teaming up with another one or not. You said it yourself, stars will sacrifice a little money now to win a ring and there's nothing wrong with that at all.

Tom Stone
10-23-2011, 08:52 AM
Portland's Owner Allen is the face of the lock-out......this guy really doesn't care if there is an NBA Season......This guy is so Rich, he will wait until every player goes bank robbed, if he has to.....and got the money and other investments to do just that.....The players should be scared.......there options are

1. Try to outlast the owners........it can't be done.
2. De-certify the union......won't help them at all....the NBA will open under the current offer maybe worse, players will come running back....and they lose all current contracts....not a good option.
3.swallow there pride, choose hard cap......and then with the hard cap the owners might give the band the players wanted 53% if the NBA does well, and 50% if it doesn't....plus they get all current contracts and lose no money from the canceled season.

It takes a dumb man to fight a fight he can't win, knowing he will take a worse offer later and you can't out last them......there is a saying I like....Too much pride can Kill a Man, if Billy and Fisher let there pride get in the way and can't get a deal done, are they really willing to choose options 1 or 2.....If the players are at this point and I think they are, it's soon going to be time for them to speak up, get the best offer they can from the Owners and take a vote.....Hopefully the players understand just what Billy and Fisher are up against, and they choose to not go down with the ship like there captain's Billy and Fisher. :cool:

Dade County
10-23-2011, 10:20 AM
Portland's Owner Allen is the face of the lock-out......this guy really doesn't care if there is an NBA Season......This guy is so Rich, he will wait until every player goes bank robbed, if he has to.....and got the money and other investments to do just that.....The players should be scared.......there options are

1. Try to outlast the owners........it can't be done.
2. De-certify the union......won't help them at all....the NBA will open under the current offer maybe worse, players will come running back....and they lose all current contracts....not a good option.
3.swallow there pride, choose hard cap......and then with the hard cap the owners might give the band the players wanted 53% if the NBA does well, and 50% if it doesn't....plus they get all current contracts and lose no money from the canceled season.

:

Didn't the nfl Decertify, those players kept their contracts, why can't the Nba players keep their contracts?

And if the union decertifies, does that mean that all players are free agents or do the owners still hold the rights to the players?

Tom Stone
10-23-2011, 11:14 AM
Didn't the NFL Decertify, those players kept their contracts, why can't the NBA players keep their contracts?

And if the union decertify, does that mean that all players are free agents or do the owners still hold the rights to the players?



I'm not 100% sure....but I remember the owners saying if they de-certify, they run the risk of losing current contracts....and I think it does mean that they are all free agents....it would be crazy.

ink
10-23-2011, 11:17 AM
They were a profitable team last year though. Still, that wasn't really my overriding point. My point was that you don't need multiple stars to win, but there isn't any shame in teaming up with another one or not. You said it yourself, stars will sacrifice a little money now to win a ring and there's nothing wrong with that at all.

We'll have to disagree on your last point because I think there are a LOT of fans and ex-NBA players who think it's a major cop-out. But I completely agree that you don't need multiple stars to win. Or at least you don't have to import multiple stars. The Spurs had three star players but they were all developed from within; none of them are the kind of over-hyped/over-marketed stars that are so controversial. Those are stars created by the organization itself, which is the whole point of team building.

ink
10-23-2011, 11:21 AM
Well, Dallas just proved that one superstar is enough if you can put the right cast around him. At the end of the day, you need a star though which is something that actually hasn't been discussed enough outside PSD of course haha. '04 Pistons ring a bell as well......

Barkley had the balls to say it himself. He said something to the effect of "we need have stars in small markets because without them there, the NBA as whole will suffer". This isn't something I've denied and I understand wholeheartedly what Charles was getting at. My issue with that notion though, is that if these teams aren't doing their jobs well enough to put a good team around their star, why should he stay? Why is it now all of sudden a problem, when stars want to give themselves a better opportunity to succeed? Isn't that something we as human beings would want? I just don't get it. At all.

I know people will probably right me off as a big market fan, so I'm biased and all that BS, but the fact remains is that stars now feel pressured to win immediately because of social media and alike. Right now, those opportunities lie in bigger markets. As far as finding a way to help the markets without the resources the bigger markets have, I honestly don't know. But a hard cap won't solve it because again, players want to win. It also doesn't help when you have a collection of owners that would much rather be part of the problem than the solution to the problem, Stern especially......

Basically stars should be more focused than to listen to fans on social media. Maybe that's easier said than done when you are slandered 10,000 times a day by preteens on the internet though. lol. But seriously, it shouldn't affect them, and shouldn't be the motivator. Hopefully we're just in a transition while society gets used to reality TV and social media. Hopefully people will just start to incorporate the good from it, and ignore all the bad.

Still, I wouldn't mind if they got a major earful about how spoiled so many of us think they are.

NOTE TO PLAYERS: We do not want you to control the league. We don't think you act in the best interests of basketball or the NBA and we want the league to regain its integrity.

gwrighter
10-23-2011, 02:09 PM
I've heard the term popularity being tossed around loosely in this thread. The fact of the matter is that TV Ratings are only 1 piece of the puzzle. matter of fact it's probably one of the smallest pieces.

you measure a sports popularity by peoples willingness to pay for certain goods. If people are filling the entire stadium or are buying a tremendous amount of jersey's & team products that is the measure of popularity.

Sure TV ratings might have been high but that's because instead of going to watch the Bobcats play, people would just rather sit at home & watch the heat. If we keep going in this direction fans will cease attending games & just sit & watch them at home. "no point going to watch my team as they are going to lose this game most probably."

The ACC is sold out whenever Boston, LA, Heat come to play. But for good teams its 3/4 & for bad teams its 1/3 full. the majority of Toronto fans would rather sit at home than watch their team play.

These young fanboys as people were mentioning have absolutely no money to spend on the NBA. Sure they can buy the marginal jersey here & there for 40$ from reebok. But they don't buy season tickets because they simply can't afford them consistently.

"Revenue sharing", like has previously been mentioned, supports this super-team farm team model. We're going to steal your fans but we'l give you back what we make. running a successful league will not work this way. More competition puts butts in those seats. Plain & simple. When your team win's people come watch. When they have a chance at competing & games are more important people come watch.

The Raptors had top-15 attendance even tho we were a bottom 15 team for many years. This was because people paid hoping that the Raps would pull through & make the playoffs "this year". You give the fans hope, & they will come.

Attendance is the best measure of your fans willingness to pay. If they are willing to come watch then they are most likely willing to buy team products.

Tony_Starks
10-23-2011, 02:12 PM
I know Stern must be happy because apparently a lot of fans are drinking the koolaid and believe this lockout has anything to do with "competitive balance." Believe that if you want but ask yourself why was competitive balance never an issue when Jordan dominated the 90's at peak popularity? Or when Magic and Bird dominated the 80's basically saving the league?

The leveling the playing field spin is a nice little slight of hand to distract people from what's going on but at the end of the day its all about, as Peter Holt said, "the owners being able to make a few bucks."

The fact that Dan Gilbert and Paul Allen, the most bitter owner in the league and the most apathetic owner in the league respectively, are prominent figures in the "negotiating" process really says it all. Oh and lets not leave out Robert Sarver, one of the cheapest most incompetent owners in the league..... These are the guys that our hope of a season is hinging on. Don't hold your breath!

gwrighter
10-23-2011, 02:16 PM
I know Stern must be happy because apparently a lot of fans are drinking the koolaid and believe this lockout has anything to do with "competitive balance." Believe that if you want but ask yourself why was competitive balance never an issue when Jordan dominated the 90's at peak popularity? Or when Magic and Bird dominated the 80's basically saving the league?

The leveling the playing field spin is a nice little slight of hand to distract people from what's going on but at the end of the day its all about, as Peter Holt said, "the owners being able to make a few bucks."

The fact that Dan Gilbert and Paul Allen, the most bitter owner in the league and the most apathetic owner in the league respectively, are prominent figures in the "negotiating" process really says it all. Oh and lets not leave out Robert Sarver, one of the cheapest most incompetent owners in the league..... These are the guys that our hope of a season is hinging on. Don't hold your breath!

They obviously want money, but how does an owner make money?

winning or competing makes you money. Retaining your star players makes you money. Everything that is wrong with the system as of right now deters profits for the majority of teams.

Tony_Starks
10-23-2011, 02:35 PM
They obviously want money, but how does an owner make money?

winning or competing makes you money. Retaining your star players makes you money. Everything that is wrong with the system as of right now deters profits for the majority of teams.


Whats detering their profits is mis-management of their teams. How many of the teams that are supposedly losing money are drafting well? Trading well? Scouting well? Signing top tier coaches instead of re-hashing the same ol hasbeens that have never got it done? There's a reason they can't retain their star players. Look at Phoenix, if Nash wasn't so extremely loyal he would've hit the road a LONG time ago due to Sarvers idiocy and rightly so. Thats not a system issue, the man is just screwing up.

The system isn't broken. Them saying its broken is like you constantly getting over drawn on your checking account and saying the solution is that you just need more money. At the end of the day the owners have gotten themselves in a mess with bad business practices and want a do-over at the players and fans expense, it's as simple as that.

beliges
10-23-2011, 02:44 PM
The players need to stop acting like such spoiled little *****es and accept a 50/50 deal on the BRI. These guys are lucky they even get anything from the BRI. The players already get paid what they are worth in their contracts. On top of a very generous paycheck they also receive part of the BRI. They are lucky that they do but 57% is just way to much to give to the players. There is absolutely no reason they should receive anything above 50%. Stop acting like a bunch of spoiled kids and man up, accept a more than fair 50/50 split and lets have a damn season.

gwrighter
10-23-2011, 03:05 PM
Whats detering their profits is mis-management of their teams. How many of the teams that are supposedly losing money are drafting well? Trading well? Scouting well? Signing top tier coaches instead of re-hashing the same ol hasbeens that have never got it done? There's a reason they can't retain their star players. Look at Phoenix, if Nash wasn't so extremely loyal he would've hit the road a LONG time ago due to Sarvers idiocy and rightly so. Thats not a system issue, the man is just screwing up.

The system isn't broken. Them saying its broken is like you constantly getting over drawn on your checking account and saying the solution is that you just need more money. At the end of the day the owners have gotten themselves in a mess with bad business practices and want a do-over at the players and fans expense, it's as simple as that.

you're talking as if drafting & trading are as simple as 1+1=2. nothing is guaranteed in this business. You need to take the hindsight bias into account. you only realize you've drafted or traded for a dud after you have done so. So at the time things can be seen as a large gamble and that is exactly what it is, a gamble. These GM's are forced to take these gambles in order to try & compete with the upper echelon of teams. If things were more balanced there wouldn't be a need to try & swing for the fences as you know you can compete in the FA market as other great teams can't hoard talent.

Nobody in their right minds would make stupid moves just for the sake of stupidity. These are all intelligent people. They know what they are doing, it's not so black & white as you are trying to paint. They are trying to make moves that are putting them in a place to win or to make money. but there shouldn't be a divide between the two. you should be able to win under a profitable system, not having to break the bank at a "chance" to win. This is a broken system.

You have to think of why teams are mis-managed. It's easy to blame it on the individuals by saying "oh they are stupid." But these individuals are acting within the confines of this system. If this system breeds 22 mis-managed teams then there is something wrong with the system.

Tony_Starks
10-23-2011, 09:51 PM
you're talking as if drafting & trading are as simple as 1+1=2. nothing is guaranteed in this business. You need to take the hindsight bias into account. you only realize you've drafted or traded for a dud after you have done so. So at the time things can be seen as a large gamble and that is exactly what it is, a gamble. These GM's are forced to take these gambles in order to try & compete with the upper echelon of teams. If things were more balanced there wouldn't be a need to try & swing for the fences as you know you can compete in the FA market as other great teams can't hoard talent.

Nobody in their right minds would make stupid moves just for the sake of stupidity. These are all intelligent people. They know what they are doing, it's not so black & white as you are trying to paint. They are trying to make moves that are putting them in a place to win or to make money. but there shouldn't be a divide between the two. you should be able to win under a profitable system, not having to break the bank at a "chance" to win. This is a broken system.

You have to think of why teams are mis-managed. It's easy to blame it on the individuals by saying "oh they are stupid." But these individuals are acting within the confines of this system. If this system breeds 22 mis-managed teams then there is something wrong with the system.


Well when it comes to drafting of course its a gamble but with the proper scouting and homework there are plenty of teams that get it right. Of course you're going to get a dud every now and then but when you look at the overall track record do you ever wonder why the same teams (Spurs, Utah, Lakers, Boston and Dallas for example) seem to always draft talented players no matter what pick they have? Even if its only second rounders? While other teams that shall remain nameless have been consistently making horrible draft choices for years? Thats not luck, that's skill. Also if you're making countless mistakes for years at end it becomes officially stupid. Rob Sarver for example under has reign has literally given away Rondo and Luo Deng, tried to low-ball Joe Johnson and traded him for Diaw, traded Marion for a declining Shaq, and let Amare walk for nothing. At what point do you sit back and say "wow, this guy really has no idea what the hell he's doing?" That wasn't the systems fault.

Also you're assuming 22 teams are really losing money, which was never proven. It's basically one sides word vs anothers. Regardless though I agree they need to make changes but a drastic overhaul is not necessary. Just like teams are screwing up you have small market teams that are doing it right within this same system. The changes suggested such as amnesty, the stretch exception where they can drop a player thats under performing and spread his contract over 7 years, less strict trading rules making it easier to trade players, and the money the players are giving back should serisouly be enough for a wisely managed team to recover.

JordansBulls
10-24-2011, 04:32 PM
The season as a whole experienced the highest ratings in history...

and the HEAT-Bulls series was far more watched than the actual Finals (again affirming that getting the bigger markets involved is better)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Basketball_Association_Nielsen_ratings

CBS 1976 Boston Celtics 4, Phoenix Suns 2 11.5
CBS 1977 Portland Trail Blazers 4, Philadelphia 76ers 2 12.7
CBS 1978 Washington Bullets 4, Seattle Supersonics 3 9.9
CBS 1979 Seattle Supersonics 4, Washington Bullets 1 7.2
CBS 1980 Los Angeles Lakers 4, Philadelphia 76ers 2 8.0
CBS 1981 Boston Celtics 4, Houston Rockets 2 6.7
CBS 1982 Los Angeles Lakers 4, Philadelphia 76ers 2 13.0
CBS 1983 Philadelphia 76ers 4, Los Angeles Lakers 0 12.3
CBS 1984 Boston Celtics 4, Los Angeles Lakers 3 12.3
CBS 1985 Los Angeles Lakers 4, Boston Celtics 2 13.7
CBS 1986 Boston Celtics 4, Houston Rockets 2 14.1
CBS 1987 Los Angeles Lakers 4, Boston Celtics 2 15.9
CBS 1988 Los Angeles Lakers 4, Detroit Pistons 3 15.4
CBS 1989 Detroit Pistons 4, Los Angeles Lakers 0 15.1
CBS 1990 Detroit Pistons 4, Portland Trail Blazers 1 12.3
NBC 1991 Chicago Bulls 4, Los Angeles Lakers 1 15.8
NBC 1992 Chicago Bulls 4, Portland Trail Blazers 2 14.2
NBC 1993 Chicago Bulls 4, Phoenix Suns 2 17.9
NBC 1994 Houston Rockets 4, New York Knicks 3 12.4
NBC 1995 Houston Rockets 4, Orlando Magic 0 13.9
NBC 1996 Chicago Bulls 4, Seattle Supersonics 2 16.7
NBC 1997 Chicago Bulls 4, Utah Jazz 2 16.8
NBC 1998 Chicago Bulls 4, Utah Jazz 2 18.7
NBC 1999 San Antonio Spurs 4, New York Knicks 1 11.3
NBC 2000 Los Angeles Lakers 4, Indiana Pacers 2 11.6
NBC 2001 Los Angeles Lakers 4, Philadelphia 76ers 1 12.1
NBC 2002 Los Angeles Lakers 4, New Jersey Nets 0 10.2
ABC 2003 San Antonio Spurs 4, New Jersey Nets 2 6.5
ABC 2004 Detroit Pistons 4, Los Angeles Lakers 1 11.5
ABC 2005 San Antonio Spurs 4, Detroit Pistons 3 8.2
ABC 2006 Miami Heat 4, Dallas Mavericks 2 8.5
ABC 2007 San Antonio Spurs 4, Cleveland Cavaliers 0 6.2
ABC 2008 Boston Celtics 4, Los Angeles Lakers 2 9.3
ABC 2009 Los Angeles Lakers 4, Orlando Magic 1 8.4
ABC 2010 Los Angeles Lakers 4, Boston Celtics 3 10.9
ABC 2011 Dallas Mavericks 4, Miami Heat 2 10.2


Pistons vs LA in 2004 was better ratings



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Basketball_Association_Nielsen_ratings

Table of NBA Finals game-by-game Nielsen ratings since 1997 Net.
Year Game 1 Game 2 Game 3 Game 4 Game 5 Game 6 Game 7
NBC 1997 15.8/27 15.1/27 14.2/27 16.9/30 20.1/35 18.5/35 None
NBC 1998 18.0/32 16.6/31 16.2/28 19.1/33 19.8/37 22.3/38 None
NBC 1999 11.5/20 9.6/19 12.1/21 12.0/22 11.0/22 None
NBC 2000 10.5/18 9.9/20 10.9/19 13.1/24 10.0/20 14.7/26 None
NBC 2001 12.4/23 11.7/22 12.7/23 12.6/23 11.2/22 None
NBC 2002 10.6/20 9.1/18 10.2/18 10.8/19 None
ABC 2003 6.4/11 5.2/10 7.0/12 6.6/12 6.2/12 7.5/14 None
ABC 2004 9.8/17 10.7/19 10.5/19 12.7/22 13.8/23 None
ABC 2005 7.2/13 6.9/12 7.2/13 7.2/13 8.4/15 8.8/15 11.9/22
ABC 2006 7.8/14 8.0/14 8.0/14 7.8/14 9.0/17 10.1/18 None
ABC 2007 6.3/11 5.6/10 6.4/11 6.5/12 None
ABC 2008 8.7/16 8.5/15 9.2/16 8.7/16 10.2/19 10.7/19 None
ABC 2009 7.8/14 8.2/14 8.6/15 9.4/17 8.0/14 None
ABC 2010 8.6/14 9.2/15 TBA TBA TBA
ABC 2011 9.0/15 9.3/15 9.1/15 9.6/16 10.8/18 13.3/23 None


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Basketball_Association_Nielsen_ratings - ABC Highest Ratings

18.2/33 Boston Celtics vs Los Angeles Lakers Game 7, 2010 NBA Finals
13.8/23 Los Angeles Lakers vs. Detroit Pistons Game 5, 2004 NBA Finals
12.8/17 Los Angeles Lakers vs. Boston Celtics Game 5, 2010 NBA Finals
12.7/17 Los Angeles Lakers vs. Detroit Pistons Game 4, 2004 NBA Finals
11.9/22 Detroit Pistons vs. San Antonio Spurs Game 7, 2005 NBA Finals
10.7/19 Detroit Pistons vs. Los Angeles Lakers Game 2, 2004 NBA Finals
10.5/19 Los Angeles Lakers vs. Detroit Pistons Game 3, 2004 NBA Finals
10.1/18 Miami Heat vs. Dallas Mavericks Game 6, 2006 NBA Finals
9.8/17 Detroit Pistons vs. Los Angeles Lakers Game 1, 2004 NBA Finals
9.0/17 Dallas Mavericks vs. Miami Heat Game 5, 2006 NBA Finals
8.8/15 Detroit Pistons vs. San Antonio Spurs Game 6, 2005 NBA Finals
8.4/15 San Antonio Spurs vs. Detroit Pistons Game 5, 2005 NBA Finals

SteBO
10-24-2011, 05:00 PM
We'll have to disagree on your last point because I think there are a LOT of fans and ex-NBA players who think it's a major cop-out. But I completely agree that you don't need multiple stars to win. Or at least you don't have to import multiple stars. The Spurs had three star players but they were all developed from within; none of them are the kind of over-hyped/over-marketed stars that are so controversial. Those are stars created by the organization itself, which is the whole point of team building.
I mean, I get where they're coming from but Magic Johnson needs to shut up with that because he propelled himself to play with arguably the best center in NBA history in Kareem. Barkely needs to slow down too because *****ed and moaned his way out of Philadelphia to get to Phoenix, after Moses Malone left. These are two examples of guys who don't get **** from fans for taking the "easy" way out. That's why I'm not going to take ex-NBA players seriously because none of the those greats except maybe MJ was put in a position LBJ was. Sorry not buying it....

Alot of fans can disagree if they want, but that doesn't they're right for that matter. Again, I understand where they're coming from a little, but I think calling them a sell out for doing it is a joke :shrug:

Tony_Starks
10-24-2011, 05:03 PM
i think people confuse ratings and global popularity. Ratings have been better in years past but the game is now at its global peak, as evidenced by the players being able to launch a worldwide tour getting paid up to a milli with no assistance from the NBA........

beliges
10-24-2011, 05:30 PM
I mean, I get where they're coming from but Magic Johnson needs to shut up with that because he propelled himself to play with arguably the best center in NBA history in Kareem. Barkely needs to slow down too because *****ed and moaned his way out of Philadelphia to get to Phoenix, after Moses Malone left. These are two examples of guys who don't get **** from fans for taking the "easy" way out. That's why I'm not going to take ex-NBA players seriously because none of the those greats except maybe MJ was put in a position LBJ was. Sorry not buying it....

Alot of fans can disagree if they want, but that doesn't they're right for that matter. Again, I understand where they're coming from a little, but I think calling them a sell out for doing it is a joke :shrug:

MJ won titles with some of the most stacked teams in the history of the league. The thing with LBJ was that he was given a pretty good team in Cleaveland. They were the #1 team in the league for 2 years and had homecourt throughout the entire playoffs. Its not like LBJ left a horrible team to play with Wade. He left a team that had a chance to win it all and him winning in CLeaveland with that team would have been greater than any championships he will win playing alongside Wade and Bosh. And none of those guys you mentioned left their team to run to another elite superstar's team. Thats what bothers most of those old school players.

SteBO
10-24-2011, 05:46 PM
MJ won titles with some of the most stacked teams in the history of the league. The thing with LBJ was that he was given a pretty good team in Cleaveland. They were the #1 team in the league for 2 years and had homecourt throughout the entire playoffs. Its not like LBJ left a horrible team to play with Wade. He left a team that had a chance to win it all and him winning in CLeaveland with that team would have been greater than any championships he will win playing alongside Wade and Bosh. And none of those guys you mentioned left their team to run to another elite superstar's team. Thats what bothers most of those old school players.
Fair points, but here are the things you aren't mentioning.....

1) People here are vastly overrating LeBrons' Cavs. Nobody else would've been able to carry that cast of characters as far as LBJ took them. When Mo Williams is your second best player, you aren't going anywhere. They were a good team, but they were not better than the Celtics and Magic back then and I had been harping on this from 2009 onward. The reason they won as many games as they did was because they played in a crap division and they had, you guessed it, LeBron James. He's that good. Unfortunately, one-man teams don't win in the NBA. That's just reality. We see that every year.

2) The reason none of the guys I mentioned left to play with another elite player was because they never had to. I give MJ credit for staying, but for as much as he hated Jerry Krause at the time, he always trusted that he would put good players around him for opportunities at championships. Don't even get me started with Magic Johnson for he was drafted to a huge NBA market with arguably the best center in the NBA's history. Let's also not forget he played with guys like Byron Scott, James Worthy, and other HOF's. Point being, he never had to leave. He would've been dumb to do it. I cannot say the same things for LeBron. CLE management did a poor job of putting good players around him. They didn't even take Amare for pete's sake. :shrug:

3) Sorry, but there is no reason for LeBron to play on a Cleveland team who was stuck with bad contract after bad contract. I'll tell you this much: had LeBron stayed in CLE, they would not have been able to beat Wade, Bosh, and a much better supprting cast with what the Cavs had then. The Celtics and/or Magic would've knocked them off too. End result being, LeBron would be 31 years old with bad knees and no rings after the expiration of a max 6-year contract. Why would he play fire that way?

blahblahyoutoo
10-24-2011, 06:38 PM
I agree with everything you've said here. The one thing I disagree with is the popularity. I honestly think if you look at the quality of the NBA forum over the past couple of years you can see that the lack of knowledge is at an all time low among the often between 8-15 year old fans the sport now seems to attract. The posting numbers were PHENOMENAL in here right? But we all know that the quality was abysmal. Sad but true.

NBA is popular in the same way as Jose Canseco appearances or Mike Tyson appearances on reality TV is popular. Little kids love to tune in to hate on their targeted superstar. More people will watch traffic accidents than a genuine sport. And some of the so-called "super teams" we're seeing are more traffic accident than anything else.

Give me an honestly developed team like OKC or San Antonio any day of the week.

btw, I admire the fact that you see that the good of the league even comes before the excitement of getting Adelman as a coach and bringing in some great young talent this year. I'm behind teams like the Wolves too, hoping a new CBA gives them a fighting chance at developing and retaining championship calibre talent.

not only that but you have flashier superstars in Lebron and Howard and Griffin.
the system isn't creating more exciting bball or a popular league. it's the players.
and a new medium that allows it to happen quickly and on demand (the intertubes).

Cosmic_Canon
10-24-2011, 06:40 PM
But I for one am sick as hell at watching the same few teams duke it out every year, with the lone exception of a small market team who was lucky enough to draft a once a generation player here and there.

"I don't know what I'm talking about" post.


So, the Bulls/Thunder/Heat were title contenders in the past 5 years(sans the past 2 years)?
Oh alright then, go wander in your nonsense.

In the past 10 years, we've had AT LEAST 1 small-market team in the conference finals. But I forgot, small market teams can't win. :rolleyes:
Yep, SAC/Phoenix/Indiana/Milwaukee all had no chance.

Do me a favor, you and the rest of the posters who say "small market teams can't win", go on and stop saying that. Time and time again, this nonsense is being said, yep this is the furthest from the truth. SAC/Phoenix/Indiana/Milwaukee had no "once in a generation" talent, yet they still made title runs at a time.

You were saying.... :)

ink
10-24-2011, 07:35 PM
i think people confuse ratings and global popularity. Ratings have been better in years past but the game is now at its global peak, as evidenced by the players being able to launch a worldwide tour getting paid up to a milli with no assistance from the NBA........

Yao Ming, Dirk Nowitzki, Tony Parker, Steve Nash, Pau Gasol. Stars from your own country would be the main reason for the popularity. Add in David Stern's major push for an internationally oriented league. And don't forget, there are fanboys all over the world for the so-called "superstars".

Dade County
10-25-2011, 02:01 AM
Lets not talk about money...

I really would like to know, what the small market fans would like to see come out of this lock out... Basketball rules wise / System wise. No BRI talk please!


What guidelines can they change to make it more competitively balance ( System wise)

Because I don't see it... It's to late in my opinion ... The star players that all these teams want, are already signed with a team or they are becoming free agents next year; and the small markets that would love to have them, have no real chance of signing any of them.

The next 5yrs have already been decided... The teams that are on top, are stacked already.

Now the owners want the fews stars that are left, to stay with their current teams or move to another small market team (WTF). So those small markets can make money, but have no realistic shot of winning a championship or going deep into the playoffs ( Because the top teams are stacked already). So those few stars that didn't team up are left having to carry subpar teams and never having a real opportunity to win big.

I maybe wrong, but i don't know how the CBA is going to fix this; as of right now.
The teams are stacked already.

Only thing the league can do is start taking star players from their teams, and placing them on small market teams ( THAT SOUNDS CRAZY RIGHT?)

But i am starting to feel, thats what every small market fan really wants in their heart.

They might as well shutdown the league. The past system already ****ed everything up.