PDA

View Full Version : Player givebacks at a historical level in sports negotiations



Wade>You
10-29-2011, 04:42 PM
I read an interesting tweets regarding the thread topic title.

@sportsJC16 Joe Casale

@adbrandt I agree with players on this one. 5% giveback is historic in sports labor negotiations. I would hold at 52%.
@sportsJC16 Joe Casale


@darrenrovell what's the owners giveback in all this? The players giveback is already at historic levels in sports labor negotiations

So I decided to send an email I sent to Ira Winderman (Heat beat writer) to see if there was any truth to the comments made.


Me: I heard that the concession and givebacks the players have made in this CBA negotiations are at a historical level in sports. Is there any truth to that?

Ira: Yup, and owners still want more. The owners contend they gave away too much in the previous negotiations, which actually might have been the case, especially if you ask Eddy Curry, Rashard Lewis or Gilbert Arenas.The last part is clearly a sarcastic remark at the poor decisions certain owners have made.

Anyway I hope this opens up some eyes to the labor negotiations. Players made more than enough (and are probably footing the bill) for the NBA to continue operating until the next CBA. It's a shame that a deal wasn't made.

sep11ie
10-29-2011, 05:09 PM
Sweet, another lockout thread.

ink
10-29-2011, 10:34 PM
The damage stars have done to the NBA is also at historic levels so it's fitting that they give back historically.

NBA_Starter
10-29-2011, 10:36 PM
The damage stars have done to the NBA is also at historic levels so it's fitting that they give back historically.

Amen!

da ThRONe
10-29-2011, 11:35 PM
The damage stars have done to the NBA is also at historic levels so it's fitting that they give back historically.

What damage is that? Accepting money that was offered to them by these franchises owed by the same guys that are now crying they can't make a profit?

ink
10-29-2011, 11:42 PM
The worst problems with the league aren't actually financial; they're about the lack of integrity of some of the most prominent players.

daleja424
10-29-2011, 11:43 PM
The damage stars have done to the NBA is also at historic levels so it's fitting that they give back historically.

care to elaborate?

ink
10-29-2011, 11:51 PM
care to elaborate?

Super teams, endless whining, giving up in championship or playoff games, faked injuries, throwing teammates under the bus, quitting on your team, demanding that players on your own roster be traded, excuse-making that you don't have enough "help" to win, selfish play, un-coachable athletes, players who think they're bigger than the game -- to name just a few, none of those things are financial but all of those things are major problems in the league today. This generation of stars is really sucky. Especially when you look at the determination and grit that's admired in other sports. I know there are sucky athletes in other sports, but in the NBA, suckiness is commonplace, especially among the "superstars".

daleja424
10-29-2011, 11:55 PM
I see. So all the things that made the league more popular last league than it has been in a long time (and possibly more popular than it has ever been).

Just b/c you don't like something doesn't make it wrong...

ink
10-30-2011, 12:01 AM
I see. So all the things that made the league more popular last league than it has been in a long time (and possibly more popular than it has ever been).

Seriously? So because the majority of people will watch a traffic accident we should call it pro basketball? These are some of the whiniest athletes in all of pro sport and I think we all know it. The NBA doesn't need to be B-grade reality TV to be popular. Or maybe people just aren't confident in the actual sport, who knows. btw, the popularity myth was already busted by JB ...

ink
10-30-2011, 12:03 AM
Seriously, you think that giving up in playoff or championship games attracts fans??? What kind of fans???

daleja424
10-30-2011, 12:04 AM
My point is this ink: Just b/c you don't like it doesn't make it right or wrong.

The NBA, like any business, will/should look at the numbers. If they want to make money they need to get people interested. People are more interested in watching the league when there are super teams, evil doers, and chaos...

Is it better basketball...probably not... but that is not the only consideration.

What is it exactly that made you so cynical about all this?

ink
10-30-2011, 12:13 AM
My point is this ink: Just b/c you don't like it doesn't make it right or wrong.

The NBA, like any business, will/should look at the numbers. If they want to make money they need to get people interested. People are more interested in watching the league when there are super teams, evil doers, and chaos...

Is it better basketball...probably not... but that is not the only consideration.

What is it exactly that made you so cynical about all this?

So many of the high profile stars are absolutely sucky. That just doesn't happen in other sports.

And it's not just me; I've given up trying to defend the NBA. It just lacks credibility for all the aforementioned reasons.

Changes in this CBA could help turn the culture of the sport around again so that team comes first. It's not just a platitude that this is a team sport. It HAS to be a team sport in order to have integrity. That has to be rediscovered.

For starters, "superstars" should never give up in playoff/championship games. That's not me, that's obvious. The sport itself cannot be taken seriously when that happens, and we've seen both Kobe and Lebron do that in recent memory. In what world is that acceptable??

Fnom11
10-30-2011, 01:11 AM
Super teams, endless whining, giving up in championship or playoff games, faked injuries, throwing teammates under the bus, quitting on your team, demanding that players on your own roster be traded, excuse-making that you don't have enough "help" to win, selfish play, un-coachable athletes, players who think they're bigger than the game -- to name just a few, none of those things are financial but all of those things are major problems in the league today. This generation of stars is really sucky. Especially when you look at the determination and grit that's admired in other sports. I know there are sucky athletes in other sports, but in the NBA, suckiness is commonplace, especially among the "superstars".

So basically the same ish that's been happening since the NBA was established? Strong logic/10

ink
10-30-2011, 03:19 AM
So basically the same ish that's been happening since the NBA was established? Strong logic/10

That comment indicates you haven't watched a lot of NBA games in the 90s and before.

beasted86
10-30-2011, 09:30 AM
The damage stars have done to the NBA is also at historic levels so it's fitting that they give back historically.

Damage stars... Or scrubs?

Because for every Gilbert or Jermaine O'neal or Lewis that couldn't live up to a max deal there are about ten more Howards and Derons and Garnetts.

Its surely not the stars who are overpaid, its the Luke Waltons and Biedrins who are hurting long term.

gwrighter
10-30-2011, 10:05 AM
Good.

MiamiLoyal926
10-30-2011, 10:20 AM
Super teams, endless whining, giving up in championship or playoff games, faked injuries, throwing teammates under the bus, quitting on your team, demanding that players on your own roster be traded, excuse-making that you don't have enough "help" to win, selfish play, un-coachable athletes, players who think they're bigger than the game -- to name just a few, none of those things are financial but all of those things are major problems in the league today. This generation of stars is really sucky. Especially when you look at the determination and grit that's admired in other sports. I know there are sucky athletes in other sports, but in the NBA, suckiness is commonplace, especially among the "superstars".

Yes there are "sucky" attitudes in the league. In my opinion, attach a penalty and reward system to player salaries that depends on performance, stats, professionalism and effort.

Instead, all the demands I see will not improve player attitudes as you say is the cause, just limit the ability for teams to build heavy teams and limit players from making as much money. To me, nothing indicates progress towards insuring improved player performance. Just owners trying to gaurantee themselves financial success. At the end of the day, it took willing owners to get such "super teams " done. So why blame and take all the anger out on the players. Clearly there are as many "sucky" owners and GMs as there are players. What guarantees a player they won't get stuck under sucky management?

What if your employer came in and completely tried to screw you by changing everything without any consideration and additionally lower your salary? Would you stand around and be ok with it? We live in a democracy and this behavior just smells of dictatorship.

Owners have steamrolled the players as is. How can you stand here and still say the players are at fault? You can only give up so much. At some point you will have nothing else to give up. The players are almost left down to just giving up their dignity and to me it seems the owners are after that as well. This will not end until the players give up on everything. I believe in equality and compromise from both parties. Negotiations imply that compromises will be made by both parties for the greater good. All I see is "sucky" owners on a rampage.

A better league will come from motivated players with good management. This current cba will not motivate players nor improve management. Managers and owners will still make stupid decisions, and certain players will still lack character. None of that has been addressed in these cba talks and thus it won't change. Point. Sucky will continue on both fronts.

Bramaca
10-30-2011, 10:53 AM
Yes there are "sucky" attitudes in the league. In my opinion, attach a penalty and reward system to player salaries that depends on performance, stats, professionalism and effort.

Thats more of what I was hoping for in this lockout. Although I don't think stats should be a factor, that would only encourage 'me first' type basketball.

PhillyFaninLA
10-30-2011, 11:17 AM
Super teams, endless whining, giving up in championship or playoff games, faked injuries, throwing teammates under the bus, quitting on your team, demanding that players on your own roster be traded, excuse-making that you don't have enough "help" to win, selfish play, un-coachable athletes, players who think they're bigger than the game -- to name just a few, none of those things are financial but all of those things are major problems in the league today. This generation of stars is really sucky. Especially when you look at the determination and grit that's admired in other sports. I know there are sucky athletes in other sports, but in the NBA, suckiness is commonplace, especially among the "superstars".


Superteams date back to the 1950's Celtics team so superteams is somethign that always existed in the NBA.

BigCityofDreams
10-30-2011, 11:58 AM
Super teams, endless whining, giving up in championship or playoff games, faked injuries, throwing teammates under the bus, quitting on your team, demanding that players on your own roster be traded, excuse-making that you don't have enough "help" to win, selfish play, un-coachable athletes, players who think they're bigger than the game -- to name just a few, none of those things are financial but all of those things are major problems in the league today. This generation of stars is really sucky. Especially when you look at the determination and grit that's admired in other sports. I know there are sucky athletes in other sports, but in the NBA, suckiness is commonplace, especially among the "superstars".

Didn't players back then do the same thing. Superstar players have always ran the league.

daleja424
10-30-2011, 12:21 PM
and how exactly do you think you are going to be able to regulate how individuals carry themselves ink? The average NBA player has changed. Instead of being an ego driven control freak that needs to be the "man" we have a generation of superstars who put winning at a premium. shame on them... :rolleyes:

Evolution23
10-30-2011, 12:48 PM
So many of the high profile stars are absolutely sucky. That just doesn't happen in other sports.

And it's not just me; I've given up trying to defend the NBA. It just lacks credibility for all the aforementioned reasons.

Changes in this CBA could help turn the culture of the sport around again so that team comes first. It's not just a platitude that this is a team sport. It HAS to be a team sport in order to have integrity. That has to be rediscovered.

For starters, "superstars" should never give up in playoff/championship games. That's not me, that's obvious. The sport itself cannot be taken seriously when that happens, and we've seen both Kobe and Lebron do that in recent memory. In what world is that acceptable??

You are way out of line for the "players giving up" part. Only Lebron gave up in the playoffs, not Kobe. Kobe has been playing injured for the last 2 seasons and finally his body took a toll on him. You think the NBA is the only sport players give up in? Check out Jay Cutler last season in the NFL playoffs. A lot of people said he gave up. Stop living in the moment and take some time to look at the whole situation objectively.

Evolution23
10-30-2011, 12:50 PM
Damage stars... Or scrubs?

Because for every Gilbert or Jermaine O'neal or Lewis that couldn't live up to a max deal there are about ten more Howards and Derons and Garnetts.

Its surely not the stars who are overpaid, its the Luke Waltons and Biedrins who are hurting long term.

Exactly and who's fault is it for paying the scrubs that much money? I swear, siding with greedy billionaires just doesn't make sense for us fans.

ink
10-30-2011, 12:52 PM
Damage stars... Or scrubs?

Because for every Gilbert or Jermaine O'neal or Lewis that couldn't live up to a max deal there are about ten more Howards and Derons and Garnetts.

Its surely not the stars who are overpaid, its the Luke Waltons and Biedrins who are hurting long term.

No, "scrubs" are not the problem. If the "superstars" didn't finger point in such a sucky manner in the NBA we wouldn't ever think this way.


Yes there are "sucky" attitudes in the league. In my opinion, attach a penalty and reward system to player salaries that depends on performance, stats, professionalism and effort.

Instead, all the demands I see will not improve player attitudes as you say is the cause, just limit the ability for teams to build heavy teams and limit players from making as much money. To me, nothing indicates progress towards insuring improved player performance. Just owners trying to gaurantee themselves financial success. At the end of the day, it took willing owners to get such "super teams " done. So why blame and take all the anger out on the players. Clearly there are as many "sucky" owners and GMs as there are players. What guarantees a player they won't get stuck under sucky management?

What if your employer came in and completely tried to screw you by changing everything without any consideration and additionally lower your salary? Would you stand around and be ok with it? We live in a democracy and this behavior just smells of dictatorship.

Owners have steamrolled the players as is. How can you stand here and still say the players are at fault? You can only give up so much. At some point you will have nothing else to give up. The players are almost left down to just giving up their dignity and to me it seems the owners are after that as well. This will not end until the players give up on everything. I believe in equality and compromise from both parties. Negotiations imply that compromises will be made by both parties for the greater good. All I see is "sucky" owners on a rampage.

A better league will come from motivated players with good management. This current cba will not motivate players nor improve management. Managers and owners will still make stupid decisions, and certain players will still lack character. None of that has been addressed in these cba talks and thus it won't change. Point. Sucky will continue on both fronts.

Simple, de-emphasize the superstar element of the league and manage it as a team sport. Market the league very differently, try to win over a fan base that values work ethic. That fan base is out there and they are the majority. They just don't see a league with integrity right now. Change the financial system to reward team play at every possible turn. Enforce the rules against so-called "superstars". You are concerned with how the athlete is going to feel being asked to dedicate themselves to a league like any other athlete in any other sport dedicates themselves. I think they will earn their paycheque just like anyone else. In the end when you make upwards of $10M it's reasonable for a league to expect you to dedicate yourself to your team. But it needs to start with the NBA abandoning this "superstar" ********. As I say that, I know it won't happen; we're stuck with a very sucky league for a very long time unless someone really takes a stand.


Superteams date back to the 1950's Celtics team so superteams is somethign that always existed in the NBA.

When we talk about super teams we're talking about two or three amigos who feel they can't win without "help" and bail on their former franchise, like we're seeing with Melo, DHoward, CP3, Bosh, and Lebron. We're not just talking about teams that have unbelievable (and internally developed) talent. So, no, super teams are a recent result of a bad CBA.


Didn't players back then do the same thing. Superstar players have always ran the league.

Not at all. What's "always" to you? Look back just one decade ago in the 90s and tell me when you saw players quitting in championship games or blaming teammates because they couldn't win a championship. I don't remember Stockton or Reggie Miller blaming teammates in the Jordan era. I don't remember any free agents holding live television hours to tell the world where they were "taking their talents". I don't remember players like Melo, Howard, and CP3 whining that they had to go to a super team. Most of all I don't remember a fan base gullible enough to accept that kind of self-centredness from professional athletes in a TEAM sport.


and how exactly do you think you are going to be able to regulate how individuals carry themselves ink? The average NBA player has changed. Instead of being an ego driven control freak that needs to be the "man" we have a generation of superstars who put winning at a premium. shame on them... :rolleyes:

That's an interesting spin. The whole "being the man" and "putting winning at a premium" are cliches. Any athlete, amateur or professional in any sport puts "winning at a premium". The "being the man" BS is just eyeroller material. These current players are the egomaniacs, and that's saying a lot after the ego we saw from players like Jordan. Believe in the ****ing game, believe in the sport. Not the reality TV entertainment fodder. The league can change this if they actually believe in basketball and don't feel they have to sell personalities to the fanbase. They do it by not favouring superstars with their calls, by not favouring superstars with their CBAs, and by expecting some loyalty from their players. The good news is that there are players reversing the trend like Durant. THEY are the future of the league.

btw, here's a great comment from another thread about taking the NBA seriously:


It's still a serious basketball league but there are quite a few problems. As you said the rules that make star players better then they really are, lack of physical play, lack of fundamentals. Also the lack of competition, you have to watch a dozen games before you actually see an entertaining one. Most games during the season seem more like a pickup game.

BigCityofDreams
10-30-2011, 02:24 PM
You don't remember Charles Barkley wanting out of Philly and the Suns when things didn't work out. You don't remember Magic leading the way to get Westhead replaced. Hell there are quotes all over the net of Jordan ripping his teammates. Players have always had big egos the difference is the media coverage has increased tremendously over the yrs.

Hellcrooner
10-30-2011, 02:44 PM
the only thing that needs to be fixed is eliminate star calls completely, and pray that eliminating it makes coaches understand they can no longer make their strategy be "iso play for the star iso play for the star, iso play for the star".

ink
10-30-2011, 05:34 PM
You don't remember Charles Barkley wanting out of Philly and the Suns when things didn't work out. You don't remember Magic leading the way to get Westhead replaced. Hell there are quotes all over the net of Jordan ripping his teammates. Players have always had big egos the difference is the media coverage has increased tremendously over the yrs.

No doubt the egos have been big before, the difference is that in this star-marketed league, the CBA is flawed enough to help foster those egos. The sucky me-first crap is actually enabled by the previous CBA to a greater degree than ever before. Then it was unusual to have a player hold a gun to the franchise's head; now it is commonplace. Something is seriously wrong with that picture. Obviously that's why the owners want a change. I'm hoping for the biggest change possible because I think it's destroying the vital team element of the sport.

Hellcrooner
10-30-2011, 05:48 PM
^ kareem forde his trade in the 70s. Dr J refused to play for the bucks .

There is nothing new to that

As i said the only thing that needs to be changed to go back to team baqsketball is eliminate star calls.

In fact stars Joining is a step in that direction, is renouncing the me first i can do it alone attitude.

BigCityofDreams
10-30-2011, 06:00 PM
No doubt the egos have been big before, the difference is that in this star-marketed league, the CBA is flawed enough to help foster those egos. The sucky me-first crap is actually enabled by the previous CBA to a greater degree than ever before. Then it was unusual to have a player hold a gun to the franchise's head; now it is commonplace. Something is seriously wrong with that picture. Obviously that's why the owners want a change. I'm hoping for the biggest change possible because I think it's destroying the vital team element of the sport.

How many players have held their franchise hostage....Melo comes to mind and that's it. Bosh and LeBron left their teams and went to new ones. I'm not saying you are panicking but ppl are going overboard with this super team stuff. It's not something that's going to happen every yr.

daleja424
10-30-2011, 06:00 PM
^ kareem forde his trade in the 70s. Dr J refused to play for the bucks .

There is nothing new to that

As i said the only thing that needs to be changed to go back to team baqsketball is eliminate star calls.

In fact stars Joining is a step in that direction, is renouncing the me first i can do it alone attitude.

star calls are the biggest myth in pro basketball.

If you actually watch those star players night in and night out you see that contact is actually not called more often than not.... if officials actually blew the whistle everytime someone fouled Wade, for example, the guys would average 20 FTAs per game.

daleja424
10-30-2011, 06:02 PM
not sure melo even held his team hostage TBH... he just refused to sign an extension and let his team know he may leave.

taking your team hostage is what happens in the NFL (When a guy under contract refuses to play...ie Carson Palmer)...

Hellcrooner
10-30-2011, 06:03 PM
star calls are the biggest myth in pro basketball.

If you actually watch those star players night in and night out you see that contact is actually not called more often than not.... if officials actually blew the whistle everytime someone fouled Wade, for example, the guys would average 20 FTAs per game.

Man, you shoudl pay more attention, star calls are a FACT and every team has a player or two that benefit from it, and the bigger the star the more they get benefit.

You can barely touch KObe , or lebron withouth getting a foul called.

daleja424
10-30-2011, 06:05 PM
Man, you shoudl pay more attention, star calls are a FACT and every team has a player or two that benefit from it, and the bigger the star the more they get benefit.

You can barely touch KObe , or lebron withouth getting a foul called.

wrong.

those guys have the ball in their hand the most...but do not get a higher percentage of calls than other people.

As a Wade fan... it is laughable to me when people talk about him getting superstar treatment. For every bad call he gets there are 2-3 calls he doesnt get that were clear fouls.

Chronz
10-30-2011, 06:09 PM
There is nothing new or wrong with the game, you cant complain about stars controlling their own destinies if FA was something that was fought long and hard for. You cant complain about the superstar salaries because they are actually underpaid. You cant complain about the rule changes because all they have done is maintain an efficiency balance, lest we forget what was happening to the ratings when defenses were getting too dominant.

Chronz
10-30-2011, 06:11 PM
Man, you shoudl pay more attention, star calls are a FACT and every team has a player or two that benefit from it, and the bigger the star the more they get benefit.

You can barely touch KObe , or lebron withouth getting a foul called.
You can disagree with him without insulting how much of the sport he watches, your both just exchanging opinions, there are no facts/stats being revealed here, so lets not act so cocky.

Chronz
10-30-2011, 06:13 PM
So basically the same ish that's been happening since the NBA was established? Strong logic/10
Ive had this conversation with him before, Im pretty sure hes saying its more prevalent today but quantifying such a claim would be troublesome. You can definitely find examples dating back to the NBA's beginning though.

beliges
10-30-2011, 07:16 PM
Wow some people are so ignorant when it comes to business and the NBA lockout. The players do not own the teams. The owners own the teams. If anyone is entitled to the majority of the revenue its the owners. Plain and simple. The players will get paid through the contracts they can generate. The owners put up the money and as such they deserve the majority of the profits generated from their money. The fact that the players are getting the majority of the BRI or now asking for the majority of the BRI is also a historic feat. NBA players are more spoiled than any other player in any other league. They will NOT win this battle because the owners have much much much more to lose than the players do. I dont understand how the people who are on the players' side dont understand this very simple concept.

Muttman73
10-30-2011, 07:33 PM
Riddle me this Batman...

Without the NBA what are the owners? Wealthy business owners, lawyers, realestate moguls...

now

Without the NBA what are the players?

For the most part under educated and unemployed. Some of them actually go to a university and learn something, a few even graduate. Without the NBA most of these guys would be worse off than those of us who post in here.

The owners deserve to get the majority of the $, it's plain and simple.

beliges
10-30-2011, 07:40 PM
Riddle me this Batman...

Without the NBA what are the owners? Wealthy business owners, lawyers, realestate moguls...

now

Without the NBA what are the players?

For the most part under educated and unemployed. Some of them actually go to a university and learn something, a few even graduate. Without the NBA most of these guys would be worse off than those of us who post in here.

The owners deserve to get the majority of the $, it's plain and simple.

This is 100% right but its not even the main reason the owners deserve the money. Its the owners money!! I dont get how these people dont understand. Its a business. The owners put up the money to run the business and they deserve the majority of the profits from the business. I love the argument that "owners are taking advantage of the players." Thats what the majority of those taking the players' side attempt to argue. One of the silliest arguments ive ever heard. NBA players are treated better than any other athlete in American sports.

daleja424
10-30-2011, 08:10 PM
Man, you shoudl pay more attention, star calls are a FACT and every team has a player or two that benefit from it, and the bigger the star the more they get benefit.

You can barely touch KObe , or lebron withouth getting a foul called.


You can disagree with him without insulting how much of the sport he watches, your both just exchanging opinions, there are no facts/stats being revealed here, so lets not act so cocky.

The average NBA team used 94.5 possessions per game last year and shot about 25 free throws per game. That is one free throw every 3.78 possessions.

Compare that to the rate of some super stars:
Kobe- 32.7 possessions, 7.1 FT attempts= one FT every 4.6 posessions
Lebron- 29.2 possessions, 8.4 FT attempts= one FT every 3.5 posessions
Wade- 29.3 possessions, 8.6 FT attempts= one FT every 3.4 posessions
Melo- 31.8 possessions, 7.9 FT attempts= one FT every 4.0 posessions
Durant- 29.1 possessions, 8.7 FT attempts= one FT every 3.3 posessions

I don't see any glaring data that suggests to me that "superstars" get special treatment. As I have said...it is more a matter of getting a similar % of the calls, but just having a much higher usage %

(Stats courtesy of hoopdata.com and Yahoo!Sports)

beasted86
10-30-2011, 08:15 PM
This is 100% right but its not even the main reason the owners deserve the money. Its the owners money!! I dont get how these people dont understand. Its a business. The owners put up the money to run the business and they deserve the majority of the profits from the business. I love the argument that "owners are taking advantage of the players." Thats what the majority of those taking the players' side attempt to argue. One of the silliest arguments ive ever heard. NBA players are treated better than any other athlete in American sports.

It's actually not a business, because businesses are allowed to fail, NBA teams are not. I can't understand how anyone thinks any business "deserves to profit" anyway.

With the way the owners and some fans think of these current negotiations, you'll only push teams to become the Florida Marlins in the NBA. Teams that are terribly run and managed, but because of the salary system of revenue sharing, those crooks are turning a profit before they sell a ticket or a hotdog. Revenue sharing pays the entire Marlins payroll and then some... the owners even admitted turning profits but not using the money to fill out the team with talent. And it doesn't matter how crappy a roster they field every year, or how low in attendance they become... the system allows them to continue filling their wallet and never fold as a team.

Chronz
10-30-2011, 08:26 PM
Nice

daleja424
10-30-2011, 08:27 PM
Not at all perfect... but it is the only data I could find (I couldn't find data for fouls drawn by player...so I had to improvise)

Kevj77
10-30-2011, 08:36 PM
It's actually not a business, because businesses are allowed to fail, NBA teams are not. I can't understand how anyone thinks any business "deserves to profit" anyway.

With the way the owners and some fans think of these current negotiations, you'll only push teams to become the Florida Marlins in the NBA. Teams that are terribly run and managed, but because of the salary system of revenue sharing, those crooks are turning a profit before they sell a ticket or a hotdog. Revenue sharing pays the entire Marlins payroll and then some... the owners even admitted turning profits but not using the money to fill out the team with talent. And it doesn't matter how crappy a roster they field every year, or how low in attendance they become... the system allows them to continue filling their wallet and never fold as a team.Not only are teams not allowed to fail, but they don't provide all the capital like a normal business would.


The NBA lockout, however, is not a typical case. In a capitalist system, owners provide the capital (the buildings, the machines, the infrastructure, etc.) necessary for the workers to create the product. The revenue this product generates in turn compensates the workers for their labor and the owners for their investment.

However, NBA owners are not the only ones providing the capital necessary to run their business. A modern arena is essential to the operation of an NBA franchise; Seattle's refusal to pay to renovate Key Arena or build a new facility was the central issue David Stern cited in helping Clay Bennett relocate the Sonics to a much smaller market in Oklahoma City. Over the last 10 years, local governments have spent $1.75 billion, 84 percent of the total cost, on eight new or renovated NBA arenas.Also unlike a normal business were workers create a product, NBA player are the product.

http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2011/10/27/2518670/nba-lockout-2011-owners-public-investment-arenas

daleja424
10-30-2011, 08:38 PM
:clap:

smith&wesson
10-30-2011, 08:58 PM
So basically the same ish that's been happening since the NBA was established? Strong logic/10

you can find examples here in there in the past. but nothing like today.


Superteams date back to the 1950's Celtics team so superteams is somethign that always existed in the NBA.

yes they do. but never before did players have THIS MUCH SAY in the matter. again you can find examples here and there ... but to have guys planning this kind of stuff years in advance wasnt soo common back then.


and how exactly do you think you are going to be able to regulate how individuals carry themselves ink? The average NBA player has changed. Instead of being an ego driven control freak that needs to be the "man" we have a generation of superstars who put winning at a premium. shame on them... :rolleyes:

winning at the cost of compition. every year now you will see guys want to join up. again this was not as common before as it is today. first ray allen, kg, pierce, then lerbon, wade and bosh, then melo and stat, whos next ? howard, paul, dwill. etc. it will be an anual thing.. it was never this common. it use to be fashionable to start and end your career on one team.


You are way out of line for the "players giving up" part. Only Lebron gave up in the playoffs, not Kobe. Kobe has been playing injured for the last 2 seasons and finally his body took a toll on him. You think the NBA is the only sport players give up in? Check out Jay Cutler last season in the NFL playoffs. A lot of people said he gave up. Stop living in the moment and take some time to look at the whole situation objectively.

carter gave up on his team and admitted it. so did tmac.. lebron, kobe ... bosh checked out after the all star game his last season in toronto... thats already way too many examples for my likeing.


the only thing that needs to be fixed is eliminate star calls completely, and pray that eliminating it makes coaches understand they can no longer make their strategy be "iso play for the star iso play for the star, iso play for the star".

i hate the super star calls too. its not easy on the refs to try and call games fairly but the super star calls have gotten out of hand. infact most games end and are determined by those very calls. i agree with you crooner.


How many players have held their franchise hostage....Melo comes to mind and that's it. Bosh and LeBron left their teams and went to new ones. I'm not saying you are panicking but ppl are going overboard with this super team stuff. It's not something that's going to happen every yr.

actually yes it is. its the new trend. every year if there are any super stars to be in free agency they will have theyre pick in where they want to play and they will force theyre teams hand to trade them to that particular destination. either that or they leave and the franchise gets nothing. again it use to be fashionable to start and end your career on the same team. now its all about who i can join to help me win. this was never as common in the past and the players didnt have as much control and power. some cases yes but not like today.

ink
10-30-2011, 09:11 PM
Also unlike a normal business were workers create a product, NBA player are the product.

http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2011/10/27/2518670/nba-lockout-2011-owners-public-investment-arenas

Same old, same old. In no way are the players the complete product. This is just reality evasion.

1. Take a player and strip everything away from that player and tell me if you have an NBA.

2. Take a team and remove the whiny superstar and you still have an NBA.

Yes, the league took a quality hit, and yes some fans would stop watching, mainly the ones who fight all the time on the net about who is the "GOAT" lol, but you still have a league and you still have basketball.

Not just picking on this post but there is some really loopy logic at work in some of these threads. I am sure I just read that NBA teams are not allowed to fail. Of course they are. What people can't seem to grasp is that these are FRANCHISES and the league is the company. The company is going to do everything in its power to keep the franchises healthy. If they fail, which they do, they move them. We've seen that happen several times in league history, the most recent being Seattle to OKC.

Kevj77
10-30-2011, 09:35 PM
Same old, same old. In no way are the players the complete product. This is just reality evasion. Take a player and strip everything away from that player and tell me if you have an NBA. Take a team and remove Kobe and all the other whiny superstars and you still have an NBA. Yes, the league took a quality hit, and yes many fanboys would stop watching, but you still have a league and you still have basketball.

Not just picking on this post but there is some really loopy logic at work in some of these threads. I am sure I just read that NBA teams are not allowed to fail. Of course they are. What people can't seem to grasp is that these are FRANCHISES and the league is the company. The company is going to do everything in its power to keep the franchises healthy. [b]If they fail, which they do, they move them[b]. We've seen that happen several times in league history, the most recent being Seattle to OKC.They hold a city hostage and force them to pay for their arena (factory) or they leave, the Kings just did this to Sacramento they threatened to leave for Southern Cali and only changed their minds when the mayor of Sac promised to try to publicly fund a new arena. They are franchises, but I've seen franchises in my local market close while the company still exists because the individual store wasn't profitable. The NBA will never allow that.

Yes, the players are the product I wouldn't watch D-league players or pay to see them. Just like I wouldn't pay to see a terrible movie or buy bad music from Itunes. It doesn't matter to me who the producer or owner is. The NBA is entertainment.

smith&wesson
10-30-2011, 09:44 PM
They hold a city hostage and force them to pay for their arena (factory) or they leave, the Kings just did this to Sacramento they threatened to leave for Southern Cali and only changed their minds when the mayor of Sac promised to try to publicly fund a new arena. They are franchises, but I've seen franchises in my local market close while the company still exists because the individual store wasn't profitable. The NBA will never allow that.

Yes, the players are the product I wouldn't watch D-league players or pay to see them. Just like I wouldn't pay to see a terrible movie or buy bad music from Itunes. It doesn't matter to me who the producer or owner is. The NBA is entertainment.

the game is the product. the players are the employees. can employees have a negative effect on the product ? yes with poor atitudes!

unfortunatley when these certain franchises do infact fail and are moved the players are not fired. they go where the franchise goes or are traded to other franchises. their jobs r safe even if they had a hand in helping that franchise fail. you see they can do no wrong and with that atitude your bound to have a negative effect not just in the nba but in any company.

i.e gilbert arenas. the guy who takes guns to work yet is still employed. what other line of work would this be acceptable.

beasted86
10-30-2011, 09:44 PM
Just like the players are replaceable, so are the owners.

All it takes is money to own a basketball team. To get into the NBA and generate $4.2 billion, you need a unique talent.

Both sides need each other, but owners being guaranteed profits solely because of the system will turn a lot more money hungry investors to the league who look at owning a team only as a business enterprise. Does the league really need more Donald Sterling types? Satisfied with turning a profit and little else. 30 years of ownership with 3 seasons over .500 and 4 playoff appearances.

ink
10-30-2011, 09:46 PM
They hold a city hostage and force them to pay for their arena (factory) or they leave, the Kings just did this to Sacramento they threatened to leave for Southern Cali and only changed their minds when the mayor of Sac promised to try to publicly fund a new arena. They are franchises, but I've seen franchises in my local market close while the company still exists because the individual store wasn't profitable. The NBA will never allow that.

They have more public clout than most corporations, therefore they can push for public funding. Different issue really but I hear you. They're still franchises and the league is still pulling out the stops to make them viable in the markets they have chosen. After finding out they're not viable, they move them.


Yes, the players are the product I wouldn't watch D-league players or pay to see them. Just like I wouldn't pay to see a terrible movie or buy bad music from Itunes. It doesn't matter to me who the producer or owner is. The NBA is entertainment.

Nobody has refuted the fact that it would still be the NBA without such and such a player. The league is not the players; it employs the players. We are talking at cross purposes because all you are thinking about are replacement players while I'm talking about longer term. The league is still the league no matter who plays in it. But the fact remains that both sides need each other, and both sides and the GAME itself benefit if the players are not in control. If they are in control and only thinking of themselves, that is not going to be good for the entire product. I care more about the entire product and the game itself than I do for the players, especially the "I can't win without a superstar" crop we're enduring right now.

ink
10-30-2011, 09:47 PM
Just like the players are replaceable, so are the owners.

No one refutes that.


All it takes is money to own a basketball team. To get into the NBA and generate $4.2 billion, you need a unique talent.

OMG that is naive. Extremely naive. If you are taking business right now you will soon learn that it takes unique talent to run a business, especially of this magnitude. Pro sports franchises are extremely complex and challenging operations.

beasted86
10-30-2011, 09:55 PM
No one refutes that.



OMG that is naive. Extremely naive. If you are taking business right now you will soon learn that it takes unique talent to run a business, especially of this magnitude. Pro sports franchises are extremely complex and challenging operations.

I agree, but when you propose a system that takes a lot of work out of the equation and makes it near fool proof to turn a profit, it reduces ownership to simply an investment bid to a stock holder. Buy the team and watch the profits stack up on top of the equity.

ink
10-30-2011, 09:56 PM
you can find examples here in there in the past. but nothing like today.



yes they do. but never before did players have THIS MUCH SAY in the matter. again you can find examples here and there ... but to have guys planning this kind of stuff years in advance wasnt soo common back then.



winning at the cost of compition. every year now you will see guys want to join up. again this was not as common before as it is today. first ray allen, kg, pierce, then lerbon, wade and bosh, then melo and stat, whos next ? howard, paul, dwill. etc. it will be an anual thing.. it was never this common. it use to be fashionable to start and end your career on one team.



carter gave up on his team and admitted it. so did tmac.. lebron, kobe ... bosh checked out after the all star game his last season in toronto... thats already way too many examples for my likeing.



i hate the super star calls too. its not easy on the refs to try and call games fairly but the super star calls have gotten out of hand. infact most games end and are determined by those very calls. i agree with you crooner.



actually yes it is. its the new trend. every year if there are any super stars to be in free agency they will have theyre pick in where they want to play and they will force theyre teams hand to trade them to that particular destination. either that or they leave and the franchise gets nothing. again it use to be fashionable to start and end your career on the same team. now its all about who i can join to help me win. this was never as common in the past and the players didnt have as much control and power. some cases yes but not like today.

:clap::clap:

ink
10-30-2011, 09:58 PM
I agree, but when you propose a system that takes a lot of work out of the equation and makes it near fool proof to turn a profit, it reduces ownership to simply an investment bid to a stock holder. Buy the team and watch the profits stack up on top of the equity.

I guarantee that no CBA will make running a complex league like this fool proof. But it might help re-shape the game. It did in the NHL. The difference in quality and attitude of the product is like night and day.

BigCityofDreams
10-30-2011, 10:25 PM
actually yes it is. its the new trend. every year if there are any super stars to be in free agency they will have theyre pick in where they want to play and they will force theyre teams hand to trade them to that particular destination. either that or they leave and the franchise gets nothing. again it use to be fashionable to start and end your career on the same team. now its all about who i can join to help me win. this was never as common in the past and the players didnt have as much control and power. some cases yes but not like today.
--------------------------------------------------

And where are these players going to go?????? Teams are going to have to have the cap space in order to bring those types of stars to their franchise. Outside of Howard and Paul are there any other players that will try to make a power move. There aren't many places left to build super teams.

beasted86
10-30-2011, 10:41 PM
I guarantee that no CBA will make running a complex league like this fool proof. But it might help re-shape the game. It did in the NHL. The difference in quality and attitude of the product is like night and day.

Half of these teams losing money have already been mismanaged and will turn a profit. If you were competent enough to become a billionaire with the capability to buy a team, running the team from here on out will be a cakewalk.

ink
10-30-2011, 10:44 PM
actually yes it is. its the new trend. every year if there are any super stars to be in free agency they will have theyre pick in where they want to play and they will force theyre teams hand to trade them to that particular destination. either that or they leave and the franchise gets nothing. again it use to be fashionable to start and end your career on the same team. now its all about who i can join to help me win. this was never as common in the past and the players didnt have as much control and power. some cases yes but not like today.
--------------------------------------------------

And where are these players going to go?????? Teams are going to have to have the cap space in order to bring those types of stars to their franchise. Outside of Howard and Paul are there any other players that will try to make a power move. There aren't many places left to build super teams.

It's the practice in general that needs to be stopped. Think longer term. With the current loopholes and the precedent set by the 2010 FA period, we'll see this repeat itself when teams create the cap space they need to hoard the best available FAs. We're not just talking about right now ...

ink
10-30-2011, 10:46 PM
Half of these teams losing money have already been mismanaged and will turn a profit. If you were competent enough to become a billionaire with the capability to buy a team, running the team from here on out will be a cakewalk.

Again, as a business student you should know that's not true. There is nothing simple about a corporate entity as complex as a pro sports league.

Bramaca
10-30-2011, 10:49 PM
However, NBA owners are not the only ones providing the capital necessary to run their business. A modern arena is essential to the operation of an NBA franchise; Seattle's refusal to pay to renovate Key Arena or build a new facility was the central issue David Stern cited in helping Clay Bennett relocate the Sonics to a much smaller market in Oklahoma City. Over the last 10 years, local governments have spent $1.75 billion, 84 percent of the total cost, on eight new or renovated NBA arenas.
Also unlike a normal business were workers create a product, NBA player are the product.

http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2011/10/27/2518670/nba-lockout-2011-owners-public-investment-arenas

Wouldn't this be an example of the value that the NBA (owners and league office) is providing when it comes to the revenue they create? They have used their connections and business talents to get stadiums built that allow for a maximization of revenue while at the same time limiting their expenditures to do so. Who do you think has reaped the benefits of this? The players. If the owners had to cover those expenses (approx 5% of revenue from the last 10 years) that would be coming right off the players salaries. Not to mention the added benefits that those new or renovated arenas have provided to BRI.

The owners cover those expenses and we aren't talking about an argument about the players split being anywhere from 50 to 52.5% but rather between 45 and 47.5% or possibly lower. Don't get me wrong, I don't think it is right that much public money has gone to susidize a 4 billion a year industry but it is the players that benefit from it more then anybody else, if not the full benefit of it. But do you think that benefit for the players would be there without the owners money, influence, business knowledge, and connections?

Bramaca
10-30-2011, 11:03 PM
Half of these teams losing money have already been mismanaged and will turn a profit. If you were competent enough to become a billionaire with the capability to buy a team, running the team from here on out will be a cakewalk.

Isn't that usually the way with franchises of large businesses. They are usually set up so that it is easy to make good money on them, thats why people pay a premium to own a McDonalds instead of trying to start up their own place.

BigCityofDreams
10-30-2011, 11:50 PM
It's the practice in general that needs to be stopped. Think longer term. With the current loopholes and the precedent set by the 2010 FA period, we'll see this repeat itself when teams create the cap space they need to hoard the best available FAs. We're not just talking about right now ...

But the players will still need desirable destinations to create their own teams. Yrs from now if the Bucks clear space do you think big name players will rush to play there even if they can offer them large sums of money.

ink
10-30-2011, 11:57 PM
But the players will still need desirable destinations to create their own teams. Yrs from now if the Bucks clear space do you think big name players will rush to play there even if they can offer them large sums of money.

Hopefully players will lose the ability to create their own teams. Players know how to play, they almost never know anything about team or league building.

beasted86
10-31-2011, 12:06 AM
Isn't that usually the way with franchises of large businesses. They are usually set up so that it is easy to make good money on them, thats why people pay a premium to own a McDonalds instead of trying to start up their own place.

No. Owning a McDonalds doesn't build equity.

Also in the real world, a successful MCD would give you like 3% returns annually.

Bramaca
10-31-2011, 12:23 AM
No. Owning a McDonalds doesn't build equity.

Also in the real world, a successful MCD would give you like 3% returns annually.

McD's doesn't build equity? I can tell you with 100% certainty that that is complete ********.

Badluck33
10-31-2011, 12:26 AM
Anyway I hope this opens up some eyes to the labor negotiations. Players made more than enough (and are probably footing the bill) for the NBA to continue operating until the next CBA. It's a shame that a deal wasn't made.

Other side of this coin is that the players/agents could be blamed for ruining the NBA under this CBA.

imagesrdecievin
10-31-2011, 12:27 AM
I don't understand the contradiction in attitude regarding players 'dictating' where they want to play.

There's so much emphasis in this thread that owner's be respected as businessmen (not stewards of a very expensive hobby known as pro sports). Well why not give players the same respect?

The player's being accused of holding owners at gunpoint are merely exercising the tools available to them to further their own careers how they see fit:

"I will not sign an extension with you. Feel free to trade me to any team you like - but there are only certain teams that I will sign an extension with. If you don't like it then I will simply honor my contract(or opt out as is my right by contract) and sign in a location of my choosing."


You can't have it both ways where you criticize a player for doing what is best for themselves(ultimately the heart of capitalism) but defend the owners.



Oh yeah - the NBA would still be the NBA if all the players weren't there, but it definitely wouldn't be "where amazing happens".

beasted86
10-31-2011, 12:33 AM
McD's doesn't build equity? I can tell you with 100% certainty that that is complete ********.

Each MCD restaurant doesn't build equity any higher than inflation. NBA team equity is way higher than inflation.... sometimes 5-7% gains per year.

Bramaca
10-31-2011, 12:41 AM
Each MCD restaurant doesn't build equity any higher than inflation. NBA team equity is way higher than inflation.... sometimes 5-7% gains per year.

Where do you get your info from? Because, as I said, I am 100% sure that you are full of **** on this. When I was in university I used to manage at one and saw all their books regarding sales and expenses. Later on I did his books and worked on his taxes, saw how much he paid for it, how long he owned it for, and what he sold it for. His equity grew at a rate much higher then inflation.

Is that seriously what you think though? That NBA teams equity grows at greater then inflation meanwhile other companies franchises only grow at the rate of inflation.

beasted86
10-31-2011, 12:48 AM
Where do you get your info from? Because, as I said, I am 100% sure that you are full of **** on this. When I was in university I used to manage at one and saw all their books regarding sales and expenses. Later on I did his books and worked on his taxes, saw how much he paid for it, how long he owned it for, and what he sold it for. His equity grew at a rate much higher then inflation.

Is that seriously what you think though? That NBA teams equity grows at greater then inflation meanwhile other companies franchises only grow at the rate of inflation.

Many businesses do. My family has owned a couple businesses as well as business real estate, and many times growth is only around the inflation rate of 2-3% a year. Maybe they could have held out and sold for more in certain instances, but I don't know...

imagesrdecievin
10-31-2011, 12:51 AM
In this terrible economy I doubt very many businesses are experiencing any sort of equity growth...

Except for owning a professional sports franchise in one of the major three sports. And the only reason for that is because owning a team in the big three sports is essentially a hobby/glamour thing and as odd as it sounds there is never a shortage of billionaires with money to burn.

If owner's were interested in turning a profit then they would run them as such rather than trying to win(see Donald Sterling).

Bramaca
10-31-2011, 01:11 AM
Many businesses do. My family has owned a couple businesses as well as business real estate, and many times growth is only around the inflation rate of 2-3% a year. Maybe they could have held out and sold for more in certain instances, but I don't know...

Revenue and goodwill are two of the main factors in determining a sale price, especially in something that doesn't have as much in terms of fixed assets like the NBA or McD's. Both companies have about as much goodwill as you can have in their respective industries. And if revenues grow much beyond the rate of inflation that will translate into growth of value or equity beyond inflation. The NBA's revenue has grown by 500% over the last 25 years which is well beyond the rate of inflation so that translates into equity growing beyond as well.

If a companies value isn't growing beyond inflation then its sales are relatively flat and only really growing with inflation as well.

smith&wesson
10-31-2011, 01:45 AM
And where are these players going to go?????? Teams are going to have to have the cap space in order to bring those types of stars to their franchise. Outside of Howard and Paul are there any other players that will try to make a power move. There aren't many places left to build super teams.

it shouldnt be about where these star players want to go or where they end up. . its gotten to a point where they dictate the way the league is structured and have more say in office decisions more then ever beofre.

the players should simply be players and give their all to the respective teams they are on. they shouldnt meet up with the compition over the summer and plan what is to be 2 seasons from now and then check out on their current teams when it matters.

where will they go ?? it all depends on the new cba. i cant tell you how it will be structured and what gm's will be working with. but i can tell you that the lakers, celtics, knicks, heat, bulls, mavs, will always be desirable locations to the new age star player and there are no shortage of future star players that will inevidably enter free agency.

remeber players when they stayed on one team and how much you could identify them with the culture of that team ? reggie miller, paul pierce, tim duncan, and even magic,bird mj to name a few. these players are a dieing bread in the sence that you wont see loyalty like that anymore.

Hellcrooner
10-31-2011, 04:03 AM
^ jordan, Bird, Magic may have not been Career players for one team if they fell in Denver instead of chicago, Boston, L.A

LakersIn5
10-31-2011, 05:27 AM
it shouldnt be about where these star players want to go or where they end up. . its gotten to a point where they dictate the way the league is structured and have more say in office decisions more then ever beofre.

the players should simply be players and give their all to the respective teams they are on. they shouldnt meet up with the compition over the summer and plan what is to be 2 seasons from now and then check out on their current teams when it matters.

where will they go ?? it all depends on the new cba. i cant tell you how it will be structured and what gm's will be working with. but i can tell you that the lakers, celtics, knicks, heat, bulls, mavs, will always be desirable locations to the new age star player and there are no shortage of future star players that will inevidably enter free agency.

remeber players when they stayed on one team and how much you could identify them with the culture of that team ? reggie miller, paul pierce, tim duncan, and even magic,bird mj to name a few. these players are a dieing bread in the sence that you wont see loyalty like that anymore.

because they started their careers already on a big market team so no need to ask for a trade or sign elsewhere to a big market team.

BigCityofDreams
10-31-2011, 11:08 AM
Hopefully players will lose the ability to create their own teams. Players know how to play, they almost never know anything about team or league building.

Can't the same be said about the a number of ppl in the front office that make poor decisions.


it shouldnt be about where these star players want to go or where they end up. . its gotten to a point where they dictate the way the league is structured and have more say in office decisions more then ever beofre.

the players should simply be players and give their all to the respective teams they are on. they shouldnt meet up with the compition over the summer and plan what is to be 2 seasons from now and then check out on their current teams when it matters.

where will they go ?? it all depends on the new cba. i cant tell you how it will be structured and what gm's will be working with. but i can tell you that the lakers, celtics, knicks, heat, bulls, mavs, will always be desirable locations to the new age star player and there are no shortage of future star players that will inevidably enter free agency.

remeber players when they stayed on one team and how much you could identify them with the culture of that team ? reggie miller, paul pierce, tim duncan, and even magic,bird mj to name a few. these players are a dieing bread in the sence that you wont see loyalty like that anymore.

I understand what you're saying but how many times have we seen players give their all to a franchise only to be shown the door. How many times have we seen players bust their ***** trying to win for the team that drafted them only to be traded or not brought back.

Players staying with one team is a thing of the past but that happens in all sports. You're still going to have guys that retire with the team they started with such as Kobe, Dirk, probably Wade, etc.

Shmontaine
10-31-2011, 11:48 AM
Not only are teams not allowed to fail, but they don't provide all the capital like a normal business would.

Also unlike a normal business were workers create a product, NBA player are the product.

http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2011/10/27/2518670/nba-lockout-2011-owners-public-investment-arenas

anyone can handpick the arena subsidies that support their argument... if this author would've gone back 15-17 years instead of 10, he'd see quite a different percentage of public subsidized renovations...


Boston Celtics
151 Merrimac Street, Boston, MA 02114
Primary Owners: Boston Basketball Partners LP, a group led by Managing Partner and CEO Wycliffe Grousbeck
tel (617) 523-6050 / fax (617) 523-5949

Fleet Center (Opened in 1995), shared with the Bruins (NHL)

Total Cost:
$160 million

No Significant Public Subsidy


Chicago Bulls
1901 W. Madison Street, Chicago, IL 60612-2459
Primary Owner: Jerry Reinsdorf
tel (312) 455-4000 / fax (312) 455-4198

United Center (Opened in 1994), shared with the Blackhawks (NHL)

Total Cost:
$150 million

City Public Subsidy:
$11 million, 7% of total (general fund)


Denver Nuggets
1000 Chopper Circle, Denver, CO 80204
Primary Owner: E. Stanley Kroenke
tel (303) 405-1100 / fax (303) 575-1920

Pepsi Center (Opened in 1999), shared with the Avalanche (NHL)

Total Cost:
$165 million

County Public Subsidy:
$5 million, 3% of total (general fund)


Indiana Pacers
125 S. Pennsylvania Street, Indianapolis, IN 46204
Primary Owners: Melvin and Herbert Simon
tel (317) 917-2500 / fax (317) 917-2599

Conseco Fieldhouse (Opened in 1999)

Total Cost:
$175 million

City Public Subsidy:
$72 million, 41% of total, (sales tax, capital improvement fund)


Los Angeles Clippers
Staples Center, 1111 S. Figueroa St., Ste. 1100, Los Angeles, CA 90015
Primary Owner: Donald T. Sterling
tel (213) 742-7500 / fax (213) 742-2550

Staples Center (Opened in 1999), shared with the Lakers (NBA) and the Kings (NHL)

Total Cost:
$321 million

City Public Subsidy:
$71 million, 22% of total (general fund)

-----

Los Angeles Lakers
3900 W. Manchester Boulevard, Inglewood, CA 90305-2227
Primary Owner: Jerry Buss
tel (310) 419-3100 / fax (310) 419-3234

Staples Center (Opened in 1999), shared with the Clippers (NBA) and the Kings (NHL)

Total Cost:
$321 million

City Public Subsidy:
$71 million, 22% of total (general fund)


Philadelphia 76ers
Wachovia Center, 3601 S. Broad Street, Philadelphia, PA 19148
Primary Owner: Comcast, Chairperson: Edward M. (Ed) Snider
tel (215) 339-7600 / fax (215) 339-7632

Wachovia Center (Opened in 1996), shared with the Flyers (NHL)

Total Cost:
$206 million

City, State Public Subsidy:
$23 million, 11% of total (general fund)


Toronto Raptors
Air Canada Centre, 40 Bay St., Ste. 400, Toronto, Ontario M5J 2X2, Canada
Primary Owner: Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment, controlled by Steve A. Stavro
tel (416) 815-5600 / fax (416) 359-9205

Air Canada Center (Opened in 1999), shared with the Maple Leafs (NHL)

Total Cost:
C$265 million

No Significant Public Subsidy


Washington Wizards
601 F St. NW, Washington, DC 20004
Primary Owner: Abe Pollin
tel (202) 661-5000 / fax (202) 661-5101

MCI Center (Opened in 1997), shared with the Capitals (NHL)

Total Cost:
$260 million

City Public Subsidy:
$60 million, 23% of total (general fund)

http://www.leagueoffans.org/nbaarenas1990.html

smith&wesson
10-31-2011, 01:46 PM
Can't the same be said about the a number of ppl in the front office that make poor decisions.



I understand what you're saying but how many times have we seen players give their all to a franchise only to be shown the door. How many times have we seen players bust their ***** trying to win for the team that drafted them only to be traded or not brought back.

Players staying with one team is a thing of the past but that happens in all sports. You're still going to have guys that retire with the team they started with such as Kobe, Dirk, probably Wade, etc.

true. i was amazed that ewing was traded, or that hakeem retired in toronto instead of houston where he won 2 ships. i see what your saying as well.

BigCityofDreams
10-31-2011, 04:55 PM
true. i was amazed that ewing was traded, or that hakeem retired in toronto instead of houston where he won 2 ships. i see what your saying as well.

I see what you're saying as well you made some very good points.