PDA

View Full Version : RIC BUCHER... WHAT small MARKET TEAMS REALLY WANT



Pages : [1] 2

Dade County
11-02-2011, 08:15 PM
Ric Bucher at the 4:25 - 5:00 mark
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=7182946&categoryid=2459788

"The small market owners really want a system that controls the players, that essentially insures them if they are fortunate to draft a star player.... That star player can't hold them hostage as for as where they want to go/play.

Every small market team wants... if their are lucky enough to draft that star player, that player can't determine when he's going to leave and where he's going to go".


HOW ARE THE OWNERS GOING TO DO THAT?

I didn't see/read anything in this current deal that is on the table, that will allow me to believe that the owners have succeeded in this goal.

............... ................... ................. .................

And of course they used Lbj as the example... wtf haters.
WHY NOT Melo, he fits their description perfectly.

Hawkeye15
11-02-2011, 08:23 PM
some sort of a franchise tag, which isn't on the table. I am sorry, but that is the way the NBA has become. If a star player is drafted, and his team is terrible, he will leave.

Its the state of youth in the US honestly. Kids now graduate from college, thinking they DESERVE to succeed. Um, no, you earn success.

Chronz
11-02-2011, 08:24 PM
Why should they be able to control this? If thats the case then we may as well abolish the lottery and let rookies choose where they want to spend the rest of their careers.

Anilyzer
11-02-2011, 08:26 PM
Ric Bucher at the 4:25 - 5:00 mark
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=7182946&categoryid=2459788

"The small market owners really want a system that controls the players, that essentially insures them if they are fortunate to draft a star player.... That star player can't hold them hostage as for as where they want to go/play.

Every small market team wants... if their are lucky enough to draft that star player, that player can't determine when he's going to leave and where he's going to go".


HOW ARE THE OWNERS GOING TO DO THAT?

I didn't see/read anything in this current deal that is on the table, that will allow me to believe that the owners have succeeded in this goal.

............... ................... ................. .................

And of course they used Lbj as the example... wtf haters.
WHY NOT Melo, he fits their description perfectly.


^^ exactly right

Chronz
11-02-2011, 08:26 PM
some sort of a franchise tag, which isn't on the table. I am sorry, but that is the way the NBA has become. If a star player is drafted, and his team is terrible, he will leave.
I always wondered why people always say there is no franchise tag, thats pretty much what restricted free agency is. But this is the way stars have always been.


Its the state of youth in the US honestly. Kids now graduate from college, thinking they DESERVE to succeed. Um, no, you earn success.

This doesnt make sense, KG didnt earn his title by staying put on his horrible team.

Anilyzer
11-02-2011, 08:33 PM
some sort of a franchise tag, which isn't on the table. I am sorry, but that is the way the NBA has become. If a star player is drafted, and his team is terrible, he will leave.

Its the state of youth in the US honestly. Kids now graduate from college, thinking they DESERVE to succeed. Um, no, you earn success.

Well, who "earns" success more than an athlete like Lebron James, who dedicates every moment of his life to becoming the best basketball player in the world?

Lebron, Kobe, Dwight... these are magnificent athletes who have risen to the top through their own talent, sweat and hard work; oh, and by the way, they're the ones that fans want to see.

Compare with some of the owners: Jim Buss, a ne'er-do-well who inherits ownership and control of a team through sheer unbridled nepotism, and openly jokes about how "anybody could do this"; Gilbert, who made billions selling his vastly overpriced internet company before the internet bubble; etc, etc. A LOT of silver spoons and shady business deals. blah blah blah whatever.

Free agency is just part of the sport. Owners like Gilbert want to take it away out of spite... they want to make it personal and go all "Al Davis" on the players.

Who really cares, anyways? A single magic moment of Kobe's career, a game winning 3, a perfect play or dropping 81 points on Toronto, is something that money could never, ever buy, and that no NBA owner could ever come close to experiencing.

BigCityofDreams
11-02-2011, 08:34 PM
So basically they want to force star players to stay on bad teams. They have bird rights, RFA, can offer their players more money than other teams, etc but that's not enough.

Mudvayne91
11-02-2011, 08:35 PM
Just have 6 teams or so with the NBA. I would love for the ABA to come back. That way all you "big" market teams can get all the super stars you want and I won't have to deal with a rigged BS league. Everybody wins!

Hawkeye15
11-02-2011, 08:36 PM
I always wondered why people always say there is no franchise tag, thats pretty much what restricted free agency is. But this is the way stars have always been.


This doesnt make sense, KG didnt earn his title by staying put on his horrible team.

its a very, very watered down version of the franchise tag.

My bottom statement has to do with the consensus, not every single case. The youth of America, in general, thinks they deserve to be successful, instead of earning it. Obviously I am not laying a blanket statement down for all of them. But the majority fit the bill.

5ass
11-02-2011, 08:36 PM
if i was going to be blame any1 on the way the NBA has become i would blame the media for putting too much stock into winning championships when determining all-time players rankings

smith&wesson
11-02-2011, 08:38 PM
some players like kg gave theyre best years to a franchise that never really put him in a position to win. in this scenerio i beleive a player should be able to demand a trade and have some say in where he goes. there would have been no point if the t-wolves traded garnet to the raptors or somthing. he wouldnt have won. i think that is a special case though it does happen. we cant really expect a super star to start and finish his career on a franchise that wasnt able to get the right pieces around him.

i know some owners would love to just make money off that super star and never go too deep in to their pockets and atain a championship roster.

would wade remain a heat if miami wasnt going to get lebron & bosh or other high caliber players for wade to play with ? no probably not. but you cant expect him to remain a heat and have haslem and chalmers be the 2nd and 3rd best players of the team for several years either. .

i never really blamed carter for leaving toronto for this reason. why should a player stay with a team after giving his best years to the franchise but was never surounded with a championship caliber team ? if i was that player i would feel like im wasting my career.

then theres the other side of it. how can a small market team ever really be succesfull if all its star players are fleeing for a large market city ?

Hawkeye15
11-02-2011, 08:38 PM
Well, who "earns" success more than an athlete like Lebron James, who dedicates every moment of his life to becoming the best basketball player in the world?

Lebron, Kobe, Dwight... these are magnificent athletes who have risen to the top through their own talent, sweat and hard work; oh, and by the way, they're the ones that fans want to see.

Compare with some of the owners: Jim Buss, a ne'er-do-well who inherits ownership and control of a team through sheer unbridled nepotism, and openly jokes about how "anybody could do this"; Gilbert, who made billions selling his vastly overpriced internet company before the internet bubble; etc, etc. A LOT of silver spoons and shady business deals. blah blah blah whatever.

Free agency is just part of the sport. Owners like Gilbert want to take it away out of spite... they want to make it personal and go all "Al Davis" on the players.

Who really cares, anyways? A single magic moment of Kobe's career, a game winning 3, a perfect play or dropping 81 points on Toronto, is something that money could never, ever buy, and that no NBA owner could ever come close to experiencing.

Oh I don't mean it in a negative way in every case. Someone like LeBron DID resign with a franchise that never gave him ****. It was only after he gave them the chance to build a roster that he left.

Free agency should always be the way it is. I understand bad teams not wanting to lose their franchise player, but that is the nature of sports owners. If you can't put out a winner, the only other option you have is money. And winners have money too.

Anilyzer
11-02-2011, 08:39 PM
Btw, as promised, I now admit that ALL my analysis of the NBA lockout was incorrect. Not that anybody cares.

The question to me now seems to be whether we lose 1/2 the season or the entire season. It's really looking like the entire season to me right now.

Anyways... it seems that a majority of our "captains of industry" and our "leaders of capitalism" are busted out or on a tight budget now.

NBA basketball, as we've known and loved it, is NOT for those on an uber-tight budget. So, say goodbye to the NBA as we're known it. All those owners are worried now about losing money or reselling their investment... a bunch are probably "upside down" and getting deeper. So, it's broken.

Maybe we can look at some big time German or Chinese investors to step in, perhaps with a new U.S.-based league. Everybody here is now clearly scared to invest, scared to take a chance, scared to risk a few bucks for a good return, so... whatever.

Payoff the existing contracts, turn the NBA into the NHL, and see you on The Travel Channel. good night now

BigCityofDreams
11-02-2011, 08:43 PM
some players like kg gave theyre best years to a franchise that never really put him in a position to win. in this scenerio i beleive a player should be able to demand a trade and have some say in where he goes. there would have been no point if the t-wolves traded garnet to the raptors or somthing. he wouldnt have won. i think that is a specially case though. but it does happen. we cant really expect a super star to start and finish his career on a franchise that wasnt able to get the right pieces around him.

i know some owners would love to just make money off that super star and never go too deep in to their pockets and atain a championship roster.


Exactly some of these owners just want to be good enough to fill the arena and make a few playoff berths but don't want to spend big to be a winner.

ink
11-02-2011, 08:44 PM
Ric Bucher at the 4:25 - 5:00 mark
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=7182946&categoryid=2459788

"The small market owners really want a system that controls the players, that essentially insures them if they are fortunate to draft a star player.... That star player can't hold them hostage as for as where they want to go/play.

Every small market team wants... if their are lucky enough to draft that star player, that player can't determine when he's going to leave and where he's going to go".


HOW ARE THE OWNERS GOING TO DO THAT?

I didn't see/read anything in this current deal that is on the table, that will allow me to believe that the owners have succeeded in this goal.

............... ................... ................. .................

And of course they used Lbj as the example... wtf haters.
WHY NOT Melo, he fits their description perfectly.

There is nothing in the current deal that will do this. The article said that small market teams WANT TO make this happen. Does anyone dispute that? Obviously not. The article is only stating what everyone knows to be true.

buckeye
11-02-2011, 08:45 PM
Sure there isn't an owner in the world who wouldn't like the return of the Reserve Clause but can they really believe they can control player movement to any great extent. Sure maybe they can get one extra year with a franchise tag. Beyond that the players can't buckle to their demands because without FA salaries decline big time.

Anilyzer
11-02-2011, 08:47 PM
Oh I don't mean it in a negative way in every case. Someone like LeBron DID resign with a franchise that never gave him ****. It was only after he gave them the chance to build a roster that he left.

Free agency should always be the way it is. I understand bad teams not wanting to lose their franchise player, but that is the nature of sports owners. If you can't put out a winner, the only other option you have is money. And winners have money too.

*ahem* Let me explain something about winning, true work ethic and the entrepneurial spirit:

When you are the best at something, you go to where you WANT to be and to where you can be the BEST that you can be. You NEVER stay put in a losing situation, especially when you are getting disrespected or pimped out.

For instance, our founding fathers left England to build a country here. When England stood on us, taxing us and regulating all of our commerce, we fought a "war of independence".

The best in every field often "leave" for a "better team" or to start their own team. Everyone from Bill Gates to Henry Ford.

THAT is earning it. I don't know how we came up with this idea of free agency for players, or moving to a "super team" somehow equates to "not earning it."

And btw, all this "young folks don't want to work for anything" is BS, old people have been saying that since the caveman days. I bet that you, just like me, when we were kids, old people yelled at us "get off the lawn, you whippernappers" and "you young folks never want to work for anything."

Guess what: we'll all be working for decades to support all these millions of aging baby-boomers with all their medicare and social security, and oh yeah, these are the same folks that bankrupted everything with crooked real estate loans.

Anilyzer
11-02-2011, 08:50 PM
There is nothing in the current deal that will do this. The article said that small market teams WANT TO make this happen. Does anyone dispute that? Obviously not. The article is only stating what everyone knows to be true.

if the salary cap / luxury tax is restrictive enough, they think it will do it. What they really want is to abolish free agency: if rival teams couldn't bid for players, then they could pay them whatever they want.

anyways, economists have already demonstrated that the salary cap actually creates and allows player movement and the creation of super teams. The Lebron-Wade-Bosh thing could never have happened in an uncapped league, and Gilbert would've paid 5x more than what he was offering to keep Lebron in a free market system.

League is probably losing $500M in equity this week, which is just UGLY

ink
11-02-2011, 08:51 PM
Funny how the thread started out with a misreading of the article and then ends up being a string of unrelated off topic posts.

Hawkeye15
11-02-2011, 08:51 PM
*ahem* Let me explain something about winning, true work ethic and the entrepneurial spirit:

When you are the best at something, you go to where you WANT to be and to where you can be the BEST that you can be. You NEVER stay put in a losing situation, especially when you are getting disrespected or pimped out.

For instance, our founding fathers left England to build a country here. When England stood on us, taxing us and regulating all of our commerce, we fought a "war of independence".

The best in every field often "leave" for a "better team" or to start their own team. Everyone from Bill Gates to Henry Ford.

THAT is earning it. I don't know how we came up with this idea of free agency for players, or moving to a "super team" somehow equates to "not earning it."

And btw, all this "young folks don't want to work for anything" is BS, old people have been saying that since the caveman days. I bet that you, just like me, when we were kids, old people yelled at us "get off the lawn, you whippernappers" and "you young folks never want to work for anything."

Guess what: we'll all be working for decades to support all these millions of aging baby-boomers with all their medicare and social security, and oh yeah, these are the same folks that bankrupted everything with crooked real estate loans.

you are going way too deep dude. Kids nowadays flip jobs, and companies like candy. There is no loyalty. They graduate from college and expect to be the CEO in 10 years.

NBA isn't any different.

Hawkeye15
11-02-2011, 08:51 PM
Funny how the thread started out with a misreading of the article and then ends up being a string of unrelated off topic posts.

You're off topic

(Tommy Boy style post....)

ink
11-02-2011, 08:52 PM
if the salary cap / luxury tax is restrictive enough, they think it will do it. What they really want is to abolish free agency: if rival teams couldn't bid for players, then they could pay them whatever they want.

anyways, economists have already demonstrated that the salary cap actually creates and allows player movement and the creation of super teams. The Lebron-Wade-Bosh thing could never have happened in an uncapped league, and Gilbert would've paid 5x more than what he was offering to keep Lebron in a free market system.

League is probably losing $500M in equity this week, which is just UGLY

Economists can theorize all they like, which they do and get it wrong daily. This group of owners wants to regain control of the league. Obviously they're not going to abolish free agency so I'm not even sure why bother heating up the rhetoric to that level.

thenetslegend
11-02-2011, 08:52 PM
i agree with the small market owners

ink
11-02-2011, 08:53 PM
You're off topic

(Tommy Boy style post....)

If you can't beat em join em. lol.

Mudvayne91
11-02-2011, 08:54 PM
Exactly some of these owners just want to be good enough to fill the arena and make a few playoff berths but don't want to spend big to be a winner.

And some owners were constantly over the cap (Nuggets) and got a lot of pieces for their superstar while he was around, what's your point?

ink
11-02-2011, 08:55 PM
you are going way too deep dude. Kids nowadays flip jobs, and companies like candy. There is no loyalty. They graduate from college and expect to be the CEO in 10 years.

NBA isn't any different.

The labour force is structured so differently. Everything is on a contract basis out there. Grandfathers and Dads both would have had the choice to be permanent staff, which doesn't really exist anymore, especially in entertainment or sports industries.

So, I agree, that there is no loyalty, and there is even less permanence.

thenetslegend
11-02-2011, 08:57 PM
You're off topic

(Tommy Boy style post....)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCyaXh-VZco

BigCityofDreams
11-02-2011, 09:03 PM
you are going way too deep dude. Kids nowadays flip jobs, and companies like candy. There is no loyalty. They graduate from college and expect to be the CEO in 10 years.

NBA isn't any different.

They learned that from the generations that came before them. Everyone here has seen Wall Street or other movies along those lines. In life as well as sports we have seen someone take a job and then parlay it into a better one.

DoMeFavors
11-02-2011, 09:05 PM
NBA tweeted Nazr Mohammed and Charlie V about the proposal.

topdog
11-02-2011, 09:07 PM
Well, who "earns" success more than an athlete like Lebron James, who dedicates every moment of his life to becoming the best basketball player in the world?

Does he? Not trying to "hate" but I have not heard much about him working on his game in offseasons nor have I seen much improvement overall on the court.

Being 6'9" with an athletic genetic disposition has nothing to do with these guys success, right? That's the problem with the NBA - scouts talk about draftees learning skills like shooting later and worry about size and speed now. These guys are generally lucky and some bother to pair hard work with their good fortune.

LA_Raiders
11-02-2011, 09:12 PM
100% Agree with owners... Players want to control the league? **** Them...

BigCityofDreams
11-02-2011, 09:13 PM
And some owners were constantly over the cap (Nuggets) and got a lot of pieces for their superstar while he was around, what's your point?

A lot of pieces but not obtaining a great number 2 to play along side Melo in order to take them over the top. They brought Iverson who was a ball hog. Billups was a nice addition I can't deny that.

BigCityofDreams
11-02-2011, 09:13 PM
100% Agree with owners... Players want to control the league? **** Them...

Players always ran the league

PlezPlayDKnicks
11-02-2011, 09:14 PM
Does he? Not trying to "hate" but I have not heard much about him working on his game in offseasons nor have I seen much improvement overall on the court.

Being 6'9" with an athletic genetic disposition has nothing to do with these guys success, right? That's the problem with the NBA - scouts talk about draftees learning skills like shooting later and worry about size and speed now. These guys are generally lucky and some bother to pair hard work with their good fortune.

I agree. The man is naturally gifted and I'm sure he works on his game but totally dedicated to his game I'd have to disagree. Lebron seems to rely on his natural ability more than the holes in his game . Kobe- KG - Rose are guys who fit that bill IMO

Anilyzer
11-02-2011, 09:14 PM
you are going way too deep dude. Kids nowadays flip jobs, and companies like candy. There is no loyalty. They graduate from college and expect to be the CEO in 10 years.

NBA isn't any different.

Kobe has loyalty for the Lakers. Shaq kind of did, but in the end he didn't. Duncan has loyalty to the Spurs... Iverson had loyalty to the Sixers but they didn't have loyalty to him in the end.

Loyalty itself has to be earned.

For ****'s sake, seriously, if you were drafted by the Clippers, or by some wannabe plantation owner in Cleveland, wouldn't you want to find a better team? The choice to play WHERE you want and with WHO you want, like college kids have, is great. Why not take that?

If you LIKE the owner, the team, the town, the tradition... then you'll stay. Or maybe you'll leave and regret it. Whatever. Either way loyalty doesn't come free... you can't "draft" loyalty, and then "lock in" loyalty with a longterm contract.

Teams should take the Lakers example: Shaq said he wanted out and he was gone the next day. Everyone knows it's a privilege to play for the Lakers, and if you want to be gone from the Lakers all you have to do is say the word.

This pitiful loser teams desperately trying to hold onto players whom they think they can cash in on, and trashing the league when they can't get their way. *uggggghhh*

I usually wouldn't say this, but it is now at the point where it is literally destroying the league and destroying the game of basketball. The owners who are doing this are GROSSLY incompetent and don't have sufficient bankroll for this game.

redhorse
11-02-2011, 09:15 PM
Just a question. You think it's possible for a Nba to follow what MLB does. Like type a and type b free agents. Like when lebron signed with the heat they at least get a 1st round draft pick in return from the heat.

SteBO
11-02-2011, 09:16 PM
Does he? Not trying to "hate" but I have not heard much about him working on his game in offseasons nor have I seen much improvement overall on the court.

Being 6'9" with an athletic genetic disposition has nothing to do with these guys success, right? That's the problem with the NBA - scouts talk about draftees learning skills like shooting later and worry about size and speed now. These guys are generally lucky and some bother to pair hard work with their good fortune.
Supposedly he's worked on a post game, but it's not like we actually see something like that nowadays, so it's tough to say. I agree with you though, and that's why hype can be a dangerous thing coming into professional sports. I don't think LeBron is a classic example of this by any means, but speaking in general terms the media is going to praise you if you're that damn good at the sport you play, and it will naturally bring some so-called "haters" out to nitpick. Just the way it is, and how it will always be.......

SteBO
11-02-2011, 09:18 PM
And some owners were constantly over the cap (Nuggets) and got a lot of pieces for their superstar while he was around, what's your point?
They were constantly over the cap and didn't invest their dollars in the right players. That's on the owner/management, not anyone else....

CeeDub15
11-02-2011, 09:19 PM
That is one thing i dont like about the NBA, I feel like the player should be more loyal to the team that brought them into the league and coached them up personally.

Anilyzer
11-02-2011, 09:20 PM
Economists can theorize all they like, which they do and get it wrong daily. This group of owners wants to regain control of the league. Obviously they're not going to abolish free agency so I'm not even sure why bother heating up the rhetoric to that level.

It's fundamental. Here's an easy explanation:

Free agency = free market

Salary cap = attempt to control the costs of the free market, and limit player movement

Free agency + Salary cap = no incentive for great players to stay on bad or small market teams, and no way for teams to "go to the well" to outbid large market teams to keep their superstars.

Also makes possible superteams, as three or four max deals fit under the cap.

Actually, I think a semi-hard salary cap, with NO upper limit on individual player deals would accomplish what the owners want. Gilbert could've offered Lebron 90% of the cap, say, $60M a year, and paid the other players minimum dollars, and he would've stayed.

Of course, Lebron proved that the money didn't matter to him as much as the freedom of choice.

Hawkeye15
11-02-2011, 09:21 PM
Kobe has loyalty for the Lakers. Shaq kind of did, but in the end he didn't. Duncan has loyalty to the Spurs... Iverson had loyalty to the Sixers but they didn't have loyalty to him in the end.

Loyalty itself has to be earned.

For ****'s sake, seriously, if you were drafted by the Clippers, or by some wannabe plantation owner in Cleveland, wouldn't you want to find a better team? The choice to play WHERE you want and with WHO you want, like college kids have, is great. Why not take that?

If you LIKE the owner, the team, the town, the tradition... then you'll stay. Or maybe you'll leave and regret it. Whatever. Either way loyalty doesn't come free... you can't "draft" loyalty, and then "lock in" loyalty with a longterm contract.

Teams should take the Lakers example: Shaq said he wanted out and he was gone the next day. Everyone knows it's a privilege to play for the Lakers, and if you want to be gone from the Lakers all you have to do is say the word.

This pitiful loser teams desperately trying to hold onto players whom they think they can cash in on, and trashing the league when they can't get their way. *uggggghhh*

I usually wouldn't say this, but it is now at the point where it is literally destroying the league and destroying the game of basketball. The owners who are doing this are GROSSLY incompetent and don't have sufficient bankroll for this game.


calling a player "loyal" when he was drafted into a PERFECT situation is misleading, to say the least.

Would you prefer we only have 10 teams? Should we just axe the ones that aren't run correctly? Cmon man.

The Clippers, you example, make money btw. They are not one of the teams saying this, I guarantee it.

Hawkeye15
11-02-2011, 09:22 PM
Does he? Not trying to "hate" but I have not heard much about him working on his game in offseasons nor have I seen much improvement overall on the court.

Being 6'9" with an athletic genetic disposition has nothing to do with these guys success, right? That's the problem with the NBA - scouts talk about draftees learning skills like shooting later and worry about size and speed now. These guys are generally lucky and some bother to pair hard work with their good fortune.

at this point of LeBron's career, its better for him if nobody knows what he is up to. None of us know what he is doing, and that is probably not the worst thing.

Mudvayne91
11-02-2011, 09:24 PM
They were constantly over the cap and didn't invest their dollars in the right players. That's on the owner/management, not anyone else....

Well, it was truly Kenyon Martin that really screwed them. That and guaranteed contracts. There were other smaller moves, but not nearly as major. And I don't really disagree with you, but my point was a rebuttal that not all "small" market teams were just trying to sit on a superstar to make money and really didn't care about winning. There's no need to punish the teams that are trying to win because of a team that just wants to make $. Nuggets tried bringing in a lot of players to help win albeit most being mistakes.

SteBO
11-02-2011, 09:31 PM
Well, it was truly Kenyon Martin that really screwed them. That and guaranteed contracts. There were other smaller moves, but not nearly as major. And I don't really disagree with you, but my point was a rebuttal that not all "small" market teams were just trying to sit on a superstar to make money and really didn't care about winning.
Ah, alright. Denver actually gave Kenyon that contract? Damn. Small Market teams, as we all know, will be a step behind the bigger markets simply because of the hand they've been dealt in terms of market size, city attraction, etc......That's why those teams have to be smart in their decision-making and get a little lucky. Easier said than done, but that's reality. Denver was a good team, but was simply tied at the hip with the guaranteed money they owed players like Kenyon, Nene, Chauncey, and 'Melo at the time. Denver isn't a good example here, because I knew they were trying to win. They have been trying to compete since they drafted Carmelo.

ink
11-02-2011, 09:35 PM
It's fundamental. Here's an easy explanation:

Free agency = free market

Salary cap = attempt to control the costs of the free market, and limit player movement

Free agency + Salary cap = no incentive for great players to stay on bad or small market teams, and no way for teams to "go to the well" to outbid large market teams to keep their superstars.

Also makes possible superteams, as three or four max deals fit under the cap.

Actually, I think a semi-hard salary cap, with NO upper limit on individual player deals would accomplish what the owners want. Gilbert could've offered Lebron 90% of the cap, say, $60M a year, and paid the other players minimum dollars, and he would've stayed.

Of course, Lebron proved that the money didn't matter to him as much as the freedom of choice.

Again, untested theories and personal beliefs. None of those things are as yet proven. What the league is doing is re-asserting the control they want to have as owners. It's really not much more complex than that in terms of motivation, and nothing is a certainty in this economy and in this unique sport/entertainment field.

da ThRONe
11-02-2011, 10:04 PM
I don't think that speaks for all the owners maybe just Dan Gilbert.

As a fan of a small market team. I just want a chance to offer something that a large market team may not be able to because of cap space. I just want my GM to have some kind of leverage when signing FA. No New Orleans may not have New York's allure(in others opinion), but we have double/triple the salary to offer.

Blink
11-02-2011, 10:12 PM
What the NBA needs is more guys like Kevin Durant.

But that said I can agree with players wanting to leave. Why should a star player have to play for the owner who pretty much sits and watches his star player carry a whole team on his back. (Like LeBron)
the owners sit around and expect their teams superstar to get him to the top when they don't do sh** to surround that star player with any kind of talent. I mean id love to see guys stick around and be loyal to their respective franchises but come on. CP3, Dwight Howard, LeBron, etc have played on horrible teams and the owners don't do a damn thing to push their GM into making a trade to help a guy out....this lockout could help the NBA in the future but nope...its all about the money...its truly a shame

Dade County
11-02-2011, 10:25 PM
There is nothing in the current deal that will do this. The article said that small market teams WANT TO make this happen. Does anyone dispute that? Obviously not. The article is only stating what everyone knows to be true.

I know what Ric said (and i know what the owners would like to happen)....

It's just the fact of the owners really would like for it to be this way, and they see nothing wrong with that.

This tells me, know matter how much the union gives, the owners are going to want more; until they get a system that can control players movements.




Funny how the thread started out with a misreading of the article and then ends up being a string of unrelated off topic posts.

It was never a misreading (1st of all it's a video).

2nd ... Everyone knows what the owners really want, so they are commenting on that fact. The PSD posters are voicing their out range, because this is why their is no basketball, and it's stupid, because the owners can never really keep a player on their team, that doesn't really want to be their.

Dade County
11-02-2011, 10:30 PM
i agree with the small market owners


100% Agree with owners... Players want to control the league? **** Them...

? Agree with what?

Are you in favor of a career franchise tag?

Are you in favor of a very talented player being stock with a bad organization for 5- 10yrs?

Are you in favor of a player not having a say so, on where he is traded too? And that new owner says, you can't leave my team ( I own you)?


That is one thing i dont like about the NBA, I feel like the player should be more loyal to the team that brought them into the league and coached them up personally.

What would have the player do?

ink
11-02-2011, 10:39 PM
I know what Ric said (and i know what the owners would like to happen)....

It's just the fact of the owners really would like for it to be this way, and they see nothing wrong with that.

This tells me, know matter how much the union gives, the owners are going to want more; until they get a system that can control players movements.

2nd ... Everyone knows what the owners really want, so they are commenting on that fact. The PSD posters are voicing their out range, because this is why their is no basketball, and it's stupid, because the owners can never really keep a player on their team, that doesn't really want to be their.

The NBA is a corporate entity with a collective bargaining agreement. They will have to ratify whatever is put on the table for voting. The union has already prevented a hard cap so I don't see how anyone could possibly think that abolishing free agency is ever going to happen.

But yes, sure, a lot of the smaller franchises would like a means to retain their talent. All along this has been about talent acquisition and retention. And they don't deal in absolutes, that's why they negotiate. It just happens that after two CBAs that favoured the players, the owners have dominated these talks.

Rocco Gandolfo
11-02-2011, 10:46 PM
And of course they used Lbj as the example... wtf haters.
WHY NOT Melo, he fits their description perfectly.[/QUOTE]

I'll tell you why, because Melo never once actually said trade me or lose me. Melo stated that he was not interested in signing an extension in Denver until he saw what his options were on the open market. Denver knew they were going to lose him and they were complimented very well with Chandler, Gallo, Mozzy, and Felton.
LeBron knew exactly what he was going to do then exploited the league the system and the media to grandstand nothing more than a slap in the face to the Cav's. Why give the Cav's any hope at all KNOWING you are not only leaving, but leaving for what amounts to a late first round draft pick.
LeBron was an idiot for what he did and will always be hated for it. Just get used to it...

Sinestro
11-02-2011, 10:51 PM
What small market owners want is guaranteed success and profits we need some new owners and more loyal players although I can't really blame LeBron, Dwight or Paul for leaving their team

Dade County
11-02-2011, 10:57 PM
Well, it was truly Kenyon Martin that really screwed them. That and guaranteed contracts. There were other smaller moves, but not nearly as major. And I don't really disagree with you, but my point was a rebuttal that not all "small" market teams were just trying to sit on a superstar to make money and really didn't care about winning. There's no need to punish the teams that are trying to win because of a team that just wants to make $. Nuggets tried bringing in a lot of players to help win albeit most being mistakes.

They did try, but like you said, they brought in the wrong talent.

And when a player gets hurt "Kenyon Martin, Brandon Roy, Michael Redd" they need to put in a role, so that team can amnesty/cut that player (but the player still gets paid his money, but the cap is not affected so harshly).

So a team can move on, and be able to compete. Thats what they need to fix, anyone now a sports analyst or an Nba player, past the word lol

Hellcrooner
11-02-2011, 10:58 PM
they want slavery.

btw i read something interesting bout this particular regard this morning.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7177921/the-beginning-end-ncaa


i hope if owners sneak that **** in the cba some lawyer and player has the balls to take them into justice.

DoMeFavors
11-02-2011, 10:58 PM
And of course they used Lbj as the example... wtf haters.
WHY NOT Melo, he fits their description perfectly.

I'll tell you why, because Melo never once actually said trade me or lose me. Melo stated that he was not interested in signing an extension in Denver until he saw what his options were on the open market. Denver knew they were going to lose him and they were complimented very well with Chandler, Gallo, Mozzy, and Felton.
LeBron knew exactly what he was going to do then exploited the league the system and the media to grandstand nothing more than a slap in the face to the Cav's. Why give the Cav's any hope at all KNOWING you are not only leaving, but leaving for what amounts to a late first round draft pick.
LeBron was an idiot for what he did and will always be hated for it. Just get used to it...[/QUOTE]

No Cleveland knew there was a chance LeBron could leave and refused to trade for Amare * if that rumor is true* and once Cavs were eliminated by Celtics they made no moves during the first days of free agency to get LeBron any help. Thats their fault.

Hellcrooner
11-02-2011, 11:00 PM
I don't think that speaks for all the owners maybe just Dan Gilbert.

As a fan of a small market team. I just want a chance to offer something that a large market team may not be able to because of cap space. I just want my GM to have some kind of leverage when signing FA. No New Orleans may not have New York's allure(in others opinion), but we have double/triple the salary to offer.

you mean like being able to offer 1 more year of contract and a 10-20% more money on the total contract + a higer % of increase each year?

ALL THAT was ALREDY in the PAST cba-

barreleffact
11-02-2011, 11:02 PM
you mean like being able to offer 1 more year of contract and a 10-20% more money on the total contract + a higer % of increase each year?

All that was alredy in the past cba-

+1

naps
11-02-2011, 11:02 PM
Yea, how do you expect your star to stay when you don't bring in right people to surround him? Those owners just want their superstars to stay so they can keep making profits and not care about the championships. Well, guess what, superstars care about their own legacy and most owners don't. They want to win. And owners want to make money through their superstars. There shouldn't be any franchise tag. You basically take all the enthusiasm out of your franchise player by giving him crappy teams years after years. We could miss out on some great careers if that BS was implemented. KG is a prime example of why this shouldn't be a rule.

thenetslegend
11-02-2011, 11:05 PM
? Agree with what?

Are you in favor of a career franchise tag?

Are you in favor of a very talented player being stock with a bad organization for 5- 10yrs?

Are you in favor of a player not having a say so, on where he is traded too? And that new owner says, you can't leave my team ( I own you)?



What would have the player do?

something needs to happen, small market teams just cant win

Dade County
11-02-2011, 11:16 PM
And of course they used Lbj as the example... wtf haters.
WHY NOT Melo, he fits their description perfectly.

I'll tell you why, because Melo never once actually said trade me or lose me. Melo stated that he was not interested in signing an extension in Denver until he saw what his options were on the open market. Denver knew they were going to lose him and they were complimented very well with Chandler, Gallo, Mozzy, and Felton.
LeBron knew exactly what he was going to do then exploited the league the system and the media to grandstand nothing more than a slap in the face to the Cav's. Why give the Cav's any hope at all KNOWING you are not only leaving, but leaving for what amounts to a late first round draft pick.
LeBron was an idiot for what he did and will always be hated for it. Just get used to it...[/QUOTE]


How did Lbj exploit the league? Do you mean he was a free agent and had the right to sign anywhere he wanted?

I really don't care what he did to the media.

And for the Cleveland fans, once again he was a free agent, that means he can sign anywhere he wants; he is no longer tied to that organization. But yes he could have did things differently.

And the HEAT tried to give them Michael Beasley, but the owner wanted to be a dick. The Cavs could have used Beasley last year, and in the future...smh

And if you think Melo did not tell Denver, that he is not resigning with them behind close doors......... you are on your own. Melo said all the right words publicly.

flatbush knicks
11-02-2011, 11:21 PM
I swear i think some of these people are communist if you take away free agency that'll be modern day slavery what you people forget is these players are people and are grown men they dont need anybodies permission to play for any team they want

Arch Stanton
11-02-2011, 11:22 PM
I'll tell you why, because Melo never once actually said trade me or lose me. Melo stated that he was not interested in signing an extension in Denver until he saw what his options were on the open market. Denver knew they were going to lose him and they were complimented very well with Chandler, Gallo, Mozzy, and Felton.
LeBron knew exactly what he was going to do then exploited the league the system and the media to grandstand nothing more than a slap in the face to the Cav's. Why give the Cav's any hope at all KNOWING you are not only leaving, but leaving for what amounts to a late first round draft pick.
LeBron was an idiot for what he did and will always be hated for it. Just get used to it...


How did Lbj exploit the league? Do you mean he was a free agent and had the right to sign anywhere he wanted?

I really don't care what he did to the media.

And for the Cleveland fans, once again he was a free agent, that means he can sign anywhere he wants; he is no longer tied to that organization. But yes he could have did things differently.

And the HEAT tried to give them Michael Beasley, but the owner wanted to be a dick. The Cavs could have used Beasley last year, and in the future...smh

And if you think Melo did not tell Denver, that he is not resigning with them behind close doors......... you are on your own. Melo said all the right words publicly.[/QUOTE]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Michael Beasley = Delonte West 2.0 - Steal of a lifetime! Great guy for a young team.

MJ-BULLS
11-02-2011, 11:26 PM
the players already control the nba. but in the same time, those teams that have a star player and are a small market team, have to do what it takes to surround their star player with talent. If i was in a team that sucked, i would bolt to a winning team also. its about winning.

flatbush knicks
11-02-2011, 11:26 PM
and pease stop with all this big market small market crap my knicks sucked for how long ther is only a couple of big markets that actually have been doing good for a while now i mean dallas and the lakers i mean seriously how many da!n big markets are they hell torontos a big market and they suck PLEASE stop making excuses for your teams sucking if a big market steals your players its probaly because your front office sucks i mean how many players left the spurs and went to a big market

thenetslegend
11-02-2011, 11:27 PM
I swear i think some of these people are communist if you take away free agency that'll be modern day slavery what you people forget is these players are people and are grown men they dont need anybodies permission to play for any team they want

nobody wants to play for memphis, indiana, minnesota, cleveland, etc, so something needs to be done

Arch Stanton
11-02-2011, 11:31 PM
nobody wants to play for memphis, indiana, minnesota, cleveland, etc, so something needs to be done

You mean the concentration camps where all the NBA players are forced to play. Send in the troops or Captain America and he can bring the slaves (I mean NBA players) back into prosperity also known as Miami, NYC, or LA.

flatbush knicks
11-02-2011, 11:38 PM
lol

thenetslegend
11-02-2011, 11:40 PM
You mean the concentration camps where all the NBA players are forced to play. Send in the troops or Captain America and he can bring the slaves (I mean NBA players) back into prosperity also known as Miami, NYC, or LA.

yes thats what i meant

barreleffact
11-02-2011, 11:44 PM
nobody wants to play for memphis, indiana, minnesota, cleveland, etc, so something needs to be done

relocation is something...

Hellcrooner
11-02-2011, 11:48 PM
nobody wants to play for memphis, indiana, minnesota, cleveland, etc, so something needs to be done

thats why conly, gay and randolph signed back??

ink
11-02-2011, 11:50 PM
Yea, how do you expect your star to stay when you don't bring in right people to surround him? Those owners just want their superstars to stay so they can keep making profits and not care about the championships. Well, guess what, superstars care about their own legacy and most owners don't. They want to win. And owners want to make money through their superstars. There shouldn't be any franchise tag. You basically take all the enthusiasm out of your franchise player by giving him crappy teams years after years. We could miss out on some great careers if that BS was implemented. KG is a prime example of why this shouldn't be a rule.

Some real generalizations in there, especially the bolded ones. I doubt there are many owners in the league who don't want to win, and the ones that fail still try damn hard. I am no defender of the Cavs, I didn't like their team any more than anyone else, but you could see that moves were being made to try to surround Lebron with talent. I would bet a ton of money that Lebron was also consulted on virtually every move. The final point is that this whole thing is inverted. They're not supposed to be pampering and sucking up to their "superstars". The point has been made lots of times that there are all kinds of greats who didn't win a championship. They are no less great except in this petty way of thinking where someone is garbage unless they "have a ring". If KG had retired in Minnesota I would not see anything wrong with that. Stockton retired in Utah, Miller retired in Indiana, Nash will hopefully retire in Phoenix, and they are among the all time greats. What's more, they are among the classiest players to ever play the game. Something that CAN'T be said for the 2010 FA class. They are the least classy of all time.

flatbush knicks
11-02-2011, 11:50 PM
thats why conly, gay and randolph signed back??

nobody else wanted them except for gay

Mudvayne91
11-02-2011, 11:51 PM
and pease stop with all this big market small market crap my knicks sucked for how long ther is only a couple of big markets that actually have been doing good for a while now i mean dallas and the lakers i mean seriously how many da!n big markets are they hell torontos a big market and they suck PLEASE stop making excuses for your teams sucking if a big market steals your players its probaly because your front office sucks i mean how many players left the spurs and went to a big market

Playing in a place like NY, you have a big advantage over say a Denver or Cleveland. The reason the Knicks have sucked so long was the continuous horrible FO decisions. Drafting, bad free agents, coaching etc.

And Denver was a better team than NY, so I'm not sure what you're getting at.

flatbush knicks
11-02-2011, 11:56 PM
whats this magical advantage they all offer the same money carmelo actually didnt want to leave denver those duma**es just didnt put talent around him he told them o get some talent and they signed AL F**KEN HARRINGTON !!!! what would you do and dont get me started on cleveland

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 12:01 AM
Some real generalizations in there, especially the bolded ones. I doubt there are many owners in the league who don't want to win, and the ones that fail still try damn hard. I am no defender of the Cavs, I didn't like their team any more than anyone else, but you could see that moves were being made to try to surround Lebron with talent. I would bet a ton of money that Lebron was also consulted on virtually every move. The final point is that this whole thing is inverted. They're not supposed to be pampering and sucking up to their "superstars". The point has been made lots of times that there are all kinds of greats who didn't win a championship. They are no less great except in this petty way of thinking where someone is garbage unless they "have a ring". If KG had retired in Minnesota I would not see anything wrong with that. Stockton retired in Utah, Miller retired in Indiana, Nash will hopefully retire in Phoenix, and they are among the all time greats. What's more, they are among the classiest players to ever play the game. Something that CAN'T be said for the 2010 FA class. They are the least classy of all time.

Since when is exercising your right to free agency classless? They had every right to leave. They were not obligated to inform anyone. Melo only refused to sign an extension. big deal. Lebron had every right to go. Why does either acct make them classless? Also, why does retiring with one team make you classy? It is their careers and they deserve to make whatever they want with them.

thenetslegend
11-03-2011, 12:02 AM
thats why conly, gay and randolph signed back??

well thats the owners fought for overpaying non stars

Dade County
11-03-2011, 12:07 AM
. What's more, they are among the classiest players to ever play the game. Something that CAN'T be said for the 2010 FA class. They are the least classy of all time.

Their classless because they were all free agents? :shrug:

Bosh is classless because he wanted to play for a new team? :shrug:

Lbj contract was up, but he should have resign with the Cav's (Crazy *** owner man... :shrug:

Wade should have left Miami, to sign with the Minnesota Timberwolves :shrug:

Pat should have not signed all those free agents, and told them to go some where else :shrug:

I'm just f'in around with you... You are talking about the teaming up thing:D

ink
11-03-2011, 12:10 AM
Since when is exercising your right to free agency classless?

Fairly simple answer to that strawman question: when your behaviour is classless while you're a free agent.

Dade County
11-03-2011, 12:10 AM
Since when is exercising your right to free agency classless? They had every right to leave. They were not obligated to inform anyone. Melo only refused to sign an extension. big deal. Lebron had every right to go. Why does either acct make them classless? Also, why does retiring with one team make you classy? It is their careers and they deserve to make whatever they want with them.

THANK YOU :clap:

I thought I was going crazy.

ink
11-03-2011, 12:12 AM
Their classless because they were all free agents? :shrug:

Their classlessness had nothing to do with free agency. It had to do with them being classless. Wade, not so bad, but the others ...

Yeah, I'll take the guys who were either classy free agents or classy in their commitment to their team. And yes, it matters in a team sport.

ink
11-03-2011, 12:12 AM
THANK YOU :clap:

I thought I was going crazy.

I wouldn't say crazy, but star obsessed, yes. ;)

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 12:17 AM
Their classlessness had nothing to do with free agency. It had to do with them being classless. Wade, not so bad, but the others ...

Yeah, I'll take the guys who were either classy free agents or classy in their commitment to their team. And yes, it matters in a team sport.

Why remain at all loyal to a team that will throw you away as soon as you become unserviceable? Teams can openly look to trade a player but the player is classless for wanting to do what he feels is best for him? They did nothing classless IMO except the decision which did give a few million to charity. And this is from an avid Lebron hater btw.

Hellcrooner
11-03-2011, 12:20 AM
Lebron show in tv for he decision was clasless.

Wade? nope not at all in fact he stayed in his team.

Bosh? well neutral, ( he shoudl have made clear to BC that he was out so he coudl try a trade and get something back).

Melo? in fact he INDEED DID THE CORRECT THING say, I AM NOT RESIGNIGN, i want ONE OF THESE FEW TEAMS ( that can sign me for free once season is over) so you can try and can get something back .

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 12:22 AM
Most speculated Bosh was gone. I don't consider him classless even if he did not tell them. No one would rent him for a year, and I doubt may of his desireable teams had the assets to get him.

Hellcrooner
11-03-2011, 12:24 AM
Most speculated Bosh was gone. I don't consider him classless even if he did not tell them. No one would rent him for a year, and I doubt may of his desireable teams had the assets to get him.

there were rumours bout bynum for bosh swap, and raptors didnt accept.

btw both raps and cavs ACCEPtED sign and trades with Miami

so their owners should shut their traps, and not be hypocrital now, if they were so angered and mad about the system they woudl have let them walk for free,

ink
11-03-2011, 12:24 AM
Why remain at all loyal to a team that will throw you away as soon as you become unserviceable? Teams can openly look to trade a player but the player is classless for wanting to do what he feels is best for him? They did nothing classless IMO except the decision which did give a few million to charity. And this is from an avid Lebron hater btw.

You're continuing with the misunderstanding that I have a problem with free agency. I don't. But I do have a problem with the way the 2010 group of FAs conducted themselves. More to the point, I want to see a CBA that allows the league to manage its players and not the other way around. A lot of the failed teams that were abandoned by "superstars" were also built/ruined by "superstar" input. That is always forgotten in these discussions. Players should play and management should manage. Allow those that actually HAVE the requisite skill set to manage do the managing.

btw, Peter Holt, the owner of the Spurs, is one of the more reasonable owners leading the fight to improve the CBA. He and his management are showing tons of loyalty to the players that have showed them loyalty, even while being mocked by fans for hanging on to their aging stars for too long. Loyalty works both ways.

BigCityofDreams
11-03-2011, 12:24 AM
Some real generalizations in there, especially the bolded ones. I doubt there are many owners in the league who don't want to win, and the ones that fail still try damn hard. I am no defender of the Cavs, I didn't like their team any more than anyone else, but you could see that moves were being made to try to surround Lebron with talent. I would bet a ton of money that Lebron was also consulted on virtually every move. The final point is that this whole thing is inverted. They're not supposed to be pampering and sucking up to their "superstars". The point has been made lots of times that there are all kinds of greats who didn't win a championship. They are no less great except in this petty way of thinking where someone is garbage unless they "have a ring". If KG had retired in Minnesota I would not see anything wrong with that. Stockton retired in Utah, Miller retired in Indiana, Nash will hopefully retire in Phoenix, and they are among the all time greats. What's more, they are among the classiest players to ever play the game. Something that CAN'T be said for the 2010 FA class. They are the least classy of all time.

But that's the way it's always been. Barkley no longer wanted to be in Philly so he forced a trade to PHX. Kareem no longer wanted to be a Buck so he was moved to LA. Magic didn't like how the offense was being run and lead the charge to get Westhead fired. The younger generation learned from the past.

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 12:29 AM
there were rumours bout bynum for bosh swap, and raptors didnt accept.

btw both raps and cavs ACCEPtED sign and trades with Miami

so their owners should shut their traps, and not be hypocrital now, if they were so angered and mad about the system they woudl have let them walk for free,

True on both accounts.


You're continuing with the misunderstanding that I have a problem with free agency. I don't. But I do have a problem with the way the 2010 group of FAs conducted themselves. More to the point, I want to see a CBA that allows the league to manage its players and not the other way around. A lot of the failed teams that were abandoned by "superstars" were also built/ruined by "superstar" input. That is always forgotten in these discussions. Players should play and management should manage. Allow those that actually HAVE the requisite skill set to manage do the managing.

btw, Peter Holt, the owner of the Spurs, is one of the more reasonable owners leading the fight to improve the CBA. He and his management are showing tons of loyalty to the players that have showed them loyalty, even while being mocked by fans for hanging on to their aging stars for too long. Loyalty works both ways.
The management can manage. No one makes them seek player input as far as I am aware, but if they mess up the players are gone. What more could they do?

Dade County
11-03-2011, 12:33 AM
Lebron show in tv for he decision was clasless.

Wade? nope not at all in fact he stayed in his team.

Bosh? well neutral, ( he shoudl have made clear to BC that he was out so he coudl try a trade and get something back).

Melo? in fact he INDEED DID THE CORRECT THING say, I AM NOT RESIGNIGN, i want ONE OF THESE FEW TEAMS ( that can sign me for free once season is over) so you can try and can get something back .

Lets say Bosh told him that... Every team that the BC would have tried to trade him to, Bosh would have said no (Making Bosh a Villain) Raptor fans would have been going crazy.

If Bosh says the only team I would play for is Miami, BC would have looked at him like... WTF... Why only Miami.

Pat would have offered Beasley & picks ( Raptors would have wanted more ) Raptor fans again going crazy.

ink
11-03-2011, 12:35 AM
Most speculated Bosh was gone. I don't consider him classless even if he did not tell them. No one would rent him for a year, and I doubt may of his desireable teams had the assets to get him.

This opens a whole other subject but believe me, we watched Bosh operate and he did two key things that were quite classless:

- immediately after the ASG he went down with an injury that he insisted he couldn't come back from even though doctors had cleared him to play. Normally athletes have to be restrained from getting back into action; he couldn't even be convinced even though his team was in a playoff race. The team missed the playoffs by a game. Bosh essentially threw the season.
- he promised his GM that he would keep them informed about his decisions and strung them along as if he might re-sign right until the end. He broke his word and the GM was left with a completely different scenario to deal with even though Bosh had promised he would communicate so that a fair S&T could be facilitated. He basically shafted the GM and the fanbase by breaking his word.

Remember, this was not sour grapes. The consensus among many Raptors fans was that we did not want management to re-sign him to a max contract. Many felt that he didn't justify that kind of salary and it would be an albatross to the franchise for the length of the deal. Great 3rd option, not a max contract player and we knew it after having seen him play every game for years.

If Bosh knew he was leaving he should have said so openly and stuck to his word. It appears very clear now that the three amigos knew as far back as 2008 that they were going to buddy up together somewhere in 2010. If this wasn't collusion I don't know what is, and it angered owners and fans alike.

The point is that NBA history is filled with great players who didn't win rings but handled it with integrity. The 2010 class didn't. It's that simple.

ink
11-03-2011, 12:43 AM
But that's the way it's always been. Barkley no longer wanted to be in Philly so he forced a trade to PHX. Kareem no longer wanted to be a Buck so he was moved to LA. Magic didn't like how the offense was being run and lead the charge to get Westhead fired. The younger generation learned from the past.

I see this comment get made often to try to prove how it has always been like this. It hasn't. These were exceptions and they were also very different.

Sure Barkley forced his trade, but it was an exception at the time. Kareem had a very good religious reason for wanting out of Milwaukee, he was one of the first generation of Muslim African Americans and you and I can imagine that was not a good situation for him. That's an exception based on humane grounds. Magic not wanting a coach is different than exploiting free agency. The younger generation did not learn from them. They learned from Shaq when he left the Magic for the Lakers. They learned from Carter and TMac who demanded out. They learned from players that were suddenly given more clout than ever before by the new CBAs of the late 90s and 2000s. The post-MJ CBA period has seen a major shift away from a team sport, and it has seen a major shift toward a player controlled league. Players need to stick to playing because they suck at management and team building.

Now this "superteam" ******** is commonplace. A huge change happened leading up to 2010 and after. The league needs free agency, sure, but not this kind of free agency. Let management build teams, not the superstars. Considering the astonishing level of talent, they really aren't even very good.

Bosh even picked the wrong team ... which supports the idea that players should play and let management manage. If he had chosen the Bulls the fit would have been near perfect and Chicago could very well be the reigning NBA champions. You don't need the world's BEST players to win a ring, you need the players that fit best together. Bosh beside Noah would have solved all of Bosh's problems as a big, and he would have provided a brilliant second to Rose. That would have been an outstanding team to watch and I said so at the time.

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 12:47 AM
^eh...the only response I can make is there is no loyalty in business, and there shouldn't be. There are countless examples of players getting screwed over to make salaries match.

Bosh should have been like Melo and said nothing either way. Thus, I do see your point about Bosh. Perhaps I have overlooks facts about Lebron as well but to Lebron's credit he was forever in the media. I think the media difference skews public perception between now and past players.

I definitely agree they knew for years they would come together.

Mudvayne91
11-03-2011, 12:48 AM
whats this magical advantage they all offer the same money carmelo actually didnt want to leave denver those duma**es just didnt put talent around him he told them o get some talent and they signed AL F**KEN HARRINGTON !!!! what would you do and dont get me started on cleveland

They won 50+ games 4 straight years in a far better Western Conference. They had talent on their team. 2 years removed from the WCF and had the same roster minus Dahntay Jones. Not sure what you're getting at. He admitted after the trade he wanted to go home. He had no intentions to sign with Denver and let them know the year prior he was traded.

JayHunter
11-03-2011, 01:00 AM
I don't know how that will happen

Dade County
11-03-2011, 01:09 AM
I

Bosh even picked the wrong team ... which supports the idea that players should play and let management manage. If he had chosen the Bulls the fit would have been near perfect and Chicago could very well be the reigning NBA champions. You don't need the world's BEST players to win a ring, you need the players that fit best together. Bosh beside Noah would have solved all of Bosh's problems as a big, and he would have provided a brilliant second to Rose. That would have been an outstanding team to watch and I said so at the time.

But you can say this about any contending team.

IF LBJ played for L.A
If bosh played for OKC
If D Wade played for Dallas ( Noooooooo!!! ) lol

It all make sense, because they are very talented players.

Rose should play for Dallas ... Sounds broken right?

But I do enjoy reading your post, you make sense more times then none.

da ThRONe
11-03-2011, 03:26 AM
you mean like being able to offer 1 more year of contract and a 10-20% more money on the total contract + a higer % of increase each year?

ALL THAT was ALREDY in the PAST cba-

No I mean being able to offer 50-200% more money. And with the sign and trades players got the extra year and money and markets.

da ThRONe
11-03-2011, 03:29 AM
I would just like to take a min. to laugh at the idea that not having a cap would prevent superteams.

Dude never heard of the Yankees? And that's in a sport where one individual person impact pales in comparison to basketball. Imagine if Dolan, Arison, and Buss didn't have a limit.

abe_froman
11-03-2011, 03:44 AM
he's partly right,partly wrong.cuz even if its put into effect and they still dont draft or attract any big names.they'll be whining about the system being rigged.rules needing to change.then if/when they get one.the same owners,the same fanbases will be whining to change it back,do away with any cap,let us form superteams around our star

Chronz
11-03-2011, 04:21 AM
I see this comment get made often to try to prove how it has always been like this. It hasn't. These were exceptions and they were also very different.
Based on what though? The only difference I see is the amount of money involved, it could be more prevalent but the league is also alot bigger than the 10 team league it used to be.


They learned from Shaq when he left the Magic for the Lakers.
This makes no sense, Shaq left as a Free Agent, why would they learn from Shaq if all he did was something that has been going on long before him? Wouldnt they have learned from the first free agent who ever signed a deal? Better yet wouldnt they have learned from someone who didnt even wait until his contract was over to force a trade, ala Barkley they hypocrite or even Dream when he was demanding to be traded.


They learned from Carter and TMac who demanded out.
But Tmac/Vince learned from Magic, Dream and Chuck and they learned from Julius who learned from Wilt and so on and so forth.


They learned from players that were suddenly given more clout than ever before by the new CBAs of the late 90s and 2000s. The post-MJ CBA period has seen a major shift away from a team sport, and it has seen a major shift toward a player controlled league. Players need to stick to playing because they suck at management and team building.

So long as its their legacies on the line they will and should have a say in team building and I dont see how they are any different than the surplus of incompetent owners/GM's we have, you know the ones who got the league in this mess in the first place. Players only agree to what GM's think they are worth.

Im really trying to understand your reasoning but could you provide any proof to substantiate your claims? The stars have always had the power by my thought process, they just had different leverage. Like the threat of jumping leagues in place of threatening to opt-out.


Now this "superteam" ******** is commonplace. A huge change happened leading up to 2010 and after. The league needs free agency, sure, but not this kind of free agency. Let management build teams, not the superstars. Considering the astonishing level of talent, they really aren't even very good.

What kind of free agency? The kind where players dont get freedom to choose where to play? How do they let management decide what team they should ditch them for?



Bosh even picked the wrong team ... which supports the idea that players should play and let management manage.
Umm Toronto was Chris Bosh's management, was Toronto going to advise him to sign somewhere with only his needs in mind? Im not following your logic here, Im pretty sure if it were up to Toronto, Bosh would still be there.


If he had chosen the Bulls the fit would have been near perfect and Chicago could very well be the reigning NBA champions. You don't need the world's BEST players to win a ring, you need the players that fit best together. Bosh beside Noah would have solved all of Bosh's problems as a big, and he would have provided a brilliant second to Rose. That would have been an outstanding team to watch and I said so at the time.

Most likely but you are in no position to suggest whats the right move for him when you dont know what his priorities are. If it was simply winning and not worrying about HOW he won or where he lived and whatnot then Chicago seems like the better option but only in Year1, it is yet to be seen what Miami does from here on out. Still free agency marks a chance for a player to weigh all his wants and needs and make the decision based on everything he believes at the time.

Chronz
11-03-2011, 04:32 AM
I definitely agree they knew for years they would come together.

If this were true then why did Miami try so hard to land Odom the year prior? Landing Odom would have prevented them from having to CAP to sign one of them.

Chronz
11-03-2011, 04:42 AM
If Bosh knew he was leaving he should have said so openly and stuck to his word. It appears very clear now that the three amigos knew as far back as 2008 that they were going to buddy up together somewhere in 2010. If this wasn't collusion I don't know what is, and it angered owners and fans alike.

Same question to you, how could they have known yet Riley and Wade were still trying to sign Odom the year prior. Having Odom would have made it impossible to get all 3.

SteBO
11-03-2011, 08:40 AM
I understand you hate how the 2010 fa class handled it ink. I wasn't really a fan either, but to say bosh made the wrong choice is wrong. Based on what? You can play hypothetical world all day in regards to bosh in Chicago, but he's played one year in Miami and played well. Wanting to win in a good situation through his eyes isn't wrong, whether you think it is or not.

Players making their own move for their own careers is something that's been going on for years. Now owners want to take that away. Sorry, I find that sickening.

While the execution could've been better, there is nothing wrong with what lebron, bosh, melo, and amare did. CP3 and Dwight will most likely do similar things since their current situations aren't really good. I just can't fault them, especially since past players have done the same.

3RDASYSTEM
11-03-2011, 09:05 AM
HAWKEYE15 wat did the owners actual 'earn' or do they think they DESERVE success and a franchise?rather they run it into the ground or strike profit

it all go hand in hand in the end,they need each other

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 09:13 AM
If this were true then why did Miami try so hard to land Odom the year prior? Landing Odom would have prevented them from having to CAP to sign one of them.

It could have been a front or diversionary tactic. The players knew they wanted to play together IMO. I can't prove it, but it can't really be disproved either.

thunderforce
11-03-2011, 09:15 AM
I don't they have to make it impossible for super star players to leave they just have to make sure that the loosing team is fairly compensated with like 5 first round picks .

daleja424
11-03-2011, 09:16 AM
It could have been a front or diversionary tactic. The players knew they wanted to play together IMO. I can't prove it, but it can't really be disproved either.

You are flat out wrong. The HEAT through money at mutliple players in the past several years that would have prevented them from signing all three guys. Those players ended up going eslewhere and so it set Miami up to bring in all three... but this was not preplanned. Miami went HARD after Mo Williams, Charlie Bell, Lamar Odom, and others in recent years... all of which would have hindered them last summer.

daleja424
11-03-2011, 09:19 AM
I'm not saying that they didn't all joke about how fun it would be to play together in the past... I'm sure they did. But that was not a plan from the HEATs persepctive...and it was not even considered a realistic option by most so called experts. Lebron, Wade, and Bosh were all VERY close to signing other places in fact. Wade will tell you there were days he though he was going to become a Bull...and Lebron felt like he would be a Cav for most of the offseason.

Sinestro
11-03-2011, 09:21 AM
I'm not saying that they didn't all joke about how fun it would be to play together in the past... I'm sure they did. But that was not a plan from the HEATs persepctive...and it was not even considered a realistic option by most so called experts. Lebron, Wade, and Bosh were all VERY close to signing other places in fact. Wade will tell you there were days he though he was going to become a Bull...and Lebron felt like he would be a Cav for most of the offseason.

I think they joked about it at it first and as time passed and Bosh wasn't winning in Toronto, Wade in Miami and LeBron in Cleveland they realized "why not?"

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 09:56 AM
^+1. regardless of who knew, I think the players knew they wanted to play together. I never though for a second Lebron would stay a Cav btw.

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 10:00 AM
You are flat out wrong. The HEAT through money at mutliple players in the past several years that would have prevented them from signing all three guys. Those players ended up going eslewhere and so it set Miami up to bring in all three... but this was not preplanned. Miami went HARD after Mo Williams, Charlie Bell, Lamar Odom, and others in recent years... all of which would have hindered them last summer.

I remember Miami trying to shed as much space as possible for a few years. They may have tried to sign players b, but if you believe every rumor Bynum was on the table to get Melo. Rumors and everything that does not happen is more or less speculation. How many times have we heard a player wants to play in NY or that a team is seeking player X only for it to not happen or not have been the case? I could be completely wrong, but what ACTUALLY happened just seems too perfect to ignore the likelihood that it was planned.

BigCityofDreams
11-03-2011, 10:11 AM
I see this comment get made often to try to prove how it has always been like this. It hasn't. These were exceptions and they were also very different.

Sure Barkley forced his trade, but it was an exception at the time. Kareem had a very good religious reason for wanting out of Milwaukee, he was one of the first generation of Muslim African Americans and you and I can imagine that was not a good situation for him. That's an exception based on humane grounds. Magic not wanting a coach is different than exploiting free agency. The younger generation did not learn from them. They learned from Shaq when he left the Magic for the Lakers. They learned from Carter and TMac who demanded out. They learned from players that were suddenly given more clout than ever before by the new CBAs of the late 90s and 2000s. The post-MJ CBA period has seen a major shift away from a team sport, and it has seen a major shift toward a player controlled league. Players need to stick to playing because they suck at management and team building.

Now this "superteam" ******** is commonplace. A huge change happened leading up to 2010 and after. The league needs free agency, sure, but not this kind of free agency. Let management build teams, not the superstars. Considering the astonishing level of talent, they really aren't even very good.

Bosh even picked the wrong team ... which supports the idea that players should play and let management manage. If he had chosen the Bulls the fit would have been near perfect and Chicago could very well be the reigning NBA champions. You don't need the world's BEST players to win a ring, you need the players that fit best together. Bosh beside Noah would have solved all of Bosh's problems as a big, and he would have provided a brilliant second to Rose. That would have been an outstanding team to watch and I said so at the time.

They might have been exceptions but they still demonstrate how players have always had power in the league. Is it bigger now than it was then sure but they still exercised their right to flex their muscle.

Management has been in control of building teams and and some of them have made bad decisions. You made a point that players shouldn't be Gms because more often than not they don't have a good grasp on building teams but the big 3 got together because the cast they were surrounded with was poor. Lebron was the best or second best player in the league anyone would die to play with him and the best the franchise could do was a bunch of role players and stars past their prime.

Chronz
11-03-2011, 03:31 PM
It could have been a front or diversionary tactic. The players knew they wanted to play together IMO. I can't prove it, but it can't really be disproved either.
So Lamar Odom was in on it too now? I cant disprove it but that sounds completely bogus to me.

Chronz
11-03-2011, 03:32 PM
I don't they have to make it impossible for super star players to leave they just have to make sure that the loosing team is fairly compensated with like 5 first round picks .

Those rules were done away with because it ended up hurting some teams, like when the Jazz signed Gail Goodrich for 2 or 3 draft picks that ended up being Magic Johnson and Moses Malone IIRC.

da ThRONe
11-03-2011, 03:46 PM
I understand you hate how the 2010 fa class handled it ink. I wasn't really a fan either, but to say bosh made the wrong choice is wrong. Based on what? You can play hypothetical world all day in regards to bosh in Chicago, but he's played one year in Miami and played well. Wanting to win in a good situation through his eyes isn't wrong, whether you think it is or not.

Players making their own move for their own careers is something that's been going on for years. Now owners want to take that away. Sorry, I find that sickening.

While the execution could've been better, there is nothing wrong with what lebron, bosh, melo, and amare did. CP3 and Dwight will most likely do similar things since their current situations aren't really good. I just can't fault them, especially since past players have done the same.

I tell you what the Hornets isn't in a terrible situation in regards to keeping Paul. We may still get a flex cap at the very least a super strict luxury tax. This is going to force teams to either let some star players go via some amnesty clause or tradethe for next to nothing. We have the roster/cap space to benefit from this. The only questionable contract we have is Okafor and even he's a tradeable asset.

ChiSoxJuan
11-03-2011, 03:51 PM
Given that the NBA is operating the Hornets right now & Paul makes a big difference in the value of that franchise, I don't see Stern inking this deal unless it includes solid compensation for teams that lose stars or restrictions on tax paying teams wanting to sign them. The Hornets need to come away with significant leverage on Paul to stay. It can't be a situation where S&T is the only means they have to get something in return.

Wade>You
11-03-2011, 03:52 PM
LMAO at "players holding owners hostage." Anyone else get a laugh at how the owners play themselves off as victims and are trying to desensitize people to the idea that slavery is ok?

ChiSoxJuan
11-03-2011, 03:57 PM
The NBA as a whole is a more profitable business when teams are able to retain their stars. That is not slavery. The NBA is a league which means the Lakers are just as responsible for the competitive balance in it as the Hornets. The system should prevent the Lakers from hoarding talent as much as it can help the Hornets retain or obtain it.

Case in point: As much as the league saw rising revenues as a result of both the resurgency of the Bulls & the Heat, imagine the revenues if one of the big 3 had signed with the Bulls. I have no doubt a Bulls lead team with Wade & Rose in their backcourt would have pulled better ratings & generated more revenue in the Finals than the 3-headed monster did.

Wade>You
11-03-2011, 03:59 PM
The NBA as a whole is a more profitable business when teams are able to retain their stars. That is not slavery. The NBA is a league which means the Lakers are just as responsible for the competitive balance in it as the Hornets. The system should prevent the Lakers from hoarding talent as much as it can help the Hornets retain or obtain it.So where plantations, that's why we had a civil war.


Given that the NBA is operating the Hornets right now & Paul makes a big difference in the value of that franchise, I don't see Stern inking this deal unless it includes solid compensation for teams that lose stars or restrictions on tax paying teams wanting to sign them. The Hornets need to come away with significant leverage on Paul to stay. It can't be a situation where S&T is the only means they have to get something in return.I've never see anyone argue that a conflict of interest is a good thing. The Hornets shouldn't have a vote in this year's CBA for obvious reasons.

ink
11-03-2011, 03:59 PM
Report them to the anti-slavery tribunal in your neighbourhood. We need to end the persecution and repression of spoiled millionaires. It has gotten out of hand and has to be stopped.

ChiSoxJuan
11-03-2011, 04:02 PM
Rubbish. Without a system in place to foster competitive balance, the league would have fewer teams which means less jobs for players. There is no way the NBA can support 30 teams without a system in place to give small market & mid market teams a chance to attract & develop stars.

ink
11-03-2011, 04:02 PM
So where plantations, that's why we had a civil war.

I've never see anyone argue that conflict of interest is a good thing. The Hornets shouldn't have a vote in this year's CBA for obvious reasons.

I always love seeing people comparing conflicts that left thousands dead to a trivial pro sports negotiation between the rich and super rich.

But keep making the parallel. I'm sure someone will agree that this is somehow related to the Civil War.

Wade>You
11-03-2011, 04:03 PM
Report them to the anti-slavery tribunal in your neighbourhood. We need to end the persecution and repression of spoiled millionaires. It has gotten out of hand and has to be stopped.A sympathizer of billionaires crying about millionaires. I can't tell if you're serious or not. Money shouldn't be an issue; both sides make money. It's about what's right and just. Obviously, you're not gonna win that side of the argument.

ink
11-03-2011, 04:03 PM
Rubbish. Without a system in place to foster competitive balance, the league would have fewer teams which means less jobs for players. There is no way the NBA can support 30 teams without a system in place to give small market & mid market teams a chance to attract & develop stars.

Common sense and clear. Well put.

ink
11-03-2011, 04:05 PM
A sympathizer of billionaires crying about millionaires. I can't tell if you're serious or not. Money shouldn't be an issue; both sides make money. It's about what's right and just. Obviously, you're not gonna win that side of the argument.

If it's about anything other than money it should be about improving the game, not ridiculous statements about slavery.

The comparison would be like me saying you are like Beyonce because you have two arms and two legs.

Rego247
11-03-2011, 04:07 PM
If it's about anything other than money it should be about improving the game, not ridiculous statements about slavery.

The comparison would be like me saying you are like Beyonce because you have two arms and two legs.

Agreed.

Hellcrooner
11-03-2011, 04:20 PM
If it's about anything other than money it should be about improving the game, not ridiculous statements about slavery.

The comparison would be like me saying you are like Beyonce because you have two arms and two legs.

yes, because the game is sooooo much better if you got 30 wacky teams instead of 8 good ones 10 middle ones and 10 bad ones.

ChiSoxJuan
11-03-2011, 04:22 PM
I blame Stern for not firing the "contraction" shot in July. There are at least 6 owners looking to sell their teams once this CBA gets done. There are 2 recent owners that bought their teams on the promise of this CBA. Then there are the Hornets for which the NBA can't find an owner. Stern should've said the league is preparing to buy out these teams at a nominal price above purchase & shut them down if there are not major changes to the CBA to improve competitive balance in the league. That not only will reduce the BRI next year, but also eliminate 135 player jobs. If the NBAPA is not prepared to make the changes neccessary, the only other option they have to saving these jobs is to put their own skin in the game. The league is prepared to make the NBAPA part owners in these 9 teams in exchange for a substantial $ investment to keep them afloat.

Had he done that, I think this would've ended in Aug.

da ThRONe
11-03-2011, 04:35 PM
I blame Stern for not firing the "contraction" shot in July. There are at least 6 owners looking to sell their teams once this CBA gets done. There are 2 recent owners that bought their teams on the promise of this CBA. Then there are the Hornets for which the NBA can't find an owner. Stern should've said the league is preparing to buy out these teams at a nominal price above purchase & shut them down if there are not major changes to the CBA to improve competitive balance in the league. That not only will reduce the BRI next year, but also eliminate 135 player jobs. If the NBAPA is not prepared to make the changes neccessary, the only other option they have to saving these jobs is to put their own skin in the game. The league is prepared to make the NBAPA part owners in these 9 teams in exchange for a substantial $ investment to keep them afloat.

Had he done that, I think this would've ended in Aug.

I agree with your principle, but the bolded line isn't true. The league has fielded several offers for the Hornets. I think the main concern is the CBA for the league as of now. Then finding a owner or ownership group committed to keeping the franchise in New Orleans.

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 04:50 PM
So Lamar Odom was in on it too now? I cant disprove it but that sounds completely bogus to me.

Never said that. They just might not have offered him enough money/a competitive enough offer. Maybe Odom just valued winning over what they did offer. I cannot say. I won't BS, I don't know an extensive amount about this nor do I care to research it (the Odom FA). However, I do feel, members of the FO were highly aware of the possibility of the 3 joining together.

Dade County
11-03-2011, 04:51 PM
The NBA as a whole is a more profitable business when teams are able to retain their stars. That is not slavery. The NBA is a league which means the Lakers are just as responsible for the competitive balance in it as the Hornets. The system should prevent the Lakers from hoarding talent as much as it can help the Hornets retain or obtain it.

Case in point: As much as the league saw rising revenues as a result of both the resurgency of the Bulls & the Heat, imagine the revenues if one of the big 3 had signed with the Bulls. I have no doubt a Bulls lead team with Wade & Rose in their backcourt would have pulled better ratings & generated more revenue in the Finals than the 3-headed monster did.

This is the real problem huh? Angry owners and fans, still but heart that Miami got all of them (Discounted). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZr2qOXQJ4w

If anyone of the trio would have went to NY, Chicago, etc.... Everybody would have been happy

You jealousy *** people.



Rubbish. Without a system in place to foster competitive balance, the league would have fewer teams which means less jobs for players. There is no way the NBA can support 30 teams without a system in place to give small market & mid market teams a chance to attract & develop stars.

Miami is a mid market, and they attract star players.

But anyway, can you suggest to us a system that can do what you say? So I can pass it along to the Owners & union.

AIMelo=KillaDUO
11-03-2011, 04:57 PM
Ric Bucher at the 4:25 - 5:00 mark
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=7182946&categoryid=2459788

"The small market owners really want a system that controls the players, that essentially insures them if they are fortunate to draft a star player.... That star player can't hold them hostage as for as where they want to go/play.

Every small market team wants... if their are lucky enough to draft that star player, that player can't determine when he's going to leave and where he's going to go".


HOW ARE THE OWNERS GOING TO DO THAT?

I didn't see/read anything in this current deal that is on the table, that will allow me to believe that the owners have succeeded in this goal.

............... ................... ................. .................

And of course they used Lbj as the example... wtf haters.
WHY NOT Melo, he fits their description perfectly.

Uhh... no, Melo gave Denver the oportunity to get something in return. I bet Cleveland wishes LeBron woulda done that. It's not being a hater @ all, Melo was proffesional about the whole thing and kept in contact with the FO with what was going on.

Dade County
11-03-2011, 04:58 PM
I blame Stern for not firing the "contraction" shot in July. There are at least 6 owners looking to sell their teams once this CBA gets done. There are 2 recent owners that bought their teams on the promise of this CBA. Then there are the Hornets for which the NBA can't find an owner. Stern should've said the league is preparing to buy out these teams at a nominal price above purchase & shut them down if there are not major changes to the CBA to improve competitive balance in the league. That not only will reduce the BRI next year, but also eliminate 135 player jobs. If the NBAPA is not prepared to make the changes neccessary, the only other option they have to saving these jobs is to put their own skin in the game. The league is prepared to make the NBAPA part owners in these 9 teams in exchange for a substantial $ investment to keep them afloat.

Had he done that, I think this would've ended in Aug.

I agree 100%

Dade County
11-03-2011, 05:02 PM
Uhh... no, Melo gave Denver the oportunity to get something in return. I bet Cleveland wishes LeBron woulda done that. It's not being a hater @ all, Melo was proffesional about the whole thing and kept in contact with the FO with what was going on.

I think you need to look at the video and read what I wrote again....

They are talking about Melo, but they don't call him by name (Lbj gives them more ratings)... Denver did not want to trade Melo to NY, but they had to because thats the only place he would resign. Owners don't like that ****.

Nj would not have gave them ****, if Melo wasn't going to resign with them, matter a fact, If it was up to the Owners, Melo couldn't have left.

Chronz
11-03-2011, 05:19 PM
Never said that. They just might not have offered him enough money/a competitive enough offer. Maybe Odom just valued winning over what they did offer. I cannot say. I won't BS, I don't know an extensive amount about this nor do I care to research it (the Odom FA). However, I do feel, members of the FO were highly aware of the possibility of the 3 joining together.
Your not seeing the glaring contradiction that comes with Odom even considering the possibility of going to Miami. The fact that he declined their offer doesnt change the fact that Miami did offer him the most lucrative contract they were allowed to. You must not remember the fuss people were making about the money Odom could save in taxes by signing in Miami to help offset the few million he would miss out on in LA. Believe me, it was very real, at least in Miami's eyes. I never thought Odom would leave LA but Wade and Riley were making the pitch clear as day.

Its all but impossible for them to have made that pitch yet KNOW they were going to sign the Big3 the following year.

Chronz
11-03-2011, 05:21 PM
Rubbish. Without a system in place to foster competitive balance, the league would have fewer teams which means less jobs for players. There is no way the NBA can support 30 teams without a system in place to give small market & mid market teams a chance to attract & develop stars.

Maybe thats whats best for the league, 20 talented teams. Would small market teams rather have a chance or no shot at all?

Thats definitely unfair but there is no magical cure all to curve players control or enhance the basketball IQ of the leagues Owners.

What do you suggest?

Chronz
11-03-2011, 05:34 PM
The NBA as a whole is a more profitable business when teams are able to retain their stars. That is not slavery. The NBA is a league which means the Lakers are just as responsible for the competitive balance in it as the Hornets. The system should prevent the Lakers from hoarding talent as much as it can help the Hornets retain or obtain it.
Those players gave their team sufficient time to build a championship core around them, the system works just fine in retaining stars, teams just have to overpay. When the system breaks down is when it expects stars to stay put regardless of what gos on around them.

So the problem isnt in getting stars to give the teams that draft them a chance, as all 3 of the amigos signed extensions when they reached FA. The problem lies in the rules forbidding teams from paying even more to get out of the hole there in. When you waive a player he should get payed and you should be allowed to replace his salary with a serviceable player, this will give the stars team the ability to sign players if they remove others.

Obviously this will result in a spike in salary but your talking about a group of individuals who saw fit to overspend to levels of lunacy in the prior system. But in an effort to curve that behavior the overall length of contracts or even guaranteed years in general should be cut down by 2 years.

Players shouldnt have 5 years of security for a single year of performance. In return the players at large will be given the chance to play for multiple contracts once released.


Case in point: As much as the league saw rising revenues as a result of both the resurgency of the Bulls & the Heat, imagine the revenues if one of the big 3 had signed with the Bulls. I have no doubt a Bulls lead team with Wade & Rose in their backcourt would have pulled better ratings & generated more revenue in the Finals than the 3-headed monster did.
So had Wade left his original team and signed with the bigger market in Chicago it would have signified all that is right with player movement? But Bron and Bosh cant go to his team?

Player movement garners interest because basketball is a game of tremendous consistency, stirring up the pot makes for new interesting storylines. If anything the league should be open to constant shuffling, making it easier to move on from mistakes is by far a bigger problem than convincing stars to stay. Those stars stay as long as they can, its negligence that leads to their departure, not corruption.

AIMelo=KillaDUO
11-03-2011, 05:43 PM
I think you need to look at the video and read what I wrote again....

They are talking about Melo, but they don't call him by name (Lbj gives them more ratings)... Denver did not want to trade Melo to NY, but they had to because thats the only place he would resign. Owners don't like that ****.

Nj would not have gave them ****, if Melo wasn't going to resign with them, matter a fact, If it was up to the Owners, Melo couldn't have left.

I'm not going off what they said... I'm going off what you said. You said "HATERS WHY DON"T THEY TALK ABOUT MELO" And the reason you said that, is because LeBron James is on your team. Carmelo gave them a choice, take something in return, or allow him to walk away. Denver's FO isn't stupid, they took what they could and honestly, got some pretty damn good players in return. LeBron didn't give them a choice.

Birdmannn
11-03-2011, 05:53 PM
I'm not going off what they said... I'm going off what you said. You said "HATERS WHY DON"T THEY TALK ABOUT MELO" And the reason you said that, is because LeBron James is on your team. Carmelo gave them a choice, take something in return, or allow him to walk away. Denver's FO isn't stupid, they took what they could and honestly, got some pretty damn good players in return. LeBron didn't give them a choice.

Carmelo was completely set on leaving. Bron gave them a chance to sign someone, didn't he try to get bosh to join him?

PlezPlayDKnicks
11-03-2011, 05:53 PM
I'm not going off what they said... I'm going off what you said. You said "HATERS WHY DON"T THEY TALK ABOUT MELO" And the reason you said that, is because LeBron James is on your team. Carmelo gave them a choice, take something in return, or allow him to walk away. Denver's FO isn't stupid, they took what they could and honestly, got some pretty damn good players in return. LeBron didn't give them a choice.

Agreed. By not signing an extension and not going to where Denver wanted Melo is a bad guy.. Dude wanted his money b4 the lockout and that's that. Denver got a great deal by us according to Psd. They went from trash to treasure just that fast

da ThRONe
11-03-2011, 05:55 PM
Maybe thats whats best for the league, 20 talented teams. Would small market teams rather have a chance or no shot at all?

Thats definitely unfair but there is no magical cure all to curve players control or enhance the basketball IQ of the leagues Owners.

What do you suggest?

Hmm maybe a hard/flex cap. Any system that puts a reasonable cap on each individual team salary. People are prisoners of the moment. Just because the "Heatles" left a decent amount of money on the table in their primes doesn't mean this is an issue. This was the 1st time and probably the last we see something of that magnitude.

Mudvayne91
11-03-2011, 05:59 PM
Agreed. By not signing an extension and not going to where Denver wanted Melo is a bad guy.. Dude wanted his money b4 the lockout and that's that. Denver got a great deal by us according to Psd. They went from trash to treasure just that fast

According to PSD? Minus the playoffs, the Nuggets were one of the hottest teams after the trade. I'm not mad about the trade, I just hate the way the NBA is set up. In all honesty, I'm pretty excited to see the Nuggets play again. I have no doubt we'll be a top 5-6 team with young pieces.

For the record, a lot of Nuggets fans were fine with Melo leaving. It was a big ****ing distraction. The worst part was having to involve Chauncey Billups, who didn't want to leave. That guy was the heart of the Nuggets, if you will. It sucks he had to get involved. That's in the past now and we're over it, but just saying.

nystandup
11-03-2011, 06:18 PM
The Nuggets were my 2nd favorite team before the trade and now that half of the Knicks are there they still remain my 2nd favorite. I was rooting for them in the playoffs.

SteBO
11-03-2011, 06:22 PM
I'm not going off what they said... I'm going off what you said. You said "HATERS WHY DON"T THEY TALK ABOUT MELO" And the reason you said that, is because LeBron James is on your team. Carmelo gave them a choice, take something in return, or allow him to walk away. Denver's FO isn't stupid, they took what they could and honestly, got some pretty damn good players in return. LeBron didn't give them a choice.
It was still a distraction though, and Melo could've not commented on the matter when asked about it. Other players do it, and LeBron was one of them after the question got annoying after a while. And let's not act like LeBron didn't give CLE a chance to get better quality players around him to win, regardless of when......

EDIT: I just realized that you meant after the fact, in terms his team being able to get players back in return. My bad......

nystandup
11-03-2011, 06:28 PM
im still missing my boy Gallo

3XDouble
11-03-2011, 07:41 PM
Just have 6 teams or so with the NBA. I would love for the ABA to come back. That way all you "big" market teams can get all the super stars you want and I won't have to deal with a rigged BS league. Everybody wins!

Really, everyone? How about the 300+ players (80%) of the leauge that no longer have an extremely lucrative job. How about the 24 cities that no longer have a team. How about the thousands of people who earn a living or part of their living because of the NBA.

This would also result in far fewer regular season games and therefore far less revenue per player. The expense ratio would also go up substantially given many of the expenses are not variable. Six super teams would also generate much less interest nationally and internationally, thus reducing endorsement opportunities for players.

Dade County
11-03-2011, 08:58 PM
I'm not going off what they said... I'm going off what you said. You said "HATERS WHY DON"T THEY TALK ABOUT MELO" And the reason you said that, is because LeBron James is on your team. Carmelo gave them a choice, take something in return, or allow him to walk away. Denver's FO isn't stupid, they took what they could and honestly, got some pretty damn good players in return. LeBron didn't give them a choice.

They are hating on Lbj, because what Bucher said what small market owners really want to stop , is what exactly Melo put his team through.

( I am not personally putting a negative opinion on what Melo did) I am saying the player that actually fit their conversation is Melo not Lbj. this is where Bucher hate comes into play; and if you can't see that, your bad.

Melo did give his team a choice (to trade him to the NY or loss him for nothing. like I said, Owners don't like that, and they are fighting hard to stop that in this lockout.

You attack what I said (and thats fine) but you are not seeing the bigger picture. all you care about is that I typed "Melo".

If you do respond to this post, you should comment on how the Owners are fighting to stop what Melo did, in this Lockout... Owners will like to try to take that away.

Dade County
11-03-2011, 09:03 PM
Agreed. By not signing an extension and not going to where Denver wanted Melo is a bad guy.. Dude wanted his money b4 the lockout and that's that. Denver got a great deal by us according to Psd. They went from trash to treasure just that fast

Denver got a great deal... But the topic of the thread is, Owners would like to take away that option from Star Players.

How do you feel about that, do you agree with the Small Market Owners?

Anilyzer
11-04-2011, 01:58 AM
nobody wants to play for memphis, indiana, minnesota, cleveland, etc, so something needs to be done

Please tell me that you're not serious; please tell me that you're being sarcastic.

Lebron didn't want to re-sign in Cleveland (with an owner who everybody now realizes is a complete HATER and a weird freakshow) so, therefore "something needs to be done" and the whole season needs to be lost, we need this idiotic lockout, and even when a deal is done it still needs to keep going on so that the owners can prove that they can squeeze or extort another few percentage points from the players?

The NBA League office and the owners are now officially jerking themselves off with sandpaper while they chew on tinfoil.

"mmmmmm. See Lebron! You see what we can do!"

F them. I don't even care right now if there's a season. The season didn't start, and there's been no free agent or rookie stuff, so now my NBA addiction is starting to wear off.

Let's talk some more about this next June. /

Mudvayne91
11-04-2011, 02:05 AM
Really, everyone? How about the 300+ players (80%) of the leauge that no longer have an extremely lucrative job. How about the 24 cities that no longer have a team. How about the thousands of people who earn a living or part of their living because of the NBA.

This would also result in far fewer regular season games and therefore far less revenue per player. The expense ratio would also go up substantially given many of the expenses are not variable. Six super teams would also generate much less interest nationally and internationally, thus reducing endorsement opportunities for players.

I was being a bit sarcastic. However, I'd love for the ABA to come back. The NBA is run like a joke. My team has virtually 0 chance to win. Whether it's players leaving or the biased reffing, it's crap. I'm not the only one that feels this way either. It's a huge problem that many big market fans like to ignore. I'd rather support my team in a lesser league and have a chance to win than have my team in the NBA and have no chance to win because it doesn't make David Stern $.

Anilyzer
11-04-2011, 02:19 AM
I was being a bit sarcastic. However, I'd love for the ABA to come back. The NBA is run like a joke. My team has virtually 0 chance to win. Whether it's players leaving or the biased reffing, it's crap. I'm not the only one that feels this way either. It's a huge problem that many big market fans like to ignore. I'd rather support my team in a lesser league and have a chance to win than have my team in the NBA and have no chance to win because it doesn't make David Stern $.

*sigh*

In all fairness... ok, let's talk odds for a second.

Let's imagine that all 30 teams are equally good: that means that each team has a 1/30 chance to "win it all."

That means, that each team has a mathematical expectation to win the title once every 30 years. But, that's just mathematical expectation. In real terms, when you factor in random variance... any one of the teams could EASILY go 100 years or more without winning a title (comparable to the odds of, say, flipping a coin "heads" three times in a row).

Now, factor in that not all the teams are equally good. Some teams, like the Lakers, are in towns where there is a rich basketball tradition. They've been lucky enough to win before. They know HOW to win. They EXPECT to win. They have hall of fame friends, ex-players, consultants, scouts, managers and coaches. They teach basketball, they make perfect personnel decisions, and they make great players out of good ones.

So now, when you look at Dan Gilbert's absurd tantrum after losing in the ECF's in 2010, you can really get a sense of what a JOKE it is.

It's not just that "we're a small market team wah wah wah", it's that "We want to win NOW, this year, RIGHT NOW, or else the whole league isn't fair."

Seriously... with that attitude... and wtf if Cleveland can't win, then in the future there won't even BE any Cavaliers, or maybe not even any NBA as far as Gilbert is concerned.

Hellcrooner
11-04-2011, 02:22 AM
I was being a bit sarcastic. However, I'd love for the ABA to come back. The NBA is run like a joke. My team has virtually 0 chance to win. Whether it's players leaving or the biased reffing, it's crap. I'm not the only one that feels this way either. It's a huge problem that many big market fans like to ignore. I'd rather support my team in a lesser league and have a chance to win than have my team in the NBA and have no chance to win because it doesn't make David Stern $.

the moment a real aba menace comes back the moment the owners have to back of and budge to whatever the players want.

as a matter of fact if european teams had built biggers arenas and coudl convince more fans to follow basket there wouldnt be a lock out because the owners would have already budged.

Mudvayne91
11-04-2011, 02:27 AM
*sigh*

In all fairness... ok, let's talk odds for a second.

Let's imagine that all 30 teams are equally good: that means that each team has a 1/30 chance to "win it all."

That means, that each team has a mathematical expectation to win the title once every 30 years. But, that's just mathematical expectation. In real terms, when you factor in random variance... any one of the teams could EASILY go 100 years or more without winning a title (comparable to the odds of, say, flipping a coin "heads" three times in a row).

Now, factor in that not all the teams are equally good. Some teams, like the Lakers, are in towns where there is a rich basketball tradition. They've been lucky enough to win before. They know HOW to win. They EXPECT to win. They have hall of fame friends, ex-players, consultants, scouts, managers and coaches. They teach basketball, they make perfect personnel decisions, and they make great players out of good ones.

So now, when you look at Dan Gilbert's absurd tantrum after losing in the ECF's in 2010, you can really get a sense of what a JOKE it is.

It's not just that "we're a small market team wah wah wah", it's that "We want to win NOW, this year, RIGHT NOW, or else the whole league isn't fair."

Seriously... with that attitude... and wtf if Cleveland can't win, then in the future there won't even BE any Cavaliers, or maybe not even any NBA as far as Gilbert is concerned.

Seems to work fairly well for the NFL and the integrity of the sport isn't in question. God forbid some parity. I do agree with you though. I could care less if there's no season next year. Honestly, I wouldn't be too upset if the NBA completely folded.

broncosfan4eva
11-04-2011, 02:36 AM
Make the player stay till he reaches atleast 30 lol

Anilyzer
11-04-2011, 03:44 AM
Seems to work fairly well for the NFL and the integrity of the sport isn't in question. God forbid some parity. I do agree with you though. I could care less if there's no season next year. Honestly, I wouldn't be too upset if the NBA completely folded.

I think that the upside down draft and the weighted draft lottery, combined with the salary cap as it now stands, gives as much expectation of parity and competitiveness as you could possibly want.

With free agency, any team has a chance to attract and sign any free agent. If the players or the agents don't favor those cities--hey, work that out. But the players are free, and the teams ALL technically have an equal shot to sign players. The bad teams also start with a HUGE advantage, because they get to draft the very best players every year.

We could also consider a system where all the players are put into a pool every year, and a totally random lotto is held for each round of a big player draft. Then the teams get one pick each for every round, until all the players are picked.

All the teams could put their 52% of BRI into a large pool, and it would be paid out to the players according to what round of the draft they were picked in: first round is superstar or all star caliber players, second round is stars or very strong starters, etc.

That way every year every team has a fresh, randomly selected mix of players. No team could ever get stuck with a bunch of "bad contracts" or a "losing chemistry"; every year you start over and have a fresh chance.

Note that even in this scenario, Cleveland is still a 30:1 underdog to win the title, and that they can easily go (another) 100 years without winning a title,
just in terms of mathematical expectation.

This system would be great, and different towns would get to host superstar players on their teams for one year (or more if they got lucky in the draft). Since all the games are mostly watched on TV, and the only difference is uniforms, it shouldn't matter to the league whether it is "the Knicks" or "the Timberwolves" or "the Jazz" who end up winning the title. Why should it? Why should one team be more prestigious, popular, or likely to win?

I think we should adopt this kind of communal system in the NBA immediately

ChiSoxJuan
11-04-2011, 12:53 PM
I personally think there is enough BB talent in the world to support 30 NBA teams so I am not a fan of contraction. For those of you that support total & unequivocal free agency in the land of the NBA, you need to first convince the NBAPA to fit the bill for those teams borrowing $ to meet operating costs & for unprofitable teams. In a balls-to-the-walls FA world of the NBA owners should at least be entitled to operating a team without risk of financial loss beyond depreciation of assets.

For the rest of us this is about negotiating on a system that has just the right amount of free agency to maintain competitive balance in the league. In terms of general principles, the higher the cap goes, the higher the max goes, & the more exceptions there are, the more player movement there is, the more teams with greater financial risks depend on good drafts. The best way to increase their odds of having good drafts is to both increase the volume of their picks & the position of their picks. That being said there is limit to which they can be helped from the draft. After that their focus shifts to lowering caps, lowering maxes, weakening exceptions, & weakening overall player movement.

beasted86
11-04-2011, 01:07 PM
It's pretty clear the draft lottery system has screwed a couple of teams over that should have gotten higher picks. There are a number of teams that have never moved up in the draft... while you have a 33-49 Bulls team with a 1.7% chance at the #1 pick get it.

Teams already tank, so there's no point in a lottery.

ChiSoxJuan
11-04-2011, 01:30 PM
The lottery makes sense given that the bulk of the 30 teams are medium sized wallets. They don't have nearly as deep pockets as the big wallets yet they still dream of winning a championship & are willing to spend a larger % of their revenue than the big wallets to get there. The last thing they want to see is a small wallet leap frog over them on account of top picks every yr.

Fisher had a nice proposal last spring. He wanted to double the picks amongst lottery teams. The lottery would still apply for the initial picks, but then those teams would be slotted based on their winning %'s. Again the medium sized wallets wanted no part of that. Hunter never voiced much support for it either. As much as I support the idea, I think Fisher failed the union in that he didn't do enough to get media support for it. He never seemed to realize that first he needed to get major fan & media approval of the idea before he could ever hope to sway the owners.

At the very least the NBA should have a compensation system similar to MLB. When a player reaches Type A FA status by virtue of thier production, a team just has to offer arbitration for 1 yr to that player. If the player opts for FA instead, that team gains the 1st rd pick of the team signing that FA. Think of all of the S&T deals over the past few yrs, & how the impact an arbitration like system would have on those deals. The compensation system in MLB is one of the reasons the Rays beat out of the Red Sox & the Marlins have won to championships.

Hellcrooner
11-04-2011, 01:37 PM
^compensate my ***.

if one dude has been traped in a team for 5 to 10 years and has become an unrestricted fa he should be completely free to go.

if they want compensation talk to the dude bout where he wants to go when theres 1 or 2 years left and TRADE him to that team.

simple as that.

ChiSoxJuan
11-04-2011, 01:53 PM
Then you must be in favor of either contraction or the NBAPA fitting the bill for teams in the red on operating costs. If you don't compensate a team losing a marquee player with talent, then you have to be willing to compensate them with $ when their ability revenue declines as a result of that lost player.

EnWhyKay
11-04-2011, 02:12 PM
Its funny how much hatred Lebron and Melo get for their moves.. None of you folks would stay at a Job if it wasn't fulfilling to you. If you hated your boss.. Or you did not like the way the Company was run.. You reserve the right to resign/quit and go elsewhere.. This is no different in the NBA.. I dont get the big deal. You guys put too much stock in sports.. The guys are Human Beings.. And last time I checked this was a free country.. After that scathing leather that Gilbert wrote to Lebron after he left.. I wouldnt want to work for that guy either...

Not to mention Melo was right in leaving Denver.. Look at that Roster.. Chandler, Martin, and Lawson are all overseas.. Nene is a free agent.. What is left there.. If Melo would have resigned there would just be him and he would be at their Mercy for however long.. What is left is certainly not going to be a championship contender.. And the guy is in his prime.. He said he was unsure about the direction of the team and wanted to see whats out there on the open market.. What is wrong with that?.. This is America...

You guy would rather Lebron and Melo end up like KG?. Spend his best years in a place barely making the playoffs and getting bounced in the first and second round every year right?.. SMH... Get a clue..

Hellcrooner
11-04-2011, 02:15 PM
^ if they are losing money, then as any bussiness woudl do, close the store and leave the profitbales ones open.

in the end is sterns fault for focusing the stupid league in stars instead of teams, and making people abnormaly schizofrenic bout winning instead of following your city team out of pride for the city, win or lose.

the whole system should be checked and made more similar to how things work in the rest of the world, as in each city even from the smallest town in the country has THEIR team that wont never be moved somwhere else and a ton of vertical divisions where you can get promoted to a superior league or demoted to an inferior league out of your results.

but of course this is very difficult to ingegrate with ncaa , the draft and the rest of the crap.

Dade County
11-04-2011, 02:16 PM
Then you must be in favor of either contraction or the NBAPA fitting the bill for teams in the red on operating costs. If you don't compensate a team losing a marquee player with talent, then you have to be willing to compensate them with $ when their ability revenue declines as a result of that lost player.

When you guys say " The team lost a player, you make it seem as though the player says F U, and runs out of town happy yelling and screaming with money coming out of his armpits.

The team and players signed a legal document, stating how long that player and team are joint together. When the contract is up, they are separated, both parties agreed to the length of the contract.

So it's not on sided as some of you guys make it sound out to be. Why does the team need any compensation because a player contract is up, both parties agreed they will be free of each other during a certain date.

ChiSoxJuan
11-04-2011, 02:31 PM
A team losing a player is clear. As a member of the Cav's Lebron was an asset of the Cav's. That asset was responsible for the largest % of revenue for the Cavs from various revenue sources. The loss of that asset has a substantial impact on that revenue now. It was not within the Cav's power to retain Lebron so the Cav's must be compensated to some degree for that loss. Miami's compensation as a result of the S&T does not even come close to the magnitude of that loss.

da ThRONe
11-04-2011, 02:36 PM
When you guys say " The team lost a player, you make it seem as though the player says F U, and runs out of town happy yelling and screaming with money coming out of his armpits.

The team and players signed a legal document, stating how long that player and team are joint together. When the contract is up, they are separated, both parties agreed to the length of the contract.

So it's not on sided as some of you guys make it sound out to be. Why does the team need any compensation because a player contract is up, both parties agreed they will be free of each other during a certain date.

Agreed 10000%

These are the same people who want shorter contracts as well. They want it both ways.

ChiSoxJuan
11-04-2011, 03:01 PM
Give the teams most likely to lose marquee talents in FA adequate compensation for that loss, & they will be the last ones advocating for shorter deals.

beasted86
11-04-2011, 03:14 PM
The lottery makes sense given that the bulk of the 30 teams are medium sized wallets. They don't have nearly as deep pockets as the big wallets yet they still dream of winning a championship & are willing to spend a larger % of their revenue than the big wallets to get there. The last thing they want to see is a small wallet leap frog over them on account of top picks every yr.

Fisher had a nice proposal last spring. He wanted to double the picks amongst lottery teams. The lottery would still apply for the initial picks, but then those teams would be slotted based on their winning %'s. Again the medium sized wallets wanted no part of that. Hunter never voiced much support for it either. As much as I support the idea, I think Fisher failed the union in that he didn't do enough to get media support for it. He never seemed to realize that first he needed to get major fan & media approval of the idea before he could ever hope to sway the owners.

At the very least the NBA should have a compensation system similar to MLB. When a player reaches Type A FA status by virtue of thier production, a team just has to offer arbitration for 1 yr to that player. If the player opts for FA instead, that team gains the 1st rd pick of the team signing that FA. Think of all of the S&T deals over the past few yrs, & how the impact an arbitration like system would have on those deals. The compensation system in MLB is one of the reasons the Rays beat out of the Red Sox & the Marlins have won to championships.
I don't think Lakers owner is envious of the Thunder owner because one guy has a $90M payroll of veterans, and the other has a $58M payroll of rookies and has stacked talent through the draft. At the end of the day the Lakers will gross 20x the profit margin the Thunder does.

And as far as the draft arbitration, what does a Heat 27-30 pick do for the Cavs in all reality?

I say let the worst teams get the #1-3 pick. If the owner thinks the teams best interest is tanking and driving away fans, then so be it. Lottery should only be used as a tie breaker.

Dade County
11-04-2011, 03:21 PM
A team losing a player is clear. As a member of the Cav's Lebron was an asset of the Cav's. That asset was responsible for the largest % of revenue for the Cavs from various revenue sources. The loss of that asset has a substantial impact on that revenue now. It was not within the Cav's power to retain Lebron so the Cav's must be compensated to some degree for that loss. Miami's compensation as a result of the S&T does not even come close to the magnitude of that loss.

Why wasn't it with in their power to keep Lbj (Because the contract that both parties signed had ended......... Case close!

And why most the Cav's be compensated by the HEAT ... The HEAT had nothing to do with that previous contract signed by Lbj and Cav's organization, but now the HEAT has to compensation that organization; because that player is freed from that contract that had ENDED?

What sense does that make:confused:



Miami's compensation as a result of the S&T does not even come close to the magnitude of that loss.

Who's fault is this, not the HEAT :bang: The Cav's are lucky that the HEAT organization gave them something. Lbj was ready to sign here with or with out a sign & trade. (yes I know that Miami needed either Toronto or the Cav's to do a sign and trade, so we could have players like UD...etc.)

Cav's should have traded before his contact was up... end of story. I know that sounds crazy because Lbj Cav's had the best record and all that stuff, but you have to do, what you have to do.

ChiSoxJuan
11-04-2011, 03:32 PM
And as far as the draft arbitration, what does a Heat 27-30 pick do for the Cavs in all reality?


Exactly. That doesn't even scratch the surface to the revenue loss the Cav's endure as a result of Lebron's departure. It was not in their power to keep Lebron because the 6 yrs, max $ was not enough to entice him to stay. Player choice must be tempered by competitive balance for teams to both survive & thrive in the NBA.

RevisIsland
11-04-2011, 03:44 PM
Of course the small market owners want a franchise tag. Nobody wants to get Lebron'd

ChiSoxJuan
11-04-2011, 03:58 PM
Compensation for teams is always difficult because the NBA has an avid interest in maintain & growing the franchise value of all 30 teams. The more creative you get with ideas like draft double & turning a late 1st into a lottery pick, the more the 30 teams have to pay the expense for the decisions of 1. The lottery exists because the bulk of the 30 teams are mid wallet sized & they look at the lottery as the best odds for a quick turnaround. Ending the lottery is probably a tougher sell right now than a draft double.

Anilyzer
11-04-2011, 05:40 PM
A team losing a player is clear. As a member of the Cav's Lebron was an asset of the Cav's. That asset was responsible for the largest % of revenue for the Cavs from various revenue sources. The loss of that asset has a substantial impact on that revenue now. It was not within the Cav's power to retain Lebron so the Cav's must be compensated to some degree for that loss. Miami's compensation as a result of the S&T does not even come close to the magnitude of that loss.

Sorry, but that's just BS.

Imagine if Lebron failed, big time. Imagine if he was some kind of Greg Oden or a Ryan Leaf.

Then the Cavs wouldn't want anything to do with him. In fact, they would probably spend millions on a big PR campaign, trashing him in the media as "the biggest bust in the history of the NBA" and blaming all their troubles on him.

The basic factor here is the rule of law. Lebron was perfectly, PERFECTLY, within his legal rights to leave and sign with Miami. He was also perfectly within his legal rights to appear on ESPN and announce his decision. He was even nice enough to meet with all the prospective teams and owners, including multiple meetings with Dan Gilbert and the Cavs, who said publicly at the time that they were "very pleased" with the way that Lebron was conducting negotiations and how things were going.

So... F off with all this other nonsense. Gilbert screaming with rage, about Lebron betraying him and betraying the whole city of Cleveland or the whole state of Ohio; mobilizing Ohioans to hate Lebron and boycott him, boo him at games. Trying to tie the whole crappy economy and all the problems of Cleveland to Lebron, making Lebron the very face of betrayal, disloyalty and under-handed mean-spiritedness in the entire world. Some kind of uppity urban devil who had viciously raped the entire city of Cleveland, and then spit on it on his way out of town. AND they want 1st round picks in compensation. AND they want to lockout the NBA. AND they want to abolish player free agency.

Just, what a load of crap. Lebron should really sue Cav's management for slander; there's some real cheddar there yo. Those fools said so many irresponsible things, and they did everything to try to trash Lebron's reputation. Of course, Lebron doesn't have as noble a character as Gilbert, a mortgage loan mogul and internet bubble billionaire who is building a mega-casino in Cleveland with thousands of crappy slot machines to milk all the old ladies and tourists when they come downtown.

But yeah... if Lebron sucked nobody would care. But when they see value they try to grab it, and they are just angry that they can't control it and own it for pennies on the dollar like everything else.

Anilyzer
11-04-2011, 05:50 PM
Then you must be in favor of either contraction or the NBAPA fitting the bill for teams in the red on operating costs. If you don't compensate a team losing a marquee player with talent, then you have to be willing to compensate them with $ when their ability revenue declines as a result of that lost player.

Wrong.

What claim does a team have on a free agent player? His contract has expired, his draft rights have expired, so why does the team that he played on before have to be "compensated"? Simply put, they don't.

The league should not become some kind of communist coop, where everything is geared toward "leveling" or promoting "competitive balance". It should be a Darwinian system where excellence and good decisions are rewarded, along with hard work, and where any team has a chance to win. All these people complaining that because Miami has Lebron and Wade, or LA has Kobe and Gasol, therefore no other team can win, EVER, are just pathetic.

That Gilbert's team went from having the best record in the NBA and almost reaching the finals, to having the WORST record in the entire NBA, should tell you everything you need to know. A crap team with no pride, no tradition and no competitive fire, that probably knew it would lose Lebron to free agency, but instead of making a blockbuster trade decided to go the drama-queen route instead.

Just laughable.

ChiSoxJuan
11-04-2011, 06:01 PM
A strictly Darwinian system = contraction of the weakest teams. This has nothing to do with communist. Every game in the NBA consists of two teams. The greater the disparity between those two teams, the less the value of the game. A strictly Darwinian system = more crap games with a 30 team league, or better games in a 20 team league. The player's are always going to be on the side with more teams.

da ThRONe
11-04-2011, 06:37 PM
A strictly Darwinian system = contraction of the weakest teams. This has nothing to do with communist. Every game in the NBA consists of two teams. The greater the disparity between those two teams, the less the value of the game. A strictly Darwinian system = more crap games with a 30 team league, or better games in a 20 team league. The player's are always going to be on the side with more teams.

It also means contracting the leagues earning potential.

Anilyzer
11-04-2011, 07:56 PM
A strictly Darwinian system = contraction of the weakest teams. This has nothing to do with communist. Every game in the NBA consists of two teams. The greater the disparity between those two teams, the less the value of the game. A strictly Darwinian system = more crap games with a 30 team league, or better games in a 20 team league. The player's are always going to be on the side with more teams.

Look, we've already been over this territory before: It's a Darwinian league regardless, otherwise it's a fixed, watered-down, goofy entertainment.

The good teams will rise--and ultimately good coaching, management and hard work PLUS talent win consistently.

And also, we've already said that there is only one Lebron, one Kobe, one Dwight, one Wade. But there are 30 teams. So that talent inequality will just always be there.

The whole idea of superstars and uber-stars is based on inequality. That's all anybody wants to see, really, is that one guy who flies higher than everybody else and can dominate the league. And why should Dan Gilbert just "own" Lebron because he happened to get the lucky lotto ticket to draft him? For the league, it doesn't matter what team Lebron is on; whatever team he's on becomes the center and focal point of the league. Seriously, Gilbert is just mad because he thought he was on the verge of having a championship, of being an instant NBA champion... but now he realizes that might take a few hundred years.

Actually, for all the "pro-ownership" people, I think the best, most fairest solution is just to ban guys like Kobe and Lebron from the league completely.

The league could ban the legit top 15 players in the league, let them go to Europe or whatever, and then the league would have much more parity. It's really just those few freaks of nature that are messing up your controlled, total-parity league where every team has an equal chance.

Anilyzer
11-04-2011, 07:58 PM
Seriously, if Miami didn't have Lebron, Dallas didn't have Dirk, Lakers didn't have Kobe (or Gasol), OKC didn't have Durant, Celtics didn't have Pierce... if the top 10 players were banned from the league...

then next year the playoff race is wide open. Every team has a total chance to "win it all", you've got total parity, everybody's happy, just like that and Bob's your uncle.

ChiSoxJuan
11-04-2011, 08:20 PM
There has always been a sense of ownership over drafted players & that has extended well beyond the owners to the fans themselves. When their team drafts a player they think of that player as their own. Fans get only moderately upset when their team fails to sign one of their favorite players as a FA. They get vehemently upset when they lose their favorites to FA. Vehemently upset fans are more likely to tune out their team & that's bad for business.

I think back to when JR paid MJ $30M for a season. He wouldn't be able to do that today & he should have that right. MJ epitomized the term "franchise" player & the franchise should have the right to pay their guys whatever they want. That should be their leverage over owners wanting that player as a FA.

Would Lebron have bolted the Cavs if Gilbert could offer him an 8 yr deal? I don't think so. Gilbert should've been given that opportunity. The stay home max should be optional. Exceeding it should not be transferable. No S&T option there. The game exists for the fans first, the players second, & the owners third. FA should take a back seat to pleasing the fans.

ajnapoleon
11-04-2011, 09:48 PM
Why don't Fans understand these players are human and they dont want to waste years on a bad team?...for christ sake you are only 21-29 once in your life you dont get those years back no matter how much money you make!! Just to show some damn loyaty to some fans that only like you because you can play ball better than some others?...with todays media you dont win a 5 rings by your 5-6th year you a bust and should not be able to smile or have some type of fun until you do?..theses guys do not want to go down like that... if you was any one of them and seen what the older legends have had like bird and that front line and magic and his top 50 teamates ...what would you want?

ChiSoxJuan
11-04-2011, 10:44 PM
Considering the fans are the sole reason I have the opportunity to earn a liivng in the NBA I would want to make them as happy as possible about the NBA. My loyalty to the team that drafts me is the first step in that effort. Of course they want to win so I would discuss system changes I think that could benefit that team the most with my player rep. There is no greater joy for an NBA player than to win a championship for the team that drafts him. Just ask MJ about that.

Hellcrooner
11-04-2011, 10:47 PM
Considering the fans are the sole reason I have the opportunity to earn a liivng in the NBA I would want to make them as happy as possible about the NBA. My loyalty to the team that drafts me is the first step in that effort. Of course they want to win so I would discuss system changes I think that could benefit that team the most with my player rep. There is no greater joy for an NBA player than to win a championship for the team that drafts him. Just ask MJ about that.

Yeah well, if i got drafted by Lakers, Knicks, Bulls, Warriors, Sixers theres definetly a good chance i stay there forever.

Other teams?..........sorry but unless im winning like crazy and i respect the team history ( spurs, Rockets, Celtics, Suns) im counting the days until i can pack my bags to one of the teams i like.

ChiSoxJuan
11-04-2011, 10:58 PM
And that's why there are about 12 teams in the NBA that have no odds of getting better other than striking gold in the lottery. They are fated to lose until that happens. What's the next 2 teams likely to go from winning to losing? Orlando & the Hornets. When Howard & Paul leave those teams are probably looking at +20L. Odds are Den will see +10L in it's first season without Melo. Guys like Nene & Affalo are nearing UFA status as well & their agents are already fueling rumors of better fits.

So what are we really looking at 3 yrs from now? Twelve teams have 200-1 odds or worse to win a championship now. Three yrs from now that could jump to Sixteen teams with the next wave of marquee player jumps. Explain to us all how a league continues to survive when over 1/2 the teams become perrenial losers. Do you have any idea what the growth of fan apathy will be like when that happens? How do you think that will impact future revenue?

Dade County
11-04-2011, 11:47 PM
Considering the fans are the sole reason I have the opportunity to earn a liivng in the NBA I would want to make them as happy as possible about the NBA. My loyalty to the team that drafts me is the first step in that effort. Of course they want to win so I would discuss system changes I think that could benefit that team the most with my player rep. There is no greater joy for an NBA player than to win a championship for the team that drafts him. Just ask MJ about that.


I don't believe you are human...

I suspect you are a artificial intelligence program... Manufactured by the US government and purchased my the NBA.

You reek of brainwashing.




And that's why there are about 12 teams in the NBA that have no odds of getting better other than striking gold in the lottery. They are fated to lose until that happens. What's the next 2 teams likely to go from winning to losing? Orlando & the Hornets. When Howard & Paul leave those teams are probably looking at +20L. Odds are Den will see +10L in it's first season without Melo. Guys like Nene & Affalo are nearing UFA status as well & their agents are already fueling rumors of better fits.

So what are we really looking at 3 yrs from now? Twelve teams have 200-1 odds or worse to win a championship now. Three yrs from now that could jump to Sixteen teams with the next wave of marquee player jumps. Explain to us all how a league continues to survive when over 1/2 the teams become perrenial losers. Do you have any idea what the growth of fan apathy will be like when that happens? How do you think that will impact future revenue?

So what should the league do? And please answer the question; say something, instead of going around in circles.

Because you sound like you know what you are talking about, but your just running around your on words, and not giving a solution to the current NBA problem/lockout.

Bravo95
11-05-2011, 12:37 AM
in the end is sterns fault for focusing the stupid league in stars instead of teams, and making people abnormaly schizofrenic bout winning instead of following your city team out of pride for the city, win or lose.

Yes.

ChiSoxJuan
11-05-2011, 12:43 AM
I gave the solution in the official thread. Teams need much greater leverage to keep their stars. Teams need better compensation when they lose a star.

1) Teams with current max player's on their team or player's eligible for max deals should have the right to offer the max HOME deal or a deal of their choosing. The luxury tax system is the only real limiting factor here. Stern likes to quote the NHL but he ignores the fact that guys have signed deals for as many as 11 yrs. There is even lingo in the CBA coverning terms for player's getting 10 yrs or more. The NBA needs that flexibility. The CBA should not act like a babysitter preventing owner's from making dumb decisions. It's sole purpose is to provide competitve balance amongst teams with wide disparity in revenue while retaining the maximum player value possible.

2) A team having more than 2 max players should lose it's MLE. A team carrying more than 2 max players for 2 or more yrs should pay a progressively higher tax rate for being over the cap.

3) A team losing a max player gains 2 1st rd picks from the team signing that player. This is in addition to any compensation the team might get in a S&T deal. If the picks are more than 3 yrs out, the team gains the right to chose the signing teams MLE in lieu of the picks.

4) A supplemental draft enables teams losing max players to trade picks for players. Each team protects 5 players. The rest are eligible for this draft. The league assigns the pick value of each player in the draft. A team must accept the rd value of the pick regardless of the potential slot value. This is how a Cle can quickly turn 2 1st rd picks from Mia into a quality player.

This should help change the trend of winning teams turning into losing teams when a max player leaves. This will aid competitive balance more than anything else. The net effect is that player's will earn more as a result of these changes & talent will be more spread throughout the league.

Dade County
11-05-2011, 02:30 AM
I gave the solution in the official thread. Teams need much greater leverage to keep their stars. Teams need better compensation when they lose a star.

1) Teams with current max player's on their team or player's eligible for max deals should have the right to offer the max HOME deal or a deal of their choosing. The luxury tax system is the only real limiting factor here. Stern likes to quote the NHL but he ignores the fact that guys have signed deals for as many as 11 yrs. There is even lingo in the CBA coverning terms for player's getting 10 yrs or more. The NBA needs that flexibility. The CBA should not act like a babysitter preventing owner's from making dumb decisions. It's sole purpose is to provide competitve balance amongst teams with wide disparity in revenue while retaining the maximum player value possible.

Ok... I see nothing wrong with this one. As long, as you are not trying to say that the Max star player has to sign that HOME deal max contract.




2) A team having more than 2 max players should lose it's MLE. A team carrying more than 2 max players for 2 or more yrs should pay a progressively higher tax rate for being over the cap.

Just stop it... as long as you are not into the luxury tax, you should have a right to a mid level.




3) A team losing a max player gains 2 1st rd picks from the team signing that player. This is in addition to any compensation the team might get in a S&T deal. If the picks are more than 3 yrs out, the team gains the right to chose the signing teams MLE in lieu of the picks.

Go to sleep...




4) A supplemental draft enables teams losing max players to trade picks for players. Each team protects 5 players. The rest are eligible for this draft. The league assigns the pick value of each player in the draft. A team must accept the rd value of the pick regardless of the potential slot value. This is how a Cle can quickly turn 2 1st rd picks from Mia into a quality player.

This should help change the trend of winning teams turning into losing teams when a max player leaves. This will aid competitive balance more than anything else. The net effect is that player's will earn more as a result of these changes & talent will be more spread throughout the league.

So basically this Supplemental draft can happen every year? Or it's when a team losses a Max star player?

So regular nba players that have signed contracts to be with a certain team (that have moved their families to a certain city of their chosing); will have to be constantly moving around the country, if the team that they are with don't protect them ( by choosing then in their top 5)?

Man!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What's wrong with you.

TopsyTurvy
11-05-2011, 03:06 AM
It's a pipe dream to hope that the NBA will see 'small market' teams come to prominence. It's coded into the very DNA of the game of basketball (which involves far less competitors than just about any team sport in the world). Hell, all you have to do is pull a listing of previous NBA champs to see how much of a dream championship parity truly is.

Kevj77
11-05-2011, 04:06 AM
Why is it a pipe dream? Look at those great teams they all built their teams with good draft picks and smart trades, the one exception being Shaq signing with LA. Small market teams that have made good decisions have had chances at the title, the Spurs won four championships. The Kings, Suns, and Portland all had very legitimate chances at winning championships in the last decade. Miami isn't exactly a huge market.

All that happened while teams like the Knicks, Bulls and Celtics were bad for most of the decade.

abe_froman
11-05-2011, 04:13 AM
Why is it a pipe dream? Look at those great teams they all built their teams with good draft picks and smart trades, the one exception being Shaq signing with LA. Small market teams that have made good decisions have had chances at the title, the Spurs won four championships. The Kings, Suns, and Portland all had very legitimate chances at winning championships in the last decade. Miami isn't exactly a huge market.

All that happened while teams like the Knicks, Bulls and Celtics were bad for most of the decade.

parity isnt small v. large market.i agree with you,but its easier(not bad way either)to build in larger markets as they have more of a willingness to spend

Tony_Starks
11-05-2011, 01:26 PM
At the end of the day this lockout boils down to what the big 3 did, what Melo did, what Utah felt they were forced to do with D Will, and small market teams wanting some sort of assurance that they won't keep losing their big ticket players to big teams.

The problem is that its not like these guys are playing like a couple seasons and just demanding out. When you give a team 5 plus years to make some moves and put you in a position to win and you're mired in mediocrity what do you expect a player in his prime to do? Take his talents to LA! Or NY. They're never going to be able to prevent that......

ChiSoxJuan
11-05-2011, 02:56 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_5_draft
The Rule 5 draft affords the losingest teams in MLB access to players in the minors that have been there for 4-5 yrs who may have ML experience. Probably the most famous Rule 5 pick is the Cy Young winner Johan Santana. It's how the Twins got him & one of the big reasons they rose to power in the past decade. The Yanks are the team most victimized by the Rule 5 draft & it's a big deal in MLB when you consider how the Yanks stockpile their farm systems.

Many Rule 5 players have gone on to play on World Series teams & this is one of the contributing factors to the diversity in WS Champs over the past two CBA's. You see the Yanks acquire ml players more so through trades than the draft. Their draft rank is almost always near the bottom except for when they trade a star to weak teams for strong picks or prospects. Because most of their 40 man roster is filled with well established ML vets, mlers tend to languish in their system for yrs. They are mostly used in trades for vets. But it doesn't stop there. The Yanks are also the biggest spenders on foreign born players who never enter the draft. They are signed as FA's & start out in the Yanks ml system. So the Rule 5 is a good way for losing teams to get access to these foreign born players via the Yanks $. Most Rule 5 players play in the AFL (Arizona Fall League). These are considered the most ML ready players so it's not hard for losing teams to pick quality Rule 5 players.

There is nothing of comparison in the NBA to MLB's ml system. The bulk of players in the development league of the NBA rarely reach even 6th man status in the NBA. So any attempt to include a supplemental draft in the NBA must involve NBA rosters. I have given you a detailed breakdown of the top 3 PER players on the weakest 10 teams in the NBA. We are talking pathetic PERs. PERs that don't even warrant 6th man status on the best teams. These teams are looking at a minimum of 3-5 yrs just to get to the 30-40 win mark. If ever there was a time for a supplemental draft it is clearly now. The NBA owners can't claim ingnorance to how MLB works. JR of the Bulls is considered one of the most knowledgeable owners of both sports. The fact that you have never heard the words "supplemental draft" in these negotiations proves that idiots are running the show.

ChiSoxJuan
11-05-2011, 03:16 PM
Ok... I see nothing wrong with this one.
Try to stay cerebral in your posts. Reverting to put downs is dumb. We all understand you are arguing on behalf of the Heat's unholy trinity & so we are cutting you a LOT of slack in your comments.

In MLB there is no compensation for teams losing players in the Rule 5 draft, but every team participates. That's certainly reasonable in a supplemental draft for the NBA but again when you consider the PER of the top 3 players on the bottom 12 teams in the NBA what will be available to the top 12 teams in such a draft is highly unlikely to make their NBA roster. That is why I believe those bottom 12 teams should have to exchange picks for players in an NBA supplemental draft.

You of all people should understand the value of supplemental drafts seeing that both the Rays & Marlins have built their rosters on it in MLB.

Dade County
11-05-2011, 03:34 PM
Try to stay cerebral in your posts. Reverting to put downs is dumb. We all understand you are arguing on behalf of the Heat's unholy trinity & so we are cutting you a LOT of slack in your comments.

In MLB there is no compensation for teams losing players in the Rule 5 draft, but every team participates. That's certainly reasonable in a supplemental draft for the NBA but again when you consider the PER of the top 3 players on the bottom 12 teams in the NBA what will be available to the top 12 teams in such a draft is highly unlikely to make their NBA roster. That is why I believe those bottom 12 teams should have to exchange picks for players in an NBA supplemental draft.

You of all people should understand the value of supplemental drafts seeing that both the Rays & Marlins have built their rosters on it in MLB.

I'm a little confused, did you take the wrong quote? Because the one you took of me, says

Originally Posted by Dade County
Ok... I see nothing wrong with this one.

I have no problem with your 1st idea, it's some of the other ones that are unrealistic... You can't punish a team because they sign a free agent, thats not right (give up 2 first rd picks, because you signed a Max level player taht was on the open market):confused:

JOSKOMANG4
11-05-2011, 03:54 PM
Well similar to MLB, why doesn't the NBA implement a system where free agents are categorized as column A & Column B caliber athletes. Basically if that player signs elsewhere, depending on his nba value, that team would lose their draft pick?

Example: 2012 Free agency; CP3 signs with the NYY. The knicks would lose their 2013 1st rd pick to the Hornets

ChiSoxJuan
11-05-2011, 03:59 PM
MLB, NHL, & the NFL do just that. If you sign a Type A FA, you owe the team he came from a 1st rd pick in MLB. There is similar but not as costly compensation in the NHL. In the NFL if you sign or trade for an FT player, you owe the sending team 2 1st rd picks. If you sign or trade for a TT player, you owe that team 1 1st rd pick.

You just don't seem to be getting how dire the NBA is right now. There are at least 10 teams that don't have a player even worthy of 6th man status on a contending team. That means even under the best possible circumstances draft wise, they are 3-5 yrs from reaching a 30-40 win mark. That is their best scenario right now. The league that needs compensation in lieu of losing FA's the most is the NBA.

Seriously, the NBA has to be the worst thought out idea for a competitive league. Again, consider MLB. When a team waives a player (and it happens all the time), the losingest teams have the first right to claim him. When they claim the player they inherit the contract. Again this is yet another reason why the league with no salary cap & the GREATEST economic disparity amongst teams continues to prove more competitive than the NBA. Typically what happens in MLB is an exchange of picks from the team claiming him for cash from the team waiving him. That lowers the cost for the team picking him up.

Is such a concept in the current owner's proposal or have they once again only thought a solution 1/2 way through? There is a great provision called stretch amnesty exemption in this CBA. The player's apparently have agreed to it. It affords a Det to waive Hamilton, cut his payments in 1/2 & extend their length. They get cap space ST, & spread the cost over time. This will be a yearly provision. Hamilton then becomes a FA. The owner's are hoping that the restrictions they want on the big wallets will steer Hamilton to the mid & small wallets with the most cap space. You don't design a system on HOPE! When they considered the SAE they should have put in a provision that allows teams to claim Hamilton and TAKEOVER the spread contract! With the losingest teams getting first access to claim him this is a quick way to spread good talent across teams.

Kevj77
11-05-2011, 04:17 PM
ChiSoxJuan when free agency started in the NBA there was draft pick compensation and it directly lead to the Showtime Lakers dominating the 80s. Gail Goodrich was signed by the Jazz as a free agent and the Jazz had to give up draft picks, one of those draft picks ended up being the #1 pick and the Lakers got Magic Johnson. They already tried it.

ChiSoxJuan
11-05-2011, 04:23 PM
What's missing in the NBA's waiver system is the ability for teams to structure trades around waivers. In the NBA, when a player is waived, a team either claims him & his contract in it's entirety or they don't. The weakest teams can claim before the strongest ones. The NBA needs to allow both teams to negotiate a trade around the claim. Let's look at Arenas this time.

Let's say in a perfect world Howard agrees to stay with Orl & Orl decides to use the SAE on Arenas. If teams are able to negotiate trades around waivers (like they do in MLB), then a team looking to add Arenas could work a trade with Orl to get him at a discount below the avg SAE price. Since it's structured around waivers, the weak teams get that right before the strong ones.

Nobody has a problem with the Showtime Lakers. When you build a championship with competent drafts, good coaching, & strong development you are well deserving of it regardless of your team's revenue. Consider the Heat in the reverse. Let's say 4 yrs from now, the Big 3 leave all at the same time. Under a FA compensation system the Heat would get an infusion of 1st rd picks. If they strike gold & land 2 future max players in one draft, they might suffer 1 yr but they'll regain contending status quickly.

Tony_Starks
11-05-2011, 04:37 PM
I think the waiver system is fine. With the stretch exemption any half way competent gm has a legit chance of getting things going in the right direction. You can't have a waiver system that only benefits the small market teams said, or as one gm said "amnesty rule is great until Baron Davis goes to Miami!"

That sort of thinking is kind of ridiculous. Once you waive a guy and he's off your books then its over with. If teams were that concerned over where he was going they shouldn't be waiving him in the first place.

But with the exemptions, some wiggle room on the trade guidlines that will make trades a little easier to pull off, and shorter contracts no team that is running their business correctly should have anything to compain about. That and intelligent drafting should be enough to turn things around.

ChiSoxJuan
11-05-2011, 04:48 PM
You're a dreamer. I'm logistics driven. The odds of weak teams landing max players in the draft are no where close to where you are dreaming. About 1/2 of lottery picks wash out. It doesn't matter what team is doing the picking. About 1/2 the rest go on to reach max status. The other 1/2 fall somewhere in between. Of the 1/2 that get to max status, about 1/2 of them don't stay there long. A small % of lottery picks then go on to become consistent max players with long careers.

The waiver system is not fine. The waiver system needs to be tweaked to favor the weakest teams just like it is in the other 3 majors. This idea that the NBA is somehow above them is ridiculous. The NBA is in dire need of these things. What you just can't seem to grasp is that 10 teams right now have no hope of ever exceeding the cap. They just don't have the rev's. Exemptions don't mean much to them. They have the cap space. They need the $ & the talent.

Dade County
11-05-2011, 05:02 PM
Is such a concept in the current owner's proposal or have they once again only thought a solution 1/2 way through? There is a great provision called stretch amnesty exemption in this CBA. The player's apparently have agreed to it. It affords a Det to waive Hamilton, cut his payments in 1/2 & extend their length. They get cap space ST, & spread the cost over time. This will be a yearly provision. Hamilton then becomes a FA. The owner's are hoping that the restrictions they want on the big wallets will steer Hamilton to the mid & small wallets with the most cap space. You don't design a system on HOPE! When they considered the SAE they should have put in a provision that allows teams to claim Hamilton and TAKEOVER the spread contract! With the losingest teams getting first access to claim him this is a quick way to spread good talent across teams.

I complete agree with this in a way.... At first I didn't like the idea that the league might do this (but it's unfair if these players all go to contending teams).

You see I can change my views about somethings, but some of the things you post, take it to fair.




Nobody has a problem with the Showtime Lakers. When you build a championship with competent drafts, good coaching, & strong development you are well deserving of it regardless of your team's revenue. Consider the Heat in the reverse. Let's say 4 yrs from now, the Big 3 leave all at the same time. Under a FA compensation system the Heat would get an infusion of 1st rd picks. If they strike gold & land 2 future max players in one draft, they might suffer 1 yr but they'll regain contending status quickly.

Thats not going to happen... Wade & Lbj are going to retire has HEAT players, sorry.

Tony_Starks
11-05-2011, 05:13 PM
You're a dreamer. I'm logistics driven. The odds of weak teams landing max players in the draft are no where close to where you are dreaming. About 1/2 of lottery picks wash out. It doesn't matter what team is doing the picking. About 1/2 the rest go on to reach max status. The other 1/2 fall somewhere in between. Of the 1/2 that get to max status, about 1/2 of them don't stay there long. A small % of lottery picks then go on to become consistent max players with long careers.

The waiver system is not fine. The waiver system needs to be tweaked to favor the weakest teams just like it is in the other 3 majors. This idea that the NBA is somehow above them is ridiculous. The NBA is in dire need of these things. What you just can't seem to grasp is that 10 teams right now have no hope of ever exceeding the cap. They just don't have the rev's. Exemptions don't mean much to them. They have the cap space. They need the $ & the talent.


How do you think those 10 teams you speak of got in that predicament? Would it not be from years total incompetence? I mean these guys can't even rebuild right. How many of them have been putting together teams for years that are not good enough for the playoffs and not bad enough for a decent draft pick. Thats not a system issue, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the concept of destroy and rebuild. And you speak of drafts do you ever wonder why teams like the Spurs for example ALWAYS draft good players, regardless of their position? You think thats by luck or skill?

Basically what you're saying is you want to take a situation that took years of messing up to get them where they are and wipe the slate clean overnight with new rules. Not going to happen. Took them years to get in, will take them years to get out. Thats just reality. How did Miami and New York even get in position to pull off what they did? Was it not literally years of planning? Its not like they just lucked out.....

ChiSoxJuan
11-05-2011, 05:26 PM
Do you know what your argument amounts to? You are walking around town with a big yellow stain on your leather jacket. People are looking at you. You reply, "don't worry it will wear off eventually." Do you know what their response is? You're a ! Go & clean off your leather jacket! Do what you have to & remove the stain! Do you understand why MLB has all the system changes it does to help weak teams? Because they understood things had gotten so dire they needed a QUICK resolution to resuscitate those teams. That solution had to include benefiting from the decisions of successful teams. That's where Rule 5 comes into play. These players are blocked on contending teams. They gain a chance to play on weaker teams. That's where the waiver wire comes into a play. When the Yankees waive a player, the weak teams take a look in hopes the Yanks are open to a trade of cash for picks & talent so they can get that player cheaper. It happens all the time.

To DC: I hate the Heat. I was a fan of Wade at Marquette. I saw plenty of his games when he was there. He was destined to be a Bull. I will always believe that & hold out hope eventually the desire burns in him to play in the house MJ built. You can keep Lebron :D

Dade County
11-05-2011, 06:23 PM
D wade can't leave the HEAT... I'm serious.

lbj can leave before he can.... Wade is a heater for life.

And why do you hate the HEAT, they haven't done anything wrong, they just got players out of free agency.

ChiSoxJuan
11-05-2011, 08:42 PM
I didn't really care if Bosh & LBJ went to the Heat. Wade needed to be a Bull. Where does he spend his summers? Chicago. He spends more days away from the game in Chicago than he does in Miami. We got him to cry over the decision the last time so here's hoping we seal the deal for what should be the last contract in his career. What a way to go out. Winning championships for the Bulls alongside Rose-Howard. Everyone will praise the Bulls for doing it the right way. They'll get Howard through trade & afford Orlando the opportunity to build around Noah. They won't use their market pull to sign him as a FA & leave his team high & dry. Talent for talent to get Howard. Wade, will simply say enough with South Beach, Chicago's my home. Lebron's an ***, & Rose is a hero. I want to be a hero too. I'm sick of being a villain. The return of the Prodigal son. By then the Bulls will have come off their 3rd franchise 3-peat. Wade will be part of the 4th.

Tony_Starks
11-05-2011, 08:48 PM
I didn't really care if Bosh & LBJ went to the Heat. Wade needed to be a Bull. Where does he spend his summers? Chicago. He spends more days away from the game in Chicago than he does in Miami. We got him to cry over the decision the last time so here's hoping we seal the deal for what should be the last contract in his career. What a way to go out. Winning championships for the Bulls alongside Rose-Howard. Everyone will praise the Bulls for doing it the right way. They'll get Howard through trade & afford Orlando the opportunity to build around Noah. They won't use their market pull to sign him as a FA & leave his team high & dry. Talent for talent to get Howard. Wade, will simply say enough with South Beach, Chicago's my home. Lebron's an ***, & Rose is a hero. I want to be a hero too. I'm sick of being a villain. The return of the Prodigal son. By then the Bulls will have come off their 3rd franchise 3-peat. Wade will be part of the 4th.



Aha! I suddenly see where you're onsided bitterness stems from. All your post make sense to me now........

That basically sounds like a disgruntled ex-boyfriend that lost his chick to a rich guy with a Bentley.

Dade County
11-05-2011, 09:00 PM
I didn't really care if Bosh & LBJ went to the Heat. Wade needed to be a Bull. Where does he spend his summers? Chicago. He spends more days away from the game in Chicago than he does in Miami. We got him to cry over the decision the last time so here's hoping we seal the deal for what should be the last contract in his career. What a way to go out. Winning championships for the Bulls alongside Rose-Howard. Everyone will praise the Bulls for doing it the right way. They'll get Howard through trade & afford Orlando the opportunity to build around Noah. They won't use their market pull to sign him as a FA & leave his team high & dry. Talent for talent to get Howard. Wade, will simply say enough with South Beach, Chicago's my home. Lebron's an ***, & Rose is a hero. I want to be a hero too. I'm sick of being a villain. The return of the Prodigal son. By then the Bulls will have come off their 3rd franchise 3-peat. Wade will be part of the 4th.

Why did you do this to yourself....... :no:



They'll get Howard through trade & afford Orlando the opportunity to build around Noah. They won't use their market pull to sign him as a FA & leave his team high & dry.

Your going to sale to the GM / fan bass/ & Ownership of the Magic.... That Noah is a piece to build around (After they had D12) :laugh2:

And then you slip in, YOU WONT USE YOUR MARKET pull TO SIGN HOWARD AS A FREE AGENT, BECAUSE you DON"T WANT TO LEAVE ORLANDO HIGH & DRY :punish:

Could the reason why the Bulls will make a trade offer to the Magic, is because thats the only way Howard can get on your team???????????



Wade, will simply say enough with South Beach, Chicago's my home. Lebron's an ***, & Rose is a hero. I want to be a hero too. I'm sick of being a villain. The return of the Prodigal son. By then the Bulls will have come off their 3rd franchise 3-peat. Wade will be part of the 4th.

:laugh: Good one!!!

And how would you have done it the right way, when Wade would have to sign with you guys as a FREE AGENT
( I know you hate that word)

All joking aside ..... That was priceless ( I know you are joking.... all fun and games )

ChiSoxJuan
11-05-2011, 09:08 PM
You just don't undestand NBA fans. The first loyalty they respect is for a draftee to stay with the team that drafted them. But that only lasts until the player's final yrs. Then they respect the player's right to play before his hometown fans. We won't be signing Wade as a FA. Beaten by the Bulls 3 yrs in a row, changes will be inevitable for the Heat. Wade will have the best trade value of the unholy trinity so he'll cajole Mia into getting the deal done. You'll get a starting SG & some picks so we won't leave you high & dry. No one will ever claim a Lebron led team to be dry. You'll always be the villains. No sympathy for the devil. :D

You clearly don't know Noah. The Bulls do not rape the system like the Heat & the Lakers. They upgrade their talent when the opportunity presents itself. Noah led the league in rebounding & double-double's for the first 2 mo's of the season last yr. That's right. He was beating D12. Of course the return of Boozer, & getting hurt put an end to that but it showed what Noah's capable of if when he's the focus in the post, & he can stay healthy. So yes, Orlando can build around Noah.

Dade County
11-05-2011, 09:12 PM
You just don't undestand NBA fans. The first loyalty they respect is for a draftee to stay with the team that drafted them. But that only lasts until the player's final yrs. Then they respect the player's right to play before his hometown fans. We won't be signing Wade as a FA. Beaten by the Bulls 3 yrs in a row, changes will be inevitable for the Heat. Wade will have the best trade value of the unholy trinity so he'll cajole Mia into getting the deal done. You'll get a starting SG & some picks so we won't leave you high & dry. No one will ever claim a Lebron led team to be dry. You'll always be the villains. No sympathy for the devil. :D

Child please ... My Yahweh be with you.

ink
11-06-2011, 12:13 AM
You just don't undestand NBA fans. The first loyalty they respect is for a draftee to stay with the team that drafted them. But that only lasts until the player's final yrs. Then they respect the player's right to play before his hometown fans. We won't be signing Wade as a FA. Beaten by the Bulls 3 yrs in a row, changes will be inevitable for the Heat. Wade will have the best trade value of the unholy trinity so he'll cajole Mia into getting the deal done. You'll get a starting SG & some picks so we won't leave you high & dry. No one will ever claim a Lebron led team to be dry. You'll always be the villains. No sympathy for the devil. :D

You clearly don't know Noah. The Bulls do not rape the system like the Heat & the Lakers. They upgrade their talent when the opportunity presents itself. Noah led the league in rebounding & double-double's for the first 2 mo's of the season last yr. That's right. He was beating D12. Of course the return of Boozer, & getting hurt put an end to that but it showed what Noah's capable of if when he's the focus in the post, & he can stay healthy. So yes, Orlando can build around Noah.

Strongly agree with the bolded. Huge market but they still endured years of rebuilding to get where they are today. They didn't just buy their way to winning; they developed largely from within and then supplemented that work.

Kevj77
11-06-2011, 12:24 AM
What's with this buying their way to winning BS. By the part you bolded and your post you imply that the Bulls did it the right way, but the Heat and Lakers didn't. Come on man. The Heat got way under the cap to sign free agents they aren't even in the luxury tax yet. The Lakers built their team just like the Bulls with good drafting and trades. The only free agents on the team are Artest (Metta), Fisher, Barnes and Blake. The rest of the team was put together through the draft or trades. That isn't the right way? Clearing cap space isn't the right way?

Are you just upset they put a core together and can afford to keep it? What is the right way Ink?

What do you think the Bulls payroll would be like in a few years if the NBA kept the current CBA? When they have to give Rose the max and fill out their roster with Deng, Noah and Boozer all making over 10 mil? Same goes for OKC once they extend all their players on rookie contracts and fill out a roster? They would have huge payrolls, but it's OK bcause they did it right?

ChiSoxJuan
11-06-2011, 12:40 AM
Wrong. You're looking at just last yr of the Lakers. You have to look at the moves for all of the championship yrs & the fact they are the biggest spenders in the league over that time. That being said let's talk about Artest. What did he cost the Lakers? Would he have made a difference on the Bulls vs the Heat if he had chosen to go back to the team that drafted him instead? Did he take the easy road with LA over the challenging road with Chicago?

With respect to the Heat. You're right. You can't fault mgmt or the system for the centerpiece of their team (Wade) orchestrating the greatest single move the NBA has ever seen. You can't fault Wade either. But you are still looking at 3 guys that will avg $60M/yr in a very short time. Mia has made their choice. They now have to build around that core with whatever picks they can scrounge up & whatever vets will choose to play with them for the min. They should not be bailed out by the MLE.

The MLE was the biggest mistake of the old CBA which is why the hardliners are fighting for it's removal. The idea of the cap was to be hard when trying to attract new FA's & soft when extending your own players. The MLE threw a major wrench in that. The MLE allowed big revenue teams to attract good FA's & later extend them under Bird rights. Again the league did not forsee that. They know better now but the NBAPA is resistant to it's removal.

ink
11-06-2011, 12:41 AM
What's with this buying their way to winning BS. By the part you bolded and your post you imply that the Bulls did it the right way, but the Heat and Lakers didn't. Come on man. The Heat got way under the cap to sign free agents they aren't even in the luxury tax yet. The Lakers built their team just like the Bulls with good drafting and trades. The only free agents on the team are Artest (Metta), Fisher, Barnes and Blake. The rest of the team was put together through the draft or trades. That isn't the right way? Clearing cap space isn't the right way?

You're using the flawed CBA to justify what they've done. No, clearing cap space isn't the right way; it's the way the previous CBA allowed for, which is exactly what needs to be rectified in the current CBA negotiations.


What do you think the Bulls payroll would be like in a few years if the NBA kept the current CBA? When they have to give Rose the max and fill out their roster with Deng, Noah and Boozer all making over 10 mil? Same goes for OKC once they extend all their players on rookie contracts and fill out a roster? They would have huge payrolls, but it's OK bcause they did it right?

No, they will have a window with this talent just like any team will have a window of opportunity. That's the way a hard cap system works at least and it's not such a bad system when you consider the interests of the whole league.

ink
11-06-2011, 12:43 AM
The MLE was the biggest mistake of the old CBA which is why the hardliners are fighting for it's removal. The idea of the cap was to be hard when trying to attract new FA's & soft when extending your own players. The MLE threw a major wrench in that. The MLE allowed big revenue teams to attract good FA's & later extend them under Bird rights. Again the league did not forsee that. They know better now but the NBAPA is resistant to it's removal.

Well said.

ChiSoxJuan
11-06-2011, 12:46 AM
What do you think the Bulls payroll would be like in a few years if the NBA kept the current CBA? When they have to give Rose the max and fill out their roster with Deng, Noah and Boozer all making over 10 mil? Same goes for OKC once they extend all their players on rookie contracts and fill out a roster? They would have huge payrolls, but it's OK bcause they did it right?

Yes. Again the spirit of the cap is to be flexible to keep one's own talent. Talent developed by the organzation & be hard when trying to acquire someone else's talent. The MLE allowed teams like the Lakers to acquire talent that could of helped other teams greatly & then extend those players under Bird rights. That's one of the reasons they have the highest payroll & tax costs.

Kevj77
11-06-2011, 01:10 AM
You're using the flawed CBA to justify what they've done. No, clearing cap space isn't the right way; it's the way the previous CBA allowed for, which is exactly what needs to be rectified in the current CBA negotiations.

No, they will have a window with this talent just like any team will have a window of opportunity. That's the way a hard cap system works at least and it's not such a bad system when you consider the interests of the whole league.Ink what is wrong with clearing cap space? Free agency was fought for in the courts and won by players in every major sport. It is part of the system now. I'd agree if the Heat were way over the cap, but they weren't they planned for free agency. They weren't the only team that tried this, but they got the major free agents, which got them a lot of hate from fans of teams that thought they had a chance at Lebron, Wade or Bosh.

As for having a window that has to close because of some artificial limitation like a cap that blows. Why should a teams window close other than injury or age? You would like to see teams that make good decision in the draft, trades or free agency have to blow up their teams? Why so teams that make bad decisions can get those players?

Help me understand this because I don't. I'd like to see a system were every owner could make a profit and afford their players at the same time, if that means players make less cool. To make it so teams can't keep their rosters not cool.

ink
11-06-2011, 01:18 AM
Ink what is wrong with clearing cap space? Free agency was fought for in the courts and won by players in every major sport. It is part of the system now. I'd agree if the Heat were way over the cap, but they weren't they planned for free agency. They weren't the only team that tried this, but they got the major free agents, which got them a lot of hate from fans of teams that thought they had a chance at Lebron, Wade or Bosh.

As for having a window that has to close because of some artificial limitation like a cap that blows. Why should a teams window close other than injury or age? You would like to see teams that make good decision in the draft, trades or free agency have to blow up their teams? Why so teams that make bad decisions can get those players?

Help me understand this because I don't. I'd like to see a system were every owner could make a profit and afford their plays at the same time, if that means players make less cool. To make it so teams can't keep their rosters not cool.

CLEARING CAP SPACE: you asked what the right way was. My answer would be develop from within like the Spurs. Clearing cap space is legal, sure, but I'd rather see a team develop their own success rather than horde someone else's developed talent. I'd also rather see athletes who dedicate themselves to their teams and teammates. The only examples I can give are from the past right? Doesn't mean I want to return to the past. I just can't give examples from the future when the NBA becomes less about individuals and more about the team sport that it actually is. :)

TALENT WINDOW: every team has this regardless of cap situation. The Spurs' window has closed, the Suns window has closed. This, for me, was the most exciting rivalry of the past decade and it's over now. Windows close, other windows open. The Thunder's window is now open, the Bulls window is now open. Looking for great things from those teams. Shrewdly built teams that worked hard for years to build their success. Bulls haven't had success since the MJ years while the Thunder (aka Sonics) haven't been great since Kemp and Payton. Great to see them back and great to see that they did it mostly from within.

Dade County
11-06-2011, 01:19 AM
Ink what is wrong with clearing cap space? Free agency was fought for in the courts and won by players in every major sport. It is part of the system now. I'd agree if the Heat were way over the cap, but they weren't they planned for free agency. They weren't the only team that tried this, but they got the major free agents, which got them a lot of hate from fans of teams that thought they had a chance at Lebron, Wade or Bosh.

As for having a window that has to close because of some artificial limitation like a cap that blows. Why should a teams window close other than injury or age? You would like to see teams that make good decision in the draft, trades or free agency have to blow up their teams? Why so teams that make bad decisions can get those players?

Help me understand this because I don't. I'd like to see a system were every owner could make a profit and afford their players at the same time, if that means players make less cool. To make it so teams can't keep their rosters not cool.

I just think that some of these guys just what change... They would like their teams to be contenders, I can't hate on them for that; but some of their suggestions on how the system could be different are not to my looking.

Kevj77
11-06-2011, 01:25 AM
Yes. Again the spirit of the cap is to be flexible to keep one's own talent. Talent developed by the organzation & be hard when trying to acquire someone else's talent. The MLE allowed teams like the Lakers to acquire talent that could of helped other teams greatly & then extend those players under Bird rights. That's one of the reasons they have the highest payroll & tax costs.Completely wrong the only players that LA acquired in free agency are Artest, Fisher, Barnes and Blake. They only take up 17% of the payroll. The reason the Lakers have the highest payroll is

1) they re-signed the players they drafted or traded for like Kobe, Pau, Bynum and Odom.

2) they are an older team and under this CBA players can get yearly raises and even higher raises with Bird rights.

Dade County
11-06-2011, 01:28 AM
CLEARING CAP SPACE: you asked what the right way was. My answer would be develop from within like the Spurs. Clearing cap space is legal, sure, but I'd rather see a team develop their own success rather than horde someone else's developed talent. I'd also rather see athletes who dedicate themselves to their teams and teammates. The only examples I can give are from the past right? Doesn't mean I want to return to the past. I just can't give examples from the future when the NBA becomes less about individuals and more about the team sport that it actually is. :)

It's not someone's else's talent... They are free agents (That means) they have no allegiance to any organization; they earned that by fulfilling their CONTRACT.

Teams don't even dedicate them self's to the players they draft or sign as free agents. Where is this coming from:confused:



TALENT WINDOW: every team has this regardless of cap situation. The Spurs' window has closed, the Suns window has closed. This, for me, was the most exciting rivalry of the past decade and it's over now. Windows close, other windows open. The Thunder's window is now open, the Bulls window is now open. Looking for great things from those teams. Shrewdly built teams that worked hard for years to build their success. Bulls haven't had success since the MJ years while the Thunder (aka Sonics) haven't been great since Kemp and Payton. Great to see them back and great to see that they did it mostly from within.


But what does it matter if it's from with in, or by trade or free agency:confused:

Just come out and say it... You think their should be no free agency, right?

da ThRONe
11-06-2011, 01:39 AM
You have to be lucky to build through the draft. Sure it takes an eye for talent, but with things like the lottery and draft player have to fall to you.

ChiSoxJuan
11-06-2011, 02:51 AM
This thread is about what small market teams really want. Simply put leverage to keep the players they draft & develop longer & leverage to sign impending FA's over teams grossly over the cap like the Lakers. Cap rules prevent the Laker's from signing them as FA's, but not to work S&T's for them before they become FA's.

Obviously if you are a fan of teams that have been using their market & revenue leverage to get the best FA's & work the best S&T deals then you're not going to give a crap about what these teams want. You're just posting in here to basically crap on their problems. The rest of us believe they have a point though we may disagree with their methods.

Kevj77
11-06-2011, 03:06 AM
This thread is about what small market teams really want. Simply put leverage to keep the players they draft & develop longer & leverage to sign impending FA's over teams grossly over the cap like the Lakers. Cap rules prevent the Laker's from signing them as FA's, but not to work S&T's for them before they become FA's.

Obviously if you are a fan of teams that have been using their market & revenue leverage to get the best FA's & work the best S&T deals then you're not going to give a crap about what these teams want. You're just posting in here to basically crap on their problems. The rest of us believe they have a point though we may disagree with their methods.Seriously stop using the Lakers as an example it's making you look bad. The Lakers have zero players they did a S&T for. Also the Bulls have more money spent in free agency than the Lakers. Boozer and Korver make $18.5 million, that is more than all the Lakers free agents combined $16.09 million for Artest, Fisher, Barnes and Blake.

You're are looking like a hypocrit. You said it was OK for the Bulls to spend to keep their core, but don't mention they added free agents while they still could.
Yes. Again the spirit of the cap is to be flexible to keep one's own talent. Talent developed by the organzation & be hard when trying to acquire someone else's talent. The MLE allowed teams like the Lakers to acquire talent that could of helped other teams greatly & then extend those players under Bird rights. That's one of the reasons they have the highest payroll & tax costs.
Yet you keep using the Lakers as an example of buying people when your team has used cap space to sign free agents before the Bulls have zero cap space because they have to pay Rose the Max.

ChiSoxJuan
11-06-2011, 03:20 AM
Seriously, if you want your defense of the Lakers to gain any credence at all you must go BEFORE the time that Artest joined them. You must show a chronology of their moves since their championship run over the last decade under the last 2 CBA's. If you are not prepared to do that, you have no defense.

What the small market teams really want has been clearly defined & I'm just happy that for now it coincides with what the Bulls want. We are a big market team under the cap with tradeable assets & good picks. That's rare in the NBA right now.

Kevj77
11-06-2011, 03:42 AM
The last two CBA's are you serious the CBA before this one wasn't unfair to any team. Salaries didn't explode until the late 90s early 2000s when this current CBA took effect. You are talking out your ***.

What about before Artest joined them? Who besides Shaq has ever got more money than Artest from the Lakers in free agency? Nobody that's who. I'll admit we signed Shaq, but we cleared cap space to do it. They traded for Horry, Rice, Odom, Ariza and Gasol. They drafted Kobe (draft day trade), Fisher, Jones, Van Exel, Campbell, Bynum, Divac. The biggest free agents we signed were Fox, Artest and Fisher (his second time around). We trade Jones and Campbell for Rice, Ceballos for Horry, Divac a starting center for the pick that landed Kobe, Shaq for Odom, the only trade anyone can say was robbery was Pau and we traded Kwame (they really wanted his $10 mil expiring contract) Marc Gasol and 2 first round picks, honestly you want me to go over the entire Lakers history just to prove you wrong.

Yet somehow you want the Bulls to have all the same advantages, you aren't even a small market fan. The Bulls have spent more on free agency than the Lakers.

ChiSoxJuan
11-06-2011, 03:51 AM
They traded for Horry, Rice, Odom, Ariza and Gasol.
BINGO we have a winner! How many of those trades came by way of leverage?
They don't win the championships without these guys. How many of those trades & the subsequent ones you mentioned involved players holding a gun to their former teams to get the trade done?

Of course you lost all credence with the Bulls have spent more on FA then the Bulls. That's not even close to the truth. The only prominent FA's we spent $ on were Wallace & Boozer. Wallace we quickly trade to free the cap space, & Boozer involved no leverage at all. His former team didn't even bother with S&T.

ChiSoxJuan
11-06-2011, 03:53 AM
They traded for Horry, Rice, Odom, Ariza and Gasol.
BINGO we have a winner! How many of those trades came by way of leverage?
They don't win the championships without these guys. How many of those trades & the subsequent ones you mentioned involved players holding a gun to their former teams to get the trade done?

Of course you lost all credence with the Bulls have spent more on FA. That's not even close to the truth. The only prominent FA's we spent $ on during the last Lakers championship run were Wallace & Boozer. Wallace we quickly trade to free the cap space, & Boozer involved no leverage at all. His former team didn't even bother with S&T.

ChiSoxJuan
11-06-2011, 03:57 AM
They traded for Horry, Rice, Odom, Ariza and Gasol.
BINGO we have a winner! How many of those trades came by way of leverage?
They don't win the championships without these guys. How many of those trades & the subsequent ones you mentioned involved players holding a gun to their former teams to get the trade done?

Of course you lost all credence with the Bulls have spent more on FA. That's not even close to the truth. The only prominent FA's we spent $ on during the last Lakers championship run were Wallace & Boozer. Wallace we quickly traded to free the cap space, & Boozer involved no leverage at all. His former team didn't even bother with S&T.

Kevj77
11-06-2011, 04:07 AM
They traded for Horry, Rice, Odom, Ariza and Gasol.
BINGO we have a winner! How many of those trades came by way of leverage?
They don't win the championships without these guys. How many of those trades & the subsequent ones you mentioned involved players holding a gun to their former teams to get the trade done?

Of course you lost all credence with the Bulls have spent more on FA. That's not even close to the truth. The only prominent FA's we spent $ on during the last Lakers championship run were Wallace & Boozer. Wallace we quickly traded to free the cap space, & Boozer involved no leverage at all. His former team didn't even bother with S&T.You really are amking yourself look bad. Ceballos was an all-star for Horry, Ariza wasn't even in the Orlando rotation it was considered a minor trade that really worked out, they traded Shaq for Odom, and Jones another all-star and Campbell for Rice, the Pau trade was fairer than people made it out to be at the time it included Kwame's $10,000,000 expiring, Marc Gasol and 2 first round picks. You act like Boozer and Korver are the only free agents you signed over the last decade, but te fact remains they make more than all the current Lakers free agents combined. Yes, we signed Shaq, but they cleared cap space to do it.

The didn't use any leverage, none of those player were holding guns to the heads of their teams.

It's called good management.

ink
11-06-2011, 04:54 AM
It's not someone's else's talent... They are free agents (That means) they have no allegiance to any organization; they earned that by fulfilling their CONTRACT.

Teams don't even dedicate them self's to the players they draft or sign as free agents. Where is this coming from:confused:

Obviously it is someone else's developed talent. Someone else developed it.


But what does it matter if it's from with in, or by trade or free agency:confused:

This really deserves a facepalm, but here's an answer: because the team that develops a champion from within has achieved the ultimate. It means that franchise fully deserves the championship they have earned, not bought. I'm aware that most champions have free agents on their roster. The issue is with teams that continually hoard free agents, or teams that wipe out massive amounts of cap space and try to build super teams, teams that are often not even really that great. There's a huge difference between teams that operate as teams and win, and teams that have enough elite individual talent that they don't even have to be fully functional.


Just come out and say it... You think their should be no free agency, right?

I have no problem with free agency; my issue is with collusion and the fact that the league/management need to be managing the league, not the players. Let people do what they are qualified to do.

Kevj77
11-06-2011, 05:05 AM
Ink you use the Spurs as an example, but they only got Duncan because Robinson got hurt. Then lucked out and won the lottery to land Duncan, then when Robinson came back healthy they won it all. Sure they drafted well (Parker and Manu), but they also made smart trades and signed player that wanted to win at a discount. They don't win their last championship without Horry.

How do you consider luck into the equation? Is luck better than good management?

No team is ever made p entirely from the draft, honestly you are reaching here.

abe_froman
11-06-2011, 05:20 AM
How do you consider luck into the equation? Is luck better than good management?

No team is ever made p entirely from the draft, honestly you are reaching here.

to your question: always,thats he difference between winners and losers.we're not the the most well run team,never have been.but fell *** backwards into two that you can build around

basketball isnt like other sports where refinement/development is a big part of the job.the league is and has always been dominated by raw talent players ,relying on just their gifts.its the nature of sport

ink
11-06-2011, 05:23 AM
^^ Not reaching at all. Again and again I've posted about the teams that build from within by acknowledging that they mostly build from within. We're all aware that teams supplement their rosters with key free agents. It's a question of balance. I've also said multiple times that I have no problem with free agency since it works for both sides when done well. That is also a question of balance. But the emphasis has to be on developing your own core, your own talent. That is a massive part of the competition between franchises in any sport, that's where the pride is in developing a champion. It's not just about who can stack a team and win, it's about who can develop a team and win. There's absolutely nothing wrong with controlling free agency so that all 30 teams in the league have a chance at talent acquisition and retention. The problem right now with the NBA is that the players are too entrenched in their entitled position to see that they are destroying the essence of competition between teams in this league.

ChiSoxJuan
11-06-2011, 10:05 AM
Again the economic disparity in the NBA is that the Lakers spend 40-45% of their revenue on player's salaries and small market teams spend as much as 70-75%. The Lakers are the biggest spenders in the NBA. Small market teams obviously want the rules to shrink that gap. The economic disparity in MLB is even greater than that in the NBA, but much better revenue sharing, a luxury tax system that's goes mostly to the weakest, & rules of operation like arbitration, compensation picks, trades around waivers, & a supplemental draft provide less competitive disparity than the NBA.

The small market battle is not just against the NBAPA. It's against the big wallets as well. No one is suggesting there should be no FA. FA is the lifeblood of MLB & even the small markets like KC will spend $10M/yr on a starter. They can do that now because they have that money as a result of revenue sharing that essentially doubles what they take in locally. All any onei is saying is that FA needs to be tempered. MLB does it right & the NBA does it wrong.

Southsideheat
11-07-2011, 10:44 AM
Maybe these small market teams should be worrying about putting a good team around their star players instead of worrying about them leaving. If a team like Cleveland can't win a championship with lebron after 7 years, they deserve to lose him. Same goes to Minnesota and KG.

BigCityofDreams
11-07-2011, 12:00 PM
Maybe these small market teams should be worrying about putting a good team around their star players instead of worrying about them leaving. If a team like Cleveland can't win a championship with lebron after 7 years, they deserve to lose him. Same goes to Minnesota and KG.

Seven yrs and they surround Lebron with flashy names of stars past their prime. Oh look we got you Shaq...hey look we got you Ben Wallace remember when he was a defensive beast.

Chronz
11-07-2011, 12:13 PM
So the Spurs are the only legit champs?

Chronz
11-07-2011, 12:17 PM
.

Chronz
11-07-2011, 12:37 PM
^^ Not reaching at all. Again and again I've posted about the teams that build from within by acknowledging that they mostly build from within. We're all aware that teams supplement their rosters with key free agents. It's a question of balance.
Only there is nothing more honorable about TANKING to get a player in the Draft than patiently waiting (The Heat wasted 2 of Wades PRIME YEARS which nearly led to his departure just to have the Cap Space) and acquiring talent through FA. What kind of balance do you find acceptable? How many trades can a champ be allowed to make and how good of a player can they trade for? Why is it ok for the Spurs to tank and get Duncan/D-Rob but its not ok for Miami to waste 2 years of Wades prime just to get him the help he needs? Duncan came into the league a superstar so its not like they developed him. They also added Manu, a 25 year old international phenom. About the only guy they developed was Tony Parker but why so much emphasis on the development. Developing a player doesnt make him your property so why should he be forced to stay somewhere he clearly doesnt want to be.


I've also said multiple times that I have no problem with free agency since it works for both sides when done well. That is also a question of balance.
You have said this but you have yet to clarify what you mean. This vague concept doesnt sound like Free Agency to me, it sounds more like slavery. It works just fine, the problem has never been stars leaving as all 3 amigos stayed with their teams beyond their draft contracts.


But the emphasis has to be on developing your own core, your own talent. That is a massive part of the competition between franchises in any sport, that's where the pride is in developing a champion. It's not just about who can stack a team and win, it's about who can develop a team and win.
As a fan its probably more enjoyable watching your team gradually turn into a contender but the the pride in meshing together still exists. Its not a given that talent = titles so the hardwork that gos into winning is still there. In fact I always find it more impressive when players come together to accomplish something their GM's couldnt ala Celtics.


There's absolutely nothing wrong with controlling free agency so that all 30 teams in the league have a chance at talent acquisition and retention.
We already have that its called Restricted FA and the players can only choose from the teams that have the cap space. Also the rules are set up to favor home teams so they actually have a better shot. In order for a star to leave (like Bron did) they have to take less money.

Its why teams have already been able to keep those players, why do you think Bron was never able to get help in Cleveland and he was there for 7 years. How long is a star player suppose to put up with negligent ownership?



The problem right now with the NBA is that the players are too entrenched in their entitled position to see that they are destroying the essence of competition between teams in this league.

Even if what your saying is true, the vague concepts your asking for are unrealistic and have gone the way of the dodo ever the strike at the All-Star game.

Chronz
11-07-2011, 12:44 PM
Maybe these small market teams should be worrying about putting a good team around their star players instead of worrying about them leaving. If a team like Cleveland can't win a championship with lebron after 7 years, they deserve to lose him. Same goes to Minnesota and KG.

Precisely why those focusing on FA have things completely backwards, those guys stayed FOREVER, particularly KG. The problem isnt with stars leaving, its WHY they felt the need to leave. Most of those reasons can be changed, its just more expensive. Thats why owners dont want to do away with the system, they just want to further encroach on the freedom the players have worked hard to obtain.

The only tweak the system needs is that teams should be able to erase their mistakes, buyouts that dont count against the cap would have allowed those teams with stars to build better teams around them.

Still the biggest contradiction is this, how do you make it easier for that star to obtain the support he requires without a team losing their players?

Like had Cleveland been able to offer Ray Allen or Michael Redd the dollars that their homes teams were able to give then one of them gos to Cleveland. But what happens to the teams that lose them?

Chronz
11-07-2011, 01:01 PM
Again the economic disparity in the NBA is that the Lakers spend 40-45% of their revenue on player's salaries and small market teams spend as much as 70-75%. The Lakers are the biggest spenders in the NBA. Small market teams obviously want the rules to shrink that gap.
This is a good measure for cost analysis but not really for measuring how much teams actually spend because the %'s involved arent equal. For example what your suggesting, that small market teams want THAT gap to shrink is essentially asking for the Lakers to spend more of their money on players or bringing up the revenue of smaller markets. Both of which would accomplish nothing in the way of parity but would definitely make the league richer as a whole.


The economic disparity in MLB is even greater than that in the NBA, but much better revenue sharing, a luxury tax system that's goes mostly to the weakest, & rules of operation like arbitration, compensation picks, trades around waivers, & a supplemental draft provide less competitive disparity than the NBA.

So basically those teams that dont get the players get more money. The supplemental draft sounds interesting but if its what Im thinking (giving the team useless picks) its totally non-transitive. A harder lux tax system might curve spending but this really only hurts teams trying to KEEP their own stars as teams can only go over on players with bird rights or MLE players.



The small market battle is not just against the NBAPA. It's against the big wallets as well.
Based on what though? Im pretty sure the Knicks have as much economic power as anyone else and they have sucked throughout this CBA.


No one is suggesting there should be no FA. FA is the lifeblood of MLB & even the small markets like KC will spend $10M/yr on a starter. They can do that now because they have that money as a result of revenue sharing that essentially doubles what they take in locally. All any onei is saying is that FA needs to be tempered. MLB does it right & the NBA does it wrong.

But the MLB system isnt tempered, I think your on to something with giving smaller markets the chance to spend.

ink
11-07-2011, 01:06 PM
Even if what your saying is true, the vague concepts your asking for are unrealistic and have gone the way of the dodo ever the strike at the All-Star game.

It's a summary. It's not up to me to propose the solution now is it? Am I employed by either the league or the union? Is anyone on this board? Is anyone privy to the inner workings of the league, of its finances, of its proposals, of negotiation minutes? We all get press releases that turn into media articles or television spots, no more. We disagree on what's right/wrong with the league. You like the status quo. I see it as dysfunctional. As long as the owners achieve something sensible I will support some of their ideas. As of now, I'd say they've failed miserably in the last two CBAs and the current round of negotiations. It's not entirely their fault however, since the players are fighting against change with all they can muster. It's hard to achieve progress when one side refuses to even see the need. So, for now, we're left with a bland compromise that can't really satisfy anyone.

Hellcrooner
11-07-2011, 01:17 PM
^ if i was in the payroll of the league, lockout woudl be over.
Owners ( at least half of them) would be happy, players woudl be happy too.
its a simple equation Money and freedom rights, the more of one you get in the deal the more you give up in the other end, that would make them happy.

ChiSoxJuan
11-07-2011, 01:20 PM
The supplemental draft is not picks in MLB. It's players that have been mostly in the minors for 4-5 yrs. In otherwords, it's all about players that are ready to come up but blocked by the ML talent on those teams. An equivalence in the NBA would be recently drafted players that have spent at least 2 seasons on an NBA roster.

As I said earlier, some of these players have gone on to play on World Series teams in the past decades.

Wrt to the NBA, the small market owners want to see that gap shrink mostly via increased revenue sharing. It's not about salaries at all. They fight over the BRI split because of the lack of revenue sharing.

Rumors have surfaced and are being tweeted about that after MJ's side delivered the terms of the final offer, some of the media moguls who have the largest local media revenue are reaching out to MJ with better offers of revenue sharing to help get this done on Wed. So as I said before, this battle is really small vs big, & small vs union. The more the small win from the big, the less they need to ask from the union. The mid's as always are pretty much along for the ride, & they'll back either the smalls or the bigs depending on their own team's current situation both talent wise & $ wise.

Chronz
11-07-2011, 01:32 PM
It's a summary. It's not up to me to propose the solution now is it? Am I employed by either the league or the union? Is anyone on this board? Is anyone privy to the inner workings of the league, of its finances, of its proposals, of negotiation minutes? We all get press releases that turn into media articles or television spots, no more.
Im asking for the basis behind your summary, not the outright solution. Just your theory on what would help the problems you see with the league and what led you to believe it.



We disagree on what's right/wrong with the league. You like the status quo. I see it as dysfunctional.
Thats not true, I dont think its functioning, I have mentioned several SPECIFIC problems, what I do disagree with are the vague claims because I see no specific breakdown and I do not see historical precedence. Thats why Im asking and have been asking. Your usually a logical fellow so Im curious as to what you know that led to your deductions.

How exactly should we curve FA? What specific incentive could you make that prevents FA from choosing a certain destination.


My impression from your posts is that you think the NBA used to be alot different and that players leaving their original teams is the problem that prevents league wide parity. But you constantly bring up the Decision and all that does is show a group of 3 players who stayed with their teams for 7 years before finally giving up on their negligent owners. Can you think of a better example of whats wrong FA.

Chronz
11-07-2011, 01:34 PM
The supplemental draft is not picks in MLB. It's players that have been mostly in the minors for 4-5 yrs. In otherwords, it's all about players that are ready to come up but blocked by the ML talent on those teams. An equivalence in the NBA would be recently drafted players that have spent at least 2 seasons on an NBA roster.

As I said earlier, some of these players have gone on to play on World Series teams in the past decades.
No the NBA equavalent would be D-League players who arent under contract for an NBA team.

Recently drafted players could mean Derrick Rose. You really think the Bulls should give up D-Rose if they make a FA acquisition.

Tony_Starks
11-07-2011, 01:39 PM
I have yet to hear a logical explanation of how the system the owners are attempting to institute will make it possible for 30 teams to be contenders and get the nba to a place where there's a different team winning a championship every year.

And by the way, the only era where multiple teams won the championship for a decade was the 70's so if you seriously are buying the notion that the "system is broken" because there's no parody then technically its been broken since the 80's........

ChiSoxJuan
11-07-2011, 01:40 PM
You're not even close. A guy who has spent 4-5 yrs mostly in the minors since age 18 or 19 is worth FAR MORE than a D-League player in the NBA. Teams get the right to protect a set amount of players for the Rule 5 in the MLB. Obviously D Rose would be protected. When I mentioned 2 yr players in the NBA, I'm talking about those with the least amount of minutes. The fact they are on the roster means they aren't a total bust.

Chronz
11-07-2011, 01:44 PM
^ if i was in the payroll of the league, lockout woudl be over.
Owners ( at least half of them) would be happy, players woudl be happy too.
its a simple equation Money and freedom rights, the more of one you get in the deal the more you give up in the other end, that would make them happy.

Its at the height of hubris to think we know all the answers, the truth is neither side is going to be happy. The owners should win this time around because they caved in too much the last few years, which only happened because the players had been getting screwed for so long.

In other words its always going to be a work in progress that has to be evaluated every so often. My only cocky stance is that I truly believe players should not be rewarded such long term contracts. It hurts too many teams so either cut back on the guaranteed years or make it so teams dont have to be saddled by those bad contracts in terms of CAP Space.

ChiSoxJuan
11-07-2011, 01:46 PM
We all understand that the only way to insure 30 competitive teams right now, is to blow it all up. Void all the deals, throw all 450 players in a draft, let lottery balls decide the order of the draft & build the teams. That's not going to happen.

All you can do is CHANGE the current system to IMPROVE the odds of teams getting better.

I've listed everything MLB has in it's arsenal to do that. I've even included their foresight in the likely luxury tax system coming wrt to the draft to help weaker teams draft & sign high picks. Don't claim it can't be done. It's already been done in 3 league's & their level of competition has never been stronger. Just look at the @*(@ NHL for pete's sake!

Chronz
11-07-2011, 01:48 PM
I have yet to hear a logical explanation of how the system the owners are attempting to institute will make it possible for 30 teams to be contenders and get the nba to a place where there's a different team winning a championship every year.

And by the way, the only era where multiple teams won the championship for a decade was the 70's so if you seriously are buying the notion that the "system is broken" because there's no parody then technically its been broken since the 80's........

Ive wondered before how the 70's would have been received in this day and age. If every team in the league were .500 would that spark more or less interest?

Part of the reason I like basketball is because of the strength of those teams. I would much rather see 6-7 legitimate powers playing basketball at the highest level possible than see a bunch of mediocre clubs winning a default chip. I also like comparing teams from yesteryear and noticing similarities throughout champions.

Ink has referred to this type of love for the game as a cultural and he may be right, but neither one of is right/wrong but I will admit the league should target whichever audience is greater.

Would you rather see a bunch mediocre clubs fighting for such a prized possession?

ink
11-07-2011, 01:51 PM
Im asking for the basis behind your summary, not the outright solution. Just your theory on what would help the problems you see with the league and what led you to believe it.

Thats not true, I dont think its functioning, I have mentioned several SPECIFIC problems, what I do disagree with are the vague claims because I see no specific breakdown and I do not see historical precedence. Thats why Im asking and have been asking. Your usually a logical fellow so Im curious as to what you know that led to your deductions.

The ideas are throughout the threads. The main one is to move the league away from a star-based system regardless of the current belief that the NBA is a star-driven league. That can be achieved with a change in marketing and a change in system. Yes, I think a hard cap would help because it would force both agents and management to completely rethink their budgets. The rich teams of the league (which btw, the Raptors would be closer to, so there is no bias here) would not be able to stockpile either primary or secondary stars very easily because everyone would have EXACTLY the same budget across the board. There would be no luxury tax at all, which I think is a seriously flawed idea. The hope, and it can only be a hope, since we can't predict the future, is that the league could actually achieve a culture change within the player ranks so that this obnoxious sense of entitlement in the players starts to disappear. I think we could be only a generation away from that, especially if the league stops babying its stars. Who knows, it might also reduce the number of fanboys if the league's marketing approach is less superficial and star-driven. IMO you focus on teamwork, character, work ethic, competition, and stop with the reality TV ********. Remember, when I talk about Reality TV, I'm including all of the Shaq/Kobe crap too, anything of that kind from any of the star players. It's trash. You might think that's vague, but it's very specific. Pampering and enabling these guys' egos has done no good for the league whatsoever, as it has only garnered the league the rep as a trashy league. The NBA seriously needs to clean up its image overall, they need to do much more than just give all 30 teams equal access to talent.

We/they are so used to the convoluted defunct CBA exemptions that they are regarded as gospel. Not so. Other leagues do not allow for any exemptions, they balance their budgets, and they have better overall competition. What people don't realize is that the onus then is on management to work within strict budgetary guidelines with no exceptions. There are models out there: I look at the cap system the NHL has in place as a very effective one. Not perfect, and there are still some over-payments and frenzy-shopping for mediocre players, but quite effective in allowing weak teams to bounce back from bad seasons. I've also written about the collaborative work done by the players and league in the NHL post 2004-05 lockout on improving the rules and quality of play with a Competition Committee.