PDA

View Full Version : When All the Smoke Clears.......



Tony_Starks
11-07-2011, 05:08 PM
(if we ever have basketball again)


Since this thing has essentially turned into the small market owners holding the game hostage, do you think the star players will hold that against them when its all over? I mean if you're a superstar and you know that owners of certain teams were willing to goof off an entire season for a system that ultimately pays you less and limits your options wouldn't you remember it?

I think it will have a backfire effect where guys will start getting together even more and teaming up leaving the Bobcats and Cavs of the world entirely in the cold. At the end of the day you can still go to a big city, clean up on endorsements, and play for a contender so even a restrictive system is not going to stop that.

I just think the "hard-line stance" has the potential to seriously backfire for some teams, at least with this group of stars....

Chronz
11-07-2011, 05:11 PM
Good point, but I doubt it effects them since the stars arent really jumping through hoops to come to them in the first place.

lovingTO
11-07-2011, 05:13 PM
The nba is a joke

iggypop123
11-07-2011, 05:15 PM
jordan can kiss any star coming to charlotte as a free agent

Hawkeye15
11-07-2011, 05:16 PM
minimal effect imo. You do where you get paid. Been that way forever unless you are a superstar, in which case teams cater and make room for you.

In reality, if a player holds it against an owner for not wanting a season if he is just going to continue to lose money due to the structure of the NBA, that is pathetic imo. Players need to understand that the league has to find a way to right itself financially.

Owners caved in on the previous two CBA's, and are now making a strong stand. Fine with me honestly. The players generate the revenues, but they wouldn't be in position to make this kind of money if it wasn't for the structure of the NBA and its owners in the first place.

Muttman73
11-07-2011, 05:21 PM
Why is the NBA the only league that calls it's elite players Super Stars? They don't do that in the NFL, MLB or NHL. One more reason why I hate, for the most part the arrogant and over paid players in this league.

Hawkeye15
11-07-2011, 05:25 PM
Why is the NBA the only league that calls it's elite players Super Stars? They don't do that in the NFL, MLB or NHL. One more reason why I hate, for the most part the arrogant and over paid players in this league.

pretty much dude. Its alarming what the NBA players have become. Easily the most spoiled athletes of any sport.

sixer04fan
11-07-2011, 05:27 PM
minimal effect imo. You do where you get paid. Been that way forever unless you are a superstar, in which case teams cater and make room for you.

In reality, if a player holds it against an owner for not wanting a season if he is just going to continue to lose money due to the structure of the NBA, that is pathetic imo. Players need to understand that the league has to find a way to right itself financially.

Owners caved in on the previous two CBA's, and are now making a strong stand. Fine with me honestly. The players generate the revenues, but they wouldn't be in position to make this kind of money if it wasn't for the structure of the NBA and its owners in the first place.

+1

And when it's all said and done, when the smoke clears, if you're a free agent and any team offers you a substantial contract, that means they want you to be a part of their organization. They like you, they want to give you a lot of money, and they want you to be a part of their team and community. Players appreciate that, regardless of what has happened. Whether you support the owners or not, this lockout is not a personal attack on any one player. It's just the owners trying to make more money for themselves. Whether you see that as selfish or not, it's nothing personal either way.

Will the owners hold a grudge against certain players that want the union to get a better deal? No, of course not. So why would the players hold a grudge against certain owners that want the league to get a better deal?

Tony_Starks
11-07-2011, 05:31 PM
minimal effect imo. You do where you get paid. Been that way forever unless you are a superstar, in which case teams cater and make room for you.

In reality, if a player holds it against an owner for not wanting a season if he is just going to continue to lose money due to the structure of the NBA, that is pathetic imo. Players need to understand that the league has to find a way to right itself financially.

Owners caved in on the previous two CBA's, and are now making a strong stand. Fine with me honestly. The players generate the revenues, but they wouldn't be in position to make this kind of money if it wasn't for the structure of the NBA and its owners in the first place.



Im not so sure about that. There's a reason guys like Kobe and Lebron were selling out arenas when they were in high school. I went to see Lebron play in high school at UCLA's Pauley Pavillion and the place was completely packed. These guys are once in a generation talents. Sure the NBA puts the structure in place, but without these guys putting on the spectacular shows that they do that structure means nothing....

mlisica19
11-07-2011, 05:34 PM
The NBA needs to implement a HARD Salary cap. What they have now only limits what rich teams can do, but does not stop them from obtaining anyone and everyone they wish too.

How is it fair that these Big market teams can obtain the best players even if they go over the cap. Smaller market teams cant afford to even reach the cap, let alone go over it.

Putting a hard cap into the NBA, like the NHL did, would divide the big names, the top tier talent. It would make for a much more competitive game of basketball night in and night out. This is what makes for a strong league...

The smaller teams would be forced to spend $$$, the richer teams would be forced to limit their spending. It makes teams and franchises work harder and think smarter when they assemble their teams. Not just put three superstars with top end role players and watch them go all the way.

Baseball should do it too... Football does not really need to, simply cuz you dont see the same teams winning championships. Football teams rely more on drafting players and bringing them up the works.

The only reason soccer leagues cannot do it is because if you were to limit teams from spending, then players would go to a different league and their are dozens of competitive leagues willing to spend. At least they made a rule that teams cann no longer spend $$ they do not have yet.

Oh and a harder cap does not mean players are limited their money. If the league does well, the salary cap goes up and players can get more money. The most valuable players on each team would be paid the most.

mlisica19
11-07-2011, 05:39 PM
Im not so sure about that. There's a reason guys like Kobe and Lebron were selling out arenas when they were in high school. I went to see Lebron play in high school at UCLA's Pauley Pavillion and the place was completely packed. These guys are once in a generation talents. Sure the NBA puts the structure in place, but without these guys putting on the spectacular shows that they do that structure means nothing....

Exactly but the league will say that its fine the way it is because teams who do not make the playoffs have a good chance at top draft picks. Starting over, top meat talent... except we all know we dont come across Durants and James all the time. A lot of these smaller teams end up with nothing but a solid 1st round pick. Not a face of teh franchise type player.

INSTALL THE HARD Cap! Watch as the bigger teams have to get rid of their 3rd or 4th best guys. Those 3rd or 4th best guys can be top 2 guys on most of the NBA teams. Spread the talent and you make for a more competive league. You will have more competion for the playoffs especially during the last 2 months.

smith&wesson
11-07-2011, 05:44 PM
(if we ever have basketball again)


Since this thing has essentially turned into the small market owners holding the game hostage, do you think the star players will hold that against them when its all over? I mean if you're a superstar and you know that owners of certain teams were willing to goof off an entire season for a system that ultimately pays you less and limits your options wouldn't you remember it?

I think it will have a backfire effect where guys will start getting together even more and teaming up leaving the Bobcats and Cavs of the world entirely in the cold. At the end of the day you can still go to a big city, clean up on endorsements, and play for a contender so even a restrictive system is not going to stop that.

I just think the "hard-line stance" has the potential to seriously backfire for some teams, at least with this group of stars....


first of all which one of the superstars you know of play for a small market city now ? name just ONE. what do the small market teams have to lose ? as it is no one wants to play for them.

the deal in place now allows for large market teams to stack up on talent while small market teams lose the talent they draft.

now the owners are fighting for some of the control back and will fight for a deal that favours them and is structured to help them build a winner. the deal we have in place now leaves ALLLL small market teams with out any stars let alone super stars or multiple stars & super stars. something needs to change.

Tony_Starks
11-07-2011, 05:48 PM
first of all which one of the superstars you know of play for a small market city now ? name just ONE.

what do the small market teams have to lose ? as it is no one wants to play for them.


Durant? CP3?


And also Im not asking is what the owners asking for right or wrong Im asking do you think the players will hold a grudge about certain owners taking a hard stance?

nickdymez
11-07-2011, 05:49 PM
jordan can kiss any star coming to charlotte as a free agent

Why would he want to kiss them?

Hawkeye15
11-07-2011, 05:54 PM
Im not so sure about that. There's a reason guys like Kobe and Lebron were selling out arenas when they were in high school. I went to see Lebron play in high school at UCLA's Pauley Pavillion and the place was completely packed. These guys are once in a generation talents. Sure the NBA puts the structure in place, but without these guys putting on the spectacular shows that they do that structure means nothing....

not sure about what? Where could LeBron make $14-20 million dollars playing basketball, outside the structure of the NBA, unless he went overseas? The players aren't signing the huge network contracts, or building arenas that make huge amounts of money. Without these Big Bad Billionaires, the NBA players would be forced overseas, or into much smaller paying leagues. That is the facts of it honestly.

Its a business. If a player wants to be immature and be angry at Glen Taylor for example, for not being happy losing money every single year and wanting a change, than they need to grow up.

The structure does mean something. If you want to make huge amounts of money playing a child's game, and do it inside the US borders, guess what? You can't do better than the NBA.

edit: Use LeBron as one example. Amare, Joe Johnson, Kobe, etc. Any player making stupid money to play a game.

Hawkeye15
11-07-2011, 05:57 PM
Its rare anyways when a big named player signs with a small market in any of the major sports. That will never change. The change needs to be a fair way for all owners to have a chance to make a profit owning and NBA team. If 22/30 teams are losing money, the system needs to change, and the players can be as upset as they like at that. It will never be perfect. There will always be moronic owners. But when over 70% of the teams with owners who were billionaires well before owning an NBA team are losing money, something is wrong.

Tony_Starks
11-07-2011, 05:58 PM
Why is the NBA the only league that calls it's elite players Super Stars? They don't do that in the NFL, MLB or NHL. One more reason why I hate, for the most part the arrogant and over paid players in this league.



The NBA players are the most accessible of any sport from uniforms to the proximity of which the fans can watch them play. From a marketing standpoint its smart, I rarely see kids walking around in NFL, MLB, or NHL jerseys but I see NBA ones all the time.

And to be fair I think most people would agree athletes in all sports are arrogant and overpaid, Im not sure what qualifies NBA players to be at the top of that list. Someone would argue they are the most skilled athletes of any sport.

But thats a whole nother story......

Tony_Starks
11-07-2011, 06:01 PM
Its rare anyways when a big named player signs with a small market in any of the major sports. That will never change. The change needs to be a fair way for all owners to have a chance to make a profit owning and NBA team. If 22/30 teams are losing money, the system needs to change, and the players can be as upset as they like at that. It will never be perfect. There will always be moronic owners. But when over 70% of the teams with owners who were billionaires well before owning an NBA team are losing money, something is wrong.


IF they are indeed losing money you do realize that profit sharing of the owners of their gate money and tv deals would cover a huge portion of that if not all of it right?

ChiSoxJuan
11-07-2011, 06:01 PM
No. They will never go to the small market teams unless those teams are clearly on the cusp of something great. These stars are not willing to take risks. They don't want that kind of challenge. They want sure things.

As far as the non-stars, it's going to come down to $ & trades like it always does. Trades don't give them much choice, & if a sm market team has the best offer out there they'll take it. Players have short memories on this stuff. They always do. Agents do much of their thinking for them anyways.

Hawkeye15
11-07-2011, 06:08 PM
IF they are indeed losing money you do realize that profit sharing of the owners of their gate money and tv deals would cover a huge portion of that if not all of it right?

I believe that has been a big part of the owners discussion, and yes it will help if there is more profit sharing. But the salaries of NBA players need to be reigned in. Sure there are a few guys who are worth more than they get paid, but the amount of $10+ million deals is frightening when you look at many of the players that have them.

smith&wesson
11-07-2011, 06:08 PM
Durant? CP3?


And also Im not asking is what the owners asking for right or wrong Im asking do you think the players will hold a grudge about certain owners taking a hard stance?

let me ask you this. do you really beleive that new orleans will be able to retain chris paul ?

that will leave durant. the one and only player who is a super star and is willing to play for a small market team. ONE PLAYER

AND okc needs to thank theyre lucky stars that he is the type of character guy that is willing to stay with them. a one in million type of character guy that just doesnt seem to come around very often any more.

Hawkeye15
11-07-2011, 06:09 PM
let me ask you this. do you really beleive that new orleans will be able to retain chris paul ?

that will leave durant. the one and only player who is a super star and is willing to play for a small market team. ONE PLAYER

AND okc needs to thank theyre lucky stars that he is the type of character guy that is willing to stay with them. a one in million type of character guy that just doesnt seem to come around very often any more.

and even then if okc was no longer contending i will promice you durant would want to leave as well. who wouldnt ?

and Love in 2015..... :)

Hawkeye15
11-07-2011, 06:10 PM
Kobe wanted to leave LA when they weren't competing for championships. The stars will go where the wins are, and that happens to be the large markets many times, due to their financial abilities.

smith&wesson
11-07-2011, 06:10 PM
the deal in place now allows for large market teams to stack up on talent while small market teams lose the talent they draft. it may very well remain this way with the new deal.

but you cant blame the owners for fighting for some of the control back. they will fight for a deal that favours them and is structured to help them build a winner. the deal we have in place now leaves ALLLL small market teams with out any stars let alone super stars or multiple stars & super stars. something needs to change.

toronto
charlotte
indiana
milwakee
clevland
memphis
denver
new orleans
golden state
minnisota

these teams should all just close up shop and let the big boys play. because they simply will not hang or be able to compete because no "super star" will willingly go and play for them or resign with them.

Hawkeye15
11-07-2011, 06:12 PM
the deal in place now allows for large market teams to stack up on talent while small market teams lose the talent they draft. it may very well remain this way with the new deal.

but you cant blame the owners for fighting for some of the control back. they will fight for a deal that favours them and is structured to help them build a winner. the deal we have in place now leaves ALLLL small market teams with out any stars let alone super stars or multiple stars & super stars. something needs to change.

toronto
charlotte
indiana
milwakee
clevland
memphis
denver
new orleans
golden state
minnesota

these teams should all just close up shop and let the big boys play. because they simply will not hang or be able to compete because no "super star" will willingly go and play for them or resign with them.


each one of these teams has had a superstar sign with them, whether it was retention or in free agency. They just happen to not be winning now. Once they are, it changes, so that is why you don't simply contract teams.

smith&wesson
11-07-2011, 06:13 PM
Kobe wanted to leave LA when they weren't competing for championships. The stars will go where the wins are, and that happens to be the large markets many times, due to their financial abilities.

or did kobe really even want out ? he was just holding his owners hostage untill they got him the big guns he wanted all along.

thats the control that these owners want back. players should not be able to dictate office decisions at all.

smith&wesson
11-07-2011, 06:16 PM
each one of these teams has had a superstar sign with them, whether it was retention or in free agency. They just happen to not be winning now. Once they are, it changes, so that is why you don't simply contract teams.

How many of those teams were able to retain theyre own players ? how many of those super stars agreed to a trade to those teams or were simply drafted by those teams ?

if the topic is parity there simply is none in the nba. thats the point im trying to make. and if the small market owners are fighting for a more even playing feild im gonna be supporting them. but in reality we know its not going to happend.

big market teams will always be more desirable and there really isnt much that can be changed about that.

Tony_Starks
11-07-2011, 06:20 PM
let me ask you this. do you really beleive that new orleans will be able to retain chris paul ?

that will leave durant. the one and only player who is a super star and is willing to play for a small market team. ONE PLAYER

AND okc needs to thank theyre lucky stars that he is the type of character guy that is willing to stay with them. a one in million type of character guy that just doesnt seem to come around very often any more.



I think NO had a chance at keeping Paul before this. What Im saying is I believe is I think these negotiations may very well change the climate between players and some owners.

Is it right? Is it wrong? I don't know but I do know owners like Robert Sarver and Peter Holt have done pretty well in the past landing free agents in what I would call mid-markets. These guys from all accounts have been damn adamant about shutting the players out. Holt had even said something to the effect of "the players haven't felt enough pain yet" you think guys are going to forget that in the future?

You guys are saying yeah they'll go with whoever cuts the check but if that was the case they wouldn't be giving up millions as we sit, they would've just took the deal and got paid so evidently its not all about the money......

smith&wesson
11-07-2011, 06:34 PM
I think NO had a chance at keeping Paul before this. What Im saying is I believe is I think these negotiations may very well change the climate between players and some owners.

Is it right? Is it wrong? I don't know but I do know owners like Robert Sarver and Peter Holt have done pretty well in the past landing free agents in what I would call mid-markets.These guys from all accounts have been damn adamant about shutting the players out. Holt had even said something to the effect of "the players haven't felt enough pain yet" you think guys are going to forget that in the future?

You guys are saying yeah they'll go with whoever cuts the check but if that was the case they wouldn't be giving up millions as we sit, they would've just took the deal and got paid so evidently its not all about the money......


no what im saying is no matter what cba deal is in place chances are that not many things will change in regards to big market cities being more desirable then small market cities. i will suport a small market owner in fighting for some control back but i simply dont think its realistic. if i was a player straight up i would want to play for the lakers, bulls, knicks, and would hate to play for the raptors. why because A) the cities are bigger and more marketed, and B) they have a history of winning.

to answer your question i think some owners are famous for being bad owners period. i have no idea why any one would want to play for the clippers owner who is verbally abusive to his players or the suns owner who is soo cheap that he would break up an actuall championship caliber team and hold on to nash in order to squeez every penny out him.

but to say these small market owners have had success in mid market free agents .. its probably because they HAD a super star they drafted and players wanted to play with him not for the city. that is untill he left. ie. lebron in clevland, melo in denver, durant in okc, etc. soon as those players are gone, those cities are no longer desirable for any free agent. therefor to answer you question no this will not back fire because as it is no one wants to play for them. how can it get worst. from not wanting to play for a small market team to realll really not wanting to play for them ? either why they dont want to play for them lol

smith&wesson
11-07-2011, 06:43 PM
I think NO had a chance at keeping Paul before this. What Im saying is I believe is I think these negotiations may very well change the climate between players and some owners.

Is it right? Is it wrong? I don't know but I do know owners like Robert Sarver and Peter Holt have done pretty well in the past landing free agents in what I would call mid-markets. These guys from all accounts have been damn adamant about shutting the players out. Holt had even said something to the effect of "the players haven't felt enough pain yet" you think guys are going to forget that in the future?

You guys are saying yeah they'll go with whoever cuts the check but if that was the case they wouldn't be giving up millions as we sit, they would've just took the deal and got paid so evidently its not all about the money......


new olreans has 0 chance of retaining paul. no fault of the city or managment. simply because other elite players are joining up there for the trend is if you want to compete now you have to team up. so unless new orleans gets another elite player they really have no chance of resigning paul. do you really think dwight howard wants to play for new orleans ? no he doesnt. but thats the point theres nothing these small market owners are saying thats makeing it worst for themselves that it already is.

beasted86
11-07-2011, 06:47 PM
good point, but i doubt it effects them since the stars arent really jumping through hoops to come to them in the first place.

+100

Sactown
11-07-2011, 07:10 PM
let me ask you this. do you really beleive that new orleans will be able to retain chris paul ?

that will leave durant. the one and only player who is a super star and is willing to play for a small market team. ONE PLAYER

AND okc needs to thank theyre lucky stars that he is the type of character guy that is willing to stay with them. a one in million type of character guy that just doesnt seem to come around very often any more.

He's getting payed millions and he's on a championship team... I don't see a reason on why he'd want to leave... I don't think it's so much players on winning teams heading for big markets.. It's players that don't think they can win go to big markets...

Sactown
11-07-2011, 07:12 PM
Players are always going to be going for the money.. I don't think this lockout will affect any future signings.. everyone will kiss and make up after the lockout

Tony_Starks
11-07-2011, 07:13 PM
He's getting payed millions and he's on a championship team... I don't see a reason on why he'd want to leave... I don't think it's so much players on winning teams heading for big markets.. It's players that don't think they can win go to big markets...


Thank you man people act like he's just staying there out of the kindness of his heart. His management is competent and has put the right pieces and him and compensated him well. His team is actually the rare example of a small market team that is doing it right, you notice you haven't heard his owner making a big spectacle of himself.....

ClippersE.G
11-07-2011, 07:28 PM
That does not matter. Players will play wherever they get the most money. If for some reason the NBA ceases to exist they will probably resort to playing for a million dollars a month somewhere, while the bums of the league play for thousands a month.

They do not care as long as they get payed. It is 100% about the money...that is why I think it is so funny watching all these players making Jokes about "is anyone hiring" on Twitter because well all know for damn sure none of them are going to go and be part of the working class when they can play a game that people play for fun, and get paid. It is a luxury to be able to get played doing it but they will probably never realize it until they miss a whole year worth of checks.

Sactown
11-07-2011, 07:33 PM
Thank you man people act like he's just staying there out of the kindness of his heart. His management is competent and has put the right pieces and him and compensated him well. His team is actually the rare example of a small market team that is doing it right, you notice you haven't heard his owner making a big spectacle of himself.....

That's why we have good small market teams on rare occasions.. It's when things fall together perfectly.. When the team begins to win right when the player starts their peak so they feel they have a shot at a championship.

Kevj77
11-07-2011, 07:38 PM
The Kings were a perfect example of that. Webber was originally upset about being traded there, but after he saw how good they could be Webber bought in.

Sactown
11-07-2011, 07:41 PM
The Kings were a perfect example of that. Webber was originally upset about being traded there, but after he saw how good they could be Webber bought in.

Exactly winning teams will always be able to retain players.. it's the losing teams that suffer.. and for a small market team it's hard to get back on track when nobody is lining up at the door to sign with you... players play to win and players play to get paid.. if both is an option they're always going to sign there whether it be a small market team or big market..

Hawkeye15
11-07-2011, 08:03 PM
How many of those teams were able to retain theyre own players ? how many of those super stars agreed to a trade to those teams or were simply drafted by those teams ?

if the topic is parity there simply is none in the nba. thats the point im trying to make. and if the small market owners are fighting for a more even playing feild im gonna be supporting them. but in reality we know its not going to happend.

big market teams will always be more desirable and there really isnt much that can be changed about that.

I understand your point. Small markets either need to be a playoff team year in and year out, or they will lose their star player. I know that is the way it goes. But small markets are always putting forth competitive teams. Maybe not every one of them, but there are handfuls every year. Contraction is not the answer.

Is it fair that the Knicks sucked for years, and made money, while a small market team may have been fielding a playoff team and losing money? No, of course not. But that is business, and the market. Getting rid of small market teams is not the answer. Having a system in place that allows the POSSIBILITY for all teams to succeed is.

Kevj77
11-07-2011, 08:04 PM
Exactly winning teams will always be able to retain players.. it's the losing teams that suffer.. and for a small market team it's hard to get back on track when nobody is lining up at the door to sign with you... players play to win and players play to get paid.. if both is an option they're always going to sign there whether it be a small market team or big market..People are making too big of a deal about were players sign in free agency, look at the best teams over the last decade, those teams were built with smart trades and good drafts. With the exception of Shaq signing with LA the free agents those teams signed were not star players.

I'll use those great Kings teams as an example. Webber was acquired by trade, so was Christie, and Bibby. They drafted Peja and Turk. Their free agents were Divacs and Jackson.

Teams that can compete have no problem attracting free agents, but usually by the time players know they can compete they can't afford big name players in free agency because of their cap situation, so free agency has always been the least effective way of building a contender.

Sactown
11-07-2011, 09:16 PM
People are making too big of a deal about were players sign in free agency, look at the best teams over the last decade, those teams were built with smart trades and good drafts. With the exception of Shaq signing with LA the free agents those teams signed were not star players.

I'll use those great Kings teams as an example. Webber was acquired by trade, so was Christie, and Bibby. They drafted Peja and Turk. Their free agents were Divacs and Jackson.

Teams that can compete have no problem attracting free agents, but usually by the time players know they can compete they can't afford big name players in free agency because of their cap situation, so free agency has always been the least effective way of building a contender.

Like I've said before it can work out that way, but it has to work out practically perfectly to go into contention.. The put a team together that was balanced and on the rise, the team was assembled quickly.. if the Kings received Webber and we sucked for 3-4 more years he would of left, but because it was built well together and we had practically instant success he wanted to say. The problem is, when you draft a star player and you aren't able to put together a contending team after 4 years and they leave and you have to start over again, it could be 3-5 more years till you can get enough blocks together at the same time that you can retain most of your players

Tony_Starks
11-07-2011, 09:23 PM
Like I've said before it can work out that way, but it has to work out practically perfectly to go into contention.. The put a team together that was balanced and on the rise, the team was assembled quickly.. if the Kings received Webber and we sucked for 3-4 more years he would of left, but because it was built well together and we had practically instant success he wanted to say. The problem is, when you draft a star player and you aren't able to put together a contending team after 4 years and they leave and you have to start over again, it could be 3-5 more years till you can get enough blocks together at the same time that you can retain most of your players


If your starting from the absolute bottom with cap space and building around a legit francise player, 4 years is plenty of time to get to respectability. Not contender status, but respectability. Thats four years of chances to draft right, make shrewd trades, and smart FA signings.

I guarantee if you give me 4 of the bottom teams that have had absolutely no chance recently and we go back for 4 years and go down the line on their drafts,trades, and signings, it will be laughable.

Don't get me wrong, Im not saying its easy by any stretch because luck and injuries play a role. Im just saying we are giving way too many excuses to some teams that have been completely blowing it.

Sactown
11-07-2011, 09:25 PM
If your starting from the absolute bottom with cap space and building around a legit francise player, 4 years is plenty of time to get to respectability. Not contender status, but respectability. Thats four years of chances to draft right, make shrewd trades, and smart FA signings.

I guarantee if you give me 4 of the bottom teams that have had absolutely no chance recently and we go back for 4 years and go down the line on their drafts,trades, and signings, it will be laughable.

And it's sad that if a small market teams screws up they've got to start from scratch while the big market teams can just sign big name free agents and be back in the game

Sactown
11-07-2011, 09:27 PM
And also you have to add to the fact that even when successful small market teams are losing money.. so after a large run, who knows if they can even finance another run

Law25
11-07-2011, 09:39 PM
These NBA owner remind me of the movie Horrible Bosses in how they run their teams. If you seen the movie you know what i mean. You have the psycho ( Clippers owner, Portand, the jerk who dosent know what the hell he's doin so he spends and make the employees pay (soon to be Jin Buss), then you have the owners who are so infactuated when these star player and cant stand rejection ie the Cavs owner.


I have issue with all this small market bla bla bla when teams like the Spurs got it done, the Thunder doin good, and up in coming Grizz. Everyone is jumping on players like i do at times about wanting everything easy and pulling a Lebron, but what are these owner doin. If the actually researched talent and drafted like the Spurs and Thunder, or traded like the Lakers they will have the winning team they want and it will be easy to market. You dont always need a star to win or did everyone forget how the Pistons ran the east for three years recently or how even with an aging Duncan the Spurs got o ne in 07 ( all ther stars were drafted two in the second round). My point is owner are being let off the hook to easy. They're not doin what is takes to when which is put a winner on the floor that fans would want to see, so their not making the money they want and trying to get the player to take 10% paycuts worth millions a percentage and thats weak.


Also what big name free agent has the Lakers taken that werent already Lakers before their free agency because of their big bucks in the Last say 30 years. Shaq ans an old Artest is all who come to mind. Kobe draft trade, Pau trade, Odom trade, Bynum drafted, Jones drafted, Van Excel drafted, Worthy drafted, Scott drafted,I beleive Coop was drafted, Magic drafted, Kareem traded, Wilt dont remember, West drafted. Tell me who im missing, and the same can be said about the Spurs.Is it fair to tell the big market teams to let those players go in free agency to be fair when they took all the risks.Before the Lakers won Kobe was seen as a selfesh player no one wants to play with, Pau was becoming injury pron and heart as questioned with the grizz, Odom was a inconsisstant pot head with the clipps that made strides for a season under Pat, and we still talk about Bynum Knees. Lakers took the risks and are reaping the rewards. Small market teams need to stop makin excusses and do their ****ing job.

Kevj77
11-07-2011, 10:23 PM
Exactly Law and it isn't just the Lakers that made good draft picks and smart trades the 80s Celtics drafted Bird, traded the 1st overall pick in the draft and another 1st round pick to the Warriors for Parish and the 3rd overall pick in 1980. The Warriors passed on McHale and the Celtics landed two HOFers in one move. That was the foundation along with Bird for 3 championships.

The Bulls only major free agent was Rodman. The Spurs drafted most of their team, even the Kings built their best team this way. Detriot in the 80s traded for Laimbeer, and Rodman then drafted Thomas, Dumars and Salley. All the great teams were put together this way except the Lakers when they signed Shaq, but the rest of the team was either drafted or traded for except Fox.

What people that are *****ing about free agency are really upset about are these current players like Lebron, Bosh, Melo leaving their teams and the possibility that CP3 and Howard could do the same.