PDA

View Full Version : Players' Salaries In The 70s Compared To Now



NetsPaint
11-24-2011, 06:14 PM
A while ago on commentary Walt Frazier said he and his teammates made 200,000 dollars a year and they were happy.

In professional wrestling NOW (not real, but they are athletes who put their body on the line) the biggest stars make 1-2 million or so a year. Most of them have to pay for their hotels and stuff.

I realize in the 70s salaries for jobs in general were less, and items, homes, etc. were too, BUT 200,000 a year is pretty damn good even now. Did they have to pay for their hotels and stuff back than either? I'm guessing not, but, that's just a guess.

These players should get a lesson on what these greats made before they whine about what their making. Would be nice if there was some kind of "legends compared to current player rule" with how much someone makes. That would make things too complicated though heh.

The J.R. and his perks contract with the Chinese team shows you where his head is at with money.

Do you really think most of these players are doing this on principle? They seem they can't have enough. The cap level should have never came to this, but it did, so no going back now with big contracts, which is fine, but yeah. Max contracts are so big that even not-so great players don't have to put the effort in to get those max contracts because they'd get paid big anyway.

Do these players even APPRECIATE their money, their lifestyle? I'm not saying who I think is right between the players and owners, but it's difficult to take these players seriously when half of them spend money on identical whips and giant white wall homes you'd see on MTV cribs to impress their boys.

Wade>You
11-24-2011, 06:18 PM
Do you really think most of these players are doing this on principle?The majority of current players are already locked on to contracts from the previous CBA, so this new CBA doesn't affect them in any way.

You'd have an easier time arguing that the owners are doing this for the money and not "competitive balance," which is actually the case.

gwrighter
11-24-2011, 06:29 PM
With 20 dollars in the 70s anyone could have bought a lot more than you can now.......

Close this dumb thread.

Using consumer price index annual average price inflation numbers, $200 000 in 1970 = 1 186 434.16 in 2011.

http://www.halfhill.com/inflation.html

beliges
11-24-2011, 06:30 PM
The majority of current players are already locked on to contracts from the previous CBA, so this new CBA doesn't affect them in any way.

You'd have an easier time arguing that the owners are doing this for the money and not "competitive balance," which is actually the case.

Ya it so crazy how the ones that have hundreds of millions of their own dollars invested into these franchises are not happy with the fact the players are entitled to a much greater portion of the profits than they are.

ITs a very interesting point the threatmaker brought up with this. I think the identity of the "professional athlete" has changed significantly from the 70s as compared to today. Back in those days there was no internet, there were no huge endorsements or global fame. There wasnt that round the clock full scale coverage. The players played for the love of the game and a paycheck. It wasnt about the fame or doing commercials or "having fun with your friends." It was much more simple back then. Today its too much like a business for these players and it seems its more about how rich and famous I can get as opposed to how great of a basketball player I can be.

nyKnicks126
11-24-2011, 06:32 PM
Using consumer price index annual average price inflation numbers, $200 000 in 1970 = 1 186 434.16 in 2011.

http://www.halfhill.com/inflation.html

Life styles were different in general back in the 70s things change.

Bishnoff
11-24-2011, 06:32 PM
REAL wages (wages adjusted for inflation) are the only way to compare player salaries from different periods in time.

gwrighter
11-24-2011, 06:40 PM
Life styles were different in general back in the 70s things change.

There are more things to buy now sure, but doesn't mean they're useful. Things have changed since the last CBA but the players refuse to accept that. That's the point.

gwrighter
11-24-2011, 06:41 PM
REAL wages (wages adjusted for inflation) are the only way to compare player salaries from different periods in time.

its approx. 1.2mil today.

nyKnicks126
11-24-2011, 06:49 PM
There are more things to buy now sure, but doesn't mean they're useful. Things have changed since the last CBA but the players refuse to accept that. That's the point.
Players waste money now. Eddy Curry's dry cleaning cost him 20,000 for his tux. Didn't pay it.. Probably got sueddd now.

and some of the small market owners don't know how to manage their franchises.

There are some players I would say that are conservative with their money and invest it into a nice retirement fund....

NetsPaint
11-24-2011, 06:49 PM
Life styles were different in general back in the 70s things change. Don't bait.
The Knicks players did compete with suits and whatever back then, they just didn't go over the top. They did enjoy luxury. Similar lifestyles, difference is now the players are ridiculous.

NetsPaint
11-24-2011, 06:52 PM
don't be arrogant. Using consumer price index annual average price inflation numbers, $200 000 in 1970 = 1 186 434.16 in 2011.

http://www.halfhill.com/inflation.html
This is one of the things I wanted to know. I knew 200,000 thousand - 65 million is far from the same worth comparing times.

nyKnicks126
11-24-2011, 06:53 PM
The Knicks players did compete with suits and whatever back then, they just didn't go over the top. They did enjoy luxury. Similar lifestyles, difference is now the players are ridiculous.

But salaries increase in every profession as time goes on so..

But Yes.. The players are ridiculous now.. They go out to dinner and their bill is over 4000 or 5000 when they go out with people.

kjoke
11-24-2011, 07:19 PM
I hate this argument. I don't care how much money you think I should make right now, I'm going to fight to make sure I keep it as is. Don't act as if you wouldnt do the same, if someone came up to you and said to take less.

buckeye
11-24-2011, 07:23 PM
Just illustrates what inflation does to the value of a dollar. I live in a coop that sold in 1970 for 17,500. Now even in a lousy real estate market similar units are running at about 350,000 or 20 times the value in 1970. Using that as a guage does he mean the average should be about 4 mil. So lets see 12 guys averaging 4 mil, team salary 48 mil. Not so far fro m the cap eh?

Hawkeye15
11-24-2011, 07:48 PM
I am not even going to read this honestly, it will just get me more pissed off at the players right now.

Wasn't it Larry Bird that signed the first deal in history for $1 million a season? I could be totally wrong, it just popped into my head. And now 13th guys on the bench make more.

Its pathetic.

blahblahyoutoo
11-25-2011, 12:54 PM
don't y'all realize theys gots to feeds they kizz?

MrfadeawayJB
11-25-2011, 01:04 PM
^^^
Sprewell???

Hellcrooner
11-25-2011, 01:27 PM
Op

the 70s? really?

the era where basket became so little popular that you had to watch the finals in tape delay?

How much profit were teams making? do you really want to compare the profit they made then with no merchandising 0 international projection to the current superbrand money cow? that nba is?

http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/battle29.jpg
http://comics.emmafrostfiles.com/media/covers/Uncanny-X-Men-499.jpg

40 cents vs 3 dollars

so yep those 200 thousned are suposedly 1 and a half million right now.

BUT the truth is inflation does not work mathematecally.

Example my parents bought their home in 1979 for 30000 euros, aplying the same factor that to the comics ( 7,5) the price should be now 225000 euros.
guess what the price of that house now ( SECOND HAND go figure if it was new) is 400000 euros. ( 13, 3)


so those 200000 would be more like 2.9 million dollars, again in a poorer market with less benefit for the league.

Chronz
11-25-2011, 02:21 PM
I am not even going to read this honestly, it will just get me more pissed off at the players right now.

Wasn't it Larry Bird that signed the first deal in history for $1 million a season? I could be totally wrong, it just popped into my head. And now 13th guys on the bench make more.

Its pathetic.

Players are underpaid.

KnicksorBust
11-25-2011, 02:39 PM
Players are underpaid.

More are overpaid than underpaid.

beliges
11-25-2011, 03:22 PM
Players are underpaid.

I really hope this is sarcasm. Because not only are NBA players paid more than any other professional athlete in North America, they also have the most player friendly contracts out of any professional athlete and on top of all that they make a much larger portion of all basketball revenue than any other professional athlete as well. Basically, NBA players are the most compensated professional athletes this side of Europe.

Hawkeye15
11-25-2011, 05:05 PM
Players are underpaid.

I can name 10 that are overpaid for every one you can name that are underpaid.

Chronz
11-25-2011, 05:25 PM
More are overpaid than underpaid.
The few that are worth the money are ridiculously underpaid.


I can name 10 that are overpaid for every one you can name that are underpaid.
Id like to see the #'s

JordansBulls
11-25-2011, 05:31 PM
I am not even going to read this honestly, it will just get me more pissed off at the players right now.

Wasn't it Larry Bird that signed the first deal in history for $1 million a season? I could be totally wrong, it just popped into my head. And now 13th guys on the bench make more.

Its pathetic.

I believe there was a rumor where Magic Johnson was going to sign a 25 year deal for 25 million bucks with the Lakers.

ewmania
11-25-2011, 05:40 PM
.... are people seriously talking about giving 200,000 a year for players who produce a billion dollar organization

this thread is a epic fail... difference between the 70's and now the ratings and NBA value increased at a huge rate than before

so 200,000 is dumb amount of money

hey while your at it... how about you start a thread on why johnny depp gets paid so much on a Pirates film even tho it produces over 200 mil each

ewmania
11-25-2011, 05:41 PM
I really hope this is sarcasm. Because not only are NBA players paid more than any other professional athlete in North America, they also have the most player friendly contracts out of any professional athlete and on top of all that they make a much larger portion of all basketball revenue than any other professional athlete as well. Basically, NBA players are the most compensated professional athletes this side of Europe.

lol baseball players make more money than NBA players

tell me one NBA player with a bigger contract than a-rod

Bramaca
11-25-2011, 05:58 PM
The few that are worth the money are ridiculously underpaid.

Some are ridiculously underpaid while others aren't so much. Take LeBron and Dwight for example, two players that people commonly say are worth 50 million a year. Over the last 4 years they have played in markets that are virtually identical in size with very similar success in the post-season (about the same amount of playoff series). I would say that for the most part they had a pretty equal imact on their teams on-court performance. Does that mean they are worth the same amount of money though?

Over those 4 years though Cleveland had revenue of 631 million while Orlando only had 406 million in revenue. By the revenue the two created for their teams I would say that Howard is probably only worth about 15-20 million a year at most (which is around what he is scheduled to make) while LeBron in Cleveland would probably be worth something in the neighborhood of 50 million.

Meanwhile, in Miami I doubt that LeBron is worth anything close to 50 million per year. There is virtually no way he can increase their revenue enough to justify that. I think his current contract is probably closer to his worth there.

ewmania
11-25-2011, 06:06 PM
Some are ridiculously underpaid while others aren't so much. Take LeBron and Dwight for example, two players that people commonly say are worth 50 million a year. Over the last 4 years they have played in markets that are virtually identical in size with very similar success in the post-season (about the same amount of playoff series). I would say that for the most part they had a pretty equal imact on their teams on-court performance. Does that mean they are worth the same amount of money though?

Over those 4 years though Cleveland had revenue of 631 million while Orlando only had 406 million in revenue. By the revenue the two created for their teams I would say that Howard is probably only worth about 15-20 million a year at most (which is around what he is scheduled to make) while LeBron in Cleveland would probably be worth something in the neighborhood of 50 million.

Meanwhile, in Miami I doubt that LeBron is worth anything close to 50 million per year. There is virtually no way he can increase their revenue enough to justify that. I think his current contract is probably closer to his worth there.

exactly... and the people who complain about players getting so much money, stop buying lebrons sneakers... stop watching his decision on espn... stop watching his basketball games, stop paying 1,000 front row seats to see him play

the NBA isnt paying him... you are

Bramaca
11-25-2011, 06:39 PM
exactly... and the people who complain about players getting so much money, stop buying lebrons sneakers... stop watching his decision on espn... stop watching his basketball games, stop paying 1,000 front row seats to see him play

the NBA isnt paying him... you are

Here is the thing though, there are less then 5 players in the entire league that are really underpaid and nobody comes close to creating the revenue that LBJ did in Cleveland. A handful of players underpaid and 400+ paid what they are worth or overpaid.

still a fan
11-25-2011, 07:00 PM
I just read this and can't figure out the direction the thread is going?

The OP is saying players should be appreciative because of what the players made in the 70's?

I'll agree salaries are out of whack, but please realize many things from the 70's:

Cost of a new home was $26,000 compared to $350,000 today
Average salary of a home was 8700 compared to 55,000
Stamp was .06
Gas was .36

I remember it like it was yesterday, 1977 I would sneak out and take my sisters car, drive all night and put in just over $5.00 of gas so she wouldn't notice.

Everything as they say is relevant.


Now realize the average salary in 1970 in the NBA was 35,000 and today its over 5 mil

So looking at that way the OP has a great argument because thats 157X and thats crazy!

still a fan
11-25-2011, 07:14 PM
I also think its important to realize the big jump in the NBA happened in the 70's to the 80's because of the competition from the ABA as players were starting to jump ship to the NBA, the ABA then started offering bigger salaries which in turn the NBA then beat and then some.

I remember when Haywood came over and made the jump he signed a 6 yr deal for 1.5 mil paid over 10 years with a deferred rate.

The average salary in one decade jumped from 35K to 180K because of the NBA taking the ABA players.

Its the economics of sports but not to dwell don't look any further on blame past the fans ourselves:

We pay those crazy prices to go to games, we pay for Dog, Beer etc 30.00, we now pay for cable or Dish when we use to simply watch games for free on our local tv stations.

We pay for ESPN, the NBA channel, MSG etc....

We now pay over 100 bucks for a players jersey, etc....

Actually its a very interesting thread, and me growing up in the 70's watching economies change, and the sports evolution take place it brings a sense of reality back in.

beliges
11-25-2011, 07:19 PM
lol baseball players make more money than NBA players

tell me one NBA player with a bigger contract than a-rod

LOL indeed. NBA players make more on average than any other professional athlete in North America. There exceptions of course, like A Rod but he is a rarity. NBA players are the best compensated professional athletes we have. And its not even that close. But I guess its still not enough for these guys.

Hawkeye15
11-25-2011, 07:34 PM
The few that are worth the money are ridiculously underpaid.


Id like to see the #'s

what numbers? And how are you personally evaluating if a player is overpaid, underpaid, or paid just right? Because for every LeBron, there are 10 guys out there that are paid too much for what they do imo. Hence why 22 teams are losing money. There is no way a role player who is a bench player or 4-5th option should make $7+ million a year, and there are countless of them.

Hawkeye15
11-25-2011, 07:36 PM
.... are people seriously talking about giving 200,000 a year for players who produce a billion dollar organization

this thread is a epic fail... difference between the 70's and now the ratings and NBA value increased at a huge rate than before

so 200,000 is dumb amount of money

hey while your at it... how about you start a thread on why johnny depp gets paid so much on a Pirates film even tho it produces over 200 mil each

of course nobody is advocating going back to those salaries. What I am personally saying is, when 22/30 teams are losing money, the players need salary reductions, since that is overwhelmingly the highest cost of operating a team outside the obvious costs.

Chronz
11-25-2011, 07:54 PM
what numbers?
The net worth, its not about how many players but the amount of money the players are entitled to. I dont think its far off what they make, overall averages of course.

Hawkeye15
11-25-2011, 08:12 PM
The net worth, its not about how many players but the amount of money the players are entitled to. I dont think its far off what they make, overall averages of course.

Basketball, or the NBA, is business, right? How can you say they are worth X when their teams are losing money in most cases?

Simple way to settle this. Even if you include players on rookie deals, I can give you more bad contracts than you can give me good contracts, value wise. When we take away rookie deals from the argument, its so lopsided its a joke.

There are honestly 5-10 players that are underpaid, outside the stars still on their rookie deals (all of which will get huge money when they are done with those). Outside that, can you really tell me that a huge portion of players don't make much more than they are worth?

If 72% of the business model is failing, its time to rework what you think individual players are worth. As I said, 5-10 are worth more than any deal they could possibly get. But they are outliers, as are Rose, Love, and Griffin for example.

still a fan
11-25-2011, 09:04 PM
Basketball, or the NBA, is business, right? How can you say they are worth X when their teams are losing money in most cases?

Simple way to settle this. Even if you include players on rookie deals, I can give you more bad contracts than you can give me good contracts, value wise. When we take away rookie deals from the argument, its so lopsided its a joke.

There are honestly 5-10 players that are underpaid, outside the stars still on their rookie deals (all of which will get huge money when they are done with those). Outside that, can you really tell me that a huge portion of players don't make much more than they are worth?

If 72% of the business model is failing, its time to rework what you think individual players are worth. As I said, 5-10 are worth more than any deal they could possibly get. But they are outliers, as are Rose, Love, and Griffin for example.

your fighting a losing battle because of age in these forums, most fans for some reason will back the players no matter what and don't understand the economics of the league as a whole?

They don't care teams lose money, some say get rid of them but they don't get their are only 450 players at one given time who can be on an NBA roster.

And to the folks comparing basketball to baseball? Apples and oranges: going by those standards shouldn't baseball players make twice as much because they play twice as many games?

Its all revenue based and a baseball stadium sure can fill up the seats a lot more than an arena, or does that not count anymore?

If your losing money and the economy dictates change the players have to accept that, the alternative for them is not pleasant.

Hawkeye15
11-25-2011, 09:12 PM
your fighting a losing battle because of age in these forums, most fans for some reason will back the players no matter what and don't understand the economics of the league as a whole?

They don't care teams lose money, some say get rid of them but they don't get their are only 450 players at one given time who can be on an NBA roster.

And to the folks comparing basketball to baseball? Apples and oranges: going by those standards shouldn't baseball players make twice as much because they play twice as many games?

Its all revenue based and a baseball stadium sure can fill up the seats a lot more than an arena, or does that not count anymore?

If your losing money and the economy dictates change the players have to accept that, the alternative for them is not pleasant.

good point dude. There are some here who are very familiar with real life, economics, and business models. But sure, there are plenty here who don't care about a healthy league, they just want their team playing tonight.

John Walls Era
11-25-2011, 09:23 PM
How can you compare the 70s to now. The cost of living has increased significantly since then.

Hawkeye15
11-25-2011, 09:29 PM
How can you compare the 70s to now. The cost of living has increased significantly since then.

of course it has. But the salaries don't come anywhere in the area of the inflation of the dollar versus now. That being said, the league wasn't nearly as profitable, margin wise, in the 70's, so you would expect an increase in salaries compared to the normal standard of living rate.

But it keeps coming back to this. NBA players are BY FAR, across the board, the most compensated athletes in the United States in a team sport. Its not even close. And their league is failing, business wise. Their salaries need to drop, and even when they do, they will still have a huge cushion on any other sport as far as compensation.

NetsPaint
11-25-2011, 09:44 PM
How can you compare the 70s to now. The cost of living has increased significantly since then.
This is the problem. Why should a guy who can't even crack one minute a game be paid to have more than guys back then?

Basketball is still a job. 200,000 dollars aint enough for a luxurious house? Buy a nice condo. And I'm not saying they should go back to 200,000 dollars, they should be paid to pretty much what they're worth TODAY, which isn't a TON more than that.

I mean come on, these dudes don't need 350,000 homes. If they want that or million dollar homes, they should earn it. Is there a bunch of unappreciative rich people on here? I made a little over eight dollars last week, I sure wouldn't be worrying about my life if I made 200,000. People are really underrating that kind of money.

A lot of these players are so full of it. Are owners the ones paying them and competing with other owners? Yeah, obviously. But you got players who didn't take their teams that far and they're giving their owners no choice other than to spend money on them instead of bettering the team. A lot of these players are All-Stars, but nowhere near what LeBron would do for a franchise.

So what, these players get what they want from the owners, and their complaining about their pay?

People brought up the NBA's marketability dramatically going up in the 70s, fair point, but it's still a game, not professional wrestling. We gotta think about what helps the game too.

LakersMaster24
11-25-2011, 10:17 PM
The NBA should have some kind of way to divide up the players into superstars, stars, role players, bench warmers and fillers.

Superstars = 15-19 million
Stars = 7-13 million
Role Players = 4-7million
Bench Warmers = 2-3 million
Fillers = Below 1 million - 1.5 mill.

Each player will be evaluated by his role. A good role player like Lamar Odom can be paid around 7 million, but someone like DeShawn Stevenson, even thogh he is a role player should be payed around 4mill. In order to get more money players will work harder to move up in this "social class", the trick, is that if a player does not maintain the same level of play his role will decrease, thus automatically lowering his salary.

Sounds crazy, but it can work...

still a fan
11-25-2011, 10:31 PM
The NBA should have some kind of way to divide up the players into superstars, stars, role players, bench warmers and fillers.

Superstars = 15-19 million
Stars = 7-13 million
Role Players = 4-7million
Bench Warmers = 2-3 million
Fillers = Below 1 million - 1.5 mill.

Each player will be evaluated by his role. A good role player like Lamar Odom can be paid around 7 million, but someone like DeShawn Stevenson, even thogh he is a role player should be payed around 4mill. In order to get more money players will work harder to move up in this "social class", the trick, is that if a player does not maintain the same level of play his role will decrease, thus automatically lowering his salary.

Sounds crazy, but it can work...

LOl Stern would love you, this would mean players would go to teams where their role is more important:)

Here is the problem with your thinking, I'm a 6th man today but at the trade deadline I'm relegated to a lesser role? Now my pay goes down?

Unions will not be too fond of you lol

Hellcrooner
11-25-2011, 10:50 PM
Basketball, or the NBA, is business, right? How can you say they are worth X when their teams are losing money in most cases?

Simple way to settle this. Even if you include players on rookie deals, I can give you more bad contracts than you can give me good contracts, value wise. When we take away rookie deals from the argument, its so lopsided its a joke.

There are honestly 5-10 players that are underpaid, outside the stars still on their rookie deals (all of which will get huge money when they are done with those). Outside that, can you really tell me that a huge portion of players don't make much more than they are worth?

If 72% of the business model is failing, its time to rework what you think individual players are worth. As I said, 5-10 are worth more than any deal they could possibly get. But they are outliers, as are Rose, Love, and Griffin for example.

i open a mcdonalds here in zaragoza ( there are several already btw)

my mcdonadls is not working, my employees are crap and im losign money ( or not recovering my invest fast enough).


do i call mcdonalds central and tell them they need to give me money from the other mcdonadls in my city or even in spain so i can get my benefit?

can i call my employees and say im paying them less?

can i ask mcdonalds to move good employees from other mcdonadls ( withouth me having to raise their salary)

No, i can FIRE some of my employees and see if my benefit grows.

then if im still not making it i can CLOSE my mcdonalds and go to rot in a pile of fresh crap.

heyman321
11-25-2011, 10:56 PM
The few that are worth the money are ridiculously underpaid.


Id like to see the #'s

No kidding, I think EVERYONE agrees that the superstars should be making more, but the scrubs should NOT. Why should Luke Walton be paid whatever is he making for sitting on the bench? Same with Kleiza, Amir Johnson, Travis Outlaw, Rashard Lewis, Jermaine O'Neal, etc.

mlisica19
11-25-2011, 11:29 PM
They do not at all know the value of a dollar.
Some of these athletes get big bucks just because they were born very talented.

I heard that a majority of these NBA players go bankrupt within 2 years of leaving the NBA

Dankster
11-25-2011, 11:29 PM
There's other variables that need to be factored in that have nothing to do with wage inflation statistics--the game has evolved so much since the 70's from a branding standpoint. Say what you will about Stern, but he's truly helped globalize the sport thanks mostly to having some of the most incredible athletes in his league in the 80's.

The players today are basically reaping the benefit of how the league has grown from a global standpoint. That's primarily the reason guys make what they do now. Don't think for a second Walt Frazier wouldn't be making max money if he currently was playing..Just a wrong era for him from an economical standpoint..

Chronz
11-25-2011, 11:35 PM
Basketball, or the NBA, is business, right? How can you say they are worth X when their teams are losing money in most cases?
Thats why I would love to see the #'s, though its probably impossible for us to figure out a franchises net worth and how much of that can be credited to an individual. From what Ive heard the owners are claiming to be losing money no matter the outcome (cancelled season or not) when that simply cannot be. So I dont really trust whats out there right now.


Simple way to settle this. Even if you include players on rookie deals, I can give you more bad contracts than you can give me good contracts, value wise. When we take away rookie deals from the argument, its so lopsided its a joke.

Your not getting me, you can have 10 players that are overpaid to my 1, if that 1 player garners significantly less than his market value that it eclipses the loss then the players as a whole are underpaid on average.

Kevj77
11-26-2011, 12:16 AM
Thats why I would love to see the #'s, though its probably impossible for us to figure out a franchises net worth and how much of that can be credited to an individual. From what Ive heard the owners are claiming to be losing money no matter the outcome (cancelled season or not) when that simply cannot be. So I dont really trust whats out there right now.


Your not getting me, you can have 10 players that are overpaid to my 1, if that 1 player garners significantly less than his market value that it eclipses the loss then the players as a whole are underpaid on average.Star players are underpaid. Lebron James is the most underpaid athlete ever if this Forbes article is true.


No player in the 64-year history of the National Basketball Association has come close to having the immediate and profound impact that LeBron James had when he bolted the Cleveland Cavaliers for the Miami Heat this summer. The King’s move accounted for both the biggest gain and drop in team values: the Heat’s worth increased 17%, to $425 million (seventh among the NBA’s 30 teams), and the Cavaliers plummeted 26%, to $355 million (15th).

The Heat sold out their season ticket inventory for the 2010-11 campaign after four straight years of attendance declines. Ticket prices are going up next year and ratings for Heat games on Sun Sports, the Fox-owned regional sports network, have doubled this season. Meanwhile, after winning more than 60 games each of the past two seasons, the Cavs won only eight of their first 45 games this year and owner Dan Gilbert recently announced that prices for Cavs games would be lowered next season.

According to Forbes, Amare also had a huge impact on the Knicks.


The New York Knicks replace the Los Angeles Lakers as the NBA’s most valuable team, worth $655 million, up 12% from last year. Signing Amar’e Stoudemire has been a big help both on the court and with sponsors. The Knicks sold out their full-season ticket inventory for the first time since the 2001-02 season. The Knicks’ parent company, Madison Square Garden, Inc., signed a sponsorship deal with JPMorgan Chase in September that’s worth at least $30 million a year over 10 years.Is that what you were asking for?

Sorry forgot to post the link.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2011/01/26/the-nbas-most-valuable-teams-2/

THE MTL
11-26-2011, 12:56 AM
Actually players from the 70s had to pay for their hotel, food, etc too.

I do side with the players in the lockout, but one thing I will agree with though is that anyone from midlevel to not-so-great-very-good players are VASTLY overpaid!

Seriously, almost everyone in the 10-13 million dollar range (besides Rondo) is OVERPAID in the NBA

Hawkeye15
11-26-2011, 02:47 AM
i open a mcdonalds here in zaragoza ( there are several already btw)

my mcdonadls is not working, my employees are crap and im losign money ( or not recovering my invest fast enough).


do i call mcdonalds central and tell them they need to give me money from the other mcdonadls in my city or even in spain so i can get my benefit?

can i call my employees and say im paying them less?

can i ask mcdonalds to move good employees from other mcdonadls ( withouth me having to raise their salary)

No, i can FIRE some of my employees and see if my benefit grows.

then if im still not making it i can CLOSE my mcdonalds and go to rot in a pile of fresh crap.

the model you present has been done. When a corporation has thousands of outlets giving it profit it succeeds, despite constant individual failures.

Hawkeye15
11-26-2011, 02:49 AM
Thats why I would love to see the #'s, though its probably impossible for us to figure out a franchises net worth and how much of that can be credited to an individual. From what Ive heard the owners are claiming to be losing money no matter the outcome (cancelled season or not) when that simply cannot be. So I dont really trust whats out there right now.


Your not getting me, you can have 10 players that are overpaid to my 1, if that 1 player garners significantly less than his market value that it eclipses the loss then the players as a whole are underpaid on average.

your last statement is backwards. And that is why you are wrong my friend.

Birdmannn
11-26-2011, 03:05 AM
your last statement is backwards. And that is why you are wrong my friend.

Why is he wrong thou?
I see what he means where kobe and lebron are so underpaid for what they bring in that it just gets spread over to other players and that makes it so the middle men in the NBA get paid more then they are worth.