PDA

View Full Version : Smaller Markets vs. Bigger Markets: What can the NBA do to solve this problem.



Mr. NBA
12-10-2011, 05:30 AM
Of course, the big problem in the NBA right now isn't about whether CP3 leaves New Orleans, it's probably where to? A big market? or a small market?


Mostly every year we see these type of transactions happen where superstars
from small markets leave their cities or clubs to enter into a bigger market with a big franchise.

My question is what can the league do to solve this problem? Apparently, having a Collective Bargaining Agreement to change this policy doesn't do justice.

For example, Los Angeles is a big market. Los Angeles has a hollywood, glamour, glitz, and celebrities to attract big name players to this type of market. These are called uncontrollable market forces of which the league and the players can't do anything about because it's outside the hands of the NBA. However, these factors affect the NBA and it's players from the transactions they could have had.

On the other hand, Cleveland is a small market. Cleveland has nothing except, Drew Carrey, Shin-soo Choo, and possibly the song "Cleveland Rocks".

So for a guy like LeBron it's a no-brainer to leave this market and end up in a bigger market like Miami.


Maybe the league should start ranking each club and city according to their respective market tier and rank them from 1 to 30 according to market share and power. That way it's easier for the league to see which market each player is going to and from which transaction. They should take this into consideration.

or maybe when the NBA draft starts, the league can also take this into consideration when giving the top picks to the worse NBA teams. Kind of like averaging out with 1. the worse team in the NBA and 2. What rank does this team fall into in terms of market share.

I was wondering how everyone of you out there felt as well. thanks.

Raps18-19 Champ
12-10-2011, 06:40 AM
A hard cap.

Heediot
12-10-2011, 07:07 AM
Remove the cap on max contracts (non-rookie deals, keep cap on rookie deals), leave the salary cap system as it is. If guys like Lebron/Wade/Dwight/Cp3 get 30 million a year, super-teams will be harder to form without killing yourself in luxury tax. Keep the luxury tax as it is as a deterrent. If teams (bigger markets/financially inclined) want to pay the luxury tax and there is a revenue sharing system, all non-tax paying teams benefit anyway. As of now, the luxury tax generates revenue for the non-tax paying small market teams. It'd be harder for these superstars to sacrifice in this system because the market can shoot up their value. In the current system their value is capped. It's a lot harder to sacrifice 40-50 million over the course of a contract, thus making it harder to form super-teams.

Edit: It is also harder for teams to save up for superstars in my proposal because you cannot dictate as easily how much cap-room you need for a player. In the old system Miami knew how much room they needed for 3-Max contracts, in this new system it'd be a lot harder to guesstimate.

rabzouz 96
12-10-2011, 07:29 AM
move teams to cities that are more economical for the teams

Wade>You
12-10-2011, 07:41 AM
Considering it's the "small market" teams like the Raptors, Cavs, Wizards, etc. that are responsible for the majority of bad contracts, how is a hard cap supposed to help them out?

Heediot
12-10-2011, 07:48 AM
Considering it's the "small market" teams like the Raptors, Cavs, Wizards, etc. that are responsible for the majority of bad contracts, how is a hard cap supposed to help them out?

Bad contracts are by-product of there being too many teams in the NBA. There is too much money to go around and a salary floor forcing teams to spend. Teams have to spend a certain amount, and there is not enough players deserving what they are getting paid. That's just one reason, another is if you don't spend its more difficult to generate revenue because fair-weather fans turn their back on you if your not competitive.

Raps18-19 Champ
12-10-2011, 08:19 AM
Considering it's the "small market" teams like the Raptors, Cavs, Wizards, etc. that are responsible for the majority of bad contracts, how is a hard cap supposed to help them out?

What bad contracts have the Cavs, Raptors, Wizards, Wolves, etc, given out?

And hard cap helps out small market teams in a way that stars can't team up since 3 stars salaries would take up most of the cap. Meaning either they take a really reduced pay cut so the team can fill out the rest of the roster or only 1 or 2 stars per league.

thekmp211
12-10-2011, 11:41 AM
What bad contracts have the Cavs, Raptors, Wizards, Wolves, etc, given out?

And hard cap helps out small market teams in a way that stars can't team up since 3 stars salaries would take up most of the cap. Meaning either they take a really reduced pay cut so the team can fill out the rest of the roster or only 1 or 2 stars per league.

oh i dunno, mo williams, larry hughes, larry hughes again, gilbert arenas, brendan haywood, randy foye, mike miller, andrea bargnani, jose calderon, al jefferson, alvin williams, tj ford, jerry stackhouse, antawn jamison, antawn jamison again, shannon brown, mike olowakandi, Raph Araujo, Ndudi Ebi, ect ect ect.

Raps18-19 Champ
12-10-2011, 11:46 AM
oh i dunno, mo williams, larry hughes, larry hughes again, gilbert arenas, brendan haywood, randy foye, mike miller, andrea bargnani, jose calderon, al jefferson, alvin williams, tj ford, jerry stackhouse, antawn jamison, antawn jamison again, shannon brown, mike olowakandi, Raph Araujo, Ndudi Ebi, ect ect ect.

Half of those contracts weren't even bad when first given out.

You;re basically judging past actions in the present. Judge them when they were first signed. Because half of those deals were reasonable at the time.

ManRam
12-10-2011, 12:06 PM
The only way to end it is to end free agency, and that won't happen.

In today's NBA, and it's existed forever but is becoming more true now, players want to play in big markets. A star FA will never consider signing with a good 2/3s of the teams any more...

And you guys don't get it. Small markets have to offer more money to get the same guys...hence why they tend to "overpay" more. That's a cop out that ignores the fact at hand.

BALLER R
12-10-2011, 12:24 PM
Considering it's the "small market" teams like the Raptors, Cavs, Wizards, etc. that are responsible for the majority of bad contracts, how is a hard cap supposed to help them out?

We are not a small market. Our situation is more because we aren't winning. what "small market" team can be bad but the arena is never empty

joshhorvath
12-10-2011, 12:27 PM
i don't see how Toronto would be considered a small market.. If Toronto where in the USA, it would be one of the largest cities. The GTA is a huge population, along with a country behind it...

albertc86
12-10-2011, 12:27 PM
Contraction.

Why should the smaller markets have just as much power as the larger market teams? The larger market teams generate more money and should have the better teams. The smaller market teams are lucky to get a piece of the pie especially when the bigger teams come into town.

Raps18-19 Champ
12-10-2011, 12:29 PM
No one wants to play for Canada, that's why.

These kids grew up in the streets. None of them are actually educated enough and say things like "It's cold in Canada" and "They all live in igloos".

Raps18-19 Champ
12-10-2011, 12:29 PM
Contraction.

Why should the smaller markets have just as much power as the larger market teams? The larger market teams generate more money and should have the better teams. The smaller market teams are lucky to get a piece of the pie especially when the bigger teams come into town.

Large market teams can still generate more money with a hard cap.

Hawkeye15
12-10-2011, 12:31 PM
Hard cap is the only way. But it will never happen. Small market teams will continue to be used as farming systems for the bigger markets.

And the Paul deal starting all this talk is a side note. The Lakers are well run. They always have the assets to acquire what they want. Don't be upset because they have players that are desireable to teams looking to move a star that wants to leave.

3neSoulja
12-10-2011, 12:32 PM
Considering it's the "small market" teams like the Raptors, Cavs, Wizards, etc. that are responsible for the majority of bad contracts, how is a hard cap supposed to help them out?

yes.. because toronto is a small market. jose and bargs r such bad contracts because they both cant play a lick of defence. tell me this...would u rather have bargs and his 10m a year avg salary or nene at 15m a season?

BALLER R
12-10-2011, 12:32 PM
Funny thing too in Toronto we haven't even had snow this year yet. Hasn't there already been snow storms in some U.S Cities? #Justsaying

ManRam
12-10-2011, 12:34 PM
You can justify why Toronto is great (it's one of my 5 favorite North American cities that I've been to) but that doesn't negate the fact that it isn't a large NBA market (in the states) and that it isn't a desirable destination for FAs. A lot of these guys don't want to play in Canada...period. It's a huge market, but it's not a huge NBA market and it's not a desirable destination..regardless of how nice of a city it is or isn't.

BALLER R
12-10-2011, 12:36 PM
You can justify why Toronto is great (it's one of my 5 favorite North American cities that I've been to) but that doesn't negate the fact that it isn't a large NBA market (in the states) and that it isn't a desirable destination for FAs. A lot of these guys don't want to play in Canada...period. It's a huge market, but it's not a huge NBA market and it's not a desirable destination..regardless of how nice of a city it is or isn't.

Huge NBA market based on what? If we're talking money then we are up there. Free agent desirable destination I agree with you on that point

albertc86
12-10-2011, 12:37 PM
It's not just the teams or ownership, either. It's the cities they play in. Just saying...

BALLER R
12-10-2011, 12:38 PM
yes.. because toronto is a small market. jose and bargs r such bad contracts because they both cant play a lick of defence. tell me this...would u rather have bargs and his 10m a year avg salary or nene at 15m a season?

Call me stupid but I rather have bargs

Sadds The Gr8
12-10-2011, 12:40 PM
I don't think there's anything that can be done. The NBA is becoming european football, where once young players get good, they bolt for the big markets (Man U, Liverpool, Chelsea, Barcelona, Real Madrid, The Milans, etc...) and you never see any up and coming surprising teams. It's always the same teams dominating every league, and the Champions league. It ****in sucks but that's the way it's shaping up to be.

effen5
12-10-2011, 12:52 PM
Funny thing too in Toronto we haven't even had snow this year yet. Hasn't there already been snow storms in some U.S Cities? #Justsaying

Thats funny you say that.....we got our first snow 2 days ago (which was very minimal) and today is actually the coldest day of the year....

This winter has been pretty good so far.

BALLER R
12-10-2011, 12:55 PM
Thats funny you say that.....we got our first snow 2 days ago (which was very minimal) and today is actually the coldest day of the year....

This winter has been pretty good so far.

Let's hope it continues

ne3xchamps
12-10-2011, 12:58 PM
Another sad about big markets in the NBA thread. Great. :rolleyes:

Easy answer..... HARD CAP!

thekmp211
12-10-2011, 01:00 PM
Half of those contracts weren't even bad when first given out.

You;re basically judging past actions in the present. Judge them when they were first signed. Because half of those deals were reasonable at the time.

which ones? i get that larry hughes was valued a certain way the offseason he made all that money. it still doesn't excuse a player like him getting paid 20 million a year. some of the guys i listed were draft picks by those respective teams. and i was only popping off names for four of thirty franchises.

what about the western conference right now? besides the lakers (who everyone seems to forget did not look strong last season) you have small market teams in the spurs, blazers, thunder and grizzlies in the mix for contention. how did they become successful? why did the bulls, knicks and heat all suck for the better part of a decade?

they did it by drafting smart, trading smart and signing smart. it's not impossible. the difficulty curve is just a lot higher in basketball because you only have 5 guys on the court at a time.

"small market" teams aren't operating out of shanties. they are multi-hundred million dollar operations. there is no excuse for a poorly run team.

it doesn't surprise me that these guys would blame the system for doing badly at their jobs. these are the same type of *******s who ruined the economy and then took a check from taxpayers.

Hawkeye15
12-10-2011, 01:16 PM
which ones? i get that larry hughes was valued a certain way the offseason he made all that money. it still doesn't excuse a player like him getting paid 20 million a year. some of the guys i listed were draft picks by those respective teams. and i was only popping off names for four of thirty franchises.

what about the western conference right now? besides the lakers (who everyone seems to forget did not look strong last season) you have small market teams in the spurs, blazers, thunder and grizzlies in the mix for contention. how did they become successful? why did the bulls, knicks and heat all suck for the better part of a decade?

they did it by drafting smart, trading smart and signing smart. it's not impossible. the difficulty curve is just a lot higher in basketball because you only have 5 guys on the court at a time.

"small market" teams aren't operating out of shanties. they are multi-hundred million dollar operations. there is no excuse for a poorly run team.

it doesn't surprise me that these guys would blame the system for doing badly at their jobs. these are the same type of *******s who ruined the economy and then took a check from taxpayers.


Small market teams only have a chance if they draft well, and get their star out of the draft however. They aren't getting them via free agency. But that is understood.

As far as the bad contracts thing, small market teams do indeed need to overpay a bit. The NBA is littered with bad deals all the time, its not just small market teams dude. Small market teams also won't draw the vet glue guys that championship teams needs unless they are a contender already, unlike some of the larger markets.

Point is, we can all ***** about it all we want. Its been this way for 10+ years, and will remain this way. You just have to hope your team does what the Spurs did, and the Thunder are doing now. Otherwise don't watch sports lol.

Iodine
12-10-2011, 01:22 PM
Small market teams need to draft better than big market teams, make smart trades, and extend guys early in their career.

Also it is possible to use a guy's personality to see how much he really wants to go to a huge market.

thekmp211
12-10-2011, 01:24 PM
Small market teams only have a chance if they draft well, and get their star out of the draft however. They aren't getting them via free agency. But that is understood.

As far as the bad contracts thing, small market teams do indeed need to overpay a bit. The NBA is littered with bad deals all the time, its not just small market teams dude. Small market teams also won't draw the vet glue guys that championship teams needs unless they are a contender already, unlike some of the larger markets.

Point is, we can all ***** about it all we want. Its been this way for 10+ years, and will remain this way. You just have to hope your team does what the Spurs did, and the Thunder are doing now. Otherwise don't watch sports lol.

that's my point it's never been any different, the league and all the fans have "survived" up until this point and now suddenly the world goes nuts.

re: overpaying veterans, i honestly am not sure that's as much of an issue for small market teams as you think. in fact, teams live the thunder have thrived by not taking that approach. obviously, if management thinks they are one piece away, things change. even today though, you saw a classic veteran glue guy in grant hill spurn the big market knicks to re-sign with small-market, currently-irrelevant phoenix.

Iodine
12-10-2011, 01:26 PM
that's my point it's never been any different, the league and all the fans have "survived" up until this point and now suddenly the world goes nuts.

re: overpaying veterans, i honestly am not sure that's as much of an issue for small market teams as you think. in fact, teams live the thunder have thrived by not taking that approach. obviously, if management thinks they are one piece away, things change. even today though, you saw a classic veteran glue guy in grant hill spurn the big market knicks to re-sign with small-market, currently-irrelevant phoenix.

Because we live with twitter, espn 27 and NBA TV, and such a culture of hyperbole and shock reactions that now people feel like they any tidbit or spin they read is the gospel and freak out.

da ThRONe
12-10-2011, 01:29 PM
The NFL doesn't have these issues because they have a hard cap. Market size doesn't matter it how you run your organization that does.

In the NBA unless your the Knicks bad. Large rev teams can offer market, title caliber teams, and a close to a max deal.

Iodine
12-10-2011, 01:31 PM
The NFL doesn't have these issues because they have a hard cap. Market size doesn't matter it how you run your organization that does.

In the NBA unless your the Knicks bad. Large rev teams can offer market, title caliber teams, and a close to a max deal.

The NFL also has an entire different financial set up.

Good try though

thekmp211
12-10-2011, 01:31 PM
Because we live with twitter, espn 27 and NBA TV, and such a culture of hyperbole and shock reactions that now people feel like they any tidbit or spin they read is the gospel and freak out.

absolutely. but certain owners and fans feel the need to bring the big/small market disparities to such astronomical levels the likes of which we've never seen before and i'm not sure where that sentiment is coming from. especially on the parts of guys like dan gilbert.

if i were a cavs player, i would have boycotted training camp as soon as my owner essentially called me a fill-in prop. what a disgrace.

Hawkeye15
12-10-2011, 01:33 PM
NFL teams don't lose money. Its a tough comparison, so its not fair to just assume having a hard cap and forcing all teams to spend at least 95% of the cap will just create competitive balance. If they did that in the NBA, there would be teams going under eventually.

Iodine
12-10-2011, 01:34 PM
absolutely. but certain owners and fans feel the need to bring the big/small market disparities to such astronomical levels the likes of which we've never seen before and i'm not sure where that sentiment is coming from. especially on the parts of guys like dan gilbert.

if i were a cavs player, i would have boycotted training camp as soon as my owner essentially called me a fill-in prop. what a disgrace.

Because for some odd reason they demand competitive balance, which even Karl Marx would laugh at.

There isnt going to be 30 41-41 teams, and if there was do you have any idea how ****** that would be

da ThRONe
12-10-2011, 01:41 PM
Do people even know with competitive balance means? It means ever franchise has an even starting point. Ofcourse they will only be so many title contenders any given year. The problem is it's always the same teams because the league gives huge advantages to large rev teams. Competitive balance is about eliminating the huge advantages large rev teams have in the league.

PhillyFaninLA
12-10-2011, 01:42 PM
TC ask the Spurs and Thunder if they think there is a problem.

Ask the small market teams that have good owners, good coach, good president, and a good GM how they feel about this.

Ask the post Ewing and pre Amare and Melo Knicks how they feel about large verse small markets.

Its an issue of competence not market.

Raph12
12-10-2011, 01:44 PM
Contraction and then a redraft with franchise tags - Get rid of the teams that lost money last season, then redraft all the players in the league and finally give each team a franchise tage so that they can control what they want to do with their best player at all times.

thekmp211
12-10-2011, 01:57 PM
Do people even know with competitive balance means? It means ever franchise has an even starting point. Of course they will only be so many title contenders any given year. The problem is it's always the same teams because the league gives huge advantages to large rev teams. Competitive balance is about eliminating the huge advantages large rev teams have in the league.

b.s. strewn throughout. competitive balance is much complicated than "an even starting point", whatever that even means.

besides the lakers, which big-market teams has consistently been a contender over the past 20 years? which small-market teams?

the owners all just agreed on a cba YESTERDAY. literally. yesterday. if they were this concerned about competitive balance maybe they should have continued the lockout. they made the rules.

Robbw241
12-10-2011, 01:58 PM
They need to move to bigger markets. Just have like 4 teams in LA, 5 in NY, 3 in Boston.

Iodine
12-10-2011, 02:00 PM
TC ask the Spurs and Thunder if they think there is a problem.

Ask the small market teams that have good owners, good coach, good president, and a good GM how they feel about this.

Ask the post Ewing and pre Amare and Melo Knicks how they feel about large verse small markets.

Its an issue of competence not market.

To a point yes. A small market team like Los Spurs can take advantage of not being in NY and take more unsexy picks (TP, Manu, George Hill) since they have less constant scrutiny and the fans are a different breed, while the Knicks always will feel the need to strike fast and big because of their market and attention.
But there is a vice versa of Los Spurs being able to make a big FA push or having a lot of control in league meetings, and the knicks always can

Iodine
12-10-2011, 02:02 PM
b.s. strewn throughout. competitive balance is much complicated than "an even starting point", whatever that even means.

besides the lakers, which big-market teams has consistently been a contender over the past 20 years? which small-market teams?

the owners all just agreed on a cba YESTERDAY. literally. yesterday. if they were this concerned about competitive balance maybe they should have continued the lockout. they made the rules.

Clearly the rockets and sixers

Marco22
12-10-2011, 02:10 PM
The NBA has to many teams they need to drop about 14 teams. 16 teams is enough it also will make the league much stronger.

thunderforce
12-10-2011, 02:21 PM
They need to make the lux tax even higher which they did they should also make sure small markets don't loose superstar players for nothing . If they are traded and get fair value then fine , but if they don't get fair value they should be able to get extra picks after the non playoff teams pick .

Hawkeye15
12-10-2011, 02:31 PM
Do people even know with competitive balance means? It means ever franchise has an even starting point. Ofcourse they will only be so many title contenders any given year. The problem is it's always the same teams because the league gives huge advantages to large rev teams. Competitive balance is about eliminating the huge advantages large rev teams have in the league.

this is a great point. When people speak of competitive balance, I sometimes think they want everyone to be within 38-45 wins. Every team.

Heediot
12-10-2011, 02:36 PM
The problem I have with the current system is why does a guy like Joe Johnson get more annual salary versus say a guy like Derrick rose when he signs his extension?

cooters22
12-22-2011, 02:01 PM
this is a great point. When people speak of competitive balance, I sometimes think they want everyone to be within 38-45 wins. Every team.

I don't think the NBA wants competitive balance. They want NBA stars and not NBA teams. And the stars currently want to play in specific places and the league allows/makes it attainable for players to do this.

Celticsfan2007
12-22-2011, 02:35 PM
Eliminating the cap on Max contracts is what needs to be done. Money always talks in sports.

For example: The Miami big 3 was formed because each of them knowingly took a 5-6mil pay cut a year to play for with each other because under the max contract rules they could only make X amount of dollars.

Now if you remove the max contract space, teams with cap space would have been able to offer him more than whatever the max contract is. Say a team like the knicks was willing to pay Lebron 40million a year to play for them, leaving them a little over 26mil to spend on the rest of the team under salary cap rules. They would have been able to offer him something that Miami could not without not signing other 2.

If your Lebron do you take 40mil to play with nobody or take 14mil to play with two of your friends?

You answer the question.

Celticsfan2007
12-22-2011, 02:39 PM
Right now, the way the Salary cap and player contracts are allowed to be constructed, players are willing to take minimal pay cuts to play for a winning team/with other superstars.

It's sad that players like Lebron under our current rules can't make anymore money than other Max guys like Joe Johnson, Marc Gasol, etc....

THIS IS THE PROBLEM WITH THE NBA

thekmp211
12-22-2011, 03:30 PM
one idea that came to mind the other day, not sure if it's feasible at all. what if each team had a cap-exempt roster spot. this spot could be used on star players, and there would be no salary limit and no cap hit against the team. you can only have one such player on your roster at a time.

totally out of thin air, but i think it speaks to ^ post which i agree with.

LongWayFromHome
12-22-2011, 03:56 PM
one idea that came to mind the other day, not sure if it's feasible at all. what if each team had a cap-exempt roster spot. this spot could be used on star players, and there would be no salary limit and no cap hit against the team. you can only have one such player on your roster at a time.

totally out of thin air, but i think it speaks to ^ post which i agree with.

And if you're looking to help the small market teams, make this rule only applicable to a player who you drafted and has only ever played for you.

ie: Lebron could only sign that deal with Cavs, Rose with Bulls, etc. This way, if Kobe really generates you 80mil in revenue Lakers can pay him 50mil and no one else can ever come close.

I realize 2 of those are big market teams but you can see how it helps small markets like NO or OKC.

IDB Josh M
12-22-2011, 04:18 PM
What problem?

tcav701
12-22-2011, 04:22 PM
Anyone is against a hard cap is a fan of a team that would be hurt by it and probably flat out lying if they say it wont help.

Everyone knows its a good idea, they just want rules that help their team win.

NYKalltheway
12-22-2011, 07:43 PM
What problem is there? Everyone playing at their strengths is not a problem is it?