• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

2011 NBA Playoffs |OT| Don't Compare Refs to Cigarettes

Status
Not open for further replies.

Blackface

Banned
Black Mamba said:
A lot of the problems you list will be the result of limiting salaries, possibly even reducing current contracts.

The NBA has an easy time fractioning the player base.

All they got to do is reduce the slice of the total pie by taking most of it from the top end salaries, but guaranteeing higher salaries for the low end. Max goes from $18 million to $13 million but the $6 mil MLE becomes $6.5 million.

Cutting out a year from contracts will help too. There might be protections thrown in like franchise tag of some variety for smaller market teams. Then some revenue sharing.


Regarding Bynum for Dwight, we are all mostly joking. but, Bynum is only 23, he is young. orlando, IMO, would definitely take him if they HAVE TO lose Dwight. And his contract is very short term by then. And the salaries will match under any system, the current CBA or the next one. Of course it would have to be a S&T and not a FA signing outright. But very few guys do move as FA. Bron and Bosh were traded, too.

But whatever happens, teams like the Lakers will be protected with an ability to stay powerhouses (assuming they don't do anything stupid). Stern won't kill his league's strength.

The debate with your method is, is it the players, the market.

If you took the Lakers team of the past 12 years, and put it in Cleavland, would it make close to as money for the league?

Almost all signs point to-outside of three teams on the top end, and four teams on the low-end-they all have potential to make BANK.

New York, LA and Chicago are the only big market teams that can make substantially more then any other city in basketball. Where as Minny, Memphis, NO and Milwuake, even if they made it to the NBA finals, would stay close to the bottom.

Every other team in the middle fluctuates.

What this means is the NBA does not need to protect large markets. Even if those large markets don't win, they still make money.

in 2009 NY, LA and Chicago were still the top 3 money makers. Even though two of the three were not good teams. 2007, 2008 the same thing. In 2006, Chicago only dropped to fourth.

So in reality, there is more potential for money to be made by protecting the middle of the pack teams, and turning them into good teams, then there is protecting LA, NY or Chicago. They will always make money, so they don't need help from the league.

This can be seen with the Cav's. Who were one draft away from filing for bankruptcy, then they got Lebron. Lebron took them for bankrupt to one of the top 5 most valuable franchises in the NBA. All the while, NY, LA and Chicago still brought in lots of money.

So no, the league won't protect the large markets. They don't need them to be good, they just need them to make money. Two of the three largest markets have proven to make money even when they are bad. The only way the Lakers wouldn't be in the same boat, is if they have awful, embarrassing, bandwagon fans (like Cleavland). I don't think this is the case.

The league knowds this. So the league is going to put in rules that protect all the middle teams. If they can get teams like Toronto and Philli winning, it will bring more money to the league then making a place like Chicago a winner. Simply because the profit increase from going number 3/4 to number 1 (in Chicago's case) is much smaller then going frrom 10/12 to top 5 (in Toronto's case).
 

charsace

Member
zero margin said:
Fernandez is a joke. He's not even looking to shoot he's so demoralized. Ship em out.
Remember when you guys said he wasn't worth a first from the knicks? I wouldn't give up a second for him right now.
 

linsivvi

Member
Black Mamba said:
trax - the ratings say otherwise. QED

He has no clue. Stern wants the NBA to overtake football, in particular the English Premier League as the #1 sport in the world. The international market for the premier leagues are mostly the traditional powerhouses like MU and Liverpool, and the NBA would need that if they want to replace them.
 

ianswoody

Member
Just the past two have been home calls. Refs have been missing on both sides. The last Dallas collapse made me sick, literally. I might die if it happens again.
 

Blackface

Banned
linsivvi said:
He has no clue. Stern wants the NBA to overtake football, in particular the English Premier League as the #1 sport in the world. The international market for the premier leagues are mostly the traditional powerhouses like MU and Liverpool, and the NBA would need that if they want to replace them.

The way Forbes breaks down the valuations of NBA franchises. Mathematically the NBA would make more money and become a large entity if the middle teams won. Since the big teams make money regardless of if they win or lose.

NBA fans are proven to watch players over teams. Nobody watches the Spurs because they are boring. But Cav games when Lebron was playing got more viewers then almost any team in the NBA.

Also, The Premier League is having massive financial problems and owners are selling teams left and right. The way it's setup is a massive problem and they have been trying to fix it for the better part of a decade.

You don't know what you are talking about, stop embarrassing yourself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom