Why NOT Contraction?
by dweebowitz on Feb 28, 2011 4:56 PM PST
Email
Print
Seems like everyone's got an opinion about whether there should be contraction in the NBA or not. LeBron thinks there should. Of course, I couldn't give a rat's doo-doo-maker about LeBron's opinion on...well, anything. But maybe he makes sense here. Maybe Kevin Love would be happier and more productive on a team with other superstars.
More after Tha JUMP!!!
We all know that D-Stern is all about the Bennies. And whether it's selling jerseys or creating global alliances, what generates the Bennies is superstars. Particularly superstars competing for the championship. Do we seriously think that anyone outside our hardcore fanbase cares that the Sixers are playing tough, scrappy basketball and winning games and are generally fun to watch? How many non-hardcore fans not from Minneapolis can even name more than three players on the Timberwolves? Does anyone even show up at Bobcats games except for the possibility of seeing the owner?
And with the new SuperFriends mentality of the top players, more and more there will be a few super-stacked teams at the top of each conference, and a pool of food animals to be plundered for any remaining useful assets. As it's been said, this has happened before, in the 80s, where there were a few good teams and everyone else was pretty much irrelevant.
Every team has its hardcore fans. Obviously, if there were no more Nets, the really rabid Nets fans would be crushed. But would the casual basketball fan care at all? Deron Williams and maybe Brook Lopez would sign with other teams, and that would be the end of it.
I suspect that the teams that would remain would appeal more to the casual fan, the fan who wears a Lakers shirt to a Sixers/Raptors game, or a Yankees cap to a Diamondbacks/Rangers game. This is most of America outside the rabid fan base of each team, and the entirety of the world outside of America (and Stern cares a LOT about marketing the NBA to the rest of the world). The average American fan loves to root for a winner. They want to brag to their beer buddies that they were on board the whole time when Kobe scored 57 in the Finals to beat Boston, while watching in a Philly sports bar.
If you were Stern Almighty, how would you answer these questions?
1) Would you contract?
2) How many teams would you want in your New World Order?
3) Which teams would you contract to get to that number?
Discuss. I'm getting Fehrklempt...
Another user-created commentary provided by a Liberty Ballers reader.
46 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I’d hate for the NBA to turn into a league in which only a few teams had a chance at a championship every season.
by yosoysean on Feb 28, 2011 7:30 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
You think that’s not true now? There are how many elite teams? Maybe three? And it seems like at least two of them have been elite for a really long time now. And the other one was basically built up by a very interested outside party who was willing to food-animalize his own team that he was GM of to get them there. If you want to put the two new SuperFriends teams in there, well, at least one of them is a total Stern favorite (frozen ping-pong balls, anyone?) and the other one is going to have to be now that LeBron, Wade, and Bosh are there.
How much longer is Dwight Howard going to stay in Orlando? He’s already making unhappy noises. Chris Paul isn’t staying in NO. I don’t think Deron Williams is going to stay with the Nets. These guys are already looking around for SuperFriends teams to be on. We already know exactly how many years Blake Griffin will be on the Clippers until he starts looking around for a SuperFriends team of his own, or, God Forbid, people will go to LA to play with Blake (this will probably only happen if Sterling sells the team), and there will be TWO relevant teams in LA.
The 80s were more or less a SuperFriends era. Which was great for you if you were a Boston or LA (or, if we’re being honest, Philly) fan. And it pretty much sucked for everyone else.
It almost makes sense to contract about half the league, let the top players all end up together on those teams that are left, and either move the rest to the D-League, or have a new ABA as like a super-D-League, or whatever, for those towns that had crappy teams. The mediocre players on the contracted teams (like, basically, the entire Sixers roster, depending on how you feel about Iguodala…I think he could find a place in the Sweet 16) could be redistributed to the super-D-League teams and kept as a pool of injury replacements for the good teams.
Why fight the SuperFriends? It doesn’t make any sense, really. The economics support really good teams, fewer in number. No one is in business to lose money.
YOU BLASPHEME!
Liberty Ballers / Ridiculous Upside / SBN Philly / Twitter
The Artist Formerly Known As The Artist Formerly Known As Michael Bourn
by Michael Levin on Mar 1, 2011 5:50 AM PST up reply actions
1) Yes, sort of. I’d adopt a Euro style soccer system, with multiple tiers, relegation, promotion, etc. So I’d expand, than relegate. All nonsense, but hey…if I’m emperor stern, this is the vision I’d push on the owners.
2) 24 teams in the NBA Premier League, split into 2 conferences. Play each conf. opp. 4 times, out of conf. twice, for 68 games. Time for leagues to shift focus from filling arena calendars to the less is more approach that keeps footballers (american and int’l) rolling in money.
3) Sacramento, Charlotte, N.O., LA Clippers, for sure. After that, things get tough. Minny and Cleveland are my choices, though I’d feel bad as those are solid sports towns.
'Things are more like today than they have ever been before." Gerald R. Ford
I suggested something like a relegation system once. People thought it was kind of a bad idea, although I like it…but I’m an English soccer fan :)
I’m just not sure there are enough owners willing to be small-time toll-takers in the US to support a multi-tiered system. The economics don’t seem to support it. For example, the Sixers, with, supposedly, an NBA-level roster (this is debatable), can’t come anywhere close to filling their arena now. You think people are going to come out to see a stripped-down version without whatever legitimate talent may be on the roster? How many people would come out to see the Sixers without, say, Iguodala, Brand, and Jrue, who might be sent to go play for good teams?
Americans love superstars and championship winners, and that’s about who they will support. Diehards don’t generate a lot of income, in most cases.
Case in point. I would say that most of the regular commenters here could be considered diehard Sixers fans. How many of us have season tickets? How many of us go to more than five home games per season? How many of us (even those of us in the Philly area) haven’t been to a game at all this year?
This isn’t English soccer, where 3000 fans will travel on a Wednesday afternoon halfway across the country to see their team, barely above the relegation time, take on another team barely above the relegation line, from the second to the third division. This is America, where if you’re not a serious contender to win the championship this year, no one bothers to go to your home games.
Relegation
You make a lot of good points about why relegation won’t happen in any sport in America, even though its a fine idea.
With the current way its setup, fans won’t be able to live with the fact they have no chance to win the NBA title at the start of the season. Hope is one of the things that alot of fans live on and taking that away may drive away fans.
Second, I believe that many of the EPL teams are independently owned and not part of a owners group. Many teams in the lower divisions fail and cease operations. Owners wouldn’t approve that change.
Finally, how would you do the draft? English soccer teams just buy and sell players, how would that work in this system?
That discussion could go on forever but lets get back to the topic. I think the NBA could easily contract two teams. I can’t say which teams to contract because there are hardcore fans of each team but you have to look at teams that obviously don’t care about winning, such as the Grizzlies or Bobcats, which is hurting the competitiveness of the league.
I think fans of these teams will stay fans of the league if the NBA product keeps them interested. You can do this by making the league competitive from top to (almost) the bottom. By getting rid of teams that care solely about money instead of winning titles, you can do this.
I don’t know that two is enough. I would suggest that the league could easily get down to 12 teams. Those teams would be loaded, and each would have a reasonable chance of winning the title in any given year. I would go something like this:
NOTE: This is based partially on who’s good right now, and partially on geographic desirability.
Eastern Conference:
Boston Celtics (“Classic” multiple championship team, winning tradition, large national following, represents the New England Area)
New York Knicks (New York has to have a team)
Miami Heat (“SuperFriends” team, represents the South)
Chicago Bulls (Championship tradition, large national following, Chicago must be represented, representing the Midwest in general)
Washington Wizards (Although I would go back to the Bullets. Geographic representation for the mid-Atlantic, upper South regions, not because they’re good now)
Kansas City Kings (bring ’em back! – representing the central Midwest and mid-South)
Western Conference
Los Angeles Lakers (duh!)
Portland Trail Blazers (or maybe Seattle SuperSonics – representing the Pacific Northwest)
Golden State Warriors (represents the Bay Area)
Denver Nuggets (represents the Mountain and western Plains states)
Dallas Mavericks (because Mark Cuban needs to be involved in the league)
Houston Rockets (for the rest of Texas)
Only California and Texas are big enough to support two teams…SF fans would never support an LA team, etc.
You have to figure, with 12 players on each active roster, you’re talking about only the 192 best players making a team. Even then, there certainly aren’t 192 “SuperFriends” in the NBA, but right now, there are over 400 players employed by NBA teams, and you have to figure at least half don’t belong in the NBA.
The fans (at least the casual/international fans who generate the vast majority of league income) make out here, because the games will be better, the teams will all be really, really competitive, and anyone would have a chance to win in any given season.
The only people who get hurt are the hardcore, say, Grizzlies, fans, or Wolves fans, or Hawks fans, or whatever. But I figure the Wolves fans will be OK, since after I reshuffle the NHL, they’ll get the North Stars back (I’m pretty sure I don’t even know what their current team is called), and let’s face it, Minnesotans care more about hockey anyway. Hawks fans still have the Braves and Falcons, who are more interesting anyway. Grizz fans can watch college basketball…and the 11 Bobcats fans have NC, Duke, NC State, and Wake Forest. Chances are, they’re more interested in them anyway.
And here? I’m not sure most people would notice the Sixers were gone. It’s Flyers season, after all…and spring training just started.
12 teams
Would be interested to see the 120 players you would have. Feel like there would be too many quality guys left out. There is plenty of talent to support 25-28 teams, especially when the 10th men on the bench are just filler who hardly play anyway.
If I had enough time to go through rosters, it might make for an interesting exercise to figure out who would be among the Chosen 144 players, and who would be playing in Europe or the D-League (which would suddenly probably be really, really good watching). I could probably do the exercise with the Sixers roster (based only on this year’s performance, not historical track records, for the most part):
Would get a job in the New NBA: Iguodala, Brand
Might make an NBA roster: Holiday, Turner (?), Young (??)
Better off in Europe: Noce, Donger
D-League Material: Meeks, BOSS, Speezy, Hawes, Brackins
Thanks for playing, guys: Krapono, Battie
I’m not so conversant with any other team’s roster that I could really break them down in a meaningful way. I know who the better players are on pretty much every team, but I couldn’t tier down the bench guys.
So, if you figure, five guys making the cut from a current mid-tier team (which I think we can agree is exactly what the Sixers are), with a couple more from the better teams and a couple less from the worse teams, you come out with 150 guys who at least marginally belong in the new NBA. Which works out pretty well, since there would be 144 roster spots on the 12 teams. So, let’s say even 20—25 guys who are marginal NNBA players might not get roster spots right away and would have to go bust their asses in the D-League to prove they’re good enough to be on a roster if someone gets hurt or retires or doesn’t pan out or whatever, or would go take a bit less money and go play in Europe or wherever.
If you did this with the New Orleans roster since i cheeer for both
Players to stay: CP3 Emeka West
Players that might: Ariza, Landry, Qpon?
Better of in the D: Willie, jason smith, aaron gray, jarret jack
Player in Europe: Belinelli, David Andersen
Sorry but thanks for playing: Mbenga Marcus banks
by sd3 on Mar 3, 2011 9:51 AM PST up reply actions
The other thing I would like is a real minor league....
The facade of “student-athletes” going one-and-done sickens me and I dont care about the “business” of NCAA Hoops. College shouldnt make money teaching these kids how to become “pro basketball players”.
And for the NBA, too many roster spots taken up by “projects” like Thabeet, Brackins who would be better off in a REAL competitive developmental league, so…. Contracted cities can have “AAA” teams. Maybe even reduce rosters since you dont have to keep such “projects” at the “pro” level.
1) yes, 24 teams to start (I could see 18 but…)
2) Minny, Sacto, New Orleans, Charlotte, Milwaukee, Memphis (Utah dodged the first bullet and Atlanta, at 8th, is too big a market).
PS I used to love the Kansas City Kings for some reason – bring em back. Maybe move the Clips there.. nah LA can support 2 teams… if they dont suck.
I fully agree with this suggestion…
Maybe even reduce rosters since you dont have to keep such "projects" at the "pro" level.
I am suggesting a hard 12-man roster. No guys in suits. Send ‘em to the D-League. If someone gets hurt, sign a D-Leaguer to a 10-day tryout. The other thing is, no affiliations. If you don’t keep a guy on your 12-man roster, you renounce your rights to him (contracts in this scenario would be non-guaranteed). Let him play for someone else.
I would do things like so:
NNBA teams:
-———————-
Team alignment: As above. 12 teams.
Roster: 12 players.
Draft: 1 round. 12 total players get selected to play in the NNBA. In a really good year, that’s about how many players can play well enough to justify a rotation spot, anyway. The rest of the young guys can fight their way up through the NDL system.
Contracts: Like the NFL. Signing bonuses that don’t count against the cap, but non-guaranteed, unless a guarantee is specifically negotiated for an individual player. Like, if you want Kobe or LeBron, you better be prepared to give him all of his money, even if he gets hurt or starts to suck. But if you get, say, Elton Brand, who isn’t on that level, maybe he gets a big signing bonus that doesn’t leave you stuck in cap hell for years, so he gets a lot of his money, but you can release him early and free up cap space if he turns out to be an oft-injured disaster. Especially if he just missed the entire season due to injury. I’m just sayin’ :)
The NDL (New D-League):
-—————————————————
Teams: However many people want to own them. The more, the merrier. Possibly introduce the relegation system down here, with multiple tiers, to see how it works for a much lower cost of experimentation than doing it with the top teams.
Roster: 15 players, like the current NBA. 12 active, 3 reserve in streets.
Player Acquisition: The NDL would draft players after the NBA preseason is over and the 12 -man rosters have been set for the Big 12. Five-round draft of all available players, including those who are just out of college and didn’t get picked up by a NNBA team, or veteran players not under contract to any other team. Free agent signings to bulk up the rest of the roster. If we go to a multi-tiered NDL system, possibly as each level sets rosters, the next level drafts. This would have the effect of staggering the basketball seasons throughout the year, but I don’t think that’s a terrible thing. Also, any higher-level team can call up a player from a lower-level team, either on a 10-day try-n-buy, or a “rest-of-season” deal.
Contracts: Three-year max, no guarantees. Automatically terminate if a player is called up by a higher-level team. No salary cap per se, but max money per contract defined in the CBA. Basically, if a NDL owner wants to spend a bunch of money putting together the best mediocre team he can buy, he can knock himself out. Up to a certain point. After the 5-round draft removes the best mediocre players, of course.
Free Agency: Only for players who are undrafted in the 5-round NDL draft. Players whose contracts expire would be automatically entered in the draft for the following year. This would have the effect of limiting player movement between NDL teams season to season, but since the idea is to get to the NNBA, who really cares, as long as you’re playing and getting paid to do it.
Age Limits: None. Screw that noise. If a kid wants to play ball instead of going to college, and someone wants to sign him to a contract to play ball, let the kid play ball. This is America!
So, it’s all sort of hybrid, with the NNBA being the shiny SuperFriends league, and all the interesting English soccer multi-tier stuff going on at the NDL level. Frankly, if this setup existed, I would be doing all my commenting at Ridiculous Upside instead of here, because the NDL setup would be WAY more interesting.
But I’m a diehard Sixers fan. I don’t give a crap about superstars, unless they play for us :D
Anyway, I’m sure there are a ton of holes in my approach here, and I am sure there’s something I’ve missed that’s really important. But I don’t care, because I am taking the day off of work. Because I feel like it :)
This is why I haven’t accepted a partnership at my current firm. I get to spend 20 minutes thinking up an entirely new structure for US professional basketball instead of arguing asset valuations of insolvent companies with the US Trustee.
Hey, Maybe Ricko has a formula for those?
And this is much more fun – its how I wile (sp?) away the mundane hours until i get my next gig…..
For the record, I actually like affiliation – at least in 1 tier so you can develop players in your system. And subsidize their pay – keep em out of the fugazy minor league known as NCAA.
That’s pre-petition. During proceedings, it’s assets=debts=assets. Then afterwards, it’s assets=debts=0, more or less, depending on what state you live in, and what your debts are, and who they’re to, and what you own.
Now you too can do my job. Good Times! :D
(Of course, that’s only if you file for Chapter 7. Chapter 11/13 are much more involved/lucrative for your friendly neighborhood attorney. And the beauty is, no trustee!).
I don’t actually do a lot of Chapter 7 work. Some, mostly involving finding buyers for the assets to create the bankruptcy estate, which gets really complicated when you’re talking about shares of stock in closely-held companies or investment partnerships. But it’s even irritating dealing with real property, because any moderately savvy purchaser knows it’s property of the estate for liquidation, and they offer you pennies on the dollar, because the stuff HAS to be sold. The trick is finding people who really need the stuff, rather than people who just want to turn it around for a quick buck. For corporate clients (I don’t usually handle consumer debt stuff unless it’s as a favor to a friend or relative), we desperately try to avoid having an auction sale, and place things ourselves as much as possible. We get vastly more money. Which means less stuff pays more debt. Which means creditors committees who don’t sue, which usually translates to happier (bankruptcy clients, particularly Chapter 7 clients, tend to be very unhappy people) clients. And happier clients usually call again the next time they have a stupid idea for a business and they run it poorly and it fails. God Bless America!
Because I know you all desperately wanted to know what I do all day when I’m not re-architecting the NBA or watching Dora with my son or bemoaning BOSSness or making chicken soup or calling things BUSTs.
Your worlds would collide if you handled the New Orleans Hornets then right?
Let me know if you come across any trading or “financial” technology companies with software I can salvage (ok, ok…..scavenge) !
Anyway, I just wanted to see if we could get RickoT on some Ch 13 cases. He’d be a great workout guy :-)
Tell David Stern to call me. I’ll hook him up!
And of course you want the intellectual property. I freaking hate dealing with IP valuations. Figures :)
I don’t know…Ricko gets married to specific details (generally, height), and that might make him too inflexible to come up with a good workout plan. Although he would be good in front of the judge…he’s VERY persistent once he does get married to an idea, whether that idea makes sense or not. And there are plenty of judges out there who don’t insist that what the lawyers say make sense, including some who work on the US Bankruptcy Court. :D
Although, I will say that the Bankruptcy Court judges in DE and EDPA are really very good to work with. Much more pleasant than the ones in NYC.
Brought up minors/relegation because I don’t see the NBA owners buying up other teams to contract them. I know this is all silly, but as said above, words are cheap.
As for how it might be done profitably for current owners…we can make a minor/major league system better than the rest. We have the technology…
1) give current NBA owners a quasi-Spirit of St Louis deal. They keep a share of the big NBA pot until they’ve been stuck in lower divisions for X years. Not forever, just for awhile.
2) charge expansion fees and split that pot with current owners. I picture dumb NBA owners reacting like the attorney from Idiocracy ( “I like money.”) If nobody wants to buy in, fine…idea’s dead. But I gotta believe that there are enough businesspeople with money burning a hole in their pockets craving for attention, willing to buy in to the NBA pie.
3) We’re Americans! Tournaments and playoffs are what we do! The lower divisions will have a tournament, and the winner gets promoted and goes to the playoffs. I believe Bill Simmons has been pitching the tourney idea for years. Would probably make more money than the pray for lottery savior method we “relegate” half the league to now. Which reminds me…
4) The draft….with roster limits and salary caps, why do we need it? To force our league’s best assets (young talent) into the hands of our worst management teams? If the next LeBron wants to play for LA out of high school, and LA wants him and can afford him, let it happen. If this means small market teams with lousy management can’t compete, and get relegated, so be it.
5) Get a taste of that college money. Let 19 and under players go straight to pro, either by ditching the rule entirely, or by allowing top level teams to loan a fixed number of players to lower divison clubs. Why have a pointless minors/DLeague setup? What is the NBA’s vision for the D-League anyway? A poor man’s AA baseball?
6) allow the new expansion teams to play up to Y (with Y >=2) home games outside North America. Unless teleporting comes along, a true global league will never happen. But maybe letting a new owner take his toy home for 2 games will encourage foreign investment, and help the league grow its brand in a more meaningful way than the NFL/NHL/MLB’s pointless overseas exhibitions.
Main selling points – Smart, rich owners might be sold on the prospect of owning global icon superteams. The dumb owners get cash now, relegation later.
'Things are more like today than they have ever been before." Gerald R. Ford
Three simple steps to make the game better:
1. Make the NBA contracts non-guaranteed
2. Make college players play at least 2 years in the NBA
Who's Been Eatin' Hummus?
She passed wind, excused herself, and sponged off in the corner as I sat dazed and confused...
3. Bring back NBA on NBC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_h7Lm7C9Nk
Who's Been Eatin' Hummus?
She passed wind, excused herself, and sponged off in the corner as I sat dazed and confused...
by rajav on Mar 1, 2011 4:07 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
You are the smartest man alive.
It really sucks that they in the last few years re-upped with ABC/TNT. They could have waited it out, signed for money because of how much more viewership there is, and most importantly….brought back this theme. I defy Beethoven or Bach to come up with this classic.
by saveourbluths on Mar 1, 2011 4:28 PM PST up reply actions
My arguement to the contraction point
Why would anyone want to watch basketball in any of the states that lose a team, many people are “hard-core fans”. you would also lose all the extra money the nba makes in selling tickets because entire states would not cheer for the nba and go to games.
If I had to guess, I would translate like so:
“The NBA would lose the ‘hard-core’ fan base of the specific teams that were contracted. These people would not spend money on NBA-related product. This is bad for the NBA’s bottom line.”
I wonder. I suspect really hard-core fans would eventually support their NDL teams, at least to an extent. I do think there is a small percentage of fans that, if they lost their team, would move on to, I don’t know, hockey or something. But I bet that (let’s say, for example if the Sixers were contracted, and Philly suddenly became an NDL city, a lot of us more hardcore fans would support the Philly NDL team. Let’s face it, Sixers fans are not exactly thronging to the CoreStatesFirstUnionWachoviaWellsFargo Center to support their team as it is.
I am completely guilty of this…I’ve not been to a game in person since the Sixers played in the Spectrum and Charles Barkley was on the team, and I still consider myself a huge Sixers fan. I did live in NYC for most of those years, but even since I’ve been back, I don’t go to the games…my son is too young, he won’t sit through a game comfortably. Or it’s easier/cheaper/better to just watch on TV. Or I can’t make amusing comments to my blog-buddies while watching if I’m actually at the arena. Or whatever.
Like I said in a previous comment on this thread:
I would say that most of the regular commenters here could be considered diehard Sixers fans. How many of us have season tickets? How many of us go to more than five home games per season? How many of us (even those of us in the Philly area) haven’t been to a game at all this year?
It could be realistically stated that I have not spent one cent on my favorite sports team (yes, I’m one of those weird Philadelphians who loves the Sixers the most…there aren’t many of us) this season. And it’s not like last year, where I couldn’t justify supporting a team that sucked as bad as Eddie and the Jordanaires sucked.
Bottom line, If the Sixers were contracted tomorrow, the NBA wouldn’t be losing out on one red cent of my money. And I suspect there are plenty of Sixers fans (or Nets, or Bobcats, or Wolves, or Hornets fans) just like me. Even if I do try to shlep my son to one game this year, just so I can infect him with my Sixers fandom (I know, I know, call Child Protective Services), it’s just not that much money. The league makes its money on TV contracts, and the networks would still pay to broadcast the NBA games into Philly…people have to see Kobe v. LeBron! And frankly, I would say 75% of the fanbase really only cares about Kobe v. LeBron and their ilk.
I would probably spend at least as much money on supporting my local NDL team as I would the Sixers, although I might not type as much about them. Ah. The hell with it. I probably would type every bit as much :D
Ricko says, Contraction? Not my first choice, the more teams mean the NBA is in more places making more money. If the franchises are in trouble, we’ll try to adjust the arrangement so they’re not. Talent dilution is no concern, the NBA isn’t worried about a quality product, as long as the stands are full.
The fans are fans because the team is there. As long as it appears the team is trying to win, the fans can get behind it. I’m not sure how some teams survive year after year without winning, but they do. If the problem is there aren’t enough people in the stands, either the prices are too high or the local product too bad. I think the current economic conditions are making the NBA entertainment a little to expensive for the masses. It makes sense that the league and players work out a better way to be exposed to this together. You can’t justify 20 million if no one is coming to see you play!
If I’m Stern I want an NBA Europe and an NBA Asia and an NBA S. America. The championship of the world would come from these continents after a team wins their continental championship.
Basketball is a game that can be played anywhere, in cold or warm climates. It should have very broad appeal, it just takes time for people to get used to it as a form of entertainment that matters to them. I’m not satisfied with the NBA being king of N. America. The game as it is played can be exported to the rest of the world and local talent will stay more local, thus generating more regional pride.
As the Web has expanded NBA exposure, along with International media presence, the rest of the world is acquiring a taste for the NBA game. Places with the economy to support it represent an opportunity. It isn’t hard to see a team in every European capital in an NBA Europe, is it?
Talent dilution is no concern, the NBA isn’t worried about a quality product, as long as the stands are full.
Since when are the stands full?
If I’m Stern I want an NBA Europe and an NBA Asia and an NBA S. America. The championship of the world would come from these continents after a team wins their continental championship.
Would never happen but okay idea.
Places with the economy to support it represent an opportunity.
And they already have established leagues.
Seriously, FIBA is a joke compared with the NBA marketing machine and rules. It would help global basketball immensely to get rid of them, and there’s really nothing they can do about it! The NBA is a business, FIBA is more like the NCAA, a bunch of fat-heads. Not sure if any of you follow Futbol, but if you watched the world cup, you saw how backwards their game management and rules enforcement was. Americans have a much more straight-forward idea of fairness- unbiased referees, that elevates the integrity of the competition. Winning any way possible, even by cheating is the world’s way. Winning within the rules fair and square is the American way.
The stands are full enough in enough arenas as far as I can tell. There are games on every night tuned into by avid viewers. There are thousands of fans chatting about them the next day on the web.
The Raptors and the Nets are playing a game in London. Now, we have to get the French to build an Arena for an NBA quality team. The Olympics in London may well have a springboard effect. There are enough people in Europe to support a league as big as the NBA there. More and more NBA players are from Europe and to be the first league to run a world wide Championship would be quite an accomplishment for the NBA.
In the final analysis this is an entertainment business and the first ones in extort money from the new owners who then join the exclusive club. Once you have a team you can take it where you want, as long as another owner doesn’t already have it. The bigger the number of owners, the more money that comes in and the more profitable the business is. Basketball is cheap TV programming, and people watch it at home and in bars. The bigger the fan base the more money they make.
Americans have a much more straight-forward idea of fairness- unbiased referees, that elevates the integrity of the competition.
Wha-wha-wha-what???? I might give them “biased in a predictable manner, so you can play around it”…like, “Don’t go anywhere near Kobe/LeBron/DWade toward the end of the game, because you can predict the ref will call a touch foul if you’re within 5 feet of them as they make their highlight-reel scoring move.”
As to the fair-play thing, I would think winning at all costs is more the American way than anywhere else. Look at baseball and PEDs, for one example. The Patriots and Spygate. The fact that a significant percentage (obviously, not a majority, or even a large minority, but still, the percentage is kinda disturbing) of NBA and NFL players have rap sheets, but are let off with small suspensions or with a slap on the wrist. The fact that the NFL doesn’t give a crap about player safety, and a lot of ex-players are dying young from concussion-related complications.
We INVENTED “Win At All Costs”.
I do agree that the World Cup officiating was atrocious, though.
The problem is, in most countries outside the US, basketball is something of an afterthought. Even in countries where it is really big (some of the South American countries, like Brazil and Argentina), it’s still very much second-best to soccer. In many countries, it’s played, but it’s not anywhere near where soccer is. And frankly, no one wants American leagues in their countries.
And you have missed my primary point. Which is, that even in the cities in America that have NBA franchises, unless that team has 1) at least one marketable superstar, and 2) consistently wins and is in the championship hunt, chances are there are almost as many casual fans (if not more) who will root for a team that meets those requirements as there are “hardcore” fans of the local team.
There are already too many crap players on every team, even the best teams. Are you advocating that Nowitski, Ginobili, etc., go home and play in the NBA spinoff league in their native countries? Then even more crap players would be playing on NBA teams. Which is the exact opposite of what needs to happen.
This is why I’m suggesting contraction:
1) The economic losses from the local diehard fanbases wouldn’t be as bad as you might think, because there just aren’t that many diehard fans of crap teams packed with mediocre-to-bad players. Most (the more casual) local fans would rather root for a winner with a superstar roster than the local laundry that sucks.
2)The product would be way better without all the crap players. The teams that remain will be the kind of teams most American fans want to see…teams full of superstars that are able to reasonably compete for a championship every year.
3) At least part of the economic loss from the local diehards would be recouped with the greatly expanded D-League format. If someone is going to be a diehard basketball fan of their local team, chances are they are going to be a diehard fan of whatever team is local (although obviously not in every single case), even if it is a D-League team of whatever tier it is.
If there were a Second Division D-League team in Philly, I bet most of us would be on here talking about them and which of their players are going to get picked up by a First Division D-League team or even an NBA team, going to as many games of theirs as we do Sixers games, and buying their shirts. I expect that a few fans would say “Screw it, I’m going to just go watch the Flyers,” but this is a big hockey town anyway, and those people are probably already diehard Flyers fans.
Hell, I know if we had a D-League team here (even if the Sixers were still here) I would be a HUGE fan of theirs, and constantly agitating for the Sixers to pick up whichever guys I thought were good. And if the Sixers weren’t here, I would probably go buy season tickets or something. Which I don’t even do for the Sixers, a team of which I’ve been a diehard fan for 35 years. Although I want to once my son gets a little older.
Philly supporting a D-League team….
in addition to the Sixers and local college teams, maybe, but probably not.
in lieu of the Sixers and all local college teams, possibly, though I would think NCAA programs would privatize/professionalize in some way well before the D-League ever became a true developmental competitor.
as a minor league team of the 12 NBA superteams in your model, with college basketball still in existence….no. Zero, no chance. If there is one thing Philly will never accept, in anything, its being portrayed as minor league to other American cities.
'Things are more like today than they have ever been before." Gerald R. Ford
You think Philly will accept not having any team at all? I suppose it’s possible. So, if Philly doesn’t want an NDL team, one doesn’t have to be here. The diehards can watch Villanova or Temple or the Flyers. I’m sure plenty of other cities will be happy to have an NDL team :)
How many people even think about the Sixers in this town? There’s a reason I have us as a prime candidate for contraction. No one cares about the team that’s here, and no one will until they become a championship contender. There are too many other sports options featuring teams that are at or near the top of their league every year.
I suspect that you are right, and we might take more Philly-style pleasure out of having our team contracted with no replacement than we would with having our team demoted to a First Division D-League team.
The idea that the fifth or sixth largest City in the US should end up with an NDL team tells me you better stay out of the entertainment business, because you have no concept of what is going on. If your product can’t fill stands here, you may as well not have a league at all.
The NBA is wildly popular and has fans in every state in the country. Quality clearly doesn’t matter as these stadiums all continue to remain open, with enough paying customers to make it viable.
Contraction is in all likelihood an empty threat. It’s just a bargaining ploy. Although some teams are probably not profitable on their own, the TV and marketing revenue enables them all to be operated in the black. If not, the league will allow the franchise to be sold or moved to a city with a more lucrative deal.
More Cities, more fans, more stadiums, more national games, more money. That’s the NBA’s forumula.
I would definitely contract
I would take out six teams(one out of each division). It would not necessarily be one per division it would be the six teams with the lowest records; however this is more about eliminating the six worst markets and also double markets if the city can not support two teams. So you take the twenty-four best teams and put them in the twenty-four best markets. This would require realignment most likely but what ever.
Let's get it Birds.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
Related FanPosts on Liberty Ballers
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
