The Official NBA Collective Bargaining Thread vol Phased in Hard Cap

[CP1708]

Originally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh

The owners aren't mad about paying Duncan, LeBron or Wall max contracts, they are mad about market forces driving them to pay roll players exorbitant contracts to stay competitive. The owners would be compleltley happy to pay the LeBrons of the world the most and pay everybody else nothing but thats not in the best interest of the union.

Also I think it's pretty much impossible to argue that being in a small market doesn't make more difficult to win a championship, not impossible but certainly more difficult.

Being in a small market has nothing to do with anything.  Just as being in a big market does not make it easier to win.  Hello Knicks and Clippers. 

This isn't baseball or football where you have 25 or 50 players to account for.  You have 12.  And 1-2 is enough all by themselves to give you a shot.  Draft well on top of that, and you're in.  Simple, easy, done.  Spurs did it.  OKC close, Memphis close, Toronto had a chance if the 2 kids they had had any sort of heart at all (Tracy and sister) Portland could have done something if they didn't suck at drafting bigs or injure every player they touch, the Jazz were close for almost 2 decades.  The Cavs were close, but couldn't do a damn thing right after lucking into Lebron.  The Magic have won the lottery THREE times.  They've been a game here or a game there from winning something.  Sacramento was in the mix for a while.  It ain't about the damn market. 

Stop with the small market bs people, this ain't the Kansas City Royals and Pittsburgh Pirates we're dealing with here.  Draft one guy and suddenly you are half way there.  Can't do that in other sports, but you can in basketball, when will people figure that out?  How many examples do you need? 

  

 

[CP1708]

Originally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh

The owners aren't mad about paying Duncan, LeBron or Wall max contracts, they are mad about market forces driving them to pay roll players exorbitant contracts to stay competitive. The owners would be compleltley happy to pay the LeBrons of the world the most and pay everybody else nothing but thats not in the best interest of the union.

Also I think it's pretty much impossible to argue that being in a small market doesn't make more difficult to win a championship, not impossible but certainly more difficult.

Being in a small market has nothing to do with anything.  Just as being in a big market does not make it easier to win.  Hello Knicks and Clippers. 

This isn't baseball or football where you have 25 or 50 players to account for.  You have 12.  And 1-2 is enough all by themselves to give you a shot.  Draft well on top of that, and you're in.  Simple, easy, done.  Spurs did it.  OKC close, Memphis close, Toronto had a chance if the 2 kids they had had any sort of heart at all (Tracy and sister) Portland could have done something if they didn't suck at drafting bigs or injure every player they touch, the Jazz were close for almost 2 decades.  The Cavs were close, but couldn't do a damn thing right after lucking into Lebron.  The Magic have won the lottery THREE times.  They've been a game here or a game there from winning something.  Sacramento was in the mix for a while.  It ain't about the damn market. 

Stop with the small market bs people, this ain't the Kansas City Royals and Pittsburgh Pirates we're dealing with here.  Draft one guy and suddenly you are half way there.  Can't do that in other sports, but you can in basketball, when will people figure that out?  How many examples do you need? 

  

 

[duba169]

being in a desirable market will ALWAYS make things easier

is the new CBA going to turn Cleveland into Miami?

is it goin to turn NYC into Charlotte?

is it going to help the players pay less taxes in Canada?

warriors and knicks, prime examples of a big market not leading to wins. Same with Boston for 2 decades and when they won it was because of a gift trade not market size.

same with Chicago before MJ. Chicago was TERRIBLE before and after MJ. Getting the number one pick fixed CHI not market size



this is all pointless anyway. This isn't about parity. It's about money. The fact that we are even talking about parity shows that Stern's PR battle won

 

[duba169]

being in a desirable market will ALWAYS make things easier

is the new CBA going to turn Cleveland into Miami?

is it goin to turn NYC into Charlotte?

is it going to help the players pay less taxes in Canada?

warriors and knicks, prime examples of a big market not leading to wins. Same with Boston for 2 decades and when they won it was because of a gift trade not market size.

same with Chicago before MJ. Chicago was TERRIBLE before and after MJ. Getting the number one pick fixed CHI not market size



this is all pointless anyway. This isn't about parity. It's about money. The fact that we are even talking about parity shows that Stern's PR battle won

 

[cosmiccanon]

Originally Posted by CP1708

This is for Statis, Mamba and PMatic, the guys that were involved on Twitter last night.  (sucks doin all that work at 140 characters each. 

)


Statis, you are a small market club.  You win the lottery.  You get John Wall, or more importantly, a player of that talent/skill level.  Yay for you, right?  You now have a face of the franchise, a super duper stud at age 20, etc etc etc.  The league don't have to market @#$%, you don't have to market @#$%, the word of mouth alone will handle that.  College ball showcased him, the hype is built, the social media and real media will take over for now and generate that buzz you need.  John Wall type player, now plays ball for YOU, small market guy. 

John Wall type guy has a shelf life of 10-12 years give or take in his career.  Lucky to get to 13-14, happy if you can get the 10.  Hard work on a body to play 1,000+ games. 

For the first 4 years of John Wall type guy's career, he will make 5 mil, 5.5 mil, 7 mil AT YOUR OPTION, and then 7.5 AT YOUR OPTION. 

4 years of John Wall type guys career, for 25 million dollars, and you make what as an owner off him? 

  Almost half his expected shelf life, he averages a little over 6 mil a year. 


Now switch up John Wall guy.  Lebron guy.  Tim Duncan guy.  Paid 4-5-6 mil each, for 4 years.  Then they get to make their money, money they will have earned ten fold by then.  And you sit here and cry "small market"  You'll make hundreds of millions off these players, which you "WON" in a lottery, they didn't decide to join your team, they were drafted, picked like they were cattle or something, and you get to make money hand over fist, while you pay them minimum wage. 

But then you cry "small market" bs when they start to get the money they have ALREADY EARNED but you didn't have to pay. 


An owners shelf life?  Decades.  20, 25, 30, 35 years if you live that long.  You can make that money for multiple decades, each player gets 2, and HOPEFULLY 3 contracts in their life, and you continue to back Stern, and his owners, for doing "what's right" 


Shame on you and the people like JA and Doo that follow you.  Seriously, shame on you guys. 

 

 

[cosmiccanon]

Originally Posted by CP1708

This is for Statis, Mamba and PMatic, the guys that were involved on Twitter last night.  (sucks doin all that work at 140 characters each. 

)


Statis, you are a small market club.  You win the lottery.  You get John Wall, or more importantly, a player of that talent/skill level.  Yay for you, right?  You now have a face of the franchise, a super duper stud at age 20, etc etc etc.  The league don't have to market @#$%, you don't have to market @#$%, the word of mouth alone will handle that.  College ball showcased him, the hype is built, the social media and real media will take over for now and generate that buzz you need.  John Wall type player, now plays ball for YOU, small market guy. 

John Wall type guy has a shelf life of 10-12 years give or take in his career.  Lucky to get to 13-14, happy if you can get the 10.  Hard work on a body to play 1,000+ games. 

For the first 4 years of John Wall type guy's career, he will make 5 mil, 5.5 mil, 7 mil AT YOUR OPTION, and then 7.5 AT YOUR OPTION. 

4 years of John Wall type guys career, for 25 million dollars, and you make what as an owner off him? 

  Almost half his expected shelf life, he averages a little over 6 mil a year. 


Now switch up John Wall guy.  Lebron guy.  Tim Duncan guy.  Paid 4-5-6 mil each, for 4 years.  Then they get to make their money, money they will have earned ten fold by then.  And you sit here and cry "small market"  You'll make hundreds of millions off these players, which you "WON" in a lottery, they didn't decide to join your team, they were drafted, picked like they were cattle or something, and you get to make money hand over fist, while you pay them minimum wage. 

But then you cry "small market" bs when they start to get the money they have ALREADY EARNED but you didn't have to pay. 


An owners shelf life?  Decades.  20, 25, 30, 35 years if you live that long.  You can make that money for multiple decades, each player gets 2, and HOPEFULLY 3 contracts in their life, and you continue to back Stern, and his owners, for doing "what's right" 


Shame on you and the people like JA and Doo that follow you.  Seriously, shame on you guys. 

 

 

[everysingletime]

Originally Posted by CP1708

This is for Statis, Mamba and PMatic, the guys that were involved on Twitter last night.  (sucks doin all that work at 140 characters each. 

)


Statis, you are a small market club.  You win the lottery.  You get John Wall, or more importantly, a player of that talent/skill level.  Yay for you, right?  You now have a face of the franchise, a super duper stud at age 20, etc etc etc.  The league don't have to market @#$%, you don't have to market @#$%, the word of mouth alone will handle that.  College ball showcased him, the hype is built, the social media and real media will take over for now and generate that buzz you need.  John Wall type player, now plays ball for YOU, small market guy. 

John Wall type guy has a shelf life of 10-12 years give or take in his career.  Lucky to get to 13-14, happy if you can get the 10.  Hard work on a body to play 1,000+ games. 

For the first 4 years of John Wall type guy's career, he will make 5 mil, 5.5 mil, 7 mil AT YOUR OPTION, and then 7.5 AT YOUR OPTION. 

4 years of John Wall type guys career, for 25 million dollars, and you make what as an owner off him? 

  Almost half his expected shelf life, he averages a little over 6 mil a year. 


Now switch up John Wall guy.  Lebron guy.  Tim Duncan guy.  Paid 4-5-6 mil each, for 4 years.  Then they get to make their money, money they will have earned ten fold by then.  And you sit here and cry "small market"  You'll make hundreds of millions off these players, which you "WON" in a lottery, they didn't decide to join your team, they were drafted, picked like they were cattle or something, and you get to make money hand over fist, while you pay them minimum wage. 

But then you cry "small market" bs when they start to get the money they have ALREADY EARNED but you didn't have to pay. 


An owners shelf life?  Decades.  20, 25, 30, 35 years if you live that long.  You can make that money for multiple decades, each player gets 2, and HOPEFULLY 3 contracts in their life, and you continue to back Stern, and his owners, for doing "what's right" 


Shame on you and the people like JA and Doo that follow you.  Seriously, shame on you guys. 

 

You make an NBA player's life sound like it's some kind of indentured servitude. 

You can talk about an NBA player's shelf life all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that in the span of 10-12 years they make more than tons of hard working people make in a lifetime, and some of them earn that money doing literally nothing. 

No matter how they restructure the new CBA, it isn't going to change a damn thing.  Anything important anyway.  Owners will still cake, and yes, the top draws in the nba ej. the lebrons, the kobes, the walls, roses, etc. etc. etc. will still cake too via endorsement deals, etc.

Think about it.  The stuff they're fighting on, like hard cap, mid level exceptions, length of contracts...how is that going to affect any of the top tier players that you say are getting exploited by owners?  That kinda stuff affects the middle and lower tier guys, man. 

The owners want 3-4 year contracts - big deal.  The Lebrons and the Wades and the Boshs benefited from their shorter contracts.  They got into the team they wanted right?  In their primes.

Mid level exceptions?  Doesn't apply to the top dogs.

Hard cap?  That should prevent overvalued, mid tier talents from getting overpaid ... it won't affect the Lebrons and the Kobes and yes, the John Walls, in the least.

Stop trying to sensationalize your arguments to make a point.  NBA players living the good life, point blank.

 

[everysingletime]

Originally Posted by CP1708

This is for Statis, Mamba and PMatic, the guys that were involved on Twitter last night.  (sucks doin all that work at 140 characters each. 

)


Statis, you are a small market club.  You win the lottery.  You get John Wall, or more importantly, a player of that talent/skill level.  Yay for you, right?  You now have a face of the franchise, a super duper stud at age 20, etc etc etc.  The league don't have to market @#$%, you don't have to market @#$%, the word of mouth alone will handle that.  College ball showcased him, the hype is built, the social media and real media will take over for now and generate that buzz you need.  John Wall type player, now plays ball for YOU, small market guy. 

John Wall type guy has a shelf life of 10-12 years give or take in his career.  Lucky to get to 13-14, happy if you can get the 10.  Hard work on a body to play 1,000+ games. 

For the first 4 years of John Wall type guy's career, he will make 5 mil, 5.5 mil, 7 mil AT YOUR OPTION, and then 7.5 AT YOUR OPTION. 

4 years of John Wall type guys career, for 25 million dollars, and you make what as an owner off him? 

  Almost half his expected shelf life, he averages a little over 6 mil a year. 


Now switch up John Wall guy.  Lebron guy.  Tim Duncan guy.  Paid 4-5-6 mil each, for 4 years.  Then they get to make their money, money they will have earned ten fold by then.  And you sit here and cry "small market"  You'll make hundreds of millions off these players, which you "WON" in a lottery, they didn't decide to join your team, they were drafted, picked like they were cattle or something, and you get to make money hand over fist, while you pay them minimum wage. 

But then you cry "small market" bs when they start to get the money they have ALREADY EARNED but you didn't have to pay. 


An owners shelf life?  Decades.  20, 25, 30, 35 years if you live that long.  You can make that money for multiple decades, each player gets 2, and HOPEFULLY 3 contracts in their life, and you continue to back Stern, and his owners, for doing "what's right" 


Shame on you and the people like JA and Doo that follow you.  Seriously, shame on you guys. 

 

You make an NBA player's life sound like it's some kind of indentured servitude. 

You can talk about an NBA player's shelf life all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that in the span of 10-12 years they make more than tons of hard working people make in a lifetime, and some of them earn that money doing literally nothing. 

No matter how they restructure the new CBA, it isn't going to change a damn thing.  Anything important anyway.  Owners will still cake, and yes, the top draws in the nba ej. the lebrons, the kobes, the walls, roses, etc. etc. etc. will still cake too via endorsement deals, etc.

Think about it.  The stuff they're fighting on, like hard cap, mid level exceptions, length of contracts...how is that going to affect any of the top tier players that you say are getting exploited by owners?  That kinda stuff affects the middle and lower tier guys, man. 

The owners want 3-4 year contracts - big deal.  The Lebrons and the Wades and the Boshs benefited from their shorter contracts.  They got into the team they wanted right?  In their primes.

Mid level exceptions?  Doesn't apply to the top dogs.

Hard cap?  That should prevent overvalued, mid tier talents from getting overpaid ... it won't affect the Lebrons and the Kobes and yes, the John Walls, in the least.

Stop trying to sensationalize your arguments to make a point.  NBA players living the good life, point blank.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Originally Posted by CP1708

Originally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh

The owners aren't mad about paying Duncan, LeBron or Wall max contracts, they are mad about market forces driving them to pay roll players exorbitant contracts to stay competitive. The owners would be compleltley happy to pay the LeBrons of the world the most and pay everybody else nothing but thats not in the best interest of the union.

Also I think it's pretty much impossible to argue that being in a small market doesn't make more difficult to win a championship, not impossible but certainly more difficult.

Being in a small market has nothing to do with anything.  Just as being in a big market does not make it easier to win.  Hello Knicks and Clippers. 

This isn't baseball or football where you have 25 or 50 players to account for.  You have 12.  And 1-2 is enough all by themselves to give you a shot.  Draft well on top of that, and you're in.  Simple, easy, done.  Spurs did it.  OKC close, Memphis close, Toronto had a chance if the 2 kids they had had any sort of heart at all (Tracy and sister) Portland could have done something if they didn't suck at drafting bigs or injure every player they touch, the Jazz were close for almost 2 decades.  The Cavs were close, but couldn't do a damn thing right after lucking into Lebron.  The Magic have won the lottery THREE times.  They've been a game here or a game there from winning something.  Sacramento was in the mix for a while.  It ain't about the damn market. 

Stop with the small market bs people, this ain't the Kansas City Royals and Pittsburgh Pirates we're dealing with here.  Draft one guy and suddenly you are half way there.  Can't do that in other sports, but you can in basketball, when will people figure that out?  How many examples do you need? 

  

Those are exceptions that prove the rule

Basically you are saying to not be un successful as a big market you have to be racists slum lord meddler (Donald Sterling) or or a completely incompetent inheritance baby who lets his GM sexually harass his employees.

1. Big markets like LA, NY, MIAMI can acquire those 1a, 1b franchise guys through free agency, small markets generally can't.
2. Small Market teams with lower population density can't afford be really bad a season because attendance will plummet, forcing them to over pay marginal franchise talents to stay competitive.
3. Small markets can't throw money at mistakes, if they get cuaght up with one bad contract it can cripple them.
4. Getting that final piece to win championship that can take you from close to actually winning

and toronto is not a "small market".

Its harder, not impossible but harder, fact of the matter besides the Spurs, Detroit, LA, Bos, have one like all the championships for the past like 20 years.

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Originally Posted by CP1708

Originally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh

The owners aren't mad about paying Duncan, LeBron or Wall max contracts, they are mad about market forces driving them to pay roll players exorbitant contracts to stay competitive. The owners would be compleltley happy to pay the LeBrons of the world the most and pay everybody else nothing but thats not in the best interest of the union.

Also I think it's pretty much impossible to argue that being in a small market doesn't make more difficult to win a championship, not impossible but certainly more difficult.

Being in a small market has nothing to do with anything.  Just as being in a big market does not make it easier to win.  Hello Knicks and Clippers. 

This isn't baseball or football where you have 25 or 50 players to account for.  You have 12.  And 1-2 is enough all by themselves to give you a shot.  Draft well on top of that, and you're in.  Simple, easy, done.  Spurs did it.  OKC close, Memphis close, Toronto had a chance if the 2 kids they had had any sort of heart at all (Tracy and sister) Portland could have done something if they didn't suck at drafting bigs or injure every player they touch, the Jazz were close for almost 2 decades.  The Cavs were close, but couldn't do a damn thing right after lucking into Lebron.  The Magic have won the lottery THREE times.  They've been a game here or a game there from winning something.  Sacramento was in the mix for a while.  It ain't about the damn market. 

Stop with the small market bs people, this ain't the Kansas City Royals and Pittsburgh Pirates we're dealing with here.  Draft one guy and suddenly you are half way there.  Can't do that in other sports, but you can in basketball, when will people figure that out?  How many examples do you need? 

  

Those are exceptions that prove the rule

Basically you are saying to not be un successful as a big market you have to be racists slum lord meddler (Donald Sterling) or or a completely incompetent inheritance baby who lets his GM sexually harass his employees.

1. Big markets like LA, NY, MIAMI can acquire those 1a, 1b franchise guys through free agency, small markets generally can't.
2. Small Market teams with lower population density can't afford be really bad a season because attendance will plummet, forcing them to over pay marginal franchise talents to stay competitive.
3. Small markets can't throw money at mistakes, if they get cuaght up with one bad contract it can cripple them.
4. Getting that final piece to win championship that can take you from close to actually winning

and toronto is not a "small market".

Its harder, not impossible but harder, fact of the matter besides the Spurs, Detroit, LA, Bos, have one like all the championships for the past like 20 years.

 

[Kimchi Papi]

This article from ESPN.com from 7/12/11 provided some great insight. Story here. I think this lock out is going to last for a while. If I were an owner, I definitely wouldn't pay 3/4 of the players in the L the type of money they're currently getting. With the economy the way it is (& it's not going to get better any time soon, in fact it will get worse), the NBA will not make th type of revenue needed to even sustain existing franchises. I can actually see the NBA contracting teams within the next 4-5 years. I'd say as many as 4 teams.

 

[Kimchi Papi]

This article from ESPN.com from 7/12/11 provided some great insight. Story here. I think this lock out is going to last for a while. If I were an owner, I definitely wouldn't pay 3/4 of the players in the L the type of money they're currently getting. With the economy the way it is (& it's not going to get better any time soon, in fact it will get worse), the NBA will not make th type of revenue needed to even sustain existing franchises. I can actually see the NBA contracting teams within the next 4-5 years. I'd say as many as 4 teams.

 

[CP1708]

amel223 wrote:

---

You make an NBA player's life sound like it's some kind of indentured servitude. 

You can talk about an NBA player's shelf life all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that in the span of 10-12 years they make more than tons of hard working people make in a lifetime, and some of them earn that money doing literally nothing. 

No matter how they restructure the new CBA, it isn't going to change a damn thing.  Anything important anyway.  Owners will still cake, and yes, the top draws in the nba ej. the lebrons, the kobes, the walls, roses, etc. etc. etc. will still cake too via endorsement deals, etc.

Think about it.  The stuff they're fighting on, like hard cap, mid level exceptions, length of contracts...how is that going to affect any of the top tier players that you say are getting exploited by owners?  That kinda stuff affects the middle and lower tier guys, man. 

The owners want 3-4 year contracts - big deal.  The Lebrons and the Wades and the Boshs benefited from their shorter contracts.  They got into the team they wanted right?  In their primes.

Mid level exceptions?  Doesn't apply to the top dogs.

Hard cap?  That should prevent overvalued, mid tier talents from getting overpaid ... it won't affect the Lebrons and the Kobes and yes, the John Walls, in the least.

Stop trying to sensationalize your arguments to make a point.  NBA players living the good life, point blank.

*sigh*

This is getting frustrating.  Do any of you guys look at big pictures?  Can you connect dots without hands being held?  Here, I'll talk a lot slower for you, ok?  

Owner X makes hundreds of millions off Lebron type player for first 4 years of Lebron's deal.  Hundreds of mil.  You with me? 
Now, Owner X has to pay some other bums, 3-5-7-9 million as well, KNOWING that he makes hundreds of millions off just the Lebron type kid, for 4 years.  Are you still with me?  Do you see how much is being made still?  

Yes, all Lebron's, Dwights, etc will get paid, no I do not worry about them.  Cream will rise to the top.  But those players DRIVE the money.  Why would I need to worry about a Ronny Turiaf type guy that will only play 5-6 years and make what, 12-15 million his whole career?  Owners don't give a @#$% about any of that.  They can conceivably make what, 250 mil in 4 years of Lebron?  More?  500 mil?  Go low, say Lebron busts, owner makes 150 mil maybe, just off the initial buzz, and hope, and maybe next year etc etc.  So 150 to 500 mil, Bron gets paid 25 mil.  Pretty decent money was just made by that owner, no? 

You can talk about an NBA player's shelf life all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that in the span of 10-12 years they make more than tons of hard working people make in a lifetime, and some of them earn that money doing literally nothing. 


I work hard.  But nobody buys a 9 dollar beer to watch me work.  My daughters teacher works hard, but Transformers 3 doesn't pay add time on the side of her classroom.  My wife's feet hurt at work, but Nike don't feel like puttin some high tech shoes on her feet, nobody will see them.  You writin all this down?  Because that's the way the world spins.  It's how money is made/spent/earned.  People want to come home from work, and be entertained.  Be it sports, movies, wrestling, porn, what the hell ever.  People spend their hard earned money on entertainment.  And companies pay their money to advertise their products when people watch the most.  Why you think infomercials are always on at 3 AM?  Cuz everyone asleep dude.  Ain't nobody watching.  You don't see a lot of infomercials during halftime of the super bowl do you?  Why is that?  Go away with all the "make tons of money more than hard working poor souls", blah blah blah, grow up.  World been this way for 100 years.  People used to pay 700 dollars for VCR's, now they can't sell one for a twenty.  Consumer money moves where the action is. 

The lower teir'd guys salaries are paid by the big dogs earning potential.  Damon Jones don't earn his money with the Cavs, Bron earn's Jones money, hence their importance.  That may be simplyfying it a bit, but you get the point.  Bron generates so much for the Cavs, they can pay X amount of salaries off him alone.  (during the rookie deal that is)


Kevin Garnett in Minny.  4 year rook deal, Minnesota made a lot of money for a while, what if they kept Ray Allen instead of Marbury?  Ray could have taken the big shots for KG, add another peice here or there, suddenly small market Minnesota has a longer shelf life.  Instead they tried to home run with Marbury, dude was a head case, end of story. 
Milwaukee, trades Dirk on draft day. 

  Small market woes. 
OKC isn't OKC if Portland doesn't take Oden.  Small market advantage?  No, plain and simple luck.  Luck happens. 
Clips get the #1 pick, take Olowakandi.  Lakers get 10 pick few years later, take Bynum.  One fails, other succeeds.  Market?  Or simply luck + coaching/talent eval? 

People that try to place blame on market are scapegoating.  In the end ALL OF IT, comes down to talent, players, and coaching/management moves.  Size of the city, cost of the beers, amount of hats you sell, none of that garbage matters.  It's the players. 

For those small markets, they need to take the money they save off rookie contracts and re-invest it in scouting, personnel evaluators.  My company invests all of it's free money into R & D, Research and Development, that's what small market clubs can do when they win a lottery and get a guy that generates far more than he is paid.  Why is it the Spurs scout so well and take Tony Parker and Manu late, but the Bucks don't take them, or the Grizz (who have improved greatly) or the Warriors, etc etc?  Better scouting departments, better scouts.  Smarter GM's.  People need to let the market stuff go already.  Please. 

  

 

[CP1708]

amel223 wrote:

---

You make an NBA player's life sound like it's some kind of indentured servitude. 

You can talk about an NBA player's shelf life all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that in the span of 10-12 years they make more than tons of hard working people make in a lifetime, and some of them earn that money doing literally nothing. 

No matter how they restructure the new CBA, it isn't going to change a damn thing.  Anything important anyway.  Owners will still cake, and yes, the top draws in the nba ej. the lebrons, the kobes, the walls, roses, etc. etc. etc. will still cake too via endorsement deals, etc.

Think about it.  The stuff they're fighting on, like hard cap, mid level exceptions, length of contracts...how is that going to affect any of the top tier players that you say are getting exploited by owners?  That kinda stuff affects the middle and lower tier guys, man. 

The owners want 3-4 year contracts - big deal.  The Lebrons and the Wades and the Boshs benefited from their shorter contracts.  They got into the team they wanted right?  In their primes.

Mid level exceptions?  Doesn't apply to the top dogs.

Hard cap?  That should prevent overvalued, mid tier talents from getting overpaid ... it won't affect the Lebrons and the Kobes and yes, the John Walls, in the least.

Stop trying to sensationalize your arguments to make a point.  NBA players living the good life, point blank.

*sigh*

This is getting frustrating.  Do any of you guys look at big pictures?  Can you connect dots without hands being held?  Here, I'll talk a lot slower for you, ok?  

Owner X makes hundreds of millions off Lebron type player for first 4 years of Lebron's deal.  Hundreds of mil.  You with me? 
Now, Owner X has to pay some other bums, 3-5-7-9 million as well, KNOWING that he makes hundreds of millions off just the Lebron type kid, for 4 years.  Are you still with me?  Do you see how much is being made still?  

Yes, all Lebron's, Dwights, etc will get paid, no I do not worry about them.  Cream will rise to the top.  But those players DRIVE the money.  Why would I need to worry about a Ronny Turiaf type guy that will only play 5-6 years and make what, 12-15 million his whole career?  Owners don't give a @#$% about any of that.  They can conceivably make what, 250 mil in 4 years of Lebron?  More?  500 mil?  Go low, say Lebron busts, owner makes 150 mil maybe, just off the initial buzz, and hope, and maybe next year etc etc.  So 150 to 500 mil, Bron gets paid 25 mil.  Pretty decent money was just made by that owner, no? 

You can talk about an NBA player's shelf life all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that in the span of 10-12 years they make more than tons of hard working people make in a lifetime, and some of them earn that money doing literally nothing. 


I work hard.  But nobody buys a 9 dollar beer to watch me work.  My daughters teacher works hard, but Transformers 3 doesn't pay add time on the side of her classroom.  My wife's feet hurt at work, but Nike don't feel like puttin some high tech shoes on her feet, nobody will see them.  You writin all this down?  Because that's the way the world spins.  It's how money is made/spent/earned.  People want to come home from work, and be entertained.  Be it sports, movies, wrestling, porn, what the hell ever.  People spend their hard earned money on entertainment.  And companies pay their money to advertise their products when people watch the most.  Why you think infomercials are always on at 3 AM?  Cuz everyone asleep dude.  Ain't nobody watching.  You don't see a lot of infomercials during halftime of the super bowl do you?  Why is that?  Go away with all the "make tons of money more than hard working poor souls", blah blah blah, grow up.  World been this way for 100 years.  People used to pay 700 dollars for VCR's, now they can't sell one for a twenty.  Consumer money moves where the action is. 

The lower teir'd guys salaries are paid by the big dogs earning potential.  Damon Jones don't earn his money with the Cavs, Bron earn's Jones money, hence their importance.  That may be simplyfying it a bit, but you get the point.  Bron generates so much for the Cavs, they can pay X amount of salaries off him alone.  (during the rookie deal that is)


Kevin Garnett in Minny.  4 year rook deal, Minnesota made a lot of money for a while, what if they kept Ray Allen instead of Marbury?  Ray could have taken the big shots for KG, add another peice here or there, suddenly small market Minnesota has a longer shelf life.  Instead they tried to home run with Marbury, dude was a head case, end of story. 
Milwaukee, trades Dirk on draft day. 

  Small market woes. 
OKC isn't OKC if Portland doesn't take Oden.  Small market advantage?  No, plain and simple luck.  Luck happens. 
Clips get the #1 pick, take Olowakandi.  Lakers get 10 pick few years later, take Bynum.  One fails, other succeeds.  Market?  Or simply luck + coaching/talent eval? 

People that try to place blame on market are scapegoating.  In the end ALL OF IT, comes down to talent, players, and coaching/management moves.  Size of the city, cost of the beers, amount of hats you sell, none of that garbage matters.  It's the players. 

For those small markets, they need to take the money they save off rookie contracts and re-invest it in scouting, personnel evaluators.  My company invests all of it's free money into R & D, Research and Development, that's what small market clubs can do when they win a lottery and get a guy that generates far more than he is paid.  Why is it the Spurs scout so well and take Tony Parker and Manu late, but the Bucks don't take them, or the Grizz (who have improved greatly) or the Warriors, etc etc?  Better scouting departments, better scouts.  Smarter GM's.  People need to let the market stuff go already.  Please. 

  

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Originally Posted by DubA169

being in a desirable market will ALWAYS make things easier

is the new CBA going to turn Cleveland into Miami?

No but it will make it more difficult for Miami to out spend Cleveland.

is it going to help the players pay less taxes in Canada?
No but it will make it easier for higher state tax teams to retain players and not get bullied into trading them like Denver did. (FYI there are like 4 other teams with taxes higher than the raptors)

warriors and knicks, prime examples of a big market not leading to wins. Same with Boston for 2 decades and when they won it was because of a gift trade not market size.
See this is my point, does Milwaukee get the gift trade? How about Sacramento? %+!# no, Boston gets it because it's Boston and players want to play their but if the cap is harder and things like sign and trades are abolished it makes it more difficult for things like that to happen.

Besides the spurs.

PHI, LA, CHI, BOS, HOU, DETROIT have won all the championships for the past 30 years is that coincidence?

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Originally Posted by DubA169

being in a desirable market will ALWAYS make things easier

is the new CBA going to turn Cleveland into Miami?

No but it will make it more difficult for Miami to out spend Cleveland.

is it going to help the players pay less taxes in Canada?
No but it will make it easier for higher state tax teams to retain players and not get bullied into trading them like Denver did. (FYI there are like 4 other teams with taxes higher than the raptors)

warriors and knicks, prime examples of a big market not leading to wins. Same with Boston for 2 decades and when they won it was because of a gift trade not market size.
See this is my point, does Milwaukee get the gift trade? How about Sacramento? %+!# no, Boston gets it because it's Boston and players want to play their but if the cap is harder and things like sign and trades are abolished it makes it more difficult for things like that to happen.

Besides the spurs.

PHI, LA, CHI, BOS, HOU, DETROIT have won all the championships for the past 30 years is that coincidence?

 

[CP1708]

Originally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh

warriors and knicks, prime examples of a big market not leading to wins. Same with Boston for 2 decades and when they won it was because of a gift trade not market size.

See this is my point, does Milwaukee get the gift trade? How about Sacramento? %+!# no, Boston gets it because it's Boston and players want to play their but if the cap is harder and things like sign and trades are abolished it makes it more difficult for things like that to happen.

Besides the spurs.

PHI, LA, CHI, BOS, HOU, DETROIT have won all the championships for the past 30 years is that coincidence?

You mean the Bucks that traded Dirk? 

 

The Kings that had a team full of talent, but no balls? 

  That ain't market size, that's cup size.  They had small cups is all. 

Yeah, LA drafted Magic and Worthy, Bulls drafted MJ and Pip, Boston drafted Bird, and draft day trade for McHale and Chief.  Houston drafted Dream, and Horry too for that matter, Detroit draft Isiah, Dumars, etc.  Nail the draft, win titles.  Duncan and David, drafted.......

  

 

[CP1708]

Originally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh

warriors and knicks, prime examples of a big market not leading to wins. Same with Boston for 2 decades and when they won it was because of a gift trade not market size.

See this is my point, does Milwaukee get the gift trade? How about Sacramento? %+!# no, Boston gets it because it's Boston and players want to play their but if the cap is harder and things like sign and trades are abolished it makes it more difficult for things like that to happen.

Besides the spurs.

PHI, LA, CHI, BOS, HOU, DETROIT have won all the championships for the past 30 years is that coincidence?

You mean the Bucks that traded Dirk? 

 

The Kings that had a team full of talent, but no balls? 

  That ain't market size, that's cup size.  They had small cups is all. 

Yeah, LA drafted Magic and Worthy, Bulls drafted MJ and Pip, Boston drafted Bird, and draft day trade for McHale and Chief.  Houston drafted Dream, and Horry too for that matter, Detroit draft Isiah, Dumars, etc.  Nail the draft, win titles.  Duncan and David, drafted.......

  

 

[Deleted member 38182]

Originally Posted by CP1708

Originally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh

warriors and knicks, prime examples of a big market not leading to wins. Same with Boston for 2 decades and when they won it was because of a gift trade not market size.

See this is my point, does Milwaukee get the gift trade? How about Sacramento? %+!# no, Boston gets it because it's Boston and players want to play their but if the cap is harder and things like sign and trades are abolished it makes it more difficult for things like that to happen.

Besides the spurs.

PHI, LA, CHI, BOS, HOU, DETROIT have won all the championships for the past 30 years is that coincidence?

The Kings that had a team full of talent, but no balls? 

  That ain't market size, that's cup size.  They had small cups is all.    
hey....... that's just what you get when you have 3 and a half white guys starting

 

 

[Deleted member 38182]

Originally Posted by CP1708

Originally Posted by Osh Kosh Bosh

warriors and knicks, prime examples of a big market not leading to wins. Same with Boston for 2 decades and when they won it was because of a gift trade not market size.

See this is my point, does Milwaukee get the gift trade? How about Sacramento? %+!# no, Boston gets it because it's Boston and players want to play their but if the cap is harder and things like sign and trades are abolished it makes it more difficult for things like that to happen.

Besides the spurs.

PHI, LA, CHI, BOS, HOU, DETROIT have won all the championships for the past 30 years is that coincidence?

The Kings that had a team full of talent, but no balls? 

  That ain't market size, that's cup size.  They had small cups is all.    
hey....... that's just what you get when you have 3 and a half white guys starting

 

 

[CP1708]

^
Then how do you explain Bibby havin more balls than Hot Potato Webber? 

 

[CP1708]

^
Then how do you explain Bibby havin more balls than Hot Potato Webber? 

 

[duba169]

Boston got a gift trade because mchale used to play for boston and they already had a star in paul pierce

 

[duba169]

Boston got a gift trade because mchale used to play for boston and they already had a star in paul pierce

 

[Deleted member 38182]

Originally Posted by CP1708

^
Then how do you explain Bibby havin more balls than Hot Potato Webber?