The Official NBA Collective Bargaining Thread vol Phased in Hard Cap

[2morrowbegins2day]

What's the difference between a hard cap and a soft cap?

 

[man listen]

Originally Posted by Jay02

I don't know about anybody else but my point is that good management can overcome the limitations of a small market. the problem with the Bucks is that Michael Redd was taking up 96 mill in the first place. you're talking about a team that had Ray Allen, Sam Cassell, Glen Robinson and Mike Redd all on one team and then in the same breath saying the system is flawed and small markets aren't given a chance. Stern wants to make it so that anyone rich enough can buy a team and be guaranteed to at least break even which would be the worst thing for the quality of the game. it would invite a bunch of clowns that don't care about basketball as long as they make a profit...there are enough Donald Sterlings as is. there are all kinds of restrictions on who can play in the league but anyone with enough money can buy a team and run a franchise into the ground while laughing to the bank. and now they want to make it so that guys who are even less qualified and interested in basketball are able to go and swim in the pool of money. if you're buying into the illusion that the owners are in it to "fix the game" (after one of it's most successful seasons ever with Dallas, Memphis and OKC going deep into the playoffs....what's to fix?) then I don't know what to tell you. 

You're right about Stern letting any doofus control any team and drilling it into the ground no denying that. Like I said to CP, its Stern and certain Owners, against small market owners, against the players. The whole situation is !@!%$#. The good management argument is a very good one. Your gonna give certain teams opportunites that other teams cant have but tell them to overcome it by having better management? How about all teams have the same opportunities and then see where management takes ya. 

it seems like you're arguing that nobody wants to play in Milwaukee because of things like weather, endorsements, lifestyle etc. all those things are attributes of the city that will never change (but Jennings does have a shoe deal tho) so giving all teams the same money to spend isn't gonna make Milwaukee any more attractive for two reasons, it's not the sexy place to be AND they don't know how to run a basketball franchise. the playing field will never be level especially if the front office sucks. Millions to lose on the Clippers or millions to lose on the Bucks? seriously, knowing both teams don't know how to win which one are you picking? 
so to answer your question yes, certain teams will always have advantages over others and the way to overcome it is to make better decisions. Ray Allen was traded for a 34 year old Gary Payton and Desmond Mason. Seattle sucks so much as a city they have the most suicides and even they got Ray to re-up. Boston isn't a glamorous city and their management sucks but all it took was a few good decisions and they got guys to re-up. Just look at LA....both teams have the exact same opportunities and we can see where management has taken each. I don't know about you but I'm not trying to work for the guy who's checking out my balls in the shower after the game (Sterling smh). I mean it's gotta be depressing to play for a team where the weather sucks AND you're not having fun on the court because it's basically a million dollar dead end job where you know your bosses are idiots and you're never gonna win. there are cities just as boring as Milwaukee but players get drafted there and when they have the choice to leave they actually choose to stay. why? for whatever reason they stay the Bucks don't offer that and that's on them. bottom line I know you love the game but I think you love the Bucks more and it's messing with your head. if the Packers win it again this year and are competitive for the rest of the decade I don't think you would complain about how unfair it is for the other teams. you don't really want the NBA "fixed", what you want is for the Bucks to fix themselves and create a competitive environment so they can attract competitive players in spite of their location (like Green Bay does) 

 

[man listen]

Originally Posted by Jay02

I don't know about anybody else but my point is that good management can overcome the limitations of a small market. the problem with the Bucks is that Michael Redd was taking up 96 mill in the first place. you're talking about a team that had Ray Allen, Sam Cassell, Glen Robinson and Mike Redd all on one team and then in the same breath saying the system is flawed and small markets aren't given a chance. Stern wants to make it so that anyone rich enough can buy a team and be guaranteed to at least break even which would be the worst thing for the quality of the game. it would invite a bunch of clowns that don't care about basketball as long as they make a profit...there are enough Donald Sterlings as is. there are all kinds of restrictions on who can play in the league but anyone with enough money can buy a team and run a franchise into the ground while laughing to the bank. and now they want to make it so that guys who are even less qualified and interested in basketball are able to go and swim in the pool of money. if you're buying into the illusion that the owners are in it to "fix the game" (after one of it's most successful seasons ever with Dallas, Memphis and OKC going deep into the playoffs....what's to fix?) then I don't know what to tell you. 

You're right about Stern letting any doofus control any team and drilling it into the ground no denying that. Like I said to CP, its Stern and certain Owners, against small market owners, against the players. The whole situation is !@!%$#. The good management argument is a very good one. Your gonna give certain teams opportunites that other teams cant have but tell them to overcome it by having better management? How about all teams have the same opportunities and then see where management takes ya. 

it seems like you're arguing that nobody wants to play in Milwaukee because of things like weather, endorsements, lifestyle etc. all those things are attributes of the city that will never change (but Jennings does have a shoe deal tho) so giving all teams the same money to spend isn't gonna make Milwaukee any more attractive for two reasons, it's not the sexy place to be AND they don't know how to run a basketball franchise. the playing field will never be level especially if the front office sucks. Millions to lose on the Clippers or millions to lose on the Bucks? seriously, knowing both teams don't know how to win which one are you picking? 
so to answer your question yes, certain teams will always have advantages over others and the way to overcome it is to make better decisions. Ray Allen was traded for a 34 year old Gary Payton and Desmond Mason. Seattle sucks so much as a city they have the most suicides and even they got Ray to re-up. Boston isn't a glamorous city and their management sucks but all it took was a few good decisions and they got guys to re-up. Just look at LA....both teams have the exact same opportunities and we can see where management has taken each. I don't know about you but I'm not trying to work for the guy who's checking out my balls in the shower after the game (Sterling smh). I mean it's gotta be depressing to play for a team where the weather sucks AND you're not having fun on the court because it's basically a million dollar dead end job where you know your bosses are idiots and you're never gonna win. there are cities just as boring as Milwaukee but players get drafted there and when they have the choice to leave they actually choose to stay. why? for whatever reason they stay the Bucks don't offer that and that's on them. bottom line I know you love the game but I think you love the Bucks more and it's messing with your head. if the Packers win it again this year and are competitive for the rest of the decade I don't think you would complain about how unfair it is for the other teams. you don't really want the NBA "fixed", what you want is for the Bucks to fix themselves and create a competitive environment so they can attract competitive players in spite of their location (like Green Bay does) 

 

[addict4sneakers]

Originally Posted by Jay02

Are dudes in here really saying that market size doesnt matter in the NBA? CP did you just say that they got Melo and Amare cause they rid their cap to have room? The Bucks had 96 million dollars open up due to Redds contract expiring. Technically we have a shot at any player in the league, but do we? NO. The only thing we can do is use that cap space to load up on average players and get a few above average players if we're lucky. 

I love basketball, but this is what the NBA needs. This league is so effed up right now i dont care if its locked out all year 2 years or 3 years, as long as it gets fixed. There is no parity whatsoever. The NBA is ruining the game of baskebtall but no one is realizing it cause they half the fan base doenst know what basketball is and would rather argue who's better Kobe or Lebron.
If yall are saying the NBA isnt completely +*$%!* right now your an idiot.

no parity? what playoffs were you watching?

lulz at the NBA ruining basketball. NTer please

 

[addict4sneakers]

Originally Posted by Jay02

Are dudes in here really saying that market size doesnt matter in the NBA? CP did you just say that they got Melo and Amare cause they rid their cap to have room? The Bucks had 96 million dollars open up due to Redds contract expiring. Technically we have a shot at any player in the league, but do we? NO. The only thing we can do is use that cap space to load up on average players and get a few above average players if we're lucky. 

I love basketball, but this is what the NBA needs. This league is so effed up right now i dont care if its locked out all year 2 years or 3 years, as long as it gets fixed. There is no parity whatsoever. The NBA is ruining the game of baskebtall but no one is realizing it cause they half the fan base doenst know what basketball is and would rather argue who's better Kobe or Lebron.
If yall are saying the NBA isnt completely +*$%!* right now your an idiot.

no parity? what playoffs were you watching?

lulz at the NBA ruining basketball. NTer please

 

[cosmiccanon]

Originally Posted by Big J 33

All of that, just fantastic stuff. You say 10 good players out of 3 years of non-lotto picks... that's not exactly a great percentage there. And why can't we rule out a player until his 3rd or 4th year? Where's that in the rules? Sure, it's possible, but do you actually think Jordan Hill will develop into a rotation player on a playoff team?, do you think Thabeet will pan out? Do you know anything about Motiejunas' game? I'll give you Lee, he's solid right now, but like I said, not that young. Sure, they could have "potential" but I'm speaking directly to this team right now.


2006

Shawne Williams; Rondo, Kyle Lowry, Shannon Brown, Daniel Gibson, Paul Millsap, and Leon Powe(7 players)

2007

Rodney Stuckey, Nick Young, Marco Bellinili, Jared Dudley, Wilson Chandler, Rudy Fernandez, Aaron Brooks, Arron Affalo, Tiago Splitter, Carl Landry, Glen Davis, Marc Gasol, and Ramon Sessions. (13 players)

2008

Robin Lopez, Roy Hibbert, Javale McGee, JJ Hickson, Courtney Lee, Serge Ibaka, Nicolas Batum, George Hill, Mario Chalmers, and DeAndre Jordan(10 players)

So, from 2006 - '08, 30 out of 138(number of non-lotto picks) panned out. That's 21% success, 1 in 5 if you hate math. I'm not saying the late picks are loaded with gems(nor the whole draft for that matter), but there's a healthy amount of talent to find. So, the more picks you have, the better chance you have at building through the draft. If that's the case, why are these bad teams TRADING AWAY their 1st rounders or NOT ACCUMULATING picks. Once again, the good small market front offices(Portland, OKC, Rockets, Spurs) do their best to accumulate picks/young talent. Each year, these late 1st rounders of the good teams are available, whether for cash(how the Knicks got the Lakers' pick, to draft Toney Douglas in '09) or for proven vets(Grizzlies with Battier). 

At the end of the day, great front office>>all

 

[cosmiccanon]

Originally Posted by Big J 33

All of that, just fantastic stuff. You say 10 good players out of 3 years of non-lotto picks... that's not exactly a great percentage there. And why can't we rule out a player until his 3rd or 4th year? Where's that in the rules? Sure, it's possible, but do you actually think Jordan Hill will develop into a rotation player on a playoff team?, do you think Thabeet will pan out? Do you know anything about Motiejunas' game? I'll give you Lee, he's solid right now, but like I said, not that young. Sure, they could have "potential" but I'm speaking directly to this team right now.


2006

Shawne Williams; Rondo, Kyle Lowry, Shannon Brown, Daniel Gibson, Paul Millsap, and Leon Powe(7 players)

2007

Rodney Stuckey, Nick Young, Marco Bellinili, Jared Dudley, Wilson Chandler, Rudy Fernandez, Aaron Brooks, Arron Affalo, Tiago Splitter, Carl Landry, Glen Davis, Marc Gasol, and Ramon Sessions. (13 players)

2008

Robin Lopez, Roy Hibbert, Javale McGee, JJ Hickson, Courtney Lee, Serge Ibaka, Nicolas Batum, George Hill, Mario Chalmers, and DeAndre Jordan(10 players)

So, from 2006 - '08, 30 out of 138(number of non-lotto picks) panned out. That's 21% success, 1 in 5 if you hate math. I'm not saying the late picks are loaded with gems(nor the whole draft for that matter), but there's a healthy amount of talent to find. So, the more picks you have, the better chance you have at building through the draft. If that's the case, why are these bad teams TRADING AWAY their 1st rounders or NOT ACCUMULATING picks. Once again, the good small market front offices(Portland, OKC, Rockets, Spurs) do their best to accumulate picks/young talent. Each year, these late 1st rounders of the good teams are available, whether for cash(how the Knicks got the Lakers' pick, to draft Toney Douglas in '09) or for proven vets(Grizzlies with Battier). 

At the end of the day, great front office>>all

 

[Clyde Frog]

no parity? what playoffs were you watching?

lulz at the NBA ruining basketball. NTer please

If you think the NBA is actual basketball smh. So many rules are skewed its ridiculous, if you dont notice how poorly the game is played then its obvious you havent actually played organized basketball. And yes no parity. I understand the Mavs beat a choke artist in Lebron this past year. I understand Kevin Durant is a becoming a beast, but yes no parity. We can predict the final four pretty accurately every year. For other sports not so much.

 it seems like you're arguing that nobody wants to play in Milwaukee because of things like weather, endorsements, lifestyle etc. all those things are attributes of the city that will never change (but Jennings does have a shoe deal tho) so giving all teams the same money to spend isn't gonna make Milwaukee any more attractive for two reasons, it's not the sexy place to be AND they don't know how to run a basketball franchise. the playing field will never be level especially if the front office sucks. Millions to lose on the Clippers or millions to lose on the Bucks? seriously, knowing both teams don't know how to win which one are you picking? so to answer your question yes, certain teams will always have advantages over others and the way to overcome it is to make better decisions. Ray Allen was traded for a 34 year old Gary Payton and Desmond Mason. Seattle sucks so much as a city they have the most suicides and even they got Ray to re-up. Boston isn't a glamorous city and their management sucks but all it took was a few good decisions and they got guys to re-up. Just look at LA....both teams have the exact same opportunities and we can see where management has taken each. I don't know about you but I'm not trying to work for the guy who's checking out my balls in the shower after the game (Sterling smh). I mean it's gotta be depressing to play for a team where the weather sucks AND you're not having fun on the court because it's basically a million dollar dead end job where you know your bosses are idiots and you're never gonna win. there are cities just as boring as Milwaukee but players get drafted there and when they have the choice to leave they actually choose to stay. why? for whatever reason they stay the Bucks don't offer that and that's on them. bottom line I know you love the game but I think you love the Bucks more and it's messing with your head. if the Packers win it again this year and are competitive for the rest of the decade I don't think you would complain about how unfair it is for the other teams. you don't really want the NBA "fixed", what you want is for the Bucks to fix themselves and create a competitive environment so they can attract competitive players in spite of their location (like Green Bay does) 

First off im not arguing just for Milwaukee, im arguing for the other 18 or so small marketed teams that dont have a chance. The teams that make up more than half the league. Its not that I want just the Bucks to be fixed, I want the NBA to be fixed. And yes I am arguing that nobody wants to play in places like Milwaukee because they are egotistical tools that care more about money and being the face of everything but the basketball. Lebrons so focused on being a global icon that he forgot he has to win first. Jordan won first then became the icon. Im not saying management has nothing to do with it, management has alot to do with it. But again, its hard to manage when your more limited than everyone else.
Ray Allen for Desmond Mason 

 Once Stern screwed us out of a finals birth it all went down hill..

 

[laker4lifeman]

Originally Posted by Jay02

no parity? what playoffs were you watching?

lulz at the NBA ruining basketball. NTer please

If you think the NBA is actual basketball smh. So many rules are skewed its ridiculous, if you dont notice how poorly the game is played then its obvious you havent actually played organized basketball. And yes no parity. I understand the Mavs beat a choke artist in Lebron this past year. I understand Kevin Durant is a becoming a beast, but yes no parity. We can predict the final four pretty accurately every year. For other sports not so much.

 it seems like you're arguing that nobody wants to play in Milwaukee because of things like weather, endorsements, lifestyle etc. all those things are attributes of the city that will never change (but Jennings does have a shoe deal tho) so giving all teams the same money to spend isn't gonna make Milwaukee any more attractive for two reasons, it's not the sexy place to be AND they don't know how to run a basketball franchise. the playing field will never be level especially if the front office sucks. Millions to lose on the Clippers or millions to lose on the Bucks? seriously, knowing both teams don't know how to win which one are you picking? so to answer your question yes, certain teams will always have advantages over others and the way to overcome it is to make better decisions. Ray Allen was traded for a 34 year old Gary Payton and Desmond Mason. Seattle sucks so much as a city they have the most suicides and even they got Ray to re-up. Boston isn't a glamorous city and their management sucks but all it took was a few good decisions and they got guys to re-up. Just look at LA....both teams have the exact same opportunities and we can see where management has taken each. I don't know about you but I'm not trying to work for the guy who's checking out my balls in the shower after the game (Sterling smh). I mean it's gotta be depressing to play for a team where the weather sucks AND you're not having fun on the court because it's basically a million dollar dead end job where you know your bosses are idiots and you're never gonna win. there are cities just as boring as Milwaukee but players get drafted there and when they have the choice to leave they actually choose to stay. why? for whatever reason they stay the Bucks don't offer that and that's on them. bottom line I know you love the game but I think you love the Bucks more and it's messing with your head. if the Packers win it again this year and are competitive for the rest of the decade I don't think you would complain about how unfair it is for the other teams. you don't really want the NBA "fixed", what you want is for the Bucks to fix themselves and create a competitive environment so they can attract competitive players in spite of their location (like Green Bay does) 

First off im not arguing just for Milwaukee, im arguing for the other 18 or so small marketed teams that dont have a chance. The teams that make up more than half the league. Its not that I want just the Bucks to be fixed, I want the NBA to be fixed. And yes I am arguing that nobody wants to play in places like Milwaukee because they are egotistical tools that care more about money and being the face of everything but the basketball. Lebrons so focused on being a global icon that he forgot he has to win first. Jordan won first then became the icon. Im not saying management has nothing to do with it, management has alot to do with it. But again, its hard to manage when your more limited than everyone else.
Ray Allen for Desmond Mason 

 Once Stern screwed us out of a finals birth it all went down hill..

 

[ill steelo]

More recently, haven't either the Colts steelers or patriots been in the super bowl for the past 9 years? Contrast that with the Lakers mavs and spurs and you have the same amount of parity as far as championship contestants are concerned. Spurs are a small market team btw.

 

[cosmiccanon]

Originally Posted by laker4lifeman

Originally Posted by Jay02

no parity? what playoffs were you watching?

lulz at the NBA ruining basketball. NTer please

If you think the NBA is actual basketball smh. So many rules are skewed its ridiculous, if you dont notice how poorly the game is played then its obvious you havent actually played organized basketball. And yes no parity. I understand the Mavs beat a choke artist in Lebron this past year. I understand Kevin Durant is a becoming a beast, but yes no parity. We can predict the final four pretty accurately every year. For other sports not so much.

 it seems like you're arguing that nobody wants to play in Milwaukee because of things like weather, endorsements, lifestyle etc. all those things are attributes of the city that will never change (but Jennings does have a shoe deal tho) so giving all teams the same money to spend isn't gonna make Milwaukee any more attractive for two reasons, it's not the sexy place to be AND they don't know how to run a basketball franchise. the playing field will never be level especially if the front office sucks. Millions to lose on the Clippers or millions to lose on the Bucks? seriously, knowing both teams don't know how to win which one are you picking? so to answer your question yes, certain teams will always have advantages over others and the way to overcome it is to make better decisions. Ray Allen was traded for a 34 year old Gary Payton and Desmond Mason. Seattle sucks so much as a city they have the most suicides and even they got Ray to re-up. Boston isn't a glamorous city and their management sucks but all it took was a few good decisions and they got guys to re-up. Just look at LA....both teams have the exact same opportunities and we can see where management has taken each. I don't know about you but I'm not trying to work for the guy who's checking out my balls in the shower after the game (Sterling smh). I mean it's gotta be depressing to play for a team where the weather sucks AND you're not having fun on the court because it's basically a million dollar dead end job where you know your bosses are idiots and you're never gonna win. there are cities just as boring as Milwaukee but players get drafted there and when they have the choice to leave they actually choose to stay. why? for whatever reason they stay the Bucks don't offer that and that's on them. bottom line I know you love the game but I think you love the Bucks more and it's messing with your head. if the Packers win it again this year and are competitive for the rest of the decade I don't think you would complain about how unfair it is for the other teams. you don't really want the NBA "fixed", what you want is for the Bucks to fix themselves and create a competitive environment so they can attract competitive players in spite of their location (like Green Bay does) 

Ray Allen for Desmond Mason 

 Once Stern screwed us out of a finals birth it all went down hill..

ETHER

C'mon guys, keep f-ing w/ me and CP. We sonning you guys w/ these weak *** excuses. Quit crying, and get your front office game up bruhs.

 

[duba169]

The NBA has been ruining basketball for about a decade if not more. The new Cba has absolutely nothing to do with that

If the new cba starts to mention an end to preferential treatment and ticky tack fouls

And stop bringing the NFL up. Parity is very simple when the team plays a one game playoff

 

[addict4sneakers]

Originally Posted by Jay02

no parity? what playoffs were you watching?

lulz at the NBA ruining basketball. NTer please

If you think the NBA is actual basketball smh. So many rules are skewed its ridiculous, if you dont notice how poorly the game is played then its obvious you havent actually played organized basketball.

steve nash's court vision
chris paul's floor generalship
dirk nowitzki dominating the playoffs scoring using less than two dribbles
kobe bryants footwork/ shot creation.

yeah players get away with violations. so may even be ignored. but to say "the NBA is ruining basketball" is crazy. youngsters are taking three steps on the playground while screaming "lebron"

 its been 20 years since the NBA has been this talented. on any night the best player in the league changes.

 

[addict4sneakers]

Originally Posted by Jay02

no parity? what playoffs were you watching?

lulz at the NBA ruining basketball. NTer please

If you think the NBA is actual basketball smh. So many rules are skewed its ridiculous, if you dont notice how poorly the game is played then its obvious you havent actually played organized basketball.

steve nash's court vision
chris paul's floor generalship
dirk nowitzki dominating the playoffs scoring using less than two dribbles
kobe bryants footwork/ shot creation.

yeah players get away with violations. so may even be ignored. but to say "the NBA is ruining basketball" is crazy. youngsters are taking three steps on the playground while screaming "lebron"

 its been 20 years since the NBA has been this talented. on any night the best player in the league changes.

 

[CP1708]

Jay02 wrote:

---

Again though I pose this question Tell me CP do like parity in sports or no? How can you like the NBA and the NFL when they are on complete opposite ends of the spectrum. Ik its gonna be tough for you but for one second your not a Laker fan. Do you wanna see the same 4 teams in the conference finals every year, or do you wanna go into the year saying wow theres alot of good teams, any one of them could win this year.

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/font]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]f you prefer watching the same 4 teams at the end of the year that I cant argue that. Thats what you prefer. Personally I find that boring hence the reason the NFL is so great.
[/font]

  I'm not sure what any of this has to do with, but I'll answer as I'm a fair guy. 

I don't give a damn about parity.  I also don't give a damn about anything.  What DO I care about?  The game.  The players.  Execution, philosophy, management, but I don't give a crap HOW it gets done, just THAT it gets done.  Make sense? 

Parity is an excuse.  A reason, nothing more.  If the best owner, has the best GM, the best coach, and then the best players, then guess what, they are the best.  Period.  No matter the how, the who, the what or the why, that's what's goin on. 

I hate the Patriots.  In my own division, kick our @#$ all the time, win 3 outta 4 super bowls, hate those jerks, but guess what, I respect the hell out of what they do, and have done. 
Your Packers, LOVE what they have done.  Love it.  Love their Draft execution, love many of their players, the coaching staff is top notch, love it.  Do you honestly think I give a flying @#$% how much revenue they get from somewhere?  How much they charge for beer?  What percent they get from TV deals?  I don't care about ANY of that.  Just that it gets done.  

I have a question for you.  WHY THE @#$% DOES IT MATTER WHO OR WHY I ROOT FOR SOMEONE?  What if I was born in Hawaii?  Do I not get to have a favorite team?  

  Want the answer?  I make up my own +@#!@*@**+++% mind, that's how.  Why do I have to root for the city I was born in?  What purpose does that serve?  What if I was born in El Paso, who the hell do I root for then?  Do you get what I'm sayin to you here?  I think it's hilarious that people just HAVE to root for their home town teams, I think those guys are a bunch of tool bags.  Grow your own brain.  I didn't have a choice what city or hospital I was born in, but I damn sure have the right to choose what teams I want to love.  As a matter of fact, I did get one team from my home town, the LA Lakers.  But I wasn't down with the Raiders, I don't care about the Dodgers, and USC/UCLA mean nothing to me.  I went my own route.  And you'll notice, my sig don't exactly say Yankees, Cowboys, Duke and Lakers now do it? 

 

Cubs lose every single year.  EVERY year.  BIG market too, think that matters?  Nope.  Canes used to be great, not so much anymore, does it matter to me?  Nope, still my team.  Dan Marino long gone, should I stop loving the Dolphins?  Not a chance.  So spare me your garbage about rooting for the home teams and all that @#$%^&*&  That would mean there can only be fans in specific areas, and that's dumb and short sighted. 


As for the dumbest thing you have said, WHAT YEAR HAS IT BEEN THE SAME 4 TEAMS IN THE CONFERENCE FINALS BACK TO BACK????????????????????????????????  WHENNNNNNNNNNN????????? 

I'll wait.  Hit me with it.  LOVE to hear this answer. 

I can't think of one.  You might get a 2, or maybe even 3 one year, but you won't find a 4 during our lifetime.  Not that I'm aware of at least.  So what are you complaining about?  How is the NBA sooooooooo broken, and yet there's new blood all the time.  I bet you thought the Heat was winnin easy last year, no?  You expected the Magic to make the finals in 09?  You predicted LA v Boston in 08?  Spurs/Cavs in 07.  I bet when you watched the Heat vs The Mavs in 06, you just KNEW they would rematch 5 years later didn't you?  You also KNEW the Pistons would beat LA.  Oh.  Thas right, you didn't know ANY OF THAT @#$%, but here you sit, the NBA is broken, it's unfair, boo hoo whoa is me and my Milwaukee Bucks.  Poor me. 

  Get a clue man.  Noah didn't want to go to the Bucks, no @#$% he didn't, I wouldn't either, not because of the winter (ya know, cuz Chicago's winters are so much better) but because their ownership is garbage.  Noah is just one player, what's your excuse for Rondo, Smith, Paul, Hedo, Boozer, and on and on it goes?  That's not just one random failure which every team will have, that's a trend homie, a decade long trend of @#$% ups.  Quit blamin a system that worked just fine.  

It's ok though, you fall into the trap.  People LOVE to blame the Yankees for everything too, they got 1 title in 11 years.  Back in the 80's and early 90's they were putrid.  But nobody remember that, they just see high dollars now and blame them for all the problems the Royals have or some @#$%.  It's a cop out.  Excuses, built on top of more excuses. 

Keep Dirk, maybe take Boozer or Hedo, you have something to build with.  Ok, you mess those up, it happens, now you have the #1 pick, get CP3 OR Deron, but no, you messed that up too, ok, take Bogut, now go get Rondo the next year.....nope, didn't do that either.  It's their own @#$%^& fault.  Why you think it's your right to tap into another team's tv money JUST BECAUSE is incredible to me. 

We just got thru one of the greatest post seasons in the history of the game, but you cryin the league is messed up. 

  And people like you, and Doo, and JA back Stern and dumb @#$% owners with similar horrible decisions all over their resumes, and want the league to change for the "better".  In a way, I hope it @#$%s up even more.  I hope you guys get what you want, and watch the league go to @#$%  just so you guys can get a clue and see how foolish ya'll were.  But you won't see it, naw, you'll just keep rooting for your "home" teams and they'll still fail and you'll move on to a new excuse.  Maybe the Lakers make too much radio money or something, or, ya know what, you can just blame the Yankees. 

  

 

[CP1708]

Jay02 wrote:

---

Again though I pose this question Tell me CP do like parity in sports or no? How can you like the NBA and the NFL when they are on complete opposite ends of the spectrum. Ik its gonna be tough for you but for one second your not a Laker fan. Do you wanna see the same 4 teams in the conference finals every year, or do you wanna go into the year saying wow theres alot of good teams, any one of them could win this year.

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/font]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]f you prefer watching the same 4 teams at the end of the year that I cant argue that. Thats what you prefer. Personally I find that boring hence the reason the NFL is so great.
[/font]

  I'm not sure what any of this has to do with, but I'll answer as I'm a fair guy. 

I don't give a damn about parity.  I also don't give a damn about anything.  What DO I care about?  The game.  The players.  Execution, philosophy, management, but I don't give a crap HOW it gets done, just THAT it gets done.  Make sense? 

Parity is an excuse.  A reason, nothing more.  If the best owner, has the best GM, the best coach, and then the best players, then guess what, they are the best.  Period.  No matter the how, the who, the what or the why, that's what's goin on. 

I hate the Patriots.  In my own division, kick our @#$ all the time, win 3 outta 4 super bowls, hate those jerks, but guess what, I respect the hell out of what they do, and have done. 
Your Packers, LOVE what they have done.  Love it.  Love their Draft execution, love many of their players, the coaching staff is top notch, love it.  Do you honestly think I give a flying @#$% how much revenue they get from somewhere?  How much they charge for beer?  What percent they get from TV deals?  I don't care about ANY of that.  Just that it gets done.  

I have a question for you.  WHY THE @#$% DOES IT MATTER WHO OR WHY I ROOT FOR SOMEONE?  What if I was born in Hawaii?  Do I not get to have a favorite team?  

  Want the answer?  I make up my own +@#!@*@**+++% mind, that's how.  Why do I have to root for the city I was born in?  What purpose does that serve?  What if I was born in El Paso, who the hell do I root for then?  Do you get what I'm sayin to you here?  I think it's hilarious that people just HAVE to root for their home town teams, I think those guys are a bunch of tool bags.  Grow your own brain.  I didn't have a choice what city or hospital I was born in, but I damn sure have the right to choose what teams I want to love.  As a matter of fact, I did get one team from my home town, the LA Lakers.  But I wasn't down with the Raiders, I don't care about the Dodgers, and USC/UCLA mean nothing to me.  I went my own route.  And you'll notice, my sig don't exactly say Yankees, Cowboys, Duke and Lakers now do it? 

 

Cubs lose every single year.  EVERY year.  BIG market too, think that matters?  Nope.  Canes used to be great, not so much anymore, does it matter to me?  Nope, still my team.  Dan Marino long gone, should I stop loving the Dolphins?  Not a chance.  So spare me your garbage about rooting for the home teams and all that @#$%^&*&  That would mean there can only be fans in specific areas, and that's dumb and short sighted. 


As for the dumbest thing you have said, WHAT YEAR HAS IT BEEN THE SAME 4 TEAMS IN THE CONFERENCE FINALS BACK TO BACK????????????????????????????????  WHENNNNNNNNNNN????????? 

I'll wait.  Hit me with it.  LOVE to hear this answer. 

I can't think of one.  You might get a 2, or maybe even 3 one year, but you won't find a 4 during our lifetime.  Not that I'm aware of at least.  So what are you complaining about?  How is the NBA sooooooooo broken, and yet there's new blood all the time.  I bet you thought the Heat was winnin easy last year, no?  You expected the Magic to make the finals in 09?  You predicted LA v Boston in 08?  Spurs/Cavs in 07.  I bet when you watched the Heat vs The Mavs in 06, you just KNEW they would rematch 5 years later didn't you?  You also KNEW the Pistons would beat LA.  Oh.  Thas right, you didn't know ANY OF THAT @#$%, but here you sit, the NBA is broken, it's unfair, boo hoo whoa is me and my Milwaukee Bucks.  Poor me. 

  Get a clue man.  Noah didn't want to go to the Bucks, no @#$% he didn't, I wouldn't either, not because of the winter (ya know, cuz Chicago's winters are so much better) but because their ownership is garbage.  Noah is just one player, what's your excuse for Rondo, Smith, Paul, Hedo, Boozer, and on and on it goes?  That's not just one random failure which every team will have, that's a trend homie, a decade long trend of @#$% ups.  Quit blamin a system that worked just fine.  

It's ok though, you fall into the trap.  People LOVE to blame the Yankees for everything too, they got 1 title in 11 years.  Back in the 80's and early 90's they were putrid.  But nobody remember that, they just see high dollars now and blame them for all the problems the Royals have or some @#$%.  It's a cop out.  Excuses, built on top of more excuses. 

Keep Dirk, maybe take Boozer or Hedo, you have something to build with.  Ok, you mess those up, it happens, now you have the #1 pick, get CP3 OR Deron, but no, you messed that up too, ok, take Bogut, now go get Rondo the next year.....nope, didn't do that either.  It's their own @#$%^& fault.  Why you think it's your right to tap into another team's tv money JUST BECAUSE is incredible to me. 

We just got thru one of the greatest post seasons in the history of the game, but you cryin the league is messed up. 

  And people like you, and Doo, and JA back Stern and dumb @#$% owners with similar horrible decisions all over their resumes, and want the league to change for the "better".  In a way, I hope it @#$%s up even more.  I hope you guys get what you want, and watch the league go to @#$%  just so you guys can get a clue and see how foolish ya'll were.  But you won't see it, naw, you'll just keep rooting for your "home" teams and they'll still fail and you'll move on to a new excuse.  Maybe the Lakers make too much radio money or something, or, ya know what, you can just blame the Yankees. 

  

 

[duba169]

There is a wide gulf between the NBA and the players on all issues" -- NBA EVP David Stern on CBA negotiations 1982.

 

[duba169]

There is a wide gulf between the NBA and the players on all issues" -- NBA EVP David Stern on CBA negotiations 1982.

 

[beware the underdog]

Jay02 wrote:

---

Arguing with a Laker fan on this topic 

So why keep fighting? its not worth it. This dude HAS NEVER EVER EVER taken off his thick purple and yellow glasses.
Suprise this homer hasn't pulled out the "trolling card" on you yet.
He's gone on twitter to make ridiculous comments about how Duncan wouldn't be a top 10 laker.

You have made excellent points. 

    

 

[beware the underdog]

Jay02 wrote:

---

Arguing with a Laker fan on this topic 

So why keep fighting? its not worth it. This dude HAS NEVER EVER EVER taken off his thick purple and yellow glasses.
Suprise this homer hasn't pulled out the "trolling card" on you yet.
He's gone on twitter to make ridiculous comments about how Duncan wouldn't be a top 10 laker.

You have made excellent points. 

    

 

[CP1708]

Originally Posted by Beware The Underdog

You have made excellent points. 

And you have made none, as usual. 

Because the only thing you know about the NBA is how to capitalize SPURS.  Other then that, you're worthless. 

  

 

[CP1708]

Originally Posted by Beware The Underdog

You have made excellent points. 

And you have made none, as usual. 

Because the only thing you know about the NBA is how to capitalize SPURS.  Other then that, you're worthless. 

  

 

[duba169]

The NBA labor talks are headed for government intervention after the canceling of games drew the attention of the nation's top federal mediator.

George Cohen, director of the federal mediation and conciliation service, will be in New York City Monday to interview separately executives from the NBA and the National Basketball Players Association, two people with knowledge of the meeting told CBSSports.com Wednesday. The two parties will then meet in Cohen's office Tuesday in Washington, D.C.

Billy Hunter, the NBPA's executive director, divulged in a radio interview with WFAN in New York earlier Wednesday that the two sides had agreed to have their failed negotiations on a new collective bargaining agreement federally mediated.

Cohen, appointed by President Obama, was called upon to mediate the NFL's labor negotiation with the NFL Players Association before that sport's recent lockout was imposed. He has no binding authority and can only make suggestions. If nothing else, a fresh set of eyes and opinions -- not to mention meetings with a different venue and format -- couldn't hurt.

Cohen has argued five landmark labor cases before the U.S. Supreme Court and last year helped avert a crisis in Major League Soccer's labor talks. He is a former appellate court attorney with the National Labor Relations Board, and in fact argued before then-U.S. District Judge Sonia Sotomayor on the day she issued an injunction that effectively ended the Major League Baseball strike in 1995. Cohen was the MLBPA's lead attorney in the case, and also has worked with the NBPA.

In a Los Angeles Times article from March, footbal agent Leigh Steinberg said a good mediator is "an expert in the psychology of human gridlock." To that extent, Cohen has joined the right fight, as the NBA and NBPA are hopelessly, needlessly gridlocked over issues that should have been easily solved once they approached a compromise on how to divide the sport's $4 billion of revenues. The league's bargaining talks broke off Monday night after 13 hours over two days and multiple sessions over a two-week period. The league on Monday canceled the first two weeks of the regular season.

Drawn by the fact that lost games will have an economic impact beyond the parties involved, Cohen's office called both parties this week to request that they voluntarily participate in mediation, two sources said. Both agreed.

For those wondering why the step wasn't taken sooner, federal mediators generally don't get involved in labor disputes unless asked, or unless they reach an impasse after the sides had ample time to bargain. The NFL requested Cohen's involvement before the lockout was imposed, and while it's unclear what impact he had on the ultimate resolution, his powers at the time were muted by the lack of urgency in the talks.

 

[duba169]

The NBA labor talks are headed for government intervention after the canceling of games drew the attention of the nation's top federal mediator.

George Cohen, director of the federal mediation and conciliation service, will be in New York City Monday to interview separately executives from the NBA and the National Basketball Players Association, two people with knowledge of the meeting told CBSSports.com Wednesday. The two parties will then meet in Cohen's office Tuesday in Washington, D.C.

Billy Hunter, the NBPA's executive director, divulged in a radio interview with WFAN in New York earlier Wednesday that the two sides had agreed to have their failed negotiations on a new collective bargaining agreement federally mediated.

Cohen, appointed by President Obama, was called upon to mediate the NFL's labor negotiation with the NFL Players Association before that sport's recent lockout was imposed. He has no binding authority and can only make suggestions. If nothing else, a fresh set of eyes and opinions -- not to mention meetings with a different venue and format -- couldn't hurt.

Cohen has argued five landmark labor cases before the U.S. Supreme Court and last year helped avert a crisis in Major League Soccer's labor talks. He is a former appellate court attorney with the National Labor Relations Board, and in fact argued before then-U.S. District Judge Sonia Sotomayor on the day she issued an injunction that effectively ended the Major League Baseball strike in 1995. Cohen was the MLBPA's lead attorney in the case, and also has worked with the NBPA.

In a Los Angeles Times article from March, footbal agent Leigh Steinberg said a good mediator is "an expert in the psychology of human gridlock." To that extent, Cohen has joined the right fight, as the NBA and NBPA are hopelessly, needlessly gridlocked over issues that should have been easily solved once they approached a compromise on how to divide the sport's $4 billion of revenues. The league's bargaining talks broke off Monday night after 13 hours over two days and multiple sessions over a two-week period. The league on Monday canceled the first two weeks of the regular season.

Drawn by the fact that lost games will have an economic impact beyond the parties involved, Cohen's office called both parties this week to request that they voluntarily participate in mediation, two sources said. Both agreed.

For those wondering why the step wasn't taken sooner, federal mediators generally don't get involved in labor disputes unless asked, or unless they reach an impasse after the sides had ample time to bargain. The NFL requested Cohen's involvement before the lockout was imposed, and while it's unclear what impact he had on the ultimate resolution, his powers at the time were muted by the lack of urgency in the talks.

 

[beware the underdog]

CP1708 wrote:

---

Originally Posted by Beware The Underdog

You have made excellent points. 

And you have made none, as usual. 

Because the only thing you know about the NBA is how to capitalize SPURS.  Other then that, you're worthless. 

  
Why should I? You will only hate on my sig.

Surprise you didn't quote me with the usual BS

"

 You cheer for the JETS and Cowboys

 Cheering for half the NFL.

"

"SPURS suck....LA 4-1 vs them

"

You always do that.

I started the discussion on the Small vs big market. Its ok to disagree but please be respectful.