NBA Offseason 2013 - Page 80

On October 03 2013 04:45 cLutZ wrote:


Yea, in 1v1 I would expect them to hit 50%+ from anywhere on the floor. My point is you really just win 1v1s via shot selection (mostly) and not settling for shots that you aren't like 70%+.


Ace <3 Jibba <3

On October 03 2013 04:45 cLutZ wrote:


Yea, in 1v1 I would expect them to hit 50%+ from anywhere on the floor. My point is you really just win 1v1s via shot selection (mostly) and not settling for shots that you aren't like 70%+.


Ace <3 Jibba <3

On October 03 2013 08:53 cLutZ wrote:
What is the value of Kobe?

On October 03 2013 02:23 Jerubaal wrote:


-Great. I'm totally convinced that competitive balance does not affect the bottom line for the league or individual clubs. That's what I was really thinking about during the Finals. I was hoping Peter Holt turned a good profit because I'm a big fan of CAT.

-There are two quantities here, money and talent/value, and there is an indistinct relationship between the two. The Knicks and Nets are brought up as counterexamples to the Lakers. What the hell happened to "all else being equal'? Smart poor teams can beat stupid rich teams, what? But when you add smartness, knowledge of how to bend rules to your favor and spend loads of money you get the perfect storm.

-The article said over and over that winning or losing doesn't affect profits, then they say that profit sharing disincentivizes trying to win. Huh. That's going to be true regardless unless you institute some artificial punishment.

-Saying that winning doesn't affect profits may be sort of true in the short term, but that's absolutely not true in the long term. The Yankees and especially the Cowboys are proof of that. Or did Miami just triple in population?

-Individual salaries and the split of profits are negotiated separately. Is there any mention of competitive balance at these CBA negotiations? I fail to see how and to what end a salary cap would suppress overall wages if the percentage remains the same. Sure it keeps individual salaries down because you need a team. Again, max contract is a different argument than salary cap.

-The writer speaks in glowing terms of the European football leagues: A cursory glance at the EPL reveals that players received 67% of the income last year, which is substantially better but doesn't make me think that NBA players are getting ripped off at 50%. Then you look at the fact that most of them are operating at a (sometimes enormous) loss and the league collectively as a debt that equals their yearly income. It would doubtlessly quickly collapse without huge injections of cash, and there are discussions that they will soon adopt several reforms including a salary cap. Meanwhile in Spain, Barcelona and Real Madrid take a whole 43% of the income of La Liga while many of the other teams are scrabbling in the dirt.

-All of this player/financial business aside, the real reason most fans want competitive balance is because they want it to be fair. The NBA is by far the worst league in terms of heaping on advantages for it's golden children and then proclaiming their greatness. We don't need more of that because then it's just fucking WWE, except they're lying to you about it being real. Or maybe the average NBA fan is just that stupid.

On October 03 2013 09:46 RowdierBob wrote:


The writer's comparison to European football is a poor one. A salary cap would do wonders for competitive balance in the EPL (that is at least giving a chance for other teams to compete for first) but it would be the stupidest decision the FA could make. Why? Because the EPL, unlike the NBA, is subject to intense competition from outside leagues. If stars' salaries are artificially lowered due to a cap they'll just jump ship to La Liga, Serie A, Bundersliga etc where they can make more money. Unless all the major leagues collaborated to institute a UEFA-wide salary cap, it just wouldn't work.

The NBA is fortunate in this regard. European leagues can't compete with the NBA in the area that matters most: money. So the NBA can get away with utilising a salary cap to spread the talent around the league.

And just being in the EPL is an achievement for so many teams. Supporters go to games to watch their team not necessarily win but win enough games to stay in the top league. Supporters have incentive to go watch a team play even though they understand they have zero chance of competing for a title. For these supporters, staying the the top flight is, or making the Champions League, is an achievement in itself. I'll follow Liverpool ardently this year as I do each year but I know we can't win. But there's a chance we can snag a Champion's League spot and that is significant in itself. Not to mention the other competitions like the FA Cup, League Cup, UEFA Cup etc.

But what do we have in the NBA? There's not relegation or inter-continental competitions to compete in. If you remove the cap the Lakers, Knicks etc will crush the smaller clubs with their significant monetary advantage. What incentive is there to go watch teams like the Bobcats and Bucks play? There's no relegation battles, FA Cups etc to support. You're basically watching a team struggle to win 30 games a year and maybe get a glimpse at a Lebron or Kobe a couple of times a year? I'm glad the author of that article is so confident people will go watch anyway, but I don't share his optimism.

On October 03 2013 02:23 Jerubaal wrote:


-The article said over and over that winning or losing doesn't affect profits, then they say that profit sharing disincentivizes trying to win. Huh. That's going to be true regardless unless you institute some artificial punishment.

-Individual salaries and the split of profits are negotiated separately. Is there any mention of competitive balance at these CBA negotiations? I fail to see how and to what end a salary cap would suppress overall wages if the percentage remains the same. Sure it keeps individual salaries down because you need a team. Again, max contract is a different argument than salary cap.

-All of this player/financial business aside, the real reason most fans want competitive balance is because they want it to be fair. The NBA is by far the worst league in terms of heaping on advantages for it's golden children and then proclaiming their greatness. We don't need more of that because then it's just fucking WWE, except they're lying to you about it being real. Or maybe the average NBA fan is just that stupid.

On October 03 2013 11:55 slyboogie wrote:


Revenue sharing totally disincentives winning and causes bad teams. It props up teams that a) shouldn't exist because their market is too small, or there is just no market for them or b) have crappy management. If you buy a McDonald's and manage to run it into the ground because of poor market share or management, you don't get a "revenue sharing" check at the end of the month. You go out of business.

Individual salaries in a salary cap league are negotiated within the sphere of the "split of profits," or revenue split between players and owners. Max contracts don't exist in a world without salary caps - because the teams are free to offer any financial compensation they wish. Just like...in real life.

Why is it fair for bad teams to be competitive? They're bad - that's what it means. And often enough, it's not because they have no money, it's because they chose to give that money to Charlie Villanueva. Or they employed Brian Colangelo to make decisions for them. They shouod get one of the golden star children upon whom they could heap advantages and proclaim his greatness. Then that team might become competitively balanced.

On October 03 2013 12:39 Ace wrote:
boogie hitting the golden nugget. Fix management if you want to fix competitive balance.

On October 03 2013 14:36 VayneAuthority wrote:
"I'm a guy where whoever's on the court I'm going to go at them," Rose said. "If it's my teammates, it could be my mom on the court, she's going to get killed. I could care less who [is out there]. For me, I'm just trying to build that mentality where I don't care who's out there, I'm going to play the same way." - Derrick Rose

huerpadurpadurp