I think the nba cares more about games being watched than discussed online. People (including myself) can discuss the league all day but never tune into games or pay for ESPN. To be honest, it’s simply more fun to watch the drama and hypothesize than to watch the game.
No doubt they need to be more inventive and create better products. Monetize the offseason drama more (ESPN) can give Stephen A $10M a year because of his content on discussing the NBA off season. NBA need to find a way to monetize that content themselves.
The interest is there, creative ways to monetize that interest is their challenge. A couple of ways just off the top of my head: 360 deals with NBA contracts in the next CBA like the music industry. Want to run a camp, appear or start a podcast? NBA gets a cut. At the same time league will push out more official league content (for example NBA version of the hard knocks). Sponsorship cut (like the UFC pre Reebok) deal. Gambling cut from "certified" stats. Anybody can record their own stats, but now truly official stats are from NBA. Only companies that pay are guaranteed to get the most instant update of the "cerified" stats. Sell real-time game tracking data beyond box scores, like those that require cameras to track player positions and etc. Create predictive models based off of those stats and sell access. As online gambling and daily fantasy gets bigger, people way pay for incremental advantage.
unfortunately, that's what comes with signing a contract in which that team has promised to pay you hundreds or tens of millions of dollars, even if you get injured etc.
Who cares about loyalty to team, fans or city. Any one of you would jump to another company if offered more money or a better environment. These players don't owe anything to anyone. It's selfish of fans to think otherwise.
Nah, I don't see these as large revenue streams. If anything, this is nickeling and diming your audience, which may further drive down interest in your product. Maybe I'm wrong, but I won't change my perspective on this until they actually implement new business strategies and succeed in generating hundreds of millions or billions in revenue.
Again, that's why you sign a contract. You are obligated because again, you signed a contract. This contract guarantees you job security and hundreds of millions of dollars. Contracts don't care about how you want to play on a certain with your but buddy That you like a a certain place better than another. Don't **** over teams when they've signed you for guaranteed cash in good faith
Yes I understand that. However, it's a two way street, because player expects FO to field a competitive team. Owner who is paying you expects you to be 100% committed - be it effort, care for health/food, competitiveness...all of it. Why can't a player demand the same from owner and front office? Anthony Davis is best big man after Duncan and his owner/FO couldn't get him past 2nd round in 7 or so years. Owner and FO expect him to be professional, while he has to watch incompetent move after incompetent move. I think you can't compare NBA and "normal" job contracts. Most Wendy employees won't care if their annual profit can't surpass that of a Burger King. There's no competition factor that is present in NBA.
I think an easy fix would be to loosen the restrictions on who can get a no trade clause. It should be something anybody can get and negotiate for.
Whenever "slavery" is used as a negative analogy, the historical definition of slavery is always assumed. Otherwise, what's the point of the analogy?
Also, to anyone asking, yes I find this new NBA super exciting. I like the fast pace, the drama, and the gamesmanship. I like how championship are determined by the quality of front offices as much as the talent of the players
I get your point, but if a contract isn't really that enforceable it's not really a contract. I'm a fan of anyone getting paid usually.
He had only 2 years in his contract left. This and the next one. He did OKC a favour. Not only got them out of the luxury tax the owner didn't want to keep paying, he got them the biggest haul a star has ever brought back. Plus he didn't made his request public and create lockeroom problems. Everyone is left happy even some OKC fans who realised their team was going nowhere. Now they are in the best position in the league to rebuild. So what's the problem?
Losing an MVP candidate like Paul George is not doing Oklahoma City a favor. That’s like saying the Bucks trading Giannis tomorrow for this kind of haul is doing them a favor. Also, Paul George has three years left on his contract, counting the 2019-2020 season. Furthermore, @J Sizzle is correct. George could have signed with the Lakers last summer if he wanted to be in Los Angeles, or he could have signed a max contract from the Sixers if he didn’t think he would win with Westbrook in Oklahoma City. Nobody forced him to accept a four-year maximum contract extension with the Thunder. Once he signed it, he should not be looking to break the contract after one season. It’s a really bad look for the NBA that Kawhi Leonard tampered with a player under contract, and Paul George issued a trade demand one season after signing a four-year maximum contract extension with the Thunder.
If Giannis was unhappy and he was going to leave for nothing ofc he would do them a favour asking for a trade. Also PG13 signed for 3+1 of which only 2 remained. Next summer he would be an expiring UFA with much less value. Okc would be lucky to get a good fist round for him or a couple mid. Now they got the biggest prize ever.
If these fans were still under the delusion that their team, with both stars coming from serious summer surgeries, was going to contend for a title after what happened the last two years, sure they would be dissapointed.
This is missing the point. It’s not about whether or not they’re contenders. It’s about contracts not mattering every the moment they’re signed. That’s dumb.
