An excellent breakdown of the economics behind the Zach Randolph trade and the motivations of Michael Heisley. http://www.3sob.com/archives/40-july-2009/547-randolph-reaction-con Michael Heisley is an NBA owner that runs his team like a business, he will do any deal as long as it helps his bottom line. The scary thing is he'll keep it up unless someone buys the team from him. Next time we complain about Les not spending, just think about what would happen if someone like Heisley owned the team.
They do, but it seems like a different kind of cheap. The Clippers rarely make the big FA signing and sometimes do not keep their own good FA. But you don't really see them trade away someone like Pau Gasol for a bag of donuts. This might be because they're in LA and make money without having to stoop to Heisley's level.
over the past 25 years, i say that the Clips may have been the most profitable NBA team, the Lakers, Bulls, Celtics, Rox, Spurs, et al. pale in comparision. a cash cow for Donald T. Sterling.
Which is why I defended Chris Wallace in the who is the worst GM thread. The more I think about it, Wallace isn't just good at what he does, he's great - at saving money for his boss.
Yes there's revenue sharing. As long as the bottom dwellers keep supplying talent to the bigger teams like a farm system, its a symbiotic relationship where everyone comes away with something.
i guess this may be why morey keeps calling them...he's hoping he hits the jackpot with the right offer.
What a joke. The NBA has some huge problems that need to be addressed (assuming things like integrity and accountability are of any importance to the league office), but it seems all they do is recruit people to work on silly commercials.
