ClipsNation:Mysteries of the NBA Lockout-Why Does David Stern Still Have a Job?

Stern makes as much as Kobe Bryant according to the New York Times.

 

I do agree that the NBA has destroyed the game of hoops by making it about stars, with star calls, and that sort of bs. As an old school hoops enthusiast who appreciates the team work, I do get frustrated about the product on the court(although I still admire their skill) and more so how the league handles it with the referees, so on. I do enjoy watching international games, olympics, and euro league, and even college.
That said, at the same time while he changed what the game was about, this made the NBA extremely more successful with bigger than the game marquee athletes. You guys act like Magic/Bird, Jordan took the game to new heights by just playing. The good product is only one element, and if they did what they did they could've sold out arenas and created hype, but marketing it the right way, putting the spotlight in a way and building up hype, you really aren't giving the NBA enough credit.
There are big time ballers jjust tearing up Europe and have in the passed, Petrovic who came to the league, ginobili, jasekvicuus, the list goes on about stars in the euroleague. They got great fame over there, but still nothing compared to the exposure you get particularly in the league because of the marketing and access infrastructure that you have here. I think many people overlook the business side of the game that so much goes down to make that final product which is the players be able to perform and be able to be seen. ITs just ignorance in my opinion and lack of knowledge of the intricacies that all lebron, dwight, wade, kobe to be who they are and create the image that they have and sell millions of shoes/jerseys, etc.

Also as far as the notion that his international exposure came back to bite him in the but, yea ok, maybe 10-20 players will go overseas, they don't have room or the rules for the full rosters for starters. Most of those players get paid less than half of what they wold in the league, dont have private planes, the best facilities, doctors, trainers, the infrstacture, exposure, comfort of home like they do with the nba. If anything they will be playing in a much less comfortable environmentand strcuture for half the pay, sure if it will put some money in the pocket, but all it will do, especially for the stars, is make them realize long term how good they have it in the league. I don't think its much leverage at all.

 

So the 1984 draft, the first year David Stern was commissioner, that featured Michael Jordan, Hakeem Olajuwon, Charles Barkley, and John Stockton didn't have anything to do with the NBA's increasing popularity? The GAME was as popular as ever with the Sixers, Lakers, and Celtics playing on TV. It's ironic to think that you applaud Stern's ability to take the NBA out of bankruptcy but look at where we are at right now--full circle to where Stern alleges that about 2/3s of the league are losing money.

I credit with Stern keeping the NBA ship afloat and that's about it. He's been far more competent as a Commissioner than Bud Selig, Paul Tagliabue, and Hockey's commissioner the past 30 years. But to say if "he hadn't done things the way he did guys like Durant won't be making 20 million right now" is shortsighted considering the reason behind the 1999 lockout was because a player like Durant got a $20M/year contract from a SMALL MARKET TEAM. Credit Stern for trying to smack some sense into owners' ridiculous spending but don't credit Stern for "doing things like he did" so guys like Durant can get 20 million a year (which is an absurd thing to say considering he's not even making 20 million a year on his extension)

The writer is blaming Stern for not taking fair responsibility for what happened in 1999, not for playing hardball now. If Stern and the owners came out and said "You know, our calculations back in 1999 were off because we didn't foresee this rough economy so our estimate number should have been 52% for you guys instead of 57%", the Union MIGHT have swallowed that excuse better than what has been given to them.

And to say Stern is "kind to players" because Marbury and Curry made so much, I think you are giving way too much credit to Stern for the KNICKS' incompetence. Stern didn't open up the checkbook for any player; his idiotic owners did.

Why would the players do that? The average career for an NBA player is significantly more than the average NFL career so why should the Players give up their guaranteed contracts? To save the owners from their own idiot mistakes? I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the players union don't care either way if the owners want to do revenue sharing amongst themselves and I'm thinking the players union would never agree and say "look since you guys are being a good sport about SHARING money amongst yourselves, we'll go ahead and agree to having non-guaranteed contracts"

You are comparing apples and oranges again. When a buyer buys an NBA team and knows FULLY WELL he's not going to turn a profit until maybe when he sells the team, he's doing it for other reasons of course (i.e. prestige, he's a fan, wants to hoist that trophy, etc.). This is the case for most owners right? If so, you want to minimize your losses however you can and one way to is hire COMPETENT people to run your organization. COMPETENT people don't spend $100+ million on Joe Johnsons or Rashard Lewis' of the world. THAT's how you get your ass into trouble and financial losses. LOL in fact, as much as people like to say Donald Sterling is the worst owner in sports (I 100% agree), he thinks more of his bottom line and runs his team accordingly to where he doesn't lose money. In other words, if you're a future NBA owner and you know:

1. You're not going to profit by buying a franchise
2. you're market
3. you're level of knowledge in running an NBA team

You should already know the rules to the game. Don't shell out $35 milliion for Jim McIllvaine. Don't shell out $100 million for Juwan Howard. Don't shell out $120 million for Gilbert Arenas.

You know why "deadbeat" (a term you're incorrectly using) players are a rarity? Because of non-guaranteed contracts. You say "Yea and it should be like that in the NBA too". I counter with "I agree but how much the NFL and the owners don't take care of the players after they retire from crippling injuries (Earl Campbell) or multiple concussions (many quarterbacks) as much as they should?" The NFL's non-guaranteed system is a system that lets teams and owners wash their hands of their OWN mistakes. I'm not an advocate of keeping a crap player for 7 years but that's where the middle ground is--by not going the non-guaranteed route but by shortening guaranteed deals.

You might as well put the players in chains after they sign off on such an outlandish deal.

 

I have a suspicion that Stern's income isn't considering the fact he's not a high school dropout earning that sort of money, and has been there so long that he would have a passive income probably higher than any active income at this point in time.

 

Stern's salary is meaningless except to the owners who are paying him. To them he is going to earn it during this battle. Stern will break the players and then break them again just for kicks.

 

Huh? You rant on Stern but only bring up points that would seem to say you're on the NBA side and not the players....
Bringing up all those players who made 10s of millions and saying they weren't worth it (they weren't) only says those contracts shouldn't be guaranteed, which is something Stern wants.

 

he signed the former CBA which means he set up the environment for the overpaid players.

I dont fault players for wanting more money because i would want the most i could get. I do fault stern for signing off on the last CBA (with the guaranteed and all).

 

Ok I gotcha now. But Stern is an employee of the owners, they're the ones who pay him. If they tell him they're losing money and this is what needs to be done, he'll fight tooth and nails for them.

 

The CBA decision was voted on by both the players and the owners and got the required # of each to approve them.

Stern didn't unilaterally approve make the CBA happen over the objection of the owners.

 

That's fine. But people have to understand that the 99 CBA was considered a victory for the league and the owners. And they are asking for the players to concede once again, which the players are a little bit, and more as the lockout continues.

 

Yeah, I believe that's why the players liked the now-extinct CBA and the owners don't anymore. So, the question still remains - if the aforementioned CBA was so bad, why did the owners and Stern agree to it?

To me, it sounds like when the CBA was ratified, everyone - owners included - thought there would be lots of revenue for all to enjoy. But now that reality has bit them in the you-know-what, the owners are reneging.

 

I wonder how many fans will be lost because of a lock-out.

At the end of the day, it's the owners who has the final say when it comes to those superstar contracts.

Me, I just want my Rockets to be toasting bottles of champagne again.

 

The whole NBA has become a catch-22. Without marketing and stars, there would be no league. Nobody will make money and the NBA will just be a glorified version of college basketball. Similar to the 60-70s. At the same time, mass marketing also destroyed the game for the purists and made a lot of players greedy and lazy.

It's a tough job for the Commish. I think what really destroyed the NBA are the players' agents and super agents. They got greedy, want a piece of the cut, and made the players believe they could dictate anything. Just look at the "Summer of Lebron" for everything that is wrong with the league.

 

A league with a draconian CBA, no revenue sharing, no contraction, and no mechanism for parity is the worst thing that we can all hope for as fans.

The problem isn't the players making too much, it's a structural problem among the owners. The owners signed off on 57% BRI in 99, and you're telling me that even after this year of historic revenues that they can't make money?

That's a problem with parity and small market competitiveness, not with player salaries.

 

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/6906646/nba-players-union-meet-wednesday-new-york-sources-say


Players and Owners are meeting again. Hope some progress actually gets made.