utcarbs, why or how did yao get into this post? Duncan almost left and it wouldve been his right to leave. Looking at Orlando, do u see a team that can beat boston this year?They had their chance and now that window is pretty close to being closed. La is always a great destination because all they care are titles. As a player, you know mgmt only cares about rings and thats a great thing.
Parity is really tough to legislate in the NBA. Unlike the NFL, you aren't dealing with a 53-man roster that fields 11 guys at a time that must function as a serious unit to have success. This is a star driven league where one guy really does radically alter a team's fortunes. Look at our sad state, despite having the best depth in the league. Look at the Cavs first-to-worst free fall. It's a have/have not league, and there's only a dozen or so guys (out of over 400) that can qualify you as a "have" Institute that hard cap - Miami and NY got their guys without going over it. Nets are still below it. I remain against an NFL-style franchise tag (it sucks in the NFL, too). I've said it for awhile and will continue to do so: Kill the S&T. It has washed away the entire point of Bird Rights and virtually taken away the best bargaining chip of teams hoping to keep their guys. Players have a right to free agency - they have little to no choice in who drafts them, and why should they be forced to stay someplace that they never wanted to be? As fans it's easy to buy into that false sense of ownership, but its their lives and careers. If LeBron wants to play with his buddies and live it up in South Beach club scene, that's his right. I wouldn't want to stay in Cleveland with a crummy supporting cast either. If I could become a totalitarian arbitrator in the CBA talks, I'd 1) Harden the cap by killing the S&T, reducing the MLE to be once every 2-3 years, and inserting a double tax line ($80M mark) 2) Insert universal incentive clauses into all NBA contracts: the notion that Dwight Howard's max deal has him paid less than Redd, AK47, and Z-Bo is impossible to defend. Put in annual salary bumps (that carry over) when guys make All-NBA, get MVP, Finals MVP, ROY, or DPOY, win the scoring/rebounding/assists crowns, etc. Guys like LeBron become "supermax" players, which constrains teams that have them - helping out the parity cause financially. 3) If there really has to be a franchise tag, let it go like this: a) You have to QUALIFY for it, not just be a negotiating tool like in the NFL. You have to have been drafted by the team or been there 5 years, and during that same time have made All-NBA (1st-3rd), DPOY, ROY, or Finals MVP. b) The Tag is an automatic max deal, BUT with a player option to terminate after the first year, making him an UFA - if the player takes that option, he CAN NOT negotiate a new deal with the team. c) Teams can not trade a tagged player for 2 years. Teams can not use the tag more than once every 3 years. --->While teams have a tag, it doesn't give them all the power, and run a high risk that it just delays the inevitable by one year. 4) Alter the lottery so that the bottom 2 teams automatically receive picks 4-5 to discourage tanking Only other way to get parity? Shut down the Hornets Bobcats Wolves Kings and possibly Grizzlies and Pacers The league is bailing out a third of the teams out there that can't survive financially. They're fighting it hard, but it's tough to deny contraction needs to take place. You could also boost the NBDL to be a minor league and relegate the bottom 4-6 teams down to it (allow a cycle of 2 teams up/two down each year). Can't fathom it on Stern's watch, though.
Why is this always assumed? Think of the NBA as a company. The teams are "departments" or "divisions" within the company. Does the company have no right to assign whoever to whichever place its employees work? If the guy doesn't like his assignment, he can always quit the job for another company. They don't want to quit because it's a well-paying job, just like a lot of us staying in a job we don't exactly like but is paying good money.
I'm just going to think of the NBA as a professional sports league with free agency rights. Just because a megastar was drafted by a city, they don't have to, shouldn't have to, spend their entire career there. If you got drafted like a putz like Sterling that was happy to ride you to box office success and happily kept things on the cheap, wasting your prime, you might want to leave. And if you got drafted by an armpit city like Detroit, you might want to leave. It's not all about what owners and fans want - the players have rights too. Level the playing field, but it's not right to slap a ball and chain on these guys.
I don't disagree that there are a couple of garbage teams out there and some need to go. Your point about the competitive nature of the league is true. However, most teams that aren't the large markets like LA, have larger cycles of competitiveness. They take longer to get to a position to compete for a title because they have to build through the draft. Houston hasn't been competitive since 95. Defintions of competitive might vary but I define competitive as there is a strong opportunity at a championship not just the playoffs. Miller was quoted as saying that he traded Williams away because the possibility of him staying was low. You don't trade a player like Williams on a hunch. Also I'm not sure Miami was the only team with cap space. New York had the money. However, if teams knew that that Lebron wanted to play with those guys, they would have prepared their cap space for Lebron and CO. Most didn't expect all 3 to team up. They only had capspace for one major free agent as most teams do for most free agencies.
This discussion is helpful, I've got some more information to think through. It's in part a free market vs. Regulation debate. When I think about it that way it sounds like there isn't enough supply of stars to meet the demand in the markets that exist. I'm a franchise owner (gelato) and we don't open in markets without clear demand. Even if the franchisor wants more franchises open in that area. In this market, the weaker markets have to shut down their franchises or just be ok with being the weakest in the bunch. But I also know in my area where my store is located, I don't want another store opening up anywhere near me. It might be great for the franchisor, but sucks for me. Perhaps part of the problem in the NBA is that there are too many franchises diluting the demand. Many the NBA has grown too fast? Maybe the market has shrunk? Many the supply of talent has shrunk?
A professional sports league is actually more like one single company than a free market of 30 independent companies. They share revenues. They make collective bargaining with the player union. If it is a free market, the draft shouldn't be in place. Restricted FA shouldn't be in place. They shouldn't even be able to trade players. Have you heard of companies trading employees to their competitors? The real competitors in the business are the Euroleagues, China, etc. They can't really compete with the NBA now because of the prestige and the money involved. But in theory, if a player doesn't like the NBA system, they can always quit and go play for some other leagues. THEY ARE NOT SLAVES. Again, by your logic, there shouldn't even be a draft. Players should be free to go to whichever team they want right from the beginning. Are you saying that an "armpit city" like Detroit have no right to have good players for their teams? Then we might as well just locate all teams in good cities. Why even have teams in those small market places?
Exactly. Free agents will go where the best OPPORTUNITY is, and that includes all sorts of factors: money, shot at a ring, competency of the front office, coaching staff, existing players, team facilities, outside business possibilities, tax considerations, living conditions, etc. It's not about the size of the market, it's about the attractiveness of the market.
