Everything you mentioned about equal opportunity (competing for free agents, resigning your picks) is done to maximize wins, which should lead to a better product on the floor and more revenue. But what the league is selling is the maximized wins. If you don't have a star, it won't matter (competing for a title). See the Houston Rockets. I don't have Stern's exact words of "I want parity". I'm just going off of the numerous articles out there about the leagues position, such as this one: Actually, here is a quote from Stern on it but it's from a biased site (I don't feel like trying to find his direct quote): This isn't necessarily true. The Heat got 3 studs last season and didn't have one of the highest payrolls in the league. Players will go where they want to go. Every team IS forced to manage payroll. It's called spending wisely, and the rich teams that don't spend wisely suck just as much as the smaller teams that don't do it. Nothing at all. But that has nothing to do with an equal playing field. And nothing shows that spending leads to success. Do the Bobcats have a much smaller revenue stream than the Spurs (4 titles) or Thunder? Don't the Knicks have a much bigger revenue stream than the Spurs and Thunder? Or the Magic?
Back to the news: daldridgetnt David Aldridge No predictions, but guarded optimism from various sources today. Reason? "Reality is setting in," says source inv in talks from beginning. ChrisMannixSI Chris Mannix Hearing LeBron James is skipping the players world tour because of a prior commitment he couldn't change. WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski In talking with agents and players, I don't sense a connection between world tour dropouts and a belief that labor deal is imminent. ChrisMannixSI Chris Mannix Anyone surprised by how this world tour has fallen apart has not been watching the U.S. barnstorming tour. Very chaotic, little structure. SpearsNBAYahoo Marc J. Spears Source says @CP3 decided not to attend players world tour to spend more time with family and work out in preparation for post-lockout season WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski If a deal gets done fast, there's time to scrap the trip. Kobe, Amar'e and Kevin Durant still on board for tour. daldridgetnt David Aldridge BTW, source insists LBJ decision not to play in world tour doesn't mean he has any inside knowledge about a labor deal... Johnschuhmann John Schuhmann by sheridanhoops FYI, as usual, the aftermath of today's labor meetings will be televised on NBA TV & streamed on NBA.com, whenever the parties emerge. WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski Some agents say that their players have been paid in full for world trip, and some say they're still waiting on part of money. KBergCBS Ken Berger Irrelevant time-lapse update of the day: Sides have been talking for six hours, give or take a few hours for bathroom breaks and Ouija.
STEIN_LINE_HQ Marc Stein Source close to @CP3 says Paul passed on world tour to instead focus on "getting ready for the season and to spend time with family" Hmm.....????
I totally agree with Icehouse that its stars, drafting, great management as well as locale being greater determinants of success than just level of revenue; However, that doesnt mean the disparity of revenue between clubs aren't a factor in competitive balance. The fact is its obvious as a fan, I'd much rather have the team I root for be able to afford to spend into the luxury tax like the Lakers, Mavs, Magic, Knicks, Nuggets, and Blazers than teams which are barely able to afford paying up to the cap. Honestly would you rather have had the ability to spend like Cuban, Jerry Bus or restricted like the Maloof brothers, Sarver or hell even Lex ALexander. Like it or not Market size and revenue play a large role in the ability for teams to compete. Lack of both caused the city of Seattle to lose their team, its costing Hornet fans to be concerned they are next. Having money allows teams like the Blazers to buy draft picks every year, while not having it causes the Suns to sell them. Money may not be the single most important factor, but its definitely a significant factor and one which I applaud the NBA if they actually do address it.
Wrong. The sonics moved after the city refused to build a new arena for the team. In any case, the owner was a native of OKC so it would seem like a logical move for him.
I think it's minor compared to the other stuff you just mentioned. But the main point is this money grab has to do with profitability, not winning. The winning/compeitive spin is bs. I'd rather have proper management in place and the right draft pick at the right time (i.e. the year LeBron came out as opposed to last draft) than an owner with deep pockets. The Washington govt and their feelings towards public support of stadiums, which is why Houston kept our teams, is the main reason why Seattle lost their team. You are right on about New Orleans but even then, it took the worst US disaster to kill than franchise. I think any cities team would suffer if they were "Katrina'd". And yet the Blazers have routinely been first round fodder while the Suns have been contenders, even while selling off their assets (they made the WCF 2 seasons ago). Why, because they had star players. There aren't that many Nash's out there. No one is saying the ability to spend doesn't have any impact, but not to the extent some are agruing.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Heat trio come in under the cap? So unless you put a franchise tag in the new CBA, which I believe they threw out already, then these changes won't prevent guys from deciding to hook up. Not as long as they are willing to sacrifice money, which the big 3 did (and committed to do even without the S&T). How will imposing a hard cap or a quasi hard cap via a hefty lux tax penalty prevent 2-3 guys from coming together under the cap and filling the rest of the roster with cheap ring chasers? The Spurs and Thunder have been managed to perfection. So have our Rockets. The difference is they landed legit studs in the draft and we didn't. Getting the right player is #1 in this scenario, management #2 and money #3 (IMO). Again I ask, where is the support that shows the ability to outspend everyone will lead to more wins? Edit: And if you believe Billy Hunter on this, Stern came to him with threats of a lockout years before the Miami trio hooked up. That's not why they want to change the system either, or at least not the primary reason. It's $$$$.
The rationale to wanting a new arena was due to the guess what? MONEY! The new owners, apart from being from OKC also preferred the market in OKC with its newer arena and market. One of the main reason Seattle failed to approved the new arena, was due to the lack of private funding which again is a function of money. The lack of suitors who wanted to buy the Sonics and keep them in Seattle is further evidence of whats apparent to everyone. Like it or not, money played a huge role in the Seattle losing its team, to pretend otherwise is naive.
But that had more to do with the government than the market. Houston has a good market. We lost our football team for the same reason (not building the owner a stadium). We learned our lesson and subsidized three new stadiums to keep our teams. IMO, the OKC boys just wanted to move the team to their hometown. Wouldn't you?
Everything you mentioned..... has absolutely nothing to do with the new CBA, one way or another - there will never be a CBA which will make the Thunder as valuable or as desirable a franchise as the Knicks. It's impossible. The fact that the Washington government refused to build a new stadium was the underlying factor. If the owners actually take revenue sharing seriously to balance things out, then I'll respect them. But they won't, and the fact that they won't means that Icehouse is right, and this "We want all the teams to be competitive" is bullcrap. Rather than taking money from the Lakers or the rich teams, the owners are going to get together to take it from the players. And while it's understandable, I sure as heck don't like it.
sheridanhoops Chris Sheridan Hearing owners and players are ordering dinner. That is a sign we could be in for a long night. No word if they are splitting tab 51/49. daldridgetnt David Aldridge Seven-plus hours today and counting. Which, as you should know by now, is indicative of absolutely nothing.
You're right, most of what you quoted does not refer to directly to the CBA, which should be apparent as it was in reply specifically to the singular subject of whether or not Money was the reason Seattle lost its franchise. The Washington govt refused to fully finance a new arena, due to the ONE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR, MONEY! The revenue generated by the Sonics in Seattle was not an attractive enough offer to neither voters to build a new arena nor to ANY potential buyers to buy and keep the team in Seattle. I dont know what the owners will or will not do with their attempts at revenue sharing. I doubt it will come close to even approaching the NFL's system, but wouldn't any attempt to fix the current situation, be an improvement? I dont personally care about the BRI argument 50-50, 53-47 as neither has any effect on me as a fan. I just want shorter contracts (or some buyout clause) and a higher lux tax rate which would along with more revenue sharing be used to help improve the spending disparity. As a fan, the two things I hate most asides from losing is, rooting for a team stuck with a Gilbert Arenas, Rashard Lewis, Baron Davis, Kelvin Cato, Stromile Swift contract and rooting on a team without the funds to buy draft picks and keep key players, just becuase of revenue.
Chris_Broussard Chris Broussard Source close to negotiations tells me sides "definitely making progress."
WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski A league source wired into bargaining session tells Y!: "There's a deal to be had if everyone shows a little flexibility."
Did you see this part of the article that I posted? If so, what's your take on it? Do you think the economist or the data that the author compiled is inaccurate? Also, here is a direct quote about the parity BS from a league official:
