Unrivaled 3v3 League (January 2025)

[Doctor MJ]

Another legendary playoff performance by Chelsea Grey. Weird to say someone so venerated is underrated, but I feel like she tends to get slotted a tier down from the very best, and she really shouldn't be.

[ellobo]

Now that the season is over, I've got to say that I thoroughly enjoyed the first season of Unrivaled. Here are a few observations/opinions off the top of my head:

The full court/short court 3 on 3 format absolutely worked and is much better than the FIBA half court game. It looks like real basketball and you get the same familiar back-and-forth rhythm of the traditional game, and almost every detail that they tweaked was successful.

The short court and the 18 second shot clock led to a fast pace and a good balance of transition basketball and half court execution. The spacing allowed for iso opportunities, but the short shot clock put a premium on getting into actions quickly and executing smartly. The extra spacing did not mean a steady diet of hero ball as a first option became a winning strategy, but it was still a huge advantage to have players who could create something on their own.

Even with 7 minute quarters and the untimed fourth, the games didn't feel too short. The pace was high and intense and there were enough possessions for runs back and forth throughout the game. Personally, I'd like to see the target score margin increased from 11 points, which I think would allow more fourth quarter comebacks. It seemed like a lot of games were mostly decided by the start of the fourth and the games felt more like a three quarter game with a short ending added, rather than a four quarter game.

The one free throw thing worked fine. I didn't love it or hate it, although empty possessions based on missing one free throw reminded me of the old "one and one" college rule, which I did hate. On the other hand, getting two or three points for one make probably balances it out overall. Although I'm not a big fan of FIBA 3x3, one thing I do like is that they don't keep track of personal fouls, so players never have to sit due to foul trouble. They just have penalties based on the number of team fouls, which is plenty of incentive not to hack indiscriminately, but keeps the stars in the game. I'd love to see that in Unrivaled, and really become adopted more widely in general.

I really enjoyed the one on one tournament. It was very competitive, and the matchups of different types and sizes of players were intriguing. The very short shot clock helped minimize the ability of bigs to just back down smaller players. The outlet passer format was another interesting wrinkle, and was almost compulsory to use because it delayed the start of the shot clock. Otherwise, clearing the ball could take half your shot clock time. It also allowed players to set up possessions after a defensive rebound out of triple threat, or for catch and shoot three pointers, rather than always off the dribble. The two consecutive non-shooting fouls resulting in a free throw was great too. It allowed players to foul strategically, but not so much that it destroyed the flow.

It was great seeing a mix of stars doing what they do, and young players or role players taking on new and often bigger roles.

A couple of things stood out to me that could be improved, aside from the officiating (which can always be better).

One is management of injuries. I don't think it makes sense to expand rosters too much because if a team is healthy there will be too few minutes to go around. But I felt like the relief player system wasn't well thought out, and kind of an afterthought, and the players who participated were a bit random. Hiedeman was great, and Ariel Atkins and Naz Hillmon were good and played in some key situations. With NaLyssa Smith, teams were like, "Nah, we'll just play shorthanded." I think recruiting players to the relief pool more purposefully, with a few bigs, wings, and guards to match the role of the players they replace, and figuring out how to maintain some continuity when a regular player is out for an extended time, would be nice. Instead of every team having end of the bench, non-rotation players in reserve, it would be like a common shared end of the bench, so the league wouldn't have to carry more full time regulars who don't actually play.

Another is TV production, especially the lack of replays and camera angles, which seemed very lacking compared to typical basketball broadcasts. Even on coaches' challenges, the refs would be looking at replays on a monitor, but we almost never saw what they were seeing, just team huddles or commercial breaks.

Finally, I'd like to see a lot more extensive statistics and analytics.

[Doctor MJ]

Now that the season is over, I've got to say that I thoroughly enjoyed the first season of Unrivaled. Here are a few observations/opinions off the top of my head:

The full court/short court 3 on 3 format absolutely worked and is much better than the FIBA half court game. It looks like real basketball and you get the same familiar back-and-forth rhythm of the traditional game, and almost every detail that they tweaked was successful.

The short court and the 18 second shot clock led to a fast pace and a good balance of transition basketball and half court execution. The spacing allowed for iso opportunities, but the short shot clock put a premium on getting into actions quickly and executing smartly. The extra spacing did not mean a steady diet of hero ball as a first option became a winning strategy, but it was still a huge advantage to have players who could create something on their own.

Even with 7 minute quarters and the untimed fourth, the games didn't feel too short. The pace was high and intense and there were enough possessions for runs back and forth throughout the game. Personally, I'd like to see the target score margin increased from 11 points, which I think would allow more fourth quarter comebacks. It seemed like a lot of games were mostly decided by the start of the fourth and the games felt more like a three quarter game with a short ending added, rather than a four quarter game.

The one free throw thing worked fine. I didn't love it or hate it, although empty possessions based on missing one free throw reminded me of the old "one and one" college rule, which I did hate. On the other hand, getting two or three points for one make probably balances it out overall. Although I'm not a big fan of FIBA 3x3, one thing I do like is that they don't keep track of personal fouls, so players never have to sit due to foul trouble. They just have penalties based on the number of team fouls, which is plenty of incentive not to hack indiscriminately, but keeps the stars in the game. I'd love to see that in Unrivaled, and really become adopted more widely in general.

I really enjoyed the one on one tournament. It was very competitive, and the matchups of different types and sizes of players were intriguing. The very short shot clock helped minimize the ability of bigs to just back down smaller players. The outlet passer format was another interesting wrinkle, and was almost compulsory to use because it delayed the start of the shot clock. Otherwise, clearing the ball could take half your shot clock time. It also allowed players to set up possessions after a defensive rebound out of triple threat, or for catch and shoot three pointers, rather than always off the dribble. The two consecutive non-shooting fouls resulting in a free throw was great too. It allowed players to foul strategically, but not so much that it destroyed the flow.

It was great seeing a mix of stars doing what they do, and young players or role players taking on new and often bigger roles.

A couple of things stood out to me that could be improved, aside from the officiating (which can always be better).

One is management of injuries. I don't think it makes sense to expand rosters too much because if a team is healthy there will be too few minutes to go around. But I felt like the relief player system wasn't well thought out, and kind of an afterthought, and the players who participated were a bit random. Hiedeman was great, and Ariel Atkins and Naz Hillmon were good and played in some key situations. With NaLyssa Smith, teams were like, "Nah, we'll just play shorthanded." I think recruiting players to the relief pool more purposefully, with a few bigs, wings, and guards to match the role of the players they replace, and figuring out how to maintain some continuity when a regular player is out for an extended time, would be nice. Instead of every team having end of the bench, non-rotation players in reserve, it would be like a common shared end of the bench, so the league wouldn't have to carry more full time regulars who don't actually play.

Another is TV production, especially the lack of replays and camera angles, which seemed very lacking compared to typical basketball broadcasts. Even on coaches' challenges, the refs would be looking at replays on a monitor, but we almost never saw what they were seeing, just team huddles or commercial breaks.

Finally, I'd like to see a lot more extensive statistics and analytics.

I co-sign all of this! Well stated.

Biggest thing for me is how well the full-court game worked compared to half-court. I think the reality is that half-court is great for playing with a small number of players...but not so exciting to watch.

[boogiezen]

Meh. Unrivaled was not a good product outside of that 1 on 1 which was intriguing.

[hermes]

how were the ratings? did a lot of people watch?

[Green Chile]

how were the ratings? did a lot of people watch?

Recent Reddit post said 230K/game average. Not out of this world, but better than NWSL type things.

Not sure totally sure, though, and I have no idea what sort of numbers TNT was hoping for.

[Jamaaliver]

Read on Twitter

[bisme37]

Where is Unrivaled getting all this money from to where they can pay 4 times more than WNBA? (Honest question)

[hermes]

they have fewer players to spread the money across, that's one thing (like 140 some compared to 30 some)

[MrDollarBills]

Where is Unrivaled getting all this money from to where they can pay 4 times more than WNBA? (Honest question)

Less players, a lucrative TV deal with Turner Sports, and they have a crap ton of sponsorships. They also made $27m in revenue in Season 1.

Stewie and Phee have done the lord's work here. The ladies get paid and can stay home, and the league is only getting started.

Cathy might wanna start getting consultations

[MrDollarBills]

Unrivaled marketing also blows the WNBA out of the water. It's really sad.

[Green Chile]

Malonga is in!!!!

The last of the main 48 players to be announced (I think it'll be 6-8 players in the relief pool still to be announced).
Dom broke her contract with Fenerbahce to do it, and they are none too pleased.

I'm really excited to see her and Brink, and think it'll be great for them.

Unfortunately, Angel and Dijonai won't be playing this season.

[Doctor MJ]

Where is Unrivaled getting all this money from to where they can pay 4 times more than WNBA? (Honest question)

Less players, a lucrative TV deal with Turner Sports, and they have a crap ton of sponsorships. They also made $27m in revenue in Season 1.

Stewie and Phee have done the lord's work here. The ladies get paid and can stay home, and the league is only getting started.

Cathy might wanna start getting consultations

Piggy backing in agreement but wanting to emphasize:

There are so many costs to the NBA-WNBA style traditional season that really are unnecessary for producing a TV episode of something, and so think of Unrivaled as a group coming in simply trying to make TV episodes.

I have mixed feelings about this because tons of normal people’s livelihoods are partially supported by the “physical plant” of NBA-WNBA games in an arena which people making the physical trek and spending along the way.

But on a certain level I see a shift like this as inevitable.

I remember saying during the Pandemic that I could see Kyrie leaving the NBA and doing some online basketball thing instead. Can’t make as much revenue that way, but can you make enough to pay a few star’s millions? Yes, you can.

And it’s way, way, way easier to succeed in this way when all you have to do is match/surpass WNBA salaries which aren’t just lower than the NBA, but have to this point been held lower than they really should have because the WNBA wasn’t making a profit because the WNBA has so many NBA style costs built in.

The reckoning of the WNBA nkw actually being profitable should allow for the opportunity to easily outbid Unrivaled, but owners aren’t exactly enthusiastic about having to do this because a) they don’t like spending money period and b) the WNBA probably won’t be profitable in actuality until the TV contracts kick in, and unfortunately due to bad luck (and lack of foresight) the new CBA needs to be agreed to before the owners get that juicy new revenue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Menace2Sobriety]

Do the revenues for Unrivaled support an expansion to include most / all WNBA players?

I could imagine a regional format played in 4 fixed locations, with playoffs and finals in other fixed locations would increase sponsorships and TV revenue sufficiently they could go on strike…not dissimilar to the NCAA tournament (except w/ league play).

[Doctor MJ]

Do the revenues for Unrivaled support an expansion to include most / all WNBA players?

I could imagine a regional format played in 4 fixed locations, with playoffs and finals in other fixed locations would increase sponsorships and TV revenue sufficiently they could go on strike…not dissimilar to the NCAA tournament (except w/ league play).

I don't think so. It's conceivable that maybe they eventually could, but I'd also say that were I asked to advise Unrivaled, I push back against this as a goal. Good to expand with demand, bad to explicitly try to pattern yourself to match the dinosaur whose lack of flexibility is allowing you to thrive.

There's a key element here that's not the most pleasant to admit:

Only stars actually matter for revenue because no one actually want to watch the 51st/101st/whatever-and-1st best player for the sake of watching them. The relevance of non-stars is really just about support for stars and the quality that a larger team can support.

This is actually a wedge that the WNBA should be looking to potentially exploit in labor negotiation: "Why are you letting star players run your union when they are actively selling you out by joining another league they don't think your worthy of joining?".

But at the same time, on a practical level, if all the elite players of the W leave, absolutely no one will care about the W any more, and if the WNBA doesn't realize this - because they're too far up their own a** with the idea that "WNBA made the opportunity for Caitlin Clark" - they're going to ruin this for themselves.

The potential beauty of Unrivaled for WNBA labor negotiation of course is that if it successfully forces the WNBA to pay the stars more, and those stars stand in firm solidarity with the rank & file, it should be a rising tide lifting all boats in a way they rank & file players really couldn't expect to ever do without the stars.

[Doctor MJ]

Where is Unrivaled getting all this money from to where they can pay 4 times more than WNBA? (Honest question)

Less players, a lucrative TV deal with Turner Sports, and they have a crap ton of sponsorships. They also made $27m in revenue in Season 1.

Stewie and Phee have done the lord's work here. The ladies get paid and can stay home, and the league is only getting started.

Cathy might wanna start getting consultations

Also, on the deal with Turner:

We shouldn't ignore the factor of the NBA choosing to leave TNT - the most pro-basketball network in the American landscape - and thus putting Turner in a situation where where Unrivaled is the only other pro basketball game in town.

I think it's clear that the WNBA expected Unrivaled to die on the vine unable to get a good TV deal, in part because that's part of how the WNBA killed the ABL back in the '90s. But, as some may have noticed, the TV/streaming landscape is far different today, partially because of choices the NBA made to chop out networks willing to give them good money, and this allowed the Unrivaled team to swoop in and get a TV deal early in their planning, and this made all the difference when it came time to offer salaries.

It's entirely possible that if the NBA hadn't kicked TNT to the curb, then Unrivaled would never have been a serious threat to the WNBA.

[hermes]

the new tv deal money kicking next year is more or less locked in right (provided the games are actually played)?

i know the owners don't want to spend any money at all but it just seems so incredibly short sighted to complain about spending some now (while they may not be making any profits, or not much) while a huge windfall awaits them in less than a year. especially since if they don't spend a little now, they might not see the windfall next year

also cash wouldn't even be trading hands until next year anyway right? don't players only get paid during the season? i suppose there might be signing bonuses in free agency

[Doctor MJ]

the new tv deal money kicking next year is more or less locked in right (provided the games are actually played)?

i know the owners don't want to spend any money at all but it just seems so incredibly short sighted to complain about spending some now (while they may not be making any profits, or not much) while a huge windfall awaits them in less than a year. especially since if they don't spend a little now, they might not see the windfall next year

also cash wouldn't even be trading hands until next year anyway right? don't players only get paid during the season? i suppose there might be signing bonuses in free agency

Yup. The NBA/WNBA/Owners collectively seem remarkably shortsighted given that this is an experiment that began 29 years ago.

You'd think that an organization that had the stomach for more than a quarter century of struggles would find it easy deal with the relatively short amount of time it'll take before the profits come in, but that isn't what we've seen to this point.

It says a lot of things that are interesting, but one of them is this:

I think it's pretty clear that NBA owners who were also WNBA owners felt trapped losing money for a long time for reasons that were not "I don't care if I lose money, this is too important!". I think for many in these circumstances, the reason they didn't fold their franchises like some in the past had a lot to do with a) public relations, and b) Commissioner relations. They felt that it was better to lose a little money - and let's be clear, to these owners, whatever money they lost was peanuts compared to their net worth - that deal with the relationship consequences of killing their WNBA franchise.

So for these owners, now that that profit is so close they can taste, they seem like they may have a petty "We eat first, then you'll get yours" perspective that implies that all these female ballers "owe" the owners for years in the red. Hence I'd say that it's critical for the NBA-WNBA's management to figure out how to get all of "their people" in line behind the scenes before the negotiations with the players can happen rationally.

This isn't to say that owner's petty emotions are the only issues here of course. It really seems like the way the NBA set up the structure of the WNBA within the realm of the NBA is central to the problem here. I'd expect the NBA did it in this way because it made things easier at the start, and if the WNBA were a near-immediate success, it wouldn't have cause major problems. After all, if the NBA pushes owners into investing in the WNBA and those owners immediately start seeing profit from that investment, 'sall good. But after decades in the red, a move into the black casts light on to all the little contract details that can turn alliance into factions.