"Only way to avoid 'super teams' is to impose a hard cap."

smith2373 · Post #301 » by **smith2373** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 5:03 am

Why does no one ever respond to this post I make. Can someone please respond.

People talk about how SO much more parity the NFL has than the NBA.

Since 2000, 21 out of the 30 NBA teams have made it to a Conference Finals series,
Since 2000, 23 out of the 32 NFL teams have made it to a Conference Championship game.

In the last 10 seasons, there have been 7 different NFL teams to win the Super Bowl.
In the last 10 seasons, there have been 6 different NBA teams to win the NBA title.

What's your explanation for that? I thought the NFL had so much more parity than the NBA?

EvanZ · Post #302 » by **EvanZ** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 5:05 am

The way to avoid super teams is to increase the max salary. Right now it's 35% of the cap for 5-7 year players. Make it 50% or more. Hell, make it unlimited.

This works for two reasons: 1) Salaries for top stars start to mean as much or more than advertising revenue. 2) Players are competitive and teams will have to decide which players to make the top dog. Let's see LeBron take $15M when he could be getting $30M or $40M somewhere. And if Miami gave him $40M, how much of a paycut would Bosh and Wade take?

bullsnewdynasty · Post #303 » by **bullsnewdynasty** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 5:21 am

Agenda42 wrote:
RutgersBJJ wrote:None of this matters if management in ownership in Cleveland, Orlando, Denver, Utah, and New Orleans showed that they were either incompetent (Cleveland, Orlando, and New Orleans) or cheap (Denver, Utah, and New Orleans).

In what way did Denver and Utah show that they were cheap?

LOL, yeah that doesn't make much sense. At least D-Will was traded. Melo demanded out to NY. You could argue that Melo was never going to win a championship in Denver, but it's not like New York was necessarily a better situation in terms of winning/quality of the front office. It was simply Melo wanting to play in a big market.

In the interests of increasing league wide competition, I have to agree though that the salary cap system is broken and needs to be fixed for small market teams to have any viability long term. Small market teams are essentially becoming farm systems for certain large market teams (LA most notably). While teams with bird rights do have some small advantages in terms of being able to offer an extra year, there needs to be a system that puts small market teams on an even playing field with the NY's and LA's. I think a hard cap, unguaranteed contracts (w/signing bonus, like NFL), and NO CAP ON MAX SALARIES would do the trick. I know this would never happen because the union would never agree to it. But in this system, stars are going to have to turn down lots of $$ if they want to sign with teams who have other stars making big money. In this system, if a team has more than 1 star, they're probably going to have to fill out the roster with below average players, unless a star takes a huge paycut.

Agenda42 · Post #304 » by **Agenda42** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 7:48 am

smith2373 wrote:In the last 10 seasons, there have been 7 different NFL teams to win the Super Bowl.
In the last 10 seasons, there have been 6 different NBA teams to win the NBA title.

What's your explanation for that? I thought the NFL had so much more parity than the NBA?

Keep looking backwards. You'll find that the NBA has the same short list of teams winning, while the NFL has different ones. Here's some numbers to compare:

15 NFL teams have won a championship since 1980. The most common championship team over that period was the 49ers, with 4 titles. Overall, 20 different franchises have won multiple championships since 1960. 4 teams have never played in the Super Bowl.

10 NBA teams have won a championship since 1980. The most common championship team over that period was the Lakers, with 10 titles. Overall, 12 different franchises have won multiple championships since 1960. 9 teams have never played in the Finals.

The appeal of the NFL isn't that great teams somehow don't exist. It's that every franchise has the chance to build a great team, and that your team's location and market size is not a major disadvantage in building that team.

PetroNet · Post #305 » by **PetroNet** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:15 pm

Agenda42 wrote:
PetroNet wrote:
DiscoLives4ever wrote:
I believe the idea of NFL comparisons is that in the NFL any team with proper management could potentially compete regardless of market size/location. Some teams will choose to go cheap on management and stay terrible, but in the NFL you succeed by being good at management, not being in a good location or having an owner with deep pockets.

that sounds fun.... but its just not reality.

NFL titles:

Pittsburg 6
Dallas 5
New York 4
San Fran 5
LA/Oakland 4
New England 3
Miami 2

Total: 29

Everyone Else: 17

and of that "everyone else" the packers have 4, most came with lombardi, the greatest coach ever, in the very early stages of the league when there were just a handful of teams.

29 of 46 titles by big markets

Neilsen rankings of NFL media markets with multiple Super Bowl titles:

#23 Pittsburgh 6 titles
#5 Dallas 5 titles
#6 San Francisco / Oakland / San Jose, 49ers 5 titles, Raiders 3 titles
#71 Green Bay 4 titles
#1 New York Giants 4 titles, Jets 1 title
#9 Washington 3 titles
#7 Boston 3 titles
#27 Indianapolis 2 titles
#17 Denver 2 titles
#16 Miami 2 titles

You have to torture this data pretty intensely to come to the conclusion that big markets are dominating the Super Bowl.

Really.... i see 18 titles between the #1/#5, #6 markets alone. and thats not counting boston... for whom i dont think anyone would consider a medium sized market.

PetroNet · Post #306 » by **PetroNet** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:16 pm

smith2373 wrote:Why does no one ever respond to this post I make. Can someone please respond.

People talk about how SO much more parity the NFL has than the NBA.

Since 2000, 21 out of the 30 NBA teams have made it to a Conference Finals series,
Since 2000, 23 out of the 32 NFL teams have made it to a Conference Championship game.

In the last 10 seasons, there have been 7 different NFL teams to win the Super Bowl.
In the last 10 seasons, there have been 6 different NBA teams to win the NBA title.

What's your explanation for that? I thought the NFL had so much more parity than the NBA?

i posted the same.... crickets. its because they know they are wrong.

for instance that one guy said the NFL had 9 different winners the past 10 years. when i showed he was 100% false i got no response

Tim_Hardawayy · Post #307 » by **Tim_Hardawayy** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 12:57 pm

Why the **** are people even bothering to compare the NFL and the NBA without acknowledging the 16 game season or single elimination playoffs? Do people actually believe the NBA wouldn't be FULL of parity with those 2 additions alone?

So unless someone actually wants to suggest those changes, I don't want to hear a single NFL - NBA comparison on the subject of which league has more parity.

nyc6 · Post #308 » by **nyc6** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 1:08 pm

If LAL, OKC, MIA are moved to a separate playoff brackets, then the NBA playoffs would be wide open and as exciting as college basketball and football playoffs

it's not a suggestion it's a mere fact- there would be 8-10 contenders if those 3 teams were separated which is much more exciting then just 3-4 contenders. the NBA playoffs last year were extremely boring outside the mem/lac series.

eatyourchildren · Post #309 » by **eatyourchildren** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 1:36 pm

Let's just go sudden death playoffs. Problem solved. All you need is to get your team into the playoffs and you can have a cinderella run like the NCAA.

Sark · Post #310 » by **Sark** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 1:52 pm

Agenda42 wrote:
smith2373 wrote:In the last 10 seasons, there have been 7 different NFL teams to win the Super Bowl.
In the last 10 seasons, there have been 6 different NBA teams to win the NBA title.

What's your explanation for that? I thought the NFL had so much more parity than the NBA?

Keep looking backwards. You'll find that the NBA has the same short list of teams winning, while the NFL has different ones. Here's some numbers to compare:

15 NFL teams have won a championship since 1980. The most common championship team over that period was the 49ers, with 4 titles. Overall, 20 different franchises have won multiple championships since 1960. 4 teams have never played in the Super Bowl.

10 NBA teams have won a championship since 1980. The most common championship team over that period was the Lakers, with 10 titles. Overall, 12 different franchises have won multiple championships since 1960. 9 teams have never played in the Finals.

The appeal of the NFL isn't that great teams somehow don't exist. It's that every franchise has the chance to build a great team, and that your team's location and market size is not a major disadvantage in building that team.

MLB surprisingly has the most unique champions since 1980 with 19, and in that time it has only seen 1 dynasty form, whereas the NFL had 3. Even with the salary cap in the NFL, the Patriots were able to form a dynasty during the last decade.

BadMofoPimp · Post #311 » by **BadMofoPimp** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 2:13 pm

Who would watch the Bucks or Raptors with average players if the Lakers and Heat always had the top 10 players in the league amongst them?

What would be the use of rooting for the Bucks and Raptors at that point?

Everyone is not a Heat, Knicks or Lakers fan. This is why there will always be a salary cap. Thus, all those can cry that the greedy players are not getting paid enough. Yeh, right. They are getting paid more than they are worth already.

Don Draper · Post #312 » by **Don Draper** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 2:30 pm

BadMofoPimp wrote:Who would watch the Bucks or Raptors with average players if the Lakers and Heat always had the top 10 players in the league amongst them?

Any fan who isn't fair-weather.

What would be the use of rooting for the Bucks and Raptors at that point?

So you're telling us you are fair-weather fan?

Everyone is not a Heat, Knicks or Lakers fan. This is why there will always be a salary cap. Thus, all those can cry that the greedy players are not getting paid enough. Yeh, right. They are getting paid more than they are worth already.

Have no idea what you're trying to say here.

clevceltics · Post #313 » by **clevceltics** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 2:30 pm

BadMofoPimp wrote:Who would watch the Bucks or Raptors with average players if the Lakers and Heat always had the top 10 players in the league amongst them?

What would be the use of rooting for the Bucks and Raptors at that point?

Everyone is not a Heat, Knicks or Lakers fan. This is why there will always be a salary cap. Thus, all those can cry that the greedy players are not getting paid enough. Yeh, right. They are getting paid more than they are worth already.

Again you are assuming that the Bucks and Raptors are run as well as the Heat or the Lakers. They have not had the same level of administrators as the a Heat. People are going to watch the Bucks just not on a national level.

Agenda42 · Post #314 » by **Agenda42** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 2:46 pm

PetroNet wrote:Really.... i see 18 titles between the #1/#5, #6 markets alone. and thats not counting boston... for whom i dont think anyone would consider a medium sized market.

Okay fine, I'll do some statistical analysis to demonstrate the point. Let's compare the top 10 teams by market size and bottom 10 teams by market size in both leagues, and see how many championships they win.

The top 8 media markets have 10 NFL franchises. Out of 46 Super Bowls, those 10 teams have won a total of 24 times. Were the league controlled by random chance, one would expect 10 franchises to have won approximately 40% of the titles based on how many teams have existed in the league, and they actually won 52%.

Markets ranked 22 and higher have 10 NFL franchises. Out of 46 Super Bowls, those 10 teams have won a total of 15 times. Were the league controlled by random chance, one would expect 10 franchises to have won approximately 40% of the titles, and they actually won 32%.

The top 8 media markets have 10 NBA franchises. Out of 70 NBA Championships, those 10 teams have won a total of 51 championships. Were the league controlled by random chance, one would expect 10 franchises to have won approximately 45% of the titles, and they actually won 73%.

Markets ranked 19 and higher have 10 NBA franchises. Out of 70 NBA Championships, those teams have won a total of 9 times. Were the league controlled by random chance, one would expect 10 franchises to have won approximately 45% of the titles, and they actually won 12%.

Based on these data (I presume that you don't want to see even more maths), I can conclude that the big market / small market bias is approximately 9.3 times stronger in the NBA than in the NFL.

BadMofoPimp · Post #315 » by **BadMofoPimp** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 2:55 pm

Cry all you want, but a capless system will never happen because a capped system is the best system and obviously it works. Thus, I reckon that people should create a capless NBA2k13 season to fulfill their capless fantasy. Debate over. Capped system already won years ago. Your Welcome -BMP

EvanZ · Post #316 » by **EvanZ** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 2:58 pm

BadMofoPimp wrote:Who would watch the Bucks or Raptors with average players if the Lakers and Heat always had the top 10 players in the league amongst them?

What would be the use of rooting for the Bucks and Raptors at that point?

Indeed, sometimes I wonder the same thing. Hell, I'm a Warriors fan, and I wonder why I keep rooting for them.

clevceltics · Post #317 » by **clevceltics** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 2:59 pm

I have an idea. How about we get rid of every franchise that has come into the league since 86? If we do that and have a dispersal draft then teams could pick from the following players LeBron, Wade, Bosh, Love, A Davis, Gay, M Gasol, Rivers, Gilchrist, Randolph, and Gordon just to name a few. That would give Indy, Det, Cleveland, Mil alot of talent to chose from.
See these plenty of solutions to this superteam issue.

Don Draper · Post #318 » by **Don Draper** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 3:05 pm

BadMofoPimp wrote:Cry all you want, but a capless system will never happen because a capped system is the best system and obviously it works. Thus, I reckon that people should create a capless NBA2k13 season to fulfill their capless fantasy. Debate over. Capped system already won years ago. Your Welcome -BMP

When logic fails resort to trolling. You haven't changed from last summer.

"The NBA has a salary cap, therefore its the best system"
:roll:

BadMofoPimp · Post #319 » by **BadMofoPimp** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 3:06 pm

EvanZ wrote:
BadMofoPimp wrote:Who would watch the Bucks or Raptors with average players if the Lakers and Heat always had the top 10 players in the league amongst them?

What would be the use of rooting for the Bucks and Raptors at that point?

Indeed, sometimes I wonder the same thing. Hell, I'm a Warriors fan, and I wonder why I keep rooting for them.

It seems obvious to me that those that are for a capless system are either Big Market fans or friends with NBA players while they think they are underpaid. Fortunately, probably at the very least 90% of the NBA's fans don't agree with a capless system while they think the NBA players are overpaid already.

Don Draper · Post #320 » by **Don Draper** » Tue Aug 21, 2012 3:07 pm

BadMofoPimp wrote:
It seems obvious to me that those that are for a capless system are either Big Market fans or friends with NBA players while they think they are underpaid. Fortunately, probably at the very least 90% of the NBA's fans don't agree with a capless system while they think the NBA players are overpaid already.

This is a joke right?

Fortunately, probably at the very least 90% of the NBA's fans don't agree with a capless system while they think the NBA players are overpaid already.

From thin air once again.

Is hard cap the only way to avoid "super teams"?