Does Dallas seem like it should be more of a FA attraction?

[sp6r=underrated]

They get linked to a lot of players when they don’t even have cap space sometimes, makes this perception that they miss out get exaggerated. Miami is the same way, gets meetings with FA when they don’t even have cap sometimes.

My general view.

Tier 1 Cities (only 2): NY, LA, these clubs have a permanent advantage over other markets. Lakers leveraged it successfully for decades. Knicks squandered it historically. Clippers began taking advantage of it is when Ballmer took over. Nets when they mover to Brooklyn. There is a big gap between these teams and teams in the 2nd tier. And when you combine smart management with this advantage, like the Lakers did with West, you can run wild.

Tier 2: quite a few cities (not exclusive: Dallas, Miami, Atlanta, GSW, DC, Chicago, Houston): these cities either produce a lot of players or have a good business climate that allows them to spend $$$. if your city produces free agents that helps with signings/retetention. If your city has $$$ that makes it easier to front a large payroll.

Tier 3 Small Markets: these teams operate at a real disadvantage. Not attractive to free agents. Not able to spend significant $$. And when you see a sustained run of success in one of the markets like the Spurs run under Pop or the Jazz which had no titles but won a lot recognize that if they were operating in a tier 2 market or even a tier 1 market they probably achieve a lot more.

Tier 4 Relocation: Teams only enter this zone when you combine a small market with management that wants out or an indifferent fanbase that forces relocation.

You do know GSW is not a city. San Francisco is a better market than Dallas .

Considering I live in the Western Addition I am aware San Francisco is a city.

Dallas and SF are in the same tier of cities. If you want to argue SF is above Dallas fine.- But neither is in the same tier as NYC/LA

[Jonny Blaze]

They get linked to a lot of players when they don’t even have cap space sometimes, makes this perception that they miss out get exaggerated. Miami is the same way, gets meetings with FA when they don’t even have cap sometimes.

My general view.

Tier 1 Cities (only 2): NY, LA, these clubs have a permanent advantage over other markets. Lakers leveraged it successfully for decades. Knicks squandered it historically. Clippers began taking advantage of it is when Ballmer took over. Nets when they mover to Brooklyn. There is a big gap between these teams and teams in the 2nd tier. And when you combine smart management with this advantage, like the Lakers did with West, you can run wild.

Tier 2: quite a few cities (not exclusive: Dallas, Miami, Atlanta, GSW, DC, Chicago, Houston): these cities either produce a lot of players or have a good business climate that allows them to spend $$$. if your city produces free agents that helps with signings/retetention. If your city has $$$ that makes it easier to front a large payroll.

Tier 3 Small Markets: these teams operate at a real disadvantage. Not attractive to free agents. Not able to spend significant $$. And when you see a sustained run of success in one of the markets like the Spurs run under Pop or the Jazz which had no titles but won a lot recognize that if they were operating in a tier 2 market or even a tier 1 market they probably achieve a lot more.

Tier 4 Relocation: Teams only enter this zone when you combine a small market with management that wants out or an indifferent fanbase that forces relocation.

You do know GSW is not a city. San Francisco is a better market than Dallas .

Is it really???

The typical NBA player is going to come from a place like Dallas more than they are San Francisco.

I don't see San Francisco as beinh any more appealing to a young african american man than Dallas or Houston.

[Raps in 4]

The only teams to make big splashes in free agency over the past 20 years were the Lakers, Clippers, Warriors (all California teams), Brooklyn, and Miami.

I don't see Miami or New York being players again for a while, or the Dubs once Steph retires. LAL is the only consistently desirable FA destination. It doesn't matter how poorly the team is doing, there will always be a lineup of superstars trying to sign there, or demanding to be traded there.

[HiDef]

After 2011 they gutted the roster and never made it past the first round until this year.

If any other owner was as delusional as Cuban, trying to sign superstars in the middle of a rebuild, it wouldn't work out for them either

[sp6r=underrated]

My general view.

Tier 1 Cities (only 2): NY, LA, these clubs have a permanent advantage over other markets. Lakers leveraged it successfully for decades. Knicks squandered it historically. Clippers began taking advantage of it is when Ballmer took over. Nets when they mover to Brooklyn. There is a big gap between these teams and teams in the 2nd tier. And when you combine smart management with this advantage, like the Lakers did with West, you can run wild.

Tier 2: quite a few cities (not exclusive: Dallas, Miami, Atlanta, GSW, DC, Chicago, Houston): these cities either produce a lot of players or have a good business climate that allows them to spend $$$. if your city produces free agents that helps with signings/retetention. If your city has $$$ that makes it easier to front a large payroll.

Tier 3 Small Markets: these teams operate at a real disadvantage. Not attractive to free agents. Not able to spend significant $$. And when you see a sustained run of success in one of the markets like the Spurs run under Pop or the Jazz which had no titles but won a lot recognize that if they were operating in a tier 2 market or even a tier 1 market they probably achieve a lot more.

Tier 4 Relocation: Teams only enter this zone when you combine a small market with management that wants out or an indifferent fanbase that forces relocation.

You do know GSW is not a city. San Francisco is a better market than Dallas .

Is it really???

The typical NBA player is going to come from a place like Dallas more than they are San Francisco.

I don't see San Francisco as beinh any more appealing to a young african american man than Dallas or Houston.

They're similar in appeal. It could be argued either way. Oakland probably is more appealing than SF.

I'd imagine, but don't know most NBA players live in Oakland Hills, Piedmont rather than SF.

[timO]

Luka has to be pissed off, that they let Brunson walk for nothing.

in 2-3 years of first round exits he will demand a trade.

[NZB2323]

They get linked to a lot of players when they don’t even have cap space sometimes, makes this perception that they miss out get exaggerated. Miami is the same way, gets meetings with FA when they don’t even have cap sometimes.

My general view.

Tier 1 Cities (only 2): NY, LA, these clubs have a permanent advantage over other markets. Lakers leveraged it successfully for decades. Knicks squandered it historically. Clippers began taking advantage of it is when Ballmer took over. Nets when they mover to Brooklyn. There is a big gap between these teams and teams in the 2nd tier. And when you combine smart management with this advantage, like the Lakers did with West, you can run wild.

Tier 2: quite a few cities (not exclusive: Dallas, Miami, Atlanta, GSW, DC, Chicago, Houston): these cities either produce a lot of players or have a good business climate that allows them to spend $$$. if your city produces free agents that helps with signings/retetention. If your city has $$$ that makes it easier to front a large payroll.

Tier 3 Small Markets: these teams operate at a real disadvantage. Not attractive to free agents. Not able to spend significant $$. And when you see a sustained run of success in one of the markets like the Spurs run under Pop or the Jazz which had no titles but won a lot recognize that if they were operating in a tier 2 market or even a tier 1 market they probably achieve a lot more.

Tier 4 Relocation: Teams only enter this zone when you combine a small market with management that wants out or an indifferent fanbase that forces relocation.

Nobody goes to LA in FA, only an aging Lebron.

Ny the same, until KD and KI. Now i remember STAT.

Clips since Kawhi.

Really the majority of BIG FA chase money, so they go to franchises who offer him the max, and between them, they choose then.

Shaq and Dwight Howard went to LA in free agency.

Wilt requested a trade to LA so he could be around fellow celebrities and LA was the only place at the time where it was socially acceptable for a black man to be dating white women.

Kareem wanted to be traded to New York or LA, so he could be in a big city with more Muslims.

Steve Nash joined the Lakers in a sign and trade, and decided LA was the best city for his family.

LA historically has been the best FA destination.

[sp6r=underrated]

My general view.

Tier 1 Cities (only 2): NY, LA, these clubs have a permanent advantage over other markets. Lakers leveraged it successfully for decades. Knicks squandered it historically. Clippers began taking advantage of it is when Ballmer took over. Nets when they mover to Brooklyn. There is a big gap between these teams and teams in the 2nd tier. And when you combine smart management with this advantage, like the Lakers did with West, you can run wild.

Tier 2: quite a few cities (not exclusive: Dallas, Miami, Atlanta, GSW, DC, Chicago, Houston): these cities either produce a lot of players or have a good business climate that allows them to spend $$$. if your city produces free agents that helps with signings/retetention. If your city has $$$ that makes it easier to front a large payroll.

Tier 3 Small Markets: these teams operate at a real disadvantage. Not attractive to free agents. Not able to spend significant $$. And when you see a sustained run of success in one of the markets like the Spurs run under Pop or the Jazz which had no titles but won a lot recognize that if they were operating in a tier 2 market or even a tier 1 market they probably achieve a lot more.

Tier 4 Relocation: Teams only enter this zone when you combine a small market with management that wants out or an indifferent fanbase that forces relocation.

Nobody goes to LA in FA, only an aging Lebron.

Ny the same, until KD and KI. Now i remember STAT.

Clips since Kawhi.

Really the majority of BIG FA chase money, so they go to franchises who offer him the max, and between them, they choose then.

Shaq and Dwight Howard went to LA in free agency.

Wilt requested a trade to LA so he could be around fellow celebrities and LA was the only place at the time where it was socially acceptable for a black man to be dating white women.

Kareem wanted to be traded to New York or LA, so he could be in a big city with more Muslims.

Steve Nash joined the Lakers in a sign and trade, and decided LA was the best city for his family.

LA historically has been the best FA destination.

I don't know how anyone could argue LA isn't a draw. If you got money and work in entertainment, which athletes do, LA will always be an appeal

[Dirk]

I feel confident they'll be the team to get Kyrie Irving...

Yeah I'm thinking the same right now.

Nets and Lakers are talking about a trade but Shams said the Sixers and Mavs are also interested in Kyrie. Sixers beat writers have contradicted that but I don't think anyone in Dallas has said it's not true.

Meanwhile the Mavs lost Brunson and now Dragic went to the Bulls after lots of speculation he'd end up in Dallas. And I have to think the Mavs can offer something better than Russ.

We offer sharpshooter Davis Bertans, THJr and Dwight Powell for Kyrie and Joe Harris.

[Jonny Blaze]

Great city, charismatic owner, usually good teams contending or on the fringe. Even going back to the 00’s era cant remember a lot of notable FA signings.

Cap space is a problem of course, but im surprised one of these years a marquee FA hasnt wanted to go to Dallas with Luka and Dirk and the history there. Never really hear rumors linking any to them either.

The fact that Dallas is in Texas is going to turn some free agents off because it's a very conservative state, and Dallas is thought of as particularly conservative versus some other cities in the state. Kind of a similar issue with Utah and they've long had problems with race and recruiting.

Are you sure about this....or are you just speaking in a bunch of generalizations?

Maybe Dallas is "thought of" as particularly conservative by you...but the truth is that Dallas County(not the city proper, but the county) votes well over 60% for the Democrats candidate for President (65-33 Biden over Trump in 2020)...and its been this way for the past 15-20 years.

In regards to the bolded.....thats kind of ridiculous. Have you ever been to Dallas?
Dallas is about 50% non white. Dallas is nothing like Salt Lake City.

Have you ever been to a Mavericks game?
If you go to a Mavs game....I promise you you will see an abundance of non white people at Mavs (and Cowboys) games.

There is nothing that Houston has that Dallas does not.
People that have never been to Texas are always surprised at how diverse Texas is...especially in its largest cities.

[Nate505]

You do know GSW is not a city. San Francisco is a better market than Dallas .

Is it really???

The typical NBA player is going to come from a place like Dallas more than they are San Francisco.

I don't see San Francisco as beinh any more appealing to a young african american man than Dallas or Houston.

They're similar in appeal. It could be argued either way. Oakland probably is more appealing than SF.

I'd imagine, but don't know most NBA players live in Oakland Hills, Piedmont rather than SF.

Back in the late 80s (when I grew up in the Bay Area) many Warrior and As players lived in Alameda, specifically Bay Farm Island. It had the advantage of being really nice, having great views of SF, and being really damn close to the arena complex and the airport (god knows if anything has changed, but the neighborhoods directly around the Coliseum were really sketchy back then). I do imagine many lived in the Hills and Piedmont as well. I remember running into Manute Bol (well me and a dozen other kids) at a Safeway in Bay Farm Island when I was a kid. It was shocking how tall and skinny he was.

I'm pretty curious if things have changed since the move to San Francisco. Now the convivence of Oakland to the arena is gone. It might not be enough for them to move though.

[timO]

My general view.

Tier 1 Cities (only 2): NY, LA, these clubs have a permanent advantage over other markets. Lakers leveraged it successfully for decades. Knicks squandered it historically. Clippers began taking advantage of it is when Ballmer took over. Nets when they mover to Brooklyn. There is a big gap between these teams and teams in the 2nd tier. And when you combine smart management with this advantage, like the Lakers did with West, you can run wild.

Tier 2: quite a few cities (not exclusive: Dallas, Miami, Atlanta, GSW, DC, Chicago, Houston): these cities either produce a lot of players or have a good business climate that allows them to spend $$$. if your city produces free agents that helps with signings/retetention. If your city has $$$ that makes it easier to front a large payroll.

Tier 3 Small Markets: these teams operate at a real disadvantage. Not attractive to free agents. Not able to spend significant $$. And when you see a sustained run of success in one of the markets like the Spurs run under Pop or the Jazz which had no titles but won a lot recognize that if they were operating in a tier 2 market or even a tier 1 market they probably achieve a lot more.

Tier 4 Relocation: Teams only enter this zone when you combine a small market with management that wants out or an indifferent fanbase that forces relocation.

Nobody goes to LA in FA, only an aging Lebron.

Ny the same, until KD and KI. Now i remember STAT.

Clips since Kawhi.

Really the majority of BIG FA chase money, so they go to franchises who offer him the max, and between them, they choose then.

Shaq and Dwight Howard went to LA in free agency.

Wilt requested a trade to LA so he could be around fellow celebrities and LA was the only place at the time where it was socially acceptable for a black man to be dating white women.

Kareem wanted to be traded to New York or LA, so he could be in a big city with more Muslims.

Steve Nash joined the Lakers in a sign and trade, and decided LA was the best city for his family.

LA historically has been the best FA destination.

Howard came by trade, and he goes the prior year to Houston

LA is a good destination to get TRADED, not for FA.

[Bank Shot]

Not really. Luka (and Dirk before him) have masked some of the organizational issues they've had. They've been a **** show behind the scenes on both the basketball side and the business side lately.

[sp6r=underrated]

Is it really???

The typical NBA player is going to come from a place like Dallas more than they are San Francisco.

I don't see San Francisco as beinh any more appealing to a young african american man than Dallas or Houston.

They're similar in appeal. It could be argued either way. Oakland probably is more appealing than SF.

I'd imagine, but don't know most NBA players live in Oakland Hills, Piedmont rather than SF.

Back in the late 80s (when I grew up in the Bay Area) many Warrior and As players lived in Alameda, specifically Bay Farm Island. It had the advantage of being really nice, having great views of SF, and being really damn close to the arena complex and the airport (god knows if anything has changed, but the neighborhoods directly around the Coliseum were really sketchy back then). I do imagine many lived in the Hills and Piedmont as well. I remember running into Manute Bol (well me and a dozen other kids) at a Safeway in Bay Farm Island when I was a kid. It was shocking how tall and skinny he was.

I'm pretty curious if things have changed since the move to San Francisco. Now the convivence of Oakland to the arena is gone. It might not be enough for them to move though.

The area around the Coliseum is still not the best. If you have money you ain't living there but like the rest of the country crime is way lower than the 80s.

I live in SF, saving up to get out, but I wouldn't think athletes would live in the actual city. It is a pretty quiet city. Nothing close to NYC. And the people with money out here, Techbros, are culturally as far from jocks as possible.

If you want a quiet suburban life, I think the East Bay Affluent suburbs or Marin (if fine with the drive) offer a better deal. If you want city life, I think Oakland offers more of what NBA players want than SF, but admittedly I've aged out of going out late at night.

[CobraCommander]

We have no evidence that Dallas and Luka can’t attract a FA…

What happened with Dirk doesn’t apply to today.

City doesn’t matter- if city mattered Atlanta or Miami would win the title every year. If you 200mil rich you bring the “party to you”. Plus for the people on here that don’t realize this - you can’t wear a 200k necklace in the areas YOU GUYS think nba players hang lol.

Either way - I’m thinking Luka and the mavs gonna get their share of players at some point when his peer group starts looking around at where they can team Up and win…

The mavs problem is making sure Luka doesn’t decide to go to LA or Boston or Miami for various reasons. They need to make moves THIS year to show Luka he ain’t on a treadmill

[KidPistol]

Why do people assume NYC is a huge free agent destination. I’ve yet to see NYC attract multiple stars to go play for them.

[picc]

Not really. Luka (and Dirk before him) have masked some of the organizational issues they've had. They've been a **** show behind the scenes on both the basketball side and the business side lately.

As opposed to who?

The Lakers?

The Knicks?

C'mon bruh.

[SelfishPlayer]

The only real FA attraction is LA and maybe Miami, let's not fool ourselves. And that's only for stars wanting to rub with Hollywood in LA and Miami being as close to a 24/7 vacation city as one can get.

After that, all the cities pretty much have the same appeal for most. NYC in particular is a vastly overrated as FA destination.

People post statistical data to support every part of basketball except for backing up their belief of NBA players desiring NYC as a top free agent destination or even top trade destination.

[SelfishPlayer]

Great city, charismatic owner, usually good teams contending or on the fringe. Even going back to the 00’s era cant remember a lot of notable FA signings.

Cap space is a problem of course, but im surprised one of these years a marquee FA hasnt wanted to go to Dallas with Luka and Dirk and the history there. Never really hear rumors linking any to them either.

The fact that Dallas is in Texas is going to turn some free agents off because it's a very conservative state, and Dallas is thought of as particularly conservative versus some other cities in the state. Kind of a similar issue with Utah and they've long had problems with race and recruiting.

Are you sure about this....or are you just speaking in a bunch of generalizations?

Maybe Dallas is "thought of" as particularly conservative by you...but the truth is that Dallas County(not the city proper, but the county) votes well over 60% for the Democrats candidate for President (65-33 Biden over Trump in 2020)...and its been this way for the past 15-20 years.

In regards to the bolded.....thats kind of ridiculous. Have you ever been to Dallas?
Dallas is about 50% non white. Dallas is nothing like Salt Lake City.

Have you ever been to a Mavericks game?
If you go to a Mavs game....I promise you you will see an abundance of non white people at Mavs (and Cowboys) games.

There is nothing that Houston has that Dallas does not.
People that have never been to Texas are always surprised at how diverse Texas is...especially in its largest cities.

You use the term "non white" in your post as if everyone outside of white people share a monolithic experience.

[Shock Defeat]

Simple, most stars that want to team up are black, while Europeans don't have the same superteam mentality. Plus there is pretty big rivalries within European countries anyway. Those guys aren't really friends unless they are from the same country.

There's just a lot more opportunity for black American players to know each other and befriend one another. Dallas has had two foreign superstars that don't have connections in the league.