2022-23 NBA Season Discussion

[Dr Positivity]

I have a hard time seeing it worth paying Kyrie 80 million a year to roast G league talent or people being interested in it. Basketball quality depends on teammates or competition compared to golf which should be able to recreate things relatively well with the guys they poached. For the latter it also helped that they will still be allowed to play the major tournaments therefore don't have to sacrifice that much chance at prestige, and the players are less paid making it easier to bowl them over.

[Doctor MJ]

I have a hard time seeing it worth paying Kyrie 80 million a year to roast G league talent or people being interested in it. Basketball quality depends on teammates or competition compared to golf which should be able to recreate things relatively well with the guys they poached. For the latter it also helped that they will still be allowed to play the major tournaments therefore don't have to sacrifice that much chance at prestige, and the players are less paid making it easier to bowl them over.

I don't think the success of AND-1 had anything to do with the player quality relative to the NBA - your defender is supposed to look like he was actually tricked by something a serious defender wouldn't have been tricked by after all, Washington Generals-style - nor do I think any hard core Kyrie fan really understands all that much about team basketball.

I think Kyrie's put himself in a tougher place now between his lack of post-NBA success, his horribly unprofessional behavior, and his stupid opinions, but there was a time when he was drastically more popular than his impact warranted and casual basketball fans could have bought the idea of "young NBA champion leaving to do his own thing". Heck, he might have been able to do with the backing of Nike, which would have helped all the more.

[sp6r=underrated]

The point about the euroleague taking NBA talent will happen.

Long term, I'm very skeptical rookie contract scale can be maintained even if basketball only maintains its current Euro popularity. Enterprising businesspersons will figure out a way to start generating significant revenue with that level of fan interest. Once that happens, I could see sports leagues offering long-term deals better than the rookie scale to entice top players pick Europe. I lived in Minneapolis. I spent the happiest years of my life there. I'd imagine Madrid at significantly better pay will appeal to some.

If Europe develops American level of popularity for basketball, I think the NBA CBA will be restructured. The owners managed to negotiate a great share of BRI. That will have to go up. I also don't know how max salaries will be maintained. And I expect owners will have to give grown and allow more relocation to markets that appeal to players (3-4 teams in NY/LA each).

I'm also very hopefully this kills the NCAA scam for good. UCLA/USC are joining the Big 10. At this point the universities aren't even maintaining the pretense of amateurism. Universities have decided to run professional sports programs. That should come with unions, contracts, salaries and normal negotiations.

American sports leagues have been operating in a period of stability for decades. There is no reason for that to last. The American League is called the Junior Circuit because it forced MLB to accept it as a merger. The AFC was the AFL and it was a full merger. The ABA wasn't quite as succesful but it still forced a partial merger.

[sp6r=underrated]

So which jerseys do you think will look weird decades later. I'm not talking about old guys hanging around, bouncing between teams, but rather players who spent prime years with teams that people will find bizarre in retrospect.

Some picks:



Lebron's Cav jerseys will never seem weird because of his Ohio roots. I suspect Lebron will be based out of LA and will show up at Lakers games in retirement. But Miami, I expect that jersey will look real weird to fans who don't remember it. Why did he pick Miami and not NY or LA? Why didn't he just stay with Cleveland? I suspect for people who don't remember it, it will be odd.



California kid beginning his career with a small market club will seem normal. California kid finishing career in California will always be normal. California kid spending 2 seasons in OKC and re-signing there. That is weird.

I don't think Kawhi-Toronto will be weird. Due to the Raptors enormous fanbase clips of him in Toronto will be aired constantly, probably more than his SA days.

[Dooley]

The point about the euroleague taking NBA talent will happen.

Long term, I'm very skeptical rookie contract scale can be maintained even if basketball only maintains its current Euro popularity. Enterprising businesspersons will figure out a way to start generating significant revenue with that level of fan interest. Once that happens, I could see sports leagues offering long-term deals better than the rookie scale to entice top players pick Europe. I lived in Minneapolis. I spent the happiest years of my life there. I'd imagine Madrid at significantly better pay will appeal to some.

I'm sure the popularity of basketball will continue to increase in Europe but it's going to take decades to get to the point where it's any kind of threat to the NBA. The gap in quality and compensation between the NBA and Europe at present is just so enormous, there's a really long way to go before the Euroleague taking NBA talent is a serious concern. Even someone like Mirotic, who's chosen to play in Europe for non-financial reasons - he'd be making like $10 million a year more to be a very good roleplayer in the NBA than he's currently making as one of the best players in Europe. Even rookie-scale contracts for lottery picks are more lucrative than basically any Euroleague contracts, and if you're good enough to make it to the 2nd contract it's totally not comparable.

[ceiling raiser]

Not sure where else to put this, but random thought --

Since we're collectively very high on Draymond Green because of his combination of defensive ability and ballhandling/playmaking, I wonder if we need to reconsider a guy like Jason Kidd.

Definitely balanced more toward the playmaking/ballhandling side, but also a very versatile defender.

Should Kidd get more play for top 20? I guess some of the impact metrics are neither here nor there. Especially considering in the 2022 NBA you really can't afford a weak link on defense.

[Doctor MJ]

So which jerseys do you think will look weird decades later. I'm not talking about old guys hanging around, bouncing between teams, but rather players who spent prime years with teams that people will find bizarre in retrospect.

Some picks:



Lebron's Cav jerseys will never seem weird because of his Ohio roots. I suspect Lebron will be based out of LA and will show up at Lakers games in retirement. But Miami, I expect that jersey will look real weird to fans who don't remember it. Why did he pick Miami and not NY or LA? Why didn't he just stay with Cleveland? I suspect for people who don't remember it, it will be odd.



California kid beginning his career with a small market club will seem normal. California kid finishing career in California will always be normal. California kid spending 2 seasons in OKC and re-signing there. That is weird.

I don't think Kawhi-Toronto will be weird. Due to the Raptors enormous fanbase clips of him in Toronto will be aired constantly, probably more than his SA days.

On that note, the GOAT of this topic:



Rasheed "The Hawk" Wallace

[Doctor MJ]

Not sure where else to put this, but random thought --

Since we're collectively very high on Draymond Green because of his combination of defensive ability and ballhandling/playmaking, I wonder if we need to reconsider a guy like Jason Kidd.

Definitely balanced more toward the playmaking/ballhandling side, but also a very versatile defender.

Should Kidd get more play for top 20? I guess some of the impact metrics are neither here nor there. Especially considering in the 2022 NBA you really can't afford a weak link on defense.

I don't follow the reasoning. Let's start with this:

Assuming you don't have Draymond Green in your Top 20 GOAT list, what makes you expect that Kidd was clearly and massively more valuable than Green?

[ceiling raiser]

Not sure where else to put this, but random thought --

Since we're collectively very high on Draymond Green because of his combination of defensive ability and ballhandling/playmaking, I wonder if we need to reconsider a guy like Jason Kidd.

Definitely balanced more toward the playmaking/ballhandling side, but also a very versatile defender.

Should Kidd get more play for top 20? I guess some of the impact metrics are neither here nor there. Especially considering in the 2022 NBA you really can't afford a weak link on defense.

I don't follow the reasoning. Let's start with this:

Assuming you don't have Draymond Green in your Top 20 GOAT list, what makes you expect that Kidd was clearly and massively more valuable than Green?

TBF I actually might by the end of his career. I probably have him top 30 or so now.

[ardee]

Let's say 2024 comes around and either Jokic or Doncic leads their team to the Gold, and then leaves the NBA to play full time in Europe. In a basketball world where globalization means that international players determine where the best basketball is being played, the NBA's dominance is potentially at risk if those international players no longer feel like proving themselves in the NBA is the goal of any top basketball player.

This would of course have to come with other leagues being willing and able to pay salaries at least in the ballpark of what the NBA pays, which might seem far-fetched, but it's not like European soccer clubs aren't already paying out cash on this scale. There will be forces in Europe that can pay that amount of money if they want, so it will be a question of whether the European fan market will justify paying that money.

I don't know how close that is to being a reality, but learning things like the fact that more RealGM GB posters are European now than American is pretty eye-opening. Surely was not the case when I joined the site.

What odds would you put on the NBA expanding to include European teams in say the next.... 15 years?

[jalengreen]

Let's say 2024 comes around and either Jokic or Doncic leads their team to the Gold, and then leaves the NBA to play full time in Europe. In a basketball world where globalization means that international players determine where the best basketball is being played, the NBA's dominance is potentially at risk if those international players no longer feel like proving themselves in the NBA is the goal of any top basketball player.

This would of course have to come with other leagues being willing and able to pay salaries at least in the ballpark of what the NBA pays, which might seem far-fetched, but it's not like European soccer clubs aren't already paying out cash on this scale. There will be forces in Europe that can pay that amount of money if they want, so it will be a question of whether the European fan market will justify paying that money.

I don't know how close that is to being a reality, but learning things like the fact that more RealGM GB posters are European now than American is pretty eye-opening. Surely was not the case when I joined the site.

What odds would you put on the NBA expanding to include European teams in say the next.... 15 years?

Question wasn’t for me but I think 15 years is too short of a timeframe for that. It’s probably realistic that the anticipated Seattle/Vegas expansion will be the only expansion that occurs in the next 15 years. And even beyond those two, there’s seemed to be more discussion about cities like Vancouver, Kansas City, Cincinnati, Louisville, San Diego, etc.

And the logistics are rough - same reason it’s hard to see an NFL team in London despite the annual games being played there. The distance just makes regular travel hard to see regardless of timeframe. The timezone difference would presumably tank TV ratings as well for European home games.

IIRC Silver has talked about a Mexico expansion in the past. I think that, while not something that I’d foresee happening in the next 15 years, might be more realistic logistically… but difficult from the perspective of convincing players to want to play in Mexico.

Something that would be cool would be a basketball Champions League where the best American teams compete against the best European teams. Of course, that would require them to be competitive which is certainly not the case currently.

[frica]

For the NBA? No.

But could I see a guy like Kyrie leaving the NBA and trying to monetize one-on-one and AND-1 style videos where only cult members are allowed to be present? Absolutely.

The real risk for the NBA is an enterprising businessperson figures out a way to make 3 on 3, half court basketball work. You need to tailor the rules carefully to ensure guys like Kyrie are the best players in the League and ensure no bigs.

But if you could design a league that resulted in players who play like Kyrie being the best players, that league really would have a market as a boxing style, Vegas centric PPV sport.

There wouldn't be a season at all. It would just be a random collection of games announced. One month Kyrie-Durant-Harden vs Curry-Lebron-Zion. And then in a two months the names are scrambled.

A lot of basketball fans really are player fans. They don't care at all about games without the stars hence the constant demands to shorten the regular season. And out of the player fans many of them plainly prefer the Kyrie Irvings of the world over other player types.

And there are a lot of players who really don't enjoy 5 on 5 basketball. Does Durant ever give the impression that he thinks the courts needs 10 people? Not that I'm aware of.

If you made a league were those guys dominated, I could see a real possibility of the basketball culture fracturing, with a portion of the audience following the PPV league and a portion of top players jumping over. The superstar centric player fans would like it without Danny Greens out there. Kyrie would like it because he could have a boxer's schedule.

Maybe 5% chance this happens over next 30 yrs.

I actually felt that during the Covid Hiatus, the NBA had a vulnerability to something like this getting formed. Had some enterprising players started something like that then with an effective plan, it could have potentially made enough money that players would decided to leave the NBA and do this instead.

Not suggesting that players en masse would ever stop playing in the NBA when an NBA team still owed them $100,000,000+ more in salary so long as they reported for work, but once the door got opened there, you could see a player like Kyrie deciding he didn't need the NBA any more.

Now, Kyrie frankly doesn't seem like a big enough deal that him leaving would necessarily be devastating for the NBA, but if someone had Kyrie's aesthetic game with his wacko brain and was a bit more effective as a competitive 5 on 5 player, it could end up being a big deal.

Imagine Jordan stepping away from the Bulls after the first 3 peat in an era with social media. If the best and most popular player in the world leaves the NBA, look out. And then you'd get into the ugly realities of a league like the NBA being unable to easily downsize. If the NBA loses 20% of its revenue while still being on the hook for contracts they made in headier days, a whole host of problems will come to the fore.

Realistically now though, given how unimportant Kyrie is to the NBA, I think the possibly bigger threat to the NBA comes with the future of the Olympics.

Let's say 2024 comes around and either Jokic or Doncic leads their team to the Gold, and then leaves the NBA to play full time in Europe. In a basketball world where globalization means that international players determine where the best basketball is being played, the NBA's dominance is potentially at risk if those international players no longer feel like proving themselves in the NBA is the goal of any top basketball player.

This would of course have to come with other leagues being willing and able to pay salaries at least in the ballpark of what the NBA pays, which might seem far-fetched, but it's not like European soccer clubs aren't already paying out cash on this scale. There will be forces in Europe that can pay that amount of money if they want, so it will be a question of whether the European fan market will justify paying that money.

I don't know how close that is to being a reality, but learning things like the fact that more RealGM GB posters are European now than American is pretty eye-opening. Surely was not the case when I joined the site.

European leagues don't have a history of salary caps, and Europeans don't like the US style system of leagues.

They only need to be able to pay the big stars which should be doable with a sufficiently big market.
Not sure if Doncic and Jokic have the reach though.

But an exciting English, French or German prospect might very well.
Just needs a cute smile and a golden mouth.

[MartinToVaught]

The only active player in the league with enough business acumen and gravitas to potentially start their own league is LeBron, and he would never do that because he has aspirations of owning an NBA team after he retires.

Silver would be laughing his ass off behind closed doors at NBA HQ if the likes of Kyrie or KD tried to start their own players' league. It wouldn't even get off the ground because the commissioner would be too busy arguing with 10-year-olds on Twitter.

[sp6r=underrated]

Again the AFL forced the NFL into a full merger. The ABA was able to force a partial merger. The Premier League is only 30 yrs old.

Just because a rival North American league hasn't happened in our lifetime doesn't mean we won't see rival leagues formed to take on the current majors.

Frankly, I'd like to see one. There are a lot of bad things about the NBA that a competitor could eliminate.

[Doctor MJ]

Let's say 2024 comes around and either Jokic or Doncic leads their team to the Gold, and then leaves the NBA to play full time in Europe. In a basketball world where globalization means that international players determine where the best basketball is being played, the NBA's dominance is potentially at risk if those international players no longer feel like proving themselves in the NBA is the goal of any top basketball player.

This would of course have to come with other leagues being willing and able to pay salaries at least in the ballpark of what the NBA pays, which might seem far-fetched, but it's not like European soccer clubs aren't already paying out cash on this scale. There will be forces in Europe that can pay that amount of money if they want, so it will be a question of whether the European fan market will justify paying that money.

I don't know how close that is to being a reality, but learning things like the fact that more RealGM GB posters are European now than American is pretty eye-opening. Surely was not the case when I joined the site.

What odds would you put on the NBA expanding to include European teams in say the next.... 15 years?

I don't think it's feasible until supersonic flight becomes available for team transport. I don't think it's likely that this is in the cards at this point given the death of the Concord, but should the industry come back and cross over, then I think it becomes something the NBA will strongly consider trying.

[Doctor MJ]

The only active player in the league with enough business acumen and gravitas to potentially start their own league is LeBron, and he would never do that because he has aspirations of owning an NBA team after he retires.

Silver would be laughing his ass off behind closed doors at NBA HQ if the likes of Kyrie or KD tried to start their own players' league. It wouldn't even get off the ground because the commissioner would be too busy arguing with 10-year-olds on Twitter.

While I won't deny that Kyrie & KD have no proven a complete inability to come up with plans that logistically realistic, I do want to emphasize:

I'm not talking about a situation where an American basketball player creates a league that dethrones the NBA, but rather creates something that damages the NBA and leaves the NBA in a situation where they can no longer be profitable without downsizing to some degree, which could end up causing a bunch more problems.

When you have a monopoly on all the top basketball players in the world, someone else doesn't have to surpass you in order to hurt you.

[sp6r=underrated]

The only active player in the league with enough business acumen and gravitas to potentially start their own league is LeBron, and he would never do that because he has aspirations of owning an NBA team after he retires.

Silver would be laughing his ass off behind closed doors at NBA HQ if the likes of Kyrie or KD tried to start their own players' league. It wouldn't even get off the ground because the commissioner would be too busy arguing with 10-year-olds on Twitter.

While I won't deny that Kyrie & KD have no proven a complete inability to come up with plans that logistically realistic, I do want to emphasize:

I'm not talking about a situation where an American basketball player creates a league that dethrones the NBA, but rather creates something that damages the NBA and leaves the NBA in a situation where they can no longer be profitable without downsizing to some degree, which could end up causing a bunch more problems.

When you have a monopoly on all the top basketball players in the world, someone else doesn't have to surpass you in order to hurt you.

Look at the ABA it never reached parity with the NBA but it forced a merger and I'm sure the NBA would have preferred being able to tell the Nets/Spurs/Pacers/Nuggets, only one of whom represented a major market to bug off.

[falcolombardi]

The only active player in the league with enough business acumen and gravitas to potentially start their own league is LeBron, and he would never do that because he has aspirations of owning an NBA team after he retires.

Silver would be laughing his ass off behind closed doors at NBA HQ if the likes of Kyrie or KD tried to start their own players' league. It wouldn't even get off the ground because the commissioner would be too busy arguing with 10-year-olds on Twitter.

While I won't deny that Kyrie & KD have no proven a complete inability to come up with plans that logistically realistic, I do want to emphasize:

I'm not talking about a situation where an American basketball player creates a league that dethrones the NBA, but rather creates something that damages the NBA and leaves the NBA in a situation where they can no longer be profitable without downsizing to some degree, which could end up causing a bunch more problems.

When you have a monopoly on all the top basketball players in the world, someone else doesn't have to surpass you in order to hurt you.

Look at the ABA it never reached parity with the NBA but it forced a merger and I'm sure the NBA would have preferred being able to tell the Nets/Spurs/Pacers/Nuggets, only one of whom represented a major market to bug off.

Correct me if am wrong but the nba had been agressively expanding for a decade before the merger and not always to the biggest markets

The only big market team of the aba (nets) was forced to mpve to a small one over knicks pressure, is a small miracle lakers didnt do the same to clippers (maybe because they were not as stablished of a powerhouse/money cow at the time as the knicks?)

And the small/big markets ar the time were not exactly the same ones as today, phoenix was not nearly as big at the time for example, amd the nba still expanded there

[Doctor MJ]

The only active player in the league with enough business acumen and gravitas to potentially start their own league is LeBron, and he would never do that because he has aspirations of owning an NBA team after he retires.

Silver would be laughing his ass off behind closed doors at NBA HQ if the likes of Kyrie or KD tried to start their own players' league. It wouldn't even get off the ground because the commissioner would be too busy arguing with 10-year-olds on Twitter.

While I won't deny that Kyrie & KD have no proven a complete inability to come up with plans that logistically realistic, I do want to emphasize:

I'm not talking about a situation where an American basketball player creates a league that dethrones the NBA, but rather creates something that damages the NBA and leaves the NBA in a situation where they can no longer be profitable without downsizing to some degree, which could end up causing a bunch more problems.

When you have a monopoly on all the top basketball players in the world, someone else doesn't have to surpass you in order to hurt you.

Look at the ABA it never reached parity with the NBA but it forced a merger and I'm sure the NBA would have preferred being able to tell the Nets/Spurs/Pacers/Nuggets, only one of whom represented a major market to bug off.

Indeed, and the roots of the ABA's success came from the NBA turning their nose up at some of the basketball talent that was around at the time - and thus foregoing the monopoly they could have had - so we're not talking about two entirely different types of phenomena here.

Though I will say that the old NBA was letting a LOT more basketball talent slip through their fingers than the current one is, and KD & Kyrie probably aren't going to be able to get other NBA players earning NBA money to go on some other venture with them given how they've behaved in Brooklyn. (Maybe the Brooklyn behavior doesn't even matter, but it surely doesn't help.)

[Doctor MJ]

While I won't deny that Kyrie & KD have no proven a complete inability to come up with plans that logistically realistic, I do want to emphasize:

I'm not talking about a situation where an American basketball player creates a league that dethrones the NBA, but rather creates something that damages the NBA and leaves the NBA in a situation where they can no longer be profitable without downsizing to some degree, which could end up causing a bunch more problems.

When you have a monopoly on all the top basketball players in the world, someone else doesn't have to surpass you in order to hurt you.

Look at the ABA it never reached parity with the NBA but it forced a merger and I'm sure the NBA would have preferred being able to tell the Nets/Spurs/Pacers/Nuggets, only one of whom represented a major market to bug off.

Correct me if am wrong but the nba had been agressively expanding for a decade before the merger and not always to the biggest markets

The only big market team of the aba (nets) was forced to mpve to a small one over knicks pressure, is a small miracle lakers didnt do the same to clippers (maybe because they were not as stablished of a powerhouse/money cow at the time as the knicks?)

And the small/big markets ar the time were not exactly the same ones as today, phoenix was not nearly as big at the time for example, amd the nba still expanded there

I think it's interesting to look at the chronology here with an eye toward the leagues that were trying to compete with them, the ABL and the ABA.

'59-60: 8 teams
'60-61: 8 (creation of ABL)
'61-62: 9 (ABL collapses in 2nd season)
'62-63: 9
'63-64: 9
'64-65: 9
'65-66: 9
'66-67: 10
'67-68: 12 (creation of the ABA)
'68-69: 14
'69-70: 14
'70-71: 17
'71-72: 17
'72-73: 17
'73-74: 17
'74-75: 18
'75-76: 18
'76-77: 22 (NBA-ABA merger, 18 NBA + 4 ABA teams)

The NBA was very cautious about adding new franchises for the better part of two decades, but something changes in the mid-to-late '60s around the same time the ABA gets off the ground. What's the deal?

Well, my understanding is that the NBA was putting a high price on buying into the league, and so the guys who formed the ABA basically did so because they weren't willing to pay that price. There's more to it than that of course, but to the extent that "location matters", it's pretty amazing the way location standards for NBA teams seemed to get way less picky once cities started getting claimed by the ABA.

Here's a fun thing to consider:

These were the original cities of the ABL in 1961, along with relevant basketball information:

Chicago Majors - no team in Chicago at the time, the NBA would launch the Chicago Zephers the next year and then move the teams away from Chicago after the ABL died. The Zephers would become the new Baltimore Bullets before eventually becoming the Washington Wizards. Chicago would not launch a successful NBA franchise until the Bulls in '66-67...and there would be no ABA team placed in Chicago the following year.

Cleveland Pipers - no team in Cleveland at the time, the NBA would launch the Cavaliers during the ABA battle.

Kansas City Steers - no team in Kansas City at the time, the NBA would move the Cincinnati Royals during the ABA battle.

Hawai'i Chiefs - uh, that was probably not a realistic idea in the first place.

Los Angeles Jets - team didn't make it through the season, Lakers moving to LA the prior year probably had a lot to do with that. Interesting as you say things became different in the '80s with the Clippers. We know Jerry Buss wasn't happy about it but refrained from vetoing it, which was in his power. It seems likely to me that his previous friendship with Sterling, as well as Sterling's financial support as Buss was trying to buy the Lakers, made Buss feel more pressure that he would have otherwise felt. Also, we know that Sterling was trying to sell the team while it was in San Diego because he was losing money there, so this wasn't a more modern situation like when the San Diego Chargers left for LA out of sheer avarice. This was a situation where the franchise was probably going to end up moving or folding no matter what Sterling's involvement was.

San Francisco Saints - NBA would move the Warriors to SF within a couple years after this

Washington Tapers - no DC team in the NBA at the time, but remember that the NBA would soon move one nearby.

Pittsburgh Rens - the most interesting story of the bunch to me. Pittsburgh has a LONG history of basketball but in the '60s the team had Connie Hawkins first win the ABL MVP with the Rens and then win the ABA MVP, Playoff MVP & Championship with the Pittsburgh Pipers (no relation to Cleveland Pipers that I'm award of), yet were never able to draw enough to catch-on as a pro basketball market. Also there's the Pittsburgh Pisces of the movie "The Fish that Saved Pittsburgh" starring Julius Erving, while also featuring a ton of basketball pros including, you guessed it, an old Connie Hawkins playing on the Lakers with Kareem (despite the Hawk being retired several years by that point).

Anyway, I go through all of this because I think what happened here is that the emerging threat of rival leagues - kicked into high gear by the ABA actually getting superstar talents and developing its own style that would go on to eventually re-shape the NBA itself - is what drove the NBA to see expansion as a way to keep rivals from stealing territory - both geographically and talent .