Most efficient/wasteful franchises ($$$)

Moderators: bwgood77, zimpy27, infinite11285, Clav, Domejandro, ken6199, bisme37, Dirk, KingDavid, cupcakesnake

User avatar
2poor
RealGM
Posts: 11,684
And1: 1
Joined: Dec 17, 2006
Location: I'm from the city in the midwest best city in the whole wide wide world

Most efficient/wasteful franchises ($$$) 

Post#1 » by 2poor » Fri Apr 4, 2008 7:27 pm

From SI.com

Most efficient:

1.) Hornets ($1.11M per win)
2.) Jazz ($1.12M per win)
T-4.) Pistons ($1.14M per win)
T-4.) Magic ($1.14M per win)
5.) Celtics ($1.15M per win)

Most wasteful:

1.) Heat ($5.39M per win)
2.) Knicks ($4.33M per win)
3.) Sonics ($3.18M per win)
4.) T'Wolves ($3.05M per win)

read the full story here
loserX
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Posts: 45,496
And1: 26,048
Joined: Jun 29, 2006
       

 

Post#2 » by loserX » Fri Apr 4, 2008 8:14 pm

Pretty impressive that the Pistons are still up there. Dumars knows what he's doing.
User avatar
BirdIsDaKing
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,497
And1: 320
Joined: Jul 09, 2005

 

Post#3 » by BirdIsDaKing » Fri Apr 4, 2008 8:17 pm

...knicks should be number one through five
Image

We still won more games than the 72 dolphins.....
Red Robot
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,352
And1: 127
Joined: Oct 12, 2005
 

 

Post#4 » by Red Robot » Fri Apr 4, 2008 8:37 pm

Stuff like this doesn't take into account salary structure of the NBA, or the fact that most players are on multi-year deals. To really find out who's most efficient, you'd need to look at past and future team performance. For example, the Heat just won a title and they're still paying for it. The Hornets and Jazz have their star point guards on rookie contracts in part because they got high lottery picks a couple years ago. (Just an example; both teams are actually pretty impressive considering they each had some large free agent signings that drew a lot of criticism.)
RockTHECasbah
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,526
And1: 10
Joined: Oct 05, 2007

 

Post#5 » by RockTHECasbah » Fri Apr 4, 2008 8:39 pm

I agree. Take the aggregate over the last 5 or 10 years.
Know anyone who is disabled? has an addiction?
Image
HandyTax - Your Canadian Disability Tax Credit Consultants
http://www.handytax.ca
Slava
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 61,133
And1: 33,820
Joined: Oct 15, 2006
     

 

Post#6 » by Slava » Fri Apr 4, 2008 9:30 pm

Not surprising because Hornets/Jazz and Magic have thier franchise players still on rookie contracts.
:king: + :angry: = :wizard:
User avatar
Cruel_Ruin
Head Coach
Posts: 6,091
And1: 767
Joined: Nov 05, 2006
Location: The intersection of intellect, imagination and insanity
   

 

Post#7 » by Cruel_Ruin » Fri Apr 4, 2008 9:50 pm

j-far wrote:Not surprising because Hornets/Jazz and Magic have thier franchise players still on rookie contracts.


:nod:
Anticon
General Manager
Posts: 8,268
And1: 5,252
Joined: Dec 16, 2004

 

Post#8 » by Anticon » Fri Apr 4, 2008 9:54 pm

I agree with the point about rookie contracts and long term success. Although in today's NBA it is practically necessary to have one or two contributing players on rookie contracts, since you're essentially paying them nearly nothing. Rookie contracts are a big part of flexibility.

Taking from that, you would think the Pistons are the most efficient team. And they probably are, based on the current salaries of their starting 5. But they've always utilized guys on rookie contracts to succeed - Prince, Okur, Stuckey, Maxiell- so it's not like they're immune from that problem.
User avatar
Cruel_Ruin
Head Coach
Posts: 6,091
And1: 767
Joined: Nov 05, 2006
Location: The intersection of intellect, imagination and insanity
   

 

Post#9 » by Cruel_Ruin » Fri Apr 4, 2008 9:56 pm

Anticon wrote:I agree with the point about rookie contracts and long term success. Although in today's NBA it is practically necessary to have one or two contributing players on rookie contracts, since you're essentially paying them nearly nothing. Rookie contracts are a big part of flexibility.

Taking from that, you would think the Pistons are the most efficient team. And they probably are, based on the current salaries of their starting 5. But they've always utilized guys on rookie contracts to succeed - Prince, Okur, Stuckey, Maxiell- so it's not like they're immune from that problem.


Agreed that Detroit is the most efficient franchise. But still, you can't call a franchise efficient when you have MVP type players (CP3, Deron, Howard) who would easily be max deals, still on Rookie deals.
RockTHECasbah
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,526
And1: 10
Joined: Oct 05, 2007

 

Post#10 » by RockTHECasbah » Fri Apr 4, 2008 10:13 pm

Even if you increase Paul's salary the franchise is still efficient, not superefficient, but efficient
Know anyone who is disabled? has an addiction?
Image
HandyTax - Your Canadian Disability Tax Credit Consultants
http://www.handytax.ca
SlickWilly8
Junior
Posts: 443
And1: 0
Joined: Sep 17, 2007

 

Post#11 » by SlickWilly8 » Fri Apr 4, 2008 10:19 pm

BirdIsDaKing wrote:...knicks should be number one through five
:nod:
User avatar
G-Heel
Head Coach
Posts: 6,252
And1: 365
Joined: Feb 11, 2006
Location: Injured
       

 

Post#12 » by G-Heel » Fri Apr 4, 2008 10:34 pm

No Spurs? I think they're the most efficient franchise, able to win without high salaries. Most wasteful have to be Knicks.
Fire Otis!
Alex_De_Large
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,718
And1: 45
Joined: May 05, 2007

 

Post#13 » by Alex_De_Large » Fri Apr 4, 2008 11:01 pm

sonics and wolves are not really there, the players who got more money don't even play...
Hemingway
Banned User
Posts: 3,725
And1: 3
Joined: Jan 11, 2005

 

Post#14 » by Hemingway » Fri Apr 4, 2008 11:37 pm

Not that it is all that much, but the Wolves are wasting Walker. I mean, whats the deal here? I'm sure they could work some sort of buyout I can't imagine he wants to stay there.

My team, The Celtics, are set up pretty well as far as efficiency goes. The big are paid a lot but deliver, Rondo plays well above his rookie pay, Posey plays a bit above what he is paid and Brown and Cassell are in on the cheap as well. The real key however is having no one on the bench eating up big bucks. The only tiny bit of dead weight is Scalabrine but aparently he is a great practice player and lockerroom guy so who cares.
User avatar
andyhop
Analyst
Posts: 3,628
And1: 1,320
Joined: May 08, 2007
   

 

Post#15 » by andyhop » Sat Apr 5, 2008 12:48 am

Hemingway wrote:Not that it is all that much, but the Wolves are wasting Walker. I mean, whats the deal here? I'm sure they could work some sort of buyout I can't imagine he wants to stay there.

My team, The Celtics, are set up pretty well as far as efficiency goes. The big are paid a lot but deliver, Rondo plays well above his rookie pay, Posey plays a bit above what he is paid and Brown and Cassell are in on the cheap as well. The real key however is having no one on the bench eating up big bucks. The only tiny bit of dead weight is Scalabrine but aparently he is a great practice player and lockerroom guy so who cares.


Walker wants every penny he is owed in a buyout from the reports ,whilst the Wolves want a decent discount on his remaining contract amount to buy him out .If they don't get that they will keep him around to see if they can use his expiring deal to work a trade and if that fails they will buy him out sometime after the trade deadline next year.

Walker sees himself as entitled to leave with all the cash because he won't get playing time and the Wolves see him as a potential trade asset that they won't give up without there being a benefit for them.
"Football is not a matter of life and death...it's much more important than that."- Bill Shankley
tmorgan
RealGM
Posts: 14,278
And1: 9,781
Joined: Feb 04, 2005
Location: San Francisco, CA
   

 

Post#16 » by tmorgan » Sat Apr 5, 2008 1:03 am

Joe D, while not the world's best drafter (especially with lottery picks), has this category on lock. No wasteful contracts, and when he makes a mistake, he owns up to it almost immediately and makes a move (shipping Nazr out, for example).

Return to The General Board