How much would NBA players be worth ?

Mr. Savage · Post #1 » by **Mr. Savage** » Wed Jun 4, 2008 12:21 pm

If there were transfer fees and no trades in the NBA, how much would certain NBA players be worth ?

Real Madrid has apparently offered a transfer fee of 100 million Euro (155 Million USD) for Cristiano Ronaldo, who is arguably the best football player in the world right now.

He would also make 13 million Euro (20 million USD) per year After taxes.

What would certain NBA players make in an open market ?

Post #2 » by **Basti** » Wed Jun 4, 2008 1:08 pm

well it's hard to compare soccer players to basketball players because they have other values moneywise. I'm not sure how it is in america but I guess endorsemend deals plus putting people in the seats etc have another impact.

thamadkant · Post #3 » by **thamadkant** » Wed Jun 4, 2008 1:17 pm

Soccer is a bit different, as literally, the entire Europe is hardcore FANS, I'm talking about HARDCORE...

In the states (US), you have various sports taking away revenue from each other, NBA fans, NFL fans, NHL, MLB... and soon Soccer...

NBA is considered world wide, but basketball isnt very big in europe, its second to soccer, but the ration would be 75/25... or even less.

Soccer is also HUGE down in South America... so the amount of hardcore fans counts big time... also, it really is considered a world game, because there are so many good teams and every team in the top 10 rankings are MEGA events, even if just friendly's.

One reason Stern wants to conquer China.... heck, giving the Spurs rings didnt even elevate it pass soccer down in Argentina.... hehe ;-)

J/K

but in a more serious note, its for the NBA's best interest to get as much euros, south americans, asian players into the NBA as soon as possible....

D-31 · Post #4 » by **D-31** » Wed Jun 4, 2008 2:10 pm

LeBron might be able to be worth a $500 million dollar transfer fee to join the Knicks.

gjn19 · Post #5 » by **gjn19** » Wed Jun 4, 2008 2:39 pm

soccer is on a complete different level money-wise than nba basketball. it's not comparable.

Pats19andO · Post #6 » by **Pats19andO** » Wed Jun 4, 2008 11:21 pm

gjn19 wrote:soccer is on a complete different level money-wise than nba basketball. it's not comparable.

Dr Aki · Post #7 » by **Dr Aki** » Thu Jun 5, 2008 1:29 am

lol thats why football is the world game not basketball

Dr Aki · Post #8 » by **Dr Aki** » Thu Jun 5, 2008 1:33 am

on the other hand, if there were transfers and no trades

there wouldnt be a reason to have a draft

theres no reason to draft a youngster no matter how talented only to have him want to play somewhere and demand to be released from his contract so he could go play for his team of choice

big market teams would dominate the NBA, and small market teams would have next to reason to play every year except to develop youngsters only to sell them to larger teams because theyre worth more as transfers than they will ever be bringing in revenue in shirt sales etc.

especially since given a period of time, only the big market teams can afford to assemble all-star rosters and make legitimate run at the championship every year

D-31 · Post #9 » by **D-31** » Thu Jun 5, 2008 2:05 am

gjn19 wrote:soccer is on a complete different level money-wise than nba basketball. it's not comparable.

Not really, just look at the players salaries. With the NBA having a salary cap, transfer fees would be a huge advantage that the Knicks would have. The fact that C. Ronaldo isn't that good in comparison to LeBron, Beckham managing a $250 mil contract, and the fact that Dolan has wasted about $500 million on Stephon Marbury, Jarred Jeffries, Jerome James, Quentin Richardson, Malik Rose, and Larry Brown when there contracts are finished.

Yeah, if the NBA extended the length of contracts so NY could lock up LeBron for a good long time, I don't see how $500 million is out of the realm of possibility.

A.J. · Post #10 » by **A.J.** » Thu Jun 5, 2008 2:09 am

Akiho wrote:lol thats why football is the world game not basketball

Basketball>Football :wink:

HumbleBumbleBee · Post #11 » by **HumbleBumbleBee** » Thu Jun 5, 2008 2:10 am

Akiho wrote:lol thats why football is the world game not basketball

flares!

Reks · Post #12 » by **Reks** » Thu Jun 5, 2008 4:11 am

Mr. Savage wrote:If there were transfer fees and no trades in the NBA, how much would certain NBA players be worth ?

Real Madrid has apparently offered a transfer fee of 100 million Euro (155 Million USD) for Cristiano Ronaldo, who is arguably the best football player in the world right now.

He would also make 13 million Euro (20 million USD) per year After taxes.

What would certain NBA players make in an open market ?

Christiano Ronaldo is not even close to best soccer player in the world. His game is based on glamour and that's why he will never win a world cup. He does have skill but he's not the best. And I believe Kaka won footballer of the year.

Cevap · Post #13 » by **Cevap** » Thu Jun 5, 2008 6:44 am

gjn19 wrote:soccer is on a complete different level money-wise than nba basketball. it's not comparable.

not really, NBA stacks up against any individual soccer league in the world

Dr Aki · Post #14 » by **Dr Aki** » Thu Jun 5, 2008 7:29 am

Cevap wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

not really, NBA stacks up against any individual soccer league in the world

thats why there are many world class leagues not just the NBA!

that argument would only stack up if say there was only 1 truly world class league

sorry guys, but football is the world game because it is the #1 sport played around the world

Cevap · Post #15 » by **Cevap** » Thu Jun 5, 2008 8:00 am

Akiho wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

thats why there are many world class leagues not just the NBA!

that argument would only stack up if say there was only 1 truly world class league

sorry guys, but football is the world game because it is the #1 sport played around the world

There's three world class leagues: EPL, La Liga, and to the lesser extent Serie A. Not what I would classify as "many"

Dr Aki · Post #16 » by **Dr Aki** » Thu Jun 5, 2008 8:39 am

you make it sound as if theres those 3 and then nothing

but the bundesliga, eredivisie, ligue en, liga bwin contribute significantly to football

so does also the clausura, brasileir

BadWolf · Post #17 » by **BadWolf** » Thu Jun 5, 2008 9:07 am

The Cool Kids wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Christiano Ronaldo is not even close to best soccer player in the world. His game is based on glamour and that's why he will never win a world cup. He does have skill but he's not the best. And I believe Kaka won footballer of the year.

Weel, I don't like Ronaldo and his antics. But he is the best player on the best team this year. His national team is a strong contender for the EC this year. To say he is far from being the best player in the world atm is stupid. He is arguably the best, a case could be made for some other players, sure.

gjn19 · Post #18 » by **gjn19** » Thu Jun 5, 2008 2:09 pm

Cevap wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

not really, NBA stacks up against any individual soccer league in the world

that is true...because no individual soccer league has 30 teams.

but take the champions league, which features only the best teams, which features the best (well...) 32 teams in europe. 300 million euros alone is the income of this league from tv-stations. the top clubs have yearly budgets that pale everything that nba teams pay their players (also because, for a football team, you have to pay 20-25 players), and the top players make more than basketball top players...even though the play about 20 fewer (20) games than an nba players.

also, the income from the fans is stratopheric, compared to the nba.

and we didn't even speak about the country-wide leagues.

it really is not comparable.

american football could be better compared to the champions league...both in fanbase and endorsements and tv rights....but then again, the US is pretty much the only country where american football is a top 10 sport.

just head into a stadium of one of the better clubs in europe (or south america) and you can _feel_ the huge difference. it's LOUD.

Cevap · Post #19 » by **Cevap** » Thu Jun 5, 2008 7:24 pm

gjn19 wrote:
Cevap wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

not really, NBA stacks up against any individual soccer league in the world

that is true...because no individual soccer league has 30 teams.

but take the champions league, which features only the best teams, which features the best (well...) 32 teams in europe. 300 million euros alone is the income of this league from tv-stations. the top clubs have yearly budgets that pale everything that nba teams pay their players (also because, for a football team, you have to pay 20-25 players), and the top players make more than basketball top players...even though the play about 20 fewer (20) games than an nba players.

also, the income from the fans is stratopheric, compared to the nba.

and we didn't even speak about the country-wide leagues.

it really is not comparable.

american football could be better compared to the champions league...both in fanbase and endorsements and tv rights....but then again, the US is pretty much the only country where american football is a top 10 sport.

just head into a stadium of one of the better clubs in europe (or south america) and you can _feel_ the huge difference. it's LOUD.

I don't know why you bring up stadiums and fan atmosphere in this argument. It's got nothing to do with money. While soccer stadiums are bigger, the nba plays more games so it more or less evens itself out. And you say that the champions league brings 300 million in TV rights, but the nba brings in 4.8 billion over 6 years = 800 million a season. That's just the US rights. NBA is broadcasted around the world so it's logical to say the rest of the world pays somewhere between 100-200 million overall to broadcast games. 900 million a year is 3 times as much as the champions league.

And while there are 32 teams in the Champions League, realistically only a handfull can afford to pay even 50 million for a player. ManU, Chelsea, Barcelona, Real Madrid, Inter, Milan, Juventus, maybe Liverpool and Tottenham. That's it.

gjn19 · Post #20 » by **gjn19** » Thu Jun 5, 2008 7:47 pm

the top 20 clubs in europe are worth an average of $443 millions...and that was back in 2003. i don't know the numbers for nba teams, but i doubt it's that high.

http://www.forbes.com/2004/03/24/soccerland.html
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2004/0412/126tab.html

edit: found the numbers for nba teams (also from forbes) for 2007 (4 years later):
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/32/biz ... _Rank.html

average of top 20: $395 millions.

not that far of...but if you count value increase at 5% pa, the the football team average would be $537 millions...140 more.

but as I said from the start, it's not comparable. nba is a product, football is not. teams have big name sponsors, not so in american professional sports, where the team is the brand.

but interesting number non the less.