David Stern/Chris Paul

[TheOUTLAW]

I know, talk about the post not the poster, but man is he annoying.

I've never been against LeBron, heck, I'm not against him now. I"m just pro Cavaliers.

[hype_2004]

A lockout is imminent. Owners will hold out until the players are stripped of all this leverage.

The owners are trying to take the power and influence away from the players, the restructuring of the CBA is a lot more than money, it's about changing the culture of the NBA thus making it a team/owner driven league and not a player driven one.

[TheOUTLAW]

That's what everyone other than Fuego seems to think.

[moocow007]

A lockout is imminent. Owners will hold out until the players are stripped of all this leverage.

The owners are trying to take the power and influence away from the players, the restructuring of the CBA is a lot more than money, it's about changing the culture of the NBA thus making it a team/owner driven league and not a player driven one.

But it was the owners that have been throwing around crazy money for marginal free agents so far this summer isn't it?

[TheOUTLAW]

That's the problem, the owners continually need to be saved from themselves.

[gflem]

Oh and gflem I can understand the beef because yes it is wack to have 5 teams and the rest of the league sucks. But what sport do you know that every team is equally talented? How do we know there's not gonna be more talented players to come out to balance out? I just think that everyone is reading too much into this. The teams that had the money did that and thats it. If the Cavs did the same thing everyone here would be cool with it.

I have no beef, I just dont believe that the best players all being on a few teams is good for the league or each individual teams fans. Of course more talent will be coming into the league, and after the new CBA as before the teams with the worst records will get the best picks, but if after 3 years all of the new talent tries the same tactics what difference will it make?
We have the model here with our Indians, cheap ownership leads to the best players being shipped out year after year, then when one or two of the prospects blows up we repeat the cylcle. In the NBA I see the potential of the players doing the same type of thing, leaving less desireable cold weather cities for the LA/Mia/Orlando/ type destinations. As for the tax implications, I really dont blame the players if that is their reason though, I can fully understand wanting to keep as much of what you earn rather than giving it to the government in taxes.

[H00PDREAMS]

There are several scenarios that will come of this summer's fiasco, some of them have been already discussed on the interwebs.

1. LeBron, Wade, and Riley have reshaped and revitalized NBA. Some have already made the argument that LeBron's move will destroy the league. Will it? Wait till the season starts. Check ratings and jersey sales and then make your conclusions. In this scenario Stern is waiting to see the results just like the rest of us. Welcome to the New Era of the NBA. Fueled by money, inspired by AAU athletics.

2. The lock out is almost inevitable. Disgruntled and frighted owners will demand more control over player movement. LeBron, Wade, and Bosh have exposed the KNOWN weakness in this CBA. Worst case scenario there will be a monumental leveling of the playing field to satisfy owners of the Cavs, Grizzlies, Toronto, and Bucks etc... Some sports writers see the NBA turning into the NFL in terms of owner control and less than that of the MLB. Meaning no more KC Royals type teams, No More Yankee type teams. Watered down league. In this case the Super-friends down in South Beach would have killed the goose that laid the golden egg. Pay for performance anyone?

But lets not forget when the NBA raised the age limit and changed the requirements to play Pro Bball, the talent in the NCAA seamed to get less concentrated. As more teams filled their benches with decent players. Some top talent was forced to attend schools like Gardner Webb, Murray State, Davidson, etc. This resulted in the NCAA being saturated with talented teams and many more bubble teams that either of them could have a shot a national title. The NBA after the lock out may experience such a shake up can you imagine!

History will be the ultimate judge. It will be interesting to watch it play out.

[gflem]

Hoopdreams, I will be more interested in seeing the attendance figures and local TV ratings rather than jersey sales and national game TV ratings. This is where the owners make the bulk of their money, and any team having no chance at the title better have a star or at least some promising prospects or the casual fan will inevitably tune out.
And as for the talented players in the NCAA going to mid-majors, I think that is more a product of TV exposure being better now than in the past for those leagues, and for those coaches being able to sell a one and done player on being a star at a mid-major rather than sharing the spotlight at a school like Carolina or Duke and those types of teams.
I agree with you that the lockout is a certainty, and that the league will almost surely look different afterwards. Do you think we will lose an entire season? It is a possibility imo, as is the possibility that a couple teams may even cease to exist. I hope not, but the players arent going to give back their newfound power without a fight, the union will be sure of that. But ultimately, the owners as a whole hold the high cards if they can stay together and wait out an extended lockout.
I dont know the financials of each team and owner, but an extended lockout will certainly stress some of them which is why I think the possibility of some teams folding is possible. As for the players, they all better be saving up now, and i believe the union has been warning them to do just that. You are right that it will be interesting, but unfortunately we will lose our sport for some time while they fight it out.

[FUEGO]

I understand about stacking teams, but remember also that this free agency isn't always going to happen.

[mup]

What's funny is that none of you really see what's going on. Stern doesn't care about what your saying. He's gaining money from this and isn't going to chop down his money flow based on what we think. Fans are looking at this at a basketball stand point and I understand that very much. Stern and the money makers are looking at this as a way to boost their cash flow. This is like with music how Hip Hop now is watered down but it doesn't matter because corporate is getting mad money from it. Old school fans of hip hop and the nba are feeling like this new age stuff is tearing up what the purpose used to be. But that's what happens when corporate america gets a hold on stuff. You guys do not realize if Lebron wasn't bringing in money to Stern he wouldn't have any say so in nothing. Also as far as what shazam was saying about other teamsn being weak, hasn't it always been that way in every sport? There are teams that are guranteed to be wack every season. Nfl we know the browns arent gonn abe on top, but the Cowboys will be decent. Nba we know LA always has a nasty squad. Yankees will always be top in mlb. This is just the way it is.

What's up? I've been saying for years that the health of the league is based on how much money each team is making, and not on the competitive balance of the league. But, it just so turns out that competitive balance is what, in turn, usually generates the most money. So, I'm intrigued by your theory but I want you to explain to me how you think that this summer's free agent fiasco will make money for a team like the Memphis Grizzlies? I see how it makes money for the Miami Heat but I don't see how it makes money for the Grizzlies or the 28 other teams. In fact, I think you'll agree with me that it's going to cause the Raptors and Cavs, at least, to lose money. So, if more teams are hurt by it then helped by it, then how does it make money for the league as a whole?

One other rebuttal point--- although it is true that every league has good teams and bad teams in a given year, the difference is that in the nba, we have the same good teams and the same bad teams every year. In the nfl, the Saints won the Super Bowl last year, yet just a few years ago they were so bad that they had the 2d pick in the draft (Reggie Bush). When was the last time the Lakers picked in the Top 5? And the Cowboys that you mentioned have only won one playoff game since 1996 and have lost 10 games in a year four times since 2000, but have only won 10 games in a year three times.

MLB has its own problems, but do you realize that there have been 8 different World Series winners in the last 9 years? And it would have been 9 for 10 if the Indians had not blown a 3-1 lead against the Red Sox in the 2007 ALCS. In the last 9 MLB seasons, 21 of 30 teams have made it to the LCS (Baseball's Final 4), and two of the teams that have not made it (Texas and San Diego) are leading their divisions this year. In the last 9 NBA seasons, only 15 teams have made it to the Final 4 and none of the teams that haven't made it (except maybe OKC and Portland) have any prayer of making it that far in the next 5 years. So, although the Yankees and Red Sox make the playoffs almost every year, the other 6 playoff teams rotate pretty regularly.

In the last 31 years, the NBA has had 8 champions. MLB has had 19.

[FUEGO]

I feel that mup. Makes sense what your saying. But everyone should see then it's not just because Wade Bosh and Lebron got together, it's how the NBA has been for the last 10 yrs plus.

[FUEGO]

Also I forgot to add look at college football. The same teams always are on top, it's just the way the market is. Big time players don't want to go to Cleveland or Memphis like that. If they want exposure they go to big cities like NYC, LA, Chicago. Sometimes they happen to go to teams Cleveland when they are drafted. If Lebron was drafted by the Knicks or Bulls he would have done his 7 yrs there.

[gflem]

I dont think its so much exposure, an elite player on a contending team in the NBA gets that anywhere. I think it is lifestyle, nightlife, and also tax situation. Texas and Florida have advantageous tax situations, and Miami in particular has the social scene to draw stars from every venue, not just athletes. So the athletes can rub elbows with entertainers as well.
I think it is no coincidence that the three egos...er amigos chose Miami over Chicago. High taxes and having to deal with a northern winter make Chicago a much less desireable location.
In your comparison between college football, there the exposure factor, history and tradition, the home state factor, and the University being able to pay top dollar for the top coaches and facilities are the main factors in the elite players choosing one school over another. Also factor in TV contracts like Notre Dame and the Big Ten network into the equation. The NBA has no such imbalance like the college sports so thats why I tend to think the exposure argument isnt as strong.

[ShortPack]

Bucks (sorta) suporter here.

Actually, the NBA has been fixed for the big markets since Stern took over in 1980(?). And the biggest diffference is in how games are refereed. The big markets always get the key calls. Sometimes it's atrocious: just check out the Bucks/Sixers series in 2003.

I think the biggest factor in determining a team's fanbase is the state in which they reside - fans are naturally going to cheer for their home state - why wouldn't they?

So far, the big states have won 31 straight titles. No GM from a small state market has been bright-enough to overcome this hurdle in 30 years even though they make up over 1/2 the teams. Doesn't that seem strange to you? The only big states that haven't achieved a title in those 31 years are Ohio and NY, so I guess you guys too are in small-state company. (Anyway, the next time you see a 45-9 FTA advantage for your team versus a smaller-state market, think how we feel. Anyway, you have my sympathy for the way Miami outright screwed-you this year.)

NBA Title Distribution 1980-present

BIG STATES (100% of all titles)
----------
State Teams Pop Titles

California 4 33,871,648 10
Texas 3 20,851,820 6
New York 1 18,976,457 0
Florida 2 15,982,378 1
Illinois 1 12,419,293 6
Pennsylvania 1 12,281,054 1
Mass (&CT) 1 12,038,767 4
Ohio 1 11,353,140 0
Michigan 1 9,938,444 3
--------------------------------
9 states 15 147,713,001 31


SMALL STATES (0% of all titles)
------------
State Teams Pop Titles

New Jersey 1 8,414,350 0
Georgia 1 8,186,453 0
Carolina 1 6,628,637 0
Indiana 1 6,080,485 0
Washington 1 5,894,121 0 (now oklahoma)
Tennessee 1 5,689,283 0
Wisconsin 1 5,363,675 0
Arizona 1 5,130,632 0
Minnesota 1 4,919,479 0
Louisiana 1 4,468,976 0
Colorado 1 4,301,261 0
Toronto** 1 3,840,000 0
Oregon 1 3,421,399 0
Utah 1 2,233,169 0
DC** 1 572,059 0
----------------------------------
15 states 15 75,143,979 0

[unicron5]

I think people just need to accept that this is a new era, and the biggest change is really the expansion of the league since '88, with all these new franchises (Hornets, Magic, Heat, Grizzlies, Raptors, Twolves) has diluted the overall talent based of the NBA.

So star players can end up more watered down rosters. Now this would be OK if all teams had the same level of "watering down" but the CBA allows teams like the Lakers and Celtics to stockpile themselves into "super teams" (they go into the luxury tax to do so).

Then players who aren't on super teams, want to be in similar situations. Which in a way you can't really blame them. Yes Magic and Bird can talk all they want, but the fact is, they were on stacked teams pretty much from the get go, put them in a more difficult situation and who knows what they would've done.

I think "smaller market" teams also need to understand something now ... if you draft a superstar player, your clock is ticking from the very moment they are drafted. You got 4-7 years to make sure you can surround that player with a "Scottie Pippen" (meaning a good second banana that is about the same age as your star player).

If you fail to do this, you run a very high risk of losing said player to free agency/or a trade demand.

[Baseline Runner]

The problem with getting a good second fiddle player is that there are only so many of these players to go around, and many of these players can be the main guy on their own team. If you look at some of the players the Cavs were going after to pair with Lebron, Iggy, Amare, Gerald Wallace, etc., these guys are top 30 players in their own right. Since there are 30 teams in the NBA it is unlikely that a team can attain to two top 30 players.

Chris Paul already has a top 30 player on his team, David West, yet that isn't good enough for him. Lebron had four top 60 players in Mo Williams, Shaq, Varejao and Jamison plus a great team of role players and that wasn't enough for him. Now all of the superstars apparently want to join forces on several teams and the rest of the NBA will be left with crumbs.

[FUEGO]

Everyone forgets the upcoming stars such as Rose, Durant, Westbrook, etc. Also you got the young boys coming up like Evan Turner and Wall. So the NBA will be cool.