The plight of NBA small market teams

[ranger001]

Interesting, they point to the following teams that are struggling in their current market and could benefit from moving:-
Jazz
Hornets
Timberwolves
Bucks
Cavaliers
Nuggets


Only the Nuggets really surprise me on that list.

[HartfordWhalers]

Interesting, they point to the following teams that are struggling in their current market and could benefit from moving:-
Jazz
Hornets
Timberwolves
Bucks
Cavaliers
Nuggets


Only the Nuggets really surprise me on that list.

It looked at total income versus total income needed to support all franchises there, and apparently Denver area has too many teams. But why would the onus of that be on the Nuggest and not the Rockies, who supposedly require more income?

I thought it was interesting when the topic of relocation comes up Pittsburgh/St Louis/ Kansas City are often in the (second tier of the) conversation but all three showed up as (badly) maxed out by other sports.

Not sure I agree with the methodology. {There is no way NYC could support 19 teams, fans wouldn't evenly spread there spending but shell out massive bucks for the best and ignore the worst in region.} But it does provide a nice easy breakdown of msa's and income in those areas, and makes a good argument for a Ct team that could pull from both its MSA's (or casually from Providence RI MSA) would make a lot of sense.

[Turbo_Zone]

HD: http://i750.photobucket.com/albums/xx14 ... 012_HD.jpg

[GeneWilderSTL]

sorry hartford whalers but the methodology is horribly flawed and terribly simplistic. Its formulaic and ignores many gray areas.

St. Louis can support a 4th franchise and what that "report" ignores is that 40% of Cardinals (World Champs Baby!) attendance comes from outside of the St. Louis MSA. That's 40% and the Cardinals do 3 million year in and year out. That's over 1 million outside of St. Louis. Oh and while we're at it the St. Louis MSA is 2.8 Million not 2.6. That report is a simple number crunch and list in order to get web traffic.

I also don't believe the report about the Nuggets,

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2011/0509/ ... -stan.html

Denver's Nuggets and Avalanche have reached the finals only once between them (in 2001 when the Avalanche won the Stanley Cup) while Kroenke has owned them. Yet today FORBES reckons the two teams combined are worth $514 million, an unusually rich valuation for a small market. A big reason: They generate over $25 million a year in premium seating revenue.

With a fourth franchise St. Louis could easily create its own Cable Network and provide its franchises with additional revenues. The Lakers signed a 20 year deal worth 150 Million a year. The Rangers signed a new deal worth 80 million a year. The St. Louis Cardinals are a larger fanbase than the Rangers and out perform them in ratings by a landslide. That would be an opportunity to provide an NBA team with more revenue than a city where the nba is the only team in town.

St. Louis is also ranked 7th in most fortune 500 companies, for those that like to make that argument.

St. Louis just needs to be given a chance and solid ownership that knows how to make money in this market. It wouldn't be difficult as St. Louis is a sports hungry city and one of the best.

[HartfordWhalers]

sorry hartford whalers but the methodology is horribly flawed and terribly simplistic. Its formulaic and ignores many gray areas.

St. Louis can support a 4th franchise and what that "report" ignores is that 40% of Cardinals (World Champs Baby!) attendance comes from outside of the St. Louis MSA. That's 40% and the Cardinals do 3 million year in and year out. That's over 1 million outside of St. Louis. Oh and while we're at it the St. Louis MSA is 2.8 Million not 2.6. That report is a simple number crunch and list in order to get web traffic.

I also don't believe the report about the Nuggets,

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2011/0509/ ... -stan.html

Denver's Nuggets and Avalanche have reached the finals only once between them (in 2001 when the Avalanche won the Stanley Cup) while Kroenke has owned them. Yet today FORBES reckons the two teams combined are worth $514 million, an unusually rich valuation for a small market. A big reason: They generate over $25 million a year in premium seating revenue.

With a fourth franchise St. Louis could easily create its own Cable Network and provide its franchises with additional revenues. The Lakers signed a 20 year deal worth 150 Million a year. The Rangers signed a new deal worth 80 million a year. The St. Louis Cardinals are a larger fanbase than the Rangers and out perform them in ratings by a landslide. That would be an opportunity to provide an NBA team with more revenue than a city where the nba is the only team in town.

St. Louis is also ranked 7th in most fortune 500 companies, for those that like to make that argument.

St. Louis just needs to be given a chance and solid ownership that knows how to make money in this market. It wouldn't be difficult as St. Louis is a sports hungry city and one of the best.

Eh, I'm pretty sure I said I didn't agree with the methodolodgy, so I'm not sure why you are saying sorry.

But if tourists are filling 1 million seats for the Cardinals, then Vegas with very roughly double the number of tourists looks very attractive for a franchise.

[Norm2953]

I've been interested in the league contracting for some time and am surprised
by some teams on the named list. If those six problem franchises simply allowed
themselves to be bought out, perhaps we'd have a new CBA left with the teams
able to pay the the 52.5% of the BRI that the players want. I would have thought
the Kings and Grizzlies would have been favorites for contraction for a leaner
and meaner NBA would lead to better games for the fans.

[d-train]

Small market teams should collectively demand equal TV money as large market teams or small market teams should defect from the NBA and start their own league. The new small market league would crush the NBA in no time. The small markets could sell new franchises in the large markets and split the revenues from the sale. Investors would lineup to buy the new franchises. The NBA would never be able to regain their small markets and the lost revenues.

The owners will completely alienate the players before it even occurs to them to break ranks in such a way.

But yes, that would be the nuclear option of "fixing" the NBA from the owner's perspective.

Making 2 leagues out of one differently doesn't resolve any labor problems. It would raise the cost of labor if anything. I was thinking about the revenue imbalance in the NBA. Its possible increased labor costs would wipeout some or all the benefits of balanced revenue in a divided league. The best solution is for the NBA owners to agree on a system with balanced revenue.

[GeneWilderSTL]

sorry hartford whalers but the methodology is horribly flawed and terribly simplistic. Its formulaic and ignores many gray areas.

St. Louis can support a 4th franchise and what that "report" ignores is that 40% of Cardinals (World Champs Baby!) attendance comes from outside of the St. Louis MSA. That's 40% and the Cardinals do 3 million year in and year out. That's over 1 million outside of St. Louis. Oh and while we're at it the St. Louis MSA is 2.8 Million not 2.6. That report is a simple number crunch and list in order to get web traffic.

I also don't believe the report about the Nuggets,

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2011/0509/ ... -stan.html

Denver's Nuggets and Avalanche have reached the finals only once between them (in 2001 when the Avalanche won the Stanley Cup) while Kroenke has owned them. Yet today FORBES reckons the two teams combined are worth $514 million, an unusually rich valuation for a small market. A big reason: They generate over $25 million a year in premium seating revenue.

With a fourth franchise St. Louis could easily create its own Cable Network and provide its franchises with additional revenues. The Lakers signed a 20 year deal worth 150 Million a year. The Rangers signed a new deal worth 80 million a year. The St. Louis Cardinals are a larger fanbase than the Rangers and out perform them in ratings by a landslide. That would be an opportunity to provide an NBA team with more revenue than a city where the nba is the only team in town.

St. Louis is also ranked 7th in most fortune 500 companies, for those that like to make that argument.

St. Louis just needs to be given a chance and solid ownership that knows how to make money in this market. It wouldn't be difficult as St. Louis is a sports hungry city and one of the best.

Eh, I'm pretty sure I said I didn't agree with the methodolodgy, so I'm not sure why you are saying sorry.

But if tourists are filling 1 million seats for the Cardinals, then Vegas with very roughly double the number of tourists looks very attractive for a franchise.

Vegas is not that kind of a tourist city. Also an upstart franchise in Vegas can't possibly remotely even begin to compare with the St. Louis Cardinals. Not for a 100 years. The Cardinals built 1 million in attendance through decades of kmox listenes and a winning tradition. For a long time it was the furthest team west. People are raised from birth as Cardinals fans. The Cardinals draw 1 million to St. Louis. That's a fact not an if. The Cardinals. Vegas draws its tourist not because of sports but because of gambling and nightlife.

I mean Atlanta draws tons of tourists, something like 30 million, but that doesn't translate to impressive attendance. You can't just grab numbers and jump to conclusions son.

[HartfordWhalers]