Shrink the NBA? Um, No.

by Tom Ziller on Mar 18, 2009 7:37 AM PDT in Commentary

Dave at brother site Blazer's Edge argued for contraction. At FanHouse, I disagree.

Heartily.

Tweet Comment 25 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Well said

Well argued, and well thought out. I don’t think the idea of revenue sharing will be embraced however. It’s not just Dolan who makes money. Cuban makes money despite having one of the highest payroll’s in the league as well. And that’s without the value that the Knicks have as a franchise. The amazing thing to me is that the Kings don’t need to move in large part because they nearly have an arena. It took a long time for the Spurs to get an arena, and it wasn’t until they won a championship, that the fans even agreed.

I think the contraction argument is flawed. What I think the NBA is facing though, is no more teams in the NBA in terms of expansion.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

I am the stone that builder refused..I am the visual...The inspiration..That made lady sing the blues....I'm the spark that makes your idea bright.....The same spark that lights the dark....So that you can know your left from your right...I am the ballot in your box....The bullet in your gun...The inner glow that lets you know...To call your brother son....The story that just begun...The promise of what's to come...And I'm 'a remain a soldier till the war is won....

by pookeyguru on Mar 18, 2009 7:53 AM PDT reply actions

What the hell is up with everyone throwing the Kings under the bus...

Seriously its one bad season and suddenly we cannot have a franchise its so Natting frustrating. Where were all these people when we made the playoffs eight years in a row and soldout all those games. I just wish I was as cool-tempered as Gunrock because this is all bullshit. If a NBA team is not allowed to have one down year than the model is completely Natted up.

There now I've met the 75 word count. -pookeyguru

by moproblemz on Mar 18, 2009 9:02 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs

Rec'd

For turning Kenny Natt into an expletive.

He’s certainly caused enough to be accorded that (dubious) honor.

Coming to you live from the land of interim coaches.

by LeaguePassAddict on Mar 18, 2009 9:07 AM PDT up reply actions

No TZ is to blame for that

He got on us for using too many F bombs in game threads, so a few people (not me) came up with the Natt for f bomb. It started Sunday vs Washington.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Mar 18, 2009 9:09 AM PDT up reply actions

Hehe.

I guess I can take credit for the N-Bomb. And TZ as well although indirectly.

by Aykis16 on Mar 18, 2009 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions

Ah yes

You were one of the originator’s of the N-bomb. My apologies.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Mar 18, 2009 10:15 AM PDT up reply actions

As I responded on BE

Contraction would signal the beginning of the End for the NBA (barring a true economic depression). There would have to be bankrupt teams and no Cities that wanted them.

Is there some sport I’m not aware of that doesn’t have a lot of mediocre teams, some
bad teams and a few good ones at the top?

Plus, The Players Union wouldn’t even consider the idea.

Now, talk to me about cutting the playoff field down and/or going back to five games for a round or two and I’m listening.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect,
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Mar 18, 2009 9:46 AM PDT reply actions

I agree on back to 5 games for the first round.

by Aykis16 on Mar 18, 2009 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions

+1

5 game series for round 1! Bring some chance back in to those first round series!

Wait....Why is everybody clapping? Everyone around me is clapping.... I guess I should be clapping too... GO LAKERS!!! I hate living in So Cal

by 27freethrows on Mar 18, 2009 11:35 AM PDT up reply actions

The St Louis Cardinals

(I grew up in St. Louis) consistantly draw as many fans as LA and NY – with a much smaller population to draw from. 3 million in attendance a year.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect,
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Mar 18, 2009 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions

WTF?

What a microwave society that we live in today. Would anyone have considered Sacramento for contraction five years ago? Three years ago? Two years ago?

There but for the grace of Brandon Roy goes ye, Dave.

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Mar 18, 2009 12:15 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs

Everything discussed on the Blazer forum is right with the NBA. The NBA Playoffs are great, the number of divisions has made it more interesting, 82 game season is a bit long but a financial must.

-1 Blazers for the poor assessment. -2 for throwing our franchise under the bus. We weren’t taking shots at them when they were terrible the last decade.

The problem with the NBA is guaranteed contracts. How many stumps sit at the end of every teams bench who cannot play? Not only do they not sell a ticket, they eat up a good portions of the teams money and prevent much needed roster overhauls. In other sports if a team is horrible at least the franchise can clean house next season and give fans something new to buy into. In the NBA, you are stuck with the same bad players on the same bad roster for years. How can expect fans to stay excited and follow a stagnant, bad team for years?

by bignerd on Mar 18, 2009 12:19 PM PDT reply actions

We waited too long to start the re-build

I don’t think many would disagree. Nothing (not enough) happened for a few years to keep the fans excited about a future. Band-aid moves that didn’t hide a scabby lack of direction.

We can move on now. Next year will be better.

Screw the Blazer fans or anyone else who want to comment/critisize on our team or future. Thats our job.

And yes, I completely agree that fully guaranteed contracts stink-and are a big problem.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect,
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Mar 18, 2009 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions

I’d say part of the waiting around on the rebuild process was in part due to the inability to drop Kenny Thomas like contracts. Yes, as an owner you can tell them to take a hike after paying the full contract amount but that’s impractical for all but a few franchises . . . well maybe just the Knicks.

You can also trade your garbage for another teams garbage but that doesn’t do anything. Regardless, you cannot clean the slate and dump all your teams resources into turning around the team. In the NBA, you have to wait years before those contracts come off the books before you can begin a real rebuild. 3 years into the process the Kings can actually start to build.

by bignerd on Mar 18, 2009 10:35 PM PDT up reply actions

They could have done a lot to tear it down

Hard to believe now, but even K9 had some value three years ago. Ok, not a great example but more could have been done earlier. I’ve seen/heard both Maloofs admit as much and basically take blame for the delay.

So imitate the action of the tiger!.
- lend the eye a terrible aspect,
- and teach them how to war!
Henry V iii

by lietothegirls on Mar 19, 2009 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions

Peja for expirings/picks/and/or/youth

instead of for Artest, would have been starting the rebuild 2+ years earlier. The Artest trade was a last attempt to compete when the window had obviously already closed.

When it became clear that Bibby/Miller/Peja were not a “big three” that could challenge for a title, we should have blown it up right then. They all had good value at that time. Instead we took on Artest and held onto Bibby and Miller until their value had declined.

Ball movement ... is like jogging for most people: They do it occasionally, and it makes them happy. Then they go back to not doing it. - Henry Abbott

by Kfan in Korea on Mar 19, 2009 5:22 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

Agreed infinity

SACTOWN ROYALTY - Try our thick creamy shakes!

by section214 on Mar 19, 2009 10:13 PM PDT up reply actions

Globalization

The NBA should not and will not shrink and I’m 100% with Z. In fact, the NBA will follow the general globalization trend and sooner or later (I assume until 2020 the latest) European teams will join in and an international league will be created. Hopefully and more likely it will be closer to the NBA rules than FIBA’s. This is not just an opinion, I think it’s inevitable. It’s something beyond sports.

And no I’m not saying that because I want to see the Kings in Greece. :P

by ZenBaller on Mar 18, 2009 1:13 PM PDT reply actions

I doubt the NBA will globalize.

Even though Stern probably wants to, mainly to expand the market for the sport. Hence preseason games in England and Asia.

by Aykis16 on Mar 18, 2009 3:05 PM PDT up reply actions

The game is global

So hasn’t he met that objective to a degree?

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Mar 18, 2009 3:06 PM PDT up reply actions

I meant the NBA as a world league

Like with the “Athens Owls or the London Bulldogs”.

by Aykis16 on Mar 18, 2009 3:15 PM PDT up reply actions

But you're right

He has increased interest around the world.

by Aykis16 on Mar 18, 2009 3:16 PM PDT up reply actions

Yeah

He did it all by himself.

No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....

by pookeyguru on Mar 18, 2009 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions

Agree only in part

I think TZ and everyone is correct as far as the demand side of the curve — metropolitan areas willing and able to support an NBA franchise — but not about the supply side. I think the rapid expansion of the league in the late 80s/early 90s really spread the talent pool too thin, to the detriment of the game. The league is still recovering in my estimation. We know there aren’t 30 NBA-quality starting centers in the world, though the deficit is not as stark today as it was just a few years ago, nor are there 30 starting point guards, and how many teams would you consider as having real depth off their bench?

Still, I would side against contraction. It’s one thing to regret the expansion and quite another, as has been pointed out, to actually contract a franchise. We’d all love to see the game improved, and there’s other options that are fun to consider, such as reducing the schedule. But again it’s a great idea only in theory. If you reduce it to 70 games or less you allow more recovery time, time for practice (or not, if you’re Allen Iverson), get rid of back-to-backs, and there might be fewer blowouts. But the actual transition involves significant financial risk for all owners, particularly for franchises that sellout their arenas.

At the very least I hope there’s momentum to stop any further expansion, or expansion in Europe that makes the schedule even more burdensome.

by ttylerbballcamper on Mar 18, 2009 8:47 PM PDT reply actions

My guess

Is that if the league expanded to Europe, they’d only play their American/Canadian counterparts during pre-season or in some kind of championship play/tournament.

Coming to you live from the land of interim coaches.

by LeaguePassAddict on Mar 19, 2009 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions