Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The 2016 Offseason thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Axel wrote: View Post
    Not sure I see the relevance or connection. What loop hole was exploited when a player who had zero choice for 9 years, paid his dues, and finally earned the freedom to choose within the parameters of the market and chose less money? Only reason anyone blinks is because of the quality of player in question, proving that it's not about fixing a loophole as much about ensuring a balance product across the league.
    In your post you mentioned that league as a whole. In that sense, the product of the league is "competitive" basketball. NBA is not Harlem Globetrotters like basketball. If a player's choice to move to a team causes one of the team to have an "unfair" advantage then it is detrimental to the product NBA claims it provides to it's customers.

    It's the same in any industry. Not sure if you are aware, but every single industry in free economies have a competition commiission that monitors transactions among businesses that creates unfair advantage to a company. I look at it the same way. Adam Silver has every right reason to make changes so that KD to Warriors kinds of deals don't happen again.
    Last edited by ball4life; Wed Jul 13, 2016, 05:11 PM.

    Comment


    • I strongly stand beside players rights for free agency. If Silver wants a lock out he'll lose on that front. That's what this comes down to. How teams are able to leverage profit is the responsibility of the executives -- not the players. The Warriors make a boatload of money because they're in an economically exploding region, and they're winning. Good for them. Players have more freedom of mobility than ever. That's a good thing.

      Blocking that, is a 30 year step back for the NBA. Do I care about the money lost by OKC? Not really. Their owner moved the team from Seattle to cut costs, they traded away Harden to cut costs and now they've saved a significant amount of money by not keeping Durrant. Yes, there are owners like Prokorov who lose money on their teams, but if middle of the road teams are financially conservative, win enough to occasionally make the playoffs, but never do enough to win, with an exploding TV deal, and regional deals their are ways to make profit beyond 1 percent.

      Furthermore, the Balmer purchase was a rare situation. Multiple potential owners drove up the price for none business reasons. Even still, the way LA TV deals work out, I'm sure the next Clippers TV deal will be substantial.

      Comment


      • ball4life wrote: View Post
        In your post you mentioned that league as a whole. In that sense, the product of the league is "competitive" basketball. NBA is not Harlem Globetrotters like basketball. If a player's choice to move to a team causes one of the team to have an "unfair" advantage then it is detrimental to the product NBA claims it provides to it's customers.

        It's the same in any industry. Not sure if you are aware, but every single industry in free economies have a competition commiission that monitors transactions among businesses that creates unfair advantage to a company. I look at it the same way. Adam Silver has every right reason to make changes so that KD to Warriors kinds of deals don't happen again.
        But again, the differentiation between the league and individual owners. The league is acting in the best interest of the league and will prevent owners from operating in a free market capitalist environment. If owners were really operating with capitalism, no one would comment or care that GSW landed an elite player.
        Heir, Prince of Cambridge

        If you see KeonClark in the wasteland, please share your food and water with him.

        Comment


        • I think the major problem in the past was teams were able to go way above the luxury tax threshold and competing against teams that didn't have the means to get there(much like the Raptors), or as a franchise couldn't justify going there. A hard cap would give completive balance and would limit teams from having multiple superstars....depending on what the hard cap was set at.

          Comment


          • Axel wrote: View Post
            But again, the differentiation between the league and individual owners. The league is acting in the best interest of the league and will prevent owners from operating in a free market capitalist environment. If owners were really operating with capitalism, no one would comment or care that GSW landed an elite player.
            To this I said, it's like saying all these regulatory commissions, tribunals and committees in real world are acting against the principles of capitalism. Which is not true.

            Comment


            • ball4life wrote: View Post
              To this I said, it's like saying all these regulatory commissions, tribunals and committees in real world are acting against the principles of capitalism. Which is not true.
              But those tribunals etc are there to ensure that no one breaks the rules. GSW and Durant did not do anything remotely close to breaking any rule and if Durant was merely a "near all-Star" player instead of a MVP no one would care. So again, it's not about the process that happened (which the tribunals would be concerned with) but rather the impact on the league as a whole because of how good Durant is. No one bats an eye if GSW signs a JJ Reddick or even a Hassan Whiteside for example, so clearly the problem isn't an operation one but a perception one. The league as a whole now has a harder time selling hope to 29 other fan bases.
              Heir, Prince of Cambridge

              If you see KeonClark in the wasteland, please share your food and water with him.

              Comment


              • saints91 wrote: View Post
                I think the major problem in the past was teams were able to go way above the luxury tax threshold and competing against teams that didn't have the means to get there(much like the Raptors), or as a franchise couldn't justify going there. A hard cap would give completive balance and would limit teams from having multiple superstars....depending on what the hard cap was set at.
                No it wouldn't. Durrant is on the Warriors because Curry had bad ankles and so his current contract is well below market value. Bosh, LeBron and Wade took pay cuts. Wade was never the top paid Miami Heat.

                Tim Duncan took pay cuts. So has Dirk. Putting a cap on pay, when players make money through so many avenues does not restrict freedom of movement. Nor should it.

                Who cares about competitive balance? Seriously. No one does. Fans care about their teams and in the present market the hallmark of successful teams is stability. If the OKC never wanted Durrant to go they should have never left a stronger market AND THEN traded away a star player rather than pay him.

                The NBA has no right punishing players for exercising their rights when front offices do a poor job displaying loyalty.

                Comment


                • blackjitsu wrote: View Post
                  No it wouldn't. Durrant is on the Warriors because Curry had bad ankles and so his current contract is well below market value. Bosh, LeBron and Wade took pay cuts. Wade was never the top paid Miami Heat.

                  Tim Duncan took pay cuts. So has Dirk. Putting a cap on pay, when players make money through so many avenues does not restrict freedom of movement. Nor should it.

                  Who cares about competitive balance? Seriously. No one does. Fans care about their teams and in the present market the hallmark of successful teams is stability. If the OKC never wanted Durrant to go they should have never left a stronger market AND THEN traded away a star player rather than pay him.

                  The NBA has no right punishing players for exercising their rights when front offices do a poor job displaying loyalty.

                  All the teams you mentioned were way over the tax threshold. With exception to maybe GS

                  Comment


                  • When the cap was 60mil-ish teams were paying over 100mil. How's that competitive balance? If you are okay with the current structure then never mind, but if you want balance hard cap is the way to go.

                    Comment


                    • rocwell wrote: View Post
                      How frustrating that the Celtics get this pick yet again. That was one franchise building trade.

                      Comment


                      • Axel wrote: View Post
                        But those tribunals etc are there to ensure that no one breaks the rules. GSW and Durant did not do anything remotely close to breaking any rule and if Durant was merely a "near all-Star" player instead of a MVP no one would care. So again, it's not about the process that happened (which the tribunals would be concerned with) but rather the impact on the league as a whole because of how good Durant is. No one bats an eye if GSW signs a JJ Reddick or even a Hassan Whiteside for example, so clearly the problem isn't an operation one but a perception one. The league as a whole now has a harder time selling hope to 29 other fan bases.
                        What rules did TD-CIBC break when they announced their merger? why was it blocked? Even if there is any rules, who put the rules in the first place? why regulate?

                        The point is KD didn't break any rules to join the Warriors. But commish needs to do something to prevent stars joining forces if they actually mean to bring out parity in this league. Whether "parity" is juts lip service or not is another discussion all together.

                        Comment


                        • Comment


                          • rocwell wrote: View Post
                            is this a fake picture??

                            Comment


                            • Thunder looking to trade Russell Westbrook....and horrors, the Celtics are in there! Yikes.

                              https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...mepage%2Fstory

                              Comment


                              • Bendit wrote: View Post
                                Thunder looking to trade Russell Westbrook....and horrors, the Celtics are in there! Yikes.

                                https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...mepage%2Fstory
                                I wonder if we could pry him ... maybe offer to take Kanter albatross contract back to make it more appealing to them. Would have to give up Lowry but honestly don't know if Lowry will sign next year anyways I probably wouldn't want to offer him 5 year max at his age (do love Lowry though). Would be a huge gamble I don't know if I'd take not knowing if Westbrook resigns. Would get us a legit superstar. For fun heres an offer I wonder if theyd take.

                                TOR Trades

                                Kyle Lowry
                                Terrence Ross
                                Corey Joseph
                                Lucas Nogeira
                                Bruno Caboclo
                                2 first round picks next year

                                OKC Trades

                                Russell Westbrook
                                Enes Kanter

                                Our Line:

                                PG Westbrook / Wright / Van Vleet
                                SG Derozan / Powell
                                SF Carroll / min contract guy
                                PF Patterson / Sullinger / Siakam
                                C Valanciunas / Kanter / Poetl

                                Don't know if I'd want to do it or not but fun to think about.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X