OT: Lebron James Advocates NBA Contraction

[kingpest19]

A 1 out 16 chance is better than 1 out of 30.

What some people choose to ignore as well is that you can have parity with 16 teams, just like you can with 30. The bar may be lower with 30, but parity alone isn't dependent on league size-- just how good or bad teams "can" be.

Maybe, maybe not. If the league condenses the talent level into fewer teams I see it getting harder instead of easier for them.

 

[Fugu]

By Stern's own words the NBA is losing around 400 million a year.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/13/david-stern-nba-losses-co_n_461614.html

NHL cap keeps going up thus revenues are going up.

Sounds to me like that NBA has expenditure problems.

Those words are about as good as Bettman's and Levitt's.


The larger point though is that the leagues aren't losing money--- but certain franchises may be.

 

[kdb209]

Just a question. If this is the case, Why is the NFL resising expansion?

Because it would mean divvying up their network TV dollars with more teams.

It is unlikely that adding a couple more teams would increase the current deals, since any new market is already covered by NFL broadcasts.

In addition, for a long time the NFL actually liked the open LA market - it gave owners a credible threat to get public monies for stadiums.

 

[Melrose Munch]

The NFL is having difficulties with two franchises: Buffalo and Jacksonville. Both are very small markets and the swirl of relocation is around them. In addition with Minnesota.

Most of the noise was to move the Bills to Toronto till the Canadian's passed that law prohibiting NFL teams to play in the country.

Jacksonville is a very small market which is having great difficulty in filling their stadium. They along with Minny have been targets #1a and #1b to relocate to LA.

Now, back to the contraction talk. Fugu got the jist of my post. Lebron can talk contraction all he wants, his job is safe. It's the bottom rung guys who are in trouble. And the guys in the developmental leagues. So, to translate to the NHL. Sidney Crosby is safe but the guys who are border line are in trouble. And the guys who are AAAA players who bounce between the AHl and the NHL

Try telling 46-60 guys in the union, yeah, we are going to reduce the number of jobs out there....

You would have a massive voting block along with sympathetic upper level players. You could have 100 players within 700-800 who would not be too happy with a contraction plan.

If you look at the NBA, let's say they are talking about contracting two teams. that's 30 players on those rosters and 10-15 development guys who's job just got harder. That's 45 guys out of 450-500 players in the union or 10%.

Because it would mean divvying up their network TV dollars with more teams.

It is unlikely that adding a couple more teams would increase the current deals, since any new market is already covered by NFL broadcasts.

In addition, for a long time the NFL actually liked the open LA market - it gave owners a credible threat to get public monies for stadiums.

Thanks.

 

[kombayn]

I won't be surprised if the New Orleans Hornets and Sacramento Kings get contracted after this up-coming CBA. The NBA owns the Hornets and the Kings owners, the Maloof Family have bad credit problems and are being rumored to sell the Palms to Harrah's plus Arco Arena is a dump and the NBA won't be hurt if they get rid of both the teams.

 

[Ogopogo*]

Most of the noise was to move the Bills to Toronto till the Canadian's passed that law prohibiting NFL teams to play in the country. Jacksonville is a very small market which is having great difficulty in filling their stadium.

Say what??????

 

[Dado]

Most of the noise was to move the Bills to Toronto till the Canadian's passed that law prohibiting NFL teams to play in the country.

There is no such law, nor has there ever been such a law.

 

[StormCast]

too bad NHLers can't advocate contraction of canadian teams....lol..

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/truehoop/miamiheat/news/story?id=5952952

Self-serving tripe from James. He got criticized by many of the guys in the 80's and now he is trying to align himself with them and act like he's just advocating for a better era. Newsflash, there were only a couple of teams that had 3 superstars back then - the Lakers and Celtics. Not too much different than today with Miami and the Celtics. Even before the Big 3 in Miami you could have argued the Spurs and Celtics as having 3 superstars at the same time.

It's ironic that he wants to comment on the business of the NBA but he showed by his exit from Cleveland he doesn't understand the nuances of business.

 

[Fugu]

Now, back to the contraction talk. Fugu got the jist of my post. Lebron can talk contraction all he wants, his job is safe. It's the bottom rung guys who are in trouble. And the guys in the developmental leagues. So, to translate to the NHL. Sidney Crosby is safe but the guys who are border line are in trouble. And the guys who are AAAA players who bounce between the AHl and the NHL

Try telling 46-60 guys in the union, yeah, we are going to reduce the number of jobs out there....

You would have a massive voting block along with sympathetic upper level players. You could have 100 players within 700-800 who would not be too happy with a contraction plan.

If you look at the NBA, let's say they are talking about contracting two teams. that's 30 players on those rosters and 10-15 development guys who's job just got harder. That's 45 guys out of 450-500 players in the union or 10%.

I know it seems these guys have equal votes, but if they're really the bottom rungers and/or they go back and forth between leagues, do you honestly believe their voices carry much weight? These are the kind of players that have 4-5 yrs in the NHL in total--- if they're lucky. In fact, I'm willing to bet that with a cap system, the NHLPA may be willing to "flex" on minimum pay because the more money those minimum contracts take up, the less there is to spend up top.

The association isn't going take some position that threatens the well-being of the league (assuming something like contraction was necessary) to keep some borderline guys around. Imo.

 

[Fugu]

Maybe, maybe not. If the league condenses the talent level into fewer teams I see it getting harder instead of easier for them.

Someone still has to win. An elite team out of 30 or an elite team out of 16. Still like my odds better.

 

[Crazy_Ike]

Those words are about as good as Bettman's and Levitt's.

Levitt's proved to be quite accurate. The only differences were in what things were counted as hockey revenue... and it was the NHLPA's numbers that included every single thing that happened at an arena whether it it related to hockey or not.

 

[Fugu]

Levitt's proved to be quite accurate. The only differences were in what things were counted as hockey revenue... and it was the NHLPA's numbers that included every single thing that happened at an arena whether it it related to hockey or not.

Yes, I don't see how stating costs vs revenues would be affected by not counting revenues that currently are included in HRR (btw).

If the owners were able to decide what counted as HRR now, do you think the cap would be nearly as high?

 

[Ernie]

There's no way it's in the players' best interests to contract the league.

That would shrink the salary pool and mean less money for everyone.

 

[The Bob Cole]

B-b-b-b-but I didn't know what the word "contraction" meant.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ba...t=AnIUrHlKWemMXJFq_wP0KKy8vLYF?urn=nba-300875

"That's crazy, because I had no idea what the word 'contraction' meant before I saw it on the Internet," James said after the Miami Heat's practice Monday. "I never even mentioned that. That word never even came out of my mouth. I was just saying how the league was back in the '80s and how it could be good again. I never said, 'Let's take some of the teams out.'"

Ok Lebron...

 

[Fugu]

There's no way it's in the players' best interests to contract the league.

That would shrink the salary pool and mean less money for everyone.

It would also shrink the player pool -- fewer players to pay.

In theory, it could average more per player.

 

[MaskedSonja]

B-b-b-b-but I didn't know what the word "contraction" meant.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ba...t=AnIUrHlKWemMXJFq_wP0KKy8vLYF?urn=nba-300875




Ok Lebron...

One thing Lebron never has struck me as is stupid-he maybe a lot of things, but that isn't one of them.

I wonder if the NBA players "union" (or whatever it is) maybe got on the phone and essentially said "be quiet, you're essentially saying that you're okay with a lot of players losing their jobs via contraction".

I seem to recall some similar "turnarounds" during the NHL lockout ..


I think the his original comment speaks volumes, and he would be fine with a bunch of players losing jobs, as long as he continues to play-but that doesn't sound unifed

 

[Fugu]

B-b-b-b-but I didn't know what the word "contraction" meant.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ba...t=AnIUrHlKWemMXJFq_wP0KKy8vLYF?urn=nba-300875


Ok Lebron...

That's because everyone was having a hissy fit.

 

[Crazy_Ike]

Yes, I don't see how stating costs vs revenues would be affected by not counting revenues that currently are included in HRR (btw).

What is included in HRR is part of the negotiation. There are many things that are debateable either way as to whether they qualify as hockey revenue. There are also expenses as well. It's not that because the two sides have a different definition it means that one was therefore being deliberately dishonest about it.

If the owners were able to decide what counted as HRR now, do you think the cap would be nearly as high?

Let's be clear - the only reason the cap is as high as it is is because no one, not NHL not NHLPA, thought the league would immediately rebound from the lockout like nothing happened. Both sides expected a backlash not unlike what MLB was hit with. It didn't happen, and because of that, revenues are almost certainly about four years ahead of expectations - and that's with a recession! Maybe even more.

It is not a problem of what counts as HRR, it is a problem that the CBA wasn't designed for revenues growing this constantly and consistently well. This is part of why CBAs expire after just a few years - because they need to be changed periodically to adapt to current realities.

 

[Dado]

It's ironic that he wants to comment on the business of the NBA but he showed by his exit from Cleveland he doesn't understand the nuances of business.

it's the exact opposite - leaving Cleveland showed the guy understands the nuances quite well.

 

[Brodie]

Leaving Cleveland the way he did shows he knows nothing about public relations, but that's another story for another day.

 

[Fugu]

What is included in HRR is part of the negotiation. There are many things that are debateable either way as to whether they qualify as hockey revenue. There are also expenses as well. It's not that because the two sides have a different definition it means that one was therefore being deliberately dishonest about it.

While the deliberate dishonesty is debatable and difficult to prove either way, let's be clear that the claim was that costs were too high given the actual revenues. Except that some owners decided which revenues to count (e.g., Wirtz), but no one could take the option on which costs to count. For example, it was certainly possible for a team to claim only $60m in hockey revenues (what they considered hockey revenues) but in retrospect these might really have been far higher. It wasn't surprising to me that that the alleged $2-ish billion was really far closer to $2.2 billion. That might have affected Mr. Levitt's per centage of HRR that goes towards players cost just a smidge. And since the entire premise was set player costs as a per centage of revenues.... this was a very material point. Central, in fact.

Let's be clear - the only reason the cap is as high as it is is because no one, not NHL not NHLPA, thought the league would immediately rebound from the lockout like nothing happened. Both sides expected a backlash not unlike what MLB was hit with. It didn't happen, and because of that, revenues are almost certainly about four years ahead of expectations - and that's with a recession! Maybe even more.

What they didn't expect was parity from the CAD.

It is not a problem of what counts as HRR, it is a problem that the CBA wasn't designed for revenues growing this constantly and consistently well. This is part of why CBAs expire after just a few years - because they need to be changed periodically to adapt to current realities.

I disagree with this as well. The CBA "should" be able to accommodate growth very well since the players' share is always a fixed percentage of HRR. The problem has been that the growth has come in the markets that either were already faring quite well, and the Canadian dollar's effect on the smaller of the Cdn markets. The Leafs and Habs have benefited doubly in that they've experienced organic growth, then had that amplified by the CAD's increase.

 

[The Bob Cole]

One thing Lebron never has struck me as is stupid-he maybe a lot of things, but that isn't one of them.

I wonder if the NBA players "union" (or whatever it is) maybe got on the phone and essentially said "be quiet, you're essentially saying that you're okay with a lot of players losing their jobs via contraction".

I seem to recall some similar "turnarounds" during the NHL lockout ..


I think the his original comment speaks volumes, and he would be fine with a bunch of players losing jobs, as long as he continues to play-but that doesn't sound unifed

I wrote a paper recently chronicling the lockout - there were dozens of reports of pressure from the union on players who spoke out against what was happening or in support of a cap. Union solidarity was a big issue that undermined the unions strength and resilience in the long run.

 

[StormCast]

it's the exact opposite - leaving Cleveland showed the guy understands the nuances quite well.

No, you have it backward. It showed he understands only the obvious part of the business equation. The nuance is that how you do it, is very important, and burning bridges can bite you. He simply looked at business from his side and failed to understand there is a subtlety to a public parting. His Q-rating took a major hit which indirectly leads back to money in his pocket.

 

[ClassLessCoyote]

I would guess that the NHL has used a model similar to the NBA's-- expand the footprint to get a TV contract. The leagues are similar in size, ownership makeup (even sharing some owners), have or had labor issues, and.... some have said the NHL is diluted as far as talent.

Let's let it play out a bit.




He can't have opinions? I think the players may be the best judges of talent levels, and how that is spread out. (I haven't read the article yet, just going by some of the quotes.)

He can have his opinions but its not always best to give your opinion to the public when you reperesent a certain business, franchise, corporation, etc over a hot topic or issue. The Phoenix Suns and the Dbacks are 2 good exmaples of what to say and not say when SB1070 was signed into law. DBacks kept quite despite requests from others to boycott All things AZ and asked MLB to cancel the all star game here that is scheduled to be played here this summer. The Suns announced a position against and took alot of heat(and received some support as well)for their stance especially when security threw out a Suns fan for supporting the bill on his orange t-shirt at the game.

Back on topic though while LeBron does have a contract and he is set for life at the same time you are one of the most hated athletes on the planet and the last thing he wanst to do is make yourself a cancer to marketing the NBA if he is not a bad marketing image yet. Overtime more people are willing to forgive him for what he has done and he just focuses more on the game and living up to the hype he made about willing lots of titles with the Heat and stop saying or doing anything that will get those who hate him now to hate him even more IMO.

While reading through some of the responses I don't see anyone mentioning the NBA should get a salary cap like the NHL has. Would such a cap be better for the NBA or worse?

 

[Dado]

His Q-rating took a major hit which indirectly leads back to money in his pocket.

Worrying about short-term changes in q-rating is a waste of time. One great finals series against Kobe and he'll be viewed as a stud again. Heck, Kobe has had *much* worse ratings than Lebron currently has, and still managed to make the top-5 sports endorsers list. In fact, his endorsement income has gone *down* as his Q-ratings increased dramatically.

Lebron recognized he was in a situation that would not lead to championships, and made what he deemed necessary changes. I, and many others, applaud him for it. Here's hoping it leads to scintillating playoff atmosphere/results. In the NHL, it would be great if someone like Nash would forgo the easy pay check from a crap team to make less on a real contender.

This sort of thing needs to happen more, not less.