Back to the thread topic -- it ultimately causes problems with ownership. There is a HUGE difference between owning the Lakers and owning the Grizzlies. Like, even bigger than the lack of parity in the other sports.
If you buy the Coyotes, you can conceivably have a plan to build up a winning franchise. That is flat-out not possible if you buy the Grizzlies... and that's an awful lot of money to spend just to be sniffing the same air as people who are actually playing to win. Yeah, you're going to get that TV money and you get to rub elbows with the stars. But imagine spending $1.3 billion (current Grizzlies franchise value as of February 2020, per Forbes) ... imagine spending $1.3 billion to be a joke and a loser. Look at the hits MJ takes as owner of the Hornets, where he seems like a guy who's just saddled with a responsibility he doesn't actually enjoy. How many prospective buyers could there possibly be for that "opportunity"?
I have to think that corporations are the only real options, and this isn't a very good time to try and convince a corporation to make a ten-figure commitment.
This is such a great point.
What's even more true, look at teams like the Pacers, Blazers, Jazz, and Nuggets. These 4 teams are usually always playoff contenders but are they ever championship contenders? The Jazz, Pacers, and Blazers were somewhat in the 90's but all 3 of these teams couldn't beat Jordan and his Bulls, the Pacers also had good teams in the early 10's but LeBron always beat them. These 3 plus the Nuggets never tank but they never get anywhere, just round 2 at best. The Blazers have put together a nice roster w/ CJ McCullom and Damian Lillard but how are they going to get past the Lakers or the KD/Steph/Klay Warriors? They can't (and didn't w/ the Warriors). Same with the Jazz, always losing to Golden State or a Houston team w/ Harden who then also were fodder for the Warriors.
Then you have examples like the Durant-led Thunder and Shaq-led Magic. Both of these franchises crippled hard after their stars left despite having decent rosters and a "Robin" to "Batman" (Penny to Shaq, and Westbrook to Durant). The Thunder stayed competitive and even brought in Paul George but they failed in 3 straight 1st round matchups. The Magic made the playoffs a few times after Shaq left but never became anything until Howard showed up, and then he left and they went back to nothing. The Cavaliers lived and died with LeBron both iterations, the Heat did as well to some extent after he left, but Miami is a destination market that they've got little worries about players leaving in free agency unless some crazy shit happens.
The NBA is such a star-driven league that one man like LeBron can single-handidly carry a Cavaliers team full of bad contracts and injuries past teams with better rosters minus the superstar, as the 4th seed, in a league where the top-2 teams in each conference tend to play for the conference crown. How is that enjoyable? Is it any wonder so many teams tank? It's the only way to have a chance in the league. Having a guy like Paul George (a very good player) as your star to build around doesn't get you Championships, you have to have the superstar to really compete and then you have to add the pieces to do so, all while trying to keep the main guy happy.
Meanwhile as you said, a team like the Coyotes can do anything if they sneak into the Stanley Cup Playoffs and you can build from there. The Hurricanes are a good example right now of this. The Blue Jackets took down the 62 win Lightning in the first round last season. The Predators as an 8th seed went to the Finals, the Kings won as an 8th seed. That doesn't happen in the NBA. If you're not a 3 or higher seed you've got next to no shot unless LeBron is on the roster.
