Posted by TrueBlue:
Posted by BlueSeats:
Posted by tkf:
Posted by TrueBlue:
Posted by tkf:
Posted by TrueBlue:
Posted by playa2:
If every owner wanted to put winning championships and money profits #,1+2 on their list you wouldn't have players dogging it or demanding trades.
Owners and agents have ruined sports , notn just the players !
I don't care what vantage point this is looked upon, it's all a result of Stern's inept to run a league with integrity and that keeps fans first.
[Edited by - TrueBlue on 06-06-2007 1:46 PM]
The NBA made a huge mistake by marketing players first and Teams second. Next the league should have never caved into giving these long guaranteed deals with such a tight cap. The league has to get down to 3 year guaranteed deals and that is it, you will find a league with better teams, more competitive, and players who will actually have to compete for a roster spot or end up out of the league in a few years... these long term deals are going to kill the NBA....
You have to chuckle a little, 2yrs ago Stern scaled back those long term deals/contracts a yr. He has such a hard on for his idiotic vision. He wants stars to stay on 1 team, yet doesn't want those stars to have any long term financial stability because in all honesty he probably wants them on shorter term/non guaranteed deals himself, yet creates this cesspool with the owners...... an f'd up cap & lottery platform that allows owners a total out to..... just make money, shiit on winning, and with every mulligan hope they find that diamond in the rough player every 5-7yrs or so. This league is as close to a video game as it gets, if things aren't going well just hit the reset button.
[Edited by - TrueBlue on 06-07-2007 10:19 AM]
well the NBA did a good thing by allowing the team to sign their own players to the most money and even if they are over the cap they could sign and keep their own FA's. that is fine, but the 7 year guaranteed deal is a killer, it kills teams, I mean that is like the "silver surfer" of the NBA instead of wiping out planets, those contracts are going to wipe out the league. I don't see any upside to these types of deals, I mean what was stern vision in this?
I'm not sure what you guys are talking about. The owners want the long deals to lock in stars. Notice when Wade, Bron, Melo, etc, signed their post-rookie extensions they chose short 4 year deals because they didn't want to be locked in. Surely the owners would prefer to keep them forever. It takes a bit of personal savvy and responsibility on the part of the players and GMs. Players have to be willing to sign short deals if they want flexibility, and owners have to spend responsibly. The teams who survive are the ones with good management who players want to play for.
The player's union is very strong and every time the CBA is up for renewal the players threaten a lock-out, which really hurts the league. Both sides need to be placated, and thus, most situations are less than perfect compromise solutions.
As for marketing, you almost have to market stars over teams because the league is so diluted now it's a rare team that has more than one star on the roster, and thus there are few dynasties and rivalries worth noting. I don't really see a cure for the dilution problem other than things like age limits, which in theory could bring in more NBA ready players, but even such rules as imposing a rule like a 19 year age limit is met with accusations of racism.
What Stern wants more than anything else is a strong, profitable league with parity of talent, but try to find unanimity on how to get there.
That's what I was getting at Blue. I think Stern has a vision except has two sides to deal with and tilts more in favor of one side. I think Stern is Pro Owners and Owners want large profits and long term deals only with Superstars, therein lies the problem because Stern also wants to market the league globally and has to cater to the Player's Union because players makeup the league. As you said Teams don't anymore because Stern has allowed more teams/franchises to surface, tapping into these semi hopeful markets so that each can have their own hopeful Micheal Jordan. With 1 star ran teams, stars have adjusted to the fact that "hey I am this franchise and I hold it in the palm of my hand". Now we have a hostage situation. Alonzo Mourning(New Jersey/Raptor/Miami), Paul Pierce(Porltand/Boston), A.I. & Webber(Philly) K.G.(Minny), Jermaine O'neal(Pacers), Shaq(Lakers), NVE(Dallas/Warriors) Ron Artest(Pacer/Kings), Corey Magette(Clippers), Kobe & Odom(Lakers) Payton (Seattle) etc etc. And of all leagues this is the worst when it comes to coach vs players. We also have large markets becoming footnotes in this league. My question is where's the fans in all of this?
Stern works for the owners -- they pay his salary and they can vote him out. He has to be responsive to their concerns, which includes keeping the fans happy. If he were truly the worst commissioner in sports, as you assert, the owners would vote him out.
You ask where are the fans in all this while decrying expansion, but expansion is a large part of accommodating fans who want a local team, and want their local team to have a shot to evolve and compete.
Part of keeping the owners happy is creating a parity system whereby expansion teams can improve, small market teams can compete, past prime teams can rebuild, and player's concerned can be accommodated within reason.
You seem to ascribe much of the problems of the league to the marketing of players, and you blame stern directly for this. First off, I'm not sure Stern is as responsible as you assume. Sneaker companies do the same, they sell shoes via player's not teams, and I don't think stern is directing their marketing efforts. I grew up wearing Puma "Clydes" well before Stern became the commish.
I'm also not sure marketing players is a bad idea. There are expansion teams who've never been good, and old teams who've been bad for years, how else, if not with stars, can they promote themselves? "Tune in next Thursday to watch the hapless Grizzlies take on the Dynastic Spurs"?
The primary reason that NBA players have more juice than in other sports is because of how few players comprise a basketball team. No team of any sport wants discontented stars, but especially not teams where the star comprise 20% of their starting line-up.
I too would like to see less prima donnas in the league but have you seen fan response to any efforts to reign in player rights? Players coming off the bench during altercations is "fascistic"; dress codes and age limits are "racist"; whatever the duration of max contracts it's offensive; etc. Fans want the players to rule the league, until a player lets his feelings be known, even if, like in the case of Odom, it's merely a rumor.
So I ask you, lets pretend Stern gets fired tomorrow, what are the new rules you'd like enacted to balance all these concerns?
6/8/2007 8:28 AM