NBA Thread 2011-12

[naiwf]

I think it's ironic that Wade, who had a triple double, blew the game by missing a wide open pass because he was already planning to dunk the ball. Add in LeBron turning it over on one of the final possessions because he didn't want to pass to 'Melo and it was a microcosm of the Heat's problems in late game situations and what happens when 'Melo doesn't get the last shot in a one possession game

[Benjamin]

Does anyone know where I can find a replay of the All-Star game online? Preferably a free one? I was at class during the live telecast and at work during the replay, so I missed what was apparently an awesome game

Apologies if this is not allowed, though, not sure how free basketball on TV applies in the "Don't ask for certain video links" line.

[Panni]

It was pretty funny seeing Kobe & Carmelo get on Lebron's case for not at least trying to take that final shot and instead throwing that cross-court pass.

[Maxx]

So LeBron said he'd consider doing the Dunk Contest if it featured a one million dollar prize.

In other news, LeBron James can go fuck himself.

[Meacon Keaton]

See. Any time he talks, he sounds like an idiot. He really is stupid, I'm convinced.

[gunnar hendershow]

Sacramento and the Kings have struck an arena deal.

There is some justice in the world. Now we just need a team with a weak fanbase to move to Seattle and we'll be set.

[Blitz]

Sacramento and the Kings have struck an arena deal.

There is some justice in the world. Now we just need a team with a weak fanbase to move to Seattle and we'll be set.

The Hornets wave hello.

[Meacon Keaton]

I swear he had the Hornets in there and edited it out. That or my brain automatically processes "team with weak fanbase" into New Orleans.

[gunnar hendershow]

I did edit it out because there are a few teams who have some weak fanbases too but due to their histories aren't grouped in with New Orleans. I'm looking at you Milwaukee and Houston!

[Blitz]

Houston has a strong fanbase, or at least used to. I went to a few games and that place was raucous. I think the Grizzlies could be in that group, but I have no doubt that the Hornets will be the next franchise moved, and Seattle seems like the most likely destination.

NBA 2011/12 Attendance

[gunnar hendershow]

The playoff run last year basically saved basketball in Memphis. But that's a market that can survive if the team is good. There's no excuse for a place like Indiana, with a good team this year, to have such poor attendance. That used to be a thriving market, but ever since Larry Bird took over that has been far from the case. Milwaukee is just a very, very small market and despite the history I don't identify it as a basketball city. One of the biggest crimes in sports is that Milwaukee has a basketball team but no hockey team. That would be a city that would sell out a hockey game every night. But that's a different discussion.

Anyway, Hornets will certainly move and likely become the Sonics version 2. Didn't Seattle get to keep the team's name and things?

Also here's a list of NBA teams by TV market size.

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2011/03/nba-market-size-numbers-game/

[Blitz]

The playoff run last year basically saved basketball in Memphis. But that's a market that can survive if the team is good. There's no excuse for a place like Indiana, with a good team this year, to have such poor attendance. That used to be a thriving market, but ever since Larry Bird took over that has been far from the case. Milwaukee is just a very, very small market and despite the history I don't identify it as a basketball city. One of the biggest crimes in sports is that Milwaukee has a basketball team but no hockey team. That would be a city that would sell out a hockey game every night. But that's a different discussion.

Anyway, Hornets will certainly move and likely become the Sonics version 2. Didn't Seattle get to keep the team's name and things?

Also here's a list of NBA teams by TV market size.

http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2011/03/nba-market-size-numbers-game/

Yea, I remember reading an article that said when basketball comes back to Seattle, they would have the rights to the SuperSonics. I guess that's why it's not the Oklahoma City SuperSonics, even though I think there are plenty of reasons they wouldn't name the team that.

I agree that the run Memphis made last year created a buzz. Going to a Memphis game is quite an experience, too. They definitely embrace the culture there in Memphis. Before the game and during halftime they have a band that plays blue-sy/rock-n-roll music, which is kinda cool. They stadium is right in the middle of downtown, which I always enjoy a lot more than one out in the middle of nowhere. Now that Callipari is gone from Memphis, maybe more fans are turning their attention to pro basketball instead of college.

In a somewhat related note, I'd love to see the NBA expand after relocating New Orleans to Seattle and stabilizing the Kings' situation. While they're being hit hard with a failing economy in a couple of markets, I think teams in Vancouver and Mexico City are potential gold mines. I'd love to see Nash retire and then help bring the NBA back to his hometown. I think Vancouver could get behind him as either a co-owner or just upper management. Mexico City is intriguing because the NBA would be breaking new ground as far as major USA sports goes. They'd beat the other two major sports there (sorry NHL) and it's less than a three hour flight from Dallas, so it's not extremely out of the way.

At the least it's an interesting scenario to think about.

[gunnar hendershow]

Mexico City or Las Vegas would surely be the kind of cities an outgoing David Stern would try and put a team. Both are inevitably joining the ranks of American pro sports leagues at some point, it's a matter of when.

It's also a matter of when as to when our leagues get too big. The talent pool in basketball is deep, the second deepest talent pool in the entire world for a sport probably, but at a certain point there's just going to be too many teams to make the league work well.

[thuganomic]

Mexico City or Las Vegas would surely be the kind of cities an outgoing David Stern would try and put a team. Both are inevitably joining the ranks of American pro sports leagues at some point, it's a matter of when.

It's also a matter of when as to when our leagues get too big. The talent pool in basketball is deep, the second deepest talent pool in the entire world for a sport probably, but at a certain point there's just going to be too many teams to make the league work well.

The league only seems stacked because of the super-teams out there. For every Miami or New York, you've got a Charlotte, New Orleans, Detroit, Toronto...I can't see expansion being a good thing for this league right now.

[Blitz]

I wonder if the NBA could ever go to a rookie system like the MLB has. Rookie contracts are 4 years currently, IIRC. Adding two more years of team control could help, but I'm sure the player's union would never go for it. Maybe there could be benefits for reaching certain points, like if you become an All Star during your rookie contract, you're given a ___% raise in your contract. If the team doesn't honor that raise, you're able to hit FA earlier.

I'd also love to see the NBA bring back the ability to draft high school players. The caveat here, is that the player must play two seasons in the NBDL. This will coincide with the rule that players that are in college must stay until their sophomore year, but when drafted, can go straight to the NBA. The cons of drafting a high school player is that you lose two years under his NBA contract, meaning you'll only have control of him for four years. The pros of staying in college is two-fold, they can develop their game slower than they would be forced to in the NBA and also it helps the NCAA with a little continuity.

[thuganomic]

I wonder if the NBA could ever go to a rookie system like the MLB has. Rookie contracts are 4 years currently, IIRC. Adding two more years of team control could help, but I'm sure the player's union would never go for it. Maybe there could be benefits for reaching certain points, like if you become an All Star during your rookie contract, you're given a ___% raise in your contract. If the team doesn't honor that raise, you're able to hit FA earlier.

I'd also love to see the NBA bring back the ability to draft high school players. The caveat here, is that the player must play two seasons in the NBDL. This will coincide with the rule that players that are in college must stay until their sophomore year, but when drafted, can go straight to the NBA. The cons of drafting a high school player is that you lose two years under his NBA contract, meaning you'll only have control of him for four years. The pros of staying in college is two-fold, they can develop their game slower than they would be forced to in the NBA and also it helps the NCAA with a little continuity.

They'd have to raise the NBDL salaries considerably. Remember, minor leaguers get huge signing bonuses which helps make the decision easy. Not sure if the owners would be willing to pay for that, especially with high school players being pretty hit or miss.

[Maxx]

And the NCAA would pitch a huge fit.

[Blitz]

I wonder if the NBA could ever go to a rookie system like the MLB has. Rookie contracts are 4 years currently, IIRC. Adding two more years of team control could help, but I'm sure the player's union would never go for it. Maybe there could be benefits for reaching certain points, like if you become an All Star during your rookie contract, you're given a ___% raise in your contract. If the team doesn't honor that raise, you're able to hit FA earlier.

I'd also love to see the NBA bring back the ability to draft high school players. The caveat here, is that the player must play two seasons in the NBDL. This will coincide with the rule that players that are in college must stay until their sophomore year, but when drafted, can go straight to the NBA. The cons of drafting a high school player is that you lose two years under his NBA contract, meaning you'll only have control of him for four years. The pros of staying in college is two-fold, they can develop their game slower than they would be forced to in the NBA and also it helps the NCAA with a little continuity.

They'd have to raise the NBDL salaries considerably. Remember, minor leaguers get huge signing bonuses which helps make the decision easy. Not sure if the owners would be willing to pay for that, especially with high school players being pretty hit or miss.

That's the point though, they can either enter the draft and play basketball for two years for dirt cheap, and then jump into the NBA after facing considerably weaker talent, or prove themselves in college for two years against legit competition (not to mention gain national exposure) and probably get paid more. (I'm looking at you Kentucky.)

The idea isn't really to make going from high school to the NBA easy, it's to push players to play in college and refine their skills. However, every once in awhile there's that player like LeBron or Dwight that you KNOW is going to be a monster in the league. You can draft him, have him under team control, and ride your luck that you can improve the team enough in two years to make noise when the player arrives after his NBDL time. If you don't, he'll probably end up bolting for a bigger market once he's a free agent.

[JStarr]

And the NCAA would pitch a huge fit.

Since when has anyone given a shit what the NCAA thinks? Especially basketball, being dragged around by its collective hair while the football cavemen stagger toward the biggest pile of money to burn.

I wonder if the NBA could ever go to a rookie system like the MLB has. Rookie contracts are 4 years currently, IIRC. Adding two more years of team control could help, but I'm sure the player's union would never go for it. Maybe there could be benefits for reaching certain points, like if you become an All Star during your rookie contract, you're given a ___% raise in your contract. If the team doesn't honor that raise, you're able to hit FA earlier.

I'd also love to see the NBA bring back the ability to draft high school players. The caveat here, is that the player must play two seasons in the NBDL. This will coincide with the rule that players that are in college must stay until their sophomore year, but when drafted, can go straight to the NBA. The cons of drafting a high school player is that you lose two years under his NBA contract, meaning you'll only have control of him for four years. The pros of staying in college is two-fold, they can develop their game slower than they would be forced to in the NBA and also it helps the NCAA with a little continuity.

They'd have to raise the NBDL salaries considerably. Remember, minor leaguers get huge signing bonuses which helps make the decision easy. Not sure if the owners would be willing to pay for that, especially with high school players being pretty hit or miss.

That's the point though, they can either enter the draft and play basketball for two years for dirt cheap, and then jump into the NBA after facing considerably weaker talent, or prove themselves in college for two years against legit competition (not to mention gain national exposure) and probably get paid more. (I'm looking at you Kentucky.)

The idea isn't really to make going from high school to the NBA easy, it's to push players to play in college and refine their skills. However, every once in awhile there's that player like LeBron or Dwight that you KNOW is going to be a monster in the league. You can draft him, have him under team control, and ride your luck that you can improve the team enough in two years to make noise when the player arrives after his NBDL time. If you don't, he'll probably end up bolting for a bigger market once he's a free agent.

What Blitz is proposing is similar to where I've been the past several years. Players need to understand there's an opportunity cost to either choice. Owners would probably be okay with paying for a hefty signing bonus if they think there's a chance to groom a player the way they want to for two seasons.

The only problem is that some teams would be angry that their players aren't being used the way they want them to be, since you'd have players under rights to several different teams playing on a single NBDL team. Only way around that is for each NBA team to have its own D-League affiliate, and that is definitely a major hurdle, probably too big to get over.

[Blitz]

And the NCAA would pitch a huge fit.

Since when has anyone given a shit what the NCAA thinks? Especially basketball, being dragged around by its collective hair while the football cavemen stagger toward the biggest pile of money to burn.

I wonder if the NBA could ever go to a rookie system like the MLB has. Rookie contracts are 4 years currently, IIRC. Adding two more years of team control could help, but I'm sure the player's union would never go for it. Maybe there could be benefits for reaching certain points, like if you become an All Star during your rookie contract, you're given a ___% raise in your contract. If the team doesn't honor that raise, you're able to hit FA earlier.

I'd also love to see the NBA bring back the ability to draft high school players. The caveat here, is that the player must play two seasons in the NBDL. This will coincide with the rule that players that are in college must stay until their sophomore year, but when drafted, can go straight to the NBA. The cons of drafting a high school player is that you lose two years under his NBA contract, meaning you'll only have control of him for four years. The pros of staying in college is two-fold, they can develop their game slower than they would be forced to in the NBA and also it helps the NCAA with a little continuity.

They'd have to raise the NBDL salaries considerably. Remember, minor leaguers get huge signing bonuses which helps make the decision easy. Not sure if the owners would be willing to pay for that, especially with high school players being pretty hit or miss.

That's the point though, they can either enter the draft and play basketball for two years for dirt cheap, and then jump into the NBA after facing considerably weaker talent, or prove themselves in college for two years against legit competition (not to mention gain national exposure) and probably get paid more. (I'm looking at you Kentucky.)

The idea isn't really to make going from high school to the NBA easy, it's to push players to play in college and refine their skills. However, every once in awhile there's that player like LeBron or Dwight that you KNOW is going to be a monster in the league. You can draft him, have him under team control, and ride your luck that you can improve the team enough in two years to make noise when the player arrives after his NBDL time. If you don't, he'll probably end up bolting for a bigger market once he's a free agent.

What Blitz is proposing is similar to where I've been the past several years. Players need to understand there's an opportunity cost to either choice. Owners would probably be okay with paying for a hefty signing bonus if they think there's a chance to groom a player the way they want to for two seasons.

The only problem is that some teams would be angry that their players aren't being used the way they want them to be, since you'd have players under rights to several different teams playing on a single NBDL team. Only way around that is for each NBA team to have its own D-League affiliate, and that is definitely a major hurdle, probably too big to get over.

If MLB can manage to maintain five-six minor league affiliates per team, surely the NBA could figure out a way to provide each team with just one.