NBA Season 2011-12 Thread

[Brando70]

It is a shame that it's happening now because the NBA has really improved in the last few years. After an awful Cubs season and what looks like a bad Bears season, I was looking forward to watching Derrick Rose and the Bulls again. But I think the owners are going to be much more hard-nosed with this stoppage than the NFL owners were. There was a sense of not wanting to kill the golden goose in football. The NBA lockout has a much different feel.

[Rodster]

The owners have the upper hand NOW but that could change if the superstars commit to playing overseas.

[wco81]

The owners make claims of losses but like the NFL owners, they won't open the books.

They demand 50/50 and apparently the players offered to go from 57 to 53 but the owners refused to budge?

Something smells fishy about the owners' claims of financial distress.

The zero-sum trade-off at the heart of the NBA lockout is just the first
of many questions. There are plenty of follow-ups that owners should
have to answer, but so far have almost completely avoided. For example,
if owners are losing money — a claim that the NBA has made hard to
verify by its refusal to open its books — is there any evidence that
those losses have resulted from things other than the owners’ own
mistakes or constraints inherent in their market? Why should the
players as a whole earn less for their services because some owners are
poor evaluators of talent or make terrible economic choices? If TV
deals in Charlotte and Minneapolis end up being less lucrative than TV
deals in LA and New York, why should the players be forced to give up
their income to help owners make up the difference? The NBA owners were
the ones that voted to expand into smaller, riskier markets — shouldn’t
they be the ones to foot the bill when those experiments go awry?

Even in the past week’s last-ditch negotiations, the lines drawn in the
sand by the NBA were presented without justification. Why did the NBA
players need to give up 7 percentage points of BRI to get to a 50/50
split, rather than just the 4 points they had offered (worth about $160
million in salary this year alone)?

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/warriors/2 ... analogies/

[greggsand]

The owners have the upper hand NOW but that could change if the superstars commit to playing overseas.

That would have zero impact. No superstar is going to come close to making overseas what they do here. The 30 top players in the nba could go play in Italy & the owners could care less knowing they will all come running back to the nba as soon as a deal is worked out. AND in the case of current "bloated" NBA contracts, the owners would love that guy to goes play somewhere else & get hurt (which could void his current contract or have to forfeit some of it).

Unless a bunch of billionaires want to get to together & start their own league & start paying superstars 20 million a year, there is nothing that threatens the current NBA owners.

The players are going to get so burned the longer this goes on. Bill Simmons likes to compare it to the writers strike a few years ago (where the writer's guild accomplished NOTHING but a bunch of missed paychecks). He's probably right.

[Brando70]

The owners have the upper hand NOW but that could change if the superstars commit to playing overseas.

That would have zero impact. No superstar is going to come close to making overseas what they do here. The 30 top players in the nba could go play in Italy & the owners could care less knowing they will all come running back to the nba as soon as a deal is worked out. AND in the case of current "bloated" NBA contracts, the owners would love that guy to goes play somewhere else & get hurt (which could void his current contract or have to forfeit some of it).

Unless a bunch of billionaires want to get to together & start their own league & start paying superstars 20 million a year, there is nothing that threatens the current NBA owners.

The players are going to get so burned the longer this goes on. Bill Simmons likes to compare it to the writers strike a few years ago (where the writer's guild accomplished NOTHING but a bunch of missed paychecks). He's probably right.

I think that's very accurate. I think it would be in the players' best interest to take the 50/50 deal, make less during the tenure of this CBA, and renegotiate. Otherwise I think the whole season will be lost, which hurts the players far more than it hurts the owners. A significant reduction in salary is better than a catastrophic loss of salary. They lose some face but at the same time it would help their public perception and strengthen their position when they wanted to increase their percentage.

[Rodster]

Well Kobe is looking to play in Italy for chump change but then again he owns some of the team so he has a vested interest. I side with the players on this one as well as the NFL. It's the owners who pay the stupid money because they want to win the Championship. If they had self control players would not get multi-million dollar contracts for players who don't perform.

In the end it will massively hurt the league because most in the US only care about the NFL. The one thing that the NBA did not capitalize on from last year was the attention and hype of the Big 3 in Miami. I'll admit I rarely watched the NBA until last year.

[pk500]

Well Kobe is looking to play in Italy for chump change but then again he owns some of the team so he has a vested interest. I side with the players on this one as well as the NFL. It's the owners who pay the stupid money because they want to win the Championship. If they had self control players would not get multi-million dollar contracts for players who don't perform.

Kobe's deal with Bologna will be $3 million for 10 games. That's equivalent to nearly $25 million for a full NBA schedule. It's not chump change.

In the end it will massively hurt the league because most in the US only care about the NFL. The one thing that the NBA did not capitalize on from last year was the attention and hype of the Big 3 in Miami. I'll admit I rarely watched the NBA until last year.

How did the NBA not capitalize on the attention of "The Big Three" in Miami? National TV ratings were up last season on every network, fueled quite a bit by James, Wade and Bosh fusing their talents on South Beach. People watched because they wanted them to succeed; people watched because they wanted them to fail. But people watched.

So to say the NBA didn't capitalize on three stars playing in Miami -- and Carmelo coming to New York -- is crazy. The NBA's problem is that Stern settled on an unbalanced CBA that tilted too much power and money to the players in the last labor deal a few years ago. And even with that imbalance, the owners continued to throw stupid money at marginal players.

It's ironic that Cavs owner Dan Gilbert, one of the more strident voices during this lockout for a hard salary cap to help smaller markets, was one of the most egregious offenders of overpaying mediocre players. The Cavs had the highest payroll in the league -- nearly $117 million -- in 2009-10, their last with LeBron.

The NBA is pissing away during this lockout the momentum it gained through "The Big Three," just as the NHL did with its lost season the year after the Rangers brought the Stanley Cup to the largest media market in the world for the first time in 54 years.

[Rodster]

Well Kobe is looking to play in Italy for chump change but then again he owns some of the team so he has a vested interest. I side with the players on this one as well as the NFL. It's the owners who pay the stupid money because they want to win the Championship. If they had self control players would not get multi-million dollar contracts for players who don't perform.

Kobe's deal with Bologna will be $3 million for 10 games. That's equivalent to nearly $25 million for a full NBA schedule. It's not chump change.

In the end it will massively hurt the league because most in the US only care about the NFL. The one thing that the NBA did not capitalize on from last year was the attention and hype of the Big 3 in Miami. I'll admit I rarely watched the NBA until last year.

How did the NBA not capitalize on the attention of "The Big Three" in Miami? National TV ratings were up last season on every network, fueled quite a bit by James, Wade and Bosh fusing their talents on South Beach. People watched because they wanted them to succeed; people watched because they wanted them to fail. But people watched.

So to say the NBA didn't capitalize on three stars playing in Miami -- and Carmelo coming to New York -- is crazy. The NBA's problem is that Stern settled on an unbalanced CBA that tilted too much power and money to the players in the last labor deal a few years ago. And even with that imbalance, the owners continued to throw stupid money at marginal players.

It's ironic that Cavs owner Dan Gilbert, one of the more strident voices during this lockout for a hard salary cap to help smaller markets, was one of the most egregious offenders of overpaying mediocre players. The Cavs had the highest payroll in the league -- nearly $117 million -- in 2009-10, their last with LeBron.

The NBA is pissing away during this lockout the momentum it gained through "The Big Three," just as the NHL did with its lost season the year after the Rangers brought the Stanley Cup to the largest media market in the world for the first time in 54 years.

You read into my comments wrong m8, that's what I was referring to in my comments. As for Kobe, I had read in an article that he was playing for in the range of $30,000 and then it was noted that he has a vested interest in the team. Either I read it wrong (wouldn't be a first ask db. ) or the numbers changed.

[greggsand]

Kobe's deal with Bologna will be $3 million for 10 games. That's equivalent to nearly $25 million for a full NBA schedule. It's not chump change.

It's also not a signed deal. This is nothing more than talk. Don't forget Bologna first announced this possible deal while season tickets for Bologna were on sale, then they announced a few weeks ago that it was all falling through (the day AFTER the season ticket window had closed). Now supposedly talks are back on again. All very shady. Regardless, Bologna is jumping through a million hoops just to get 1 guy signed. Now, imagine trying to sign a full roster. Europe simply isn't prepared.

[pk500]

I bet that $3 million deal is a hell of a lot closer to reality than playing for $30,000 with team ownership rights. No way Kobe risks serious injury for 30 grand.

[F308GTB]

On the way home yesterday it was mentioned on the radio that negotiations were breaking down again. This got me thinking - it doesn't seem like anyone misses the NBA. Perhaps it's because we are in the meat of the NFL season, crunch time in the NCAA, stories like Paterno take so much attention away, I know the Rockets will suck and the Texans actually don't this year, or I simply don't have a care for basketball anymore. Whatever it is, I just done sense a desire by fans to get the lockout over, so it makes me wonder what the attendance impact will be when finally resolved. What's the mood in other markets?

And note that this is the first reply to the NBA thread in a month - very telling...

[vinny-b]

On the way home yesterday it was mentioned on the radio that negotiations were breaking down again. This got me thinking - it doesn't seem like anyone misses the NBA. Perhaps it's because we are in the meat of the NFL season, crunch time in the NCAA, stories like Paterno take so much attention away, I know the Rockets will suck and the Texans actually don't this year, or I simply don't have a care for basketball anymore. Whatever it is, I just done sense a desire by fans to get the lockout over, so it makes me wonder what the attendance impact will be when finally resolved. What's the mood in other markets?

And note that this is the first reply to the NBA thread in a month - very telling...

when the Phoenix Suns and/or Pacers are not winning, the NBA league doesn't exist. Definitely a fair-weather NBA fan.

[pk500]

On the way home yesterday it was mentioned on the radio that negotiations were breaking down again. This got me thinking - it doesn't seem like anyone misses the NBA. Perhaps it's because we are in the meat of the NFL season, crunch time in the NCAA, stories like Paterno take so much attention away, I know the Rockets will suck and the Texans actually don't this year, or I simply don't have a care for basketball anymore. Whatever it is, I just done sense a desire by fans to get the lockout over, so it makes me wonder what the attendance impact will be when finally resolved. What's the mood in other markets?

And note that this is the first reply to the NBA thread in a month - very telling...

It remains trendy for upper-middle class suburban professional white dudes -- who comprise a healthy majority of DSP members, I believe -- to bag on the NBA. I know: I was part of that critical group until last season, when my love affair with the Association was rekindled after about 17 years of indifference.

The quality of play in the NBA is superb. Unbelievable athletes, incredible skill. The highest level of basketball on Earth. College hoop isn't even close. And many of the cliches that us angry white dudes like to spout about the NBA are untrue. "They can't play defense." "They can't shoot." "Every offense consists of a clear-out for the superstar player to go one-on-one while his four teammates stand around."

All bullsh*t. Every one of them.

People must care more about the NBA than you think, because the Association enjoyed record ratings last season. It's the second most-popular TV sport in America behind football, so it can't be hurting that badly. The NBA is more popular than baseball. More popular than golf. More popular than the NHL. More popular than NASCAR.

No one is talking in the NBA season thread because there is little to discuss. None of the major issues and hurdles surrounding the lockout have changed. It's a stalemate of egos, not a true labor negotiation.

But the NBA's product on the court is good. Damn good.

[F308GTB]

Not saying NBA play is bad, but I'm not hearing any clamor about the lockout. In past strike/lockout situations with MLB and NFL, local sports radio was abuzz with fan frustration. NBA lockout seems like "Eh, whatever."

[greggsand]

Not saying NBA play is bad, but I'm not hearing any clamor about the lockout. In past strike/lockout situations with MLB and NFL, local sports radio was abuzz with fan frustration. NBA lockout seems like "Eh, whatever."

Well, we aren't past the point of no return (yet). The thought of a 72 game "jam packed" schedule sounds great to me. The day they "can" the season, you'll heard the outcry. BTW, if I was in Houston, I wouldn't be too upset about missing their team either.

[pk500]

Not saying NBA play is bad, but I'm not hearing any clamor about the lockout. In past strike/lockout situations with MLB and NFL, local sports radio was abuzz with fan frustration. NBA lockout seems like "Eh, whatever."

Many reasons for that.

One, this is more of a battle of egos than substance, which turns off a lot of people. Two, labor strife fatigue is starting to set in with American sports fans. First, it was the NFL lockout. Now the NBA lockout. Sports labor strife is getting old.

Three, the NBA has a ridiculous median salary. I think only baseball is higher. That tends to breed less empathy and more indifference. Four, these sides never have been close to a deal. Football always was close; it was just a matter of dividing a huge pie of revenue. The NBA lockout features owners who say they're going broke and players who say that's not their problem. A much larger gulf to bridge, with deep philosophical rifts.

I also think Stern is way more of a megalomaniacal prick than Goodell. Acrimony has been the only constant of the NBA talks.

[pk500]

Well, we aren't past the point of no return (yet). The thought of a 72 game "jam packed" schedule sounds great to me.

Not me. Truncated training camps and packed seasons will lead to more injuries and a big-time decay in the quality of play, at least for the first few months.

Stern needs to strike a balance between the owners' need to recoup lost revenue and maintaining high quality of play when the schedule is drawn up after the lockout ends. Which, of course, means we'll see as many games packed into the schedule as possible, considering Stern always has treated the players with the contempt reserved for menial hired hands.

[greggsand]

Well, we aren't past the point of no return (yet). The thought of a 72 game "jam packed" schedule sounds great to me.

Not me. Truncated training camps and packed seasons will lead to more injuries and a big-time decay in the quality of play, at least for the first few months.

Stern needs to strike a balance between the owners' need to recoup lost revenue and maintaining high quality of play when the schedule is drawn up after the lockout ends. Which, of course, means we'll see as many games packed into the schedule as possible, considering Stern always has treated the players with the contempt reserved for menial hired hands.

I getcha, but Oct/Nov basketball has always been a little shaky. It would def work in-favor of the younger teams (OKC, Utah, the Clippers???). Teams like LA, Boston, an SA will have balance their rotations carefully.

[wco81]

I miss it. As bad as the Warriors will be, I would watch them and I haven't bothered to catch the Sharks yet this year.

During the week, there is only so much NFL news you can take. I'm seeing poker on ESPN for the first time in a long time. That's a sign that there is a void. Now if they want to put up some EPL or La Liga games on, that would be great but Fox has those and it costs $10 more on Direct TV.

As for the labor issue, looks like the owners are going to get their way. Glamor team will continue to dominate. One fact that came out is that the Lakers' local TV deal is worth 10 times what the TrailBlazers' TV deal is. How do you compete with that unless there's a hard cap without any loopholes?

But NBA isn't interested in NFL-style parity. Or at least a more level playing field. And they wonder why several of their franchises are losing money and have to keep moving or as was the case last year, the league had to take them over.

[dbdynsty25]

I would hate a compressed season. Sure, it'll give you NBA hoops nearly every night for your favorite teams, but injuries are going to be HUGE as PK said. I'd rather see them use the normal NBA schedule and if that means 50 games, that's fine with me.

And the reason it hasn't been talked about, as PK also mentioned, is because nothing has happened. We (the four NBA fans on this board) are in limbo...just waiting until something is resolved. There's no free agency movement, no trades, nothing...what are we gonna talk about?

[fsquid]

Season is too long for me. 82 games to eliminate less than half the teams from contention? I loved the 50 game season in 1999. Playoffs were great last year, especially with the hometown GRizz going on a run.

[EZSnappin]

One of my friends is trying to talk me into going to Josh Howard's charity game tomorrow. I can't muster up the interest to see an And1-style exhibition; I want organized, competitive hoops. With plays. And coaching. These all-star games just depress me.

[fsquid]

The one in Memphis had Lebron and the tickets were only $20. They drew around 5k to the game.

[EZSnappin]

Didn't go; won free tickets to see Bobby Brown, Johnny Gill and Ralph Tresvant same night. That was fun.

So, I guess we might have been a bit early starting a thread for this season. Prospects getting worse by the hour.

[Brando70]

I would hate a compressed season. Sure, it'll give you NBA hoops nearly every night for your favorite teams, but injuries are going to be HUGE as PK said. I'd rather see them use the normal NBA schedule and if that means 50 games, that's fine with me.

And the reason it hasn't been talked about, as PK also mentioned, is because nothing has happened. We (the four NBA fans on this board) are in limbo...just waiting until something is resolved. There's no free agency movement, no trades, nothing...what are we gonna talk about?

I agree on the schedule. I understand the desire to capture as much revenue as possible but a compressed schedule would almost certainly hurt the quality of play.

I am really bummed at the thought of not seeing Derrick Rose and the Bulls play this year. Sure, the first two months of the season can seem like they don't matter much, but you can say that about any major sport outside of pro and college football. There was still the fun of flipping on the game and watching on any given night.