the NBA is a joke - Dwight Howard wants to leave for New York or L.A.

[hn3108]

Too many teams in the NBA

May need to downsize

20 competitive teams would be more entertaining than what we have now

First off you do realize because of this season many outsiders and irrational people would argue our franchise would need to go. Do you want that?
Secondly, can you imagine the hell losing ten teams would do to the cities, the economies of those cities, and the fight those teams would put up to keep their franchise afloat? The legal ties that team may have to the city or arena. Plus, how do you plan on reimbursing the owners. "Heres the forbes value of your team, I dont care about anything that happens after we buy the team from you only to blow it up".

 

[Chris]

First off you do realize because of this season many outsiders and irrational people would argue our franchise would need to go. Do you want that?
Secondly, can you imagine the hell losing ten teams would do to the cities, the economies of those cities, and the fight those teams would put up to keep their franchise afloat? The legal ties that team may have to the city or arena. Plus, how do you plan on reimbursing the owners. "Heres the forbes value of your team, I dont care about anything that happens after we buy the team from you only to blow it up".

Why have a franchise if it has 0 chance of ever winning? Pointless to me. So, yes, if the league is moving towards stars teaming up on teams I would like to see mass contraction. Otherwise, the league will not be entertaining and it will ruin my enjoyment of the sport. Don't want that to happen.

 

[ken kaniff]

First off you do realize because of this season many outsiders and irrational people would argue our franchise would need to go. Do you want that?
Secondly, can you imagine the hell losing ten teams would do to the cities, the economies of those cities, and the fight those teams would put up to keep their franchise afloat? The legal ties that team may have to the city or arena. Plus, how do you plan on reimbursing the owners. "Heres the forbes value of your team, I dont care about anything that happens after we buy the team from you only to blow it up".

If a team cannot even entice good free agents from signing, then I have no qualms eliminating them from the NBA. If Dan Gilbert doesn't want to lose his team, he should figure out how to bring in free agents. If he can't do that, then he doesn't deserve a team. I'd much rather have a league with 20 competitive teams, than a league with 10 good teams and 20 that are garbage.

 

[Triumph36]

First off you do realize because of this season many outsiders and irrational people would argue our franchise would need to go. Do you want that?
Secondly, can you imagine the hell losing ten teams would do to the cities, the economies of those cities, and the fight those teams would put up to keep their franchise afloat? The legal ties that team may have to the city or arena. Plus, how do you plan on reimbursing the owners. "Heres the forbes value of your team, I dont care about anything that happens after we buy the team from you only to blow it up".

If they cut 10 teams (they obv would never ever do that), including Cleveland in those 10 wouldn't be irrational.

 

[Nom]

If a team cannot even entice good free agents from signing, then I have no qualms eliminating them from the NBA. If Dan Gilbert doesn't want to lose his team, he should figure out how to bring in free agents. If he can't do that, then he doesn't deserve a team. I'd much rather have a league with 20 competitive teams, than a league with 10 good teams and 20 that are garbage.

That would cut out the entire midwest and leave Florida, Texas, New York, California and pretty much nothing else. I don't see cutting off 1/2 the country as a good business model.

And I enjoy that you are blaming Dan Gilbert for Cleveland not being a hot spot. Free agents want warm weather and shoe deals. You don't get that in Cleveland, and it ain't Dan Gilbert's fault.

 

[Mdog1]

That would cut out the entire midwest and leave Florida, Texas, New York, California and pretty much nothing else. I don't see cutting off 1/2 the country as a good business model.

And I enjoy that you are blaming Dan Gilbert for Cleveland not being a hot spot. Free agents want warm weather and shoe deals. You don't get that in Cleveland, and it ain't Dan Gilbert's fault.

Shut up noobz of course it's Gilberts fault. He should buy a weather machine to change the weather and he should buy the entire downtown so he can make it nothing but strip and dance clubs so players want to go there. Duh.

 

[ken kaniff]

That would cut out the entire midwest and leave Florida, Texas, New York, California and pretty much nothing else. I don't see cutting off 1/2 the country as a good business model.

And I enjoy that you are blaming Dan Gilbert for Cleveland not being a hot spot. Free agents want warm weather and shoe deals. You don't get that in Cleveland, and it ain't Dan Gilbert's fault.

I don't really care who's fault it is.

You forgot Boston on your list as well. And Utah. And Phoenix.

But regardless, the current model is failing. No FAs will voluntarily sign with the Cavs. And I'm sure there are plenty of major cities outside of the US that would be able to attract decent players. A model that has 10 US teams and 10 Euro teams would likely be better for the sport than having teams in Minnesota and Indiana.

 

[Rainman]

What reality do YOU live in?

Well, yes, a small market team may luckily put together a team to win a championship every once in 25 years and that same team may contend for multiple championships.

BUTTTTTT, the NBA has turned in to championship, ring chasing premadonnas that want to go to big market cities to market their "brand".

The chances of more Tim Duncans coming into the league are slim to none since the league is letting in younger and younger uneducated selfish me-players. They may have to play on small market teams for more than a few years because they are drafted, but after that they bolt!

Cleveland can't even win with arguably one of the best players ever. Do you seriously think they can ever win?

I don't.

Cleveland didn't win with Lebron because Lebron didn't let it happen. Michael Jordan won multiple championships because he cared more about winning and team. Michael stayed on the same team throughout his career and won 6 championships. Look at Kobe a Laker for life, eventhough it is L.A. , he did have a chance to leave and now has 5 rings with the same team.

 

[KI4MVP]

Open land? Is that opposed to having closed land? I don't even know what that means. I lived there for two years. I lived in Austin for two years as well. Those two cities are about a 40 minute drive apart. Houston is about 2 1/2 hours from SA. What open land are you talking about?

This thread is stupid. For one thing, we know damn well any new agreement is going to address this James situation and other situations that may come about. I'm not concerned. If the management of teams makes good decisions, any team can win in the NBA.

open land as opposed to suburbs. We drove from san antonio to corpus christi and there was absolutely nothing the whole way there. No houses, no businesses. We were worried we were going to run out of gas because we couldn't even find an exit with a gas station for a long time. And even to find that we had to get off the interstate and drive about 5 miles to a town that had one. Not at all like driving out of cleveland (or pretty much any other city I've been to)

 

[Mad Hatter]

The troubling thing with basketball is the players are now circumventing the measures that were put in place to help teams retain their players. Extensions and the extra year and higher raises Bird rights provide were supposed to help teams retain players. Instead players are leaving and still getting their extensions and 6th year by forcing trades and sign and trades.

LeBron and Bosh left, yet both got the same 6th year Wade got.
Carmelo is using his right to sign an extension to force a trade to his team of choice.

It's a real problem that will damage the league.

Exactly. A lot of people are missing this.

The NBA is structured in a way so that teams have a chance to keep their star players, because they can offer them the longest contract and most money in free agency. So if a star wants to leave his team, he has to take less money to do it. Also, they can't just go to any other team, they have to choose from teams that have enough cap space to sign them. That is why until recently, few stars other than Shaq left in free agency.

Now the stars are realizing they can blackmail their own teams by demanding a trade, completely bypass free agency, get sent to a team of THEIR choosing that otherwise probably wouldn't be able to sign them as a free agent, AND get the max amount of money for it! This is the problem, and it has very little to do with the sizes of cities and markets that a lot of people here are arguing about.

 

[ButterMPancakes]

Exactly. A lot of people are missing this.

The NBA is structured in a way so that teams have a chance to keep their star players, because they can offer them the longest contract and most money in free agency. So if a star wants to leave his team, he has to take less money to do it. Also, they can't just go to any other team, they have to choose from teams that have enough cap space to sign them. That is why until recently, few stars other than Shaq left in free agency.

Now the stars are realizing they can blackmail their own teams by demanding a trade, completely bypass free agency, get sent to a team of THEIR choosing that otherwise probably wouldn't be able to sign them as a free agent, AND get the max amount of money for it! This is the problem, and it has very little to do with the sizes of cities and markets that a lot of people here are arguing about.

How is this a problem? Teams aren't forced to do it. They can very well let the players walk away for nothing. It's not a smart business decision to let them walk away for nothing, but it's 100% up to the GMs.

 

[Mad Hatter]

How is this a problem? Teams aren't forced to do it. They can very well let the players walk away for nothing. It's not a smart business decision to let them walk away for nothing, but it's 100% up to the GMs.

It's a problem because it's blackmail. You say it's up to the GMs, but they don't really have a choice. They either take a stand and prevent the player from doing this - thus losing their star and getting nothing in return. Or they give in, trade their star and at least get a few pieces in return. They don't really want to do either, but they have to pick the one where they are compensated. Their hand is forced.

How do you see that it's NOT a problem, and a bad precedent? There are rules in place to try to help teams keep their own players, and the players are trying to bypass these rules. There is supposed to be a financial incentive for staying with your original team, yet they are able to leave their team (plus handpick their new team) and still get the incentive.

I mean, if the players can decide on a whim to change teams when they aren't even free agents yet, why do we even have a draft? Why not just let rookies sign with any team?

 

[ButterMPancakes]

It's a problem because it's blackmail. You say it's up to the GMs, but they don't really have a choice. They either take a stand and prevent the player from doing this - thus losing their star and getting nothing in return. Or they give in, trade their star and at least get a few pieces in return. They don't really want to do either, but they have to pick the one where they are compensated. Their hand is forced.

How do you see that it's NOT a problem, and a bad precedent? There are rules in place to try to help teams keep their own players, and the players are trying to bypass these rules. There is supposed to be a financial incentive for staying with your original team, yet they are able to leave their team (plus handpick their new team) and still get the incentive.

I mean, if the players can decide on a whim to change teams when they aren't even free agents yet, why do we even have a draft? Why not just let rookies sign with any team?

How is it blackmail? Unless you don't want Free Agency at all, if anything, it's a way to help the teams a bit. If a player is going to leave when he's a FA, why not let them team at least get a TPE out of it? If the team wants to play the way you think they should, then they will let the players walk and sign for less money. . . but that's a bad business decision. Are you saying there shouldn't be a Free Agency or are you saying that the CBA should not allow teams to sign and trade players to prevent players from going to another team and still making max money?



Players can decide on a "whim" however they want. The teams don't have to abide.


Say Melo never says anything about leaving, goes into FA and signs with the Knicks for the max. Best case scenario for Denver is. . . Melo's expiring, or maybe they can do what the Cavs did and get a TPE. If things go the way you want them to, Melo never says anything, signs with the Knicks, and all Denver gets is a nice contract off the book.


Now, you have what Melo did, which was let his team know he was going to become a FA and most likely sign with the Knicks and maybe a few other teams. He's still playing for Denver but is letting them get offers. If they can get Chandler or Galo/Curry's expiring, it would be a hell of a lot better than nothing.

 

[Mad Hatter]

How is it blackmail? Unless you don't want Free Agency at all, if anything, it's a way to help the teams a bit. If a player is going to leave when he's a FA, why not let them team at least get a TPE out of it? If the team wants to play the way you think they should, then they will let the players walk and sign for less money. . . but that's a bad business decision. Are you saying there shouldn't be a Free Agency or are you saying that the CBA should not allow teams to sign and trade players to prevent players from going to another team and still making max money?

Players can decide on a "whim" however they want. The teams don't have to abide.

Say Melo never says anything about leaving, goes into FA and signs with the Knicks for the max. Best case scenario for Denver is. . . Melo's expiring, or maybe they can do what the Cavs did and get a TPE. If things go the way you want them to, Melo never says anything, signs with the Knicks, and all Denver gets is a nice contract off the book.

Now, you have what Melo did, which was let his team know he was going to become a FA and most likely sign with the Knicks and maybe a few other teams. He's still playing for Denver but is letting them get offers. If they can get Chandler or Galo/Curry's expiring, it would be a hell of a lot better than nothing.

I am not advocating against free agency. Players like Melo are the ones trying to bypass free agency completely. Melo could become a free agent and sign with NY, true. But under the current system he'd have to take less money than he could get from Denver. So instead he is gaming the system to get more money and still go to the team he wants. He's not doing it to be kind to Denver and help them get something.

It sets a bad precedent because there's supposed to be a "reward" in terms of more money for a star staying with their team. I admit, my thinking is old school in that I like when the star players spend most of their careers with one team (or if they do leave, it's in a star-for-star trade). And I like that the NBA tried to give an incentive to stars for doing so. If they still want to leave their team in free agency, then fine, but there should be a disincentive (in terms of taking less money and less years) to do so.

As for the argument that it's better for Denver to at least get something instead of Melo just leaving for nothing in free agency... the team is still handcuffed by being forced to deal with the team that Melo wants to go to. They can't shop around and try to get best value for their star player. Yes, they do get something instead of nothing. But if Melo had to play by the rules and couldn't force a trade, he might actually decide to stay with Denver for more money. Who knows? I seem to remember Carlos Boozer being adamant that he was going to opt out of his contract with Utah a few years ago, but when it came time to do so, no one was offering more in free agency than he could get from taking his player option. So he took it and stayed with Utah for another year, despite what he was claiming he'd do.

The Melo situation is unique in that the team Melo wants to go to could sign him in free agency anyway. But what about when players start demanding to be traded to teams that are already over the cap? Teams that wouldn't be able to sign them as free agents? Let's say Melo does go to NY and then next year Dwight Howard decides he wants to go there too. NY wouldn't have the cap space to sign him, but Dwight can still try to force a trade there by threatening to leave in free agency. That shouldn't be allowed.

You say it's not blackmail but you also admit that really the only thing the GM can do is give in and trade the star, because they pretty much have to try to get something in return. I think there should be some form of compensation to teams if they lose players in free agency - perhaps a draft pick from the team that signs their player, or some sort of salary cap exception to allow them to sign someone themselves. I also think that players agreeing to a sign and trade should not be able to get the max contract in the deal. They should only get what they would have gotten if they had signed with the new team in free agency.

 

[ButterMPancakes]

I am not advocating against free agency. Players like Melo are the ones trying to bypass free agency completely. Melo could become a free agent and sign with NY, true. But under the current system he'd have to take less money than he could get from Denver. So instead he is gaming the system to get more money and still go to the team he wants. He's not doing it to be kind to Denver and help them get something.

It sets a bad precedent because there's supposed to be a "reward" in terms of more money for a star staying with their team. I admit, my thinking is old school in that I like when the star players spend most of their careers with one team (or if they do leave, it's in a star-for-star trade). And I like that the NBA tried to give an incentive to stars for doing so. If they still want to leave their team in free agency, then fine, but there should be a disincentive (in terms of taking less money and less years) to do so.

As for the argument that it's better for Denver to at least get something instead of Melo just leaving for nothing in free agency... the team is still handcuffed by being forced to deal with the team that Melo wants to go to. They can't shop around and try to get best value for their star player. Yes, they do get something instead of nothing. But if Melo had to play by the rules and couldn't force a trade, he might actually decide to stay with Denver for more money. Who knows? I seem to remember Carlos Boozer being adamant that he was going to opt out of his contract with Utah a few years ago, but when it came time to do so, no one was offering more in free agency than he could get from taking his player option. So he took it and stayed with Utah for another year, despite what he was claiming he'd do.

The Melo situation is unique in that the team Melo wants to go to could sign him in free agency anyway. But what about when players start demanding to be traded to teams that are already over the cap? Teams that wouldn't be able to sign them as free agents? Let's say Melo does go to NY and then next year Dwight Howard decides he wants to go there too. NY wouldn't have the cap space to sign him, but Dwight can still try to force a trade there by threatening to leave in free agency. That shouldn't be allowed.

You say it's not blackmail but you also admit that really the only thing the GM can do is give in and trade the star, because they pretty much have to try to get something in return. I think there should be some form of compensation to teams if they lose players in free agency - perhaps a draft pick from the team that signs their player, or some sort of salary cap exception to allow them to sign someone themselves. I also think that players agreeing to a sign and trade should not be able to get the max contract in the deal. They should only get what they would have gotten if they had signed with the new team in free agency.

The Magic wouldn't trade Dwight if he threatened to leave, that's ridiculous. . . . the best way to solve this is by really checking out which teams will have the money the year after, talk to the player, and see if both come to an agreement. If the player doesn't like the direction the team is going, he'll tell the team that. That's it. Now it's up to the team to decide whether or not they want to try to get something in return. The whole idea here is that doing this IS the way to ensure a team doesn't lose everything.


If Howard says he's leaving in 2012 and the team is completely out of title contention, I would actually rather have him say so. It's then up to management to play their cards. If all of the teams on Howard's list are over the cap the year after, the Magic stay put and don't trade him. Attempt to blow up the team and see if they can get lucky with a trade or two, so maybe when Howard enters FA and sees the only teams available to sign him don't have much future, he'll decide to take more money and stay with the Magic. If he already has one foot in a team that could sign him during the FA anyways, and makes it clear, then absolutely try to get someone in return from that team.


The player really only has a bit of leverage if it's like Melo's case, in which the team he wants to go to could sign him next year. Denver can either try to trade him now for a win win (Denver get something in return, Melo gets that extension) or be bitter about it and let him walk away for nothing for a lose lose (Denver gets nothing back, Melo gets less money, significantly less depending on the new CBA).


As far as your compensation to teams, teams do get that. I believe the Cavs were able to get draft picks and they got "some sort of salary cap exception", the TPE.


As far as demanding trades way before they're FAs, that's a bit rare. . . CP3 did it but talks of it died down a long time ago. Kobe did it and it seemed to be even worse because it took a ridiculous trade to get him to stay. I wouldn't consider this the same thing with Melo because he leaves next year and has given the team basically it's last chance to get something for him before the deadline.