Fair enough. Those are all good points. Like I said, I wasn't sure how feasible that scenario would be. Again, though, can you really call Miami "stacked" with only 3 players averaging double-digit points? With the pace of the game and so forth, a top-heavy roster is becoming more viable in the NBA than one that is top-to-bottom good. Depth isn't as high of a priority as it is in the NFL, for example. It probably doesn't matter now, but I'll bite. Off the top of my head, I guess I'd say the Clippers, Charlotte, Minnesota, Milwaukee, Washington, and Memphis. 24 wasn't hard number, just one that seemed to be better fit than 30. At the very least, I don't think the league (speaking strictly from a competitive standpoint, not an economic one) would miss any of the above teams, save for their own fans. Even in a league that stresses parity, they are usually the basement-dwellers.
The main thing I'd like to see come out of a new CBA is a change in the trading rules that would eliminate expiring contracts as assets. Seems ridiculous to me that an overpaid scrub is a valuable commodity solely because he's got a fat contract that's going to come of the books in a year or two.
Wow, there goes the rest of Utah's season. Prokhorov wasn't going down without anything. <a class="postlink" href="http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nba/news/story?id=6150419" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nba/ ... id=6150419</a> Deron Williams is now a New Jersey Net.
Do you guys think Williams will sign an extension with the Nets? Between playing in Newark, playing for one of the worst teams in the league, and lacking two vital first round picks, I think the Nets just got a rental instead of a long term star. Also, is there a bigger jump in NBA cities than the switch from Salt Lake City to Newark?
2010 payrolls: Mil: 81 million. NYA: 206.3 million The Yankees also take a penalty, in the form of a luxury tax. INCIDENTALLY, Milwaukee-NY is my pick for the world series this year.
What, no love for the Phillies? I thought everyone had them coming out of the NL. I'm a Braves fan, and even I think they're gonna -- whoops, wrong thread. Someone put KI on suicide watch. I've yet to see him post since this deal went down.
I don't follow baseball, and was posting figures I saw in an article a good 3-4 years ago. I think the point remains, though, when some teams spend $200+ million and other teams (maybe not the Brewers this season) are in the $20-$30 million range. Haha, it's only been less than 9 hours. I sleep sometimes, too! But yeah, it's shocking, alright. In terms of the deal, the Jazz received good compensation; inferior but quality point guard (Harris), potential future star big man (Derrick Favors), two first round picks, and cash. Oddly enough, this trade might help the Jazz...in the short term. As for Williams, I think there's a possibility he stays on the Nets for a long, long time. It's funny, because I'm just writing an article about Prokhorov and the viability of his club. Good trade for the Nets too, by the way. Milwaukee is a former multiple time NBA champion, as well as one of the most historic and passionately supported teams in the league. Their wins and loss record for their history is also outstanding, and they're not in any financial trouble. Not sure why you want to contract them. The Clippers are a viable economic product in a giant market, and potentially, with the right management, would be a check on the Lakers attracting too many big-name free agents. They stay, too. Washington is a former NBA champion, one of the most historic franchises, and has phenomenal fan support. Despite ranking 24th in terms of record during the last decade, they were 12th in attendance. Oh, and they are owned by a multi-billionaire, who doesn't care about monetary losses. They're actually a great market, too. Minnesota is a decent market with decent fan support, plus they're owned by a multi-billionaire too, who doesn't mind the losses. They should also stay. I will give you Memphis and Charlotte, 27th and 30th in the league in attendance during the 2000s, in two tiny markets. But see, it's really not so easy; there are 2 teams that are reasonable candidates for contraction (one in each conference, luckily enough), but good luck finding any more.
Juwan Howard provides a simple explanation for why Derrick Rose is a better MVP candidate than LeBron: <a class="postlink" href="http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nba/news/story?id=6150594&campaign=rss&source=ESPNHeadlines" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nba/n ... NHeadlines</a> As for my 6-team list, I didn't have enough background info there. I'll just drop the issue. You're right, it isn't as easy as I thought. Though, the NBA really does need to give up on a Charlotte franchise at some point. Apparently, the Hornets moving wasn't a hint.
Yeah, I tend to agree with him; I think the Heat without James would be a very slightly over .500, and sure, the Bulls would probably be significantly under .500 without Rose, especially with all their injuries. I actually think the Hornets and George Shinn, their greedy bastard owner, ruined it for everyone. They were a well-supported, well-attended franchise until Shinn hijacked the team and moved it to New Orleans. (And of course, within a few years, he was unhappy with attendance, many thousands fewer than in Charlotte, and wanted to move it AGAIN!) When the Bobcats made a home there, fan interest had greatly waned, most likely permanently.
Fucking christ, the Bulls just lost to the Raptors. They need to get their road game shit together. They let Barbosa torch them in the 4th. I don't have any analysis, this is just bullshit.
False false false. They have 1 championship, 3 years after their inception, in 1971. And the closest they came since was 2001 where they made the Eastern Conference finals. And in terms of passionate and historic teams, I am no sure where that is coming from. The Bucks have averaged under 17K fans (in a 19K seat arena) every year since it opened, except for the aforementioned 2001 badass team. They had a nice stretch with Abdul-Jabbar back in the 70s, but there was a big gap between that and recent successes. Listen, I am a Bucks fan and I have been continually frustrated by the lack of support for the Bucks in town. When they are winning, people perk up a bit, but by and large the support is not there. Its nothing like another small market team, the Blazers, where it is a truly loyal fan base regardless of record. Like it or not, Milwaukee is just not a great sports town. The Brewers never drew well until Miller Park opened, now that luster is wearing off and numbers are back down. The Packers don't count. The Bucks are going nowhere and are not in danger of expansion cause Herb Kohl is a competent and patient owner. However, he is getting old and I have very real fears about the future. The Bradley Center is one of the oldest stadiums in the league and aforementioned fanbase and the small market nature of Milwaukee worry me if an owner from outside WI comes in. That being said, I agree that they are not in the top 5 of teams to discuss when contraction occurs.
My mistake there; I knew they won it in 1971, and incorrectly thought they had another championship with Kareem and Big O in the 70s. I was referring to the graph in this link; <a class="postlink" href="http://www.slcdunk.com/2010/10/1/1724549/bandwagon-fans-beware-2000-01-to-2009-10-nba-performance-and" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.slcdunk.com/2010/10/1/172454 ... rmance-and</a> 19th in wins and 19th in attendance during the last decade...that's not terrible. Certainly not bad enough to want to contract them over many other teams in the league. As for history, any team that has been around for 40+ years qualifies, yeah.
And with a late-night pull of the trigger, Cleveland ships Mo Williams and Jamario Moon off to the Clippers for Baron Davis and their unprotected 2011 pick. As a Cavs fan, all I can say is fuck yeah. What it boils down to was that we shipped Mo off for a high pick. Considering his playoff choking skills, combined with the bang-up job Sessions has been doing lately, this is looking good. Start Sess and keep Davis as the backup. Keep losing while developing guys like Sess, JJ, Boobie and Eyenga. Get a couple solid pieces in the draft (which, in a perfect world, would probably be Irving and Sullinger), suck a little more next year, then attempt to follow in the footsteps of OKC right around 2013. And on a non-Cleveland note, anybody watch the first game with the new Knicks? Everybody is talking about Melo, but I'll be damned if Chauncey didn't show the hell up. He was the only 04 Piston I didn't want to punch, and hopefully he can go out with a bang.
Random thought: You know, I still think it's stupid to have two NBA teams in Los Angeles (in the same fucking arena). Blake Griffin is getting popular enough to carry attendance for the Clippers. Would Sterling ever sell them to a group that would move them up to Seattle? Snow to beach < Mormons to Jersey Shore. Sorry man, but weather absolutely cannot compete with that.
<a class="postlink" href="http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=Akr2O3DJCSC8meYOjZCTAN05nYcB?slug=ys-daviswilliams022311" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=A ... iams022311</a> Baron Davis to the Cavs for Mo Williams. I like that for the Clippers. I mean, fuck, Baron Davis couldn't even get passes in the dunk contest right.
Well, for what it's worth, Williams will be in New York City by 2012, as the Nets are planning to move to Brooklyn. This was amusing: Trading Style of 8 NBA Decisionmakers
The word is that Sterling is never going to sell the team as long as he is alive. At one point, he supposedly got an offer for close to a billion dollars spearheaded by David Geffen...and turned it down.