Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Rules and MVP

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rules and MVP

    http://www.hoopshype.com/columns/caste_hans.htm

    In NBA caste system, it's good to be "untouchable"
    by Dennis Hans / November 10, 2006

    The NBA is rightfully proud of its missionary role in spreading the game of basketball to the four corners of the earth. But international influence can be a two-way street, and in recent years the NBA has absorbed and replicated, perhaps unwittingly, the worst excesses of one of the world’s worst systems: the caste system of India. A league that once was an equal-opportunity meritocracy where every player, regardless of position, had a fair shot at greatness, now features a rules regime and style of play that grants privileges to perimeter players while rendering interior players – even Shaquille O’Neal – nothing more than dime-a-dozen, foul-plagued grunts.
    In the dishearteningly resilient caste system of India, “Untouchables” are, in the words of a 1999 Human Rights Watch report, “the lowest of the low.” Numbering 160 million people – one sixth of the population – they’re “discriminated against, denied access to land, forced to work in degrading conditions, and routinely abused at the hands of the police and of higher-caste groups that enjoy the state's protection.”
    In the caste system of the modern NBA, however, Untouchables are the highest of the high.
    The NBA’s Untouchable caste came into being at the start of the 2004-05 season, when the league responded to the very real problem of excessive grabbing and holding by going too far in the other direction, making it a foul merely to touch offensive players on the perimeter. The rule change has dramatically increased the effectiveness and statistical output – not to mention market value – of a certain class of players to such an extent that historians are likely to place asterisks next to their scoring marks in each of their untouched seasons.
    Thus, comparisons of such Untouchable greats of today as Dwyane Wade, LeBron James, Kobe Bryant, Tracy McGrady, Gilbert Arenas and Allen Iverson with their hand-checked counterparts of yesteryear – e.g., Jerry West, George Gervin, Oscar Robertson, Paul Westphal, World B. Free and Michael Jordan — can be made by observation only. My eyes tell me that there are fabulous talents in every decade, including this one. Still, the wildly different playing conditions – including the absurd number of steps and hops after picking up the dribble the modern guys have been granted – invalidate statistical comparisons.
    Another privileged NBA caste, the “Bonus Babies” (BBs), are awarded an extra point for most of their field goals – despite the fact that they only shoot when wide open and rarely are capable of creating a shot for themselves. Many BBs, including Steve Kerr, Damon Jones, Matt Bullard, Jason Kapono, Richie Frahm, Tim Legler and Kyle Korver, might never have played a minute of NBA ball in a non-caste league (though Korver is finally starting to develop the well-rounded arsenal he would have mastered in college if he hadn’t grown up in the stultifying trey era).
    BBs have been around since 1979, when the NBA instituted the three-point field goal. But they’ve taken a giant step up the caste ladder the past two seasons in conjunction with the Untouchables, who now have a much easier time “driving and kicking” – penetrating the no-touch defense, forcing other defenders to react, and then passing out to a rested and waiting BB for an easy three-point shot. That’s why today’s trey attempts are easier and more plentiful than in the pre-2004-05 period – and why so many of these fortunate, one-talent BBs are highly efficient (if not prolific) scorers.
    UBB EQUALS MVP
    The most privileged of the modern NBA players comprise a subset of the Untouchable caste: the UBBs, or Untouchables with Bonus-Baby range. Start with ball-handling brilliance and sports-car maneuverability in a touch-free environment, add oodles of bonus points from his own treys and those of his spotting-up BB teammates, and it’s easy to see why the value of a UBB has soared to the stratosphere.
    The UBB formula transformed Steve Nash – an aging occasional All-Star and defensive liability – into a two-time MVP. It has made Chauncey Billups – who never made an All-Star team in the hand-check era though he probably should have been a reserve once or twice – a legitimate MVP candidate. It may well do the same in a season or two for Jameer Nelson.
    But enough about the winners in David Stern’s unholy caste system. It’s time to look at the losers, the lowest of the low, the “Disposables.”
    Disposables used to be called “centers,” as they were the center of attention in bygone days, the hub around which the offense revolved. Today, the duties of many (not all) Disposables are largely confined to setting picks, flopping, committing intentional fouls to prevent easy baskets and creating block/charge collisions. This results in an astronomical fouling rate and frequent games where they’re limited to 10-to-25 minutes. You can’t count on them for 30 minutes, let alone the 40 an Untouchable can easily log without foul-trouble worries. So a coach needs a few Disposables at his disposal.
    FORTUNATE DISPOSABLES
    The transformation of this position from center to blocking sled is actually a blessing for many Disposables, who otherwise would rarely get off the bench or might never have been invited to training camp. Some have physical tools but are skill-deficient and remain so year after year, thanks to incompetent or negligent coaches. Some have so-so coordination or are otherwise athletically limited. Yet you’ll often see them in starting lineups or as rotation regulars, mocking the once-valid boast that NBA hoopsters are “the greatest athletes in the world.”
    Consider the Collins twins, Jason and Jarron. On offense, their job is to be run into. On defense, their job is to be run into – and act like that even when barely touched. They can’t make plays with the ball, though Jarron, at least, is a decent mid-range shooter when left alone. They are reasonably mobile as Disposables go, but they have so-so reflexes, are slow off their feet and barely elevate when they do jump. Consequently, they are poor rebounders and woeful shot blockers.
    In a meritocratic, non-caste league the Collins twins would be lucky to make a team as the 15th man. In the modern NBA, they're effective players. The same bizarre system that over-rewards perimeter talent does the same for interior no-talents. Their myriad limitations are minimized because no-perimeter-touching allows an offense with a perimeter star to be effective with a stiff on the floor. Because the NBA rewards floppers and late-arriving help defenders with undeserved charging calls, grants six fouls to every player without regard to how few minutes he averages, and rarely imposes a harsher penalty for obvious intentional fouls (committed with great frequency by those without the ability to make a play on the ball) than for unintentional ones, a defensive stiff or trio of stiffs often can be just as effective as a quick, agile, crowd-pleasing swat-and-deflection machine.
    So even though a Collins-style Disposable maintains a bottom-rung caste status as an unglamorous grunt, like the one-talent Bonus Baby he’s mighty fortunate to have an NBA job.
    UNFORTUNATE DISPOSABLES
    Another segment of the Disposable population is not so fortunate. It has never been more difficult for low-post players to put up numbers. Because of the way they and their defenders are coached, foul trouble is a constant for the likes of Shaq, Yao Ming, Zydrunas Ilgauskas and Eddy Curry. Thus, they don’t get enough court time to put up anywhere near the number of shots of the high-scoring Untouchables, and none of their un-fouled field goals are worth three points. They’re further hampered by zones and double-teams, and they both suffer and benefit in varying degrees from sumo-style low-post combat.
    While Untouchables pile up 28-to-35 points-per-game seasons, Yao is the only Disposable who’s a good bet to average 20 in 2006-07.
    As for Shaq, who even at 34 is by far the most gifted big man in the game, his rapid decline is a combination of poor coaching, the Untouchable takeover, worse-than-ever free-throw shooting and poetic justice. Let’s not forget that for several seasons he was the NBA’s premiere privileged character, allowed to dislodge defenders and camp in the three-seconds lane. He still has those privileges to a degree, but today he’s more likely to draw a foul for bulldozing or be victimized by a flop. His minutes plummeted to 30.6 per game last season because of those whistles as well as unnecessary fouls he committed on defense after Pat Riley turned him into “Shaq Doleac.” All the block/charge collisions the still-spry Shaq is foolishly creating means more fouls and pine time, and fewer points and rebounds. If the trend continues he’ll soon be saddled with this sad moniker: “The Disposable Diesel.”
    As we’ve seen, the modern NBA dramatically under-values or over-values many of its players, depending on the whims of the league’s bigwigs. But is there any caste that is properly valued and for whom statistical comparisons with their forerunners are valid? Yes.
    The Masters of the Midrange, men like Elton Brand and Kevin Garnett, eschew bonus points and special privileges. When Brand and Garnett venture into the low post, as they sometimes do, it’s as skilled artisans, not bulldozers. Brand is a power forward with a scoring style and repertoire that’s somewhat reminiscent of two elegant small forwards of the eighties, Bernard King and Alex English. All play or played a timeless, non-bruising style that needs no special treatment to be effective. Perhaps someday we’ll be able to say that about all NBA players.

  • #2
    Re: Rules and MVP

    Decent read, even though I disagree with many points.

    Would be better with paragraphs. Because, like Shaq, I feel a little cross-eyed currently.
    Read my Pacers blog:
    8points9seconds.com

    Follow my twitter:

    @8pts9secs

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Rules and MVP

      There is logic. Yes, there are privileged players in the NBA, because NBA tries to make SUPERSTARS and sell it to the world. It's more "profitable" to sell one player with 30/10/10 stats than ten players with 12/6/3 each.

      There are many talented players in NBA and there's a bit of help to "untouchable".

      But that help is not that huge imo and it shouldn't be.

      NBA is a combination of sports and business. That's all.
      "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

      - Albert Einstein

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Rules and MVP

        Btw, that's not a very big deal imo, because effect of "untouchables" is much less than "referess, help to better Euroleague team win against "worse" team and necessarily in the end of the game (if it's possible) if margin is about equal".

        Why less?

        Because in all NBA teams there are SUPERSTARS and so it's about equal. In Euroleague there are "better" and "worse" teams. That's much worse imho.
        "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

        - Albert Einstein

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Rules and MVP

          Originally posted by Pitons View Post
          Btw, that's not a very big deal imo, because effect of "untouchables" is much less than "referess, help to better Euroleague team win against "worse" team and necessarily in the end of the game (if it's possible) if margin is about equal".

          Why less?

          Because in all NBA teams there are SUPERSTARS and so it's about equal. In Euroleague there are "better" and "worse" teams. That's much worse imho.
          Could you expound on this a little bit?

          I don't watch much Euroleague, and I'm not sure I'm following you.
          This space for rent.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Rules and MVP

            Originally posted by Anthem View Post
            Could you expound on this a little bit?

            I don't watch much Euroleague, and I'm not sure I'm following you.
            Well, there are rich clubs ("Panathinaikos", "Maccabi") and not that rich, but quite good teams (I mean which can challenge like "Olimpia" or "Zalgiris") in the Euroleague. Also those rich have more impact and more chances to win in a close game (against "worse") because referees are always at their side (making very questionable decisions). I have seen many of such games in the past years. There were even rumours that there were some kind like "Serbian basketball mafia" which tried to help serbian and "Panathinaikos" coach Zeljko Obradovic in earlier years. Dunno if that's true. Also there is a nice story how Yugoslavia won Euro championship in 1995 (Europe zone head was serbian).

            I don't know how about this season. And I somewhat understand - rich clubs spend much money, so they have to succeed and don't have to loose to "worse" team if it's possible. But that's not fair. But who cares.

            That's why I love NBA's current system on players wages. That's why all the clubs are more or less competitive. There aren't super team with Wade, Lebron, Yao, Shaq, Kirilenko, Boozer on one team. And that's good.
            "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

            - Albert Einstein

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Rules and MVP

              Originally posted by Pitons View Post
              Well, there are rich clubs ("Panathinaikos", "Maccabi") and not that rich, but quite good teams (I mean which can challenge like "Olimpia" or "Zalgiris") in the Euroleague. Also those rich have more impact and more chances to win in a close game (against "worse") because referees are always at their side (making very questionable decisions). I have seen many of such games in the past years. There were even rumours that there were some kind like "Serbian basketball mafia" which tried to help serbian and "Panathinaikos" coach Zeljko Obradovic in earlier years. Dunno if that's true. Also there is a nice story how Yugoslavia won Euro championship in 1995 (Europe zone head was serbian).
              I haven't noticed it that much. I can't remeber in Euroleague anything like Heat-Dallas finals last year, in term of questionable calls.

              It is true, however, that there are many floppers and good actors in Europe, and the best of them are in the rich teams. Rich teams flop more, and that could make a difference in a close game.

              But that's it, I won't go with any conspiracy theory here..............

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Rules and MVP

                Originally posted by Pitons View Post
                That's why I love NBA's current system on players wages. That's why all the clubs are more or less competitive. There aren't super team with Wade, Lebron, Yao, Shaq, Kirilenko, Boozer on one team. And that's good.
                Yes, Europe should have this too, but only when they reach the level of NBA (in terms of money, talent).
                Until then - European basketball must grow, and environment of "wild capitalism" is the best choice.
                Some teams lose, some teams manage to get nearly the budget of an NBA team, but that's growing pains.............. Once we have 10 teams with over 40 mill budget, we can impose salary caps.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Rules and MVP

                  Originally posted by Mamluk View Post
                  I haven't noticed it that much. I can't remeber in Euroleague anything like Heat-Dallas finals last year, in term of questionable calls.

                  It is true, however, that there are many floppers and good actors in Europe, and the best of them are in the rich teams. Rich teams flop more, and that could make a difference in a close game.

                  But that's it, I won't go with any conspiracy theory here..............
                  I couldn't see the Heat - Dallas finals, so I don't know about that. Maybe someone who had seen could tell more.

                  However I remember when Lakers - Blazers played in conference finals in 99-00 (4:3 had won lakers) and Shaq sometimes has had privileges to push his opponents and 3 seconds violation in his pocket.

                  Talking about Euroleague. Yes I think that rich clubs have more chance to win in that rare close game against not that rich and not that influential teams with a help of questionable calls.

                  But this season has just begun. I hope attitude had changed.
                  "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

                  - Albert Einstein

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Rules and MVP

                    Originally posted by Mamluk View Post
                    Yes, Europe should have this too, but only when they reach the level of NBA (in terms of money, talent).
                    Until then - European basketball must grow, and environment of "wild capitalism" is the best choice.
                    Some teams lose, some teams manage to get nearly the budget of an NBA team, but that's growing pains.............. Once we have 10 teams with over 40 mill budget, we can impose salary caps.
                    10 teams? What championship would be with only 10 teams?

                    There are 24 teams in the Euroleague now. And it should be about the same amount in the future. And I see only ~ 10 rich clubs enough which could make it in the near future.

                    Maybe with larger investmenst in basketball that could be done more quickly, but as His Highness Soccer is ruling...
                    "Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

                    - Albert Einstein

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X