Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 62

Thread: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

  1. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Dillon, Co
    Posts
    3,940

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    It's a good overall article after you get past the opening. The NBA has never really had parity but's it's been far worse for the past few years then it ever has been. The issue of parity needs to be addressed and should be a top priority in the next cba. My biggest gripe remains seeing all star players dictating where they go so they can pile up on a few select teams. Leave free agency just make it so financially unattractive for a top free agent to join forces with another star that they'd rather go to Indiana or the Bucks then to sign with LA or NY.

  2. #27
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,594

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    Suppose team payrolls were required to be tiered, meaning you have 15 salary slots from (say) Vet Max to Rookie Minimum (with some leeways since not every one has rookies, &c). Meaning you could not pay 2 guys max money and if you had 3 top guys one of them would be making well below the max money.

    That third guy could get the max somewhere else, so it isn't impacting his earning potential. It just stops a team from stockpiling max (or even "within 10% of max") guys because they are willing to pay the luxury tax. It would mean that 2 guys getting together would make sense but that third guy would likely be taking a major pay cut.

    Ideas on how this could be made to work?
    BillS

    "Every time I pitched it was like throwing gasoline on a fire. Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw!"
    - Ebby Calvin "Nuke" LaLoosh

  3. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Dillon, Co
    Posts
    3,940

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    Quote Originally Posted by BillS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Suppose team payrolls were required to be tiered, meaning you have 15 salary slots from (say) Vet Max to Rookie Minimum (with some leeways since not every one has rookies, &c). Meaning you could not pay 2 guys max money and if you had 3 top guys one of them would be making well below the max money.

    That third guy could get the max somewhere else, so it isn't impacting his earning potential. It just stops a team from stockpiling max (or even "within 10% of max") guys because they are willing to pay the luxury tax. It would mean that 2 guys getting together would make sense but that third guy would likely be taking a major pay cut.

    Ideas on how this could be made to work?

    I brought something like this up on PD several months ago. Set a max salary for players 1 through 3 with making it a 50% pay cut for a free agent to join any team that already has a max contract player and a 75% pay cut to join a team that has the top 2 spots filled. Melo would've preferred the Nets over the Knicks if he wanted to leave the Nuggets in that scenario. Make an exception to this based off the # of years played for the team you sign with giving the home team an advantage to keep their players. All this could work within a hard cap but it might not be needed.

  4. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    West Palm Beach, FL
    Posts
    330

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    i dont like all of this small market talk. I only has really been a problem because thats what everyone thinks that is why lebron left cleveland. which isnt even close to the reason. if you have a good team, players are gonna want to go there, for example OKC they could get a big FA.

  5. #30
    BoilerUpMan Really?'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Bloomington
    Posts
    4,055
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    Quote Originally Posted by tfarks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    He oversimplified this obviously( I can't keep up with all the compensation rules in baseball), but I like the idea. You wanna sign a type A free agent? You lose your 1st rd pick. Give some teams incentive to keep a player throughout his contract. Rather than forcing that team to make a trade before the player may or may not leave out of fear of ending up with nothing. Now they can evaluate whether or not its a better move to trade their player away or taking a pick. Not to mention that the player might actually choose to re-sign.
    Yeah the not sure how it is determined but you can either get 1st round picks or second round picks for a type b player(not as good) or non for a average player, like Danny probably would be a Type b fringe A type player so if he signed with Clips we would get the clips second round pick.

    I think that might be kind of weird in the NBA, I mean if this was the case when type A free agents hit the market I'm it still puts low lottery teams at a disadvantage, they get a Star Player and lose their first pick, I guess I would trade my first overall pick for Kevin Durant but it might hurt the team in the long haul in acquiring the building pieces to build around that player.

    Also the talent in the NBA really drops off... I would feel sorry for a team like Cleveland that losses Lebron in free agency and he signs with at top 5 team and they only get a late 1st round pick... I guess it is more than what they would have got but still kind of depressing.



    Quote Originally Posted by itzryan07 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    i dont like all of this small market talk. I only has really been a problem because thats what everyone thinks that is why lebron left cleveland. which isnt even close to the reason. if you have a good team, players are gonna want to go there, for example OKC they could get a big FA.
    No it hasn't, he was just one of the Big Free agents, but looking at smaller name free agents you have seen this for a while


    In addition I liked the article but I am not sure about his ideas for a solution, but I really enjoyed it though.

  6. #31
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Dillon, Co
    Posts
    3,940

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    Quote Originally Posted by itzryan07 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    i dont like all of this small market talk. I only has really been a problem because thats what everyone thinks that is why lebron left cleveland. which isnt even close to the reason. if you have a good team, players are gonna want to go there, for example OKC they could get a big FA.

    That's not even close to being the whole story. It's not just small market vs big market, it's preferred teams vs unpreferred teams and the fact that most preferred teams are in big markets is no coincidence. Players prefer the lime light of the bigger markets, endorsement deals and in some cases better climates. You can't blame them but it gives an unfair advantage to some teams due to issues that are out of control for other teams like the Pacers. I do think that's why Lebron picked Miami and if it wasn't Miami it was going to be NY or Chicago for the same reasons. I think that's why Bosh went to Miami as well. That's why Amare went to NY and Melo forced a trade to NY. It's why Shaq went to L.A. and the list could go on. You see exceptions where top 5 players stay with their team but I can't recall a top 5, or even a top 10 player choosing to move to a small Market team as a free agent.
    The NBA needs parity or at least a move in that direction. I'd love as a fan for the Pacers to stand as much of a chance at drawing a big name free agent as NY.

  7. #32

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    I don't like this whole big market, little market.

    Teams all across the league still have a player they can call a star.

    I don't think teams are being skinned of stars and being attracted to a bigger city.

    We're a pretty blue collar team and we've been a blue collar team. That's Indiana basketball for you.

    I'd be happy having a team of blue collared players that aren't so called "superstars". At least not the ones that are snotty and also the ones that will attract bandwagon fans all over the world.

    I'll be happy with an Eric Gordon type of blue collared player. A Hoosier who knows what the expectations are here and would love to come back.

    There are probably a bunch of players in this league who will sign not with a big market team, but either where they feel like they can fit in or for the money.

    This city is proud their team is back on track.
    Last edited by Scot Pollard; 04-12-2011 at 10:56 PM.
    In 49 states it's just basketball, but this is Indiana!

  8. #33

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    Quote Originally Posted by Pacerized View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'd love as a fan for the Pacers to stand as much of a chance at drawing a big name free agent as NY.
    That won't happen, no matter what salary restrictions the NBA puts in place. Indiana isn't New York.

    New York and LA attracts more quality doctors, lawyers, artists and academics than anywhere else in America. Yet we still have the Mayo Clinic, Kurt Vonnegut and Ohio State University emerging from the midwest. Maybe the most talented athletes don't want to work in Indiana but Indiana usually doesn't attract the most talented people in most fields. This can be overcome through smart management and investment.
    Last edited by King Tuts Tomb; 04-12-2011 at 11:15 PM.

  9. #34
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Dillon, Co
    Posts
    3,940

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    [QUOTE=King Tuts Tomb;1212276]That won't happen, no matter what salary restrictions the NBA puts in place. Indiana isn't New York.
    QUOTE]


    I disagree, It can happen if the financial loss of teaming up with a second or third all star is great enough. I guarantee that Melo would pick the Nets, Bucks or Pacers over NY if he could get 20 mil there verses 10 mil at NY. Lebron would've stayed in Cleveland rather then go to Miami if he had to take a 10 mil per year pay cut to team up with Wade. All that's needed is some parity clauses in the cba.

  10. #35

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    I disagree, It can happen if the financial loss of teaming up with a second or third all star is great enough. I guarantee that Melo would pick the Nets, Bucks or Pacers over NY if he could get 20 mil there verses 10 mil at NY. Lebron would've stayed in Cleveland rather then go to Miami if he had to take a 10 mil per year pay cut to team up with Wade. All that's needed is some parity clauses in the cba.
    The NBA union would never agree to a CBA that only allowed free agents to make 50% of the max salary because (a) it's not fair and (b) it's it makes no sense.

  11. #36
    Administrator Peck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,620

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    Quote Originally Posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    That won't happen, no matter what salary restrictions the NBA puts in place. Indiana isn't New York.

    New York and LA attracts more quality doctors, lawyers, artists and academics than anywhere else in America. Yet we still have the Mayo Clinic, Kurt Vonnegut and Ohio State University emerging from the midwest. Maybe the most talented athletes don't want to work in Indiana but Indiana usually doesn't attract the most talented people in most fields. This can be overcome through smart management and investment.
    You keep saying this. Now explain how this can occur.

    How can smart management & investment overcome a gathering of supergroups that can be brought together by either going to the mega markets or the worlds sun & fun beach?

    Please be specific and list instances when this has occured in the past.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

  12. #37

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    Quote Originally Posted by Peck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Please be specific and list instances when this has occured in the past.
    San Antonio Spurs
    Detroit Pistons
    Oklahoma City Thunder/Seattle Supersonics
    Portland Trailblazers
    Indiana Pacers

    None of these teams is a top ten media or money market in the NBA. In the last 25 years, by my count they have 7 NBA titles and 12 finals appearances combined. Two are championship contenders this year and four are in the playoffs. There are numerous examples of ways these teams have succeeded (economical use of the draft, overseas scouting, swapping stars for assets) despite being in small markets, but I can give specific examples if you need.

    I'm also interested in what teams you think have been hurt by being in small markets. Almost every example I can find of underachieving small market teams begins and ends with "bad management."

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to King Tuts Tomb For This Useful Post:


  14. #38
    Member Constellations's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    1,979

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    Quote Originally Posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'm also interested in what teams you think have been hurt by being in small markets.
    Vancouver Grizzlies. lol

  15. #39
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Dillon, Co
    Posts
    3,940

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    Quote Originally Posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The NBA union would never agree to a CBA that only allowed free agents to make 50% of the max salary because (a) it's not fair and (b) it's it makes no sense.
    This makes complete sense. A free agent could make the max only if he stays with his own team or moves to a team that doesn't already have a max player. If he wants to join forces with another all star making the max salary or close to it, then he has to take a huge pay cut. Nothing stops the player from making the max salary but each team can be limited to 1 max salary player. The idea is to impose a heavy financial penalty on players like Melo, Lebron, and Bosh who want to join forces on any team. No top player in his prime is going to play for that much less just to join forces with another all star and chase a title. Top players would have to play against each other if they want to get paid.
    It is fair to the teams because it would apply to every team, and it is fair to the players. They still have free agency and no one is keeping them from signing for the max with a team that has no max player. If they want to take the easy way out and team up on a big market team for almost no salary that would be their choice.

  16. #40
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Dillon, Co
    Posts
    3,940

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    Quote Originally Posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    San Antonio Spurs
    Detroit Pistons
    Oklahoma City Thunder/Seattle Supersonics
    Portland Trailblazers
    Indiana Pacers

    None of these teams is a top ten media or money market in the NBA. In the last 25 years, by my count they have 7 NBA titles and 12 finals appearances combined. Two are championship contenders this year and four are in the playoffs. There are numerous examples of ways these teams have succeeded (economical use of the draft, overseas scouting, swapping stars for assets) despite being in small markets, but I can give specific examples if you need.

    I'm also interested in what teams you think have been hurt by being in small markets. Almost every example I can find of underachieving small market teams begins and ends with "bad management."
    Detroit is not a small market.

    One small market team won a title and that's because they did everything right and had a player with the integrity to stay and win it without another superstar. You can still do everything right and have a player that just wants the bright lights of a big marker and the easy way out by joining forces with other super stars.
    That's 1 exception and how many are the rule.

  17. #41
    You are my Lucifer D-BONE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Nirvana
    Posts
    6,941

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    Quote Originally Posted by Pacerized View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This makes complete sense. A free agent could make the max only if he stays with his own team or moves to a team that doesn't already have a max player. If he wants to join forces with another all star making the max salary or close to it, then he has to take a huge pay cut. Nothing stops the player from making the max salary but each team can be limited to 1 max salary player. The idea is to impose a heavy financial penalty on players like Melo, Lebron, and Bosh who want to join forces on any team. No top player in his prime is going to play for that much less just to join forces with another all star and chase a title. Top players would have to play against each other if they want to get paid.
    It is fair to the teams because it would apply to every team, and it is fair to the players. They still have free agency and no one is keeping them from signing for the max with a team that has no max player. If they want to take the easy way out and team up on a big market team for almost no salary that would be their choice.
    If there priority is truly encouraging more parity, I think they have to think more along the lines of what you're suggesting. I do agree it's as much or more about elite players dictating where they will play than it is about small vs. large markets.
    I'd rather die standing up than live on my knees.

    -Emiliano Zapata

  18. #42
    Administrator Peck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,620

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    Quote Originally Posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    San Antonio Spurs
    Detroit Pistons
    Oklahoma City Thunder/Seattle Supersonics
    Portland Trailblazers
    Indiana Pacers

    None of these teams is a top ten media or money market in the NBA. In the last 25 years, by my count they have 7 NBA titles and 12 finals appearances combined. Two are championship contenders this year and four are in the playoffs. There are numerous examples of ways these teams have succeeded (economical use of the draft, overseas scouting, swapping stars for assets) despite being in small markets, but I can give specific examples if you need.

    I'm also interested in what teams you think have been hurt by being in small markets. Almost every example I can find of underachieving small market teams begins and ends with "bad management."

    Three of the five teams that you have listed have had success in no small part to luck of the draft.

    How many times does a team get the chance to draft one of the top big man in the NBA, let alone do it twice. San Antonio

    How would this team look if instead of taking the best big man available the Trailblazers decided that his injury history made him less appealing than the player many said would be a great scorer in the NBA. OKC

    What if Grant Hill didn't force a trade via free agency & the unknown (at the time) Ben Wallace didn't become the future rock of a championship team?

    None of the above were good managment skills, with the exception of the Chucky Atkins & Ben Wallace trade (& we all know they never would have made that trade had Hill not forced it) it was just the luck of being in the right place at the right time.

    The Pacers had one of the top 10 highest payrolls in the NBA for over a decade & several years were in the top 5. Now that may be good management, I won't disagree however management could never do anything to put them over the top. Why? Even they would tell you they could never attract a marque free agent here because of the market & the fact that they had to over pay the players that were here.

    Portland I'll give you. They have fielded a competative team year after year while not landing top draft picks that often and when they do it doesn't pan out for them. However again they have never been able to do anything to get over the hump (since the 70's anyway) and they have not attracted free agents to their team either it's mostly been done by drafts & trades.

    We can skip all of the formalities of going team by team and playe by player I'll just give you one scenario that occured and you now explain to me how the smaller market was not screwed by not being the big glamorous market.

    In 1996 Shaquille O'Neal left as a free agent from the Orlando Magic to join the Los Angeles Lakers. In the 1994-95 season the Magic played the Houston Rockets in the NBA finals. They lost to the defending champs who were more experianced. The following year they made the E.C. finals only to run into the return of Michael Jordan, which no one was going to stop. Orlando's management did everything that I can think of to put a top contender around Shaq. They brought in veterans (Grant & Shaw) to go along with a decent solid cast of Anderson, Royal & Scott on top of having another young dynamic player in Hardaway.

    Orlando offered max money to get Shaq to return.

    He chose to go to the Los Angeles Lakers so he could be a part of the movie & music scene. Remember at the time the Lakers were not the leagues power house at the time of him going there. L.A. did not pay one dime more than Orlando could have & in fact because he was their player the Magic could have paid him more. But by his own words he made it clear that he chose L.A. for the offerings of the market, not the team.

    Please explain how anything that Orlando did or did not do in this case was bad management on their part & that the bigger market did not have an advantage that could have been over come.

    I believe every team in the NBA would have opened up their wallets & dumped any player (not named Jordan) to get Shaq to play for them but he only wanted the lights of Hollywood. Thus the case of one market having the supreme advantage over every other team in the NBA due to location.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to Peck For This Useful Post:


  20. #43

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    Quote Originally Posted by Pacerized View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Detroit is not a small market.
    It's 13th in the league in population, lower in media markets, and the only city in the top 20 to have lost population in the last decade. Within the next decade it will be in the lower half of NBA cities by metro area. Money-wise it's probably in the bottom ten already.

    Detroit is a medium market, on it's way to a small market.

  21. #44

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    Quote Originally Posted by Peck View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Three of the five teams that you have listed have had success in no small part to luck of the draft.
    Every team builds through the draft to some extent. Small market teams have to do it more but that's probably for the better anyway.

    How many times does a team get the chance to draft one of the top big man in the NBA, let alone do it twice. San Antonio
    San Antonio was lucky to draft Duncan but Duncan was also fortunate to be drafted by San Antonio. They surrounded him with high level role players from the draft and low cost, high reward free agents.

    What they DIDN'T do was sign over-priced free agents and trade away valuable draft picks like many owners, then blame their predicament on being in a small market. It's not the market, it's the fact that YOU TRADED AWAY YOUR LONG TERM ASSETS FOR SHORT TERM GAINS (Example: Minnesota, Cleveland and Charlotte). The Clippers, Wizards and Warriors do this too but they don't have the easy excuse of the small market.

    How would this team look if instead of taking the best big man available the Trailblazers decided that his injury history made him less appealing than the player many said would be a great scorer in the NBA. OKC
    Then Portland, another well run small market team, would have Durant and 50 wins.

    What if Grant Hill didn't force a trade via free agency & the unknown (at the time) Ben Wallace didn't become the future rock of a championship team?
    We can play "what if" all day. I care about what happened.

    None of the above were good managment skills, with the exception of the Chucky Atkins & Ben Wallace trade (& we all know they never would have made that trade had Hill not forced it) it was just the luck of being in the right place at the right time.
    Maybe so. But what about signing Chauncey for $5 million a year, drafting Tayshaun Prince, trading Stack for Rip and fleecing Danny Ainge to get Sheed? All those are luck too?

    The Pacers had one of the top 10 highest payrolls in the NBA for over a decade & several years were in the top 5. Now that may be good management, I won't disagree however management could never do anything to put them over the top. Why? Even they would tell you they could never attract a marque free agent here because of the market & the fact that they had to over pay the players that were here.
    First, the Pacers did what small market teams have to do: Put more money into good teams and hope the extra playoff money and revenue covers the cost. When the team is worse, save money by scaling back and building assets. This is how the Tampa Bay Rays have become so good in baseball and it's how the Pacers have prepared for the next era.

    Second, I don't understand why anyone would want a marquee free agent. Other than Shaq and LeBron almost every max free agent contract has been a waste of money. Let the big market teams have Rashard Lewis, Elton Brand and Eddy Curry.

    We can skip all of the formalities of going team by team and playe by player I'll just give you one scenario that occured and you now explain to me how the smaller market was not screwed by not being the big glamorous market.

    In 1996 Shaquille O'Neal left as a free agent from the Orlando Magic to join the Los Angeles Lakers. In the 1994-95 season the Magic played the Houston Rockets in the NBA finals. They lost to the defending champs who were more experianced. The following year they made the E.C. finals only to run into the return of Michael Jordan, which no one was going to stop. Orlando's management did everything that I can think of to put a top contender around Shaq. They brought in veterans (Grant & Shaw) to go along with a decent solid cast of Anderson, Royal & Scott on top of having another young dynamic player in Hardaway.

    Orlando offered max money to get Shaq to return.

    He chose to go to the Los Angeles Lakers so he could be a part of the movie & music scene. Remember at the time the Lakers were not the leagues power house at the time of him going there. L.A. did not pay one dime more than Orlando could have & in fact because he was their player the Magic could have paid him more. But by his own words he made it clear that he chose L.A. for the offerings of the market, not the team.

    Please explain how anything that Orlando did or did not do in this case was bad management on their part & that the bigger market did not have an advantage that could have been over come.

    I believe every team in the NBA would have opened up their wallets & dumped any player (not named Jordan) to get Shaq to play for them but he only wanted the lights of Hollywood. Thus the case of one market having the supreme advantage over every other team in the NBA due to location.
    I never said great players don't leave smaller markets. What I said is that it's not unique to the NBA. Some people want to live in big cities. Teams should expect this. Indianapolis wouldn't expect Tom Cruise to move there, why expect Shaq?

    But it's not a "supreme advantage." It's an advantage. It's what you need to take into account when you buy a team in a small market. If you open a restaurant in Indianapolis do you complain that you can't get Emeril Lagasse? No, you find chefs who are cheaper and effective in different ways.

    More importantly, you chose an example BEFORE this current CBA. The way the current CBA is structured superstar players can't leave their current teams (without sacrificing massive amounts of money) for SEVEN years. That's more than enough time served for one franchise. If they want to change teams after nearly a decade I don't see how any rational person can hold it against them.

    LA won 53 games the year before Shaq got there. True they weren't a powerhouse team at the time but they were still a powerhouse franchise and Shaq knew that. I also would have chosen Jerry West and Jerry Buss to build a team for me over the guy who started Amway.
    Last edited by King Tuts Tomb; 04-13-2011 at 08:47 PM.

  22. #45
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,594

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    Quote Originally Posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The way the current CBA is structured superstar players can't leave their current teams (without sacrificing massive amounts of money) for SEVEN years. That's more than enough time served for one franchise. If they want to change teams after nearly a decade I don't see how any rational person can hold it against them.
    There's an external here that gets missed, which is how much of the NBA's marketing depends on promoting a single player. Individual clubs are handicapped doing long-term marketing campaigns for the team as a whole because of the sheer amount of nationwide noise that emphasizes certain players as the reason to watch NBA basketball.

    That means that a lot of local marketing has to be on convincing local people that one of your guys is at least a good reason to watch, especially if you are not lucky enough for it to be the reason.

    Obviously, then, when that guy chooses to leave, for whatever reason (bright lights, big city, more endorsement money, to play with his buddies) that means the marketing campaign has to start from scratch.

    Why does this hurt the small market more than the big one? Because there will always be a certain %age of fans who are fans of the team, and I think that doesn't change much based on size (it changes based on history and success, but I think that becomes circular until you get back to the starting point where the franchise was positioned to become successful, and it can backfire if a major roadblock - like the #1 guy in the league leaving or a run of very bad PR - occurs). By definition, then, in a large market that %age translates into more people who will attend the games when the "name droppers" stop attending - many of whom may be happy to finally get tickets for face value instead of at stupid markups.

    This is why I think a change in the CBA is not as important as a change in the way the league views its marketing strategy. The league doesn't have to stop marketing stars, that would be stupid since it is how they get recognition from non-fans. In parallel, however, a full league-wide campaign based on "love your local team", with hooks for local marketing interconnect (and removal of that stupid 75-mile limit), would make a huge difference.
    BillS

    "Every time I pitched it was like throwing gasoline on a fire. Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw!"
    - Ebby Calvin "Nuke" LaLoosh

  23. #46

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    Quote Originally Posted by BillS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There's an external here that gets missed, which is how much of the NBA's marketing depends on promoting a single player. Individual clubs are handicapped doing long-term marketing campaigns for the team as a whole because of the sheer amount of nationwide noise that emphasizes certain players as the reason to watch NBA basketball.
    I don't know if this is necessarily true for small market teams though. Individual player marketing is largely done on a national level by endorsers and the league. If the Pacers had a superstar they wouldn't have to market him too much because just by virtue of being on ESPN all the time he'd have name recognition.

    Casual NBA fans watch games more based on individual players while local fans watch more based on win/loss and the thrill of being involved in an expression of civic pride, so I don't think a superstar matters as much for attendance as much as winning.

    I do agree with you about NBA teams needing to do more team marketing instead of focusing on the individual players so much. The NFL does such a good job with this. Look at the team logos. NFL logos are iconic, effective and ingrained in the culture of the teams. Half the NBA teams seem to change their logos every three years and it's hard to build a consistent presence in a market when you re-brand constantly.

  24. #47
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,594

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    Quote Originally Posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Casual NBA fans watch games more based on individual players while local fans watch more based on win/loss and the thrill of being involved in an expression of civic pride, so I don't think a superstar matters as much for attendance as much as winning.
    Winning or a superstar pretty much means you don't need marketing. Marketing is there to produce consistent support for the team in spite of the personnel and the record. I think if the league as a whole helped drive this team level marketing in addition to their player focus it would start to be "cool" to be a fan of a team and not just a player.
    BillS

    "Every time I pitched it was like throwing gasoline on a fire. Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw!"
    - Ebby Calvin "Nuke" LaLoosh

  25. #48
    Headband and Rec Specs rexnom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    8,751

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    It's just unfortunate that a small-market team has to be as brilliant as Sam Presti to succeed (he has literally never struck out) whereas a larger-market team like LAL eventually will get a chance to compete regardless of how well they've done.

  26. The Following User Says Thank You to rexnom For This Useful Post:


  27. #49

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    Quote Originally Posted by rexnom View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    It's just unfortunate that a small-market team has to be as brilliant as Sam Presti to succeed (he has literally never struck out) whereas a larger-market team like LAL eventually will get a chance to compete regardless of how well they've done.
    This isn't true. Large market poorly run teams fail constantly (The Wizards in particular come to mind). The Lakers are large market and brilliantly run, that's why they dominate.

  28. #50
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,594

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Good JA Adande article: Small market, Part 1

    Quote Originally Posted by rexnom View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    It's just unfortunate that a small-market team has to be as brilliant as Sam Presti to succeed (he has literally never struck out) whereas a larger-market team like LAL eventually will get a chance to compete regardless of how well they've done.
    Quote Originally Posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This isn't true. Large market poorly run teams fail constantly (The Wizards in particular come to mind). The Lakers are large market and brilliantly run, that's why they dominate.
    He didn't say a large market team will by definition dominate, he said there will always be another chance for them to compete. A poorly-run large market team has to really stink (think of the anti-Sam Presti) to fold or get moved. As long as the team stays put and has fans, there will be an opportunity to compete, and large market teams don't have the worries that a small market team does.

    I am unaware that the current Wizards ownership is considering closing them down or moving them any time soon, certainly the previous ownership had no intentions whatsoever of doing so.

    Certainly a well-run large-market team will dominate - they have all the advantages and use them well. A poorly-run small market team is about guaranteed to be gone at some point -- they have none of the advantages and can't come up with anything to offset them. The comparison would be between a competently run team in both markets - the size of the market gives an inherent advantage that means the small market can't afford to make any mistakes in order to maintain the same standards a large market can maintain while having some screwups here and there.

    The whole point is that market size is an advantage, one that could be perceived as unfair in a league trying to work across all market sizes, and that if some creative way can be made to help level that part of the playing field without rewarding poor management, the league would be stronger and better.
    BillS

    "Every time I pitched it was like throwing gasoline on a fire. Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw!"
    - Ebby Calvin "Nuke" LaLoosh

Similar Threads

  1. NBA Draft Prospects by Region - Chad Ford
    By pujhutt50 in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 03-21-2011, 05:53 PM
  2. The PD NBA Draft - #10 Milwaukee
    By Jose Slaughter in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-16-2009, 09:36 AM
  3. The PD NBA Best Pick Left in the Draft 4
    By Hicks in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-30-2008, 08:33 PM
  4. The PD NBA Draft
    By Jose Slaughter in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 05-21-2008, 04:55 PM
  5. Draft Express - NBA Player Scouting Reports
    By OakMoses in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-30-2008, 06:09 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •