Big Market Team Fallacy

[QUOTE=Blue&Orange]Correct. The hardliners, the small market owners, are worried with the present\future, the history of last 10 years is irrelevant. Who cares is few superstars changed team in the last decade, what's important is that last year Lebron, Bosh, Amare, Carmelo, Boozer did. Atlanta had to overpaid to keep Joe Johnson, and Utah had to trade Williams because they didn't wanted to lose him for nothing, so again who cares what happened or what was the trend 10,5 years ago.[/QUOTE]

Atl. payment of JJ is the system working. If they couldn't pay more, JJ would've been elsewhere.

so, is the argument now, small markets need to keep players and pay them below market? Something doesn't sound quite right abot that.

LBJ, Bosh were locked into bad markets for 7 years. 7 YEARS! They wanted a change. Good for them- and it was to a mid-sized market.

BOOZ CHOSE a small market to go to Utah...now he chose a big market. Who knows what goes on in his head.

Melo acted out to get to NY, well JJ acted out to get to Atl from Phx.

This dominance of Big Market teams is completely imagined.

[QUOTE=Joey Zaza]Atl. payment of JJ is the system working. If they couldn't pay more, JJ would've been elsewhere.

so, is the argument now, small markets need to keep players and pay them below market? Something doesn't sound quite right abot that.

LBJ, Bosh were locked into bad markets for 7 years. 7 YEARS! They wanted a change. Good for them- and it was to a mid-sized market.

BOOZ CHOSE a small market to go to Utah...now he chose a big market. Who knows what goes on in his head.

Melo acted out to get to NY, well JJ acted out to get to Atl from Phx.

This dominance of Big Market teams is completely imagined.[/QUOTE]

Don't you get it though....if a team has to max out JJ to keep him...they aren't going to win anything. They can't compete unless they have deep/unlimited pockets.

Boozer chose money in Utah...not the market. Then he left. Totally different example.

Nobody is claiming the big markets dominate the league. We (at least I am) are simply claiming that certain franchises have an advantage. I don't know where you stand....so i've been posting with sarcastic.

He thinks that all teams are equal no matter what and that management is all that matters. I disagree. That is all.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41] you could pay howard 5 million a year in LA for his salary and he'd still probably end up making more there than he would playing for the hornets at 15 to 20 million a game. and that is just the money. clearly these players want to create "a brand" of themselves. and you do that in the big markets.

anybody saying its not becoming an issue is laying.

[/QUOTE]

List me all the players that went to LAL for less. All the guys who came to NYK for less (Amare got paid more). Melo wanted NY, but he wanted to get paid more, which is why it had to be a trade. All the guys who gave Chi a discount.

I think maybe you've got Fisher, who chose LAL for personal reasons...but besides that, it HASN'T HAPPENED.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]Don't you get it though....if a team has to max out JJ to keep him...they aren't going to win anything. They can't compete unless they have deep/unlimited pockets.
[/QUOTE]

no one has unlimited pcokets...there is a cap.

I'm not sure how else to defeat this edge. You give markets the ability to lock up their rookies for 7 years, let them pay their own players more (giving a distinct advantage). Now, be able to pay guys less then they are demanding to keep them.

I think the league curtails this edge, as evidenced by the fact the FA's don't go to these big markets.

So YES there is an edge, but NOT under the 99 agreement.

[QUOTE=Joey Zaza]List me all the players that went to LAL for less. All the guys who came to NYK for less (Amare got paid more). Melo wanted NY, but he wanted to get paid more, which is why it had to be a trade. All the guys who gave Chi a discount.

I think maybe you've got Fisher, who chose LAL for personal reasons...but besides that, it HASN'T HAPPENED.[/QUOTE]

HAHA no one gives NY a discount for going there in any sport. They always ask for more money because of the high taxes. States like Florida and Texas can sometimes get a discount because of the state taxes. In fact, the Yankees ALWAYS have to pay a premium to get players to go there. No one ever gives them a discount.

[QUOTE=Joey Zaza]no one has unlimited pcokets...there is a cap.

I'm not sure how else to defeat this edge. You give markets the ability to lock up their rookies for 7 years, let them pay their own players more (giving a distinct advantage). Now, be able to pay guys less then they are demanding to keep them.

I think the league curtails this edge, as evidenced by the fact the FA's don't go to these big markets.

So YES there is an edge, but NOT under the 99 agreement.[/QUOTE]

its about the current trend. and they do. shaq went to the lakers...changed the entire landscape of basketball. lebron left cleveland...changed the entire landscape of basketball. amare and melo went to NY...completely changed the western conference. deron williams got traded in fear....

do you really think a team like the bulls or knicks would have lost carter, tmac, and bosh within a decade like the raptors did? ROFL if you don't think the bigger market teams would have had a better chance to hold on to those players. whats that? thats right...another advantage.

now chris paul and howard are most likely leaving. hey, i'll make a bet with you. i bet paul and howard go to big markets if they leave. care to take me up on that?

[QUOTE=Joey Zaza]List me all the players that went to LAL for less. All the guys who came to NYK for less (Amare got paid more). Melo wanted NY, but he wanted to get paid more, which is why it had to be a trade. All the guys who gave Chi a discount.

I think maybe you've got Fisher, who chose LAL for personal reasons...but besides that, it HASN'T HAPPENED.[/QUOTE]

what?

i don't follow. because the knicks can afford to pay more....they ended up there. its not hard. the knicks simply spend more money than most teams. i don't know why its confusing to people.

its debatable as to how important or how advantageous spending more money is. i totally agree. what is not debatable is that the simple fact of having 30 to 50 million more to spend is an advantage.

[QUOTE=Joey Zaza]Go to a KNicks game, go to a Nets game. They are not the same market. They are not close drives from each other (since they've moved to Newark they are closer, but for 8 of the last 11 years, its the meadowlands) and their crowds are different. Nets at their very best drew like the NYK at their worst.

its not the same market.[/QUOTE]

For all intents and purposes, it is the same media market. Yeah, northern New Jersey has its own daily papers (Newark Star-Ledger and Bergen County Record), but they get their TV and radio from New York City, just like southern New Jersey gets their TV and radio from Philadelphia. I kinda get what you're saying, but I'm not talking the different types of crowds and things like that, because of course it's no contest. That list I posted earlier takes into account no just the individual cities, but their suburban areas as well, in this case, northern New Jersey is a suburban area to New York City.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]what?

i don't follow. because the knicks can afford to pay more....they ended up there. its not hard. the knicks simply spend more money than most teams. i don't know why its confusing to people.

its debatable as to how important or how advantageous spending more money is. i totally agree. what is not debatable is that the simple fact of having 30 to 50 million more to spend is an advantage.[/QUOTE]

Knicks are below the cap. They can afford to pay $100,000 to anyone, they just aren't allowed to.

Why is this confusing you? Whatever money Sarver saved on Amare, he spent on other players. They all spend the about same.

The big markets being richer does not and has not given them a single advantage that the NBA as not accounted for...plus this "trend" is Carmelo. That's it. Utah losing deron is not about big/small market, it was about Deron wanting to leave. Who else is this trend? Amare taking the most money available to him (under the cap rules) to go to NY. that's a $$ decision.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]
you could pay howard 5 million a year in LA for his salary and he'd still probably end up making more there than he would playing for the hornets at 15 to 20 million a game.
[/QUOTE]

Do you really think this? You think if it was true that playing for LA could make you $15 mil. more per season, any agent would've allowed guys like Lebron or Chris Paul sign extensions with their small market teams after the rookie deal expired?

Melo's not getting $15 mil. more in endorsements all of a sudden, neither is Amare or Gasol or Steve Blake.

[QUOTE=Joey Zaza]Knicks are below the cap. They can afford to pay $100,000 to anyone, they just aren't allowed to.

Why is this confusing you? Whatever money Sarver saved on Amare, he spent on other players. They all spend the about same.

The big markets being richer does not and has not given them a single advantage that the NBA as not accounted for...plus this "trend" is Carmelo. That's it. Utah losing deron is not about big/small market, it was about Deron wanting to leave. Who else is this trend? Amare taking the most money available to him (under the cap rules) to go to NY. that's a $$ decision.[/QUOTE]

I'm not confused at all. Certain teams can afford to have higher payrolls. You do realize that we don't have a hard cap in the NBA...right? You do realize that the Mavs spent like 40 million more than some teams...right?

You seem confused....not me.

And if you don't see the trend...you are blind. Simple as that.

And I'll say it again....care to wager on where Paul and Howard end up if they leave? I'll take the big markets....you take the small markets. Deal?

[QUOTE=Kevin_Gamble]Do you really think this? You think if it was true that playing for LA could make you $15 mil. more per season, any agent would've allowed guys like Lebron or Chris Paul sign extensions with their small market teams after the rookie deal expired?

Melo's not getting $15 mil. more in endorsements all of a sudden, neither is Amare or Gasol or Steve Blake.[/QUOTE]

I don't know why the dollar amount is, but for star players....being in NY over a small market is a huge advantage...huge. And its lasting....as in for the rest of their lives type stuff.

I have no idea of calculating it, but I bet the exposure leads to a pretty high monetary value...especially if they start winning.

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]I'm not confused at all. Certain teams can afford to have higher payrolls. You do realize that we don't have a hard cap in the NBA...right? You do realize that the Mavs spent like 40 million more than some teams...right?

You seem confused....not me.

And if you don't see the trend...you are blind. Simple as that.[/QUOTE]

Certain teams can afford to have higher payorlls...lets see who those teams are. I'm sure its the big markets, with all their draw and cash....

LA Lakers ~ 95.3 (big) (OBVIOUSLY)
Orlando Magic ~ 89.9 (medium)
Dallas Mavericks ~ 85.8 (big)
Boston Celtics ~ 83.3 (big)
Denver Nuggets ~ 83.0 (medium)
Houston Rockets ~ 72.7 (medium)
Utah Jazz ~ 71.1 (small)
Philadelphia 76ers ~ 69.4 (big)
Atlanta Hawks ~ 69.1 (medium)
New Orleans Hornets ~ 68.9 (small)

[B]wait this can't be right...of the top 10 spenders, not even half are big market teams..is that possible?[/B]

Memphis Grizzlies ~ 67.8 (small)
Milwaukee Bucks ~ 67.7 (small)
Portland Blazers ~ 67.5 (small)
San Antonio Spurs ~ 64.9 (small)
Detroit Pistons ~ 64.7 (medium)
Golden State Warriors ~ 64.6 (small)
Indiana Pacers ~ 64.4 (small)
Charlotte Bobcats ~ 61.1 (small)
New Jersey Nets ~ 57.0 (small-but you guys wantto call them big)

[B]Where's NY with all its spending power? BUlls and all the players that the BIG market bulls attracy? Not a single BIG MARKET team in the mid-tier?[/B]

Phoenix Suns ~ 55.4 (medium)
Miami Heat ~ 54.4 (medium)
Washington Wizards ~ 52.7 (big)
Cleveland Cavaliers ~ 51.3 (medium)
OKC Thunder ~ 50.3 (small)
Toronto Raptors ~ 49.4 (?)
New York Knicks ~ 47.2 (BIG)
LA Clippers ~ 47.0 (BIG)
Chicago Bulls ~ 46.7 (BIG)
Sacramento Kings ~ 39.0 (small)
Minnesota T-Wolves ~ 37.6 (small)

So - the big markets can all spend more creating a trend of players going there for bigger salaries. Hmmm...not seeing it here. I must be blind.

[url]http://thehoopdoctors.com/online2/2010/10/2010-2011-team-payrolls/[/url]

[QUOTE=DMAVS41]I don't know why the dollar amount is, but for star players....being in NY over a small market is a huge advantage...huge. And its lasting....as in for the rest of their lives type stuff.

I have no idea of calculating it, but I bet the exposure leads to a pretty high monetary value...especially if they start winning.[/QUOTE]

Every star player I know that comes to NY takes top top top top dollar to come here and not a nickel less.

[QUOTE=Joey Zaza]Certain teams can afford to have higher payorlls...lets see who those teams are. I'm sure its the big markets, with all their draw and cash....

LA Lakers ~ 95.3 (big) (OBVIOUSLY)
Orlando Magic ~ 89.9 (medium)
Dallas Mavericks ~ 85.8 (big)
Boston Celtics ~ 83.3 (big)
Denver Nuggets ~ 83.0 (medium)
Houston Rockets ~ 72.7 (medium)
Utah Jazz ~ 71.1 (small)
Philadelphia 76ers ~ 69.4 (big)
Atlanta Hawks ~ 69.1 (medium)
New Orleans Hornets ~ 68.9 (small)

[B]wait this can't be right...of the top 10 spenders, not even half are big market teams..is that possible?[/B]

Memphis Grizzlies ~ 67.8 (small)
Milwaukee Bucks ~ 67.7 (small)
Portland Blazers ~ 67.5 (small)
San Antonio Spurs ~ 64.9 (small)
Detroit Pistons ~ 64.7 (medium)
Golden State Warriors ~ 64.6 (small)
Indiana Pacers ~ 64.4 (small)
Charlotte Bobcats ~ 61.1 (small)
New Jersey Nets ~ 57.0 (small-but you guys wantto call them big)

[B]Where's NY with all its spending power? BUlls and all the players that the BIG market bulls attracy? Not a single BIG MARKET team in the mid-tier?[/B]

Phoenix Suns ~ 55.4 (medium)
Miami Heat ~ 54.4 (medium)
Washington Wizards ~ 52.7 (big)
Cleveland Cavaliers ~ 51.3 (medium)
OKC Thunder ~ 50.3 (small)
Toronto Raptors ~ 49.4 (?)
New York Knicks ~ 47.2 (BIG)
LA Clippers ~ 47.0 (BIG)
Chicago Bulls ~ 46.7 (BIG)
Sacramento Kings ~ 39.0 (small)
Minnesota T-Wolves ~ 37.6 (small)

So - the big markets can all spend more creating a trend of players going there for bigger salaries. Hmmm...not seeing it here. I must be blind.

[url]http://thehoopdoctors.com/online2/2010/10/2010-2011-team-payrolls/[/url][/QUOTE]


you have 3 of the 4 top teams as big markets....LOL...and you are taking a snapshot in a year in which some big markets purposefully shed contracts to get the exact players we are talking about.

and its not just money...as i have said literally a million ****ing times. its everything. everything that goes along with the desirable locations/markets. everything matters. you guys operate with these absolutes like somebody is sitting here telling you that no small market team can ever win.

not the case at all. its just a shame that people here honestly think a team like the twolves (lowest on your list) can compete with the a team like the lakers/celtics/mavs year in year out. they can't.