Printable View
[QUOTE=tpols]Reggie Miller
Michael Jordan
Kobe Bryant
Before every game, reporters will swarm these guys about breaking scoring records in MSG. But they dont do it anywhere else. Why is that?
You couldn't name me three arenas that three small market teams play in.. dont even bother responding because its too easy to google.[/QUOTE]
I honestly can't believe people truly believe that certain franchises don't have inherent advantages.
Its mind boggling.
I don't even understand why people are disputing DMAVS claim that big market teams have an advantage.... :confusedshrug:
I went ahead and nerdified Sarcastic's favorite site "Forbes: and compiled the average player costs of six teams for the past 10 years.
1. Knicks - $96M
2. Lakers - $73M
3. Bucks - $65M
4. Spurs - $63M
5. Suns - $61M
6. Hornets - $56
Don't you think someone who can spend $96M every year for 10 years have an advantage against someone who could only spend $56M? To top it off, the Knicks earned money during those 10 years, even while sucking.
Now before people go "Look at the Spurs! Proof that big markets doesn't matter". That's beside the point, the Spurs are good because for the better part of 10 years they've drafted good, spent wisely. Can you imagine how great the Spurs would be if they had a market like N.Y. and be able to spend close to $100M every year? They'd probably have Dwight, Wade, Kobe, Paul and Amare locked up for 7 years at $10M each and win every year.
I am getting really lost here.
Someone please fill in these blanks for me so I can catch up
The Big Market Team's Inherent Advantage is______
The proof of this advantage is________________
The NBA's efforts to curtail this advantage have failed because ________
\
And here's a fair deal, people who think its unfair to raise the dominance of the Spurs are barred from raising the LAL. Otherwise, both teams can be used as examples fo big/small market success.
The Big Market Team's Inherent Advantage is_ they have larger fanbases, national exposure, popularity which can be very attractive to superstars who want to play in that type of environment.
The proof of this advantage is_ tons of superstars over the past couple of decades going to big market teams either through draft demands or FA making those teams dynasties.. Shaq, Kareem, Magic, Kobe, Wilt all going to LA through a personal preference.. Dwight announcing he might leave Orlando for LA.. talks of a big 3 in NY with CP3, Melo and Amare... it goes on and on and on. Then of course you get the fact that many superstars have left their small market/shitty teams and cities to go play in the limelight[virtually all of my above examples started off in small markets or were going to end up there].
The NBA's efforts to curtail this advantage have failed because _ there's nothing you can do to limit the attractiveness of a city/franchise. Their location, history, and prestige is unchangeable by enforcing any rules.
[QUOTE=Joey Zaza]I am getting really lost here.
Someone please fill in these blanks for me so I can catch up
The Big Market Team's Inherent Advantage is [U][B]more and more players want to team up with other stars in bigger or better markets than the one's they are in. Smaller market teams are forced to overspend on mediocre talent to keep their stars happy.[/B][/U]
The proof of this advantage is [B][U]Larger market teams are able to spend and still turn a profit regardless of team success, whereas smaller markets can get burried for years.[/U][/B]
The NBA's efforts to curtail this advantage have failed because [B][U]there is nothing in the CBA that helps prevent it. This is part of the reason we are where we are.[/U][/B]
\
And here's a fair deal, people who think its unfair to raise the dominance of the Spurs are barred from raising the LAL. Otherwise, both teams can be used as examples fo big/small market success.[/QUOTE]
It's completely fair to bring up the Spurs, but I would consider them more of the exception to the rule than anything. Not every team lands a top 2 or 3 PF in the history of the game. The Spurs were always able to keep their stars and constantly chew up and spit out role players on the cheap to put around them. It's rare, and it's rare because no other market seems to be able to do it.
Since '99, which small market superstar left to go to a big team? We can use 'Melo. Anyone else? Can't use Amare/Booz they were offered more money by teams under the cap.
We really can't use Paul/Howard until they actually leave their teams and go to this Big Market.
[QUOTE=Rab]It's completely fair to bring up the Spurs, but I would consider them more of the exception to the rule than anything. Not every team lands a top 2 or 3 PF in the history of the game. The Spurs were always able to keep their stars and constantly chew up and spit out role players on the cheap to put around them. It's rare, and it's rare because no other market seems to be able to do it.[/QUOTE]
Of course it's unreasonable to ask small market teams to luck into a Tim Duncan, but what separates San Antonio with Duncan from say Minnesota with KG is that they made smart moves after the fact. That's the issue. So much of the problem with this debate is that a lot gets solved if Drew Gooden isn't getting $30 million contracts. If teams tried to build through financial prudence and really working the draft then so many of the problems would be lessened. There's always going to be bad teams, but that doesn't mean you tear down the teams that want to spend so that poorly run teams can reset the scoreboard.
[QUOTE=gasolina]I don't even understand why people are disputing DMAVS claim that big market teams have an advantage.... :confusedshrug:
I went ahead and nerdified Sarcastic's favorite site "Forbes: and compiled the average player costs of six teams for the past 10 years.
1. Knicks - $96M
2. Lakers - $73M
3. Bucks - $65M
4. Spurs - $63M
5. Suns - $61M
6. Hornets - $56
Don't you think someone who can spend $96M every year for 10 years have an advantage against someone who could only spend $56M? To top it off, the Knicks earned money during those 10 years, even while sucking.
Now before people go "Look at the Spurs! Proof that big markets doesn't matter". That's beside the point, the Spurs are good because for the better part of 10 years they've drafted good, spent wisely. Can you imagine how great the Spurs would be if they had a market like N.Y. and be able to spend close to $100M every year? They'd probably have Dwight, Wade, Kobe, Paul and Amare locked up for 7 years at $10M each and win every year.[/QUOTE]
So we have 2 big market teams and 4 small market teams in the top 6 in spending over the last 10 years. LA and San Antonio have 7 championships between them in the last ten years. While the rest of account for 0 combined. It seems to me that having Tim Duncan and Kobe Bryant has more to do with success than spending spending or market size. New York is proof that market size and spending don't make such a huge difference or they would have done a hell of a lot more in the past 10 years.
[QUOTE=Joey Zaza]Since '99, which small market superstar left to go to a big team? We can use 'Melo. Anyone else? Can't use Amare/Booz they were offered more money by teams under the cap.
We really can't use Paul/Howard until they actually leave their teams and go to this Big Market.[/QUOTE]
bosh/lebron
and if you don't think the NY market had anything to do with amare leaving you are just being stubborn. same with boozer.
the raptors have lost carter, tmac, and bosh within the decade....lol
[QUOTE=Joey Zaza]Since '99, which small market superstar left to go to a big team? We can use 'Melo. Anyone else? Can't use Amare/Booz they were offered more money by teams under the cap.
We really can't use Paul/Howard until they actually leave their teams and go to this Big Market.[/QUOTE]
That wasn't an issue back then. This is the trend that is happening now, and that small market teams are wanting to prevent.
Melo used the leverage. The Jazz traded D-Will before he could use that leverage against them. We saw what the Heat did. Of course, Miami isn't a large market, but there is a market appeal there. Howard has announced there is already a pretty good chance he'll bounce, and you know it won't be to the Bucks or Cavs. We'll see how it plays out with D-Will, Howard, and Paul this year, but in my opinion, they're cut from the same cloth as LeBron, Bosh, Wade, and Melo.
I think you can absolutely use Amar'e in this scenario. The Suns simply didn't want to guarantee that kind of money over that many years to him because of the fear it would cripple the franchise. The appeal of NY and the financial flexibility NY had were certainly an appeal to him.
Booz I agree you can't use because the Jazz didn't want him back anyway
[QUOTE=DMAVS41]the raptors have lost carter, tmac, and bosh within the decade....lol[/QUOTE]
That would certainly have more to do with the state of the Raptors than big markets stealing them. Since the Raptors drafted Chris Bosh in 2003 they had the chance to draft at least a few of Andre Iguodala, Andrew Bynum, LaMarcus Aldridge, Brandon Roy or Rudy Gay. If they make a few more of the right moves, maybe Bosh doesn't leave or at least they could've done more when he was there.
[QUOTE=Joey Zaza]I am getting really lost here.
Someone please fill in these blanks for me so I can catch up
The Big Market Team's Inherent Advantage is______
The proof of this advantage is________________
The NBA's efforts to curtail this advantage have failed because ________
[/QUOTE]
1.Opportunities beyond basketball. Higher profile market.
2. The movie Shazam
3. They actually made the movie Shazam
[QUOTE=gasolina]Is this serious? Didn't Kobe, Wade, and Lebron all had big games in consecutive nights at MSG a couple of years ago?[/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure Kobe, Wade, and Lebron have far more memorable games than beating the Knicks of the last decade.
[QUOTE=B
[QUOTE=Kurosawa0]That would certainly have more to do with the state of the Raptors than big markets stealing them. Since the Raptors drafted Chris Bosh in 2003 they had the chance to draft at least a few of Andre Iguodala, Andrew Bynum, LaMarcus Aldridge, Brandon Roy or Rudy Gay. If they make a few more of the right moves, maybe Bosh doesn't leave or at least they could've done more when he was there.[/QUOTE]
of course. but that is part of the issue. if teams with more resources and a desirable location miss in the draft, they can buy players. look at what cuban has done. he got dirk in the draft and then basically has bought every player we've gotten since.
if some of those guys were on bigger market teams, more resources would have been spent on getting in quality players with the chances of an elite free agent actually wanting to play there. if bosh had been on the knicks, people would have wanted to go join him in NY.....nobody was thinking about joining bosh in Toronto.
Wonder why....