The NBA Offseason Thread

[Birds of B'more]

With another season in the books, figured it was time to begin a new thread on here. And honestly, my eyes just couldn't take any more of the LeBron vs Kobe debate.

Like the NFL, most of the attention and discussion surrounding this offseason will center on CBA negotiations and a potential labor stoppage. But first, the Draft will take place on June 23rd, and unlike the recent NFL Draft, this time current players can be traded since the draft occurs before the expiration of the CBA on July 1.

So anyway, thought this could be a place to discuss anything offseason related: draft, free agency, trades....as well as the CBA negotiations and what the future of the NBA may look like.

Have at it.

[Sports Guy]

NBA is going to have a long lockout in all likelihood.

And the lockout delays the Bynum, Odom, draft picks for Howard deal.

[Pedro Cerrano]

I'd surmise that we see 1/2 a season next year which is a huge benefit for veteran teams like the Lakers, Spurs, Celtics, etc int terms of their ability to win a title.

I think the Lakers will end up dealing for Howard.

Heard a rumor that the Wizards were offered the #2 overall pick for JaVale McGee and the #6 and that Ernie said no. SMH...

[Remember The Alomar]

NBA is going to have a long lockout in all likelihood.

And the lockout delays the Bynum, Odom, draft picks for Howard deal.

Is this rumor actually legit?

[Sports Guy]

Is this rumor actually legit?

It is being thrown around...That is the type of deal the Lakers would have to give up IMO.

No way Orlando gets Howard to sign an extension, so trading him now and avoiding a Melo situation is what they need to do.

[Birds of B'more]

NBA is going to have a long lockout in all likelihood.

And the lockout delays the Bynum, Odom, draft picks for Howard deal.

If the new CBA has any similarity to the old one, LA would have to take more salary from Orlando to make the deal work. Someone like Turkoglu added in might do it.

EDIT: Nevermind, for some reason I had Gasol's name in my head as part of the deal instead of Odom.

[MRLeavey]

Any rumors about the Wizards making any moves? I really think the next couple of weeks will be critical to their long-term prospects. I'm not a fan of the team, but I'm interested to see what type of talent they surround John Wall with.

They've got pieces that afford them some genuine flexibility. I'd personally go hard after Millsap, Josh Smith, and Iguodala in that order on the trade market, and Marc Gasol in free agency.

If the Wizards could come away from the offseason with a starting five of...

PG John Wall
SG Kawhi Leonard (selected at #6)
SF Josh Smith (traded for Jevale McGee)
PF Paul Millsap (traded for #18 and an unprotected first next year)
C M. Gasol (free agency)

... I think you're looking at a young, talented playoff team that can defend.

I'd also unload Blatche for a reliable sixth man from the backcourt.

[Pedro Cerrano]

Any rumors about the Wizards making any moves? I really think the next couple of weeks will be critical to their long-term prospects. I'm not a fan of the team, but I'm interested to see what type of talent they surround John Wall with.

They've got pieces that afford them some genuine flexibility. I'd personally go hard after Millsap, Josh Smith, and Iguodala in that order on the trade market, and Marc Gasol in free agency.

If the Wizards could come away from the offseason with a starting five of...

PG John Wall
SG Kawhi Leonard (selected at #6)
SF Josh Smith (traded for Jevale McGee)
PF Paul Millsap (traded for #18 and an unprotected first next year)
C M. Gasol (free agency)

... I think you're looking at a young, talented playoff team that can defend.

I'd also unload Blatche for a reliable sixth man from the backcourt.

Uhhh, I'll have what you're having ;-)

[MRLeavey]

Uhhh, I'll have what you're having ;-)

Haha... is that overly optimistic?

[Pedro Cerrano]

Haha... is that overly optimistic?

Put it this way, if the Hawks traded Josh Smith for JaVale McGee the GM would have to have his head examined. Smith is close to an elite all-around player (youngest player in NBA history to 1,000 blocks I believe) while McGee, who could still be good, is extremely raw, extremely soft and extremely limited offensively.

[ccbird]

They were talking in the playoffs how Smith's athleticsm and noticably down and since his game is predicated on athleticism he's not a guy the Wiz should target IMO. I mean he still probably has 2-3 very good seasons in him but the Wiz need to look even more long term. BTW...I agree that McGee for SMith wouldn't be enough for Atlanta.


As far as McGee and the #6 for #2 I would probably do it but it's close and I'm a big believer in Derick Williams. McGee still has potential, even if it's only as strong defensive player alaTyson Chandler and Kanter, who I also like, could still be available at 6. If I knew Kanter would def be there at 6 I'd probably hold onto the pick but that is probably less than 50/50 right now..

[Pedro Cerrano]

They were talking in the playoffs how Smith's athleticsm and noticably down and since his game is predicated on athleticism he's not a guy the Wiz should target IMO. I mean he still probably has 2-3 very good seasons in him but the Wiz need to look even more long term. BTW...I agree that McGee for SMith wouldn't be enough for Atlanta.


As far as McGee and the #6 for #2 I would probably do it but it's close and I'm a big believer in Derick Williams. McGee still has potential, even if it's only as strong defensive player alaTyson Chandler and Kanter, who I also like, could still be available at 6. If I knew Kanter would def be there at 6 I'd probably hold onto the pick but that is probably less than 50/50 right now..

He's only 25.

[MRLeavey]

Put it this way, if the Hawks traded Josh Smith for JaVale McGee the GM would have to have his head examined. Smith is close to an elite all-around player (youngest player in NBA history to 1,000 blocks I believe) while McGee, who could still be good, is extremely raw, extremely soft and extremely limited offensively.

I definitely agree with your overall assessment and obviously prefer Josh Smith given the fact that I'd trade for him, but they're statistically not very different, and McGee is younger/cheaper, while each fills a position of need for the other team.

Based on statistics per 30 minutes in 2011:

GP MIN PTS FGA FG% 3PA 3P% FTA REB AST BPG PF +/-

McGee 79 2191 13.1 9.9 55% 0.0 0% 3.8 10.4 0.6 3.9 3.8 -3.7
Smith 77 2644 17.3 14.2 48% 2.1 33% 4.3 8.9 3.5 2.5 3.0 1.0

Last season McGee outblocked and outrebounded Smith, and shot a higher percentage from the field. He is clearly still very raw, which could be a good or bad thing depending on your perspective (at 23, I'm comfortable with that). Smith outscored McGee, and is clearly also a better on-ball defender, and what appeals to me most is his ability to run the floor with Wall. But he is also more of a known and limited quantity offensively, and has been booed in Atlanta and chastised by his coaches for his questionable shot selection.

Just putting it out there. It might not be quite as uneven as you think, though I certainly could be wrong.

Either way, I totally agree that it's a long-shot.

[Pedro Cerrano]

I definitely agree with your overall assessment and obviously prefer Josh Smith given the fact that I'd trade for him, but they're statistically not very different, and McGee is younger/cheaper, while each fills a position of need for the other team.

Based on statistics per 30 minutes in 2011:

GP MIN PTS FGA FG% 3PA 3P% FTA REB AST BPG PF +/-

McGee 79 2191 13.1 9.9 55% 0.0 0% 3.8 10.4 0.6 3.9 3.8 -3.7
Smith 77 2644 17.3 14.2 48% 2.1 33% 4.3 8.9 3.5 2.5 3.0 1.0

Last season McGee outblocked and outrebounded Smith, and shot a higher percentage from the field. He is clearly still very raw, which could be a good or bad thing depending on your perspective (at 23, I'm comfortable with that). Smith outscored McGee, and is clearly also a better on-ball defender, and what appeals to me most is his ability to run the floor with Wall. But he is also more of a known and limited quantity offensively, and has been booed in Atlanta and chastised by his coaches for his questionable shot selection.

Just putting it out there. It might not be quite as uneven as you think, though I certainly could be wrong.

Either way, I totally agree that it's a long-shot.

Yes, you have to consider their positions as well. If you have Smith with a league-average center versus McGee with a league-average small forward/power forward which team do you think would be better overall on the glass and blocking shots?

[Birds of B'more]

The other obvious name that could move this summer would be Chris Paul, but I haven't heard any recent rumors on him. With New Orleans' ownership in flux and the franchise currently under NBA stewardship, there's several ways you could look at what could happen with him this summer. But ultimately if they keep him I'd say the chances of Paul staying with the Hornets after next season is nil.

[MRLeavey]

Yes, you have to consider their positions as well. If you have Smith with a league-average center versus McGee with a league-average small forward/power forward which team do you think would be better overall on the glass and blocking shots?

Definitely a fair question, but am I wrong to view Smith as more of a SF (at least in terms of style of play)?

[Pedro Cerrano]

No you're definitely right there. Smith plays more like a SF which makes his blocks and rebounds from that position even more impressive.

[Sports Guy]

He's only 25.

So what? A lot of high school guys have seen their games really decline by their late 20s.

[MRLeavey]

The other obvious name that could move this summer would be Chris Paul, but I haven't heard any recent rumors on him. With New Orleans' ownership in flux and the franchise currently under NBA stewardship, there's several ways you could look at what could happen with him this summer. But ultimately if they keep him I'd say the chances of Paul staying with the Hornets after next season is nil.

Steve Nash is in a similar boat. I think the Knicks would be a perfect landing spot, but it seems the Suns aren't going to move him for whatever reason.

[Birds of B'more]

Steve Nash is in a similar boat. I think the Knicks would be a perfect landing spot, but it seems the Suns aren't going to move him for whatever reason.

If Paul reaches free agency, I would put the Knicks on the top of the list (as of today) of potential landing spots. In the meantime, I think the Knicks will be content to go with Chauncey Billups, who is entering the final year of his contract.

[mweb]

Any rumors about the Wizards making any moves? I really think the next couple of weeks will be critical to their long-term prospects. I'm not a fan of the team, but I'm interested to see what type of talent they surround John Wall with.

They've got pieces that afford them some genuine flexibility. I'd personally go hard after Millsap, Josh Smith, and Iguodala in that order on the trade market, and Marc Gasol in free agency.

If the Wizards could come away from the offseason with a starting five of...

PG John Wall
SG Kawhi Leonard (selected at #6)
SF Josh Smith (traded for Jevale McGee)
PF Paul Millsap (traded for #18 and an unprotected first next year)
C M. Gasol (free agency)

... I think you're looking at a young, talented playoff team that can defend.

I'd also unload Blatche for a reliable sixth man from the backcourt.

Forgetting about how realistic this is for a second, let me ask you who is going to shoot the ball from the perimeter out of that lineup? That has the potential for being the worst 3 point shooting starting lineup in modern NBA history.:D

There's not much ball handling skills there either at the 2 and 3. Both wing players have the ball handling skills that rate more to in between a 3 and a 4.

[mweb]

If Paul reaches free agency, I would put the Knicks on the top of the list (as of today) of potential landing spots. In the meantime, I think the Knicks will be content to go with Chauncey Billups, who is entering the final year of his contract.

There's a good chance the Knicks won't have the cap space after the new CBA.

I also don't think him and Melo are a great fit.

[mweb]

Regarding Bynum + for Howard, well that's certainly possible, but Jim Buss seems pretty serious about holding onto Drew.

[ccbird]

Regarding Bynum + for Howard, well that's certainly possible, but Jim Buss seems pretty serious about holding onto Drew.

Which is crazy. His knees are so close to being shot.

[ccbird]

He's only 25.

I think he'll probably be solid into his 30s but I could easily see him slip into noticable decline in the next few years. I wouldn't want to be the one signing him to a max or near max contract when his current one is up in two years.

[mweb]

I think he'll probably be solid into his 30s but I could easily see him slip into noticable decline in the next few years. I wouldn't want to be the one signing him to a max or near max contract when his current one is up in two years.

I agree. Plus, he's a rather limited player imo. He's not much of a shooter, he's not much of a passer, he's not much of a ball handler, and he's not much of a post player. He's a very good defender and rebounder (for his position) and on offense he uses his great athleticism to get some points and he'd be a great fast break partner for Wall, but otherwise he isn't effective on offense for the most part.

[mweb]

Which is crazy. His knees are so close to being shot.

Not sure about being close to being shot, but he's certainly shown himself to be far from durable.

I like him quite a bit, but I'd definitely look to deal him for Howard.

[MikeAD]

What is the word on the CBA and a lockout?

[MRLeavey]

Forgetting about how realistic this is for a second, let me ask you who is going to shoot the ball from the perimeter out of that lineup? That has the potential for being the worst 3 point shooting starting lineup in modern NBA history.:D

There's not much ball handling skills there either at the 2 and 3. Both wing players have the ball handling skills that rate more to in between a 3 and a 4.

I may have a higher opinion of Leonard than most, but I think he's going to be an excellent scorer at the NBA level, and I really like his mid-range potential. Wall is also capable of scoring more at the point than the league average, and Smith, Millsap and Gasol are all capable scorers, though not distance shooters obviously.

But more importantly to me, the lineup I put together is one that can get up and down the court, rebound the basketball, and defend. I'd definitely want a 6th man than can shoot the basketball, but if the team I put together gets out in transition, they'll get a lot of high percentage shots to offset their lack of perimeter shooting.

I see what your saying though. Obviously my starting team is not a particularly good jump-shooting unit (which is important). But I think they can make up for that in other areas.

It's also beyond hypothetical... but remember, Smith hasn't played with a capable point guard during his career. I get the reluctance though... he is a limited offensive player.

[MRLeavey]

Not sure about being close to being shot, but he's certainly shown himself to be far from durable.

I like him quite a bit, but I'd definitely look to deal him for Howard.

Yea... you can't really pass up Howard just because you like Bynum's upside. He hasn't been able to sustain it. Big men that struggle to stay healthy are a huge red flag.

I wonder if the Lakers would try to get Jameer Nelson out of a deal too. They desperately need an upgrade at the point.

[mweb]

I may have a higher opinion of Leonard than most, but I think he's going to be an excellent scorer at the NBA level, and I really like his mid-range potential. Wall is also capable of scoring more at the point than the league average, and Smith, Millsap and Gasol are all capable scorers, though not distance shooters obviously.

But more importantly to me, the lineup I put together is one that can get up and down the court, rebound the basketball, and defend. I'd definitely want a 6th man than can shoot the basketball, but if the team I put together gets out in transition, they'll get a lot of high percentage shots to offset their lack of perimeter shooting.

I see what your saying though. Obviously my starting team is not a particularly good jump-shooting unit (which is important). But I think they can make up for that in other areas.

It's also beyond hypothetical... but remember, Smith hasn't played with a capable point guard during his career. I get the reluctance though... he is a limited offensive player.

Leonard may turn out to be a good player, but as of now he's a poor outside shooter with a game closer to a 4 than a 3.

Yeah, you have some guys who can score, but they'll have a hard time finding much free space within 15 feet of the basket with no one on the floor that even has to guarded at the 3 point line.

[Sports Guy]

Yea... you can't really pass up Howard just because you like Bynum's upside. He hasn't been able to sustain it. Big men that struggle to stay healthy are a huge red flag.

I wonder if the Lakers would try to get Jameer Nelson out of a deal too. They desperately need an upgrade at the point.

Gotta think the Magic would want them to take back one of their several bad contracts..Problem is, what is LA going to deal to even out the money? Obviously Blake and Odom would have to be in the deal, along with Bynum...But who else could even out some of the money disparity?

[Birds of B'more]

There's a good chance the Knicks won't have the cap space after the new CBA.

I also don't think him and Melo are a great fit.

The Knicks' only financial commitments beyond next season are to Carmelo and Amare, IIRC. They may not have the cap room under a new CBA for Paul, but if they don't, very few other teams will either.

[Birds of B'more]

Gotta think the Magic would want them to take back one of their several bad contracts..Problem is, what is LA going to deal to even out the money? Obviously Blake and Odom would have to be in the deal, along with Bynum...But who else could even out some of the money disparity?

If the Lakers are willing to take back Turkoglu along with Howard, Bynum+Odom+Blake would be close to even money.

[Sports Guy]

If the Lakers are willing to take back Turkoglu along with Howard, Bynum+Odom+Blake would be close to even money.

And the Lakers would be trading at least 1 future first round pick.

[mweb]

The Knicks' only financial commitments beyond next season are to Carmelo and Amare, IIRC. They may not have the cap room under a new CBA for Paul, but if they don't, very few other teams will either.

The Knicks have just over 41M in committments for that year. The cap last year was 58M. If the cap drops just a few million they won't have room unless Paul takes a discount or the max contract is lowered a decent amount (it will be in years, but I don't know about dollars per year). They also have a first round pick.

Oh and of course there generally aren't many teams that can afford max level guys in free agency other than retaining their own.

[Sports Guy]

BTW, there is talk that both Miami and the Lakers want a first round pick this year.

Are they looking to trade a player to free up salary or do they want that pick because they feel they need some youth on their roster off the bench?

[MRLeavey]

In the max deal conversation, I'm somewhat surprised the Heat aren't looking to move Bosh.

He's a really good player, but given the volume of shots that Wade and Lebron take, I think you could probably get similar production from a more affordable player while improving depth.

Probably goes against the buy low, sell high philosophy in some ways, but I still think he's a commodity to most GMs.

[mweb]

In the max deal conversation, I'm somewhat surprised the Heat aren't looking to move Bosh.

He's a really good player, but given the volume of shots that Wade and Lebron take, I think you could probably get similar production from a more affordable player while improving depth.

Probably goes against the buy low, sell high philosophy in some ways, but I still think he's a commodity to most GMs.

I don't think that's a bad idea necessarily, but I do think keeping those 3 guys together would be smart in terms of cohesion. They'll continue to improve playing with each other and it seems that they have very good chemistry off the court.

If they were to trade one of their stars, I think Wade or James would make more sense as Jeff Van Gundy said since they don't co-exist that well on offense other than fast breaks. But to my previous point, they'll improve in that regard.

[Sports Guy]

In the max deal conversation, I'm somewhat surprised the Heat aren't looking to move Bosh.

He's a really good player, but given the volume of shots that Wade and Lebron take, I think you could probably get similar production from a more affordable player while improving depth.

Probably goes against the buy low, sell high philosophy in some ways, but I still think he's a commodity to most GMs.LeBron for Howard.

[Pedro Cerrano]

LeBron for Howard.

As funny as that sounds, I really think that deal would make Miami a noticably better team. The thing is, they are already really really good defensively but lack that big low post presence.

[Sports Guy]

As funny as that sounds, I really think that deal would make Miami a noticably better team. The thing is, they are already really really good defensively but lack that big low post presence.

The pieces would fit better in Miami if they made that deal(or if they deal Wade for Howard).

Its not that Howard is better than LBJ, its just that the team flows better.

Of course, they still got to the finals this year, so why fix what ain't broke?

[Pedro Cerrano]

Lots of rumors about Minnesota trading the #2 pick. I've heard they're targeting Steve Nash which makes sense. You always want a 37-year-old PG in the last year of his deal when you already have two young PGs on the roster.

[Sports Guy]

Lots of rumors about Minnesota trading the #2 pick. I've heard they're targeting Steve Nash which makes sense. You always want a 37-year-old PG in the last year of his deal when you already have two young PGs on the roster.

They must not like this draft....They may figure they can get Nash and then turn around and deal him immediately or wait until the deadline and deal him.

[Birds of B'more]

Lots of rumors about Minnesota trading the #2 pick. I've heard they're targeting Steve Nash which makes sense. You always want a 37-year-old PG in the last year of his deal when you already have two young PGs on the roster.

Nash would actually make sense if Minn was a possible a contender....you have no idea how Rubio's transition to the NBA will go and Flynn is no more than a backup on a good team. But the Wolves are far from being a contender, so it makes no sense. It's also why the rumors of a Pau Gasol trade make no sense for them either. I think it's the other Gasol they should go after.....he'd fit nicely on their frontline with Love and Beasley.

[Sports Guy]

Spurs trying to trade Parker for a lottery pick.

[ccbird]

Let me just put this out there as a prediction. Rubio will be a huge bust.

-Would be interesting to see the Cavs go D. Williams and Knight/Walker but I hink they expect Kanter to be there at 4 and like the Irvin/Kanter combo better.

-If I'm the Wiz I'm throwing McGee and the 18th pick at Minn. Otherwise, I guess they are stuck with Vessely.

[Pedro Cerrano]

IMO there are literally two "sure things" in this draft. Kyrie and D Will. If the Wizards can get one of them for a reasonable price, they need to do it.

[MikeAD]

IMO there are literally two "sure things" in this draft. Kyrie and D Will. If the Wizards can get one of them for a reasonable price, they need to do it.

I agree, they need to make that move.

[Dr. FLK]

The pieces would fit better in Miami if they made that deal(or if they deal Wade for Howard).

Its not that Howard is better than LBJ, its just that the team flows better.

Of course, they still got to the finals this year, so why fix what ain't broke?

Man...if they had a trio of LBJ/Wade, Bosh, and Howard, Miami would be untouchable for years. Wade/LBJ could dominate the ball without having to worry about "sharing". Bosh would have all the freedom in the world in the low post. And Howard is just a force on both ends of the court.

[Sports Guy]

IMO there are literally two "sure things" in this draft. Kyrie and D Will. If the Wizards can get one of them for a reasonable price, they need to do it.

Vessely would be a nice pick for them.

This draft does blow though.

A guy I would really want to draft, in a draft as poor as this one, is Ferried.

He has a major skill and one that translates well. He is athletic, big and will rebound. He hustles and plays good defense. He will provide you a lot of value and be in the league for a long time.

[Birds of B'more]

Vessely would be a nice pick for them.

This draft does blow though.

A guy I would really want to draft, in a draft as poor as this one, is Ferried.

He has a major skill and one that translates well. He is athletic, big and will rebound. He hustles and plays good defense. He will provide you a lot of value and be in the league for a long time.

You mean Kenneth Faried? A lot of mocks have him going to the Blazers. He does fill a need for them, although not their biggest need.

[mweb]

I think your Blazers did a nice job getting Felton for Miller, etc.

[Birds of B'more]

I think your Blazers did a nice job getting Felton for Miller, etc.

The Felton trade was nice. I think Andre Milller was (and is) underappreciated, but no doubt Felton brings more to the table. Although I'm not sure if he sticks around beyond this season. If the Knicks can't clear enough cap space for Paul next summer, look for them to go after Felton....he played well with Amare before the trade.

I have no idea what the Blazers were thinking on the Nolan Smith pick, and folks here aren't happy about it. Would much rather seen them take Faried, or if they wanted to deepen the PG position, either Jackson or Cole would have been better choices.

[Sports Guy]

The Felton trade was nice. I think Andre Milller was (and is) underappreciated, but no doubt Felton brings more to the table. Although I'm not sure if he sticks around beyond this season. If the Knicks can't clear enough cap space for Paul next summer, look for them to go after Felton....he played well with Amare before the trade.

I have no idea what the Blazers were thinking on the Nolan Smith pick, and folks here aren't happy about it. Would much rather seen them take Faried, or if they wanted to deepen the PG position, either Jackson or Cole would have been better choices.

I like Nolan Smith and feels he has a role in the NBA but that wasn't a great pick.

Faried made more sense...He made more sense for a lot of teams IMO who went different directions. He may not be the best player in this draft but he will be on the few who will still be around in 8-10 years, still as a contributing player.

[Birds of B'more]

I like Nolan Smith and feels he has a role in the NBA but that wasn't a great pick.

Faried made more sense...He made more sense for a lot of teams IMO who went different directions. He may not be the best player in this draft but he will be on the few who will still be around in 8-10 years, still as a contributing player.

It's not that the Blazers liked Smith that bothers me, it's where they picked him. I have not heard anyone, before or after the draft, say that he was a 1st rounder. If they really liked him, they could have waited. He wouldn't have been there when the Blazers picked at #51, but I'm sure they could have maneuvered up in the 2nd round to get him. Either way, my only guess is that Smith is insurance in case Brandon Roy misses significant time this season. But if Roy can go, even if it's just 15 min/gm, I doubt Smith will see much time.

Everyone obviously wants to use the Ben Wallace comparison to describe Faried, and they certainly have a lot of similarities. I don't know if he'll have a 15-year career like Wallace, but he should do well....his skills translate to the NBA and guys with his kind of motor usually find a way. Some people out here justify the Blazers passing on Faried by saying they already have a guy like him, only with more offense, in Gerald Wallace. While true to a point, that's no reason to pass on the guy. The Blazers are razor-thin on the frontline. Barring any roster additions, LaMarcus Aldridge will probably have to play a lot of time at the 5 again....you can't tell me Faried wouldn't have contibuted to this team right away, certainly more than Smith is likely to.

[Sports Guy]

It's not that the Blazers liked Smith that bothers me, it's where they picked him. I have not heard anyone, before or after the draft, say that he was a 1st rounder. If they really liked him, they could have waited. He wouldn't have been there when the Blazers picked at #51, but I'm sure they could have maneuvered up in the 2nd round to get him. Either way, my only guess is that Smith is insurance in case Brandon Roy misses significant time this season. But if Roy can go, even if it's just 15 min/gm, I doubt Smith will see much time.

Everyone obviously wants to use the Ben Wallace comparison to describe Faried, and they certainly have a lot of similarities. I don't know if he'll have a 15-year career like Wallace, but he should do well....his skills translate to the NBA and guys with his kind of motor usually find a way. Some people out here justify the Blazers passing on Faried by saying they already have a guy like him, only with more offense, in Gerald Wallace. While true to a point, that's no reason to pass on the guy. The Blazers are razor-thin on the frontline. Barring any roster additions, LaMarcus Aldridge will probably have to play a lot of time at the 5 again....you can't tell me Faried wouldn't have contibuted to this team right away, certainly more than Smith is likely to.

1) I saw many mock drafts and draft analysts that said Smith was a late first rounder.

2) Wallace was more of a shot blocker than Faried will ever be.

[Birds of B'more]

The lockout is on (http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/43597418/ns/sports-nba/). Given the terrible economy, one has to wonder how much tolerance the public will have for two pro sports leagues in labor disputes simultaneously, versus when it was just the NFL.

[BaltimoreTerp]

The lockout is on (http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/43597418/ns/sports-nba/). Given the terrible economy, one has to wonder how much tolerance the public will have for two pro sports leagues in labor disputes simultaneously, versus when it was just the NFL.

This lockout is interesting, because unlike the NFL lockout where one side is basically acting on pure greed, both sides in this one have legitimate arguments. I wouldn't be surprised to see this one be much quieter and less acrimonious than the NFL, but last much longer.

[lordbrook]

Work stoppages in professional sports piss me the firetruck off. I hate myself for being so invested in the sports, but can't seem to wean myself away so I just sit and stew.

[MikeAD]

Is a lockout in the NBA sort of like a tree falling in empty woods?

Also, how do salaries work during a lock out. Do players get paid during a lockout or is everything on hold? When work resumes do they get the back pay? Just curious, thanks to anyone who knows.

[Birds of B'more]

The players don't receive any pay during a lockout. When the season starts, they will only get paid based on the number of games played. So if all 82 games are played (even if they don't start on time), the players will receive the full amount of their contracts (pending the terms of the new CBA). If they only play a partial season, the players will be paid a prorated portion of their contract.

As for your first sentence, it depends on the forest. In Baltimore, an NBA lockout probably won't get much notice. The fact that the NFL season will (hopefully) be in full swing and the NHL will be starting up too will draw more attention away. But where I live in Portland, where the NBA is the only game in town, a lockout that affects the start of the season will definitely have an impact.

[Pedro Cerrano]

It's really hard to sympathize for any side when they're earning millions and Joe Everyman gets stuck paying $8 for a beer at games. Yea yea, I know stay at home and watch on tv....

[Pedro Cerrano]

The players don't receive any pay during a lockout. When the season starts, they will only get paid based on the number of games played. So if all 82 games are played (even if they don't start on time), the players will receive the full amount of their contracts (pending the terms of the new CBA). If they only play a partial season, the players will be paid a prorated portion of their contract.

As for your first sentence, it depends on the forest. In Baltimore, an NBA lockout probably won't get much notice. The fact that the NFL season will (hopefully) be in full swing and the NHL will be starting up too will draw more attention away. But where I live in Portland, where the NBA is the only game in town, a lockout that affects the start of the season will definitely have an impact.

Thoughts on the Oden offer??? ;-)

[Sports Guy]

50 games at best this season IMO.

Why did you have to leave Kyrie!???!!!!

[Birds of B'more]

Thoughts on the Oden offer??? ;-)

No surprise, and it's the right move. As long as you only have to commit to him for one season (no one will outbid Portland's qualifying offer) you may as well roll the dice and see if he can finally have some sort of impact. While the Blazers have said nothing official, the beat writers here all seem to agree that he will not be cleared to participate when training camp opens, assuming that happens on time. With that possibility beginning to look less likely with the lockout, it buys GO more time to rehab and maybe be cleared for full activity once the NBA does reopen for business. Like many things, we'll just see how the CBA negotiations go.

[The Maestro]

What's the over/under on games played this season?

[Birds of B'more]

What's the over/under on games played this season?

As far as I can find, Vegas hasn't set an over/under yet. I'll go with SG's number and say 50 1/2.

[backwardsk]

Sad to see Armen Gilliam pass away at 47, while playing hoops.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=AqLfbKoGYkvoc6nWk4hkZds5nYcB?slug=ap-obit-gilliam

[The Epic]

50 games at best this season IMO.

Why did you have to leave Kyrie!???!!!!

I gotta say...that kid playing a full season would have been...wow.

[Sports Guy]

I gotta say...that kid playing a full season would have been...wow.

It would have been great to see B Knight and Irving come back to school this year...Can you imagine Duke, UNC and Kentucky if that happened?

UNC got everyone back but you give Duke and Kentucky their top players as well...WOW!

[Birds of B'more]

Yao Ming is retiring (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/gameon/post/2011/07/yahoo-report-yao-ming-to-retire/1). No surprise...when 7-foot-plus guys have problems with stress fractures, you can pretty much bet that they're going to have very short careers.

[Phil Beckett]

Yao Ming is retiring (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/gameon/post/2011/07/yahoo-report-yao-ming-to-retire/1). No surprise...when 7-foot-plus guys have problems with stress fractures, you can pretty much bet that they're going to have very short careers.

a short, but tall, career!:p

[Birds of B'more]

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/6832574/billy-hunter-expects-entire-nba-season-canceled


Players Association executive director Billy Hunter says the 2011-12 NBA season will likely be canceled entirely because the commissioner's negotiating leeway is in danger of being undermined by a group of hard-line owners.

"The circumstances have changed among [David Stern's] constituency," Hunter told a group of lawyers Wednesday, as quoted in the Baltimore Sun. "In the last six or seven years, there is a new group of owners to come in who paid a premium for their franchises, and what they're doing is kind of holding his feet to the fire."

Not sure how much of this is posturing on Hunter's part, but the two sides definitely appear to have a much larger bridge to gap than the NFL did. I think at least a shortened season is a given.

[Bluerocksfan]

I would honestly be suprised if they play this year. Yeah I think things are that bad.

[Birds of B'more]

So, to no one's surprise I'm sure, the entire preseason (at least as it was originally scheduled) was officially cancelled today.

[Sports Guy]

So, to no one's surprise I'm sure, the entire preseason (at least as it was originally scheduled) was officially cancelled today.There is .1% chance any game is played before new years.

[Pedro Cerrano]

This is really sad. I'm gonna miss the NBA this year.

[ccbird]

I may be ripped for saying this but some pretty big changes need to be made to the NBA. If that means a 40 or 50 game schedule or even missing the whole year so be it. Granted, I say that as someone who has no particular team to root and really puts minimal interest into watching until the playoffs begin.

[Pedro Cerrano]

I may be ripped for saying this but some pretty big changes need to be made to the NBA. If that means a 40 or 50 game schedule or even missing the whole year so be it. Granted, I say that as someone who has no particular team to root and really puts minimal interest into watching until the playoffs begin.

Nobody that follows the league would rip you for saying this. The whole current salary structure in the league is sort of a joke. The owners, who can't discipline themselves into giving away awful contracts, want to change the CBA so that Rashard Lewis can't get a max deal of that sort anymore. The players, of course, are balking.

This is just one of many things that probably need to change.

[allstar1579]

It took losing an entire year of play for Hockey to get fixed. I think it's going to take something similar here. All that should have to be said is the moronic comment made the other day, if the lockout is going to last a year or two the players will just create their own league. Really...? Egos out of control.

[mweb]

It took losing an entire year of play for Hockey to get fixed. I think it's going to take something similar here. All that should have to be said is the moronic comment made the other day, if the lockout is going to last a year or two the players will just create their own league. Really...? Egos out of control.

The NBA doesn't need to be fixed nearly as much as the NHL did.

And I'm sure there are reasons why it won't happen, but I would think setting up a basketball league would be a lot easier than the other sports.

[allstar1579]

The NBA doesn't need to be fixed nearly as much as the NHL did.

And I'm sure there are reasons why it won't happen, but I would think setting up a basketball league would be a lot easier than the other sports.

They need to fix different things, but they are just as if not more screwed up. I used to watch most every game of the season, I've been so turned off over the past couple years I haven't watched ANY game since 2006.

Venues, funding, insurance, transportation, marketing, non-compete and exposure all pose pretty big problems if they were to start another league. They couldn't use any current owners for any assistance, they couldn't use most of the venues currently set up to support basketball since most are owned or contracted in someway that I'm sure would prevent it. There's just a lot more to something that big than, oh, well we'll just do it ourselves if they won't give us the 70-ker-billion dollars we want. I mean they are fighting because they want these huge deals, so who do they think are going to pay them huge deals without the NBA owners funding?

[Pedro Cerrano]

They need to fix different things, but they are just as if not more screwed up. I used to watch most every game of the season, I've been so turned off over the past couple years I haven't watched ANY game since 2006.

Venues, funding, insurance, transportation, marketing, non-compete and exposure all pose pretty big problems if they were to start another league. They couldn't use any current owners for any assistance, they couldn't use most of the venues currently set up to support basketball since most are owned or contracted in someway that I'm sure would prevent it. There's just a lot more to something that big than, oh, well we'll just do it ourselves if they won't give us the 70-ker-billion dollars we want. I mean they are fighting because they want these huge deals, so who do they think are going to pay them huge deals without the NBA owners funding?

What about the game turns you off?

PS, there is no way the NBA is as screwed up as the NHL was.

[mweb]

They need to fix different things, but they are just as if not more screwed up. I used to watch most every game of the season, I've been so turned off over the past couple years I haven't watched ANY game since 2006.

Venues, funding, insurance, transportation, marketing, non-compete and exposure all pose pretty big problems if they were to start another league. They couldn't use any current owners for any assistance, they couldn't use most of the venues currently set up to support basketball since most are owned or contracted in someway that I'm sure would prevent it. There's just a lot more to something that big than, oh, well we'll just do it ourselves if they won't give us the 70-ker-billion dollars we want. I mean they are fighting because they want these huge deals, so who do they think are going to pay them huge deals without the NBA owners funding?

So you are basing the NBA being at least as screwed up as the NHL was on your own lack of interest in it. Let me know if you want to actually back up this claim because that surely did not do it.

The NBA is coming off an incredible season both in terms of on the court and TV ratings. Quite the year for publicity as well. Some teams are losing money(NBA is exaggerating), and some concessions by the players need to be made and have been made in the negotiations, but some of the problem can be fixed among the owners and they're working on that as well.

Oh and as I stated, I agree there are reasons why they won't create a new league. I'm just saying it's more plausible than the other major sports. They could realistically make money by creating a tournament involving just the top players though, maybe not even 5 on 5, maybe just 3-3. Heck a 1-1 tournament would create interest. The point is they can be creative. Obviously that wouldn't compare to the money they take in with the NBA, but it's better than nothing and can hope in their negotiations. I don't expect it to happen, but they could do it if they like.

[allstar1579]

What about the game turns you off?

PS, there is no way the NBA is as screwed up as the NHL was.

The lack of calls, both fouls and traveling, the showboating, the whole culture it has created with their max contracts, "I'm bigger than the team" attitudes, and general lack of sportsmanship. It's gotten to be closer to street ball, and kids come up trying to be just like them. That whole "I'm not a role model" attitude is all over the place in the NBA. These kids don't know how to act when they get money and people just keep handing them millions of dollars.

[Pedro Cerrano]

The lack of calls, both fouls and traveling, the showboating, the whole culture it has created with their max contracts, "I'm bigger than the team" attitudes, and general lack of sportsmanship. It's gotten to be closer to street ball, and kids come up trying to be just like them. That whole "I'm not a role model" attitude is all over the place in the NBA. These kids don't know how to act when they get money and people just keep handing them millions of dollars.

Are you a fan of the NFL?

[Pedro Cerrano]

The biggest thing the NBA players have going for them, IMO, is the fact that because basketball is a global sport there are other places for them to play it, albeit not for as much money. For NFL players it was either the NFL or nothing.

[allstar1579]

Are you a fan of the NFL?

Yeah, but with the * that I don't like or appreciate the knuckleheads there either. With the NBA it's more about the on-the-court stuff than off it though. The fundamentals, the team-based nature is all out the window these days. It's all me-me-me, look at MY stats, look at MY team. The whole LeBron debacle was a good illustration of that. Plenty of other people in the league think they should have their own 30 minute FA show too, it's that train of thought I can't stand. It's a TEAM sport, and the days where you ask a player why they won and they talk about teammates and coaching are over. These days players talk about doing all THEY can do, and whine about not having good enough teammates, then they refuse to play until they get cut so they can sign with who they want. The players RUN the league instead of respecting their employers, I think that's the biggest problem I have with it.

[Pedro Cerrano]

Yeah, but with the * that I don't like or appreciate the knuckleheads there either. With the NBA it's more about the on-the-court stuff than off it though. The fundamentals, the team-based nature is all out the window these days. It's all me-me-me, look at MY stats, look at MY team. The whole LeBron debacle was a good illustration of that. Plenty of other people in the league think they should have their own 30 minute FA show too, it's that train of thought I can't stand. It's a TEAM sport, and the days where you ask a player why they won and they talk about teammates and coaching are over. These days players talk about doing all THEY can do, and whine about not having good enough teammates, then they refuse to play until they get cut so they can sign with who they want. The players RUN the league instead of respecting their employers, I think that's the biggest problem I have with it.

First off the LeBron stuff happened OFF the court. Second, it's funny you mention that LeBron is me first considering he's an extremely unselfish player, almost to a fault.

Look, I'm not trying to insult you but it's pretty clear you aren't too sure of what you're talking about here. You admittedly haven't watched a game in years yet are in a position to discuss the nightly ins and outs of games and the players' behavior.

Just say you don't like the league like most people do and, like most people, without a real basis for the dislike and we can move on.

(and sorry, but as one of the few die-hard NBA fans left, I feel a need to defend it, almost to a fault)

[mweb]

First off the LeBron stuff happened OFF the court. Second, it's funny you mention that LeBron is me first considering he's an extremely unselfish player, almost to a fault.

Look, I'm not trying to insult you but it's pretty clear you aren't too sure of what you're talking about here. You admittedly haven't watched a game in years yet are in a position to discuss the nightly ins and outs of games and the players' behavior.

Just say you don't like the league like most people do and, like most people, without a real basis for the dislike and we can move on.

(and sorry, but as one of the few die-hard NBA fans left, I feel a need to defend it, almost to a fault)

Well I'm obviously with you here. It's annoying when people that don't watch much NBA just mention stereotypes and say stuff that is clearly not true.

The NBA is in very good shape in terms of on the court stuff. They obviously need to fix the economic issues though.

Oh, and there are plenty of NBA die-hard fans where I used to live. Not so much in the Baltimore area since the Wizards have had their issues and obviously there isn't a team in Baltimore.

[backwardsk]

Are you a fan of the NFL?

I know you didn't direct this question to me, but I'll answer as my level of interest in the NBA is similar to allstar's.

In the NFL, with the limited schedule, you don't see games where teams are mailing it in, IMO. I don't watch the NBA much anymore because I don't get cable. I only get to watch the games on ABC and the occasional bulls game on wgn. I also will half-watch games if I'm out watching MNF.

In the non-playoff games that I do see, there are many possessions where the guys who don't touch the ball, don't move--at all. I'm not advocating five passes and a jump shot, gene Hackman stuff. I'm just looking for a fluid motion offense with some cuts away from the ball. I see too much isolation, one on one.

Now I don't totally blame the players. There's too many games with a lot of travel, it's definitely a grind. It's easier to get into the playoffs so the regular season games don't matter as much.

The regular season product is stale, IMO. Now I enjoyed the playoffs this season more than I did in years past.

Mweb, you stated that the tv ratings are up. I know that they've been down for awhile, I'd be interested to see how they compare to 10 years ago (post Jordan, and 20 years ago, prime Jordan)

[Pedro Cerrano]

I know you didn't direct this question to me, but I'll answer as my level of interest in the NBA is similar to allstar's.

In the NFL, with the limited schedule, you don't see games where teams are mailing it in, IMO. I don't watch the NBA much anymore because I don't get cable. I only get to watch the games on ABC and the occasional bulls game on wgn. I also will half-watch games if I'm out watching MNF.

In the non-playoff games that I do see, there are many possessions where the guys who don't touch the ball, don't move--at all. I'm not advocating five passes and a jump shot, gene Hackman stuff. I'm just looking for a fluid motion offense with some cuts away from the ball. I see too much isolation, one on one.

Now I don't totally blame the players. There's too many games with a lot of travel, it's definitely a grind. It's easier to get into the playoffs so the regular season games don't matter as much.

The regular season product is stale, IMO. Now I enjoyed the playoffs this season more than I did in years past.

Mweb, you stated that the tv ratings are up. I know that they've been down for awhile, I'd be interested to see how they compare to 10 years ago (post Jordan, and 20 years ago, prime Jordan)

I know I heard/read somewhere that NBA finals ratings have absolutely destroyed the baseball playoffs this year.

I get that people don't like the NBA regular season. But I'm sure you could find plenty of possessions on regular season college games where there are people standing around.

I'm also not trying to argue that the NBA is more popular/better than the NFL. I personally happen to like the NBA better and if I could have chosen to have one season cancelled I would have picked the NFL over the NBA. I'm in the minority and I get that. The reason I brought the NFL up was that, as usual, an NFL fan is having a grand old time pointing out what thugs the NBA players are even though the NFL has a MUCH bigger image problem than the NBA currently does. I'm not sure if that point would have been voluntarily conceded had I not brought it up.

[backwardsk]

I get that you'll defend the NBA. I remember defending the relevance of baseball when the NBA was healthy and MLB seemed to be a distant third. As far as the off-court image stuff, I'd have much more of a problem with liking the NFL players if the product wasn't so damn good. Sundays are just too enjoyable, I don't really care too much what happens off of it.

I think that part of my preferences has to do with the fact that the NFL is a one day a week league. Also, the lack of guaranteed contracts makes a difference. When I see that the wizards are trading an oft-injured pr nightmare for a $20mm/year guy, I should get excited, right? But it's Rashard Lewis. He's a fringe starter making $20mm a year. There's a big disconnect there.

[Pedro Cerrano]

I get that you'll defend the NBA. I remember defending the relevance of baseball when the NBA was healthy and MLB seemed to be a distant third. As far as the off-court image stuff, I'd have much more of a problem with liking the NFL players if the product wasn't so damn good. Sundays are just too enjoyable, I don't really care too much what happens off of it.

I think that part of my preferences has to do with the fact that the NFL is a one day a week league. Also, the lack of guaranteed contracts makes a difference. When I see that the wizards are trading an oft-injured pr nightmare for a $20mm/year guy, I should get excited, right? But it's Rashard Lewis. He's a fringe starter making $20mm a year. There's a big disconnect there.

That's the nature of having guaranteed contracts and a salary cap. Gilbert Arenas can only be traded for so many players.

[allstar1579]

First off the LeBron stuff happened OFF the court. Second, it's funny you mention that LeBron is me first considering he's an extremely unselfish player, almost to a fault.

Look, I'm not trying to insult you but it's pretty clear you aren't too sure of what you're talking about here. You admittedly haven't watched a game in years yet are in a position to discuss the nightly ins and outs of games and the players' behavior.

Just say you don't like the league like most people do and, like most people, without a real basis for the dislike and we can move on.

(and sorry, but as one of the few die-hard NBA fans left, I feel a need to defend it, almost to a fault)

That's fine, you can like it, to each their own.

I haven't watched it in years, but like I said I watched a lot of it before that point, it got to the point years ago I wouldn't watch it. It's not like I said oh last year was the breaking point for me.

I've just seen bits and pieces of media stories (which admittedly are usually going to be bad) just enough to convince me not to come back and watch. Does that mean I don't still support my Wizards? No, I still root for them and hope they do well, I'm just not going to watch them do it :)

I grew up playing and being taught to do the little things "because now a days kids don't appreciate the little things it takes to win" as my coaches would say. Guys like Mouton from MD, he would do the hustle, grinding dirty things it took that no one really wanted to. You don't see enough of that anymore. And LeBron...I won't get into that with you, obviously you are passionate about it, but I don't agree at all.

I didn't start talking about the nightly ins and outs of players behavior, I talked about what I saw up to the point I stopped watching it. I imagine things haven't changed much since all I hear on TV is me, me, me, I, I, I. LeBron did happen off the court, and that NEVER should have happened. I couldn't even ignore it when I wanted to because it was a circus. MJ never would have acted like that and he was about as cocky as they came.

[mweb]

The last two Finals have had better ratings than any year since 2004.

Here's an article (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/hiestand-tv/2011-02-22-nba-tv-ratings-increase_N.htm) from last February stating that NBA ratings were up 15-32% depending on the network.

Here's an article (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/gameon/post/2011/05/nba-miami-chicago-wednesday-tv-rating-epic/1) stating that the first two games of last years Bulls-Heat series for the highest ratings for an NBA game on cable.

Here's an article from May called NBA TV Ratings Nearing Best Ever (http://www.hoopsvibe.com/features/articles/167131-nba-tv-ratings-nearing-best-ever).

[Pedro Cerrano]

The last two Finals have had better ratings than any year since 2004.

Here's an article (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/columnist/hiestand-tv/2011-02-22-nba-tv-ratings-increase_N.htm) from last February stating that NBA ratings were up 15-32% depending on the network.

Here's an article (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/gameon/post/2011/05/nba-miami-chicago-wednesday-tv-rating-epic/1) stating that the first two games of last years Bulls-Heat series for the highest ratings for an NBA game on cable.

Here's an article from May called NBA TV Ratings Nearing Best Ever (http://www.hoopsvibe.com/features/articles/167131-nba-tv-ratings-nearing-best-ever).

Yup, and they're about to throw away all the momentum and all the interest.

Good job, NBA and players.

[allstar1579]

I know I heard/read somewhere that NBA finals ratings have absolutely destroyed the baseball playoffs this year.

I get that people don't like the NBA regular season. But I'm sure you could find plenty of possessions on regular season college games where there are people standing around.

I'm also not trying to argue that the NBA is more popular/better than the NFL. I personally happen to like the NBA better and if I could have chosen to have one season cancelled I would have picked the NFL over the NBA. I'm in the minority and I get that. The reason I brought the NFL up was that, as usual, an NFL fan is having a grand old time pointing out what thugs the NBA players are even though the NFL has a MUCH bigger image problem than the NBA currently does. I'm not sure if that point would have been voluntarily conceded had I not brought it up.

Actually it was the next point I was going to make, but you got a little hyper-defensive.

[mweb]

Yup, and they're about to throw away all the momentum and all the interest.

Good job, NBA and players.

Yep, it is absurd.

It also shows how absurd it is to state the the NBA is in at least of bad of shape as the NHL was.

[allstar1579]

Yep, it is absurd.

It also shows how absurd it is to state the the NBA is in at least of bad of shape as the NHL was.

NBA owners claim they lost $370m last year.
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2010-11-11/sports/30099493_1_nba-owners-revenue-nba-executives

The year before the strike, the NHL lost $273m.
http://www2.nhl.com/images/levittreport.pdf

You have a funny definition of absurd.

[mweb]

NBA owners claim they lost $370m last year.
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2010-11-11/sports/30099493_1_nba-owners-revenue-nba-executives

The year before the strike, the NHL lost $273m.
http://www2.nhl.com/images/levittreport.pdf

You have a funny definition of absurd.

Haha. Anyone believing the NBA lost 370M last year is rather naive. I'm pretty sure even Stern has backed off that number. Oh and the NHL (according to them, so exaggerated) was spending 76% of its gross revunue on players compared to 57% in the NBA. But at least you brought numbers to the table this time rather than the narcistic argument that because you aren't watching that must mean the NBA is doing at least as bad as the NHL was.

And again, the NBA on the court and in terms of popularity is thriving right now. Was the NHL? The NBA can more easily fix their problems than the NHL did and the game is in a much better position than the NHL was at the time or is now for that matter.

[mweb]

Nate Silver's article (http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/05/calling-foul-on-n-b-a-s-claims-of-financial-distress/) destroys the $340 million nonsense.

[allstar1579]

Nate Silver's article (http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/05/calling-foul-on-n-b-a-s-claims-of-financial-distress/) destroys the $340 million nonsense.

Which was destroyed by the NBA days later...
http://www.nba.com/2011/news/07/06/nba-rebuttal/index.html

And more recently from the ACTUAL book values turned over by the NBA...
http://nba-point-forward.si.com/2011/10/03/lockout-math-nbas-losses-at-heart-of-talks/

Not quite $340m but still more than NHL teams were losing.

[mweb]

Which was destroyed by the NBA days later...
http://www.nba.com/2011/news/07/06/nba-rebuttal/index.html

And more recently from the ACTUAL book values turned over by the NBA...
http://nba-point-forward.si.com/2011/10/03/lockout-math-nbas-losses-at-heart-of-talks/

Not quite $340m but still more than NHL teams were losing.

Once again, it is naive to believe whatever number the NBA is providing while negotiating for a new collective bargaining agreement.

The NBA only destroyed it if you are willing to believe the NBA. According to financial experts, it's more like 120 million as the rest of it was manipulated to make it look like they lost more than they did, and that's if you want to trust their books otherwise, which the players association does not. They have not actually shown their actual books to the public for examination either. So you may want to rethink the capitalization of actual since we haven't seen them and the players association says stuff is left out (http://nba-point-forward.si.com/2011/07/15/union-lawyer-talks-nbas-missing-records/).

And again, what about the health of the game economics aside? It seems clear that the NBA beats out the NHL in this regard.

[allstar1579]

Once again, it is naive to believe whatever number the NBA is providing while negotiating for a new collective bargaining agreement.

The NBA only destroyed it if you are willing to believe the NBA. According to financial experts, it's more like 120 million as the rest of it was manipulated to make it look like they lost more than they did, and that's if you want to trust their books otherwise, which the players association does not. They have not actually shown their actual books to the public for examination either. So you may want to rethink the capitalization of actual since we haven't seen them and the players association says stuff is left out (http://nba-point-forward.si.com/2011/07/15/union-lawyer-talks-nbas-missing-records/).

And again, what about the health of the game economics aside? It seems clear that the NBA beats out the NHL in this regard.

We can sit here and say the other side is lying all day. The NFL did the same thing, it's more likely neither is right. With the amount of money spent on salaries and operating costs these days it wouldn't shock me in the slightest if they did have a total NOL of $340m though, the big teams still did fine, but a TON of teams were bleeding money. Think about it as individual markets, it doesn't seem that far-fetched to me.

We aren't comparing apples to apples thinking about that stuff, I never tried to pretend the NHL and NBA are on even keel, they never will be. Demographics say there will always be more NBA fans than NHL fans, and that's fine, it's like the NBA being D1 and NHL being D2, but for them to be losing similar money that the NHL was, is an epic fail for the NBA. Sure their ratings are better than they've ever been, it's free to sit at home and watch the game on TV, but the flip to that is those people sitting home and watching aren't in the stadium buying tickets and food.

[mweb]

We can sit here and say the other side is lying all day. The NFL did the same thing, it's more likely neither is right. With the amount of money spent on salaries and operating costs these days it wouldn't shock me in the slightest if they did have a total NOL of $340m though, the big teams still did fine, but a TON of teams were bleeding money. Think about it as individual markets, it doesn't seem that far-fetched to me.

We aren't comparing apples to apples thinking about that stuff, I never tried to pretend the NHL and NBA are on even keel, they never will be. Demographics say there will always be more NBA fans than NHL fans, and that's fine, it's like the NBA being D1 and NHL being D2, but for them to be losing similar money that the NHL was, is an epic fail for the NBA. Sure their ratings are better than they've ever been, it's free to sit at home and watch the game on TV, but the flip to that is those people sitting home and watching aren't in the stadium buying tickets and food.

The $120 million number is an independent one. As is Nate Silver using Forbes. I'll go with independent sources over the NBA or the players.

You're the only person I have seen say that the NBA is in at least of bad of shape as the NHL was and I'll just leave it at that.

[allstar1579]

The $120 million number is an independent one. As is Nate Silver using Forbes. I'll go with independent sources over the NBA or the players.

You're the only person I have seen say that the NBA is in at least of bad of shape as the NHL was and I'll just leave it at that.

And Forbes has been proven to be estimating and wrong in multiple sports but you choose to believe it on this one? The SI article was an independent source that said $300m.

As bad as shape is a subjective thing when you say it like that. I meant it financially. Like I said you can look and say once they figure out how to reset the money problem the NBA has a much easier road to recovery than the NHL did.

[mweb]

And Forbes has been proven to be estimating and wrong in multiple sports but you choose to believe it on this one? The SI article was an independent source that said $300m.

As bad as shape is a subjective thing when you say it like that. I meant it financially. Like I said you can look and say once they figure out how to reset the money problem the NBA has a much easier road to recovery than the NHL did.

The SI article was simply relaying what the NBA was saying as was the other SI article stating the players side.

I am believing that the $120 million number is pretty accurate other than what the owners are leaving out, which was mentioned in the link I provided. So I'll go along with a $100 million estimate, which is not hard to fix given how much revenue we are talking about. Easier to fix than the NHL situation imo.

And if you only meant it financially, why was the only other things in that post how you didn't watch NBA anymore and then in a new paragraph how you didn't think the players could create their own league?

[allstar1579]

The SI article was simply relaying what the NBA was saying as was the other SI article stating the players side.

I am believing that the $120 million number is pretty accurate other than what the owners are leaving out, which was mentioned in the link I provided. So I'll go along with a $100 million estimate, which is not hard to fix given how much revenue we are talking about. Easier to fix than the NHL situation imo.

And if you only meant it financially, why was the only other things in that post how you didn't watch NBA anymore and then in a new paragraph how you didn't think the players could create their own league?

I don't watch the NBA anymore because of personal bias. I liked the days of Hakeem, Ewing, Jordan, Drexler, Bird...it was a different era and the game has changed (not just in a cliche way).

I don't think ANY pro sports league players could create their own league, there is just too much that goes into something that big, it struck a nerve that any pro athletes are that egotistical that they think that they could. I understand owners and players are on two sides of this fight, but it seems a little beyond disrespectful to say they can do it better than their bosses.

[Sports Guy]

AS, the things you want changed aren't going to change.

This is all about money, plain and simple.

The owners agreed to a dumb deal before and now, they want the players to relinquish a boatload of money.

This has nothing to do with the product itself.

[mweb]

I don't watch the NBA anymore because of personal bias. I liked the days of Hakeem, Ewing, Jordan, Drexler, Bird...it was a different era and the game has changed (not just in a cliche way).

I don't think ANY pro sports league players could create their own league, there is just too much that goes into something that big, it struck a nerve that any pro athletes are that egotistical that they think that they could. I understand owners and players are on two sides of this fight, but it seems a little beyond disrespectful to say they can do it better than their bosses.

Did they say that they could do it better? I didn't read this.

They would need some rich guy to fund it like the guy the NBA stopped from buying the Warriors, as suggested on Grantland (http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7058281/we-need-renegade-basketball-league), but with that, I don't think it's impossible at all for them to create a league that would generate interest. That would only occur if this became a stalemate that was clearly not going to be resolved for a long time. Or as I said, I think they could do things like 3-3, 2-2, and/or 1-1 tourneys much more easily and draw interest.

[mweb]

As, the things you want changed aren't going to change.

This is all about money, plain and simple.

The owners agreed to a dumb deal before and now, they want the players to relinquish a boatload of money.

This has nothing to do with the product itself.

It wasn't generally considered to be a dumb deal then.

But yes, it is all about money.

[allstar1579]

As, the things you want changed aren't going to change.

This is all about money, plain and simple.

The owners agreed to a dumb deal before and now, they want the players to relinquish a boatload of money.

This has nothing to do with the product itself.

Yeah I know...that's why I ended up walking away. I didn't mean to tie my loss of interest to the lockout, they were mutually exclusive.

[allstar1579]

Did they say that they could do it better? I didn't read this.

They would need some rich guy to fund it like the guy the NBA stopped from buying the Warriors, as suggested on Grantland (http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7058281/we-need-renegade-basketball-league), but with that, I don't think it's impossible at all for them to create a league that would generate interest. That would only occur if this became a stalemate that was clearly not going to be resolved for a long time. Or as I said, I think they could do things like 3-3, 2-2, and/or 1-1 tourneys much more easily and draw interest.

I think the exact quote was something like If there isn't going to be basketball then we're going to have to find another way to play, if this is going to last 1-2 years we might just have to start our own league. The intention there could go either way, that it's a slap in the face of owners, or they were just throwing out a crazy idea to try to scare them (that didn't make a lot of sense to me). I get the going overseas to play threat, but like you said they would need an astronomical amount of money to make it happen.

If they said they'd have to have some tournaments, or some organized games or something sure, I can see that. But a whole LEAGUE? I almost feel like it's an idea planted by the guys running the two streetball leagues in DC and LA, seeing how it came on the heels of all that back and forth.

[mweb]

I think the exact quote was something like If there isn't going to be basketball then we're going to have to find another way to play, if this is going to last 1-2 years we might just have to start our own league. The intention there could go either way, that it's a slap in the face of owners, or they were just throwing out a crazy idea to try to scare them (that didn't make a lot of sense to me). I get the going overseas to play threat, but like you said they would need an astronomical amount of money to make it happen.

If they said they'd have to have some tournaments, or some organized games or something sure, I can see that. But a whole LEAGUE? I almost feel like it's an idea planted by the guys running the two streetball leagues in DC and LA, seeing how it came on the heels of all that back and forth.

Well I guess I see it as being a little more possible than you do, but yeah, I highly doubt it happens.

[Sports Guy]

Yeah I know...that's why I ended up walking away. I didn't mean to tie my loss of interest to the lockout, they were mutually exclusive.Loss of interest is because its just a bad game right now and has been for some time.

They need to reduce the season by 20 or so games.

It won't happen of course but it is what would be best for the game.

[Pedro Cerrano]

Loss of interest is because its just a bad game right now and has been for some time.

They need to reduce the season by 20 or so games.

It won't happen of course but it is what would be best for the game.

More people watch the NBA than MLB.

[backwardsk]

More people watch the NBA than MLB.

Does that stat apply domestically or globally? The NBA has a huge presence in Asia and Europe.

In one of mweb's links it said that this year's finals was the second highest viewed since magic/isiah. At first glance, I thought that was bs, no chance it outdrew jordan's first threepeat, until I thought about the fact that all of Germany was watching along with the population of whatever planet deshawn Stevenson is from.

[Pedro Cerrano]

Does that stat apply domestically or globally? The NBA has a huge presence in Asia and Europe.

In one of mweb's links it said that this year's finals was the second highest viewed since magic/isiah. At first glance, I thought that was bs, no chance it outdrew jordan's first threepeat, until I thought about the fact that all of Germany was watching along with the population of whatever planet deshawn Stevenson is from.

Mars...he's from Mars.

[mweb]

Loss of interest is because its just a bad game right now and has been for some time.

They need to reduce the season by 20 or so games.

It won't happen of course but it is what would be best for the game.

Are you just talking about your loss of interest?

Because there isn't a loss of interest overall.

Oh and your complaint is also one about MLB from people who are casual fans like you are with the NBA.

[mweb]

Does that stat apply domestically or globally? The NBA has a huge presence in Asia and Europe.

In one of mweb's links it said that this year's finals was the second highest viewed since magic/isiah. At first glance, I thought that was bs, no chance it outdrew jordan's first threepeat, until I thought about the fact that all of Germany was watching along with the population of whatever planet deshawn Stevenson is from.

Last years Finals averaged 17.3 million American viewers per game, which was slightly down from the previous years 7 game LA-Boston series.

Last years' WS averaged about about 3 million less viewers per game.

If you look at this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Series_television_ratings), you'll see just how important the Yanks being in the WS is to the ratings. Boston helps too, especially when they took the nation by storm in 2004. Without either of those teams or a Chicago or LA team, the ratings are rather poor.

Both leagues depend on match-ups to get ratings, but it seems that MLB is more dependent on big markets.

[Sports Guy]

Are you just talking about your loss of interest?

Because there isn't a loss of interest overall.

Oh and your complaint is also one about MLB from people who are casual fans like you are with the NBA.All of the pro sports leagues have regular seasons that are too long, except for the NFL.

As boring as the NBA is, unless you are a die hard baseball fan, that is an even more boring sport to watch on TV.

[Sports Guy]

The best thing that happened to the NBA was the Heat...People wanted to watch them because they loved them or hated them. That really helped out the NBA this year.

[mweb]

All of the pro sports leagues have regular seasons that are too long, except for the NFL.

As boring as the NBA is, unless you are a die hard baseball fan, that is an even more boring sport to watch on TV.

That's fine. But again, your comment of loss of interest isn't really supported by facts since there isn't a loss of interest. If you are just talking for your own loss of interest, that's fine.

Yeah, like baseball, the basketball season is long, but both have been that way forever, neither are changing, and they aren't the reason for a loss of interest.

I agree that baseball can be boring if there's no rooting interest.

[mweb]

The best thing that happened to the NBA was the Heat...People wanted to watch them because they loved them or hated them. That really helped out the NBA this year.

I agree. They are the primary reason why interest in the NBA rose last year.

[backwardsk]

Last years Finals averaged 17.3 million American viewers per game, which was slightly down from the previous years 7 game LA-Boston series.

Last years' WS averaged about about 3 million less viewers per game.

If you look at this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Series_television_ratings), you'll see just how important the Yanks being in the WS is to the ratings. Boston helps too, especially when they took the nation by storm in 2004. Without either of those teams or a Chicago or LA team, the ratings are rather poor.

Both leagues depend on match-ups to get ratings, but it seems that MLB is more dependent on big markets.

This is good info. Do you have a chart that shows the last 5 years of the NBA finals? I see a similar chart with the neilsen ratings (such as 9.0/15), and honestly, I'm not smart enough to decipher what that means!

You state that the NBA recently drew 17mm average recently. MLB had 19mm with the Yankees in 2009--a point you have made.

I wanted to do a side by side comparison over the past five years. One thing I did notice from the MLB numbers is that a game 7 really skews the averages.

[mweb]

This is good info. Do you have a chart that shows the last 5 years of the NBA finals? I see a similar chart with the neilsen ratings (such as 9.0/15), and honestly, I'm not smart enough to decipher what that means!

You state that the NBA recently drew 17mm average recently. MLB had 19mm with the Yankees in 2009--a point you have made.

I wanted to do a side by side comparison over the past five years. One thing I did notice from the MLB numbers is that a game 7 really skews the averages.

I only saw the chart you mention for the NBA. Not sure how to find how many millions of people watched each Finals.

[Sports Guy]

Sounds like the lockout will end soon and they may still get the full 82 game schedule in.

[Pedro Cerrano]

Games through November canceled. Allegedly everything has been solved but the BRI split and this is getting absurd. I recognize that a mere percentage point = $$$$ but it's RELATIVELY nothing. The players want 52/48, the owners want 50/50. Why hasn't anyone proposed 51/49???

The NBA is my second favorite sport, after MLB, and it KILLS me that all the momentum they gained from last year, and the fact that they have an insanely large amount of upper echelon talent, is being wasted because of this bickering. GET IT SOLVED!

Signed,

A Frustrated NBA Fan

[mweb]

Games through November canceled. Allegedly everything has been solved but the BRI split and this is getting absurd. I recognize that a mere percentage point = $$$$ but it's RELATIVELY nothing. The players want 52/48, the owners want 50/50. Why hasn't anyone proposed 51/49???

The NBA is my second favorite sport, after MLB, and it KILLS me that all the momentum they gained from last year, and the fact that they have an insanely large amount of upper echelon talent, is being wasted because of this bickering. GET IT SOLVED!

Signed,

A Frustrated NBA Fan

Probably because the players just dropped from 53% and made concessions on various other things while the owners have made very few concessions since they went to 50%. Thus the players expect the owners to compromise at this point.

[mweb]

And now Stern is threatening reducing their offer since they are now losing revenue due to the season not starting, even though many of the owners probably wanted to miss games. Plus, since they claim to be losing so much money due to how much they have to pay the players, why is missing any of the season a problem for their bottom line?

[allstar1579]

And now Stern is threatening reducing their offer since they are now losing revenue due to the season not starting, even though many of the owners probably wanted to miss games. Plus, since they claim to be losing so much money due to how much they have to pay the players, why is missing any of the season a problem for their bottom line?

Because of their fixed expenses that they have to pay lockout or no lockout. Things like rent, overhead labor and other things of the like are costing them money already, the only way they pay for that is with revenue from playing games. I'm sure it's a small % in the grand scheme of things, but of course they are going to cry about it. Poor rich guys not making any money...boo hoo.

[mweb]

Because of their fixed expenses that they have to pay lockout or no lockout. Things like rent, overhead labor and other things of the like are costing them money already, the only way they pay for that is with revenue from playing games. I'm sure it's a small % in the grand scheme of things, but of course they are going to cry about it. Poor rich guys not making any money...boo hoo.

Yes, I understand that, I just think it's a bit silly given how much they claim they are losing. Plus, they still make some money from other sources like merchandise, NBA TV, etc. If they were losing anywhere near what they claim, I don't think this would be such a big issue.

[Birds of B'more]

Interesting article in The Oregonian (http://www.oregonlive.com/nba/index.ssf/2011/10/nba_high-5_92.html) about a likely "Amnesty Clause" in the new CBA . It's similar to the one from 2005 that let teams cut players and not have their salaries count against the cap, while still paying them the full amount owed. Unlike 2005, teams may not be able to remove the entire salary from the cap though...it could only be 75% this time. There may also be another exception called the "stretch" where the cap-hit of a released player could be spread out to twice the length of the contract...so hypothetically, a player due to make $10 million/year for 2 years could be released and have the cap number stretched so that it counts as $5 million/year for 4 years.

If that happens it could be a huge benefit here in Portland, where Brandon Roy's max-contract (with 4 years remaining including this season) will be a salary-cap anchor around the neck, for a player who at this point will be fortunate to be a decent sixth-man with creaky knees. Of course we still don't even have a GM here who could make the decision to do that and use the cap room to build a team that can compete in the West. I've said this before, and after reading the recent Tony LaCava thread in the Orioles forum I'm even more convinced, that Angelos and Allen are so similar in how they run the franchises they own (usually aloof and distant, but just meddlesome enough to be destructive) that it's downright eerie. If you sent a link to that thread to people out here and replaced "Orioles" with "Blazers" and "LaCava" with "????" they would just nod their heads in resignation and never realize they're on an Orioles message board. (you don't even have to change the owner's initials) :laughlol:

[Birds of B'more]

Here's a free ESPN article (http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7147880/nba-most-likely-amnesty-candidates) on it. Both Rashard Lewis and Brandon Roy are listed as "slam dunk" choices for the amnesty clause.

[TGO]

So, apparently the most hard-line "no concessions" owner in the league is...Michael Jordan?

[Pedro Cerrano]

Kobe Bryant, of the Los Angeles Lakers, is at the players' meeting today presumably to encourage the players to vote in favor of the owners' offer and get basketball back. Paul Pierce, of the Boston Celtics, is the most prominent player in favor of union decertification. Which team do YOU want to root for?

[MikeAD]

NO deal: http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7234180/nba-lockout-players-not-accept-deal-seek-decertify-billy-hunter-says

According to Stern this is the best available and every offer from here on will give more than 50% to the owners.

Dumb.

[Birds of B'more]

I guess it heads to the courts now (no pun intended).

[mweb]

NO deal: http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7234180/nba-lockout-players-not-accept-deal-seek-decertify-billy-hunter-says

According to Stern this is the best available and every offer from here on will give more than 50% to the owners.

Dumb.

It may be dumb, but the owners are mostly to blame imo.

[MikeAD]

It may be dumb, but the owners are mostly to blame imo.

That's what I was trying to say. Its dumb that Stern is going to draw that line in the sand.

[napbow]

Unbelievable. The wiz were just starting to build a strong foundation and I was looking forward to watching their growth this season. They are really risking losing the casual fan such as myself.