League considering contraction of lesser profitable teams

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • 23
    yellow
    • Sep 2002
    • 66469

    #16
    Re: League considering contraction of lesser profitable teams

    Well it surely didnt help to only shove certain players down our throats all of these years and ride that wave while people sat there and saw corrupt refs make sure certain things happened.

    People are probably tired of seeing the retread playoffs every year

    Comment

    • hokupguy
      All Star
      • Apr 2004
      • 5615

      #17
      Re: League considering contraction of lesser profitable teams

      Originally posted by Dice
      Well, basically, you keep the charter franchises, which are:
      - Lakers
      - Celtics
      - Pistons
      - Knicks
      - Sixers
      - Warriors
      Keep the ABA franchises:
      - Nets
      - Pacers
      - Nuggets
      - Spurs
      Then with the remaining, keep the franchises that's above league average value:
      - Bulls
      - Cavs
      - Rockets
      - Mavs
      - Suns
      - Raptors(?)
      - Heat

      So that leaves you to choose six out of these teams:
      - Bucks
      - Magic
      - Hawks
      - Bobcats
      - Wizards
      - Jazz
      - Blazers
      - Thunder
      - T-Wolves
      - Clippers <-----MY FIRST CHOICE
      - Kings
      - Grizzlies
      - Hornets
      ok these team cant be in the 6 because they either have new owner ship, big city, new arena or solid large fan base.

      Magic great fan base new building good team.
      Bobcats new owner in MJ quickly growing fan base
      Wizards new owner ship in a some what major city.
      Jazz they only pro sport in Utah and a very large fan base
      Blazers large fan base and follow in the north west
      Thunder crazy growing fan base and up and coming team.

      i think 1 of these teams should replace the raptors in your list of franchises that's above league average value.

      If the raptors dont improve the next 2 season i can see and hear relocation. Canada is hockey country .

      I think teams like Bucks ,T-Wolves ,Clippers ,Kings ,Grizzlies & Hornets.
      Need a rebirth in new owner ship, buliding , relocation and maybe even contraction.

      I think if teams what to turn a profit they should look at them seleves more then the players. IF you wanna give me 121 mill but i am only really worth 88 mill . I am going to take it.

      But it I am an owner and have a jack *** as a GM give huge contracts to guys like eddie curry. Thats on them not the player. But they should start putting out options on contracts based on preformance with reason. Not like grant hill with magic, dude was always hurt but i did everything he could to get back.
      "Never say never, because limits are like fears and they are often just an illusion."-M.J.

      Comment

      • Dice
        Sitting by the door
        • Jul 2002
        • 6627

        #18
        Re: League considering contraction of lesser profitable teams

        Originally posted by hokupguy
        ok these team cant be in the 6 because they either have new owner ship, big city, new arena or solid large fan base.

        Magic great fan base new building good team.
        Bobcats new owner in MJ quickly growing fan base
        Wizards new owner ship in a some what major city.
        Jazz they only pro sport in Utah and a very large fan base
        Blazers large fan base and follow in the north west
        Thunder crazy growing fan base and up and coming team.

        i think 1 of these teams should replace the raptors in your list of franchises that's above league average value.

        If the raptors dont improve the next 2 season i can see and hear relocation. Canada is hockey country .

        I think teams like Bucks ,T-Wolves ,Clippers ,Kings ,Grizzlies & Hornets.
        Need a rebirth in new owner ship, buliding , relocation and maybe even contraction.

        I think if teams what to turn a profit they should look at them seleves more then the players. IF you wanna give me 121 mill but i am only really worth 88 mill . I am going to take it.

        But it I am an owner and have a jack *** as a GM give huge contracts to guys like eddie curry. Thats on them not the player. But they should start putting out options on contracts based on preformance with reason. Not like grant hill with magic, dude was always hurt but i did everything he could to get back.
        Which is why i put a question mark next to the Raptors. I couldn't believe they are actually above league average value. Maybe because of Canadian taxes? I'm not sure. But I thought that was odd.
        I have more respect for a man who let's me know where he stands, even if he's wrong. Than the one who comes up like an angel and is nothing but a devil. - Malcolm X

        Comment

        • yankeesgiants
          I Drink Like A Champion!!
          • Feb 2007
          • 2477

          #19
          Re: League considering contraction of lesser profitable teams

          Originally posted by Bumi
          Move the Thunder from OKC. Put em in San Diego, or put em back in Seattle. Oklahoma is just too small of a market.
          San Diego had the Clippers from 78-84.
          I dont remember there names but they were allot of fun....

          Comment

          • Vince
            Bow for Bau
            • Aug 2002
            • 26017

            #20
            Re: League considering contraction of lesser profitable teams

            The Raptors are profitable because Toronto is one of the biggest markets in North America and they simply draw quite well despite having a ****ty team.

            They are not going anywhere so you guys should just stop considering them as a potential contracted team.
            @ me or dap me

            http://twitter.com/52isthemike

            Comment

            • Dice
              Sitting by the door
              • Jul 2002
              • 6627

              #21
              Re: League considering contraction of lesser profitable teams

              Originally posted by Vince
              The Raptors are profitable because Toronto is one of the biggest markets in North America and they simply draw quite well despite having a ****ty team.

              They are not going anywhere so you guys should just stop considering them as a potential contracted team.
              Well, that's why in my analogy I barely put an emphasis on performance. Unless your the Clippers who makes the playoffs 4 times in the last 25 years, the performance has to stick out like a sore thumb.

              Which is why you cannot contract a team like the Knicks. Now granted, they haven't been good in a while BUT they're not Clipper-bad. And even if they were, you simply cannot remove a team from the biggest market in all of sports. How would it look not to have an NBA team in the city where the headquarters is at?
              I have more respect for a man who let's me know where he stands, even if he's wrong. Than the one who comes up like an angel and is nothing but a devil. - Malcolm X

              Comment

              • sportzbro
                MVP
                • May 2008
                • 3892

                #22
                Re: League considering contraction of lesser profitable teams

                Originally posted by Dice
                Well, basically, you keep the charter franchises, which are:
                - Lakers
                - Celtics
                - Pistons
                - Knicks
                - Sixers
                - Warriors
                Keep the ABA franchises:
                - Nets
                - Pacers
                - Nuggets
                - Spurs
                Then with the remaining, keep the franchises that's above league average value:
                - Bulls
                - Cavs
                - Rockets
                - Mavs
                - Suns
                - Raptors(?)
                - Heat

                So that leaves you to choose six out of these teams:
                - Bucks
                - Magic
                - Hawks
                - Bobcats
                - Wizards
                - Jazz
                - Blazers
                - Thunder
                - T-Wolves
                - Clippers <-----MY FIRST CHOICE
                - Kings
                - Grizzlies
                - Hornets
                Crazy if it were to happen, but my 6 would be:

                Clippers
                T-Wolves
                Kings
                Grizzlies
                Wizards
                Hornets

                In that order.. then get rid of East/West conferences and the top 8 make the playoffs. Would be more interesting imo.
                Last edited by sportzbro; 10-22-2010, 01:05 PM.

                Comment

                • metal134
                  MVP
                  • Feb 2004
                  • 1420

                  #23
                  Re: League considering contraction of lesser profitable teams

                  This is going to be be one ugly CBA. Probably among the ugliest we've ever seen. However, the NFL's CBA will make it look like a Care Bear's picnic.
                  A screaming comes across the sky...

                  Comment

                  • Vince
                    Bow for Bau
                    • Aug 2002
                    • 26017

                    #24
                    Re: League considering contraction of lesser profitable teams

                    Wizards? C'mon people..

                    I think at most 2-4 teams need to go.

                    Kings, Grizzlies

                    Pacers need to get their **** together as well.
                    @ me or dap me

                    http://twitter.com/52isthemike

                    Comment

                    • ehh
                      Hall Of Fame
                      • Mar 2003
                      • 28962

                      #25
                      Re: League considering contraction of lesser profitable teams

                      How the hell would contraction work anyway?

                      Stern tries to tell the Raptors that they're done as a franchise - can't the owners sue the hell out of the NBA? Is there is some language some agreement when the team was first formed that said the NBA holds the power to contract them if desired?
                      "You make your name in the regular season, and your fame in the postseason." - Clyde Frazier

                      "Beware of geeks bearing formulas." - Warren Buffet

                      Comment

                      • King_B_Mack
                        All Star
                        • Jan 2009
                        • 24450

                        #26
                        Re: League considering contraction of lesser profitable teams

                        Originally posted by ehh
                        How the hell would contraction work anyway?

                        Stern tries to tell the Raptors that they're done as a franchise - can't the owners sue the hell out of the NBA? Is there is some language some agreement when the team was first formed that said the NBA holds the power to contract them if desired?
                        That's a good question. I'm sure it's something that all the owners would have to sign off on though. Majority anyway. Stern works for the owners, so if contraction is even a possibility there's at least a couple of the more powerful owners lobbying for it.

                        Comment

                        • ex carrabba fan
                          I'll thank him for you
                          • Oct 2004
                          • 32744

                          #27
                          Re: League considering contraction of lesser profitable teams

                          Originally posted by Dice
                          Well, that's why in my analogy I barely put an emphasis on performance. Unless your the Clippers who makes the playoffs 4 times in the last 25 years, the performance has to stick out like a sore thumb.

                          Which is why you cannot contract a team like the Knicks. Now granted, they haven't been good in a while BUT they're not Clipper-bad. And even if they were, you simply cannot remove a team from the biggest market in all of sports. How would it look not to have an NBA team in the city where the headquarters is at?
                          Would wager a large sum that if the Clippers played in the East they'd make it a lot more than 4 times in the past 25 years. Even with perhaps the worst owner in the NBA, Clippers have been just as relevant and probably more exciting/entertaining than the Knicks have this past decade.

                          Still there is absolutely no reason for Los Angeles to have two teams. It honestly makes no sense. I could understand maybe if Orange County had their own team, but Los Angeles? Why in the world do they need two teams? It's mind boggling Clippers have an actual fan base and that their crap owner is actually making a profit.
                          Originally posted by Vince
                          Wizards? C'mon people..

                          I think at most 2-4 teams need to go.

                          Kings, Grizzlies

                          Pacers need to get their **** together as well.
                          OK hell no to the Kings. One they have a great fanbase, two their team is on the upswing [hopefully].

                          Grizz need to go, and maybe the Hawks. Atlanta seems to do anything but want to watch their team play.

                          Comment

                          • JBH3
                            Marvel's Finest
                            • Jan 2007
                            • 13506

                            #28
                            Re: League considering contraction of lesser profitable teams

                            Originally posted by Vince
                            Wizards? C'mon people..

                            I think at most 2-4 teams need to go.

                            Kings, Grizzlies

                            Pacers need to get their **** together as well.
                            The Wizards wouldn't be going anywhere. New owner, plenty of interest and fan support...

                            Kings/Sac-Town are in trouble. Memphis is not working, and the Hornets...who even got an all-star game...are still not drawing despite (arguably) thr best PG in the league.
                            Originally posted by Edmund Burke
                            All that is needed for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing.

                            Comment

                            • Cebby
                              Banned
                              • Apr 2005
                              • 22327

                              #29
                              Re: League considering contraction of lesser profitable teams

                              Originally posted by Vince
                              Wizards? C'mon people..

                              I think at most 2-4 teams need to go.

                              Kings, Grizzlies

                              Pacers need to get their **** together as well.
                              The only teams I think that would remotely possible to contract are those three, and even then as ehh said, it'd still be nearly impossible from a practical standpoint. I would imagine the NBA would have to purchase the teams from the owner and then just shut them down.

                              Comment

                              • Dice
                                Sitting by the door
                                • Jul 2002
                                • 6627

                                #30
                                Re: League considering contraction of lesser profitable teams

                                Originally posted by ex carrabba fan
                                Would wager a large sum that if the Clippers played in the East they'd make it a lot more than 4 times in the past 25 years. Even with perhaps the worst owner in the NBA, Clippers have been just as relevant and probably more exciting/entertaining than the Knicks have this past decade.

                                Still there is absolutely no reason for Los Angeles to have two teams. It honestly makes no sense. I could understand maybe if Orange County had their own team, but Los Angeles? Why in the world do they need two teams? It's mind boggling Clippers have an actual fan base and that their crap owner is actually making a profit.
                                Maybe during most of the 2000's decade. But during the late 80's, early 90's? They might have been worst than what they are now. Can you imagine the Clippers in the late 80's playing teams like the Pistons, Bulls, Cavs and Celtics more than twice? They would have gotten their asses kicked around. Then imagine if they were playing in the East in the 90's against the Bulls, Knicks, Pacers and Magic? The Bulls in 1996 would have won 76 games due to the extra games against the Clippers. Them playing in the West during those times was bad BUT if they would have played in the East during the 80's and 90's, it would have been a slaughter.

                                The Clippers are making a profit because of cheapskate owners like Donald Sterling. They run low-risk, sure reward business. They get about $30 million a year of the revenue of the TV money the NBA gets. Whether they are on national TV or not, they get it regardless. They pay the lowest rent in the NBA at $1.5 million/year because they share the bill with the Lakers and Kings at the Staples Center. They have a low payroll. From what I read because I never been to a Clippers game, concession stands are normally closed except when the popular teams like the Lakers or Celtics are playing them. Because that's the only time the Clippers can fill up the Staples Center. That type of bull**** keeps them afloat.
                                I have more respect for a man who let's me know where he stands, even if he's wrong. Than the one who comes up like an angel and is nothing but a devil. - Malcolm X

                                Comment

                                Working...