NBA Off Topic Thread

[DieHardYankee26]

NBA Off Topic Thread

I think it’s more about the fact that the Warriors live in a market where they built out an entire complex around their arena where they can continue to collect revenue. If the Timberwolves did the same thing, could they make anywhere near as much money to justify paying so much? Probably not. Now do I care? No, I’ve been saying **** small markers for years. But I get why, if this kinda thing is important to the league, they would want to do something about it.

Now my question is what do they do when Ballmer says the luxury tax just means nothing to my wallet. Chamath sold his stake in the Dubs, Lacob is worth more than him anyway.

[bigeastbumrush]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

I think it’s more about the fact that the Warriors live in a market where they built out an entire complex around their arena where they can continue to collect revenue. If the Timberwolves did the same thing, could they make anywhere near as much money to justify paying so much? Probably not. Now do I care? No, I’ve been saying **** small markers for years. But I get why, if this kinda thing is important to the league, they would want to do something about it.

Now my question is what do they do when Ballmer says the luxury tax just means nothing to my wallet. Chamath sold his stake in the Dubs, Lacob is worth more than him anyway.

But people aren’t going to Warriors games because of the complex. They’re going because the team is good.

The Oakland A’s are trying to get a similar complex by the ports but they’re pulling something like 4,000 fans a game. I doubt they’ll get much more because of the new complex.

Like you said Ballmer can say that. But what about the owner of the Spurs?

[DieHardYankee26]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

I don’t think it has anything to do with attendance. It Dolan moved MSG and rebuilt the OG Penn Station as a mall where he could sell rent to companies that want access to the Knicks and collect that money year round even when there’s no games being played, I’m sure they’d be looking at his spending too.

[bigeastbumrush]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

I don’t think it has anything to do with attendance. It Dolan moved MSG and rebuilt the OG Penn Station as a mall where he could sell rent to companies that want access to the Knicks and collect that money year round even when there’s no games being played, I’m sure they’d be looking at his spending too.

Attendance has to be a part of it if they’re talking about payroll disparity because the teams trying to avoid the luxury tax know that they’ll have a harder time paying it if no one shows up.

GS doesn’t have to worry about that because they know they’ll sell out and they’ll make a lot of it back with those extra games. And their investors have deep pockets where who knows what goes on behind the scenes.

Yeah you can get away with that in NY because people will always show up.

But can the Spurs do that when they’re bottom 5 in attendance and have no shot at the playoffs? Where would that money come from to pay luxury taxes with one of the poorest owners in the league? We can call him cheap. But the Warriors aren’t concerned about those things. Maybe it’s funny money but they have the means to do it.

[ojandpizza]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

I agree with King but also realize it's not exactly that simple either. Kinda one of those both ways things. It's hard to tell a team willing to spend money they can't spend the money, but not every team that can't/aren't willing to do that is just because they are "being cheap" either.

Golden State can overspend because they know they are getting that money back especially with what they are building. Not every team is in that position, not every team even owns their own arena and draws income from all the events held there. Warriors were projected to eclipse 700 million this year in revenue, I think league average is like 2 something.

I get that that's not really GS's problem, but say your a team that doesn't generate that type of money for various reasons. You can't pay that much into the tax to build the team it takes to grow that revenue, your other option is tank until you MAYBE land a generational star. All while you're sucking for years because the tank, losing ticket sales, losing TV spots, not getting playoff money, etc.

It puts a lot of teams in a weird spot because even teams who are willing to spend and want to spend will more than likely have to have some length of time of being *** to get good draft picks. You suck for 5 years maybe you end up losing out on $500 million in revenue over that time span you could have made by being "good" but not "good enough" to win, that's $500 million less you'd have to put towards your team once you do land that star. So even if you aren't "cheap" you still have to make the type of money required to be able to spend that type of money. And some teams, Memphis for example, could be willing to spend every dime they have but their only route to success is nailing draft picks/young talent. It's like if Ja had a career ending injury they can just spend all the money in an off-season to "build" a contender. Big name players aren't coming to live in Memphis. Half the league is in that position.

[ojandpizza]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

But people aren’t going to Warriors games because of the complex. They’re going because the team is good.

This is true and also not true. People aren't going there because of the complex but that move was still a massive factor. Back in 2019 the move to the Chase center was projected to push them over $700 million annually in revenue. Like $300 million more than other huge market teams like the Lakers, Knicks. They made over 2 billion dollars on ticket sales before the arena was even opened. They went from a 3 billion dollar valued team to nearly 6 in just two years. They were already a really good team filling the seats and winning rings, and all of those changes still doubled them.

[bigeastbumrush]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

This is true and also not true. People aren't going there because of the complex but that move was still a massive factor. Back in 2019 the move to the Chase center was projected to push them over $700 million annually in revenue. Like $300 million more than other huge market teams like the Lakers, Knicks. They made over 2 billion dollars on ticket sales before the arena was even opened. They went from a 3 billion dollar valued team to nearly 6 in just two years. They were already a really good team filling the seats and winning rings, and all of those changes still doubled them.

Yeah so they were already good in attendance.

But is that translatable across the league? And for teams who have low attendance.

It’s one thing to be labeled as cheap when you’re trading away players to avoid a tax.

It’s another thing to be labeled as cheap when you know that you simply cannot compete because no one will invest as much in a losing product.

I can see why they’d look into this but on the other hand I don’t want the league to incentivize owners that sit on their hands and own a team just for the sake of writing off losses.

[King_B_Mack]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

Yeah I get that some teams aren't simply being cheap, there's a little bit more nuance to the convo than that. But at the same time, we shouldn't be penalizing teams any more than we already are. We've already implemented a luxury tax with stiff penalties in the name of competitive balance. We've already introduced super max contracts in the name of competitive balance for small market teams. We have a draft lottery. Revenue sharing that essentially has Golden State, New York, the LA teams, Chicago to name a few paying teams like the Spurs as you guys keep speaking up for being in a small market. Hell the Lakers are paying teams like the Spurs in revenue sharing AND eating it in luxury taxes but we still gotta hear 'oh woah is me' out of small market teams? That's a miss for me at this point. I was with the small market guys prior to the luxury tax being a thing and I agree with them that it should be a thing. But if a team is still willing to eat those costs then so be it. I don't think we should be putting further restrictions on a team willing to spend money to make their teams better.

When Steph Curry got to GS they were barely a top 10 team in attendance. They were 9th his rookie year, 2 spots higher than the Thunder whom I think we all can agree aren't exactly a media market juggernaut? The following year? 11th, a spot behind the Spurs. The year after? 10th. Two spots ahead of the Spurs and one behind the Magic. The following year the exact same spot. They didn't crack the top 5 in attendance until 2013 when they clearly had something brewing there. Even with that year they finished 6th in 2014 and when they won the title in 2015 they finished 7th in attendance. 7th in 2016 with the best record ever and 8th in 2018. Hell in 2020 the Warriors were 16th in attendance behind the Spurs, Jazz, Thunder and Rockets. They were 11th in attendance just this past season behind the Cavs and Jazz and one ahead of the Bucks. Since LeBron got to Miami, the Heat have been top 7 in attendance every year despite being the 18th biggest sports media market ahead of Cleveland, Sacramento and Portland. There are limitations to your market size sure, but I think it's a bit overstated in the context of this luxury tax discussion.

[jeebs9]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

Yeah, it was just one of those classic "given an inch, take it a mile" situations. If teams were just doing normal bench stuff then the NBA would have paid no mind but Dallas just chose to absorb the thousands of dollars in fines so they could stick Theo right there on the line in the opposing team's colors each game.

If I recall correctly, some on-court players were also falling into the standing bench guys hugging the sideline, increasing injury risk.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gAe33psRE3Y" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/--PYKy0-24E" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Seeing this reminds me of the coach touching the player on the court

https://youtu.be/poElSpe93TY

[ProfessaPackMan]

NBA Off Topic Thread

If y’all ever get bored, check this whole thread out, lol

https://twitter.com/1017van/status/1545919550570565634?s=21&t=pr_hcrmSJqzVRVhDi2H8Nw

My favorite so far:

https://twitter.com/drehorizon/status/1545938810617348096?s=21&t=pr_hcrmSJqzVRVhDi2H8Nw

[ojandpizza]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

Yeah I get that some teams aren't simply being cheap, there's a little bit more nuance to the convo than that. But at the same time, we shouldn't be penalizing teams any more than we already are. We've already implemented a luxury tax with stiff penalties in the name of competitive balance. We've already introduced super max contracts in the name of competitive balance for small market teams. We have a draft lottery. Revenue sharing that essentially has Golden State, New York, the LA teams, Chicago to name a few paying teams like the Spurs as you guys keep speaking up for being in a small market. Hell the Lakers are paying teams like the Spurs in revenue sharing AND eating it in luxury taxes but we still gotta hear 'oh woah is me' out of small market teams? That's a miss for me at this point. I was with the small market guys prior to the luxury tax being a thing and I agree with them that it should be a thing. But if a team is still willing to eat those costs then so be it. I don't think we should be putting further restrictions on a team willing to spend money to make their teams better.

When Steph Curry got to GS they were barely a top 10 team in attendance. They were 9th his rookie year, 2 spots higher than the Thunder whom I think we all can agree aren't exactly a media market juggernaut? The following year? 11th, a spot behind the Spurs. The year after? 10th. Two spots ahead of the Spurs and one behind the Magic. The following year the exact same spot. They didn't crack the top 5 in attendance until 2013 when they clearly had something brewing there. Even with that year they finished 6th in 2014 and when they won the title in 2015 they finished 7th in attendance. 7th in 2016 with the best record ever and 8th in 2018. Hell in 2020 the Warriors were 16th in attendance behind the Spurs, Jazz, Thunder and Rockets. They were 11th in attendance just this past season behind the Cavs and Jazz and one ahead of the Bucks. Since LeBron got to Miami, the Heat have been top 7 in attendance every year despite being the 18th biggest sports media market ahead of Cleveland, Sacramento and Portland. There are limitations to your market size sure, but I think it's a bit overstated in the context of this luxury tax discussion.

I'm with you, on all of this, but I think this specific example is a bit of an outlier.. There is a reason good teams paying the tax and all that hasn't been an issue brought up until this specific example. It's not even really about just market size and attendance..

For example: The Lakers are one of the largest markets in basketball, I'm sure have some of the highest attendance ratings and ticket prices as well, one of the best incomes from TV spots. But they can't even come remotely close to doing what Golden State is. We all gave Jeanie **** for cheaping out on Caruso, but the other side of that is she's not some multi-billionaire who just so happens to also own the Lakers. Her primary income is the Lakers. The Lakers don't even own the arena they play in. Her net worth wouldn't even pay for the arena GS currently has, Golden State's spend on last season would be nearly her entire net worth. Sure the team is valued at billions but I'm sure she's also passionate about the team and doesn't want to sell off controlling interest to take the leaps Golden State is.

I 100% agree that if a team is willing to eat those costs then so be it, but this isn't really within the norm of what it usually means to just "eat those costs" either. Golden State spent more in just salaries and luxury tax last year than any other team even made in revenue. Which means they probably did it the year before, will do it again next year, and are probably the only team in the entire league that can do that year-on-end. They are spending more than other teams even make.

In some ways it's a great thing obviously. They want to grow the biggest brand in North American sports. I believe they are expected to pass everyone but the Cowboys, and soon. And they are willing to pay the tax to be good, and the revenue sharing in the NBA helps everyone.. But at the same time they are now in a position to be able to outspend everyone for the foreseeable future. Which just gives the "cheap" teams an even bigger reason to stay cheap, and the teams willing to spend still not being able to spend like they can. The luxury tax situation was designed to give somewhat of a more level playing field. Golden State is so far past that it's like everyone is playing under a salary cap except for them.

[bigeastbumrush]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

For example: The Lakers are one of the largest markets in basketball, I'm sure have some of the highest attendance ratings and ticket prices as well, one of the best incomes from TV spots. But they can't even come remotely close to doing what Golden State is. We all gave Jeanie **** for cheaping out on Caruso, but the other side of that is she's not some multi-billionaire who just so happens to also own the Lakers. Her primary income is the Lakers. The Lakers don't even own the arena they play in. Her net worth wouldn't even pay for the arena GS currently has, Golden State's spend on last season would be nearly her entire net worth. Sure the team is valued at billions but I'm sure she's also passionate about the team and doesn't want to sell off controlling interest to take the leaps Golden State is.

But isn’t this what I said. GS has a type of funding that no one else has. And I think it should be looked into. I don’t have a problem with the league doing that.

Higher attendance by making the playoffs and Finals gives these luxury tax teams an easier way to pay these taxes.

All through the playoffs I kept hearing announcers slip in that after a team lost a game that “X team owners may be happy that they’ll get another home game if a series is extended”.

[DieHardYankee26]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

What exactly is it you think the Warriors are doing/worth? lol There are much richer owners in the league than them.

[bigeastbumrush]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

https://twitter.com/real7talk/status/1546997171966410754?s=21&t=AmbZts4EKClUXvmar8P4MA

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

Remember hearing that when I was in HS. From what I learned afterwards, the reason they set it up like that was to protect him from himself at the time and so he wouldn’t blow thru all of his earnings, which I believe were fearful of during that time.

His shoes were probably one of the top 3 most popular shoes during that period, up there with Jordans and AF1s.