NBA Off Topic Thread

[DieHardYankee26]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

It’s like the Bobby Bonilla deal, feels like I’ve been hearing about it every 6 months since I was 10.

[The 24th Letter]

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.

Props to his agent and team for thinking ahead.

Reminds me of the deal Jason Weaver signed with Disney instead of taking a lump sum…He’s still getting paid off The Lion King to this day…and Disney is stingy with royalties..

[jeebs9]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

Props to his agent and team for thinking ahead.

Reminds me of the deal Jason Weaver signed with Disney instead of taking a lump sum…He’s still getting paid off The Lion King to this day…and Disney is stingy with royalties..

Yes I recently heard about this!!!! For a black young brother. You just don't know what is going to happen in life. I clearly only remember his parts as Teddy and Ernest [emoji23]

https://c.tenor.com/nYxPKBYVYY8AAAAM/atl-movie.gif

https://c.tenor.com/_ae_mIx1pi8AAAAM/drum-line.gif

[J_Posse]

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.

That's why I would always laugh when dumb people would say he's "broke." Of course, the reason they set it up like that was cause of how "frivolous" he was with money.

Still, he's gonna be okay for a long, long time and hopefully Shaq gives him part ownership as Reebok shifts away from Adidas.

Official HQ of Bills Backer/Spurs Nation

[Majingir]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

Yes I recently heard about this!!!! For a black young brother. You just don't know what is going to happen in life. I clearly only remember his parts as Teddy and Ernest [emoji23]

https://c.tenor.com/nYxPKBYVYY8AAAAM/atl-movie.gif

https://c.tenor.com/_ae_mIx1pi8AAAAM/drum-line.gif

He was great in Smart Guy too.

[phenom1990]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

I always thought the fun of the soccer tournaments was seeing your team play teams from other leagues and countries, so if this ends with the Knicks playing Maccabi Tel Aviv BC then I might be in but I really don’t understand what they’re trying to do.

Also with things like the FA Cup in soccer, it involves the top teams in England playing lower division and borderline amateur teams with the chance of an unforgettable upset.

American Basketball Culture already has something similar to that it is called March Madness.

Nobody wants to see Golden State play some semi-pro American basketball team; fans don’t have any personal connection to those teams.

[King_B_Mack]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

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.

How exactly is this the Warriors fault though? So they should be penalized because they have more money than another team? The Warriors owners aren't even the richest owners in the league. That would be Steve Ballmer, Dan Gilbert, Robert Pera to name a few. The Warriors are also still playing within the rules of the league. This isn't baseball where there isn't a salary cap, they still have to make decisions on the players they choose to keep or not as we saw from half their championship team just walking out the door. They also are fine paying the luxury tax to keep the guys they already have and have drafted in Steph, Klay, Draymond and Poole. If they didn't have those guys and weren't winning titles, they likely wouldn't be paying the tax. I really don't think there's a case for "looking into" anything here with what the Warriors are spending. Just a quick glance at the estimated luxury tax payments for teams, the Warriors are at $146 million, the Clippers $144 million, the Nets $93 million, the Bucks $86 million. I think most owners aren't wiling to go into the tax if they know they're team sucks. Jerry Reinsdorf is in the 3rd largest market in the league and this dude has done backflips for years to avoid paying the luxury tax even though the Bulls are top 5 in attendance every year. He swears he'd pay the tax for a championship contender though.

The only way to shut up small market owners would be to go the NHL route and just go with a hard salary cap with no exceptions and that would be the dumbest thing the league could do.

[Majingir]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

Someone upscaled the 1997 ASG intro

https://streamable.com/3y18mt

Basically, they turned regular SD footage into 4K quality.


Which makes me wonder if the future could be the past. As in, future technology designed to "modernize" past footage, and just how good can it be. Could we ever see footage from the 70s or 80s looking modernized? Late 90s and 00s was basically as good as SD gets so those qualities are good already, but when looking at older sports footage, it seems like diff leagues and diff networks have such differing quality.

When it comes to TV shows, we're lucky that some big shows from the past were actually able to get original footage that could be turned into full screen/HD format. Would be cool having that become more common, and applicable for sports too (I know it's different since some TV shows actually filmed in those formats, but sports footage being adjusted to higher quality could do wonders)

[VDusen04]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

Someone upscaled the 1997 ASG intro

https://streamable.com/3y18mt

Basically, they turned regular SD footage into 4K quality.


Which makes me wonder if the future could be the past. As in, future technology designed to "modernize" past footage, and just how good can it be. Could we ever see footage from the 70s or 80s looking modernized? Late 90s and 00s was basically as good as SD gets so those qualities are good already, but when looking at older sports footage, it seems like diff leagues and diff networks have such differing quality.

When it comes to TV shows, we're lucky that some big shows from the past were actually able to get original footage that could be turned into full screen/HD format. Would be cool having that become more common, and applicable for sports too (I know it's different since some TV shows actually filmed in those formats, but sports footage being adjusted to higher quality could do wonders)

Technology is crazy.

On the flip side, YouTube has been going through a massive crackdown on full length classic NBA game uploads, which I've spent a ton of time watching and referencing over the years. You always knew their existence on YouTube was tenuous (since they belong to the NBA, not the uploaders) but you also hoped the NBA would continue turning a blind eye for the sake of growing the game and educating those who weren't alive to see that particular era.

A lot of amazing reference channels bit the dust this past week.

[Majingir]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

Technology is crazy.

On the flip side, YouTube has been going through a massive crackdown on full length classic NBA game uploads, which I've spent a ton of time watching and referencing over the years. You always knew their existence on YouTube was tenuous (since they belong to the NBA, not the uploaders) but you also hoped the NBA would continue turning a blind eye for the sake of growing the game and educating those who weren't alive to see that particular era.

A lot of amazing reference channels bit the dust this past week.

Thats that's something I've always felt about things on YouTube. If someone's uploading a show or a game on YouTube that you can't get anywhere else (in TV show cases, you can't get it outside of Ebay or some similar means) then it should be fair game. How can you get mad at someone uploading a show on YouTube when you're not even making money on it to begin with? I don't understand YouTube monetization, but if you're the rights holder to footage, instead of flagging a video for removal, why not allow those companies to make money off it. Let users upload it, but the rights holders make the money. Win win.

I wonder why sports leagues can't just have a vault/on demand network.

You can have every game from every season (slowly, as it will take time to upload it all, but they could definitely start with recent years and work their way backwards through time).

Even include it with a subscription to their current streaming stuff (MLB TV, NBA League pass etc.) for a slightly extra cost.

And long term, hope someone wants to buy it. WWE pulled in crazy money from NBC to buy their network and combine it with their Peacock streaming service. If NBA for instance did it, could NBC have interest in paying for it being part of Peacock? Or does Disney+ try getting in on it?

[VDusen04]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

Thats that's something I've always felt about things on YouTube. If someone's uploading a show or a game on YouTube that you can't get anywhere else (in TV show cases, you can't get it outside of Ebay or some similar means) then it should be fair game. How can you get mad at someone uploading a show on YouTube when you're not even making money on it to begin with? I don't understand YouTube monetization, but if you're the rights holder to footage, instead of flagging a video for removal, why not allow those companies to make money off it. Let users upload it, but the rights holders make the money. Win win.

I wonder why sports leagues can't just have a vault/on demand network.

As it currently stands, the NBA does profit from user uploads. I've uploaded a few NBA clips over the years and what I usually get is a notification that the NBA has claimed copyright but that I've done nothing wrong and my video is still playable. It just means, even though my account is not personally monetized, that the NBA will run ads before the videos they claim. I always thought that seemed like a fair compromise. People get to share the game, the league gets to profit off of it.

Regarding the vault on demand, I've sort of wondered whether that may be what's led to so many full length game channels getting shut down. Maybe it's a precursor to the NBA finally putting their vault to work (and they do, indeed, have a vault). Maybe an NBA+ classic game subscription is coming down the pipe at some point. If so, you'd hope they'd at least keep highlights alive on YouTube, even if full games get the axe.

On the other hand, if they're not planning on any kind of vault service, it'd be a major bummer to lose YouTube access when there's nowhere else to turn.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

If we don’t have one now, I honestly wouldn’t expect to see one at all.

That’s the one thing they dropped the ball on(along with their NBA Films Library)while their main competitor(NFL)adopted that years ago.

[TheShizNo1]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

If we don’t have one now, I honestly wouldn’t expect to see one at all.

That’s the one thing they dropped the ball on(along with their NBA Films Library)while their main competitor(NFL)adopted that years ago.

First world problems and I know I'm being entitled..... but how the **** is there not an app for every sports league that has every previous game on demand?

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[The 24th Letter]

NBA Off Topic Thread

Don’t think it’s quite out of the picture yet

Hearing Goddell playing with the idea of leaving Direct TV and starting a NFL Streaming service, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if the NBA followed suit.

[King_B_Mack]

Re: NBA Off Topic Thread

NFL already has the beginning of this. I have Game Pass and you can go back and watch every preseason, regular season, playoff and Pro Bowl game for every team all the way back to 2009. Not sure why it doesn't go back further than that though considering I've subscribed to GP for like 2 or 3 years now and it's always been stuck at 2009

I have no doubt the leagues could get themselves a very fat check from a streaming partner to carry they're game libraries ala Peacock and the WWE Network. Even if they launched a service themselves the way WWE started, they could make a ton on subscribers for that content. Especially the NFL with the access to the All 22 cam you get out of GP.