NBA Competitive Balance: Numbers Prove Spending Matters

The most interesting part to me:

"The point for fans is this: The players are opposed to limits on team spending even though the players as a group are guaranteed to always get their share of total revenue.
(...)
Individual players might be losers in that scenario but other players would also benefit. Once the BRI agreement was reached, it stopped being about player vs. owner and become player vs. player."

I'm not sure if the rank and file truelly realise this.

6 months ago Dutch Hoopfan 3 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I think they do

They still want to play where they want AND get paid a salary they feel is appropriate.

The SBN Arizona piece still doesn’t mention the impact of superstars which some of the “more payroll doesn’t mena more wins” camp will point out. However, putting one superstar with aton of scrubs is not as good as one superstar with a core of average and above average players. Even on a “one man team”, his teammates still must complement his skill set and fill in his weaknesses. So even with LeBron on the Wizards (if he were on our team), we’d need some guys who can score, who can rebound, defend on the perimeter and in the low post and guys who can grab his lob passes for easy dunks and his passes for easy open shots.

by thewiz06 on Nov 21, 2011 2:45 PM EST reply actions

But here is a wrinkle into what I just wrote

With all the bad teams in the NBA that aren’t spending, here’s the question:

Are these teams bad and not spending because they just want to pocket change (like what people think of Don Sterling), or because they know that they aren’t going to be contending for the playoffs anyway (like us last year), or is it because they know that they’re not going to be able to spend a fair dollar for the right free agent unless they overpay him grossly?

by thewiz06 on Nov 21, 2011 3:01 PM EST up reply actions

It's a factor among other factors

One could say that good teams regularly have good players in their prime. Good players in their prime regularly aren’t on cheap rookie deals anymore so thát might actually explain the correlation between winning and having a high payroll.

Good players in their prime cost a lot and finding average to above average players to support them cost average to above average money.

Good decision making and a good deal of luck are important factors too. You might be lucky and good enough to draft complementary pieces in the mid to late first round of the draft. You can be lucky or unlucky with the available FA class in a vital summer of your building process and even then you can sign the wrong player (Boozer anyone?). You can suffer severe injuries to a star or a supporting cast player (s) and see your window of opportunity slowly close on you as time passes.

Luck and good management (in that order) are the most important determinants of success in the NBA. The money in and of itself does nothing. But, as with everything in live, it makes it a lot easier!

by Dutch Hoopfan on Nov 21, 2011 5:47 PM EST up reply actions