Solving the new NBA's problems

[True Lakers Fan]

STFU doofuss

You shut the fuck up Faggot

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Yes, but everybody knows that fans who want their team to win 11 titles in a row exist. Why do you think the Lakers and Yankees have such big fan bases?

But other fans exist too.

Part of the charm of being a Clippers fan, for instance, is that you're kind of rooting for the underdog. If the Clippers won 8 titles in a row, well then, that charm is gone.

If Gonzaga becomes Duke and starts winning title after title by 20 point margins, then part of the charm of being a Gonzaga fan is gone.

If you can't see it, you can't see it. But it exists and it's prevalent.

As far as other fans exist: I don't give a shit about them - I care about my team and I want your team to lose for the next 30 years no matter what.

If Gonzaga starts winning by 20 points - prompts to them - its up to other teams to figure out how to stop them - it's called free market enterprise

Part of the Charm of being a Clippers Fan - Sorry I don't see any at all. To me that's like some one picking up a dog turd and liking it.

 

[msgkings322]

Yes, but everybody knows that fans who want their team to win 11 titles in a row exist. Why do you think the Lakers and Yankees have such big fan bases?

But other fans exist too.

Part of the charm of being a Clippers fan, for instance, is that you're kind of rooting for the underdog. If the Clippers won 8 titles in a row, well then, that charm is gone.

If Gonzaga becomes Duke and starts winning title after title by 20 point margins, then part of the charm of being a Gonzaga fan is gone.

If you can't see it, you can't see it. But it exists and it's prevalent.

Of course it exists. If you are a fan of a team that never wins that's part of the fun. Like Cub fans before 2016. But let's be real, it's even more fun if your team wins.

 

[msgkings322]

the 60's? lol....in the 60's there were how many teams? And anyway- i am a browns fan- if ia start talking about their championships in the 60's, MORE THAN 50 years i ago- i start looking like a real asshole.

This year the only 2 teams that had any kind of real chance over 5% to win the Finals were the Rockets and Warriors

Last year the only 2 teams that had any kind of chance to win were the Warriors and Cavs

the year before the only 2 teams that had any real chance of winning were the Warriors and the Cavs..............thats 6 teams over 3 years. That has never happened before.

nexct year the only team with a real chance ot win the Finals is the Warriors.

over a 4 year stretch- you have the Warriors- the 17/18 Rockets and the 16/17 Cavs and the 15-16 Cavs as the only teams that could have won a title.

In a league with 30 teams that is just crazy.

While there are some comparisons- and some that go WAY back to irrelevance and a totally different league- there is nothing that has compared to right now.



Has the NBA ever known on July 4th who will win the title the following year? I dont think so.

For most of the 1990s we knew who was winning the title on July 4.

As I said previously, out of 73 NBA championships I think only 14 franchises have ever won one.

I'm not saying it's ideal for a team to be so dominant, but it's not unusual. And the Warriors time will end at some point, maybe sooner than people think

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Of course it exists. If you are a fan of a team that never wins that's part of the fun. Like Cub fans before 2016. But let's be real, it's even more fun if your team wins.

So you're saying that the fans of the Clippers enjoys seeing their team lose year after year?

 

[msgkings322]

So you're saying that the fans of the Clippers enjoys seeing their team lose year after year?

No.

 

[trojanfan12]

the 60's? lol....in the 60's there were how many teams? And anyway- i am a browns fan- if ia start talking about their championships in the 60's, MORE THAN 50 years i ago- i start looking like a real asshole.

This year the only 2 teams that had any kind of real chance over 5% to win the Finals were the Rockets and Warriors

Last year the only 2 teams that had any kind of chance to win were the Warriors and Cavs

the year before the only 2 teams that had any real chance of winning were the Warriors and the Cavs..............thats 6 teams over 3 years. That has never happened before.

nexct year the only team with a real chance ot win the Finals is the Warriors.

over a 4 year stretch- you have the Warriors- the 17/18 Rockets and the 16/17 Cavs and the 15-16 Cavs as the only teams that could have won a title.

In a league with 30 teams that is just crazy.

While there are some comparisons- and some that go WAY back to irrelevance and a totally different league- there is nothing that has compared to right now.



Has the NBA ever known on July 4th who will win the title the following year? I dont think so.

Try and spin it how you want. You made an incorrect statement and I showed it.

The fact is you were wrong and as usual, don't want to admit it. Even though you claim you always do.

 

[trojanfan12]

I totally agree with that--- you cannot blame the Warriors one bit- they are just operating within the system- however with these results its clear that something in the system is not operating correctly.

I disagree. This is a one off situation created by some very smart drafting (and a little luck) plus some incredible luck when it comes to timing.

Absolutely no reason to change anything. The system isn't broken or working incorrectly. It's working exactly as it's supposed to. The Warriors were just a combination of smart and lucky.

Funny that I don't recall you claiming that the system wasn't operating correctly when the Cavs were making the finals 4 times in a row.

In fact, you were telling us all what a great time it was to be a Cavs fan.

 

[trojanfan12]

I just said different kind of fans exist. People are coming out and telling me no fan would not want this team to win 10 titles in a row. And yes, there are...

Lol. I've been following sports since 1970. You are literally the only fan that I've ever heard say they wouldn't want their team winning every year.

So I guess that means there are die-hard fans, bandwagon fans, player fans and you.

 

[jontaejones]

Lol. I've been following sports since 1970. You are literally the only fan that I've ever heard say they wouldn't want their team winning every year.

So I guess that means there are die-hard fans, bandwagon fans, player fans and you.

Don't be silly. It's not odd. If you won the championship every year, it wouldn't be special.

Example. When the Yankees win again (and they will), it will be special for them, cuz its been a while.

 

[SJ76]

this boogie cousins thing for 5 million has me on the edge of no longer watching the nba. I'm far from alone. something needs to be done to address this. I have a couple of ideas:

1 - assign players a rating system, perhaps using something similar to VORP. assign a "ranking" to players, maybe in tiers, and you are allowed only so many tier guys per team. something to that effect. take contracts out of it...and use a ranking system. keep a cap so to speak, but revenue sharing like MLB.

2 - perhaps set a market value "bottom" for every player, based on the above. you're not allowed to sign for less than your low end market value.

3 - just let 4 teams run the NBA, and let guys take below market value deals just to fit on a team of stars.


4 - i start watching the WNBA and cry while i punch myself in the nuts.

I don’t watch the NBA hardly at all. Usually catch the finals and a few games here and there.

I said it in another thread:
The gap between the best team and worst team in the NBA reminds me of college football. I don’t see a professional sport with that big of gap anywhere else.

 

[SJ76]

What’s really gay about Boogie is the GSWs without him are fine. They just signed him so he wouldn’t go to LA just in case in he plays lights out.

 

[tducey]

I don't like it either and agree something has to be done (Don't know what though). I expect this to be a bone of contention in the next CBA negotiations. Something's got to give as it relates to these super teams.

 

[WiggyRuss]

Try and spin it how you want. You made an incorrect statement and I showed it.

The fact is you were wrong and as usual, don't want to admit it. Even though you claim you always do.

i think more people think like i do then you do about this

and the 60's


LOL


and like i said

no teams had ever faced eachother 3 times in a Finals...

The Cavs and Warriors just did it for 4 straight years


you can tell me how other teams got close- but all close ends up being is another word for they didnt.

 

[WiggyRuss]

For most of the 1990s we knew who was winning the title on July 4.

As I said previously, out of 73 NBA championships I think only 14 franchises have ever won one.

I'm not saying it's ideal for a team to be so dominant, but it's not unusual. And the Warriors time will end at some point, maybe sooner than people think

as predictable as the NBA has been, right now we have nver had this level of predictability.

Isnt it bonkers to you that we just had 2 teams matchup for 4 straight years in the Finals, when before that, it had never even happened 3 times in a row?

AS Warriors and Cavs fans (especially as Warriors fans) - we arent going to argue with that- but i cant say i think its good for the actual league.

One of the main selling points about pro football is that just about anyone can win. Sure- yo uhave your dynasties like the Patriots, but did anyone expect the Eagles to win the Super Bowl before the year started? What were they before the year started? like 10-1 to win the title? If that?

The Warriors are what? you probably have to lay at least 1-3 odds right?


A ton of things came together to make this---- A. good management, B. the cap spike, C. the union refusing to allow for a "smoothing mechanism", D. Durant being a cupcake, E. The Greatness of LeBron, F. Steph Curry going from injury risk to top 20 player ever, G. Adam Silver being a bitch, H. Cousins injury, - and i am sure the list can go on and on

 

[wood20ks]

this boogie cousins thing for 5 million has me on the edge of no longer watching the nba. I'm far from alone. something needs to be done to address this. I have a couple of ideas:

1 - assign players a rating system, perhaps using something similar to VORP. assign a "ranking" to players, maybe in tiers, and you are allowed only so many tier guys per team. something to that effect. take contracts out of it...and use a ranking system. keep a cap so to speak, but revenue sharing like MLB.

2 - perhaps set a market value "bottom" for every player, based on the above. you're not allowed to sign for less than your low end market value.

3 - just let 4 teams run the NBA, and let guys take below market value deals just to fit on a team of stars.


4 - i start watching the WNBA and cry while i punch myself in the nuts.

Have not watched since MJ retired...…..And yeah,the league is ridiculously dumb.

Fuck LeBron and the NBA...….

 

[The Q]

The MLB PA is even stronger. Seems to work just fine for baseball.

Great article about how we got where we are..

Don’t Hate the Warriors, Hate the System That Allowed Them to Happen

The NBA PA, IMO, screwed up because it got greedy.

They screwed up by not letting the owners save money for x number of years?

 

[WiggyRuss]

They screwed up by not letting the owners save money for x number of years?

yah in the NFL you can roll un used cap space over....thats kind of interesting but makes it super complicated in some ways



i think doing what i siad would help--- one "Super Max" deal per team- that only counts as the "max" against the salary cap of say like 35M or whatever--- but you can actually pay as much as a 100 million

so that way- if Curry is Golden STates "Super Maximum Player"- he can get paid, say a contract of 4 years 200 million---- 50M a year.....but only 35 counts against the cap

then say GSW could only offer Durant a "max" of 35M a year----- but say the Kings could offer him 4 years 240 M- or 60M a year- but only 35 of it counts against the cap.


its a lot easier to turn down a 10 million a year then it is to turn down 25M a year......

that would at least spread the elite talent around a little more.....it would be a very very good deterrent against top 15 guys playing together.

they would ahve to sacrifice a LOT more money to do so.

 

[GNG]

For most of the 1990s we knew who was winning the title on July 4.

As I said previously, out of 73 NBA championships I think only 14 franchises have ever won one.

I'm not saying it's ideal for a team to be so dominant, but it's not unusual. And the Warriors time will end at some point, maybe sooner than people think

Maybe by 2020.

 

[GNG]

They screwed up by not letting the owners save money for x number of years?

The owners love to throw money away.