2022-2023 NBA Season Thread

[The Q]

Does everyone have their 1st game excuses ready in case of a loss?

How many injuries am I allowed to use?

 

[Stakesarehigh]

Does everyone have their 1st game excuses ready in case of a loss?

Marvin Bagley injury

 

[shopson67]

Does everyone have their 1st game excuses ready in case of a loss?

Yep, Westbrook is still a Laker. That one unfortunately may be an excuse for a while lol....

 

[bksballer89]

Does everyone have their 1st game excuses ready in case of a loss?

Conference finals hangover

 

[bksballer89]

 

[trojanfan12]

Yeah maybe, but I still think realistically the only way anything gets approved is if it lets the smaller markets offer something that the larger markets can’t.

No way to do that and not risk all kinds of issues.

Who/what defines a "small market"? Are the Warriors small market? They get treated like they are.

Are the Suns a small market? They used to be. But with the growth in Phoenix, are they?

What about the Clippers under Sterling? They were run like a small market team and despite being in L.A., I think that's how most viewed them.

Also, if small markets are at such a disadvantage, how do you explain the rise of the Warriors, Cavs, Raps and Bucks?

I think the biggest issue is ownership and their willingness to spend. That certainly seems to have been the case in Cleveland and Golden State.

And if ownership is the biggest issue, that is what would need to be addressed.

 

[thunderc]

No way to do that and not risk all kinds of issues.

Who/what defines a "small market"? Are the Warriors small market? They get treated like they are.

Are the Suns a small market? They used to be. But with the growth in Phoenix, are they?

What about the Clippers under Sterling? They were run like a small market team and despite being in L.A., I think that's how most viewed them.

Also, if small markets are at such a disadvantage, how do you explain the rise of the Warriors, Cavs, Raps and Bucks?

I think the biggest issue is ownership and their willingness to spend. That certainly seems to have been the case in Cleveland and Golden State.

And if ownership is the biggest issue, that is what would need to be addressed.

Well the Bucks are certainly no mystery. No concessions will be given to the Warriors and there won’t be any changes I don’t think.

 

[msgkings322]

Well the Bucks are certainly no mystery. No concessions will be given to the Warriors and there won’t be any changes I don’t think.

The idea would be to make changes for all teams to have relief signing their homegrown players not just the Warriors.

 

[thunderc]

The idea would be to make changes for all teams to have relief signing their homegrown players not just the Warriors.

I get it, just don’t see how it happens.

 

[msgkings322]

I get it, just don’t see how it happens.

The players should be on board, so it would depend on how many owners want it.

 

[trojanfan12]

Well the Bucks are certainly no mystery. No concessions will be given to the Warriors and there won’t be any changes I don’t think.

Well, there can't be any concessions given. It's a CBA issue and would have to be negotiated into the next one.

If what some others have said is true and most owners are wanting to make even harsher penalties (which seems very shortsighted), there would be an uphill battle. It would also show that owners are more of a problem than anything else.

 

[thunderc]

The players should be on board, so it would depend on how many owners want it.

Yeah that’s what I mean. Owners as a group are not going to sign on to something that in the end will only benefit large market teams. We can say that all teams can take advantage all we want but economics affects some more than others and there has be be real incentive for players to stay put for it to work for small market teams.. The hen is out of the hen house at this point. I like it in theory, let’s just kill free agency and let the smartest teams benefit.

 

[thunderc]

Well, there can't be any concessions given. It's a CBA issue and would have to be negotiated into the next one.

If what some others have said is true and most owners are wanting to make even harsher penalties (which seems very shortsighted), there would be an uphill battle. It would also show that owners are more of a problem than anything else.

Bingo. I don’t call the owners a problem though, it’s their investment.

 

[msgkings322]

Yeah that’s what I mean. Owners as a group are not going to sign on to something that in the end will only benefit large market teams. We can say that all teams can take advantage all we want but economics affects some more than others and their has be be real incentive for players to stay put for it to work for small market teams..

That's the point, the incentive would be homegrown players could be offered more money to stay.

The hen is out of the hen house at this point. I like it in theory, let’s just kill free agency and let the smartest teams benefit.

Kill free agency? What the heck?

 

[thunderc]

That's the point, the incentive would be homegrown players could be offered more money to stay.

Kill free agency? What the heck?

Hey, as long as we are talking pie in the sky.

 

[msgkings322]

Hey, as long as we are talking pie in the sky.

We aren't, but you really don't think free agency should be a thing?

 

[thunderc]

We aren't, but you really don't think free agency should be a thing?

Obviously we aren’t going back to that. But having it doesn’t benefit small market teams really. And I do think the NBA has gone way overboard giving players control. Is what it is, just my opinion.

 

[trojanfan12]

Bingo. I don’t call the owners a problem though, it’s their investment.

It's a problem from a fans perspective because fans want their teams to win and winning costs money.

Obviously, it's the owner's investment and they can more or less do what they want with it...

but if an owner can't/won't spend...they are the problem.

 

[The Q]

The idea would be to make changes for all teams to have relief signing their homegrown players not just the Warriors.

I'm not sure you can write it off entirely.

But at least maybe these supermax deals getting treated like regular max deals (i.e. rookie extensions) would be a good start.

some kind of relief so paying the tax (or even getting to avoid it from smaller teams) makes sense if the NBA really cares about letting smaller market teams be able to afford to not just keep their guys, but keep them happy by being able to have more cash to build a supporting cast around them.

 

[trojanfan12]

Yeah that’s what I mean. Owners as a group are not going to sign on to something that in the end will only benefit large market teams. We can say that all teams can take advantage all we want but economics affects some more than others and there has be be real incentive for players to stay put for it to work for small market teams.. The hen is out of the hen house at this point. I like it in theory, let’s just kill free agency and let the smartest teams benefit.

It doesn't just benefit large teams though.

For example...the Lakers would be taking full taxes on the vast majority of players on their roster including Lebron and AD. So this would do very little to help them other than maybe allow them a little more to offer an FA that they would still be paying full tax on.

Meanwhile, teams like the Cavs or maybe your Thunder in a few years could use the money saved on their own core players to add an difference making FA or 2 and become true contenders.