Don't Overlook the Brooklyn Nets as a 2019 FA Destination

[msgkings322]

New York and LA are in their own category when it comes to market size and the influence of their markets.

I guess, sure. So really it's small markets, medium markets, big markets, and two special super-markets

 

[flyerhawk]

I guess, sure. So really it's small markets, medium markets, big markets, and two special super-markets

I would argue it is basically 3 groups. Mega-markets(NY,LA), regular markets(most teams), small markets(Orlando, Portland, Minny, New Orleans).

 

[jontaejones]

Pretty much this. Unless someone like KD pulls a Lebron and decides that the lure of the Broadway light(well the bright lights of Atlantic Avenue anyway) is too great and he wants to finish his career in a big market, I don't see the Nets being a serious player for the big name FAs.

I would say that with the internet and the explosion of Cable TV that playing a big market like NYC has lost some if not a lot of appeal.

Also, consider that NYC is not the basketball mecca that it was once considered.

Markets are based mainly on TV shares, I believe.

NYC would still be a desirable place to live for a young famous person with disposable income, but Miami, Orlando, and Oakland could be just as desirable based on preference.

The bottom line is Nets and Knicks have lost most of the advantages they used to have (and they were never able to capitalize on them when they had them).

 

[flyerhawk]

I would say that with the internet and the explosion of Cable TV that playing a big market like NYC has lost some if not a lot of appeal.

Also, consider that NYC is not the basketball mecca that it was once considered.

Markets are based mainly on TV shares, I believe.

NYC would still be a desirable place to live for a young famous person with disposable income, but Miami, Orlando, and Oakland could be just as desirable based on preference.

The bottom line is Nets and Knicks have lost most of the advantages they used to have (and they were never able to capitalize on them when they had them).

I largely agree in that I don't think that LA or NY can simply lure players because of where they are. Lebron wanted to go to LA but he doesn't go to the Lakers if Buss is still running the show.

Most players care primarily about 2 things. Winning and money. Market size is, at best, a tie breaker for most players.

 

[Rockinkuwait]

I largely agree in that I don't think that LA or NY can simply lure players because of where they are. Lebron wanted to go to LA but he doesn't go to the Lakers if Buss is still running the show.

Most players care primarily about 2 things. Winning and money. Market size is, at best, a tie breaker for most players.

To a point. I mean Shaq went to LA for market size and money, wanted to be the first big man to be a major endorsement guy. Worked out really well for him. Kareem went to a bad LA team because he wanted to be in that bigger market.

Lebron isn't going to the Lakers if they are still the Minneapolis Lakers. I think for the NBA winning can be anywhere (heck it was in Cleveland recently), just get a few stars together and you have that. And market size to a point is money. Lebron's Space Jam 2, and TV shows getting picked up will help him financially.

But then you see the Clippers and Nets in those same markets not doing well historically, not getting those big names too often.

I would say it is a combination.

 

[Rockinkuwait]

I would say that with the internet and the explosion of Cable TV that playing a big market like NYC has lost some if not a lot of appeal.

Also, consider that NYC is not the basketball mecca that it was once considered.

Markets are based mainly on TV shares, I believe.

NYC would still be a desirable place to live for a young famous person with disposable income, but Miami, Orlando, and Oakland could be just as desirable based on preference.

The bottom line is Nets and Knicks have lost most of the advantages they used to have (and they were never able to capitalize on them when they had them).

Well some of them. I mean Melo wanted to go there. Stoudemire wanted to go there, lots of good FA's have wanted to go there, they've just had a crap basketball operation running for a while now.

I do wonder if that being able to market yourself anywhere has cut back on the edge that it gives a player when compared to Miami with no state tax. And NY you have the state, and possibly city tax if you live there.

 

[tlance]

I would say that with the internet and the explosion of Cable TV that playing a big market like NYC has lost some if not a lot of appeal.

Also, consider that NYC is not the basketball mecca that it was once considered.

Markets are based mainly on TV shares, I believe.

NYC would still be a desirable place to live for a young famous person with disposable income, but Miami, Orlando, and Oakland could be just as desirable based on preference.

The bottom line is Nets and Knicks have lost most of the advantages they used to have (and they were never able to capitalize on them when they had them).

It has lost some of the appeal. I can agree with.

The biggest advantage today is lifestyle. All other things equal, how many wealthy 28 year old men are going to choose living a city like Milwaukee over a city like New York, LA, or Miami?

 

[trojanfan12]

I largely agree in that I don't think that LA or NY can simply lure players because of where they are. Lebron wanted to go to LA but he doesn't go to the Lakers if Buss is still running the show.

Most players care primarily about 2 things. Winning and money. Market size is, at best, a tie breaker for most players.

^^^This^^^

All things being equal, or close to it, most players are going to pick the bigger market.

But the days of, for example, the Lakers being able to sit down with a player and say "We're the Lakers, this is LA, here's the contract, sign here" are over.

When Short Buss was running things, it was the Lakers name that got them meetings, but his incompetence and the on court product kept them from being taken seriously.

 

[trojanfan12]

To a point. I mean Shaq went to LA for market size and money, wanted to be the first big man to be a major endorsement guy. Worked out really well for him. Kareem went to a bad LA team because he wanted to be in that bigger market.

Lebron isn't going to the Lakers if they are still the Minneapolis Lakers. I think for the NBA winning can be anywhere (heck it was in Cleveland recently), just get a few stars together and you have that. And market size to a point is money. Lebron's Space Jam 2, and TV shows getting picked up will help him financially.

But then you see the Clippers and Nets in those same markets not doing well historically, not getting those big names too often.

I would say it is a combination.

All of this is true.

However, when Kareem came to the Lakers, market size was far more important and the NBA was barely getting noticed.

When Shaq came to the Lakers, they were a playoff team and Dr. Buss was running the show.

As @flyerhawk pointed out, if Short Buss was still running things, no way Lebron is in LA right now...unless he wanted to be a Clipper.