NBA OFF TOPIC THREAD

[Shanemansj13]

Then maybe those teams need to move or get ownership that can spend. Teams like Tampa, Pittsburgh, and Toronto have all been to and won the World Series.

They just have to do it a little differently and can't sustain it for more than 2-3 seasons at a time.

I was a die-hard Rams fan through the Georgia Frontiere and John Shaw years. Until the snake eating bitch decided to tank the team so she could move it...they would put teams together who could compete, but would never spend to get that final piece or 2 that would give them a real chance at getting past teams like the 49ers and Cowboys and into the Super Bowl.

I never got mad at the 49ers or Cowboys...I got mad at her and John Shaw for not doing everything they could.

Get ownership to spend? what? For example, Cleveland is not moving and location really isn't the problem but like Stakes said if ownership is not willing to spend it kills their chances to compete with teams spending 5x every year. The owner is in control, I am not sure how you get ownership to spend if they have been cheap for 20 years. You have to wait for some rich billionaire to come in and take control or for the owner to die.
For those small market teams to compete they have to do everything right and that is just for a small window and maybe one shot at a title. They need a great farm system and scouting, they need to develop those players and pay some but then turn them into multiple young assets and then develop those guys, a good manager and maybe a couple FA's or pay those guys you develop. Even if they do all those things they have to go through the playoffs gauntlet against teams spending $200M+. Pipeline dream but possible, very slim.

This isn't saying the teams spending are ruining the sport but I think a floor needs established, maybe a ceiling at some point but I don't realistically seeing that happen. At least a floor makes the lower spending teams spend and if they can't-ownership should sell-they will be forced to eventually. This seems more realistic imo

 

[fightinfunbags]

Stating the obvious, but the Saints need to find a way to get a QB. Even if Carr were playing well, he's not the guy who's going to get them over the hump.

Problem is, they are good enough everywhere else that it seems their only shot at getting the QB they need is going to have to be through FA or finding the next Brock Purdy.

They seem stuck in that 7-8 seed hell that we talk about NBA teams trying to avoid.

More so than a QB change, I think they need regime change. I’m not a Carr fan but he can give competent QB play if they get a solid offensive head coach.

 

[fightinfunbags]

The Rays were just in the World Series a couple of seasons ago.

If teams can't keep up with changing economics, maybe it's time to do as @fightinfunbags suggested and cut some teams loose. Teams shouldn't have to hold themselves back just because others can't compete financially.

Or, if revenue sharing isn't a thing, maybe MLB should look at doing it.

Beware. I’m a fucking idiot. Agreeing with me can take a toll.

 

[shopson67]

baseball won't do it but you also have to think if we retract say...the As do those fans root for the Giants or Dodgers or do they more likely give up on baseball for good? The latter is more likely.

There is that subset of fans that embrace struggling franchises as a badge of honor.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

They don’t HAVE to be. They choose to be. A salary floor with the current tax structure for the big spenders should be the reform. Stay away from a salary cap. The big markets drive the sport. They should have the ability (should they choose) to gather star studded rosters that people will gravitate to with attendance at the park and TV ratings that drive contracts. To that end, baseball is the only sport that does things right in this regard. Does the world deserve situations with the Tampa Bay Bucs celebrating a Super Bowl parade by taking laps through their stadium parking lot in front of a meager 70k people? That franchise gets overrun by visiting fans in their own stadium. Why rig the game for franchises like that to compete? Those fans don’t deserve nice things.

you're looking at this entirely through that lens and not the health of the sport. I'd argue the NBA does it best in allowing teams to spend to their market all the while maintaining a healthy economic environment.

 

[fightinfunbags]

baseball won't do it but you also have to think if we retract say...the As do those fans root for the Giants or Dodgers or do they more likely give up on baseball for good? The latter is more likely.

Solid point. I think if they like baseball they will adapt. It will be tough though to bring along the next generation of fan.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

There is that subset of fans that embrace struggling franchises as a badge of honor.

As someone who had their team move (Browns) you can't just latch onto to another team and it feel the same.

 

[trojanfan12]

baseball won't do it but you also have to think if we retract say...the As do those fans root for the Giants or Dodgers or do they more likely give up on baseball for good? The latter is more likely.

Maybe. Or, maybe the sport becomes healthier having "trimmed the fat".

But yeah, not really worth discussing because it would take some kind of huge issue for MLB to ever seriously consider it.

And I honestly can't think of anything huge enough to get them to consider it.

 

[fightinfunbags]

Get ownership to spend? what? For example, Cleveland is not moving and location really isn't the problem but like Stakes said if ownership is not willing to spend it kills their chances to compete with teams spending 5x every year. The owner is in control, I am not sure how you get ownership to spend if they have been cheap for 20 years. You have to wait for some rich billionaire to come in and take control or for the owner to die.
For those small market teams to compete they have to do everything right and that is just for a small window and maybe one shot at a title. They need a great farm system and scouting, they need to develop those players and pay some but then turn them into multiple young assets and then develop those guys, a good manager and maybe a couple FA's or pay those guys you develop. Even if they do all those things they have to go through the playoffs gauntlet against teams spending $200M+. Pipeline dream but possible, very slim.

This isn't saying the teams spending are ruining the sport but I think a floor needs established, maybe a ceiling at some point but I don't realistically seeing that happen. At least a floor makes the lower spending teams spend and if they can't-ownership should sell-they will be forced to eventually. This seems more realistic imo

More so than maybe any other franchise, the Guardians would benefit from a salary floor. They can get rewarded for their great work at development but now instead of preparing those guys to play their prime in other cities like Lindor they can keep that player and still be driven by their player development. They can’t keep all the talent and will still be savvy in who they keep and who they trade. I think they take the easy way out in sports now. I don’t even think it’s about being cheap. If the plan is pretty much use a young asset until you trade him in every case they will struggle to win big but also avoid that criticism in getting a projection wrong and getting the wrong guy to commit to while watching another guy go elsewhere and succeed. It’s the pussy’s way out.

 

[shopson67]

As someone who had their team move (Browns) you can't just latch onto to another team and it feel the same.

I dealt with it with the Rams, but at least they kept their franchise name and ultimately returned back to where they belong. As a fan 3000 miles away from LA anyway, the impact was of course less (other than trying to remember to say St Louis for that era).

I've never changed my teams, just added the Rams to the mix when I was 9.

 

[The Q]

I often see this with politics and some of the garbage GED toting MAGA tools. They always scream Facts Facts Facts. The problem is never the facts. It’s the conclusions drawn from the facts. You are citing a 38-30 head to head record with zero context. That’s a fact. The problem is the attempt to draw the conclusion that this means AFC > NFC. The fact and the conclusion don’t match up at all. It’s piss poor analysis that’s oversimplified and taken from the individual context of 68 football games.

No, they really don’t. The top 7 in each conference is what matters because we are talking playoff football.

You spelled liberals wrong

 

[The Q]

As someone who had their team move (Browns) you can't just latch onto to another team and it feel the same.

After the whalers left I rooted for individual players for probably a decade before finding myself rooting more for the bruins (Patrick Roy and Ray Bourque were two of my faves)

I debated jumping to Vegas or Seattle when they came out because I never had a strong bruins connections besides them being the same city as the Sox

But the reality is I just don’t watch enough hockey to care

I just watch the offs lol

 

[DJ Fieri]

I don't get this mindset.

The job of ownership is to do whatever they can, within the rules, to put the best team they can on the field.

Are teams supposed to not spend what they can because some other team can't spend as much?

Or is there some rule the Dodgers are breaking that I'm not aware of?

Exactly.

 

[Shanemansj13]

More so than maybe any other franchise, the Guardians would benefit from a salary floor. They can get rewarded for their great work at development but now instead of preparing those guys to play their prime in other cities like Lindor they can keep that player and still be driven by their player development. They can’t keep all the talent and will still be savvy in who they keep and who they trade. I think they take the easy way out in sports now. I don’t even think it’s about being cheap. If the plan is pretty much use a young asset until you trade him in every case they will struggle to win big but also avoid that criticism in getting a projection wrong and getting the wrong guy to commit to while watching another guy go elsewhere and succeed. It’s the pussy’s way out.

Agree, this is why I think a floor is the most reasonable solution. Plus I don't think a cap or ceiling is realistic. This will force these cheap owners to spend. The Dolans are trash, you buy a franchise and then don't spend. They spent in the 90's but it was just different back then and now with the lack of tv deals they won't spend at all.
If they do move to a floor, I would think they need some sort of majority from owners? Why would the rich owners agree to this if they can spend more, cheap owners don't want to spend so I am not sure how that will work either.

 

[trojanfan12]

Get ownership to spend? what? For example, Cleveland is not moving and location really isn't the problem but like Stakes said if ownership is not willing to spend it kills their chances to compete with teams spending 5x every year. The owner is in control, I am not sure how you get ownership to spend if they have been cheap for 20 years. You have to wait for some rich billionaire to come in and take control or for the owner to die.
For those small market teams to compete they have to do everything right and that is just for a small window and maybe one shot at a title. They need a great farm system and scouting, they need to develop those players and pay some but then turn them into multiple young assets and then develop those guys, a good manager and maybe a couple FA's or pay those guys you develop. Even if they do all those things they have to go through the playoffs gauntlet against teams spending $200M+. Pipeline dream but possible, very slim.

This isn't saying the teams spending are ruining the sport but I think a floor needs established, maybe a ceiling at some point but I don't realistically seeing that happen. At least a floor makes the lower spending teams spend and if they can't-ownership should sell-they will be forced to eventually. This seems more realistic imo

If cheap ownership is the issue, fans can express their displeasure to ownership. People forget that the McCourts once owned the Dodgers. Part of the reason they ended up selling was pressure from fans and local media.

I'm actually a huge fan of a salary floor over a salary cap. If ownership can't/won't spend to the floor, they lose their franchise. Imo, it's a great way to vet prospective owners and weed out cheap ass owners that can spend but won't.

 

[trojanfan12]

Beware. I’m a fucking idiot. Agreeing with me can take a toll.

We'll just chalk it up to the broken clock theory. lol

 

[The Q]

I don't get this mindset.

The job of ownership is to do whatever they can, within the rules, to put the best team they can on the field.

Are teams supposed to not spend what they can because some other team can't spend as much?

Or is there some rule the Dodgers are breaking that I'm not aware of?

Because local revenue isn't shared to the point to flatten out geographical advantages like it's done for the NBA and co.

The reality is the owners should be happier with the current agreement than anyone.

if they had an NBA/NFL style cap, the cap would be like 300m and the FLOOR would be 90% of that.

 

[trojanfan12]

As someone who had their team move (Browns) you can't just latch onto to another team and it feel the same.

True to an extent. I was a die hard Rams fan until they moved. I had about 5 or 6 friends who were also Rams fans. We used to get together for just about every game. They moved, a couple of us chose other teams, a couple stuck with the Rams and a couple just became "football fans" and pull for certain players as opposed to a team.

I definitely miss those days, but I'm also perfectly happy being a Seahawks fan.

 

[Black Adam]

As someone who had their team move (Browns) you can't just latch onto to another team and it feel the same.

My badge, ladies and gents...

 

[trojanfan12]

Because local revenue isn't shared to the point to flatten out geographical advantages like it's done for the NBA and co.

The reality is the owners should be happier with the current agreement than anyone.

if they had an NBA/NFL style cap, the cap would be like 300m and the FLOOR would be 90% of that.

Then the smaller markets should push for it like the NBA did.