D-Will to follow DH12 (forget about him coming to BOS)

[SHAQATTACK]

True....  If the NBA players are going to control which teams have all the talent,  then what do we need owners for or even fans.? Let em get together and entertain each other and see how much money they make.

They can just get together and make up a basketball show like the Globetrotters.

Players are now dictating  who they will play for, the coach they want, the city they want to live , the weather they want, the friends they want to live near, ect ect ...

So , I guess the fans and clubs don't matter to them.  Just so the players have everything they want .

NBA basketball will become manipulated to the point it becomes a joke like NASCAR or Wreslting.

[dtrader]

There is no logical complaint or quarrel one can have with people who work in the same field wanting to work together to reach new heights in that field.

That is an absurd statement, especially given that you somehow consider it logical.

How about any industry or setting that thrives by creating competition?  For instance...sports.  But sports are not some unique exclusion.  You couldn't have a local chowder cook-off if everyone in the town that knew how to make chowder well worked in the same restaurant.

By your logic, why would there be a draft?  Or a salary cap?  Or even a team roster limit?  Those are all restrictions on "people who work in the same field wanting to work together to reach new heights in that field".

To create a league that sells competition requires some limits that balance talent and creates competition.  Problems arise when the parties break those limits, or perhaps in this case the intent of those limits.  Normally it would be called "cheating".

well put.

Two separate things here...people wanting to work together, and people being allowed to work together.  There is no reason to hold it against someone that they wish to work together to reach new heights.  The salary cap, roster limits, etc are NOT restrictions against players "wanting" to work together.  They are restrictions that have the indirect effect of limiting who is likely to work together because of the sacrifices that would become necessary for them to unite....it never changes who "wants" to work together.

The chowder analogy doesnt quite fit either...there wouldnt be any reason to stop local chowder chefs from coming together with the aim to create a winning chowder. If every single chef capable of making chowder was on 1 side there would be an issue, but thats not at all whats being seen in the NBA.

I really dont see any issue with the recent shift in players being more pro active in their destinations.  If Miami (and now NY) have shown anything, it's that nothing guarantees success.  Plus, I think a lot of the people sounding off against it here are just mad because all the stars choosing new spots are leaving us in the cold =/

[KCattheStripe]

If I was one of the ten best in the world at my job, I'd want the ability to choose what city I lived in and with whom I worked.

Quoted for truth.

[KCattheStripe]

There is no logical complaint or quarrel one can have with people who work in the same field wanting to work together to reach new heights in that field.

That is an absurd statement, especially given that you somehow consider it logical.

How about any industry or setting that thrives by creating competition?  For instance...sports.  But sports are not some unique exclusion.  You couldn't have a local chowder cook-off if everyone in the town that knew how to make chowder well worked in the same restaurant.

By your logic, why would there be a draft?  Or a salary cap?  Or even a team roster limit?  Those are all restrictions on "people who work in the same field wanting to work together to reach new heights in that field".

To create a league that sells competition requires some limits that balance talent and creates competition.  Problems arise when the parties break those limits, or perhaps in this case the intent of those limits.  Normally it would be called "cheating".

well put.

Two separate things here...people wanting to work together, and people being allowed to work together.  There is no reason to hold it against someone that they wish to work together to reach new heights.  The salary cap, roster limits, etc are NOT restrictions against players "wanting" to work together.  They are restrictions that have the indirect effect of limiting who is likely to work together because of the sacrifices that would become necessary for them to unite....it never changes who "wants" to work together.

The chowder analogy doesnt quite fit either...there wouldnt be any reason to stop local chowder chefs from coming together with the aim to create a winning chowder. If every single chef capable of making chowder was on 1 side there would be an issue, but thats not at all whats being seen in the NBA.

I really dont see any issue with the recent shift in players being more pro active in their destinations.  If Miami (and now NY) have shown anything, it's that nothing guarantees success.  Plus, I think a lot of the people sounding off against it here are just mad because all the stars choosing new spots are leaving us in the cold =/

[nickagneta]

In the private sector of business company's can't just TELL you where to go to work. When they interview you for a job they lay out the conditions of employment and you can take or leave them. Once employed, the company can promote you or move you to another area of the country, but most companies make it a request or an option on your part. They don't force you.

So this whole, "players should play where the owners tell them to play because they are employees" statement is just off.

As to the statement that grouping star players on just a few teams is bad for the league well, facts like television ratings and sales of merchandise, you know numbers that show the popularity of the league, were never higher than when the Bird/McHale/Parish/DJ Celtics were playing the Magic/Kareem/Worthy/Scott/McAdoo Lakers. Or when the MJ/Pippen/Rodman Bulls were facing the Stockman/Malone Jazz or the Eastern Conference Knicks, Pacers and Piston teams that were stockpiled with stars.

And what brought the NBA back to its most popular state? How about the Rondo/KG/Allen/Pierce Celtics vs the Kobe/Gasol/Bynum/Artest/Fisher Lakers and the LeBron/Wade/Bosh Heat vs the Dirk/Kidd/Marion/Chandler/Terry Mavs.

The NBA has absolutely THRIVED and been at ITS MOST POPULAR state when star players are clustered together on teams and just 4-6 teams have a realistic shot at a title. That has always been how the NBA works best. The NBA is not the NFL where parity is good. That is not their business model for success. So if great players want to attempt to play together and you are one of the lucky owners that can pull it together and get those stars to play in your team, who cares. The players obviously like this and the team owners that get these players to do this like this. And it is proven to be the best way to keep the league at its most popular state.

[Celtics18]

I'm sorry, but the Thunder and the Spurs disprove the theory that small markets can't hang onto marquee players.  It looks like Minnesota is primed to help disprove that theory as well (of course, I'm hoping they don't).