Confirmation that NBA deflation is coming

[housecall]

First off you got to believe this is truth" NBA lossing $400milion.",next the players aren't buying it,so its a problem.

Why do we have to believe that

to put any validity to it

[Andy Jick]

it's always funny that when these CBA contract talks come up every so many years how the financial numbers are always fudged...  i guess the finances are open to interpretation and nobody wants to share in a multi-billion dollar business.

If I were an owner or player, I'd proceed with caution.  These are tough economic times, and nobody likes to hear multi-millionaires whine and complain when they are struggling to pay their own bills.

as society changes, it might not be so willing to forgive-and-forget, and find something else to do with their time and money...

[Hoops]

I don't consider you a racist. I just consider you a grumpy old man before your time.

you don't even know me...  i'm a happily married, father of 4 children who is very happy in life (involved in my church) and in the education field.  i'm not "grumpy"...just don't like what basketball has become.  i LOVE hockey, as i've really gravitated to the sport over the last few years and attend a number of Tampa Bay Lightning games each year (live in a suburb of Tampa).

I was a fan of 80's basketball, and fell in love with Larry Bird...that era of basketball was a joy to watch.  David Stern is trying to appease the younger crowd, and all the while, he's is destroying the game.

that doesn't make me "grumpy" as you presume...i just don't like what's happening.

Glad to hear that you're a happily married family man (so am I). But I'm not sure what that has to do with any of this. I do think there are two different issues here. One, you don't like the hype of the "new" NBA (i.e., the hip-hop music, etc.). I too would prefer to filter out a lot of the noise (music, fake crowd noise, etc.) during games. But overall, I think complaining about the "hip-hop" culture of the NBA is just sour grapes. You're guilty as charged on the grumpy accusation.

But your other issue is the quality of the product on the court. There's no question that some of these guys often lolli-gag through the first 3 quarters. But part of it is that human beings couldn't possibly maintain the intensity you see in a college game for 48 minutes/night and 82 games a year. The season is just too long for that kind of intensity. So, yeah, you have a point. You could call it a flaw in the game - but there's no way you're going to see the league cut the number of games - that's just more revenue lost.

Another thing I will say is that NBA athletes make the game look easy, which can make them seem less intense at times. Yet at the same time, these athletes are capable of athletic feats you don't see anywhere else - that's why it's worth the price of admission, even if they coast some of the time.

Anyhow, I think you have a fair point about the quality/intensity of the games. If that bothers you, fine. Doesn't bother everyone. But your disdain for the hip-hop culture of the league and its marketing seems like a non-starter. But more than anything, your "family-man" line seemed out of place (not out of line or offensive, just out of place).

[PLamb]

First off you got to believe this is truth" NBA lossing $400milion.",next the players aren't buying it,so its a problem.

Why do we have to believe that

to put any validity to it

To give anything validity you have to believe in it

But believing in something doesn't necessarily make it true

I can believe in the Tooth Fairy but that doesn't mean he or she exists

It makes the Tooth Fairy a valid thing but not real

The owners can say they lost $400 million last year but I don't believe them

Does that money include the owners salaries, the appreciation on the sale value of the team, the depreciated value of assets,  etc., etc.

I can't wait to see what the Bobcats sell for

Bob Johnson paid a lot of money to open that franchise and supposedly has lost money every year

Thing is, if he sells that franchise for $400 million, he will have made money, at least I'm pretty sure he will have

We'll see

[Vermont Green]

This is a tough issue because I feel that the players are overpaid and probably the collective salary cost is larger than can be supported by league revenues (or at least it seems reasonable).  On the other hand, it is the owners who keep signing players to these contracts.  I don't know how to get around the argument of whether teams are really loosing money or just using fuzzy math.  It seems to me though that any depreciation would show up on the financial statement and must be audited.  Depreciation is like expiring contracts.  You can say "they are really valuable" but it is what it is.  Depreciation is a loss against something you paid sometime in the past, it is not taking a loss for something you didn't pay for.  For example, you pay for car in year 2009 but you don't charge the whole cost in that year.  You spread it out.  I don't know what they are doing with the depreciation of contracts but it is hard to do much with the fact that they are paying them.

[Andy Jick]

I don't consider you a racist. I just consider you a grumpy old man before your time.

you don't even know me...  i'm a happily married, father of 4 children who is very happy in life (involved in my church) and in the education field.  i'm not "grumpy"...just don't like what basketball has become.  i LOVE hockey, as i've really gravitated to the sport over the last few years and attend a number of Tampa Bay Lightning games each year (live in a suburb of Tampa).

I was a fan of 80's basketball, and fell in love with Larry Bird...that era of basketball was a joy to watch.  David Stern is trying to appease the younger crowd, and all the while, he's is destroying the game.

that doesn't make me "grumpy" as you presume...i just don't like what's happening.

Glad to hear that you're a happily married family man (so am I). But I'm not sure what that has to do with any of this. I do think there are two different issues here. One, you don't like the hype of the "new" NBA (i.e., the hip-hop music, etc.). I too would prefer to filter out a lot of the noise (music, fake crowd noise, etc.) during games. But overall, I think complaining about the "hip-hop" culture of the NBA is just sour grapes. You're guilty as charged on the grumpy accusation.

But your other issue is the quality of the product on the court. There's no question that some of these guys often lolli-gag through the first 3 quarters. But part of it is that human beings couldn't possibly maintain the intensity you see in a college game for 48 minutes/night and 82 games a year. The season is just too long for that kind of intensity. So, yeah, you have a point. You could call it a flaw in the game - but there's no way you're going to see the league cut the number of games - that's just more revenue lost.

Another thing I will say is that NBA athletes make the game look easy, which can make them seem less intense at times. Yet at the same time, these athletes are capable of athletic feats you don't see anywhere else - that's why it's worth the price of admission, even if they coast some of the time.

Anyhow, I think you have a fair point about the quality/intensity of the games. If that bothers you, fine. Doesn't bother everyone. But your disdain for the hip-hop culture of the league and its marketing seems like a non-starter. But more than anything, your "family-man" line seemed out of place (not out of line or offensive, just out of place).

Jackie MacMullen was being interviewed some time back on the radio...it was national, and I can't remember when or what station.  But she said, "The problem with the NBA today, as opposed to years ago, is that most of the teams coast for the first 3 quarters..."  She continued, "There is no real noticeable difference between great teams and bad teams until the 4th quarter...and that's why a number of people don't enjoy watching the game anymore."

She summarized perfectly what a lot of people think about the game today.  And I think that part of the problem is the decline of the college game. 

The problem is that I'm entitled to my opinion, but if my opinion goes against the masses then I get labeled as "a grumpy old man..."  I don't like that at all.  It's the reason I stopped posting here for almost a year because I got tired of the fact that I got ganged up on.  I love the Celtics...I'm allowed to voice my opinion.  I don't go around calling 16 year olds "young disrespectful punks" so I don't appreciate the insinuation either.  I believe the game has declined...and I also believe that Stern had better wake up to this or he's going to be staring at empty arenas in the future.

I don't like loud music being played DURING the game, but during a timeout, you can turn up the volume and rip off the knob for all I care.  that doesn't make me "grumpy" it's just a personal preference.  I don't like having every nba event began with hip hop music, but that's just me...again, that doesn't make me "grumpy" it's just a preference.  Does that make me a terrible person?  Am I not allowed to share my opinion?

well I am, just as long as it agrees with everyone else's, apparently...

[wdleehi]

I don't consider you a racist. I just consider you a grumpy old man before your time.

you don't even know me...  i'm a happily married, father of 4 children who is very happy in life (involved in my church) and in the education field.  i'm not "grumpy"...just don't like what basketball has become.  i LOVE hockey, as i've really gravitated to the sport over the last few years and attend a number of Tampa Bay Lightning games each year (live in a suburb of Tampa).

I was a fan of 80's basketball, and fell in love with Larry Bird...that era of basketball was a joy to watch.  David Stern is trying to appease the younger crowd, and all the while, he's is destroying the game.

that doesn't make me "grumpy" as you presume...i just don't like what's happening.

Glad to hear that you're a happily married family man (so am I). But I'm not sure what that has to do with any of this. I do think there are two different issues here. One, you don't like the hype of the "new" NBA (i.e., the hip-hop music, etc.). I too would prefer to filter out a lot of the noise (music, fake crowd noise, etc.) during games. But overall, I think complaining about the "hip-hop" culture of the NBA is just sour grapes. You're guilty as charged on the grumpy accusation.

But your other issue is the quality of the product on the court. There's no question that some of these guys often lolli-gag through the first 3 quarters. But part of it is that human beings couldn't possibly maintain the intensity you see in a college game for 48 minutes/night and 82 games a year. The season is just too long for that kind of intensity. So, yeah, you have a point. You could call it a flaw in the game - but there's no way you're going to see the league cut the number of games - that's just more revenue lost.

Another thing I will say is that NBA athletes make the game look easy, which can make them seem less intense at times. Yet at the same time, these athletes are capable of athletic feats you don't see anywhere else - that's why it's worth the price of admission, even if they coast some of the time.

Anyhow, I think you have a fair point about the quality/intensity of the games. If that bothers you, fine. Doesn't bother everyone. But your disdain for the hip-hop culture of the league and its marketing seems like a non-starter. But more than anything, your "family-man" line seemed out of place (not out of line or offensive, just out of place).

Jackie MacMullen was being interviewed some time back on the radio...it was national, and I can't remember when or what station.  But she said, "The problem with the NBA today, as opposed to years ago, is that most of the teams coast for the first 3 quarters..."  She continued, "There is no real noticeable difference between great teams and bad teams until the 4th quarter...and that's why a number of people don't enjoy watching the game anymore."

She summarized perfectly what a lot of people think about the game today.  And I think that part of the problem is the decline of the college game. 

The problem is that I'm entitled to my opinion, but if my opinion goes against the masses then I get labeled as "a grumpy old man..."  I don't like that at all.  It's the reason I stopped posting here for almost a year because I got tired of the fact that I got ganged up on.  I love the Celtics...I'm allowed to voice my opinion.  I don't go around calling 16 year olds "young disrespectful punks" so I don't appreciate the insinuation either.  I believe the game has declined...and I also believe that Stern had better wake up to this or he's going to be staring at empty arenas in the future.

I don't like loud music being played DURING the game, but during a timeout, you can turn up the volume and rip off the knob for all I care.  that doesn't make me "grumpy" it's just a personal preference.  I don't like having every nba event began with hip hop music, but that's just me...again, that doesn't make me "grumpy" it's just a preference.  Does that make me a terrible person?  Am I not allowed to share my opinion?

well I am, just as long as it agrees with everyone else's, apparently...

I agree that NBA seems to market more narrowly to the market that likes that type of music. 

[sk7326]

This is a tough issue because I feel that the players are overpaid and probably the collective salary cost is larger than can be supported by league revenues (or at least it seems reasonable).  On the other hand, it is the owners who keep signing players to these contracts.  I don't know how to get around the argument of whether teams are really loosing money or just using fuzzy math.  It seems to me though that any depreciation would show up on the financial statement and must be audited.  Depreciation is like expiring contracts.  You can say "they are really valuable" but it is what it is.  Depreciation is a loss against something you paid sometime in the past, it is not taking a loss for something you didn't pay for.  For example, you pay for car in year 2009 but you don't charge the whole cost in that year.  You spread it out.  I don't know what they are doing with the depreciation of contracts but it is hard to do much with the fact that they are paying them.

No owner has ever sold a team at a loss ... that is always a hole card a team can have.  Rasheed Wallace makes too much money - LeBron James is wildly underpaid.  It's not a blanket statement - player value from a business perspective is based on players. 

When Donald Sterling intentionally tries to not be good - because he knows the NBA guarantees profits to teams with their structure - something is wrong. 
 

[dlpin]

This is a tough issue because I feel that the players are overpaid and probably the collective salary cost is larger than can be supported by league revenues (or at least it seems reasonable).  On the other hand, it is the owners who keep signing players to these contracts.  I don't know how to get around the argument of whether teams are really loosing money or just using fuzzy math.  It seems to me though that any depreciation would show up on the financial statement and must be audited.  Depreciation is like expiring contracts.  You can say "they are really valuable" but it is what it is.  Depreciation is a loss against something you paid sometime in the past, it is not taking a loss for something you didn't pay for.  For example, you pay for car in year 2009 but you don't charge the whole cost in that year.  You spread it out.  I don't know what they are doing with the depreciation of contracts but it is hard to do much with the fact that they are paying them.

Unless they are publicly traded, teams don't have to disclose any financial statements.
And I know what depreciation means. My point is that I'm quite sure that when they present these numbers, they present operational losses without mentioning the breaks they get back through depreciation and so on.
Otherwise, why are they releasing the bottom line but are so reluctant to actually open the books?

[Fafnir]

Jackie MacMullen was being interviewed some time back on the radio...it was national, and I can't remember when or what station.  But she said, "The problem with the NBA today, as opposed to years ago, is that most of the teams coast for the first 3 quarters..."  She continued, "There is no real noticeable difference between great teams and bad teams until the 4th quarter...and that's why a number of people don't enjoy watching the game anymore."

She summarized perfectly what a lot of people think about the game today.  And I think that part of the problem is the decline of the college game.

Why do good teams have rather nice scoring differentials in the other three quarters then?

[Andy Jick]

I'm not sure...might have something to do with the tides or the Mayan calendar.

[Fafnir]

I'm not sure...might have something to do with the tides or the Mayan calendar.

So in other words, you have no reason.

They idea that "teams don't play hard till the 4th" is overblown and easily refuted. There are many valid criticisms of the NBA, that isn't one of them.

[dlpin]

Atlanta is the only team among the top 6 to have it's best quarter in terms of points differential be the 4th.

[fairweatherfan]

I'm not sure...might have something to do with the tides or the Mayan calendar.

So in other words, you have no reason.

They idea that "teams don't play hard till the 4th" is overblown and easily refuted. There are many valid criticisms of the NBA, that isn't one of them.

I agree that teams not playing hard in the first 3 quarters is pretty much a myth (though they clearly play harder in crunch time, that's true of every sport).  NBA players are so casually awesome at what they do that they can be regularly performing stupendous athletic feats and still appear to be coasting.  But isn't your stat also consistent with a low level of effort by both teams, and a difference in talent driving the differential? 

Point differential refutes MacMullen's belief that there's no separation between good and bad teams in the first 3 quarters, but it doesn't necessarily show that they're playing hard, just that good teams perform better than bad throughout the game.

[Andy Jick]

I'm not sure...might have something to do with the tides or the Mayan calendar.

So in other words, you have no reason.

They idea that "teams don't play hard till the 4th" is overblown and easily refuted. There are many valid criticisms of the NBA, that isn't one of them.

Yeah...and Jackie MacMullen knows nothing about the NBA (or maybe I was lying).  Sorry, I'm not one of those posters who does research like I'm putting together a term paper for one of my posts.  I'm guessing I'm not alone in saying how the game seems to (at times - not always, like you're trying to paint my prior post) lack that competitive fire until the 4th quarter.

How about the game against the LOWLY Nets recently?  Didn't it seem like the Celt's were just coasting before turning on the switch late?

Since I'm guessing you'll do the research (simply to try and make me look stupid) how many games have the Celtics put away by half-time or the early third period (say a 20 point lead)?

I realize a lot of posters can't stand me here (and I'm cool with that - you probably being one of them) but it does seem in today's NBA that the difference between great teams and mediocre ones doesn't totally bear itself out until the 4th quarter...that's all I'm saying.