 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Other Stuff » Sports Talk » The NBA competitive balance question
sycophantman
So what would be the most effective fix for the problem?
The NBA competitive balance question
July 14, 2010 at 07:24PM View BBCode
So, I'm sure most of you know that only 5 NBA teams have won 70% of all the titles in the NBA. It's hard to argue against the idea that the NBA has the worst problem with competitive balance among all the major sports.So what would be the most effective fix for the problem?
happy
In basketball, a single game is a huge sample size, and points is very first order. Your objective is to score, and if you do, you get points for it, and there are a lot of points in a game. Over the course of a long series, the best team is significantly more likely to end up on top.
Of course, baseball's top 5 teams have about 60% of the championships...
in conclusion the best solution is pick a new sport to follow.
July 14, 2010 at 07:37PM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
to some degree there isnt one. Baseball probably has equally as bad competitive balance issues, but baseball outcomes are much more luck based. The reason the last place team wins so many games isnt because there isnt a huge gap in talent, its because a single baseball game is a very small sample size to judge a team off of. And not only that, but the scoring system is a second order situation. Getting on base is your objective at the plate, but scoring runs is the deciding factor, not men on base or total bases or the like.
In basketball, a single game is a huge sample size, and points is very first order. Your objective is to score, and if you do, you get points for it, and there are a lot of points in a game. Over the course of a long series, the best team is significantly more likely to end up on top.
Of course, baseball's top 5 teams have about 60% of the championships...
in conclusion the best solution is pick a new sport to follow.
(Eric)
And Tom makes a good point, there are less likely to be outlying champions in basketball, because of the long series and the nature of the sport.
July 14, 2010 at 07:55PM View BBCode
Players tend to stay with one team for the majority of their careers, and a few good players form a really sound foundation for a dynasty. I guess a hard cap which prevents teams from having more than one really good player is a possible answer, but would people really want that? I wouldn't, but I don't know, maybe that's a desirable thing for other people.And Tom makes a good point, there are less likely to be outlying champions in basketball, because of the long series and the nature of the sport.
cubfan531
There really is no solution, because basketball really revolves around the individual player rather than the team. As in any sport, you'll always have standout superstars who the team turns to, so, basketball's problem is a result of the game itself.
July 14, 2010 at 07:56PM View BBCode
I personally feel that they need to raise the height of the basket (wider talent pool, a lot of tall players, the slam dunk is now an everyday occurrence), which won't do much as a long-term solution, only shake up the talent pool to value sharpshooters a lot more.There really is no solution, because basketball really revolves around the individual player rather than the team. As in any sport, you'll always have standout superstars who the team turns to, so, basketball's problem is a result of the game itself.
sycophantman
July 14, 2010 at 08:10PM View BBCode
There are only so many really tall athletic guys out there, so the talent pool is really stretched thin. Wouldn't the quickest fix be contraction? Absurd, I know, but it would help lessen the scrubby nobodies all over the league.
(Eric)
July 14, 2010 at 08:26PM View BBCode
I'd love it if the league contracted, but it's not going to happen.
folifan19
July 15, 2010 at 05:43PM View BBCode
Abolish the Lakers, Celtics, Pistons, Knicks and Sixers from the league?
barterer2002
July 15, 2010 at 05:57PM View BBCode
I actually think the competitive balance in basketball is better reflected in that the top two teams in terms of championships have more than half of them.
sycophantman
(I'm not knocking Joe Johnson, of course, he sees the NBA as a career, and not happyfuntime like Lebron. Kudos to him, because Joe Johnson is right.)
July 16, 2010 at 11:51AM View BBCode
It's a thorny problem, with free agency empowering players more and more, how do you keep teams in unappealing cities competitive? How can you ever imagine a team like the Timberwolves ever being a threat when very few top shelf free agents will bother going there? Perhaps, players like Joe Johnson might be tempted by a max contract, but a max contract from a team like the Lakers is always going to be more attractive, so the Timberwolves are stuck always being the team to grossly overpay for players just to convince them to come to stay in Minnesota. It's a huge obstacle.(I'm not knocking Joe Johnson, of course, he sees the NBA as a career, and not happyfuntime like Lebron. Kudos to him, because Joe Johnson is right.)
(Eric)
July 16, 2010 at 05:05PM View BBCode
It's harder for the small market teams to do well, but not impossible. It doesn't help that a lot of them have awful owners/general managers.
(Eric)
July 16, 2010 at 05:47PM View BBCode
They just got bought for $450 million a couple days ago. Our proposed bid of $78.32 was rejected, for whatever reason.
tworoosters
Lets see, Cohan bought them in '95 for $119 million, so if he lost $20 million a year he only came out $31 million ahead in the deal. (and there's no way he lost $20 million a year) .
That sale is gonna 'cause some ripples when the CBA comes around.
July 16, 2010 at 08:27PM View BBCode
Originally posted by (Eric)
They just got bought for $450 million a couple days ago. Our proposed bid of $78.32 was rejected, for whatever reason.
Lets see, Cohan bought them in '95 for $119 million, so if he lost $20 million a year he only came out $31 million ahead in the deal. (and there's no way he lost $20 million a year) .
That sale is gonna 'cause some ripples when the CBA comes around.
(Eric)
July 17, 2010 at 12:29AM View BBCode
Yea, it's hard not to think that Stern and co. have been bullshitting (exaggerating, at least) a lot on the league's financial problems.
Hamilton2
There is no competitive balance because the whole league is rigged. The officiating, the draft, the free agent signings. Everything about the NBA smacks of a massive conspiratorial rigging similar to that of "professional wrestling" back in the day.
July 17, 2010 at 07:15PM View BBCode
Somebody has to say this, so I will:There is no competitive balance because the whole league is rigged. The officiating, the draft, the free agent signings. Everything about the NBA smacks of a massive conspiratorial rigging similar to that of "professional wrestling" back in the day.
vurbil
I really doubt it's a conspiracy, per se; but the officiating in the NBA makes it unwatchable for me. The calls that the star players and the home teams get are beyond what I can stomach and still view the league as legitimate.
I know I'm a biased Boston fan, but in that Game 7 in LA, the Celtics came out with so much heart and intensity. I was really proud of that team more than any other Celtic team I've ever seen because of the circumstances they were in (old fading team on the road in a Game 7 against their archrivals one game after being dominated) and the effort they turned in. Then the fourth quarter comes and it literally is like every trip down the court there is a foul called on the Celtics. The Lakers ended up shooting 37 free throws to the Celtics' 17 that game. And if you look it up (which I'm too lazy to do) you will find that a large number of them were in the fourth quarter if my memory serves me.
I know Lakers fans and NBA apologists will say it's because the Celtics play physical and commit more fouls. This may be true to an extent, but if you look at that game and the series as a whole, you will see that the games were called a certain way all throughout until suddenly the Lakers were facing the prospect of another Game 7 loss to the Celtics. Then suddenly the whistles started blowing left and right.
But that's just the latest example. I've felt this way about the NBA for a long time, going back to when the Celtics weren't even in contention in the 90's. Every single time a guy like Jordan or Kobe drives and gets stopped on a big possession, it is a foul. Now, granted, a large portion of the time they ARE fouled. But another large portion of the time, you can clearly see on the replay that a good defensive play was made.
In the NFL, you may see a phantom pass interference called for Peyton Manning here and there, but it is nothing like the NBA. When you watch an NBA game, way too much of your thinking revolves around how atrocious the officiating is, rather than on the play of the teams.
[Edited on 7-18-2010 by vurbil]
July 18, 2010 at 01:31AM View BBCode
Originally posted by Hamilton2
Somebody has to say this, so I will:
There is no competitive balance because the whole league is rigged. The officiating, the draft, the free agent signings. Everything about the NBA smacks of a massive conspiratorial rigging similar to that of "professional wrestling" back in the day.
I really doubt it's a conspiracy, per se; but the officiating in the NBA makes it unwatchable for me. The calls that the star players and the home teams get are beyond what I can stomach and still view the league as legitimate.
I know I'm a biased Boston fan, but in that Game 7 in LA, the Celtics came out with so much heart and intensity. I was really proud of that team more than any other Celtic team I've ever seen because of the circumstances they were in (old fading team on the road in a Game 7 against their archrivals one game after being dominated) and the effort they turned in. Then the fourth quarter comes and it literally is like every trip down the court there is a foul called on the Celtics. The Lakers ended up shooting 37 free throws to the Celtics' 17 that game. And if you look it up (which I'm too lazy to do) you will find that a large number of them were in the fourth quarter if my memory serves me.
I know Lakers fans and NBA apologists will say it's because the Celtics play physical and commit more fouls. This may be true to an extent, but if you look at that game and the series as a whole, you will see that the games were called a certain way all throughout until suddenly the Lakers were facing the prospect of another Game 7 loss to the Celtics. Then suddenly the whistles started blowing left and right.
But that's just the latest example. I've felt this way about the NBA for a long time, going back to when the Celtics weren't even in contention in the 90's. Every single time a guy like Jordan or Kobe drives and gets stopped on a big possession, it is a foul. Now, granted, a large portion of the time they ARE fouled. But another large portion of the time, you can clearly see on the replay that a good defensive play was made.
In the NFL, you may see a phantom pass interference called for Peyton Manning here and there, but it is nothing like the NBA. When you watch an NBA game, way too much of your thinking revolves around how atrocious the officiating is, rather than on the play of the teams.
[Edited on 7-18-2010 by vurbil]
dirtdevil
July 18, 2010 at 09:11AM View BBCode
phantom pass-interference calls for peyton manning, if they in fact exist, pale in comparision to reversing the correct call on a very real fumble in the playoffs.
vurbil
July 18, 2010 at 04:18PM View BBCode
Hey troll, we're talking about NBA officiating. Nice try though.
happy
Vurbil - brings up a topic, calls others trolls for responding. Way to go genius.
July 19, 2010 at 12:16PM View BBCode
Originally posted by vurbil
In the NFL, you may see a phantom pass interference called for Peyton Manning here and there
Vurbil - brings up a topic, calls others trolls for responding. Way to go genius.
sparxx
ie. if Carmelo leaves Denver for New York and signs a max contract, he should pay Denver for the right to leave. In this instance, Denver knows they won't be able to resign Carmelo, so they should be awarded something for the loss of that player.
Teams like Denver, Toronto and other medium market teams need to be able to compete. Right now they can't (Canada's tax system sucks so the Raptors need to in fact do more to get players) and there is no hope unless the rules change.
And for those who say he should be able to move where he wants when he wants in a free market, this is not real life. This is a game where the basic minimum salary exceeds a normal person's 100 fold. Players who are treated like heroes for the majority of the time and make more in their careers than most normal people will ever dream of (take a note Shaq. No one needs to see your big azz hangin around anymore)
There has to be a balance between large markets and medium/small markets. The playing field is not level. A rookie entering the NBA knows he will only have to play for the team that drafted him for 3 years, and then he can move on to greener pastures.
Extend the rookie contracts to 6 years. Make them have to stay in and try and build a contender. Do away with teams having multiple players with MAX contracts and in contrast to the idea of contraction, I suggest expansion.
July 19, 2010 at 09:16PM View BBCode
the problem is that large market teams can afford the luxury tax for exceeding the salary cap. Punishments have to be more serious, defaulting of draft picks, and if teams exceed the luxury tax by signing a player, the player should be required to pay a higher tax for going to a larger market team (the idea that people who earn more pay more), but in this instance this tax would be paid to the team the player leaves.ie. if Carmelo leaves Denver for New York and signs a max contract, he should pay Denver for the right to leave. In this instance, Denver knows they won't be able to resign Carmelo, so they should be awarded something for the loss of that player.
Teams like Denver, Toronto and other medium market teams need to be able to compete. Right now they can't (Canada's tax system sucks so the Raptors need to in fact do more to get players) and there is no hope unless the rules change.
And for those who say he should be able to move where he wants when he wants in a free market, this is not real life. This is a game where the basic minimum salary exceeds a normal person's 100 fold. Players who are treated like heroes for the majority of the time and make more in their careers than most normal people will ever dream of (take a note Shaq. No one needs to see your big azz hangin around anymore)
There has to be a balance between large markets and medium/small markets. The playing field is not level. A rookie entering the NBA knows he will only have to play for the team that drafted him for 3 years, and then he can move on to greener pastures.
Extend the rookie contracts to 6 years. Make them have to stay in and try and build a contender. Do away with teams having multiple players with MAX contracts and in contrast to the idea of contraction, I suggest expansion.
sparxx
ie. if Carmelo leaves Denver for New York and signs a max contract, he should pay Denver for the right to leave. In this instance, Denver knows they won't be able to resign Carmelo, so they should be awarded something for the loss of that player.
Teams like Denver, Toronto and other medium market teams need to be able to compete. Right now they can't (Canada's tax system sucks so the Raptors need to in fact do more to get players) and there is no hope unless the rules change.
And for those who say he should be able to move where he wants when he wants in a free market, this is not real life. This is a game where the basic minimum salary exceeds a normal person's 100 fold. Players who are treated like heroes for the majority of the time and make more in their careers than most normal people will ever dream of (take a note Shaq. No one needs to see your big azz hangin around anymore)
There has to be a balance between large markets and medium/small markets. The playing field is not level. A rookie entering the NBA knows he will only have to play for the team that drafted him for 3 years, and then he can move on to greener pastures.
Extend the rookie contracts to 6 years. Make them have to stay in and try and build a contender. Do away with teams having multiple players with MAX contracts and in contrast to the idea of contraction, I suggest expansion.
July 19, 2010 at 09:19PM View BBCode
the problem is that large market teams can afford the luxury tax for exceeding the salary cap. Punishments have to be more serious, defaulting of draft picks, and if teams exceed the luxury tax by signing a player, the player should be required to pay a higher tax for going to a larger market team (the idea that people who earn more pay more), but in this instance this tax would be paid to the team the player leaves.ie. if Carmelo leaves Denver for New York and signs a max contract, he should pay Denver for the right to leave. In this instance, Denver knows they won't be able to resign Carmelo, so they should be awarded something for the loss of that player.
Teams like Denver, Toronto and other medium market teams need to be able to compete. Right now they can't (Canada's tax system sucks so the Raptors need to in fact do more to get players) and there is no hope unless the rules change.
And for those who say he should be able to move where he wants when he wants in a free market, this is not real life. This is a game where the basic minimum salary exceeds a normal person's 100 fold. Players who are treated like heroes for the majority of the time and make more in their careers than most normal people will ever dream of (take a note Shaq. No one needs to see your big azz hangin around anymore)
There has to be a balance between large markets and medium/small markets. The playing field is not level. A rookie entering the NBA knows he will only have to play for the team that drafted him for 3 years, and then he can move on to greener pastures.
Extend the rookie contracts to 6 years. Make them have to stay in and try and build a contender. Do away with teams having multiple players with MAX contracts and in contrast to the idea of contraction, I suggest expansion.
Craiggles
July 19, 2010 at 09:38PM View BBCode
The salary structure is set up so that the team that drafted a player can offer him more money than everyone else. If guys are leaving "medium markets" it's because those markets aren't giving them incentives to stay other than money. At some level, that's a you problem. The league already rigs the deck in favor of keeping guys in the same uniform. Just because a team won 15 games the year that some superstar entered the league doesn't mean they get to keep him forever and ever. Eventually they have to convince him that he wants to stay, and if they can't then too bad.Pages: 1