Comments on: Forbes wants you to know they still don’t buy owners’ math

By: hardjudge

hardjudge — Fri, 11 Nov 2011 07:45:59 +0000

I suggest that the players start their own league. They play the game. The owners can buy a ticket if they want to watch pro basketball.

By: rayburns

rayburns — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 20:29:48 +0000

The stubbornness of the owners is based on one principle: Save Us From Ourselves.

Because there are owners in the NBA who can’t help but overpay fair to middling players, thus driving the costs for true NBA stars through the roof, the owners want a way that will, hopefully, keep a lid on salaries.

As for the NBA players, yes, they’re greedy. But when you’re a 6’11″ power forward who has difficulty tying your shoes much less posting up LeBron, should you really be blamed when an owner offers you $10 Million a year?

By: bmorehomeofthewire

bmorehomeofthewire — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 12:17:00 +0000

For all those I referred to in other post about being critical of the NBA players and their salary, Forbes only confirms the GREED on the owners part, and like I said before the players shouldn’t budge on their position….

By: twitter:Chapman_Jamie

twitter:Chapman_Jamie — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 03:55:00 +0000

It’s their team. if the players don’t like it then get a different job.

By: brooklynbulls

brooklynbulls — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 03:46:00 +0000

Agreed…Both sides have contributed to the irreparable damage to the momentum gained last year. If the die hards are put off by all of this back n forth, the casual fan has definitely jumped ship

By: jonrambo

jonrambo — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 03:16:11 +0000

Forbes doesn’t think they are losing money? Why does the NBA own the Hornets? Obviously the big boys are doing fine. Revenue sharing/luxury taxes aren’t enough to keep smaller market teams not only viable but competitive. Do we want this to end up like baseball where half teams are out if it before the season begins? Btw I give that league 5 years til it’s done.

By: borderline1988

borderline1988 — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 02:39:20 +0000

While I agree that the owners are most probably inflating their losses, it’s good to note that even a $130 million operating net income is extremely weak relative to revenues and relative to their investments. And I’m not sure why debt service costs shouldn’t be accounted for (these are private companies; at the end of the day, the interest is coming out of the owners pockets all the same).

I dont wish to bore anyone with this stuff (as an accountant, I already do too much of that) but I don’t believe NBA owners earn a respectable rate of return on their money considering the risks of the business, even if the return is positive.
This is especially true if you consider that big-market owners earn a disproportionate share of the league revenues.

Ultimately these owners are grown men and have to deal with and take responsibility for their own investments, whether it be an NBA team or other business. The problem is, I can assure you that none of those owners had to deal with such opposition for cutting wages of their employees. And the funniest thing about that is, those employees are millionaires to being with.

By: david8726

david8726 — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 02:31:38 +0000

We’ll agree to disagree, I guess.

The most important thing in my opinion is that a full slate of conference games gets played, and that will happen. Inter conference games will be lost, but I don’t think everyone needs to have the exact same inter conference schedule for fair playoff seeding to happen.

In the NFL, there are wildly different strength of schedules for each division.

The inter-conference (and even in-conference) NFL schedules are very different from team to team. Still, no one questions the validity of the playoff seedings in that sport even though one team might have had an easier schedule than another.

By: brooklynbulls

brooklynbulls — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 02:10:50 +0000

…..and that ’99 Spurs championship will forever be accompanied by an asterik and a world of what ifs

By: brooklynbulls

brooklynbulls — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 02:08:09 +0000

David you are one of the few posters here I normally agree with…but not on this. I’m one of the more diehard NBA fans mainly because it is the only sport I love and the only sport I follow. Tarnished is actually a generous word. A replacement schedule is not going establish the competitve balance needed for the best seeding…i.e. the number of back 2 back games, inter-conference play etc. A shortened schedule benefits some teams while hurting others.

By: david8726

david8726 — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 01:49:54 +0000

Well it obviously won’t be as good as an 82 game season, but “tarnished” is going too far I think.

If a deal is struck tonight, there will be more than enough games left for teams to play all the conference games they normally would, plus plenty of out of conference games. That’s more than enough to get a good playoff seeding and have a credible post-season.

I don’t think anyone considers the 1999 Spurs championship to be “tarnished” just because of that lockout, and if a deal happens tonight there will be more than 50 games.

By: david8726

david8726 — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 01:44:14 +0000

I guess you’re unaware of the best ratings in years that last years playoffs had.

Troll.

By: brooklynbulls

brooklynbulls — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 01:38:13 +0000

I hate to admit it, but if there is a season, it is tarnished. There’s no deal, arrangement or schedule they can come up with to truly salvage the season at this point. Actually I’m beginning to doubt an agreement will be reached this year at all

By: tapefolie

tapefolie — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 01:18:01 +0000

Does anyone still watch the nba?

By: kinggw

kinggw — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 00:38:04 +0000

Of course the owners are fudging the math. They are claiming broke because they are aware that most people dont understand how they determine “revenue”. They figure if they blame the players for being greedy the average person will take their word for it. For what its worth, NBA players like every professional athlete, are overpaid. Damn Forbes and their factual reporting.

By: zblott

zblott — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 00:22:24 +0000

There are PLENTY of ways for owners to disguise gains and make them look like losses. Until they actually open their books completely and show that they’re not totally full of crap, players have no reason to negotiate with them under the owners’ premise of “we’re losing money so the talent should make less.”

http://www.behindthebasket.com/btb/2011/11/7/5-items-the-owners-should-reveal-before-any-deal-is-signed.html