Skip to content

Quote of the Day: If you don’t think we’ll have a lockout again…

Aug 22, 2012, 1:08 PM EDT

Mavericks owner Cuban waves to fans before the start of Mavericks versus 76ers NBA basketball game in Philadelphia Reuters

“We certainly didn’t achieve all we needed to achieve. I’ve said it multiple times that in the old CBA, financially, teams were drowning in 10 feet of water, now we’re drowning in two feet of water. It’ll be interesting. Obviously the Nets just went out and spent a boatload of money. It’ll be interesting to see if that works for them or against them.”

— Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban talking about the lockout that almost cost the league last season, on ESPN Radio in Dallas (an interview we’ve already quoted a couple times), via Sports Radio Interviews.

The NBA owners want more money — no matter how much they have they will want a bigger slice of the pie. In the last lockout they got a lot from players and really tried to shift the finances of the league. But as Cuban pointed out the Nets will have a massive, long-term payroll and the Lakers next year (and likely the next couple years) will spend $17 million more than anyone else to field a team. You think small market owners think they can still compete? You think that will not fuel them to push for more changes that will not benefit players?

We don’t know what the financial landscape of the NBA will be in five years when either side (owners or players) can opt out of the current CBA. But you can bet one side will. And as Cuban says, the owners don’t think they got enough yet… although if they are drowning in two feet of water, that’s on them.

  1. worldbfree4me - Aug 22, 2012 at 1:37 PM

    If I am not mistaken, the Lakers have a Broadcast deal in place that pays the team $200 Million alone. So, I’m not so sure they care about $17 Million or the upcoming Luxury Taxes Cubano. You have to spend to win, period! Small market teams will have to carve out their own niche, be it a farm system for the league or be gone. 5 years from now is a pipe dream anyway the way this World is trending. We will be lucky to make it another 2 or 3. When the United States Military says, “We don’t need anymore weaponry” and Congress tells them that they do, we cannot be in a good place right now.

    • joshm5683 - Aug 22, 2012 at 1:47 PM

      I believe it was 3 billion total, but 200 million per year. If anything though Cuban shouldn’t complain. He has more money than the Buss family, the Mavericks just don’t have the following or market the Lakers do so he doesn’t have big tv contracts like that.

    • adlent - Aug 22, 2012 at 1:49 PM

      You’ve got to be kidding me.

      If spending money was what wins “period” the Yankees and Sox would win every world series and the Lakers and Knicks would be in every NBA Finals. It isn’t spending money that wins (though it certainly helps) but assembling a good team. There are numerous cases of small-market and/or low salary teams that win. Spending money is a crutch for poor front office talent evaluations and in basketball, more than any other sport, it constantly seems like GMs are putting together pieces that CLEARLY don’t fit.

    • limonadamas - Aug 22, 2012 at 7:17 PM

      A lot of the money coming to the Lakers for broadcasting rights is gonna go right back to the other teams in the league as part of the CBA. That’s on TOP of the luxury tax hit.

      Basically, the small market owners don’t want the free market to dictate terms of business. They want “guaranteed profits,” something that doesn’t exist anywhere else in the business sector. The push for “competitive balance” is mostly a smokescreen. Makes me sick. If they were serious about competitive balance, I might support the owners more.

      • manchestermiracle - Aug 23, 2012 at 1:38 PM

        From what I’ve read teams that make their own broadcast deals keep that money. The Lakers’ $150-200 million a year deal with Time Warner is theirs. Revenue sharing consists of teams under the cap divvying up luxury tax hits on teams over the cap.

  2. therealhtj - Aug 22, 2012 at 1:54 PM

    Not really sure why Cuban is blabbing all over the place these days, but he is right. The problems with the old CBA still doom this new one. The players want to keep their long term guaranteed deals even if it means forsaking a few bucks in the process. The owners want to remove guarantees and add a franchise type tag along with hard cap, but settle for shortening the deals and taking a bigger cut of the revenue split.

    They owners will keep chipping away while the players hold on desperately to their precious “blood issues.” In 5 years, it’ll be interesting to see how this plays out.

  3. cantonbound13 - Aug 22, 2012 at 1:59 PM

    Get rid of the cap & we’ll see which owners really want to win.

    • kdn4 - Aug 22, 2012 at 2:25 PM

      It’s going to happen again and hopefully we’ll see more teams start moving back to the larger markets where they can make money.

    • manchestermiracle - Aug 23, 2012 at 1:39 PM

      That’s what Cuban has tried to do in the past.

  4. glink123 - Aug 22, 2012 at 2:14 PM

    Hard to feel sorry for the players, considering the Lakers have 3 players that will earn nearly $67 million next season. I’d hardly say their movement has been restricted. Then you have a guy like Omer Asik earning $27 million over the next 3 years, when he averages like 3 ppg.

    • themars211 - Aug 22, 2012 at 2:43 PM

      You don’t need to feel sorry for the players because its there right to play wherever they want to when there contract is up. They same owners crying about salaries are the ones paying them.

      • therealhtj - Aug 22, 2012 at 4:34 PM

        It’s only the scrubs and past their prime guys not living up to their contracts that anyone’s complaining about. There’s got to be a way to cut those guys. Any NBA fan’s got to be in favor of that.

  5. kdn4 - Aug 22, 2012 at 2:34 PM

    We need to come up with a formula to show which players are worth what and tier it off. Will have to factor things such as normal stats (PPG, RPG, SPG, APG, etc), All Star appearances, All NBA Team appearances, All Defensive Team Appearances, ROY votes (for first contract extension), MVP Votes (after initial extension), playoff wins and so on.

    Then we’d have guys like Darko and Asik getting paid what they are really worth, the $1M-$2M range or they’re in Europe playing.

  6. themars211 - Aug 22, 2012 at 2:40 PM

    I’m getting tired of Mark Cuban. He is all good when things are going his way but if it does not he starts crying and whining. It seems that he is fixated on the Lakers and there financial situation and what they can and can’t do. Mark needs to stop being a whiny little b!tch. When he bought hist team he was all about outspending everyone because he could but now because it did not work for him he seems to hold it against the Lakers. All these owners that bought there team for whatever price new they were buying into a league with teams that have certain innate advantages. The teams in the major markets will always have a better chance at attracting the marquee players because of location and finances. A lot of these owners don’t manage there franchises well then cry that its the fault of major market teams. How about running your own franchises better and be accountable. How often do you hear any one complain about the Knicks which is in biggest market in the nation with there own network? They don’t because they run there team horribly. There payroll is the 2nd highest in the league but you don’t hear anyone complain about not being able to compete with them. Yet when it comes to the Lakers there is an issue because they know how to manage there team and take care of business. Cuban can go to hell.

    • themars211 - Aug 22, 2012 at 2:44 PM

      sorry about the grammar….lol

    • eventhorizon04 - Aug 22, 2012 at 6:00 PM

      You should have stopped writing after you admitted that the league gives certain teams advantages over other teams.

      He’s saying he wants to change that. You seem upset because you want your team to be able to outspend everyone’s by $20 million a year, and Cuban + small market owners want a league where you can’t buy rings then pretend the competition was fair.

      • themars211 - Aug 22, 2012 at 6:23 PM

        I didn’t say that the league gives certain teams advantages. I said the market and location does. For example if you own a team in Texas or Florida you have a built-in advantage that teams in NY and California don’t have because there is no state income tax on athletes salaries! Cuban doesn’t care to change that he whines and nitpicks when he can’t get his way, ie; Jason Kidd changing his mind about playing for the Mav’s. Like I stated previously I don’t hear anybody bemoaning that they can’t compete with the Knicks and they for years out spent most teams in the league. Its proven if you manage and build your team soundly you can compete and even win. Last time I checked San Antonio, OKC , Portland, and Denver where all in small markets and they seem to be doing fine. The Lakers share the same market and building for that matter with the Clippers. Up until the last year or so because of the different owners and philosophies the Clippers might as well have been playing in Montana somewhere.

  7. eventhorizon04 - Aug 22, 2012 at 5:58 PM

    The only way to give small-market teams an equal shot is a hard cap.

    In the NFL, Super Bowl winners since 2000 include Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Indianapolis, New Orleans, and Tampa Bay, with Phoenix, St. Louis, and Seattle making appearances.

    With a soft-cap, big-markets spend with reckless abandon to get multiple big name stars, then they convince middle-tier guys to play for them at discounts.

    With a hard-cap, big markets would have to convince stars to take MASSIVE paycuts to join up. Wade, LeBron, and Bosh would have to leave tens of millions of dollars on the table to join up, as opposed to a few million a year. When Big markets don’t have multiple super-stars, that frees up smaller markets to sign them, and limits “ring-chasing” by middle-tier players who sign for less money in exchange to play with superstars.

  8. khuxford - Aug 23, 2012 at 8:54 AM

    The drowning the owners have been suffering was always their fault, though. Every time they pay a role player like a starter and a fourth option like a star, they’re sticking their own head in the pail and inhaling the liquid. But no owner wants to feel, at the end of the year, like the lost out on a championship because they didn’t spend a few extra mil on the player that will put them over.

    A little discipline (and, no, I don’t mean collusion) would cure +90% of what ails them.

  9. khuxford - Aug 23, 2012 at 8:59 AM

    Oh…and I’m sure there’s no other reason he singled out Brooklyn (cough Deron cough). I’m guessing he would have included LA, except then he might have to point out how the commish vetoed that Chris Paul trade, yet let the far worse Howard trade go through.

    • manchestermiracle - Aug 23, 2012 at 1:41 PM

      The commish owns the Hornets, but not the Magic.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 NBA Player Searches
  1. D. Rose (2370)
  2. L. James (2003)
  3. K. Irving (1893)
  4. K. Bryant (1835)
  5. A. Davis (1585)