2024 Offseason Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by P_B_&_G

This is one of the things that makes me think the league is fixed. You regularly see guys traded to the Lakers below market value. The question is why?

---

Well I mean do you see that when they don’t have players named Lebron/Kobe on them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaisingTheBar

Well I mean do you see that when they don’t have players named Lebron/Kobe on them?

---

I suppose not but why would a GM for another team take less than market value in a trade under any circumstances? Let alone from the Lakers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by P_B_&_G

This is one of the things that makes me think the league is fixed. You regularly see guys traded to the Lakers below market value. The question is why?

---

Reminds me of when the league had the lakers and celtics both down.... and magically kevin mchale sends kevin garnett to the celtics and jerry west sends pau gasol to the lakers lol

and then last season the way the Lakers acquired a new team at the trade deadline despite what seemed like a lack of resources was impressive

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by P_B_&_G

This is one of the things that makes me think the league is fixed. You regularly see guys traded to the Lakers below market value. The question is why?

---

Anyone that does not think the NBA is rigged or plays favorites to big market teams with trades and officiating is blind, a Faker or any other big market fan is in denial. And no , not the river in Egypt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fullcourtpress

Reminds me of when the league had the lakers and celtics both down.... and magically kevin mchale sends kevin garnett to the celtics and jerry west sends pau gasol to the lakers lol

and then last season the way the Lakers acquired a new team at the trade deadline despite what seemed like a lack of resources was impressive

---

It has definitely happened several times over my 38 years of watching. It seems amazing that the Lakers are able to trade for good players for next to nothing at times.

You're so right. I mean, even just LeBron going there and rebuilding the current team......most other franchises would have taken a decade to rebuild after Kobe.

But it's the celebrities. The top movie stars and rappers is the only entertainment industry people cooler than athletes. But be a Laker and especially a Laker while winning gets you just a little bit cooler. I mean, just look at all the celebs that go to random Laker games. That's always going to have a draw to it. Add to that a storied franchise that could be profitable with a losing team deep in the luxury tax and it is a recipe that is too good not to rebound quickly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msusousaphone

You're so right. I mean, even just LeBron going there and rebuilding the current team......most other franchises would have taken a decade to rebuild after Kobe.

But it's the celebrities. The top movie stars and rappers is the only entertainment industry people cooler than athletes. But be a Laker and especially a Laker while winning gets you just a little bit cooler. I mean, just look at all the celebs that go to random Laker games. That's always going to have a draw to it. Add to that a storied franchise that could be profitable with a losing team deep in the luxury tax and it is a recipe that is too good not to rebound quickly.

---

Lebron openly said that a huge part of his decision to go to LA was the fact that it's better for his business opportunities.

It's where the celebrities live. It's where the movies get made. For historical reasons, it's considered a 'storied franchise' in the way other places aren't. If you're a big name guy looking to maximise not just the basketball but all aspects of potential money making (TV, movies, book deals, video games, merchandise, etc) then you probably will go to LA or NY at some point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Lebron openly said that a huge part of his decision to go to LA was the fact that it's better for his business opportunities.

It's where the celebrities live. It's where the movies get made. For historical reasons, it's considered a 'storied franchise' in the way other places aren't. If you're a big name guy looking to maximise not just the basketball but all aspects of potential money making (TV, movies, book deals, video games, merchandise, etc) then you probably will go to LA or NY at some point.

---

Yup , and that's exactly why the NBA will never be close to being #1 , heck they are only just above MLB. The NFL got it right. They have the franchise tag and they have compensation for losing star players. They have a hard cap to prevent major markets from a big advantage. The best way to build popularity is PARITY. And for those that say the NBA is more popular than it's ever been, I guess it's enough to be a couple % point above MLB and 25+ % points below the NFL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by djrnno

Yup , and that's exactly why the NBA will never be close to being #1 , heck they are only just above MLB. The NFL got it right. They have the franchise tag and they have compensation for losing star players. They have a hard cap to prevent major markets from a big advantage. The best way to build popularity is PARITY. And for those that say the NBA is more popular than it's ever been, I guess it's enough to be a couple % point above MLB and 25+ % points below the NFL

---

I would say the NBA is in a fantastic spot right now. Not because of the choices made or the flaws as you rightly pointed out. There is a ridiculous amount of talent in the league right now. You have multiple teams actually competing for championships every year now. I 100 percent believe the Pels have been hard done and railroaded by the NBA in multiple ways. But the NBA might be in the best place it’s ever been. It’s in a good spot even if it’s run by clowns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

I would say the NBA is in a fantastic spot right now. Not because of the choices made or the flaws as you rightly pointed out. There is a ridiculous amount of talent in the league right now. You have multiple teams actually competing for championships every year now. I 100 percent believe the Pels have been hard done and railroaded by the NBA in multiple ways. But the NBA might be in the best place it’s ever been. It’s in a good spot even if it’s run by clowns.

---

It does not make a difference how much talent the NBA has. The way it's set up it will never even sniff the popularity of the NFL . In fact I just saw a Gallup poll that it behind baseball by 1% . Since it's a players run league with no restrictions on anything it will always be 2nd or 3rd. There really no big reason to really invest yourself in your local team if your a small market because it's just too hard a road to hoe for them to really contend for a championship. You draft a super star and in 4-5 yrs he can just decide he wants to play for the lakers or Boston or NY because of the market. Or because he wants to be part of a super team and have an easier road to the finals. It's what happens when you set it up so the players run the league

As I am fully behind having more parity and mechanism to protect the smaller market, it will be always harder for NBA to reach parity.

Don't forget that basketball is a team sport with one of the lowest number of players. One star account for 15 percent of his team minutes, so it's obviously star driven due to the inflated importance of stars vs others team sports.

Now is it rigged ? I don't think so, I'm sure if you survey all the american citizens on where they would love to live and work in the USA without consideration of familly ties (since basically most players can relocate their whole familly if they want), most of them will chose cities or area with with either low taxes, low criminality, good weather, good infrastructures or best schools. So it's no insult to say that most players won't sign to New Orleans unless for a better job opportunity (i.e. larger contracts or minutes). With such disadvantage, it's alway going to be an uphill battle to reach the championship.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by djrnno

It does not make a difference how much talent the NBA has. The way it's set up it will never even sniff the popularity of the NFL . In fact I just saw a Gallup poll that it behind baseball by 1% . Since it's a players run league with no restrictions on anything it will always be 2nd or 3rd. There really no big reason to really invest yourself in your local team if your a small market because it's just too hard a road to hoe for them to really contend for a championship. You draft a super star and in 4-5 yrs he can just decide he wants to play for the lakers or Boston or NY because of the market. Or because he wants to be part of a super team and have an easier road to the finals. It's what happens when you set it up so the players run the league

---

It doesn’t need to be as popular as the NFL or whatever. The NBA is the NBA. It is not the NFL. Every sport has its pros and cons. All have issues with officiating, big markets and media bias. The NBA is run by clowns and if I’m being quite honest, this franchise has been run by clowns for quite some time. If we don’t-didn’t win a championship with CP3, AD and Zion that is our own fault for not being good enough. We need to start getting things right from top to bottom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by djrnno

Yup , and that's exactly why the NBA will never be close to being #1 , heck they are only just above MLB. The NFL got it right. They have the franchise tag and they have compensation for losing star players. They have a hard cap to prevent major markets from a big advantage. The best way to build popularity is PARITY. And for those that say the NBA is more popular than it's ever been, I guess it's enough to be a couple % point above MLB and 25+ % points below the NFL

---

I think global fanbases also need to be kept in mind.

Apologies to Americans, but absolutely nobody outside of the USA cares about the NFL whatsoever. Obviously that doesn't inhibit it, it makes a lot of money, the domestic fanbase is absolutely in love with it, and that's all fine, but globally speaking it's not a sport where you can find fans everywhere in the world.

The NBA isn't like that. Due to the existence and popularity of things like Euroleague, as well as the Australian NBL surging in popularity, and of course the Olympics, it has a fanbase that's global. The average person in Europe has heard of Michael Jordan, Lebron James, Magic Johnson, and Kobe Bryant whereas I'm pretty sure if I went out in the street now and asked a dozen random people, none of them would know who Drew Brees is.

In that sense, the NBA is just going for a completely different business model. The NFL has an incredible deep hold in the US, but its reach isn't particularly broad. The NBA clearly wants a bite out of the larger global basketball marker and is willing to have a shallower domestic hold in exchange for that increased breadth.

If think if you asked Adam Silver whether they'd rather emulate the success of American Football or, say, global soccer, he'd say soccer. Sure, maybe no individual game of it (aside from the UEFA Finals or the World Cup Finals, which are both vastly larger events) exceeds the Super Bowl in viewers, but the sport is omnipresent globally and that holds value.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

I think global fanbases also need to be kept in mind.

Apologies to Americans, but absolutely nobody outside of the USA cares about the NFL whatsoever. Obviously that doesn't inhibit it, it makes a lot of money, the domestic fanbase is absolutely in love with it, and that's all fine, but globally speaking it's not a sport where you can find fans everywhere in the world.

The NBA isn't like that. Due to the existence and popularity of things like Euroleague, as well as the Australian NBL surging in popularity, and of course the Olympics, it has a fanbase that's global. The average person in Europe has heard of Michael Jordan, Lebron James, Magic Johnson, and Kobe Bryant whereas I'm pretty sure if I went out in the street now and asked a dozen random people, none of them would know who Drew Brees is.

In that sense, the NBA is just going for a completely different business model. The NFL has an incredible deep hold in the US, but its reach isn't particularly broad. The NBA clearly wants a bite out of the larger global basketball marker and is willing to have a shallower domestic hold in exchange for that increased breadth.

If think if you asked Adam Silver whether they'd rather emulate the success of American Football or, say, global soccer, he'd say soccer. Sure, maybe no individual game of it (aside from the UEFA Finals or the World Cup Finals, which are both vastly larger events) exceeds the Super Bowl in viewers, but the sport is omnipresent globally and that holds value.

---

I think that the fact that the NBA is popular on a more global aspect hurts it domestically for the fan that is invested in their team. Most international fans follow the big market teams that have a Lebron or a Kobe or a Michael Jordan or what ever top superstar is playing at the time. They are not invested in a hometown team because they have none. After all, it is the National Basketball Association, not the International Basketball Association, with the exception of Toronto.

I would venture to say that fans of their hometown teams in all those leagues you mentioned are more loyal to them than any one particular NBA team. And Soccer fans are rabid about their sport because their team represents their country. The best way to build the popularity of a sport is to have a team the hometown fans can fall in love with. And make it so that team has the same chance as every other team in the league even if they are a small market.

The reason that basketball in general has taken a global aspect is because it's an Olympic sport. When it was added to the Olympics is when it took off globally. Football will never be , but watch out, the NFL is expanding to international markets more and more every yr. And every time a game is played internationally it's sold out , so I'll bet it's not that hard to find an international sports fan who knows who Tom Brady or Drew Brees is

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by djrnno

I would venture to say that fans of their hometown teams in all those leagues you mentioned are more loyal to them than any one particular NBA team. And Soccer fans are rabid about their sport because their team represents their country. The best way to build the popularity of a sport is to have a team the hometown fans can fall in love with. And make it so that team has the same chance as every other team in the league even if they are a small market.

---

It may hurt things domestically to some extent, but the NBA doesn't really mind that too much because they are, at the end of it all, a business that wants to make money, and the money is working for them. The TV deals keep getting bigger, the merch sales keep going higher. It's clear for them that the strategy is working.

That said, football (soccer) fans are rabid about the teams which aren't even national. Sure, you have the point that people will support England just because they're from England, but there's also people who are rabid over hometown teams (even if those teams are garbage).

One of the problems of UEFA football is that teams very explicitly do not have the same chances as every other team regardless of market size. It's actually a far worse problem than in the NBA. In UEFA, you can literally just spend money to make money. There's no strict salary cap like there is in the NBA, instead team salary just has to stay lower than a certain percentage of overall team revenue. So successful teams that make more money can (and do) just outspend the opposition when it comes to acquiring players and such, which in turn makes them more money, which means they can spend more money.

If you're a fan of your local town football team, unless you happen to support Chelsea or Manchester City or something, you're never winning anything at the highest level and the system is designed to make it nearly impossible for your team to ever get to the point where it might.

If you think that Tom Brady is known by most people outside USA, you will be surprised. I'd say even his wife is more famous than him in Europe.

American football is pretty much unwatchable for the vast majority of the World. I think it's deeply rooted in the american culture and that's why you all love it so much, but for the rest of the World it's more a curiousity, some expression of the american exceptionalism than a sport.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by djrnno

Yup , and that's exactly why the NBA will never be close to being #1 , heck they are only just above MLB. The NFL got it right. They have the franchise tag and they have compensation for losing star players. They have a hard cap to prevent major markets from a big advantage. The best way to build popularity is PARITY. And for those that say the NBA is more popular than it's ever been, I guess it's enough to be a couple % point above MLB and 25+ % points below the NFL

---

And yet the Chiefs are in the Super Bowl every year while the (defending) NBA champ hasn't made it out of even the 2nd round since 2019.

Then why is every NFL game played internationally sold out well in advance of the game? https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/...ahawks-germany

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ml wave

And yet the Chiefs are in the Super Bowl every year while the (defending) NBA champ hasn't made it out of even the 2nd round since 2019.

---

1st Kansas City is not a big market team. 2nd they just happen to have a very good HC and QB. It's not that KC is in the SB a lot lately, it's the fact that The NFL has set it up that EVERY team has an equal chance of obtaining success. Unlike the NBA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

It may hurt things domestically to some extent, but the NBA doesn't really mind that too much because they are, at the end of it all, a business that wants to make money, and the money is working for them. The TV deals keep getting bigger, the merch sales keep going higher. It's clear for them that the strategy is working.

That said, football (soccer) fans are rabid about the teams which aren't even national. Sure, you have the point that people will support England just because they're from England, but there's also people who are rabid over hometown teams (even if those teams are garbage).

One of the problems of UEFA football is that teams very explicitly do not have the same chances as every other team regardless of market size. It's actually a far worse problem than in the NBA. In UEFA, you can literally just spend money to make money. There's no strict salary cap like there is in the NBA, instead team salary just has to stay lower than a certain percentage of overall team revenue. So successful teams that make more money can (and do) just outspend the opposition when it comes to acquiring players and such, which in turn makes them more money, which means they can spend more money.

If you're a fan of your local town football team, unless you happen to support Chelsea or Manchester City or something, you're never winning anything at the highest level and the system is designed to make it nearly impossible for your team to ever get to the point where it might.

---

People everywhere will always support the hometown teams or teams that represent their country, there will always be fans regardless. Even if the scales are lopsided.Although from what I know to represent a country don't you have to be a citizen of that country? What I'm saying is with parity and each team having an equal chance of success the support becomes much more. If your hometown or your country's team is just bad or has no chance of success then the interest, especially of the non-rabid fan is not that great. It's just a fact the more interest you create the more $ you will make. If the NBA were to implement a hard cap and something like the franchise tag the NFL uses it would level the playing field for ALL teams, making it so no super teams could be created 2 or 3 superstar players saying " let's all get together and make a super team and get us a ring"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blattman

If you think that Tom Brady is known by most people outside USA, you will be surprised. I'd say even his wife is more famous than him in Europe.

American football is pretty much unwatchable for the vast majority of the World. I think it's deeply rooted in the american culture and that's why you all love it so much, but for the rest of the World it's more a curiousity, some expression of the american exceptionalism than a sport.

---

This is absolutely the case.

I really think most Americans don't understand exactly how insular a phenomenon the NFL is. From what I can gather, it's basically a nigh-omnipresent God-sport in the US, and almost completely non-existent outside of it.

Sure, games sell out when they go international, but that's not because it has legions of fans here, it's because they're novelties and we've all heard of the NFL because we watch American TV and American movies, so when it comes up as a once in a lifetime event, people will go. That doesn't mean that the sport itself is actually popular. I have never met anyone in the UK who actually watches the NFL, and absolutely Gisele Bundchen is more well known in Europe than Tom Brady is.

Over in the US, she was Tom Brady's trophy wife. In Europe, it was more like ''oh that's Gisele Bundchen and her husband, he's some kind of professional sportsman I think''.

I think the NFL also suffers from the fact that we already have rugby in the England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, France, Germany, South Africa, New Zealand, Australia, et cetera. It's obviously not the same game but it has some superficial resemblance, and there's a cultural divide in it. Why would you ever watch American football - where games take forever, have eighteen million advertisements, there are breaks after every play, and it's just fundamentally a boring sport to watch unless you grew up with it - when you have rugby which is kind of a similar idea in terms of physicality and the type of ball and the overall goal, but is much faster, more immediate, less corporate, and frankly more fun?

Most of you are missing the point It's not really about the NFL or even football, it's about a business plan that makes a sport more popular. And the key word is PARITY. The sport could be pickleball. The NFL business plan has set it up so each team has a level playing field. The hard cap has it so no rich owner can buy a championship. With the franchise tag a bunch of self centered star players can not decide to make a super team just to get a ring and then go elsewhere. It's all about what's best for the league not a bunch of star players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blattman

If you think that Tom Brady is known by most people outside USA, you will be surprised. I'd say even his wife is more famous than him in Europe.

American football is pretty much unwatchable for the vast majority of the World. I think it's deeply rooted in the american culture and that's why you all love it so much, but for the rest of the World it's more a curiousity, some expression of the american exceptionalism than a sport.

---

Not to be disrespectful but Americans are really not concerned about how popular our sport is with the rest of the world.That's why we call it the NATIONAL football league or the NATIONAL basketball association. I truly doubt that South Africans worry about how popular cricket is in the US

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blattman

most of them will chose cities or area with with either low taxes, low criminality, good weather, good infrastructures or best schools.

---

Seems like this would preclude anyone choosing to go to New York

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

This is absolutely the case.

I really think most Americans don't understand exactly how insular a phenomenon the NFL is. From what I can gather, it's basically a nigh-omnipresent God-sport in the US, and almost completely non-existent outside of it.

Sure, games sell out when they go international, but that's not because it has legions of fans here, it's because they're novelties and we've all heard of the NFL because we watch American TV and American movies, so when it comes up as a once in a lifetime event, people will go. That doesn't mean that the sport itself is actually popular. I have never met anyone in the UK who actually watches the NFL, and absolutely Gisele Bundchen is more well known in Europe than Tom Brady is.

Over in the US, she was Tom Brady's trophy wife. In Europe, it was more like ''oh that's Gisele Bundchen and her husband, he's some kind of professional sportsman I think''.

I think the NFL also suffers from the fact that we already have rugby in the England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, France, Germany, South Africa, New Zealand, Australia, et cetera. It's obviously not the same game but it has some superficial resemblance, and there's a cultural divide in it. Why would you ever watch American football - where games take forever, have eighteen million advertisements, there are breaks after every play, and it's just fundamentally a boring sport to watch unless you grew up with it - when you have rugby which is kind of a similar idea in terms of physicality and the type of ball and the overall goal, but is much faster, more immediate, less corporate, and frankly more fun?

---

I have tried hard, but cannot seem to get into rugby. It seems very boring to me. Guess it is what you are used to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobertM320

Seems like this would preclude anyone choosing to go to New York

---

Yep and that's one of the main reason why New York franchises are struggling to attract Big Time FA despite the big market aspect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by djrnno

Not to be disrespectful but Americans are really not concerned about how popular our sport is with the rest of the world.That's why we call it the NATIONAL football league or the NATIONAL basketball association. I truly doubt that South Africans worry about how popular cricket is in the US

---

You may be right but both leagues needs fans outside of the US in order to complete their growth. They all look at the money the Premier League get for international rights and know that's where they need to be headed. The media rights on the US market are pretty much on a bubble with stable or decreasing viewership and a skyrocketing price. They need that international money to compensate once the bubble will burst.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by P_B_&_G

This is one of the things that makes me think the league is fixed. You regularly see guys traded to the Lakers below market value. The question is why?

---

This is totally untrue. There's actually what's referred to as a Laker tax. Where they have to overpay to get a deal done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nichols

This is totally untrue. There's actually what's referred to as a Laker tax. Where they have to overpay to get a deal done.

---

Who is using Laker tax except Lakers media and fans ?

Like most fanbase, they tend to overvalue their own assets so they feel they have to pay more but just look at the history of trades made and you'll see it doesn't exist and more often than not, Lakers tends to take advantage of delfated value of players asking for a trade to them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

This is absolutely the case.

I really think most Americans don't understand exactly how insular a phenomenon the NFL is. From what I can gather, it's basically a nigh-omnipresent God-sport in the US, and almost completely non-existent outside of it.

Sure, games sell out when they go international, but that's not because it has legions of fans here, it's because they're novelties and we've all heard of the NFL because we watch American TV and American movies, so when it comes up as a once in a lifetime event, people will go. That doesn't mean that the sport itself is actually popular. I have never met anyone in the UK who actually watches the NFL, and absolutely Gisele Bundchen is more well known in Europe than Tom Brady is.

---

I disagree I think most Americans understand that football is something that's only popular in the United States. Like another poster said most Americans are just not concerned if other countries watch our sports leagues or not. If people in other countries watch basketball good for them, but we don't actually care.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by djrnno

1st Kansas City is not a big market team. 2nd they just happen to have a very good HC and QB. It's not that KC is in the SB a lot lately, it's the fact that The NFL has set it up that EVERY team has an equal chance of obtaining success. Unlike the NBA

---

Sure, there's less of a big market appeal in the NFL than the NBA (not that that's helped the Clippers/Nets/Knicks...meanwhile the Nuggets won the championship last year and this year's conference finalists included Indiana and Minnesota) but you either have parity or you don't, and the myth of the NFL is that a league completely dominated by the Patriots and now the Chiefs has some sort of equal fortune.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hornetsrebirth

I disagree I think most Americans understand that football is something that's only popular in the United States. Like another poster said most Americans are just not concerned if other countries watch our sports leagues or not. If people in other countries watch basketball good for them, but we don't actually care.

---

Sure but the point I'm making isn't about the fans, it's about the leagues themselves.

The NFL seems happy to have a complete stranglehold on American sports with basically zero imprint outside of it. That works for them, obviously they make money from it just fine, and the fans are happy.

The NBA isn't following that model. It seems happier to take a smaller chunk of the domestic market but is very actively trying to cultivate fanbases outside of the US. It makes sense, because basketball in general is more of a global sport even it's not exclusively the NBA.

So when people argue that the NBA should change its business model to be more like the NFL's because ''the NBA will never be number 1'' and ''the NFL got it right'' and the NBA ''won't ever sniff the popularity of the NFL'' et cetera et cetera, they're missing the point. They have different goals. The NBA is more popular than ever and, globally speaking, it's the far more culturally relevant sport, which brings its own benefits. That's why noting that the NFL is an insular sports culture with extremely limited reach is important.

It's also why the claim that parity is important for top level success doesn't work when you examine it on a global level. It may be true in the NFL that parity brings popularity (I wouldn't know, I don't watch the NFL and I'll take other people's word on it) but the NBA draws more inspiration from international soccer/football in that respect, which is heavily imbalanced by design and which is the most popular sport out of all three mentioned.

Clearly, the NBA doesn't mind having a star-driven league where certain teams languish because clearly that doesn't hurt their bottom line, and arguing that the NFL does it right and is more popular so the NBA should adopt the principles of things like a franchise tag doesn't work if you take the global market into consideration because the NFL isn't globally more popular and the most popular sports have even less parity. Parity is not integral to league success.

That said, the NBA is about to crown its 6th different champion in 6 years, the last 6 MVPs have been international players, the last ROTY is French and the number one pick of the upcoming draft is likely to be French, and their TV deals are worth more than ever, so it looks like the NBA has achieved precisely what it wanted in terms of international reach and money while also delivering parity at the top end. Anyone can win a chip; Toronto, Denver, Milwaukee have all done it recently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobertM320

Seems like this would preclude anyone choosing to go to New York

---

New York just kind of sucks. There are a lot of good reasons to visit and live there short term, but it isn?t somewhere you?d want to stay. Too cramped, smelly, high taxes, crime and too political. It?s never really been much of a sports hotspot despite being a massive market.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nichols

This is totally untrue. There's actually what's referred to as a Laker tax. Where they have to overpay to get a deal done.

---

Yeah. The Lakers can get anyone they want because basketball players, while celebrities, aren't on the top tier with rappers and movie stars, they're mostly B list celebs.....but being one of the top three or so players in the league or playing for the Lakers vaults you up rubbing elbows with the A listers.

Someone could make an argument that the movie and music industries have dropped down a bit in American celebrity status but the appeal of playing for LAL is that you get invited to more A list parties and get to upgrade your entourage playing there. So as long as that holds true they will always be able to attract the Lebrons and ADs of the world and by having those guys you'll always attract the role playing ring chasers. It's how they rebuilt so quickly after Kobe with LeBron and it's why they will only be down two to three seasons tops after LeBron when other franchises would take a decade to rebuild.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

New York just kind of sucks. There are a lot of good reasons to visit and live there short term, but it isn?t somewhere you?d want to stay. Too cramped, smelly, high taxes, crime and too political. It?s never really been much of a sports hotspot despite being a massive market.

---

This is a seriously comical take. NYC is the capital of the world for a reason and you certainly don’t get it. Your summation of NY comes straight from the Fox News sound bites. “It’s never been much of a sports hotspot” Oy vey!! Too funny!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msusousaphone

Yeah. The Lakers can get anyone they want because basketball players, while celebrities, aren't on the top tier with rappers and movie stars, they're mostly B list celebs.....but being one of the top three or so players in the league or playing for the Lakers vaults you up rubbing elbows with the A listers.

Someone could make an argument that the movie and music industries have dropped down a bit in American celebrity status but the appeal of playing for LAL is that you get invited to more A list parties and get to upgrade your entourage playing there. So as long as that holds true they will always be able to attract the Lebrons and ADs of the world and by having those guys you'll always attract the role playing ring chasers. It's how they rebuilt so quickly after Kobe with LeBron and it's why they will only be down two to three seasons tops after LeBron when other franchises would take a decade to rebuild.

---

Agreed..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blattman

Who is using Laker tax except Lakers media and fans ?

Like most fanbase, they tend to overvalue their own assets so they feel they have to pay more but just look at the history of trades made and you'll see it doesn't exist and more often than not, Lakers tends to take advantage of delfated value of players asking for a trade to them.

---

No.. just no. lol. Many team execs have asked more from the Lakers than they would from other teams for role players. A little research would clear that up for you. Paul George wanted to be traded to the Lakers, his team execs resented the idea, and over asked to get the deal done. Even the Pel's execs resented the prospect of sending AD to the Lakers and resisted. It's not just a Lakers issue.

Well Klay Thompson has purged everything GS related on his social media accounts. Also unfollowed GS

https://www.barstoolsports.com/blog/...rriors-content

Would you give Klay a shot here if you are Grif or you think he is done after multiple injuries? I believe we have enough injury prone players on our team so I would pass on him.

Off topic: BI has every single attribute that Jayson Tatum has...He just refuses to be "it"

Why haven't we signed anyone yet?

Monty Python Camelot Dance Dance GIFfrom Monty Python Camelot Dance GIFs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhyHornetsWhy

Off topic: BI has every single attribute that Jayson Tatum has...He just refuses to be "it"

---

I see that. I always remember when Jrue Holliday was the most hated player on the Pels roster. BI has a great work ethic. He'll improve. If I were betting, I'd put money down that he stays. It'll all come down to injuries. If the team stays relatively healthy, we'll contend and everyone will change their minds about him like they have with Jrue and so many other players. If the injuries continue, keeping him will be considered the worst move and the beginning of the end for the Griffin/Green era.

Klay would be really interesting if we move BI or CJ and end up with Garland or Allen. Would be a bit redundant if we hold pat.

The fact that our staff is all bolting to Detroit of all places is somewhat concerning. The front office board (Gayle & Dennis, Griff) might actually be okay with our mediocrity. There are some rumblings they are having second thoughts on moving Ingram now that they know his stock is higher than first thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nichols

Even the Pel's execs resented the prospect of sending AD to the Lakers and resisted.

---

Which had nothing to do with it being the Lakers and was entirely because of Lebron/Klutch meddling in the middle of the season.

Are we getting these two back together in a reunion tour?

https://external-content.duckduckgo....f31&ipo=images

That would be interesting. It certainly never worked in Portland but they also didn't have Zion. Not the most exciting for me but intriguing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 13 - 3

The fact that our staff is all bolting to Detroit of all places is somewhat concerning. The front office board (Gayle & Dennis, Griff) might actually be okay with our mediocrity. There are some rumblings they are having second thoughts on moving Ingram now that they know his stock is higher than first thought.

---

Jake Madison had a pretty good quote on this today. Something along the lines of 'staff leaving to take equal or less than positions elsewhere is the sign of a bad franchise. Staff leaving to take more money or a better position (which Trajan and Fred did) is the sign of a healthy one'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by msusousaphone

That would be interesting. It certainly never worked in Portland but they also didn't have Zion. Not the most exciting for me but intriguing.



Jake Madison had a pretty good quote on this today. Something along the lines of 'staff leaving to take equal or less than positions elsewhere is the sign of a bad franchise. Staff leaving to take more money or a better position (which Trajan and Fred did) is the sign of a healthy one'.

---

Jake trying to spin it the best he can. Meanwhile Jrue Holiday is about to get another ring. So I guess Jrue wanted to leave here because the Pelicans were in a good position.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 13 - 3

Jake trying to spin it the best he can. Meanwhile Jrue Holiday is about to get another ring. So I guess Jrue wanted to leave here because the Pelicans were in a good position.

---

Jrue wanted to leave to win a ring. I think everyone knew he would not get it here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PELICANSFAN

Jrue wanted to leave to win a ring. I think everyone knew he would not get it here.

---

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't remember Jrue asking for a trade. I recall that trade happening because the Pelicans wanted to make a move. We needed to acquire assets for rebuilding and knew that we could not be competitive with Jrue being the best player on our team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hornetsrebirth

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't remember Jrue asking for a trade. I recall that trade happening because the Pelicans wanted to make a move. We needed to acquire assets for rebuilding and knew that we could not be competitive with Jrue being the best player on our team.

---

The story that came out was that he requested a trade but did it the right way (behind the scenes) as he thought a rebuild could take too long. Could have been speculation.

can jrue come back and help us now