PDA

View Full Version : Players and Money !


PHXfan
05-07-2007, 08:15 PM
With the league picking up some of the better ABA teams, and ownership costing an arm and a leg. What type of cash are we talking about when paying players?

PHXfan
05-10-2007, 01:43 PM
To answer my own question, I just read that the salary cap for each team in the league will be $125,000.

panchess
05-11-2007, 10:54 AM
..if they are going to live up to the hype of the "future NBA stars," "best and the brightest" and all that.

I think if a minor league is going to offer a truly different product in an environmental shaped by the D-League, they are going to have to pay more money, and recruit older players that otherwise would go to Europe, sign them to multi-year deals (where appropriate) and build a fan base around "stars" the way the NBA and some minor league baseball teams do.

Whether it's the CBA, PBL, ABA or whatever, creating another "development" league with low salaries doesn't seem to make sense.

bectond
05-11-2007, 12:16 PM
..if they are going to live up to the hype of the "future NBA stars," "best and the brightest" and all that.

I think if a minor league is going to offer a truly different product in an environmental shaped by the D-League, they are going to have to pay more money, and recruit older players that otherwise would go to Europe, sign them to multi-year deals (where appropriate) and build a fan base around "stars" the way the NBA and some minor league baseball teams do.

Whether it's the CBA, PBL, ABA or whatever, creating another "development" league with low salaries doesn't seem to make sense.

I think a $125,000 salary cap is too high for a 12-week season. The tier system would be the best way to go:

Most of these minor league out-fits are not designed to survive, the best route would be to provide young players with a league that offers a low-pressure learning environment. If the PBL were wise, they would focus on Five types of players:
1-young players that are working to fix a deficiency in their games
2-veterans from foreign leagues with more experience
3-Ex-NBA players veterans
4-Local marquee players
5-Local Try-Outs

The late starting short season winter league format will not allow the PBL to sign the most attractive rookies, therefore the league should focus on signing
second year pros that did not meet expectations during the course of their rookie season and rookies that were cut or released by other leagues. These types of players should make up the bulk of PBL rosters.

Veterans from foreign leagues and ex-NBA players should only be signed to 15 day deals, thus allowing for fluid roster moves, these type of players normally jump from league to league anyway, so sign them for higher salaries but for a shorter duration.

Local marquee players should be used as the backbone of the league, these type of players allow the teams to put butts in the seats.

A fair market, young 2nd chance player salary would be about 375 per week.
6 development players per roster would only cost- $27,000 over the course of a 12 week season.

Veterans should cost about $2,500 for 15 days of service.
2 Veteran slots per roster could cost- up to $30,000 over the course of a 12 week season.

Local Marquee players should be drafted by PBL teams during the Fall, therefore the PBL should hold a Territorial draft to excite the fan base and inform potential employees that the team is interested.
Teams should sign one local rookie from the territorial draft and two local veterans
The local rookie should make 375 per week or $4,500 per year
And the local veterans should make $1,000 per week or $12,000 per year
The local try-out signee should be signed for $250 per week or $3,000 per year.

Total cost-
$27,000 for 6 developmental players
maxium of $30,000 for 2 veteran players
$4,500 for a local rookie
$24,000 for 2 marquee local veterans
$3,000 for a try-out signee
Total payroll:60,000 - 90,000

Fells
05-11-2007, 01:40 PM
I think a $125,000 salary cap is too high for a 12-week season. The tier system would be the best way to go:

Most of these minor league out-fits are not designed to survive, the best route would be to provide young players with a league that offers a low-pressure learning environment. If the PBL were wise, they would focus on Five types of players:
1-young players that are working to fix a deficiency in their games
2-veterans from foreign leagues with more experience
3-Ex-NBA players veterans
4-Local marquee players
5-Local Try-Outs

The late starting short season winter league format will not allow the PBL to sign the most attractive rookies, therefore the league should focus on signing
second year pros that did not meet expectations during the course of their rookie season and rookies that were cut or released by other leagues. These types of players should make up the bulk of PBL rosters.

Veterans from foreign leagues and ex-NBA players should only be signed to 15 day deals, thus allowing for fluid roster moves, these type of players normally jump from league to league anyway, so sign them for higher salaries but for a shorter duration.

Local marquee players should be used as the backbone of the league, these type of players allow the teams to put butts in the seats.

A fair market, young 2nd chance player salary would be about 375 per week.
6 development players per roster would only cost- $27,000 over the course of a 12 week season.

Veterans should cost about $2,500 for 15 days of service.
2 Veteran slots per roster could cost- up to $30,000 over the course of a 12 week season.

Local Marquee players should be drafted by PBL teams during the Fall, therefore the PBL should hold a Territorial draft to excite the fan base and inform potential employees that the team is interested.
Teams should sign one local rookie from the territorial draft and two local veterans
The local rookie should make 375 per week or $4,500 per year
And the local veterans should make $1,000 per week or $12,000 per year
The local try-out signee should be signed for $250 per week or $3,000 per year.

Total cost-
$27,000 for 6 developmental players
maxium of $30,000 for 2 veteran players
$4,500 for a local rookie
$24,000 for 2 marquee local veterans
$3,000 for a try-out signee
Total payroll:60,000 - 90,000

I should mention this when I talk to the PBL this afternoon for an article I am working on for the site.

panchess
05-11-2007, 02:03 PM
..two games a week isn't the "profit-maximizing" number. It's easy to say that we'll have all our games on Friday and Saturday nights, mid-week games don't make money and so on, but the reality is that you make more money playing three games a week rather than two, even if the third game is mid-week. More days making money, fewer days that are strictly overhead.

There are always venue issues, particularly when you only have 12 home games. Not a ton of buy-in for the venue in this case. More dates, more clout.

bectond
05-12-2007, 05:20 PM
..two games a week isn't the "profit-maximizing" number. It's easy to say that we'll have all our games on Friday and Saturday nights, mid-week games don't make money and so on, but the reality is that you make more money playing three games a week rather than two, even if the third game is mid-week. More days making money, fewer days that are strictly overhead.

There are always venue issues, particularly when you only have 12 home games. Not a ton of buy-in for the venue in this case. More dates, more clout.

You and I have disagreed on this issue for the past year. I'm a firm believer in the 80% of the games should be played on weekends philosophy. If teams want to save money, they should simply cut down on the overhead (family members make for great non-vital employees). I see the PBL has discovered the benefits of Comparative Advantages. If you have to play a road game and your in Rochester, you might as well save money and travel to Albany, instead of Texas. Playing a third games requires more logistical work, other than Presidents day and MLK day weekdays just don't offer much unless you are going after the suits. A Fri-Mon work week is easier on players as well, they can supplement their basketball earnings with full-time employment.

SignGuyDino
05-12-2007, 05:30 PM
This one, Fells?

http://oursportscentral.com/services/releases/?id=3468178

Seems my Google Alerts are working just fine.

OneBetter
05-12-2007, 06:57 PM
Hey Fells, great article on the PBL. I didn't know that Vermont was one of the teams making the jump. Because the PBL is trying to get sanctioned by FIBA, that means the Frost Heaves would need to play on a regulation court. Can you give us any insight into where they plan on playing next year?

panchess
05-13-2007, 07:12 AM
..Fells missed that part of the website. I e-mailed him, but he is out.

On Bectond's comment, I am assuming the PBL wants full-time basketball players and is planning to be an upgrade over the CBA. The part-time player, full-time worker model fits the ABA, not higher leagues where the guys play basketball all the time, and don't work in warehouses like 50 years ago. The PBL website certainly makes it sound like that they are shooting at least equal to, if not above, the D-League.

My comment on games stands. Three games a week is more efficient than two, and there are a few holiday weeks where it is easy. Downtime costs more money than playing, and no winter league with 12 home games is going to get only prime dates where they aren't the prime tenant.

Alumni96
05-13-2007, 09:18 AM
The CBA tried to compete with the D-league. How's that working out? The emperor Stern is not going to allow a league to compete. The days of guys going straight to the NBA from indie leagues is over. Players will have to go thru the D-league or europe. The PBL would be wise to consider this. They have a better chance of success being the "ABA" done right. I think it is a long shot that USA basketball will sanction a start up league.

bectond
05-13-2007, 09:19 AM
On Bectond's comment, I am assuming the PBL wants full-time basketball players and is planning to be an upgrade over the CBA. The part-time player, full-time worker model fits the ABA, not higher leagues where the guys play basketball all the time, and don't work in warehouses like 50 years ago. The PBL website certainly makes it sound like that they are shooting at least equal to, if not above, the D-League.

My comment on games stands. Three games a week is more efficient than two, and there are a few holiday weeks where it is easy. Downtime costs more money than playing, and no winter league with 12 home games is going to get only prime dates where they aren't the prime tenant.

Three games per week is only more efficient if 80% of the games are played on the weekend, if not the following example applies:
Let's use Teams A, B and C
If team A plays a 3 game per week schedule over the course of two weeks so,
Mon at B, Wed at C, Fri vs B for week one
Sun vs C, Wed vs B, Fri at C for week two
If team A is 10 miles north of team B and team B is 10 miles north of team c

A would have:
to travel 10 miles & provide (1) Room and Board for the Mon game with B,
Travel 10 miles & provide (2) days of R&B for the Wed game with C
Travel 20 miles for a Fri- Sun -Wed home stand, then
Travel 20 miles & provide (1) R&B for Fri game with C, then
travel 20 miles back to A.

In this first scenario Team A would travel 80 miles
and provide 4 days of room & board.

However, if team A plays a 2 game per week schedule over the course of two weeks,
Fri at B, Sun at C for week one and
Fri vs. B, Sun vs. C for week two

A would have:
to travel 10 miles & provide (1) day of R&B for the Fri game with B
Travel 10 miles & provide (2) days of R&B for the sun game with C
Then Travel 20 miles back to A

In this second scenario Team A would travel 40 miles
and provide 3 days of room & board

If we give home dates values based on revenue say,
2 for a weeknight home game
3 for a weekend home game

The 3 game per week scenario would produce a revenue sum of 8
The 2 game per week scenario would produce a revenue sum of 6

If we also give travel miles an expense value of .15 and
R&B days an expense value of .1
Arena Rental expense value of .25 per home game

The 3 game per week scenario would produce expenses of 13.15
The 2 game per week scenario would produce expenses of 6.8

In this example, the three day model is inefficient, the additional revenue generated (33%) by the extra weeknight home game does not justify the additional expense (94%) of the additional road game.

Scenario one 8-13.15= -5.15
Scenario two 6-6.8= -0.8

Three games in three nights would be efficient from a revenue stand point but it would cause logistical problems. The key is minimizing the number of breaks in the schedule, playing 2 games on the weekend does that (only one gap, a rather large one however mon-thu). These leagues can only benefit if they specialize on a particular aspect of the supply chain, and transfer other duties to other leagues in the chain. The key is focusing on the Comparative advantages in specializing. Attempting to one up each other is just azz backwards. If the NBA takes notice that the CBA or PBL is producing a service it is possible that the NBA will allocate the full effort to that league with a stipend because it is good business to do so. For example, if the PBL produces the best officials, than the NBA may allocate the training of NBA officials to the PBL.

AConcernedCitizen
05-13-2007, 10:12 AM
I asked this in another thread and don't remember where or if I ever got answered.

The NBA and FIBA have an understanding, but I do not believe that the NBA is or can sanction American leagues--US leagues and teams do not play by FIBA rules so how can they be under the FIBA umbrella for governing bodies?

panchess
05-14-2007, 08:32 AM
From their web site....

USA Basketball is the national governing body for basketball in the United States and the basic differences between memberships are as follows: active memberships are national sports organizations that actively conduct a national basketball program; associate members are organizations that conduct programs in or allied to basketball as a competitive sport, but that do not qualify for active membership; affiliate membership is open only to travel and promotional agencies or similar commercial groups involving basketball in their activities.

The CBA and D-League are members (the D-League and WNBA are listed separately from the NBA. I believe the person who asked if the NBA is prohibited from sanctioning other league is right. In any event, the D-League and WNBA are sanctioned by FIBA through USA Basketball). None of the other minor leagues in the USA are members.

Other members include the NJCAA, NABC, NAIA, the US Armed Forces, and the USA Deaf Sports Federation. Associate members include Athletes in Action and the Harlem Globetrotters.

bdaly
05-14-2007, 11:54 AM
On Bectond's comment, I am assuming the PBL wants full-time basketball players and is planning to be an upgrade over the CBA. The part-time player, full-time worker model fits the ABA, not higher leagues where the guys play basketball all the time, and don't work in warehouses like 50 years ago. The PBL website certainly makes it sound like that they are shooting at least equal to, if not above, the D-League.
This can still be done. They can't exclusively play in the PBL, but that should be expected. Many of the top ABA teams didn't have their players working a FT job on the side. Heck, for them it would be nearly impossible since they're changing cities every three months. The PBL needs to be careful of not being overly ambitious. The U.S. minor league basketball market is fickle, and we see that in every single league, so they need to keep costs modest. If things start growing, then they can up the cap. They don't want to be the IHL of basketball though--we all know how that worked out.


My comment on games stands. Three games a week is more efficient than two, and there are a few holiday weeks where it is easy. Downtime costs more money than playing, and no winter league with 12 home games is going to get only prime dates where they aren't the prime tenant.
There are arguments on both sides. In the end, it depends on the arena. If you're forced to travel across the country, forcing in as many games as possible makes sense no matter what. If travel is reasonable, it becomes more debatable. A team with 14 or 18 dates isn't really going to get prime dates either. Let's face it, with where minor league basketball is right now, no one is going to be seen as a primary tenant unless a facility is desperate for tenants. Regardless of the fact the NLL Knighthawks only play eight games in Rochester, they get better dates than the R-Sharks. Averaging 10K a game will do that for you.

panchess
05-14-2007, 01:09 PM
If you're too ambitious, you can lose tons of money and not reach the goal of a better league and better attendance.

If you're not ambitious enough, you end up like the ABA.

Actually, the National Lacrosse League is a good example of how to do it right with part-timers and "major league presentation." The biggest difference is that the NLL basically has no competition for players, so it is easier to get the best and brightest. That isn't true in minor league basketball, with national and international competitive leagues.

From what I have heard of the PBL, I don't get how it's different enough from the CBA to justify the creation of a new league. Maybe it's just me, but combining forces (as already seems to be the case for "exhibition games that may count") and creating a better league makes a lot more sense, especially given that combining the footprints of the PBL and CBA would help both leagues reduce travel costs considerably.

bectond
05-14-2007, 03:13 PM
The CBA tried to compete with the D-league. How's that working out? The emperor Stern is not going to allow a league to compete. The days of guys going straight to the NBA from indie leagues is over. Players will have to go thru the D-league or europe. The PBL would be wise to consider this. They have a better chance of success being the "ABA" done right. I think it is a long shot that USA basketball will sanction a start up league.

I donít want to turn this thread into a Comparative economic theory Debate, but.....
Without the information provided by an aggregate, it is impossible to rationally allocate resources. The NBA knows that it is better to produce 5 top notch point guards per year then it would be to produce 2. However, many intermediate factors have to fit into an economic model before any rational economic decisions can be made. Without exchange of data between leagues, the NBA would never know if focusing on developing 5 point guards a year is a better economic model than say, simply developing 2 or developing 3 while allocating the development of 2 to another league. The league canít position itself as a development force properly without satisfying the need for intermediate resources as well. The developmental league will need intermediate resources like: player personnel coaches, skill set coaches, nutritionist, strength and conditioning coaches, scouts, practice facilities, video coordinators, film session facilities, and actual games played. The NBA has to decide if it wants to focus on the development of players, officials, front office staff and all the intermediate personnel needed to ensure that players do indeed develop. Does the NBA want novice intermediate personnel developing their on-stage products? The intermediates will have to be trained elsewhere before they join an NBA or D-League staff in order to properly coach and evaluate the players. As for the NBA taking the ďall players must pass thru the D-League first approachĒ , that undermines the whole concept of optimal resource allocation. The NBA cannot orientate itself properly without first determining it is a comparative advantage to allocate the development of some of itís human resources to independent specialized leagues. With research the NBA may determine that the development of underdeveloped Big man hinders the development of wing players. These players should not have to re-enter the D-League, thus hindering wing player development before advancing to the NBA. IMO It is not in the NBAs best interest to limit the resources they allocate to independent leagues. The problem with most indie leagues is that they are mostly run by non-basketball related people. These guys really donít have a clue in regards to developing talent, they just want the joys of owning a basketball team. Without the assistance from the NBA these individuals have little incentive to share their trained staffers or information with the NBA. Most of these Nimrods at the indie level are not aware that they have any valuable resources and the resources they do have they donít have the knowledge to use or pass on to an organization that does. The NBA should do a better job of assisting in the expansion of the sport. They should be thinking Comparative Advantages, Comparative Advantages.....

bdaly
05-14-2007, 08:30 PM
From what I have heard of the PBL, I don't get how it's different enough from the CBA to justify the creation of a new league. Maybe it's just me, but combining forces (as already seems to be the case for "exhibition games that may count") and creating a better league makes a lot more sense, especially given that combining the footprints of the PBL and CBA would help both leagues reduce travel costs considerably.
I don't disagree with you here. I think both leagues will be at a similar level. As you mentioned, Matthews stated that PBL teams may play teams from another league and have them count in the standings. I'd be surprised if that league isn't the CBA. Who knows why they aren't together, and it could very well be political. Frankly, they are both similar leagues with a lot of influence coming from teams that got sick of the ABA's many issues. I'd be surprised if they don't eventually merge together.