PDA

View Full Version : CBA / NBDL Merger


mzracing76
08-19-2007, 01:10 PM
what would it mean to have a merger of both leagues. I know its a long shot, but think about this scenerio. Use the More Marketable Minor League Name (CBA). with all the history behind it, and you could have 26 teams. nearly enough for every NBA team.

I know this is a long shot, cause both leagues dont see eye to eye, but I think this would be better for the fans.

this year:
CBA = 10 / 12 teams playing
NBDL = 14 teams playing
total of 24 teams in the Top Two Minor League's Combined.

MZ

SignGuyDino
08-19-2007, 04:02 PM
The NBA could buy out the CBA if they really wanted to, and if the CBA was really interested in selling.

Apparently they are tired of trying to work out a deal every year. Since His Holiness Sternicus I is pushing for one D-League team per NBA team (which virtually all of us here agree with), you would think merging makes sense.

But if NBA owners are going to own their own D-League team, I'm sure they want some input as to the city the team is in. That wouldn't bode well for merging the two leagues.

It would say the CBA is firmly planted as the #2 minor league, but their prestige would be far less in about 5 years if the D-League expands to 29-30 teams.

one way
08-19-2007, 04:45 PM
here is something to think about. If the NBA has all of this money and all of this power and all of this prestige- why do we not have more NBDL teams. The NBA could easily spend the money, put a team anywhere they want. Reality, their teams are expensive and they lose to much money.

Chuck the Writer
08-19-2007, 06:11 PM
The D-League and the CBA are essentially two different types of minor league circuits. The D-League players are young men playing out essentially their fifth or sixth years of college, learning the pro game on a level without having tons of scrutiny on the NBA level (which can do a lot of damage if you're not properly conditioned for same, think Korleone Young).

The CBA has a mixture of rookies and veterans, all of whom are capable of playing a roll in the NBA.

The D-League already effectuated their own merger two years ago when they poached Dakota, Idaho, Sioux Falls and Colorado to join them. Those teams are currently the strongest franchises in the D-League, and teams like Arkansas and Fort Worth are either relocating or giving up the ghost.

The real test of which league is better prepared will take place in Rio Grande Valley, when the Silverados (CBA) and the Vipers (D-League) try to see which team is stronger in that region.

Besides, it's unlikely that the two leagues would ever merge at this point. There was an attempt by the NBA in 2000 to get the CBA, the IBL and the ABA to all merge into one 24-team minor league, but someone in the ABA (gee, I wonder who?) put the kibosh on the merger, claiming that the ABA was not a "minor league" and wouldn't consider merging with those leagues.

And if the two leagues merged, what would happen to the 7-point standings rule, the no-foul-out rule, and several other rule variations between the two circuits? What would happen to the CBA's stats and records, would they just disappear in a merger - or, for that matter, would the D-League's stats disappear the other way?

Yeah, it's great to think about what a merger like that would create, but let's not forget that in minor league baseball, the PCL and the IL operate just fine without any inter-league series.

SignGuyDino
08-19-2007, 06:24 PM
Well, the mistake was any talk of working with the ABA.

I agree with Chuck, the D-League recruits different types and ages of players. At this time it would be better to keep a cordial professional relationship because CBA players will still get callups until the D-League gets a team for each NBA team, maybe still get callups. Wouldn't be that bad a gesture to post CBA scores on NBATV.

Nothing wrong with a solid minor league trying out different rule changes for the NBA anyway. Remember when the D-League tried that ridiculous rule where the 3 point line didn't count until the last two minutes of each period?

What I'd rather see right now is the D-League get their full amount of teams, then work arrangements with any legit summer minor league to give their second stringers some work. Maybe in 4 or 5 years the USBA, and/or Magician's southern league yet to be named, would have proven themselves and such a deal would make total sense.

That seems to make a lot of sense. It takes constant rapport with the NBA, which is tough given the problems they have allowed with corrupt officials.

BTW, anyone have an idea what happened to Phil Evans? I know he left the D-League to stay away from New York since the D-League moved their league office up north. I was wondering what he's up to now?

panchess
08-20-2007, 12:22 PM
..with higher salaries (for at least one or two players on each team) and a larger focus on veterans as opposed to development. Compete less with the D-League (a competition the CBA can't win as long as the D-League is the official development league of the NBA) and more for Euroleague for "name" veteran talent.

Pounder
08-20-2007, 12:43 PM
The CBA average market is getting smaller, not larger.

Name European talent gets paid MUCH better in Europe than the CBA promises.

The D-League really has more value to the NBA for player development than it does ticket sales (especially once the NBA owners finally realize this). The CBA isn't much better off on the ticket sales argument.

Can the CBA do what the IBL does, only with more fans and a more traditional schedule? I'm thinking that if Pikeville is involved, and THAT works, regionalization is the order of the day. The market size issue already begs for that.

bomp
08-21-2007, 03:41 AM
Can the CBA do what the IBL does, only with more fans and a more traditional schedule?

Pounder, what do you mean by this?

Pounder
08-21-2007, 11:08 AM
More smaller markets in relatively geographically compact regions. Less travel outside the region.

This obviously means the price of entry goes down. It's tasking the CBA with being a basketball business more than a franchise business. That might be more than most owners want to swallow (being legitimate and all, anyway).

Heck, I don't think the future of the D-League is in building fan bases.

Ken, Steelheads fan
08-21-2007, 12:59 PM
Heck, I don't think the future of the D-League is in building fan bases.

I don't think so either. At first I couldn't see thirty D-League teams (one for every NBA team), but now I can. Each D-League team will probably play in whatever practice facility the parent club uses. The general public may or may not be invited to watch these games depending on team policy.

There's no way we will see thirty D-League teams in 5,000+ seat arenas though.

one way
08-21-2007, 01:57 PM
There is no way there will be 30 NBDL teams owned by owners not affliated with the parent club. The NBDL losses to much money- they cannot find thirty owners who want to lose that type of money. In order to have thrity clubs, each NBA clubs has to own the own the francise and absorb the losses and subsidize their own NBDL team.

Pounder
08-21-2007, 02:00 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if, say, LA moved the D-whatevers to Ontario, Portland puts their team in the Salem Armory... basically small facilities in the greater metro areas (sort of, when noting that neither given example is technically part of the SMSAs) of the "parent" teams. The Armory seats maybe 2,500, and that might be the smarter way to go.

Even then, I have my doubts.

The money is made by uprooting the college draft, thereby training your players your way and not having to pay someone extra millions for doing well under a strict coaching system with different rules and refs (and mistakenly called amateur, BTW). Players who don't quite make it, of course, can have contracts sold to European teams.

panchess
08-21-2007, 02:14 PM
..ironically, Gerry McNamara resigned in Greece, saying he didn't like the D-League.

I am a big Syracuse fan, but G-Mac is a bit ahead of himself, in my opinion. Great college player with limited skills for the pros.

If I were David Stern, I would set the D-League up differently, with two or four "pods" in non-NBA cities in each time zone or region, let's say. For example, Baltimore, Nashville, Kansas City and Reno. Have several teams in each location, and play doubleheaders like summer leagues, along with shooting coaches and whatever else you want.

You could have the "pods" travel to each other once or twice during the season and play all of the other teams at once. Travel would be minimal, and it would be more easier to run while likely producing more talent.

You'd strip most of the travel out, so the ultimate losses for the NBA would likely be less. You'd also create interest in the NBA in cities that are relatively large, but not quite ready for a franchise. In other words, cultivatying potential expansion candidates.

ChumpDumper
08-21-2007, 06:12 PM
..ironically, Gerry McNamara resigned in Greece, saying he didn't like the D-League.

I am a big Syracuse fan, but G-Mac is a bit ahead of himself, in my opinion. Great college player with limited skills for the pros.I think he didn't like his D-League experience because he kept losing minutes to Mateen Cleaves.

Anyway it looks like the future of the D-League lies in the teams either being owned by NBA clubs (LA, SA) or by venue owners with extremely close ties to the affiliate club (Utah) -- at least in the midsized markets. Stability has to be the overall goal for the franchises if the league wants to achieve and maintain a one-to-one D-League/NBA team ratio.

The CBA is doing some interesting things, but it's difficult to get a read on their overall strategy. Pikeville makes one think they are concentrating on the micro markets that have proven strong in the past, but do a little reading and it looks like two CBA teams are planned to play in suburban Seattle (Everett and Kent) putting four teams from Yakima to Vancouver in three or four years. Now with the return to the southwest their travel costs have to be through the roof. The only real relief that could be found would be more teams in those areas and geographical conferences to cut down on the expenses -- like the D-League just did, and like what seems to be planned for the Pacific northwest in the CBA.

I have a bias toward the D-League because I live in Austin and am a season ticket holder for the Toros (which seemed pretty close to a break-even operation before the Spurs' purchase) but I do know the CBA has been generally better run. I'll be going down to the valley at least a couple of times this season to compare the two operations. I know one will eventually have to leave, but I'll enjoy having three high-level minor-league basketball teams in the state which had none three seasons ago.

bectond
08-22-2007, 09:12 PM
There is no way there will be 30 NBDL teams owned by owners not affliated with the parent club. The NBDL losses to much money- they cannot find thirty owners who want to lose that type of money. In order to have thrity clubs, each NBA clubs has to own the own the francise and absorb the losses and subsidize their own NBDL team.

D-League teams are the only minor league basketball franchises that can be sold for a profit. Most sports teams outside the NFL lose money for tax purposes(even the Yankees lost money the last two years), the key is to recoup your loses when you sell the team. IMO D-League teams are the best option on the basketball franchise market from a business prespective. Selling teams to non NBA team owners won't be a problem. In five years there will be 30 D-league teams and the cost of buying an existing team will skyrocket due to the fact that expansion will halt in North America.

rams80
08-22-2007, 09:14 PM
D-League teams are the only minor league basketball franchises that can be sold for a profit. Most sports teams outside the NFL lose money for tax purposes(even the Yankees lost money the last two years), the key is to recoup your loses when you sell the team. IMO D-League teams are the best option on the basketball franchise market from a business prespective. Selling teams to non NBA team owners won't be a problem. In five years there will be 30 D-league teams and the cost of buying an existing team will skyrocket due to the fact that expansion will halt in North America.

What if teams keep going belly up as D-League teams are wont to do?

panchess
08-23-2007, 12:18 PM
...what operator has actually sold a D-League franchise and made money on it?

I am assuming you could sell Sioux Falls or Dakota (teams that I have to assume have assets and long tenure in good markets), but the others? Two D-League teams folded this year (Arkansas and Fort Worth) and they weren't sold.

Basically franchises aren't worth much if you can get a new one from the league for a low price. Why assume somebody else's liabilities when you aren't getting any real assets?

panchess
08-23-2007, 12:19 PM
..the schedule is more travel-friendly this year, with doubleheaders in most remote locations. The stability of the league (not perfect, but better than last year) allowed an earlier schedule, and better opportunity for arena dates.

ChumpDumper
08-23-2007, 02:52 PM
...what operator has actually sold a D-League franchise and made money on it?I imagine Southwest Basketball made some money selling the Toros.

I am assuming you could sell Sioux Falls or Dakota (teams that I have to assume have assets and long tenure in good markets), but the others? Two D-League teams folded this year (Arkansas and Fort Worth) and they weren't sold.They didn't fold completely, they couldn't find a venue in time to work into the schedule. The RimRockers tried to move to LaCrosse, Wisconsin and Southwest Basketball (also the Flyers' owner) is negotiating with Reno to have the team play there next season.

Basically franchises aren't worth much if you can get a new one from the league for a low price. Why assume somebody else's liabilities when you aren't getting any real assets?I guess we could ask Peter Holt.

bectond
08-23-2007, 03:22 PM
...what operator has actually sold a D-League franchise and made money on it?

Basically franchises aren't worth much if you can get a new one from the league for a low price. Why assume somebody else's liabilities when you aren't getting any real assets?

Stern approached Kahn with the idea of owning multiple D-League franchises.
It was a firesale dude. Kahn agreed to take on the debt of three d-league teams Huntsville, Columbus and Asheville, and he purchased one expansion team. He then sold 25% of each club to local owners.

So here is the math, he purchased one team, but he sold a 25% share of four teams. (Break even minus the debt of the three existing teams)
Then he sold one team Austin at a later date for more than he paid for the expansion team he purchased. (Profit)

Fort Worth did not fold either dude, they are moving the franchise to Reno, and Cuban is most likely going to operate a new franchise in Fort Worth. Kahn has been looking at Reno for over a year. I repeat, they are not folding. They are relocated to an area they have been looking into for over a year.

rams80
08-23-2007, 04:05 PM
Stern approached Kahn with the idea of owning multiple D-League franchises.
It was a firesale dude. Kahn agreed to take on the debt of three d-league teams Huntsville, Columbus and Asheville, and he purchased one expansion team. He then sold 25% of each club to local owners.

So here is the math, he purchased one team, but he sold a 25% share of four teams. (Break even minus the debt of the three existing teams)
Then he sold one team Austin at a later date for more than he paid for the expansion team he purchased. (Profit)

Fort Worth did not fold either dude, they are moving the franchise to Reno, and Cuban is most likely going to operate a new franchise in Fort Worth. Kahn has been looking at Reno for over a year. I repeat, they are not folding. They are relocated to an area they have been looking into for over a year.

And you honestly expect us to believe a basketball team going toe-to-toe with a program on the scale of Nevada's will ever turn a profit. In a market where minor leauge teams in all sports struggle?! That team's folding after one year-he's taking a bath.

Except for the NBA's owners, there is not enough demand to support even 20 D-League teams. There aren't enough markets where the business model could experience success. There's your economics. The only way the D-League ever hits 30 is if each NBA franchise owns a team and is willing to run it at a loss. And you can bet people will look at the red on those balance sheets and decide they don't want a team.

bectond
08-23-2007, 05:11 PM
And you honestly expect us to believe a basketball team going toe-to-toe with a program on the scale of Nevada's will ever turn a profit. In a market where minor leauge teams in all sports struggle?! That team's folding after one year-he's taking a bath.

Except for the NBA's owners, there is not enough demand to support even 20 D-League teams. There aren't enough markets where the business model could experience success. there's your economics. .

Thanks for the wonderful insight dude!

By the way, Kahn will have to sell 25% of the team to local owners before he can move the team. You can add that more to the income he has already generated (see prior post on subject).

IMO, this time next year there should be 20 NBDL franchises.
4 Expansion teams, 2 relocated teams (Ft.Worth and Arkansas) and the 14 existing clubs. Hope to hear from you in a year.

rams80
08-23-2007, 06:33 PM
Thanks for the wonderful insight dude!

By the way, Kahn will have to sell 25% of the team to local owners before he can move the team. You can add that more to the income he has already generated (see prior post on subject).

IMO, this time next year there should be 20 NBDL franchises.
4 Expansion teams, 2 relocated teams (Ft.Worth and Arkansas) and the 14 existing clubs. Hope to hear from you in a year.

1) Where will these expansion clubs be?

2) Are you SURE nobody will go belly up?

3) What makes you think that a) Kahn will be able to find local owners (most of the local guys who would be foolish enough to get in this gig already got bankrupted by the ABA), and b) he won't continue to lose money thanks to the fact that he still owns a part of a money pit that nobody wants to watch.

Ken, Steelheads fan
08-23-2007, 07:21 PM
Thanks for the wonderful insight dude!

By the way, Kahn will have to sell 25% of the team to local owners before he can move the team. You can add that more to the income he has already generated (see prior post on subject).

IMO, this time next year there should be 20 NBDL franchises.
4 Expansion teams, 2 relocated teams (Ft.Worth and Arkansas) and the 14 existing clubs. Hope to hear from you in a year.

bectond,
Not everyone on this forum is a dude (although I fit the dude category rather well). :D

According to your logic, the Indiana Alley Cats didn't fold either. They just suspended operations (where have I heard that before?) until they can move to another city. The Alley Cats are toast. The Fort Worth NBADL team is toast. It folded. The Arkansas Rimrockers are toast. Fans can't watch a live NBADL game in Forth Worth or North Little Rock anymore.

Well, I hope to be here in another year from today too. I'm getting kinda used to saying I told you so. Three years ago the Rimrockers were touted as one of the best franchise in minor league sports. I thought they were just another bad basketball franchise making unsound business decisions. Well, history has spoken. The American public is not interested in the NBADL as a spectator sport. More teams will fold next season and more NBA teams will operate their own D-League squads. When the ink becomes too red for the NBA, the D-League will be forced into existing practice facilities.

...and what are these profits you are talking about? There are expenses on the other side of the ledger. We haven't seen the books.

ChumpDumper
08-23-2007, 11:00 PM
So if were working from a pure profit standpoint, there are only about three teams in any given minor league that anyone actually wants to see, right? The "I told you" so method will work anywhere after enough time.

Since it's not my money invested I'll enjoy it while I can.

Ken, Steelheads fan
08-24-2007, 12:57 AM
So if were working from a pure profit standpoint, there are only about three teams in any given minor league that anyone actually wants to see, right? The "I told you" so method will work anywhere after enough time.

Not true. The statute of limitations on I told you so is only three years. Teams surviving longer than three seasons are immune. 8)

Ken, Steelheads fan
08-24-2007, 01:26 AM
...and since the Rimrockers were three and out:

http://www.oursportscentral.com/boards/showthread.php?t=2094&highlight=d-league+rimrockers

A blast from the past.

bectond
08-24-2007, 09:34 AM
Really, you two are barking up the wrong tree, the D-league is clearly the best option on the market. If I respond to a comment, then you guys come back with a series of hypotheticals, what if this or what if that. The fact is the D-League is on the right track. Have you guys ever considered that a parent club could enter into a formal developmental agreement with independent operators once a one to one NBA to NBDL team relationship is established. Why is it so hard for you guys to believe NBA clubs would not offer financial support to their developmental club and ensure itís survival once a one to one relationship is established. You guys just canít see the forest thur the trees.

Why canít you guys see that it is cheaper to develop talent in the D-League then any other option: bidding for high price free agents on the open market, allowing young players to waste away on the parent clubs bench or rely on colleges where athletic development is an after thought.

Instead of keeping Ian Mahiami in France for another year and taking the chance on a European team out bidding them for his future services, the Spurs can sign he and send him to Austin along with 2nd round pick Marcus Williams and develop them in their system. When Horry and Bowen retire, they may have to replacements ready to contribute on the cheap without having to enter the pricey free agent market. A Mid-Level free agent makes 5.3 mil a year, a D-League team operates for about 1 mil a year, you do the math. If teams develop more reliable talent the price of free agents will also go down. (more supply less demand).

rams80
08-24-2007, 10:43 AM
Really, you two are barking up the wrong tree, the D-league is clearly the best option on the market. If I respond to a comment, then you guys come back with a series of hypotheticals, what if this or what if that. The fact is the D-League is on the right track. Have you guys ever considered that a parent club could enter into a formal developmental agreement with independent operators once a one to one NBA to NBDL team relationship is established. Why is it so hard for you guys to believe NBA clubs would not offer financial support to their developmental club and ensure itís survival once a one to one relationship is established. You guys just canít see the forest thur the trees.

Your typical major league to minor league financial subsidies don't do you a lot of good when you barely draw in 4 digits. Even if the NBA team picks up the health costs and even the player's wages, you still have to pick up the other costs of owning the franchise and the lease. If nobody is watching the game, you still can't pay the bills. Even heavily subsidized minor league baseball has to have better attendance than your non-CBA D-League team in order to survive, unless it is directly owned by a Major League team that can better support a loss (see also, Florida State League). Your model omits the fan; which is actually the most crucial aspect to survival and failure in the minor leagues.

So even with the D-League being the best financial option on the market...the real lesson here is don't even enter the business then. Minor League Basketball will not pay out.

Why canít you guys see that it is cheaper to develop talent in the D-League then any other option: bidding for high price free agents on the open market, allowing young players to waste away on the parent clubs bench or rely on colleges where athletic development is an after thought.

It's cheaper, but the players won't go for it. They'd rather get paid more to play in Europe and have a chance to play before actual crowds as opposed to empty seats, and play in more exciting locales than Sioux Falls or Bismarck. That's the fundamental flaw-and if the better young talent keeps going to Europe, the NBA teams that want it will have no choice but to sign with them. Even if the NBA were to set up an exclusive relationship with the D-League and the D-League alone, in the absence of MLB's anti-trust exemption, I can't see said relationship surviving an anti-trust lawsuit.

Instead of keeping Ian Mahiami in France for another year and taking the chance on a European team out bidding them for his future services, the Spurs can sign he and send him to Austin along with 2nd round pick Marcus Williams and develop them in their system. When Horry and Bowen retire, they may have to replacements ready to contribute on the cheap without having to enter the pricey free agent market. A Mid-Level free agent makes 5.3 mil a year, a D-League team operates for about 1 mil a year, you do the math. If teams develop more reliable talent the price of free agents will also go down. (more supply less demand).

Again...what makes you think the player will accept playing in Austin when he knows he can make more in Europe? It happens all the time in hockey, and might happen in baseball if it was ever played in Europe. The players need to be willing participants for this to work, and I doubt that would happen.

Pounder
08-24-2007, 02:27 PM
bectond... get a hold of yourself. Relax.

You and rams (and others) are talking past each other, talking two completely different systems. Fans of each don't even know how the other system works, and it's DAMN hard to get people to think out of their box.

Besides, you're getting ahead of yourself. We SEE how the NBADL CAN have a model that actually reduces costs and potentially even reduces the "thug" image... but the D-League hasn't completely stepped over the line yet. They're afraid to fully commit, to take the last step.

I'm saying they should.

EXAMPLE: Chris Washburn. REALLY good in college. Golden State threw bleeploads of money at him without knowing about drug problems and system issues that meant the lad was never really a pro baller. LOTS of wasted money. For that matter, lots of wasted hype.

If there were a youth system and a reserve system, the Warriors (or whomever Washburn came in with) would have known about personal problems long before any hype was attached. They'd know who to promote, likely because they can train the kids in pro rules instead of college rules. College ball overhypes kids who train in systems that have little relevance to the professional game.

All the NBA has to do is to recruit high-schoolers (and eventually younger) into the D-League with the expectation of competing for NBA slots. Mind you, that has nothing to do with what will happen with college game attendance, and there's no guarantee that D-League attendance will improve because of it. That doesn't matter. The real money into league pockets comes from no longer paying millions to bad draft picks, not to mention having a say in promoting better characters instead of finding out much later what insular campus police (and no one else) already know.

Still, the thing is that the NBA has to take the next set of steps.

ChumpDumper
08-24-2007, 06:46 PM
Again...what makes you think the player will accept playing in Austin when he knows he can make more in Europe? Well, in Ian's case, he's already being paid his NBA salary.

As far as the advantage of playing in the D-League for the average player, it's clear that it's the exposure to NBA scouts playing the NBA game. It's not rocket science. There has always been a churn of players between the D-League and Europe and that will continue. If the D-League is so unattractive to players, why do they routinely come back from Europe to play in the D-League? Opportunity.

I don't think the D-League will be a money-making operation everywhere it goes. I think attendance expectations in some venues are ridiculous. I actually kind of like how the Toros have been run -- cheap, small venue in a good location, lots of sponsors. Much more realistic than acting like you're going to sell out 18,000 seats and luxury boxes an arena in North Little Rock. I think the Vipers would have been better served playing in the venue the Silverados call home. It will be an interesting season down there. May the better team win.

bectond
08-24-2007, 06:49 PM
Your typical major league to minor league financial subsidies don't do you a lot of good when you barely draw in 4 digits. Even if the NBA team picks up the health costs and even the player's wages, you still have to pick up the other costs of owning the franchise and the lease. .

I don't think you understand NBA budgets, they are normally well over 100 million a year, a 1 million D-League budget is less than 1% of an NBA budget. If D-League players can save an NBA teams millions over the course of long term contracts, NBA owners would gladly fork over money to keep a development team afloat.

For instance, say player A is a 2nd round pick, the Pistons can assign him to the D-league for up to two years for development (while paying him an NBA salary.

In the D-League, player A can focus on his long term development
and not winning games. The Pistons can develop his psychological, athletic and technical skills. If he were on the Pistons bench he would not log the type of minutes needed to develop. After one or two years, player A would either move up to the Pistons for a low level salary or the Pistons would have to pay an NBA free Agent a mid-level salary if player A did not develop. The difference being 1.5 million over three years for player A and 5.3 million over three years for the free agent. If player A develops in the D-League the Pistons will save 11.5 million over the course of three years.
I never said anything about attendance or fans watching the game, you are going to have to discuss those issues with whoever raised them. I'm discussing the fact that the D-League (if successful) will improve the overall talent level of the NBA. In the Current system either you can play or you can't. Nobody is really given the chance to improve all the facets of their games during the season. Ole School types believe NBA stands for "No Babies allowed", they are not into developing talent, those types don't believe in the D-League but the Pistons and the Spurs do. Those organizations will bring about a brave new world where teams develop talent instead of attempting to out spend the other guy.




If nobody is watching the game, you still can't pay the bills. Even heavily subsidized minor league baseball has to have better attendance than your non-CBA D-League team in order to survive, unless it is directly owned by a Major League team that can better support a loss (see also, Florida State League). Your model omits the fan; which is actually the most crucial aspect to survival and failure in the minor leagues.

So even with the D-League being the best financial option on the market...the real lesson here is don't even enter the business then. Minor League Basketball will not pay out..

I don't understand any of this


It's cheaper, but the players won't go for it. They'd rather get paid more to play in Europe and have a chance to play before actual crowds as opposed to empty seats, and play in more exciting locales than Sioux Falls or Bismarck. That's the fundamental flaw-and if the better young talent keeps going to Europe, the NBA teams that want it will have no choice but to sign with them. Even if the NBA were to set up an exclusive relationship with the D-League and the D-League alone, in the absence of MLB's anti-trust exemption, I can't see said relationship surviving an anti-trust lawsuit...

Mahiami and Williams are NBA players that will be assigned to the D-League for development. They will earn an NBA pay check not D-League pay.
I don't know what you are talking about when you stated the relationship won't survive an anti-trust lawsuit.



Again...what makes you think the player will accept playing in Austin when he knows he can make more in Europe? It happens all the time in hockey, and might happen in baseball if it was ever played in Europe. The players need to be willing participants for this to work, and I doubt that would happen.

I think you should read up on the d-league some more before posting.

bectond
08-24-2007, 07:00 PM
bectond... get a hold of yourself. Relax.

You and rams (and others) are talking past each other, talking two completely different systems. .

Rams does not know what he is talking about, he should research the D-League before he makes the type of statements he is making. Dude is coming out of left field.


Besides, you're getting ahead of yourself. We SEE how the NBADL CAN have a model that actually reduces costs and potentially even reduces the "thug" image... but the D-League hasn't completely stepped over the line yet. They're afraid to fully commit, to take the last step..

The Pistons, Jazz and Spurs are the best organizations in the NBA and they are committed to the D-League. All had dudes stashed overseas and pulled them back over here to develop in the D-League instead. They are committed to balancing their budgets. (I don't know what the Lakers are doing and I refuse to have a discussion based on the actions of those nuts) Washington may be ready to drive in head first as well.

ChumpDumper
08-24-2007, 07:22 PM
I don't know what the Lakers are doing and I refuse to have a discussion based on the actions of those nuts:D Funny. Well, they've probably had the least overhead of any D-League team so far. It'll be interesting to see how the move to Ontario works.

rams80
08-24-2007, 09:03 PM
I don't think you understand NBA budgets, they are normally well over 100 million a year, a 1 million D-League budget is less than 1% of an NBA budget. If D-League players can save an NBA teams millions over the course of long term contracts, NBA owners would gladly fork over money to keep a development team afloat.

Then why don't they simply just own the team, operate it in their own building, and eliminate the middle man? The Lakers' approach to their D-League team with the D-Fenders last year might end up being the best approach economically; and you'll be able to get your thirty teams.

For instance, say player A is a 2nd round pick, the Pistons can assign him to the D-league for up to two years for development (while paying him an NBA salary.

I'm curious...how does that show up on the NBA salary cap?

In the D-League, player A can focus on his long term development
and not winning games. The Pistons can develop his psychological, athletic and technical skills. If he were on the Pistons bench he would not log the type of minutes needed to develop. After one or two years, player A would either move up to the Pistons for a low level salary or the Pistons would have to pay an NBA free Agent a mid-level salary if player A did not develop. The difference being 1.5 million over three years for player A and 5.3 million over three years for the free agent. If player A develops in the D-League the Pistons will save 11.5 million over the course of three years.

This sounds great for the Pistons and less good for the player financially. I'm taking the player's financial perspective here.

I never said anything about attendance or fans watching the game, you are going to have to discuss those issues with whoever raised them. I'm discussing the fact that the D-League (if successful) will improve the overall talent level of the NBA. In the Current system either you can play or you can't. Nobody is really given the chance to improve all the facets of their games during the season. Ole School types believe NBA stands for "No Babies allowed", they are not into developing talent, those types don't believe in the D-League but the Pistons and the Spurs do. Those organizations will bring about a brave new world where teams develop talent instead of attempting to out spend the other guy.

I'm sorry...you're the one who was talking about the D-League teams as "investments" for the owners to build up and flip. Attendance is crucial to this plan, because if you don't draw fans, you won't be able to stay in business, and nobody will want to own a piece of a franchise that is drenched in debt and red ink that they'd have to repay.

I don't understand any of this

It's self explanatory. The only organizations that can afford to own D-League teams are the NBA teams themselves.

Mahiami and Williams are NBA players that will be assigned to the D-League for development. They will earn an NBA pay check not D-League pay.
I don't know what you are talking about when you stated the relationship won't survive an anti-trust lawsuit.

By maintaining an EXCLUSIVE developmental relationship with the D-League, the NBA could be justly accused of trying to force the other minor leagues out of business. That's where the anti-trust lawsuit comes in.


I think you should read up on the d-league some more before posting.

I did look up a list of "good" D-League alums. The best ones I can see are Devin Brown and Bobby Simmons. Neither one will be HOFers, and quite honestly I can't say the D-League helped them terribly. Maybe they should make a point of emphasizing winning for them so they could develop that "killer instinct" that seems to be so rare in that list of players I saw.
--------------------------------

You may rag on the Lakers, but I think ultimately the best model for the D-League will be one where the League is a NBA JV that plays in the same building and market as the NBA parent, and each team is owned by the NBA parent.

ChumpDumper
08-24-2007, 11:24 PM
Then why don't they simply just own the team, operate it in their own building, and eliminate the middle man? The Lakers' approach to their D-League team with the D-Fenders last year might end up being the best approach economically; and you'll be able to get your thirty teams.The D-Fenders are moving to Ontario, California as soon as the arena there is completed.

I'm curious...how does that show up on the NBA salary cap?It shows up as an NBA salary.

This sounds great for the Pistons and less good for the player financially. I'm taking the player's financial perspective here.In what way? The player is getting 10-12 times the best D-League salary, and getting more playing time than he would've gotten on the NBA club. The regular D-League player is the one who has to decide if the D-League opportuniry is worth the money he missed out on not going overseas. Stay in the D-League for two years on an NBA contract and your 2/3 of the way to a pension.

Amir Johnson just re-signed with the Pistons for $11 million after playing mostly in the D-League the past two season.

The only organizations that can afford to own D-League teams are the NBA teams themselves.Or that own venues and other minor league tems, etc.

By maintaining an EXCLUSIVE developmental relationship with the D-League, the NBA could be justly accused of trying to force the other minor leagues out of business. That's where the anti-trust lawsuit comes in.Judging from all the teams and leagues starting up in the next few years, that would be a pretty weak lawsuit.

I did look up a list of "good" D-League alums. The best ones I can see are Devin Brown and Bobby Simmons. Neither one will be HOFers, and quite honestly I can't say the D-League helped them terribly.So you followed their D-League careers closely enough to be able to make that call?

rams80
08-25-2007, 12:13 AM
The D-Fenders are moving to Ontario, California as soon as the arena there is completed.

Do they still plan to only let season ticket holders for the Lakers in?

It shows up as an NBA salary.

So can we just write "potential cap casualty" for all these guys?

In what way? The player is getting 10-12 times the best D-League salary, and getting more playing time than he would've gotten on the NBA club. The regular D-League player is the one who has to decide if the D-League opportuniry is worth the money he missed out on not going overseas. Stay in the D-League for two years on an NBA contract and your 2/3 of the way to a pension.

In that case, I'd expand the draft, because otherwise my team isn't picking up enough players to stock a team; and my team would have to stock all of it with guys on NBA contracts.

Amir Johnson just re-signed with the Pistons for $11 million after playing mostly in the D-League the past two season.

Good for him.

Or that own venues and other minor league tems, etc.

The "let's have one team pay for another plan" works less often than you'd think...especially outside of affiliated baseball.

Judging from all the teams and leagues starting up in the next few years, that would be a pretty weak lawsuit.

Or not-the players that join those teams still think they have a shot at the NBA if they work hard enough...

So you followed their D-League careers closely enough to be able to make that call?

Can you give me a dramatic example of the D-League turning a guy into a competitive superstar?

Ken, Steelheads fan
08-25-2007, 02:42 AM
...I never said anything about attendance or fans watching the game, you are going to have to discuss those issues with whoever raised them. I'm discussing the fact that the D-League (if successful) will improve the overall talent level of the NBA...

Huh?!? Okay, I'll discuss those attendance issues with YOU since YOU seem to believe the NBADL will draw huge crowds. Have you changed your mind about attendance since you posted this? BTW, you were supposed to say, I do not recall... 8)

Ken, I’m not saying that NCAA basketball will loss popularity, I’m saying the NBA is going to take all the top prospects for there internship program (the D-League), hardcore NBA fans will flock to these games, and sponsorship deals will pour in. Who really cares about the average fan, that is a different discussion. Attendance figures will not depend on the average fan. For instance:
• Most teams will cater to sponsors and talent scouts which will account for about 750 ticket sales per game
• Season ticket holders will account for about 750 more sales
• Hard Core fans from the parent team will account for about 1,500 more sales
• Group sales to churches and schools will account for about 1,500 more sales
• Once rivalries are developed 250 fans will travel with the team
• And about 750-1,000 local single game tickets will sell for each game
That means an average of 5,500-6,000 fans will attend D-League games in the future.
If after two years, the parent club does not want the player or feels the player needs more time to develop the NBA will either sell the player off for a profit or pay a portion of players overseas salary, if they plan to bring the player back at a later date. If a player goes overseas and flops, then a domestic league like the CBA will be needed as well. So that when those players return they can continue to develop their games, sometimes it takes years to master your skills, just look at Steve Nash. IMO players should always have a viable option, there should be amount six development leagues in the US for players that want to continue playing basketball. Absorption is one of the worse things the NBA could do, it prevents a natural supply chain from developing.

I haven't changed my mind. I don't think fans are interested enough in the D-League to make it a viable spectator sport.

ChumpDumper
08-25-2007, 04:25 AM
Do they still plan to only let season ticket holders for the Lakers in?1) Anyone who buys a ticket for the Laker game on the same day can get watch the D-Fenders.

2) Yes, only Laker season ticket holders will be allowed to attend games 40 miles away from the Staples Center, playing a different schedule than the Lakers. It's the perfect plan!

So can we just write "potential cap casualty" for all these guys?As much as you can for anyone at the end of an NBA bench.

In that case, I'd expand the draft, because otherwise my team isn't picking up enough players to stock a team; and my team would have to stock all of it with guys on NBA contracts.The D-League has it's own draft. Read up on these things before posting.

Good for him.Yes, and a good precedent for other players sent down to the D-League.

The "let's have one team pay for another plan" works less often than you'd think...especially outside of affiliated baseball.Tell that to the venue owners who are getting the teams. Or do you own a venue and have made this decision yourself?

Or not-the players that join those teams still think they have a shot at the NBA if they work hard enough...So you just made a point against your lawsuit. Thanks, I guess.

Can you give me a dramatic example of the D-League turning a guy into a competitive superstar?Perhaps you should review the name of the league. Were it National Basketball Association Guaranteed Superstars Somehow Overlooked in Two Rounds of the Draft League (NBAGSSOTRDL), you'd have a point.

rams80
08-25-2007, 11:40 AM
As much as you can for anyone at the end of an NBA bench.
Except the D-League guy gets cut before the end of a bench guy because at least the end of a bench guy is on the NBA team's roster.

The D-League has it's own draft. Read up on these things before posting.
Which brings me back to the who would sign a D-League contract argument...

Tell that to the venue owners who are getting the teams. Or do you own a venue and have made this decision yourself?

They'll find out themselves soon enough...

So you just made a point against your lawsuit. Thanks, I guess. No I didn't, because codification of an exclusive relationship would destroy that reason for players to sign with teams.

Perhaps you should review the name of the league. Were it National Basketball Association Guaranteed Superstars Somehow Overlooked in Two Rounds of the Draft League (NBAGSSOTRDL), you'd have a point.

If this league's future is one where it is the primary developmental organ of the NBA, then even the Superstars will have to get some seasoning there. Until then, it's just a way to get slightly better backups.

bectond
08-25-2007, 12:11 PM
Huh?!? Okay, I'll discuss those attendance issues with YOU since YOU seem to believe the NBADL will draw huge crowds. Have you changed your mind about attendance since you posted this? BTW, you were supposed to say, I do not recall... 8)

I haven't changed my mind. I don't think fans are interested enough in the D-League to make it a viable spectator sport.

Iím of the opinion that the only humane thing for the NBA to do is to euthanize high stakes college basketball. College coaches are recruiters obsessed with winning. The development of the young men on their ball clubs takes a backseat, same goes for high school and AAU coaches. Players in America are never really given the chance to develop as people or players. Coaches donít care about the type of people these kids are becoming or if their games are not developing properly.
I believe that if the top-athletes are removed from the college basketball landscape, the top universities would be forced to hire the best coaches rather than the top recruiters and the overall skill level of mid-level NBA players would improve due to better coaching at the college level. The elite players would also improve psychologically and technically, due to the fact that they would be allowed to train with other top-level players in all facets of the game away from the bright lights and pitfalls of big time college basketball.

In the future the D-League will mimic AA minor league baseball. However, Lower-Level development leagues, Spring League and Summer Leagues will also be needed. As will an independent league for veteran minor league types.

As for the attendance issue we have already gone over this issue at nauseam, who really cares about weather the average fan will attend developmental games en mass. As long as D-League teams can average 2,500 per game they will brake even. If a LaBron James type player ever skips college and enters the D-League, every D-League city he visited would sell out due to the curiosity of hard core fans. The average fan, most likely would not attend a developmental game to see a high school phenom because the average fan does not keep up with that sort of thing. The average fan does not know there are teams in Bismarck, Anaheim or Butte. That does not stop people from attending games in those areas. The average fan does not attend rodeos, stock car racing events, surfing competitions or the X games either. But those sports are doing just fine without the average fans interest. I doubt Iíll ever understand the point you are attempting to make on this issue.

D-League teams have grounds for existence, therefore the league will survive regardless of mass appeal. Other minor league basketball leagues donít have a mission, they donít serve a purpose in the supply chain, therefore they will not survive. You canít compare the economic realities of a sponsored league with those of non-sponsored leagues. The Jazz have a vested interest in the Flash, that did not exist between them and the Utah Eagles. The owners of the Flash can expect the Jazz organization to assist their franchise because they both are working to achieve the same goals. (Developing talent) NBA teams have practiced the same principles for acquiring talent as the New York Yankees do, however they all canít continue attempting to out spend each other every summer.

Small market teams like the Jazz and the Spurs must develop ways of leveling the playing field.
The D-League will allow them to develop talented players at a fraction of the cost entering the free agent market would.

Ken, Steelheads fan
08-25-2007, 01:53 PM
Oh, I think you understand my point quite well. Geez! I've stated it enough times already. :roll:

There are not enough hardcore basketball fans to support the NBADL as a spectator sport in America. That is my position. You seem to believe that there are enough of these fans. We disagree...and yes, you are right. We are going 'round and 'round on this subject seemingly to no end. Time will tell though...again.

rams80
08-25-2007, 02:33 PM
Iím of the opinion that the only humane thing for the NBA to do is to euthanize high stakes college basketball. College coaches are recruiters obsessed with winning. The development of the young men on their ball clubs takes a backseat, same goes for high school and AAU coaches. Players in America are never really given the chance to develop as people or players. Coaches donít care about the type of people these kids are becoming or if their games are not developing properly.

And the NBA does? I'd be mad if my NBA team was more focused on developing players as opposed to winning. That's the point of playing these games. I'd argue that all your system would do would be creating fundamentally sound players who have no idea how to actually win a basketball game, because they never experienced a high pressure competitive environment before entering the NBA. They might be better citizens, but the fans won't like them because they fold up under the pressure of crunch time.

I believe that if the top-athletes are removed from the college basketball landscape, the top universities would be forced to hire the best coaches rather than the top recruiters and the overall skill level of mid-level NBA players would improve due to better coaching at the college level. The elite players would also improve psychologically and technically, due to the fact that they would be allowed to train with other top-level players in all facets of the game away from the bright lights and pitfalls of big time college basketball.

See my above point. Sometimes the best way to prepare a player for the bright lights of the NBA is to give the player prior experience in the bright lights of college. As for your assertations about coaches, I think you are a little too harsh on some of the top college coaches. Is it their fault that NBA GMs are too dumb to filter out the ESPN hype?


As for the attendance issue we have already gone over this issue at nauseam, who really cares about weather the average fan will attend developmental games en mass.

If your franchise hopes to survive, you have to attract the average fan. Minor League basketball doesn't have enough hard core fans to allow franchises to survive. Promotions and attractions for the fans are crucial-folks don't go to minor league baseball games (even AA) for the prospects, but for the entire family-oriented event.

As long as D-League teams can average 2,500 per game they will brake even.

Outside of the "CBA 4" how many teams even do that? And the "CBA 4" aren't going up against College basketball, and are marketed so average fans actually want to come.

If a LaBron James type player ever skips college and enters the D-League, every D-League city he visited would sell out due to the curiosity of hard core fans.

There aren't that many hard cores in any city except LA, and that's only because LA is so large.

The average fan, most likely would not attend a developmental game to see a high school phenom because the average fan does not keep up with that sort of thing. The average fan does not know there are teams in Bismarck, Anaheim or Butte. That does not stop people from attending games in those areas. The average fan does not attend rodeos, stock car racing events, surfing competitions or the X games either. But those sports are doing just fine without the average fans interest. I doubt Iíll ever understand the point you are attempting to make on this issue.

List of dead D-League markets:
Fort Myers
Columbus
Charleston
Little Rock
Roanoke
Asheville
Fayetteville
Greenville
Mobile
Huntsville
Fort Worth

Lessons learned: 1) Perhaps the local average fan is slightly important.
2) The Southeast is college basketball country; it appears that based on the failure of every team based there that the market prefers the college product over the minor league baseketball product, and will continue to do so until the teams are marketed and have the promotions needed to bring the people in.

D-League teams have grounds for existence, therefore the league will survive regardless of mass appeal. Other minor league basketball leagues donít have a mission, they donít serve a purpose in the supply chain, therefore they will not survive. You canít compare the economic realities of a sponsored league with those of non-sponsored leagues. The Jazz have a vested interest in the Flash, that did not exist between them and the Utah Eagles. The owners of the Flash can expect the Jazz organization to assist their franchise because they both are working to achieve the same goals. (Developing talent) NBA teams have practiced the same principles for acquiring talent as the New York Yankees do, however they all canít continue attempting to out spend each other every summer.

The League's survival will ultimately depend on the active ownership of each team by it's NBA parent. The model cannot support 30 teams any other way. If the NBA truly wants this to be a pure, exclusively developmental league, that's the only approach they can take.

Small market teams like the Jazz and the Spurs must develop ways of leveling the playing field.
The D-League will allow them to develop talented players at a fraction of the cost entering the free agent market would.

Agreed...but they'll eventually have to pay the big bucks anyway if they want to keep the players.

ChumpDumper
08-26-2007, 05:19 PM
If true, this is impressive:So far, the Flash have sold more than 3,000 season tickets and signed four companies to three-year sponsorship deals. They have billboards up along I-15, have staffed tables at local events including the Revue, and will soon air their first TV commercial.
http://www.sltrib.com/sports/ci_6722855

Pounder
08-27-2007, 02:19 PM
bectond...

...the NBA-team-owned D-League teams aren't nearly enough.

The NBA has to take the draft, toss it in the dump with the rest of the trash, and create a system (which has to be an improvement on what MLS has implemented, and right out of the gate at that) in order to do what you ask.

bectond
08-27-2007, 03:34 PM
Oh, I think you understand my point quite well. Geez! I've stated it enough times already. :roll:

There are not enough hardcore basketball fans to support the NBADL as a spectator sport in America. That is my position. You seem to believe that there are enough of these fans. We disagree...and yes, you are right. We are going 'round and 'round on this subject seemingly to no end. Time will tell though...again.

D-League teams are placed in close proximity to the parent team, you have to understand that first before you can move on.....
Broomfield and Denver, Orem and Salt Lake City, Austin and San Antonio....

Then you must also understand that Denver, Salt Lake City and San Antonio have hard core fans.......If you refuse to believe this fact, then of course- you can't move on. You will never understand......

You are in Gary, i'm sure there are hardcore Bulls fans in the Chicago area. If Ben Gordan and Captain Kirk started their NBA careers in Rosemont, i'm sure more than a few hardcore Bulls fans (do you agree they exist) would have some curiosity and would attend the games if the tickets were cheap. Some families would attend because Bulls tickets are too expensive and the team would also sell tickets are groups. No mass marketing would be needed, all of the bulls super fans would know that the top pick was playing in the area and they would go see him play if the price was reasonable. The same holds true for other teams no.1 picks. If LaBron were on a D-League team coming to the Chicago area prior to his NBA debut, the arena would be packed with basketball guys waiting to get the first look at James before he entered the NBA.

rams80
08-27-2007, 04:56 PM
D-League teams are placed in close proximity to the parent team, you have to understand that first before you can move on.....
Broomfield and Denver, Orem and Salt Lake City, Austin and San Antonio....

What about the other 27 NBA teams? Do they not have fans?

Then you must also understand that Denver, Salt Lake City and San Antonio have hard core fans.......If you refuse to believe this fact, then of course- you can't move on. You will never understand......

There's hard core, and then there's "going a couple of hours out of my way in a time with higher gas prices to watch some minor leaguers play hard core." I'm going to tell you how this works in hockey and baseball from my personal experience. Peoria has the St. Louis Blues' top developmental affiliate and is only 3 hours away. Do you know how many "hard core" people from St. Louis consistently show up to watch their games? 0 (And with pro hockey most fans are hard core). Peoria also has the Cubs' A affiliate. People from Chicago occasionally show up, but not enough for a franchise to survive on its own.

Unfortunately the D-Fenders never released attendance data, but it would be interesting to see how well they did when the "hard core" Laker season ticket holders were able to come in and watch games for free.

You are in Gary, i'm sure there are hardcore Bulls fans in the Chicago area. If Ben Gordan and Captain Kirk started their NBA careers in Rosemont, i'm sure more than a few hardcore Bulls fans (do you agree they exist) would have some curiosity and would attend the games if the tickets were cheap.

I'm less sure than you. Folks in Chicago might not want to take the time to go to Gary. At least more than once a year.

Some families would attend because Bulls tickets are too expensive and the team would also sell tickets are groups.

If you can't afford Bulls tickets, chances are you wouldn't be able to afford the gas and group tickets needed to go to Gary. Or you wouldn't want to go because it's "beneath you".

No mass marketing would be needed, all of the bulls super fans would know that the top pick was playing in the area and they would go see him play if the price was reasonable. The same holds true for other teams no.1 picks. If LaBron were on a D-League team coming to the Chicago area prior to his NBA debut, the arena would be packed with basketball guys waiting to get the first look at James before he entered the NBA.

Again...based on baseball and hockey. That doesn't work. Even if you had a can't miss soon to be Superstar prospect, you have to do more. You have to advertize the game, you have to market it.

Look...you can't pay for a 25 game home schedule by relying on the parent team's fans trucking down to watch their team's prospects. Only the hardest of hard core fans would even consider doing this and fewer would go through with it. A business plan based on this is fundamentally flawed.

bectond
08-28-2007, 01:02 PM
bectond...

...the NBA-team-owned D-League teams aren't nearly enough.

The NBA has to take the draft, toss it in the dump with the rest of the trash, and create a system (which has to be an improvement on what MLS has implemented, and right out of the gate at that) in order to do what you ask.

The NBA already has a local player allocation provision. Teams can sign a local draft eligible player prior to the D-League draft.(If that is your concern) The D-League draft is a way of preventing teams from using the D-League as a garage to park players. Removing it would allow an NBA team to cut a player in Oct, sign him to a D-League contract and promote him after the new year, the union whats to protect it's players from being yo-yoed around by the Bob Johnson's, Donald Sterling's and George Shinn's of the world.

Pounder
08-28-2007, 04:34 PM
No.

Next Step: NBA teams have rights to the top # of prospects in their regions coming out of high school.* There might be 6 total around the country ready to play NBA, the rest go to D-League. The whole thing does not work unless and until D-League effectively replaces college, except for a scant few kids who want the education. College still has value as a "second chance" track, and probably keeps a good number of fans who don't care what happens with the pros.

Step After That: Bypass the schools altogether. Each NBA team sponsors a rather large youth program in their city. Through about age 16, kids only compete in town, then the NBA team sponsors U-18 teams, MAYBE U-21 teams, then the D-League team. The U designations do NOT preclude a prodigy from "playing up." Around the world, this actually entrenches the pro team to the community. This could even be a moneymaker for the NBA team (fees for kids rec basketball in the 'burbs, etc.). When you think about it, POSSIBLY, you could locate the D-League team out of town, have them run a similar program there, and do the same as the NBA city does... I'm not sure that's the way to bet, but it's a thought.

* Sorry, Los Angeles and New York, you can't keep all 25 of your prospects. I figure this POTENTIALLY helps competitive balance a bit. Of course, it should be noted that leagues around the world don't generally have recruiting restrictions. This might be a temporary condition, for all I know.

ChumpDumper
08-28-2007, 05:25 PM
Yeah, that will fly.

bectond
08-28-2007, 05:34 PM
I doubt the league would assigned players based on the region in which they live. USA basketball will most likely run an academy in which the top 25 to 30 High School Juniors and Seniors will attend. High school and College basketball will continue on as normal just without the Blue chip players. The kids at the academy will focus more on technical drills to prepare for international U-18competition. USA basketball and the NBA want the top American players to be able to play both the American and the international styles at the highest levels.

The NCAA is about to legislate a new rule which states - that if a player attends college and plays NCAA basketball he may not enter the NBA draft until after his sophomore or Junior year (Like Baseball does). This will cause many players to enter the D-League due to the way the collective bargaining agreement is laid out. Players are resticted from signing a long term deal in which they will turn 36 during the course of the deal. If a 19 year old enters the NBA his 1st contract will last 5 years making him 23 at the conclusion of the deal. If the player is elite he'll sign a max deal for 6 addtional years making him 29 when the deal expires. In order to get another max level 6 year deal the player would have to be 29 years of age. If he was 30 or 31 at the end of his max deal, his 2nd max deal would only be for 4 or 4 years in length. NBA max level deals increase in value with each passing year, cutting the contract short by just one year would cost the player as much as 30 million. Academy grads would have the choice of attending college or going to the D-League for a year before entering the draft just like every other high school student. However, if the player were all-star caliber attending college would not make sense from a business perspective.

I believe most of team USA's U-18 team will select the D-League route along with a few high school types that are also elite and those that did not have the grades to attend college.

I'm sure another entity will sponsor teams in the manner that you have laid out due to the deterioration of the public school system. However, it will most likely be a shoe manufacturer and the the NBA. I don't think the current Prep school model will last much longer, I see prep schools of the future recruiting kids out of middle school. How they will work in combination with the NBA's academy, the D-League and the NCAA I don't know.

Pounder
08-29-2007, 12:05 PM
Yeah, that will fly.

While I'd like an elaboration of this statement, let me set something up for you.

If the NBA starts telling kids that the primary route to the NBA is through the D-League rather than college, what do you think will happen?

I think a good number of kids get the message. Whether the fans follow or not is irrelevant to me.

ChumpDumper
08-29-2007, 12:52 PM
I don't believe that's what the NBA will tell kids at all. Also, there is way too much money involved in college basketball for the NCAA to just roll over and give up and way too many advantages for the average future NBA prospect to pass it up.

The very young D-Leaguer will be the kid who can't get into college or overestimated his chances at getting drafted.

Pounder
08-29-2007, 02:28 PM
The NCAA is already implementing sanctions for schools failing to meet academic standards. The schools are already seen in many cases by large numbers of student bodies as cow-towing to athletics. Moreover, Myles Brand has already had to answer to Congress regarding whether athletic departments should be tax-exempt given the massive revenues for the basketball tournament and the gist of their other major activities.

If the NCAA asserts their business acumen, there's going to be trouble one way. If they continue to follow through with toughening things up on the recruit end, there will probably be a little trouble in the other direction. The NCAA has a balancing act to complete, and the NBA need only look to San Antonio to figure out that the system is antiquated.

So don't be surprised if the NCAA encourages the NBA.

BTW... major missing component in my outline. Euro teams with the youth programs also have academies. This may be where the prep schools come in, but how does that help Sacramento? The academies really need to be where the NBA teams are.

Also, bec... I know US Soccer has the Bradenton Academy. It's a poor idea, frankly. I'd rather have the kid training with the professionals in order to blood him, and learn "my" system vice learning through AAU and the all-star gig. That way, the NBA might even have a few more teams like Phoenix... or Princeton or the 1977 Blazers or Showtime Lakers.

bectond
08-29-2007, 03:11 PM
I don't believe that's what the NBA will tell kids at all. Also, there is way too much money involved in college basketball for the NCAA to just roll over and give up and way too many advantages for the average future NBA prospect to pass it up.

The very young D-Leaguer will be the kid who can't get into college or overestimated his chances at getting drafted.

College coaches are one main ones pushing for reform. The blue chippers are attending college for only one semester under the current system. The 2nd term starts in Feb., the tourney is in March and they drop out of classes in early April to prepare for the June draft. The blue chippers will cause a schools graduation rates to drop and it sends the wrong message to the general public and student body. The NBA along with USA basketball will be placing the top prospects in an academy during their final two years of high school anyway. Why not have these guys transition directly to the NBA, they will have already had the best coaching money can buy. Why force them to study under the tutelage of a hack when they will most likely know more than the college coach by the age they are ready to attend college..

The top student athletes will go directly pro because it's just not in college basketballs best interest to continue with the current system. The NBA does not want to invest money on an unproven youngster, therefore the only sensible thing to do is have those players play a year in the D-League against undrafted college Seniors and players parked at the back of NBA benches. After one year, the player can enter the draft or return to the D-league for a second season of seasoning. All the NBA has to do is come up with the right financial package to inspire these kids to make the jump. Most likely a salary and an annuity (in case they don't pan out).

ChumpDumper
08-29-2007, 03:20 PM
So college coaches are pushing for reforms that will eliminate college basketball?

I don't think that is true, nor do I think that schools will want to trash the half billion dollars a year that comes to them from CBS to cover the tournament.

Maybe if the money somehow disappears at the time the next contract negotiations come around, something will happen. I seriously doubt it.

bectond
08-29-2007, 04:01 PM
So college coaches are pushing for reforms that will eliminate college basketball?



Go back and read my post, I never said college basketball will be eliminated.
I said the blue chips won't attend college in the future and IMOthe nba should can high stakes college basketball.(because they go a poor job of developing players).

Do you really believe the current system makes sense? Attend class Sept-Oct, Travel Nov-Mar, Withdraw in April to work-out with a trainer. Dude, this system won't last, it does not have a chance. Guys are going to have to commit to a program for two or three years, and most great players will not do that. Each year they attend college is an additional year added to the amount of years they have to wait until free agency.

ChumpDumper
08-29-2007, 04:16 PM
Go back and read my post, I never said college basketball will be eliminated.
I said the blue chips won't attend college in the future and IMOthe nba should can high stakes college basketball.(because they go a poor job of developing players).

Do you really believe the current system makes sense? Attend class Sept-Oct, Travel Nov-Mar, Withdraw in April to work-out with a trainer. Dude, this system won't last, it does not have a chance. Guys are going to have to commit to a program for two or three years, and most great players will not do that. Each year they attend college is an additional year added to the amount of years they have to wait until free agency.Well, they can't join the NBA, and the D-League compensation is crap compared to a full ride at a Division I program, to say nothing of the facilities, fan support, national exposure, etc.

As long as the money is there, the system will be there. We'll see if the money is still there in 2010 when the NCAA contract is renewed.

rams80
08-29-2007, 05:09 PM
Personally, I think the real problem in the system is the existence of an industry that evaluates and rates the talent of kids as young as middle-school age.

Comments?

Pounder
08-29-2007, 10:16 PM
Both systems are doing that, rams. You've seen USC recruiting, right?

It's inevitable.

America is the only country trying to hold teenagers as kids until 18. Maybe it's time to grow up on that account.

I have entertained some testimony that the Euro system POSSIBLY weeds kids out too early. There are 8 levels of English football (not even counting the "beer leagues" IIRC), so the once dismissed have a possible fall back or 12. Does basketball need to account for growth into the 20s? Possibly.

No system is perfect, otherwise America would have made a massive switch already. Mind you, there is a pervasive one... think youth soccer clubs in America, and understand that the concept has spread to more sports and is being entertained by the majors. The money to be made, in the right circumstances, is rather stunning, up to and including traveling parties for tournaments that rival at least the mid-level football bowl games. I'm not the biggest fan of that system, but you have to respect the potential it has to put many daggers in school ball.

mzracing76
10-13-2007, 06:21 PM
the best run the CBA ever had was 1985-1997. we had at the most, 17 teams (1991-92). and had teams all across the country, and the average league wide attendance was around 3500 per game. by the 90s, several teams (Sioux Falls, Rapid City, Lacrosse, Mexico City, Oklahoma City, Wichita Falls, etc) all averaged more than 4000 fans per game. I know Rapid City averaged more than 6000 fans on year, Sioux Falls averaged more than 5000 fans from 1994-2000, Fort Wayne and Oklahoma City also averaged 4500 fans or more on several occasions.

To me, the best years are gone. the talent sucks, the players suck, and all of the great coaches from the great CBA era of 1985-1997 are gone. guys like Flip Saunders, Bill Musselman, Eric Musselman, Dan Pannagio, Mike Thibault, Mo McHone, Sonny Allen, Corey Russell, Russ Bergman are all either done, in college, or in the NBA.

Back in the 90s (1990-1998) it was nothing for my team (Sioux Falls SKyforce) to have players play for us for 3-5 years. Cedric Hunter played in the CBA for 11 years, Henry James played in the CBA for 5-7 years, and the CBA's all time leading scorer played 12 seasons. We dont have that type of player anymore these days. nowadays, all we have are show me the money type of players.

as for merging the two leagues (CBA & NBDL). as for the stats? they would all co-unit as one. This is what the CBA did when it changed from teh EBA to the CBA in 1978. it kept the EBA Stats seperate from the Modern CBA Stats. but they recognized those stats in the CBA Guide & Register every year. so that is what would happen in a future merger.

THE NBDL does not need 30 teams. what needs to happen is the CBA needs a strong 16-18 team league, the NBDL needs a strong 16-18 team league, and a third league (ABA, IBL, etc) needs a strong 16-18 team league. if we can get this from a good 3 leagues, we would have a great minor league system. Each NBA team can sign contracts with 1-2 teams from this list. that would give you 48 teams for the 27-30 NBA teams to sign deals with.

As for attendance, each Minor League team needs a strong Front OFfice System (like Sioux Falls & Dakota). Management teams that go out and make an effort to sell season tickets and promote the team. that was one of the major reasons that the NBDL went after the SKyforce and Wizards so heavily. two teams that help teach the other NBDL teams how to run a business.

What makes the Sioux Falls Skyforce and Dakota Wizards franchises so successful? they each have successful basketball Operation's Directors. They each have a Business Side, and a Basketball side. most minor league owners try to do it all themselves, but the good owners will go out and hire a Good Basketball Director.

from 1994-2000, Sioux Falls had a Vice President of Basketball Operations (Tommy Smith) who was a Head Coach in the GBA before coming to Sioux Falls, He along with our coaches (Flip Saunders, Mo McHone) all offered their thoughts, signed players, and recruited players. Sioux Falls was able to bring in some big names back in the day (Henry James, Darryl Dawkins, Corey Beck, Stacy King, Jason Sasser, Quinton Daily, Cedric Hunter, etc). We made great trades. But we also had a Business Department that sold tickets. from 1995-2000, Sioux Falls averaged 2500-3000 season tickets a year, while averaging 4000-5000 fans a game during that time. thats waht makes a great team at this level.

Minor League Basketball wont work in LA, NY, Minneapolis. to big. We need markets with populations of 100,000 to 200,000 people. that is where this league will be strongest at. Trust me, i have been a Fan of the CBA (Skyforce) for more than 15 years (1989-present), and have seen where the league's dont work.

We need Rivalries again. Sioux Falls vs Rapid City was the biggest draw the CBA had back in the early 90s. So was the Yakima Sun Kings vs Tri City Chinook (Washington) rivalry. Sioux Falls also had Fargo to the north, and Omaha to the south. We now have Bismark to the north, but to me, the Dakota Wizards dont pose the big time rivalry that was the Sioux Falls vs Rapid City rivalry (Flip Saunders vs Eric Musselman) days. a intra-state rivalry is the best.

but with out good talent, we dont have a strong league. I do not favor this development system the NBDL uses. I dont like the fact we cant go out and get players with 5-10 years experience. we are a young league, and that translates into mistakes, bad ball movement, and above all, it translates into chemistry issues, too many selfish players.

REMEMBER: STACY KING (skyforce) once turned down a 10-day contract offer from the Boston Celtics (1996-97) to stay in Sioux Falls and help the team win a title. that was big for the fans and showed his loyalty to the team and his teammates.

MZ

SignGuyDino
10-14-2007, 07:49 AM
I'm thinking the NBA does need a 30 team minor league, but have it set to where they play in 4 divisions only with no interdivisional play, maybe 20 games. The point is to evaluate talent and get players in playing shape. Have the season from say Sept.-Feb. That way, the players will be in optimal shape for call-ups right before the NBA stretch run.

I also think that the NBA should endorse, if not actually run, a decent summer league that plays from Mar.-Jun., with maybe 12 teams. Basically, a WBA type league but one that is actually very well run.

IBL is the only spring league that comes to mind as credible enough but they don't play a strict NBA style (which is frankly fine by me).

ChumpDumper
10-14-2007, 06:44 PM
I agree somewhat with the spring league idea, but the D-League season needs to run roughly concurrently with the NBA season. The draft occurs right after the last cuts are made in NBA training camps when the best players become available. I do think there might be an argument to shorten the D-League season by a week or two to avoid the playoff roster conflicts that have happened in the past, but some relaxation in the send down/call up rules could help that.

mzracing76
10-14-2007, 11:48 PM
Shorten the season to 20 games? that wont fly, this is still about the fans in certain cities. especially Sioux Falls and Bismark. if they shorten the season, then Sioux Falls and Bismark might as well go back to the CBA.

you guys come up with some stupid idea's.

if anything, they will increase the games with the more teams we get. 56-60 games a year if we have 16-20 teams.

no interdivisional games? your nuts.

I already hate the NBDL, your making me want to go back to the CBA more and more now.

MZ

jjbballfan
10-15-2007, 03:05 AM
I agree with you alot MZ.... I laugh when they say the NBDL needs to go after the east coast and so on..... In Sioux Falls the majority of the time when the Skyforce are playing its the best entertainment in town, it gets recognition on the television stations and gets a pretty nice write up in the paper... Something you would never see in an east coast city..... All of those things are big factors in getting endorsements and attendance figures up there.

DakotaWizardsFan
10-15-2007, 07:05 PM
If the season was shortened to 20 games, I'd definitely want the Wizards to go back to the CBA.. and I guess I'd want the Skyforce to do the same because I don't want to lose our biggest rivalry.

USBasket_EricE
10-16-2007, 12:18 AM
I agree with you alot MZ.... I laugh when they say the NBDL needs to go after the east coast and so on..... In Sioux Falls the majority of the time when the Skyforce are playing its the best entertainment in town, it gets recognition on the television stations and gets a pretty nice write up in the paper... Something you would never see in an east coast city..... All of those things are big factors in getting endorsements and attendance figures up there.

Exactly. Same thing with teams that are located in or near an NBA city, like Anaheim, Fort Worth, and LA. Those teams are just there for the purpose of developing players. They aren't the prime basketball team in town, so they don't get any recognition, neither from the fans nor the media. If the NBA ever does try to get each NBA franchise to buy their own D-League team, I would hope they'd place those teams at least 100 miles from their NBA cities. I don't like what the Lakers did with the D-Fenders. That team hardly has any fans and gets absolutely no recognition unless something unusual happens like Jordan Farmar playing in a D-League game and an NBA game on the same day. I like what the Spurs did in purchasing the Toros. Austin is far enough away from San Antonio and is able to build up its own fan base. The Toros are the best basketball talent in nearly a 100 mile radius, so basketball fans will go to their games.

Of the 4 new expansion teams, I'm guessing that Orem will be the least successful, with it being only 40 miles from the Jazz in SLC. Those two cities are large and, when I was riding through the area about a year and a half ago, they seemed to be connected with all the small suburb towns between them. Fort Wayne and Hidalgo are in NBA states, but they are far enough away from the NBA cities, so they should do OK. Fort Wayne also has a basketball history. Des Moines is in the middle of Iowa and nowhere near an NBA city, so I would hope that they'd get good numbers in attendance. I don't know how well they did with the Dragons back in the IBA days, but that team did have a winning tradition and, even though the Energy are a completely different team, the fans will remember how good the other team was and they'll attend games expecting to see more of the same.

I'm curious to see which Atlanta-based basketball team will draw more fans this year, the NBA Hawks or the CBA Krunk. The Hawks always seem to flat-out suck, so maybe fans will pack some high school gym (or wherever that team finally decided to call home) to see what the CBA team has to offer!

ChumpDumper
10-16-2007, 04:50 AM
I don't like what the Lakers did with the D-Fenders.
They are moving next season, but only 40 miles east.
The Toros are the best basketball talent in nearly a 100 mile radius, so basketball fans will go to their games.
With the huge exception of UT, yes. The expectations for the Toros have been pretty small from the beginning, and I believe those are the kind of expectations most D-League teams should have.
Of the 4 new expansion teams, I'm guessing that Orem will be the least successful, with it being only 40 miles from the Jazz in SLC.
I think the fact it has been created and marketed as the Jazz farm team has helped it immensely. They have reportedly sold 4000 season tickets for their temporary home in Orem, and their permanent home is supposed to be located in some kind of utopian development the owner is spearheading in Lehi. A TV deal is reportedly in the works too.
Fort Wayne also has a basketball history. Des Moines is in the middle of Iowa and nowhere near an NBA city, so I would hope that they'd get good numbers in attendance.
Those will be interesting cases. There are already a ton of minor league and college teams playing in each market and I think there may be some expectation in those cities that anything less than selling out their large arenas may be seen as a failure.

Hidalgo may have the same kind of issue, especially with the CBA team five miles away following a model closer to that of the Toros.

I think eventually, Cuban is going to get his own D-League franchise and give the metroplex another shot.

USBasket_EricE
10-16-2007, 10:59 PM
Well, if that's the case for Orem, hopefully they do well. That Utah Eagles team in the CBA was a failure last season, but weren't they in SLC?

nksports
10-16-2007, 11:25 PM
and their permanent home is supposed to be located in some kind of utopian development the owner is spearheading in Lehi.

Wasn't that what Brigham Young had in mind when he settled Salt Lake City?;)

mzracing76
10-17-2007, 12:17 PM
What do you all think the NBDL should do to make up a roster per team? I think we should build our rosters like this.

NBA Teams:
15 Player Spots
....10 Active Player Spots
....2 Injured Reserve Spots
....3 Developement/Re-Assignment Spots

NBDL TEAMS:
12-Active Player Spots
....4 Spots Reserved for First Year Players
....2 Spots Reserved for 2nd & 3rd Year Players
....3 Spots reserved for 3rd & 5th Year Players
....2 spots for NBA Re-Assignment Players
....1 spot reserved for a Local Player from Highshool or College.


increasing the NBA Roster means the NBA teams can carry 3 players reserved for Development or Assignments

NBA should atleast have the Rookies play in the NBDL atleast 2 year deals.

I just thnk the NBDL teams should reserve the right to sign players on their own that have more than 3 years experience. we should be able to sign players with 5-10 years of experience if we choose.

MZ

ChumpDumper
10-17-2007, 02:33 PM
I have seen no restriction on the amount of NBA experience a player can have if he signs directly with the D-League. Randy Livingston had what -- nine years of NBA experience when he played with the Stampede last season?

I don't think the available player pool will allow for such a roster makeup for every team, and there is way too much player movement during the season to maintain it.

abie10
10-17-2007, 04:15 PM
i think the only restriction on playing experience in NBDL is for assignments from the nba

mzracing76
10-18-2007, 02:23 AM
Yes, Fort Wayne will be a very good market for the NBDL. they had a CBA team from 1992-1999. they were always near or at the top of the attendance standings.

I believe they lead teh CBA 2 times in the mid 90s in attendance averaging between 4,500-5500 fans a game.

Between Ft Wayne, Rapid City, Oklahoma City, and Sioux Falls, each of those teams dominated the attendance titles from 1990-1999. and to think, Jay Frye, who is one of the owners of the expansion Ft Wayne team, was the sole owner of the Fort Wayne Fury from 1994-1999. so atleast they have part of that first ownership intact.

another team from the old days (CBA) i like to see again would be the Grand Rapids Hoops team. I liked that team, and when they played in their original building, they sold out every home game (3500 fans a game). of course, that was a very small arena, but very neat for the players to play in a sold out arena.

MZ

jjbballfan
10-18-2007, 02:33 PM
I think a way to grow the NBDL would be to make it so foreign players had to play a year in the NBDL before entering the draft.... have each team have 1 or 2 foreign prospects that would maintain draft status but play a style more like NBA play so NBA scouts can scout them in an enviroment that more suits the NBA's style of play

DakotaWiz
10-18-2007, 05:13 PM
Haven't checked this in awhile, but does anyone really think it'd make sense to actually combine the two leagues? I think they're going in opposite directions... Unless the D-League added it's selected elite CBA teams, like it did last year with the Wizards, Sioux Falls, and such, I don't think this is very feasible..

mzracing76
10-19-2007, 11:07 AM
say what you want about the CBA, but atleast they can stand on their own, and they have 11 teams this year. both leagues have their problems.

the NBDL wlil stupid decisions as well. they will go to big markets (500,000 and above) which is stupid.

I want a league with Veteran players also.

CBA=AAA
NBDL=AA
ABA=A, perhaps even Rookie

jjbballfan
10-19-2007, 01:07 PM
say what you want about the CBA, but atleast they can stand on their own, and they have 11 teams this year. both leagues have their problems.

the NBDL wlil stupid decisions as well. they will go to big markets (500,000 and above) which is stupid.

I want a league with Veteran players also.

CBA=AAA
NBDL=AA
ABA=A, perhaps even Rookie

I always thought that the NBA should buy the CBA then geographically make a CBA as the veterans league.... no team connections but a NBA team could send a veteran 3+ years for a rehab stint in the CBA..... the NBDL would be for players 2 years removed from college.... or at least something like that.... the majority of the time the CBA would play CBA and so on but each team would play 3-6 inter league games.

I don't think that the NBA should buy the CBA simply to add cities to the map but more in a way to expand so that they could have 2 leagues right away....

If they want cities to expand to I have gave a list and I can keep them coming... there is so many cities they could expand to right away if they wanted to....

DakotaWiz
10-19-2007, 06:57 PM
I don't think that having the D-league as a 'AA' League would be financially reasonable, unless you're proposing that the NBA own all 4 leagues, which I guess could be possible.. I think if they went to the minor league system that they wouldn't necessarily need the age limit either. I do agree it would be nice to have some of the better vet's in the D-League, but I think the D-League does what it can to bring in talent that has a chance to make it back into the NBA. I didn't follow the CBA last year much, but I do know they didn't get anyone called up, and that's with them being able to sign veterans to contracts and everything. I think the problem is more that there aren't all that many vet's that still have a great chance to perform in the NBA if they're not already there. The vet's that do have a shot have D-League contracts or go overseas if they don't think they have a shot. Livingston, Corsley Edwards, Kevin Burleson, PJ Ramos, Troy Bell, Tony Bobbitt, BJ Elder, Eddie Robinson, Von Wafer, Andre Owens, Frank Williams, Brandon Armstrong, and Yuta Tabuse all were drafted in the D-League last year and all had some sort of NBA experience. Players signed during the season include Luke Schenscher and Luke Jackson as well. I don't know how much it's the D-League's fault that it's a young league, younger players just have a better shot at making the NBA.