Players now dictate new "super teams"

[AHF]

Why? So the owners pocket more money? If revenues are rising then I would sure hope costs (player's salaries) rise too. Looks like MLB has increasing revenues. I'm not sure if it is at the same pace as player salaries but I can't imagine with as open of a system as MLB (relatively) that they are not tracking each other closely.

MLB is healthy. The profits and revenues are both healthy. That isn't a league where > 50% of the teams are hemoraging operating losses.

[EazyRoc]

While I agree super teams hurt competitive balance, I would say slanted officiating hurts the game more. They should fire all the Refs and hire the guys from the Olympics.

[AHF]

While I agree super teams hurt competitive balance, I would say slanted officiating hurts the game more. They should fire all the Refs and hire the guys from the Olympics.

I agree that the "superstar" bias in officiating is a big problem as well. You can fix that today, however, and don't need to wait on the next CBA. Just tell the refs to call what they see and not factor in the names on the jerseys. The NBA has had a big problem with that for some time. (I don't buy the 'Stern picks which teams will advance and the refs carry out his agenda' theory.)

[Admin]

I'm not saying it wouldn't be fun if the Braves had a minor league team like the Athletics, but for fans in those markets that has to be really depressing and it is worse for the NBA because a couple of guys colluding to join forces can totally skew the competitive landscape. Put ARod (a few years ago) and CC on a bad team and that team is still pretty bad. Put Lebron and Wade on a bad team and you are a championship contender.

Yeah it's definitely a major difference based on 5 players vs 8+ pitchers where having 2 stars can really change a teams competitive ability as you said.

[Admin]

Why? So the owners pocket more money? If revenues are rising then I would sure hope costs (player's salaries) rise too. Looks like MLB has increasing revenues. I'm not sure if it is at the same pace as player salaries but I can't imagine with as open of a system as MLB (relatively) that they are not tracking each other closely.

I would like to see the highest teams salaries and the lowest team salaries a lot closer together as I think that would make baseball even more competitive... but baseball at least has great rules for compensating teams who lose star players and it would be nice if the NBA adopted something like that.

[Guest]

Just saw a Coon tweet about the super friends model on espn insider. Can someone post it? Should be interesting for this discussion: http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story?id=8154239&_slug_=nba-how-new-cba-affects-big-3-star-system&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnba%2fstory%3fid%3d8154239%26_slug_%3dnba-how-new-cba-affects-big-3-star-system

[AHF]

Here is the portion of the article relating to the discussion:

Death of the big three?

So moving forward, will the three-star system continue to be the best way to build a winning team? Cuban doesn't think so.

"You can't just use the same approach that you used in the past," he said. "In the past I could fix any mistake just by spending more money. Now, it's not just spending more money -- it's spending a lot more money. But not only that, there are also restrictions on how you can add players."

In 2011-12, the seven teams with three players making $12 million or more spent an average of 80.4 percent of the salary cap on their three stars, an average of 66.4 percent of their room under the luxury-tax threshold. When the new rules take full effect in two years, the likely result will be a re-pricing of complementary players.

"A player who might have been a $12 million or $14 million player this year or [the year] before, might be a $6 million or $7 million player," Cuban said. "So you can have one star, and three really good players, and you can package all those guys together to build a winning team. You still maybe leave yourself some flexibility knowing that if someone gets hurt, you still have your full mid-level [with which] to add."

The teams that will be poised to take advantage of the coming market shift are leaving their options open now. Teams like the Mavericks, Magic and Atlanta Hawks are shedding salary, looking to rebuild while staying nimble. On the opposite end of the spectrum, teams like the Brooklyn Nets and Houston Rockets appear poised to add multiple expensive players, perhaps locking themselves into a salary structure that no longer makes sense.

Teams like the Heat, Chicago Bulls and Memphis Grizzlies are already locked in to expensive players for several years, and the Thunder might be joining them soon. They could eventually find themselves in a crisis -- hit with an enormous luxury tax bill and unable to make significant changes because they are committed to players they can no longer afford and who are too expensive to trade.

The Knicks, on the other hand, are the most enigmatic team in the league. They are committed to Chandler, Amare Stoudemire and Carmelo Anthony through 2014-15, and may be the one team in the NBA that doesn't care about the amount it is paying in luxury tax. The Knicks already have shown their willingness to add additional expensive players to surround their big three when given the opportunity, and they may be poised to take advantage of the coming economic shift by snatching up expensive cast-offs from other teams.

In the end, the league may look fundamentally different three years from now. "Basically, there's only been one system," Cuban said, referring to the new agreement. "There's been little nuances and changes [in previous agreements], but this is night-and-day different.

"It still didn't fix all our problems, but it changed the game."

[AHF]

I believe the Cuban comments referenced in there are months old at this point so the timing is a bit strange.

[Admin]

Thank you for posting that AHF. Even if some of it is old it's still a good read.

[Guest]

I believe the Cuban comments referenced in there are months old at this point so the timing is a bit strange.

I do recall reading those comments a while ago. Coon disappoints with this article, very wishy washy.

[AHF]

I do recall reading those comments a while ago. Coon disappoints with this article, very wishy washy.

I read the article to basically say that there are teams with different views on it, but he is kidding himself if he is pretending that Dallas' dream plan wasn't to end up with Dirk, Deron and Dwight. Edited July 11, 2012 by AHF