K Love in ATL tonight

[AHF]

Maybe.... but watching this rigged league continue to screw 3/4's of its fan base does make me bleed from my eyes.. what a pathetic league we have to endure. What a pathetic fan base

 

I don't understand the rigged thing:

 

(1)  There is no economic reason for the NBA to favor Cleveland over MUCH larger markets like New York, LA, etc.

 

(2)   The auditors who certify the lottery have much more to lose if they are participating in a fraud than they do to gain by way of payoff from the NBA.  

 

(3)  The other owners in the league would go ape #$*&.

 

I certainly understand the resentment of Cleveland landing the big picks but I remember similar resentment against other teams that have gotten lucky in the lottery like Orlando did (Shaq, Webber, etc.).  That doesn't persuade me to buy into the rigging theory.

 

In conspiracy theories, I tend to follow the money to determine if a theory is viable.  Here, the money is not with rigging the lottery to favor Clevleand, Ohio.

[IheartVolt]

I don't understand the rigged thing:

(1) There is no economic reason for the NBA to favor Cleveland over MUCH larger markets like New York, LA, etc.

(2) The auditors who certify the lottery have much more to lose if they are participating in a fraud than they do to gain by way of payoff from the NBA.

(3) The other owners in the league would go ape #$*&.

I certainly understand the resentment of Cleveland landing the big picks but I remember similar resentment against other teams that have gotten lucky in the lottery like Orlando did (Shaq, Webber, etc.). That doesn't persuade me to buy into the rigging theory.

In conspiracy theories, I tend to follow the money to determine if a theory is viable. Here, the money is not with rigging the lottery to favor Clevleand, Ohio.

There is much there to suggest that Cleveland received a little help from the league. You can choose to hide your head in the sand to support the league if you want , but I am getting to old and tired of watch the same story play out. The odds for everything to fall in Cleveland's favor the way it has had to be astronomical to say the least. I call it like I see it , and I see BS

Now do not get me wrong I understand your point. It certainly makes no sense but the situation suggest all that needs to be suggested

[Guest]

I don't understand the rigged thing:

 

(1)  There is no economic reason for the NBA to favor Cleveland over MUCH larger markets like New York, LA, etc.

 

(2)   The auditors who certify the lottery have much more to lose if they are participating in a fraud than they do to gain by way of payoff from the NBA.  

 

(3)  The other owners in the league would go ape #$*&.

 

I certainly understand the resentment of Cleveland landing the big picks but I remember similar resentment against other teams that have gotten lucky in the lottery like Orlando did (Shaq, Webber, etc.).  That doesn't persuade me to buy into the rigging theory.

 

In conspiracy theories, I tend to follow the money to determine if a theory is viable.  Here, the money is not with rigging the lottery to favor Clevleand, Ohio.

 

Agree with your overall assessment, but I think even Stern would have to admit it just looks fishy.

[AHF]

There is much there to suggest that Cleveland received a little help from the league. You can choose to hide your head in the sand to support the league if you want , but I am getting to old and tired of watch the same story play out. The odds for everything to fall in Cleveland's favor the way it has had to be astronomical to say the least. I call it like I see it , and I see BS

Now do not get me wrong I understand your point. It certainly makes no sense but the situation suggest all that needs to be suggested

 

I've seen that argument for almost every team that wins the lottery, though.  Cleveland has enjoyed great odds in recent years and has beat the odds but not by some ridiculous amount:

 

Here were their standing in the lottery:

2011 - #2 & #8 best chances

2012 - #3 (this was the year to "give" Cleveland the lottery with Anthony Davis)

2013 - #3

 

The only year they weren't one of the very most likely to win the lottery statistically was this year.

 

It isn't that I am supporting the league, I just don't understand what the league has to gain.  Lebron in Miami drew incredible ratings and attention.  Why did they need him in Cleveland so badly that:

 

(1)  They would bypass much bigger markets which would make more money.

(2)  Jeopardize the league's credibility after the reffing fiasco a few years ago.

(3)  The auditors would jeopardize their individual careers and put hundreds of millions at stake for their firm.

(4)  All the other owners would agree to bypass the top talent themselves to feed Cleveland.

 

I legitimately don't follow how you get everyone aligned on this.

[AHF]

Agree with your overall assessment, but I think even Stern would have to admit it just looks fishy.

 

It looks terrible to have one team winning several times.  But it did with Orlando and everyone cried foul but I couldn't follow the money on that one either.  Why enrich Orlando at the expense of bigger markets?  I've heard it with San Antonio.  Why enrich San Antonio at the expense of Boston, etc.?  

 

I tend to think people are motivated by greed when there is corruption of the type being argued here.  Where is the payoff for this very risky scheme?  What is the motive and how does that motive convince all the owners, auditors, etc. to get on board?  

 

That is what I can't follow.  There should be some fairly clear narrative that explains why anyone would want to do this.

[IheartVolt]

I've seen that argument for almost every team that wins the lottery, though. Cleveland has enjoyed great odds in recent years and has beat the odds but not by some ridiculous amount:

Here were their standing in the lottery:

2011 - #2 & #8 best chances

2012 - #3 (this was the year to "give" Cleveland the lottery with Anthony Davis)

2013 - #3

The only year they weren't one of the very most likely to win the lottery statistically was this year.

It isn't that I am supporting the league, I just don't understand what the league has to gain. Lebron in Miami drew incredible ratings and attention. Why did they need him in Cleveland so badly that:

(1) They would bypass much bigger markets which would make more money.

(2) Jeopardize the league's credibility after the reffing fiasco a few years ago.

(3) The auditors would jeopardize their individual careers and put hundreds of millions at stake for their firm.

(4) All the other owners would agree to bypass the top talent themselves to feed Cleveland.

I legitimately don't follow how you get everyone aligned on this.

The fact that their chances to win the lottery were not great a few years does not make the rigging argument look any worse. That makes it even stronger. They would have had four #1 picks on their team! Four! All drafted by them and they just happen to have Lebron to return home and Love fall into their lap the same year. I am sorry but a leprachaun is not that damn lucky

[Wretch]

I think the majority of the board is fine with this.  Anyone who speaks against it is labeled a tanker and has his/her basketball knowledge questioned.  Very McCarthy-esque.

 

I fully expect Ferry to tweak away and we'll stay 4-7 seed/2nd round ceiling.  He'll be here as long as Waddell was with the Thrashers unless something crazy happens.

 

I'm hoping 'something crazy' is Millsap leaving for a better deal after the season.  My hope is that it'll force his hand to do something ... anything other than affix another band-aid on this ebola virus we have as a franchise. (Do I get points for the current events reference?)

 

I find myself hoping for the exact same thing.  SOMETHING that will force his hand the way BK was finally forced to find a PG.  My biggest fear is seeing us improve little by little until we peak at like 50 wins...and the crowd goes banannas!

 

While not realizing we had no problems winning 45-50+ games, making the playoffs, and advancing to the 2nd round for the past I dunno....zillion years.  Hell, we peaked at 53 wins and the 3rd seed in the East during the last era.  This is the worst case scenario as we will label that "success" and it will only further validate the Ferry-love.  

 

Meanwhile, we still will not have left the middle.

 

I don't think Teague is a star but he can step up to the level of his playoff play if he can learn to instill consistent effort and aggression in his game.  He has never done that but if he can he will go from an average PG to an above average one.  He will never be in the discussion for best PG in the NBA.

 

Dennis has the highest ceiling and lowest floor of these guys.  I was excited about the pick and remain a supporter.  I am hopeful that he emerges this year but think it will be tough to develop him with all the minutes that Teague and Mack will take.  

 

I am not at all optimistic that Payne will be a star given his profile and age but I will reserve judgment until he actually plays.  

 

At this point, I would bet against each of these guys being a star.  Heck, if Walter can develop he may be the guy with the most potential of them even though he is years away.

 

If we are going to rely on these types of hopes, though, you might as well add Mike Scott and John Jenkins to the list and put them down as potential stars as well.  

 

I've been a Teague supporter from the start.  I love his game.  I'm not confused about his ceiling though and we shouldn't be using words like "develop" or "growth" when discussing him.  He's coming up on his 6th year in the league.  He's settling into who he is.  The only thing that can take him much further, IMO is finding the right fit - like Jason Terry.

 

As far as Payne and Dennis...anything can happen and does tend to happen.  I think people (hopefully not including Danny Ferry) are still misled though, thinking that a Manu and Parker are always available outside of the lottery and/or player development can turn anyone into a "star" - just like the Spurs do! {/sarcasm}

 

History just doesn't agree with that.  At all.

 

I don't understand the rigged thing:

 

(1)  There is no economic reason for the NBA to favor Cleveland over MUCH larger markets like New York, LA, etc.

 

(2)   The auditors who certify the lottery have much more to lose if they are participating in a fraud than they do to gain by way of payoff from the NBA.  

 

(3)  The other owners in the league would go ape #$*&.

 

I certainly understand the resentment of Cleveland landing the big picks but I remember similar resentment against other teams that have gotten lucky in the lottery like Orlando did (Shaq, Webber, etc.).  That doesn't persuade me to buy into the rigging theory.

 

In conspiracy theories, I tend to follow the money to determine if a theory is viable.  Here, the money is not with rigging the lottery to favor Clevleand, Ohio.

 

Whether we subscribe to the conspiracy or not, I think the most important thing to keep in mind is that nobody knows how these players will develop.  So really, whether it was rigged or not, the chance to get an impact player is there.  Minnesota wasn't handed a #1 pick...and by the "Laws of Lottery Rigging" you could make the case that they got screwed in 2008 as the Bulls were "gifted" Derrick Rose.    However...the #3 pick they got, landed them Love, and has netted them TWO #1 picks.

 

I guess the bottom line for me is that it would suck if the rigged lottery conspiracy (which I happen to subscribe to) is true.  However, due to the uncertain nature of player potential and development, team's aren't necessarily hindered by said shenanigans.

 

The lottery should be honest and fair, but in the long run...the actual ordering of it doesn't matter as much as people think it does.  Unless we dive into that whole, "everybody gets a turn" proposal that was tossed around not too long ago.

Edited August 7, 2014 by Wretch

[Guest]

It looks terrible to have one team winning several times.  But it did with Orlando and everyone cried foul but I couldn't follow the money on that one either.  Why enrich Orlando at the expense of bigger markets?  I've heard it with San Antonio.  Why enrich San Antonio at the expense of Boston, etc.?  

 

I tend to think people are motivated by greed when there is corruption of the type being argued here.  Where is the payoff for this very risky scheme?  What is the motive and how does that motive convince all the owners, auditors, etc. to get on board?  

 

That is what I can't follow.  There should be some fairly clear narrative that explains why anyone would want to do this.

Yeah, the outcome screams C-O-N-spiracy but the money trail just isn't there.  There's more money in the book exposing lottery rigging than there would be via under-the-table payouts from the league.

[AHF]

The fact that their chances to win the lottery were not great a few years does not make the rigging argument look any worse. That makes it even stronger. They would have had four #1 picks on their team! Four! All drafted by them and they just happen to have Lebron to return home and Love fall into their lap the same year. I am sorry but a leprachaun is not that damn lucky

 

So still no explanation for why the NBA would risk so much to make this happen?  For why other teams would allow it to happen?  For why the auditors would participate?  It shouldn't be this hard.

Edited August 8, 2014 by AHF

[DrReality]

Got to wonder if the lottery was fixed to get James back to Cavs. Cleveland the new Mecca for the NBA

[AHF]

Got to wonder if the lottery was fixed to get James back to Cavs. Cleveland the new Mecca for the NBA

 

But what does that do for the NBA?  James brings the NBA tons of attention regardless of where he is and you have to have all the rival owners agree to keep feeding Dan Snyder top picks so that James will view Cleveland as a talent upgrade over Miami?  Why would the other owners buy into that?

 

How is this worth the exposure if this is revealed?  You already suffered and recovered from a major credibility hit with your ref scandal and now you are going to risk permanent damage with this type of very public conspiracy?

 

If you are going to direct James, why not direct him to LA or NY?  Can  you imagine the buzz if the Knicks landed him?  It would make the Cleveland coverage look like a county fair.

 

How do you get the auditors on board with this?  Their individual careers are over if this is revealed and the firm could collapse if this came out.  Arthur Anderson was a 9.3 BILLION dollar company (in annual revenues) when the Enron scandal broke.  They went from 28,000 employees then to 200 today.  You really think Ernst & Young will risk a similar collapse?

 

Show me the money trail or some reasonable rationale that gets the following parties on board:

 

(1)  Rival owners (who want to improve their own team);

(2)  League ownership (who want to maintain a viably credible product and maximize revenues); and

(3)  The auditors (who risk massive damage to reputation if they permit a fraud).

[Guest]

I've casually followed this argument, and I want to add in a layer of sophistication ....

And just to take away a layer of sophistication ...

 

I agree Atlanta is the market with the most sensitivity to wins/losses.  Have you seen the amount of whining that goes on around here?

 

[DrReality]

The NBA is sucking wind in LA and NY they need another market to do something.  Not that Cleveland will be a huge deal but they need a hero and the Cavs will be like David vs Goliath.  That will get a lot of press. 

[AHF]

The NBA is sucking wind in LA and NY they need another market to do something.  Not that Cleveland will be a huge deal but they need a hero and the Cavs will be like David vs Goliath.  That will get a lot of press. 

 

That will get a small % of the press that a revival in New York would get.  A small %.  That is why the NBA is not nearly as excited about promoting Indiana, etc. as it is the biggest markets.

 

If you want media attention and the NBA being constantly in the press, Cleveland is not the way to do that.

 

@hawksfanatic - I agree with your analysis.  You are looking at incremental attendance revenue.  I was more focused on additional advertising revenue from incremental media exposure and speculating that a huge event in a town like New York would fit that mold.  I'm not sure how the numbers compare on that but I suspect that from an advertising, etc. perspective that teams with their own individual networks would represent a huge revenue opportunity.  

[PSSSHHHRRR87]

I've casually followed this argument, and I want to add in a layer of sophistication and then blow it away. Economically speaking, the NBA doesn't maximize their revenues by having the big market team win the most. That isn't necessarily how they would go about this. The NBA would actually try to maximize their distribution of wins (i.e. talent) to those markets that will bring in the most money for an additional win. The components that make up this marginal revenue is a combination of market size and market sensitivity to wins. This tells you that markets that are large in size and have highly elastic demand for winning (or talent or basketball) would be the ideal place to send wins, from the NBA's perspective.

So what is a large market where their fans are sensitive to winning? Uh, you're looking at it. ATLANTA. So if the NBA was trying to rig things to maximize their revenues, then Atlanta would be an ideal candidate for this.

If you look at places like Cleveland, that is a stupid place for the NBA to send talent. It is a smaller market and their fans are insensitive to wins because there isn't much else to do in Cleveland. According to Forbes, the Cavs had revenues of $72m the season before LeBron and they were unbelievably pathetic but still ranked tied for 23rd in revenues. The season after acquiring him they increased to $93m (tied for 15th), an increase of 30% while the rest of the NBA increased by 8% that year. The last year with LeBron, the Cavs had $159m (5th), after he left they increased to $161m (4th) for 1% growth. The same time, the rest of the NBA increased revenues by about 0.5%.

I agree with most of this argument. If the league were to rig the league, they'd rig it in favor of teams like Atlanta, but it could argued that Miami and Houston are similar markets and they've both have had success attaining top talent in recent years, although I agree the pooling of talent isn't favorable for the league. It's hard for the league to have credibility when the face of the league teams up with other All-Stars to win titles.

Also, the idea that the league rigs in favor of major markets, i.e. New York, LA, Chicago is false too because those venues have the city population to fill a stadium no matter the type of basketball they play. A team can find 20,000 diehards to fill a stadium when said team in stationed in a city with a population of 10+ million people. Cities like Atlanta and Houston are the hotbeds up for grabs because the fans are here, but we are spoiled for choice when it comes to entertainment. Really, the fans the Hawks are fighting for are the family guys taking the wife and kids out to dinner and a game and the bandwagoner that puts on a Cleveland James jersey cause he feels it makes him a winner. Casual fans don't have the patience for a rebuild or mediocrity, especially when the Falcons and UGA are competitive and you can catch the Hawks with Bob and Nique on Sports South. All of the Hawks' diehard fans are on Hawksquawk. The Hawks also need to stop selling season tickets to these no-show businesses because it looks so bad.

And no one forced Lebron to go home and no one told Kevin Love to tell teams that the only team he'll play for is whatever team Lebron is on. No one forces these stars to swallow their pride and join forces. My only thing that would suggest rigging is why do they have to do the lottery behind closed doors. Why not do it on live television in front of the whole world like the actual GA lottery drawings are done. If there isn't any rigging, then there is nothing to hide...

Also, I hate the rotation idea because a draftee could hold out if he knows its Milwaukee's turn to have the number one pick and he'd rather wait until the following season when more competitive teams are in the top 5 of the draft. The draft lottery is meant for poor teams to get better, not to make great teams even stronger.

[AHF]

I guess it would be interesting to look at the books.  I suspect gate receipts are a significant portion of the revenue stream but they don't drop as much to the bottomline as media rights.  You have to pay for all the expenses associated with running the arena, etc. while the $1.9 billion annually in media rights drop right to the bottomline.  

 

The current major TV deals expire in two years and are currently worth 930 million per year to the league.

 

My point about New York is that a few years of the kind of bloated media coverage from Lebron on the Knicks could inflate that number significantly and Forbes already claims:

 

Multiple sources say the next deal’s value will at least  double the current agreement.

 

So if you are selling me on a conspiracy that all the owners will buy into, I could at least wrap my head around a situation where Lebron goes to a media focal point type of market in order to increase ratings, etc. and lead to a massive increase in TV revenue that is then shared by every team in the league.  If the baseline for the next deal is roughly $1.92 billion then something that bumps up by percentage points is at least a viable theory to think about -- particularly when that incremental revenue would drop straight to every team's bottomline.

[nathan2331]

Isn't the lottery on ESPN? I'm not sure if it shows the actual drawing, but they do have a program for it.

And in this case, I think the lottery did what it was supposed to do. When Lebron left Cleveland, they understandably became terrible which led to multiple top picks. People may want to label it as a conspiracy, but the reality is that Cleveland got lucky, and used those picks to form their trio (which I'm skeptical of).

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk

[Guest]

My biggest issue with the whole conspiracy is why would the other 31 owners turn an eye and be OK with it.

Think Philly would be Ok in not getting the #1 pick this pass draft and take Wiggins instead if an injured Embiid?

That's the one aspect I just can't buy.

Can you see Mark Cuban being ok with this and not talking?

[AHF]

Also, can we be an intelligent board and not take the $930m number for national TV deals seriously? That number is undoubtedly in place because the media reporting the number is taking the total value and dividing it by the years involved.

This board should be passed the stage at looking at averages because we know it is typically wrong. If you look at the typical NBA player contract, they will either increase or decrease in value across the life of the contract dependent upon how the player will age. This is how most long-term contracts are structured, with expectations of the future built into place. This is also the case with recent sports TV contracts are structured.

In 2007-08, when the current NBA TV contract was extended, we were in a boom and expectations were high. It is likely that ABC/ESPN/.TBS and the NBA put in place increased rights fees across years. So I don't expect $930m to be the actual national TV revenues for the 2015-16 season, the last in the current contract.

 

I got that number from Forbes on the TV contract.  The imply it is a flat amount per year of the contract:

 

The current deals with ESPN and ABC (through parent company Disney) and TNT which pay a combined $930 million per year expire at the end of the 2015-16 season. A source familiar says while the league is in advanced discussions with the two incumbent rights holders, there has been discussion around creating a package of games for a third party. Multiple sources say the next deal’s value will at least  double the current agreement.

[AHF]

CNNSI also describes them as flat based on an article from the Washington Street Journal:

 

Disney, the parent company of broadcasters ESPN and ABC, is currently paying $485 million per year over the eight-year contract with the NBA that is set to expire after the 2015-16 season. Turner, the parent company of TNT, is currently paying $445 million per year.