Adarq.org

This is going to be the best pick up game of all time

http://www.slamonline.com/nba/nba-eliminates-east-vs-west-all-star-game/

I love the concept but do hope it's more competitive. Like the 80's and 90's games used to be.

Quote from: adarqui on October 05, 2017, 09:06:04 am

Quote from: fast does lie on October 04, 2017, 08:05:18 pm

Quote from: Coges on October 04, 2017, 07:10:06 pm

This is going to be the best pick up game of all time

http://www.slamonline.com/nba/nba-eliminates-east-vs-west-all-star-game/

Yeah it's a strange change but better than no change. I'd have dreaded the same all star this year, i can literally predict what /who will be on it ..... West beats east 199 - 183 yada yada yada

I think they need to have some kind of repercussion for playing nonchalant bball to truly improve the game, maybe having it count as a w/l.  So if East wins, every east team will get a W added to rec while west teams get L to record added.

Get rid of fan voting, it's a joke, what the fans want they end up hating it anyway. Coaches only vote for the teams.

Would be hella of a game.

it's funny to me.. the best "repercussion" is just putting some serious money on the line. if you win, you get the purse. NBA is $$ RICH $$. Why not just put up 1 mil bonus per player on the winning team? Apparently it's ~50k for a winner, ~25k for a loser.. make that 1 mil for a winner, 25k for a loser and see what happens. Same goes for baseball etc.. Surely these leagues have an extra ~12 mil they can put up..

These are great examples of when capitalism is not utilized properly.

Instead, it's just owners/leagues being cheap.. then blaming it on the players.

Nah, the players association has bargained for higher and higher salary til the point it's gotten ridiculous. The GM's and non player employee's make a minute fraction of what the players make but play a key role in making it all happen, without either parties, it can't happen. The owners are already rich but still, they take losses some times.

The players have it WAAAY too good. They have literally no expenses during the season, the best benefits of any job. Min salary is like 800k, max salary is like 60,000,000, come on now.

hold on.. the player's association has bargained for higher salaries as a percentage of what the NBA makes..

how is that ridiculous?

sad @ "players have it way too good" .. they are the "product". They are the ones putting fans in the seats. They are the ones people pay to see. LOL @ key role.. If all of the players left the NBA and created their own league, that's what people would flock to see. No one would pay money to the NBA if it was full of average joes.

No one is paying money to see Joe Blow owner in the sky box.

Again, I don't care what they are paid, if it's a percentage of what the NBA is making. If the NBA stops making money, they will get paid less.

Capitalism.

Even if they have no expenses during the season, which I seriously doubt.. Who cares? Even if they have the best benefits of any job, who cares? THEY ARE THE PRODUCT. The fact that they make so much indicates that the NBA makes insane money, otherwise, they couldn't get paid what they are making.

Economics 101, capitalism 101. If the players strike, NBA doesn't make money. Work force 101.

101 101.

Your argument I see so often, is so baseless IMHO. It's just full of emotion. Look at the math. Stop looking at what the work force does or provides, and instead just look at the numbers. That's why fans with this opinion just drive me nuts... For some reason, because it involves a basketball, sports, etc, the players "deserve less". They make "too much" because, basketball...

Athletes are irreplaceable..

Why is that so hard to understand? You can't just replace Lebron James, Durant, Jordan, Magic, Bird, Tom Brady, Usain Bolt etc.. I mean you can replace them with someone who isn't on their level, but then you as an organization/owner/team/league etc, MAKE LESS MONEY and are less successful. Athletics is unique in this context.

You can replace owners, management, staff, even coaches.. but if you have someone like Allen Iverson and a sh*t team, you simply cannot replace that talent unless it's with someone equally/more effective. AI took a shit franchise (during those years) and put it on the map. Look at them before & after. Athletes like AI earn every penny.

Also, 800k minimum salary sounds fine to me.. This is a lifestyle job with a pre-season, 82 game season, possible playoffs/championships, and an active off season, in a sport/business which makes massive $$.

Props to the players association for getting everyone paid.. This is why big corps hate unions & organized labor.. Imagine if the incredible wealth inequality gaps were shortened among management/C-level people and more of that money hit the labor. But that won't happen because every single one of those people are easily replaceable.. sucks.

/rant

Just had to neg the last 2 replies, even though i never neg anyone, hehe.

cool story

I may reply later when i have time, but a lot of your assumptions are wrong. I know too much about the league and how it works.

If it's anything on the level of exhaling during the descent of a heavy squat, I can't wait.

Seriously though, please set me straight. Your initial post doesn't make me think you have anything substantive, QFE:

Nah, the players association has bargained for higher and higher salary til the point it's gotten ridiculous. The GM's and non player employee's make a minute fraction of what the players make but play a key role in making it all happen, without either parties, it can't happen. The owners are already rich but still, they take losses some times.

The players have it WAAAY too good. They have literally no expenses during the season, the best benefits of any job. Min salary is like 800k, max salary is like 60,000,000, come on now.

That post was just full of substance. The "players have it WAAAY too good" line is something i'd expect to see argued in court.

Yep Capitalism, it's the most fair system.

When players get too greedy (and owners for that matter), it's bad for us the spectators because game halts, like it did several times before.

whoa..

a capitalist who has a problem with greed?

*faints*

very confused though how greed is bad for the spectators, who seem to be putting more money in the players pockets.

honestly i think you're convictions are just not strong.. this is how you can argue for capitalism then talk about players being too greedy etc. If you were a true capitalist, like how you seemed to come off in earlier posts, you'd have absolutely no problem with how much the players are getting paid, because the free market sorts everything out.

I mean you're arguing how much money the owners should be making too, as opposed to me saying the players are making too much.

i'm not capitalist.. i'm a mix of things.. but you're a capitalist, so you shouldn't be arguing it at all.

i can see this convo could really go out of control.. i just find it funny that, your first reaction, while being a vocal capitalist, is to talk about repercussions instead of rewards.... a capitalist looks for rewards, not repercussions...

tbh now you just sound like a politician, you're all over the place.