What's new

Why a lockout would be good for the Jazz

There will nearly most definitely be a lockout starting on July 1st - but that doesn't mean the entire season will be lost.
Yes, a new CBA will likely benefit small-market teams more, but missing an entire season of basketball wouldn't be "good" for anyone. A team like Utah may be hurt "less" than some others, but it wouldn't be "good" for them because the overall product will suffer from a cancelled season.

Give me a 65-game schedule beginning in Dec or a 50-game schedule starting in January.
 
Not overseas but he told, if there is lockout, he is willing to play in the upcoming euro basket championship to help turkey, and compete against players like Gasol, Nowitzki so that he can be more ready for the season.

Do you think he would actually get any playing time? Turkey has a fair amount of good big men.
 
The NHL lockout was. Nobody cares, but the league is in good shape financially.

Agreed.

Frankly if the league came out on the other side looking like a sport in which every team had a fair chance to win with large amounts of revenue sharing and a hard cap it's hard to say that the NBA wouldn't be a better league on the other side of the lockout.
 
Agreed.

Frankly if the league came out on the other side looking like a sport in which every team had a fair chance to win with large amounts of revenue sharing and a hard cap it's hard to say that the NBA wouldn't be a better league on the other side of the lockout.

That's my biggest hope as well.
 
Agreed.

Frankly if the league came out on the other side looking like a sport in which every team had a fair chance to win with large amounts of revenue sharing and a hard cap it's hard to say that the NBA wouldn't be a better league on the other side of the lockout.

Do you really think this is possible? I mean, stranger things have happened, but really?
 
Do you really think this is possible? I mean, stranger things have happened, but really?

To be honest I think there's a fairly large impediment to this plan: Any hard cap that doesn't also roll back salaries proportionately is going to almost mandate the breakup of the Bosh/Wade/James combination. I get the feeling there's a lot of power players in this that adamantly don't want to see that happen.
 
There are a lot of things wrong with a hard cap though. Fast forward about 4 years when Hayward, Favors, Burks, and Kanter are all up for restricted free agency. Lets say the Jazz drafted incredibly well and two are all stars and two are solid starters. They are entering their prime and the Jazz have made a WCF appearance but lost. A hard cap would mean two of these players would be plucked from us like ripe apples on a tree. Most likely by down and out franchises who made poor decisions drafting and in free agency. Yet because of the hard cap, they get a free accelerated rebuild at the Jazz expense. The Jazz playoff hopes for the future are now dashed, a victim of their own success. They will likely spend the next several years on the tread mill, not good enough to make the playoffs, and not bad enough to get a high lottery pick. You might argue the Jazz can turn around and do the same, but remember they will always be second choice to any player in free agency, even with limits on payroll.
 
Unless endorsement dollars get redistributed, large markets will always have a competitive advantage in recruiting. I don't see a hard cap improving in that regard over the current system.
 
Unless endorsement dollars get redistributed, large markets will always have a competitive advantage in recruiting. I don't see a hard cap improving in that regard over the current system.

Even redistributed endorsement dollars wouldn't solve everything. Most wealthy athletes, especially NBA players, seem to want to live in a big city.

Maybe in professional Lumberjack or Mountain-biking leagues Milwaukee, Salt-Lake, and Minneapolis would be the top free-agent destination.
 
Back
Top