Knicks · Barkley on the Lockout (page 1)

Charles and I agree on many things. These are things I have written over the last few days. Not saying my sheit is that good, just saying.

Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Barkley on lockout: Small markets need to stay viable
By Mike Mazzeo

Charles Barkley joined ESPN 1050 Tuesday afternoon to talk about the NBA lockout.

Here are the major takeaways of his interview on “The Mike Lupica Show.”

• The only way the lockout will end is if the players agree to a 50-50 split on Basketball Related Income or “BRI.” Barkley says the owners have put their foot down, so the players are going to have to agree on that and potentially other concessions like a hard salary cap and revenue sharing. Otherwise, there won’t be a 2011-12 season.

• Big market teams and their ability to attract top-tier free agents is killing the league. Barkley says that teams like the Heat and Knicks may be good for ratings, but they’re bad for the NBA as a whole. Essentially, Chris Paul leaving New Orleans and potentially joining STAT and Melo in the Big Apple is just as bad as the Big Three in Miami.

“It’s not fair,” Barkley said. “It’s not fair to the integrity of the game. We need great players in the small market cities.”

• Barkley says the league wouldn’t find itself in this awful position if LeBron hadn’t bolted Cleveland and Chris Bosh hadn’t bolted Toronto to join D-Wade down in Miami.

“That’s the big elephant in the room,” Barkley said. “They’re gonna say, ‘No. No. No. We can’t have that.’ And from a business standpoint, these [owners] are running a big time business. People can say what they want to, but of course it’s about cash, and we need the small market to be viable. These guys have the right to play together, but it’s not a good business plan for the NBA. They’ve got to find a way to keep these stars in these small markets.”

• Barkley is afraid that the NBA is turning into baseball. While teams like the Yankees, Red Sox and Phillies can afford top-tier free agents, smaller markets like Tampa Bay and Milwaukee aren’t as fortunate. Barkley brought up the fact that Prince Fielder is likely to leave the Brewers to seek more money on the open market. He also mentioned Carl Crawford leaving the Rays for Boston.

“It’s not fair to the fans in Milwaukee [who haven’t been to the World Series since 1982],” Barkley said. “Basketball is becoming baseball, and we can’t have that.”

Obviously, as we’ve found out this season, money doesn’t buy championships. But it does -- with some exceptions -- buy playoff appearances.

nalod, Barkley mentioned many points we harped on.. I mentioned the baseball example a week or so ago, and while teams like Tampa may be doing well, they are the exception and not the rule, and as soon as their big stars are able to leave, tampa has to hit the reset button.. I hate the fact that I open the sports section and they are talking about the Yankees as frontrunners to land CJ wilson of the rangers.. I am like really? I am the biggest yankee fan you will find, but Jeez, the guy is still a ranger and he is still playing in the playoffs right now... I can only wonder how it feels to be a fan of a team where the big market teams can not only feast on the stars you develop, but it is talked about with such certainty while the season is still going...LOL

Small market teams should be able to keep their stars, and this is why I really am not a fan of adding paul to this team.. while I am a huge fan of his, I really wanted the knicks to develop the youth and not even make that carmelo trade..

The NBA needs fixin.. the owners seem to want to fix it.. The players... Just want to get paid.. plain and simple... and them getting the most money they can get has nothing to do with the long term prosperity of the league.. and to me that is a problem..

It's always entertaining when people use Charles Barkley as the voice of reason.

TheloniusMonk wrote:It's always entertaining when people use Charles Barkley as the voice of reason.

I had to look in the mirror and step on the scale too!

TheloniusMonk wrote:It's always entertaining when people use Charles Barkley as the voice of reason.

so do you think that barkely has no valid points whatsoever?

tkf wrote:The NBA needs fixin.. the owners seem to want to fix it.. The players... Just want to get paid.. plain and simple... and them getting the most money they can get has nothing to do with the long term prosperity of the league.. and to me that is a problem..

Players don't have any paychecks coming in....they can't hold out forever. For most, this is their only source of income. While I do miss basketball, Barkley does make some good points. I hope the fix it and don't really care at this point if there is a season this year

Didn't someone just buy the old ABA (I think thats what it was called). Talking about the league Doctor J played for before they merged with the NBA.

imo a 2nd league needs to be formed

DurzoBlint wrote:Didn't someone just buy the old ABA (I think thats what it was called). Talking about the league Doctor J played for before they merged with the NBA.

imo a 2nd league needs to be formed

why? so the players can get paid 80% of all revenue? just asking..

DurzoBlint wrote:Didn't someone just buy the old ABA (I think thats what it was called). Talking about the league Doctor J played for before they merged with the NBA.

imo a 2nd league needs to be formed

There is an New ABA. Its lower than NBDL.

ABA back in the day started small and gained steam in markets the NBA refused to expand to. Even then the NBA was much smaller in scale.

Don't forget, only 4 teams folded into the NBA. ABA was not makin money and the NBA got established franchises in markets they could justify being in. ANd 7 million per team. This was 1976.

In 35 years nobody has even tried to make a run. Too big to replicate. The best Arenas set up as revenue machines are in the clutches of the NBA in the best cities.

Can new league really make it with Teams in the Meadowlands or the Nassau Coliseum?

Anyway I know Stat said something like "its an alterative" but it really is not.

tkf wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:Didn't someone just buy the old ABA (I think thats what it was called). Talking about the league Doctor J played for before they merged with the NBA.

imo a 2nd league needs to be formed

why? so the players can get paid 80% of all revenue? just asking..

because competition is good. Because if the NBA strike lasts all years at least we'd have an alternative (WMBA is no alternative)

Barkley is telling the truth whether you agree or not!

DurzoBlint wrote:

tkf wrote:

DurzoBlint wrote:Didn't someone just buy the old ABA (I think thats what it was called). Talking about the league Doctor J played for before they merged with the NBA.

imo a 2nd league needs to be formed

why? so the players can get paid 80% of all revenue? just asking..

because competition is good. Because if the NBA strike lasts all years at least we'd have an alternative (WMBA is no alternative)

True competition is good... the problem is, finding the resources to start a league that will truly compete.. and honestly, the players are coddled in the NBA, starting a league would be only in their interest as paid players.. not the league.. again, would that be real competition..

I heard the interview...

I disagree with Barkley, the league was losing money well before LeBron made his move...Expanding to NO and Charlotte is proving to be a mistake...They can't hold that over the players heads...I agree that going 50/50 is the right thing to do if it makes teams viable...That's taking the average salaries from 5 mil per to just over 4 mil per...

Also, the league has been deciding for many years now, which player should goes where...Now the players are doing that for themselves...U think Garnett to Boston via McHale and Pao to LA via Jerry West were random trades???...The league is more exciting than it has been in years...They can charge more ad dollars and split a bigger pot...

Barkley also said that small market teams can't compete...What about OKC, Memphis made a run and can be better this year......SA ruled for many years and would continue if Tim Duncan was younger...Not everyone want to play in a big market...Miami ain't that big...

Barklay always had a bias against NY...I'm not saying this is it, but I really can't understand how he based his argument on a one year sampling, after LeBron moved and the league is at its heights in popularity...That goes counter to what he is saying...

OKC built thru the draft and as the players mature it becomes generically harder for smaller market teams to hold on to players who want top dollar.

OKC is winning nice and NO two years ago proved it can do well when it does, as did Charlotte until a string of off court moves made for bad timing.

The Arena in charlotte was the last to be built without boxes and it hurt them. For a while, the team lead the league in attendance. Never champions but Mouring and LJ were very big there. Owner was a dick and when he wanted a new arena after only like 10 years old when he was trading away poplular players, Bobby PHills crashing racing his porche, ray curruth murder (panthers) and few other things did not go well with the people there.

Teams can do well in smaller markets. Memphis owner had to get his debt structure in line before he got the team going and he never blamed anyone. He thanked the fans for support and said he would get it together, and he did.

Knicks have proven well beyond a doubt that bad management has nothing to do with success. Team makes money even when is fails. No wonder the Russian is foaming at the mouth to buy NYets. Dolan Panicked!

Its true SA has done well in a limited market but Im not sure they have made money in a long time. Your always going to have teams with bad records and there is just so much they can lose.

Im in favor of compromise and profit sharing arrangement. Base revenue plus a piece of the profits. Teams that win make more money. Lets be real, Marbuty got paid the same regardless of the teams success. Owners do better the deeper they go.

Playoff bonus pool seems like chump change these days. http://atlantapost.com/2010/06/21/nba-ch...

ramble ramble rabmle...

teams should be able to find ways out of bad contracts -- however, teams have to know not to give some of these guys silly contracts to begin with

revenue sharing is a must

contraction should be an option. too many teams in just about all the leagues, ya even the nfl (jacksonville for 1). players will fight this one.

shorter season maybe? long season, then over 50% of the teams make the playoffs anyway. this one would never happen unless the game day experience continues to decline. the rise of HD tv, if it isnt already, is going to impact all sports. less folks in the stands --> move more games to a higher charged channel on the tube if folks stay home.

Nalod wrote:
OKC built thru the draft and as the players mature it becomes generically harder for smaller market teams to hold on to players who want top dollar.

OKC is winning nice and NO two years ago proved it can do well when it does, as did Charlotte until a string of off court moves made for bad timing.

The Arena in charlotte was the last to be built without boxes and it hurt them. For a while, the team lead the league in attendance. Never champions but Mouring and LJ were very big there. Owner was a dick and when he wanted a new arena after only like 10 years old when he was trading away poplular players, Bobby PHills crashing racing his porche, ray curruth murder (panthers) and few other things did not go well with the people there.

Teams can do well in smaller markets. Memphis owner had to get his debt structure in line before he got the team going and he never blamed anyone. He thanked the fans for support and said he would get it together, and he did.

Knicks have proven well beyond a doubt that bad management has nothing to do with success. Team makes money even when is fails. No wonder the Russian is foaming at the mouth to buy NYets. Dolan Panicked!

Its true SA has done well in a limited market but Im not sure they have made money in a long time. Your always going to have teams with bad records and there is just so much they can lose.

Im in favor of compromise and profit sharing arrangement. Base revenue plus a piece of the profits. Teams that win make more money. Lets be real, Marbuty got paid the same regardless of the teams success. Owners do better the deeper they go.

Playoff bonus pool seems like chump change these days. http://atlantapost.com/2010/06/21/nba-ch...

+1
The "poor small markets don't have a chance" arguments get blown out of the water every three or four years, so running down the road of "we need parity at all costs" is a pipedream. NY and LA will always be what they are. Asking those franchises to essentially do penance for being huge markets is a continuing load of bullshit. Continuing to have the Milwaukees and the Minnies whining that they have no shot is consistently shot in the foot every time SA goes to the Finals or the Florida Marlins go to the World Series. Meanwhile, the Bostons and Chicagos smell the big dance (in the case of the WS) three times a century.