U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-14-2011, 02:18 PM
 
Location: Cook County
5,288 posts, read 6,371,163 times
Reputation: 3070

Advertisements

Since its looking more and more likely we could lose the full season it got me thinking....What team(s) stand to lose the most from a locked out season? Im thinking teams with older stars could hurt, or teams that will lose a big player to free agency next year that won't get the last year out of them?

Lakers and Spurs come to mind since Kobe and Duncan are probably the oldest of the "elite" players (not sure if Duncan still fits in that category).

I am not exactly sure how contracts work in the event of a lockout, but I am guessing some teams might not get the last year out of some of the players and could walk right into free agency after....That could effect some teams negatively as well...

Thoughts?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-14-2011, 03:15 PM
 
9,030 posts, read 16,453,674 times
Reputation: 6822
I think the suns could be impacted in quite a few ways - which is interesting because it seems like their owner is one of the more adament guys in this thing

they have one major draw at the gate in steve nash, they have a very popular older player in grant hill ....... the younger guys don't bring a ton on their own and the team will be in worse shape after a missed season - this may be the last year they could realistically cash in on some of these guys

then throw in the nature of the phoenix sports fan and how Sarver isn't popular here at all and I could see a huge blowback against them
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2011, 03:37 PM
 
Location: Cook County
5,288 posts, read 6,371,163 times
Reputation: 3070
Good call about the Suns, man is there a player that must be more pissed about the lockout than Grant Hill, seems like he is against all odds resurecting his career, and I think he might be the oldest player in the league now? I love watching him play, reason #8392 why the lockout sucks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2011, 09:05 PM
 
Location: Here or There
3,964 posts, read 2,517,123 times
Reputation: 1655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orangeish View Post
Good call about the Suns, man is there a player that must be more pissed about the lockout than Grant Hill, seems like he is against all odds resurecting his career, and I think he might be the oldest player in the league now? I love watching him play, reason #8392 why the lockout sucks.
Agreed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2011, 10:31 PM
 
Location: BMORE!
7,750 posts, read 6,167,408 times
Reputation: 3601
it seems like grant hill doesn't age. he's been in the league since i was in the 4th grade; I'm 27 now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2011, 09:46 PM
 
Location: Long Island,New York
8,163 posts, read 13,201,234 times
Reputation: 2489
Easily Sacramento! They were on the verge of leaving before this season.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2011, 02:46 PM
 
Location: Under a bridge
2,423 posts, read 3,147,379 times
Reputation: 2486
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lancet71 View Post
Easily Sacramento! They were on the verge of leaving before this season.
Economically speaking not the Kings. The Maloofs are praying that there is no season. No season means no paying out payroll. The Maloofs don't have too much going on other than basketball. They sold their cash cow New Mexico beer distributorship to raise money to save their Palms Casino in Las Vegas from creditors and they ended up losing all of it but 2%. The team in the last few seasons has been losing money.

I think the Lakers have more to lose. The owners' total wealth/earnings is basically from the Lakers. With no season there's no money to be made EVEN with their high payroll. They earn lots of money with television. The same goes with the other few owners that make money primarily on their NBA team. The teams that lose money don't want a season.

-Cheers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2011, 11:58 AM
 
Location: Long Island,New York
8,163 posts, read 13,201,234 times
Reputation: 2489
Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainBiking View Post
Economically speaking not the Kings. The Maloofs are praying that there is no season. No season means no paying out payroll. The Maloofs don't have too much going on other than basketball. They sold their cash cow New Mexico beer distributorship to raise money to save their Palms Casino in Las Vegas from creditors and they ended up losing all of it but 2%. The team in the last few seasons has been losing money.

I think the Lakers have more to lose. The owners' total wealth/earnings is basically from the Lakers. With no season there's no money to be made EVEN with their high payroll. They earn lots of money with television. The same goes with the other few owners that make money primarily on their NBA team. The teams that lose money don't want a season.

-Cheers.
The question was about losing the most. If there is no season the Lakers wont be making their $$$ like they normally do but they wont go under. The Kings can't say the same thing. Their organization can fold. A profit is always better than a loss and the Lakers obviously make more money per year based on ticket sales, memorabilia, concessions,etc...but the Lakers have enough money to survive. So even if they lost millions more than the Kings from a financial standpoint, losing a team is a greater loss.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2011, 01:09 PM
 
Location: Under a bridge
2,423 posts, read 3,147,379 times
Reputation: 2486
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lancet71 View Post
The question was about losing the most. If there is no season the Lakers wont be making their $$$ like they normally do but they wont go under. The Kings can't say the same thing. Their organization can fold. A profit is always better than a loss and the Lakers obviously make more money per year based on ticket sales, memorabilia, concessions,etc...but the Lakers have enough money to survive. So even if they lost millions more than the Kings from a financial standpoint, losing a team is a greater loss.
I did state my opinion was based from an economical standpoint. I didn't say the Lakers would go under. I said they would lose more revenue/profits if there's no season than the Kings. The Lakers earn much more money than the Kings so they would lose more money. This doesn't mean the Lakers will go under. The Lakers and their ownership are wealthy. I also mentioned the Kings' owners' financial state, too. Not good. If they're losing money with the team and are rumored to be broke why would they want to continue losing money with the season going on? The lockout buys them time. Maybe they look for a buyer? Sacramento for the most part doesn't care about basketball anymore. The attendance figures prove that. They used to sell out every game... for 8 straight seasons. If the Sacramento folks did care about the Kings the team would already be playing downtown in a new arena. Hardly a loss for most.

-Cheers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2011, 10:36 PM
 
Location: Long Island,New York
8,163 posts, read 13,201,234 times
Reputation: 2489
Quote:
Originally Posted by MountainBiking View Post
I did state my opinion was based from an economical standpoint. I didn't say the Lakers would go under. I said they would lose more revenue/profits if there's no season than the Kings. The Lakers earn much more money than the Kings so they would lose more money. This doesn't mean the Lakers will go under. The Lakers and their ownership are wealthy. I also mentioned the Kings' owners' financial state, too. Not good. If they're losing money with the team and are rumored to be broke why would they want to continue losing money with the season going on? The lockout buys them time. Maybe they look for a buyer? Sacramento for the most part doesn't care about basketball anymore. The attendance figures prove that. They used to sell out every game... for 8 straight seasons. If the Sacramento folks did care about the Kings the team would already be playing downtown in a new arena. Hardly a loss for most.

-Cheers.
The locals fought for the team to stay so this could have potentially been a big ticket sales year for the team. The same thing has been happening with my NY Islanders. The word is that they might move the team to a place like Anaheim or someplace else too to save them but no season makes them the biggest loser, just like the OP asked.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Basketball
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top