 |
|
|
 |
|
I don't mind that LeBron James, ESPN and, to a lesser extent, Dwayne Wade and Chris Bosh manipulated us viewers during the week-long process of deciding--or pretending to decide--which NBA team LeBron would play for next year. All ESPN programs, with the exception of game telecasts, had long segments about "D-Day" 2010 (and even the game telecasts presented LeBron updates on crawls beneath the action). The segments were probably ninety per cent repetitive, but for a basketball junkie like me there always seemed to be one new point to be made, one possibility to consider, that added to the intrigue. Was it a fix from the beginning? It doesn't matter to me, because I enjoyed the various plausible story lines presented (LeBron to stay in Cleveland, Bosh to go to Cleveland, LeBron to go to Chicago, LeBron and Wade and Bosh to unite in Chicago, LeBron to join A'mare Stoudamire in New York with Carmelo Anthony to come next year).
I don't mind that the players had the freedom to leave their old teams in the lurch. Pro basketball is a business. Any team can and should rid itself of any players it thinks cannot help the team. Any free agent can and should choose the team that best suits him. If either side wants to be bound by loyalty, fine, but by no means should either be expected to be so bound. It might have been classier had LeBron given Cleaveland owner Dan Gilbert advance notice of his decision and then, after making the official public announcement, thanked the owner and the Cleveland fans for their support over the years. It might have been classier had Gilbert not publicly blasted LeBron for a "shameful display of selfishness and betrayal," called him "cowardly," and accused him of "quitting" during the Cavs' losing playoff series against Boston. No doubt Gilbert has "betrayed" others himself at times in the course of running his businesses, and obviously he would still have loved to have the "quitter" stay with the Cavs to the end of his career. But I don't care that both LeBron and Gilbert behaved thoughtlessly and selfishly.
Nor do I care that LeBron, in seeking to play alongside two other superstars, may have damaged his "brand" by in effect conceding both that he could never win a championship in Cleveland without a huge influx of talent and that the Heat will never be "his" team in the way that some claim Chicago was Michael Jordan's or Boston was Larry Bird's or Los Angeles was Magic Johnson's and is now Kobe Bryant's. True, those players stayed with one team but, with the exception of Jordan, it wasn't truly "theirs." All had great teammates. Jordan had Scottie Pippin and the demented Dennis Rodman plus Horace Grant and some fine spot-up shooters. Magic had Kareem Abdul Jabbar, James Worthy, and Michael Cooper--that's practically an all-star team in itself. Bird had Kevin McHale, Robert Parish, and Dennis Johnson. Bryant won with Shaquille O'Neal, then couldn't win again until Pau Gasol joined his team. Recently, the Celtics won when Kevin Garnett and Ray Allen teamed up with Paul Pierce and Rajon Rondo blossomed into a star. Cinderella teams and one-man teams cannot get through a long playoff run. A team can't win on just hearts and smarts. It must have two or more superstars plus a strong supporting cast of players who are very good at specific roles. Charles Barkley may lament that LeBron will never be "the guy" but, with the possible exception of Jordan, no one ever has been. Had Bosh or Wade joined LeBron in Cleveland, LeBron would have been no more or less of a player than he is by joining Wade and Bosh in Miami.
However, while I don't care about the above, I do care that the Heat threw a nationally televised party featuring not only LeBron, Wade, and Bosh but a surfeit of smoke and attitudinizing and strutting. To me it was tacky and unwatchable, although I'm sure it played well to the bling-and-tat generation, TV's cherished 25-40-year-old demographic.
And, above all, I do care that salaries keep rising to embarrassing levels for guys who, yes, are infinitely better at the game than the rest of us old gym rats but who would still, I maintain, play for much less if they had to simply because playing ball for money is better than actually working. Many of us fans resent the outrageous salaries paid to ball players; paradoxically, we also resent owners who refuse to pay outrageous salaries in order to keep or acquire coveted players. The salary agreement between the NBA and the players' union comes up for negotiation after the 2010-11 season. The owners are threatening a lockout as a way to drive salaries down. I have a better solution. I suggest that the best way to insure true competition and to bring operating costs down is to measure success not by total team wins but by lowest cost per win (CPW).
In the 2009-10 season, the LA Lakers finished first in the regular season, won the Western Conference championship, and proceeded to win the NBA finals. Thier payroll was $81,728,000 (rounded to nearest $100,000), and their league record was 57 wins, 25 losses. Thus their CPW was $1,433,824. Here are the figures for teams in the Western Conference, in order of 200-10 record:
TEAM PAYROLL RECORD CPW
LA Lakers $81,728,000 57-25 $1,433,824
Dallas $59,468,000 55-27 $1,081,236
Phoenix $43,068,000 54-28 $ 797,555
Denver $74,976,000 53-29 $1,414,641
Utah $68,848,000 53-29 $1,299,018
Portland $61,781,000 50-32 $1,235,620
San Antonio $52,606,000 50-32 $1,052,120
Oklahoma City $49,063,000 50-32 $ 981,260
Houston $58,094,000 42-40 $1,383,190
Memphis $47,295,000 40-42 $1,182,375
New Orleans $68,762,000 37-45 $1,858,432
LA Clippers $37,626,000 29-53 $1,297,448
Golden State $55,404,000 26-56 $2,130,923
Sacramento $38,973,000 25-57 $1,558,920
Minnesota $28,971,000 15-67 $1,931,400
Here are the standings in order of CPW:
Phoenix
Oklahoma City
San Antonio
Dallas
Portland
LA Clippers
Utah
Houston
Denver
LA Lakers
Sacramento
New Orleans
Golden State
In the 2009-10 season, these teams qualified for the Western Conference playoffs (in order of seeding): LA Lakers, Dallas, Phoenix, Denver, Utah, San Antonio, Portland, Oklahoma City. Had my guideline been in place, these teams would have qualified in this order: Phoenix, Oklahoma City, San Antonio, Dallas, Portland, LA Clippers, Utah, and Houston. The Lakers wouldn't even get in. And, under my guideline, success in each series would again depend upon CPW. Thus, in a series between top-seeded Phoenix and eighth-seeded Houston, should Houston win four games and Phoenix three, Phoenix would win the series and advance to the next round by virtue of its lower CPW for that series ($14,356,000 to Houston's $14,523,500).
When it comes to equalizing NBA competition, not every team can spend more money, but every team can certainly spend less. Under such an egalitarian system, low-budget teams would not be penalized for existing in small markets or for having skinflint owners. Each win for a low-budget team would be precious. Soon fans would encourage owners to get cheaper players who are good but not great, leading eventually to the end of the ugly escalation of salaries that created the lack of competition in the first place. When that happens, a team like Cleveland can part with LeBron and survive with much cheaper players who will have the opportunity to scrap and hustle their way into the playoffs by virtue of the CPW formula.
|
|
|