Blogger Roundtable: NFL Free Agency Analysis

The wondrous period that is free agency has gotten underway in the NFL and the first two weeks have been exciting to say the least. Multiple big names around the league will be wearing a different uniform next year as they settle into their newest destination. We have seen the two Super Bowl contenders make some key signings that they hope will propel them to a return trip to the big game. Meanwhile, other teams are trying to make strategic signings in an attempt to fill holes before the draft on May 8th.

We asked our blogger's who they thought made the best free agent signing thus far. Here is what they had to say:

Matthew Hakimian, Featured Blogger- Darrelle Revis to the New England Patriots

As a Jets fan it hurts to say this but Darrelle Revis to the New England Patriots was a steal. Still one of the best cornerbacks in the league, Revis was cut last week by the new regime in Tampa Bay. After essentially trading Revis for NFL Defensive Rookie of the Year Sheldon Richardson, the Jets had the opportunity to sign the star corner, but Woody Johnson didn't want to deal with the drama. Bill Belichick saw a golden opportunity as the Pats scooped Revis up; I guess Revis has to apologize to his new head coach now though.

Stephen Dreznick, Featured Blogger- Denver Broncos

The best NFL free agency signings were done by the Denver Broncos. After having their defense embarrassed in the Super Bowl, they used their money to acquire Demarcus Ware and Aqib Talib. Even though people think that they overpaid for these players, they were able to improve their defense with Pro Bowl players. This, coupled with their high powered offense led by Peyton Manning, makes them serious contenders for a shot at the 2015 Super Bowl.

John Zakour, Featured Blogger- Jairus Byrd to the New Orleans Saints

The best signing of NFL free agency was the Saints and Jairus Byrd. The Saints supposedly couldn't free up any cap space, yet they reeled in the best free agent of the class and at an obvious position of need. People forget amidst their near record setting offense how pivotal elite safety play was to their Super Bowl year. The Saints are poised to put themselves in a great position to replicate their magical year.

Max Fogle, Editor-in-Chief- Every Team Who Doesn't Sign an Expensive Free Agent

While free agents definitely can be an important addition to playoff and championship teams, plenty of teams have success without breaking the bank for free agents.  This is probably due to the fact that good teams have a productive core of players already under contract taking up most of the cap space.  It's really not a bold statement to say that many good teams this season will not sign major free agents this spring.

Be sure to comment below to let us know your opinion.

Blogger Roundtable: Which League Does Soccer Threaten the Most?

Which North American sports league does soccer threaten the most? We gave our thoughts, so now it's your turn. Answer our poll at the top of the blog and then leave a comment at the bottom of this post explaining why.  

We all know that soccer is experiencing tremendous growth both in North America and abroad.  Powerful foreign soccer leagues clash with North American leagues' expansion overseas, while also carving out a chunk out a slice of the domestic sports market as well.  Soccer stacks up very well among Hispanics and young audiences, both favorable market segments.

MLS has also emerged onto the mainstream, with average attendances higher than that of the NBA or NHL.A mature MLS would almost certainly force a disruption in the traditional "Big Four" model of professional North American sports.

But the competition for viewers may not even be the greatest threat. Injury and cost concerns for youth participation have driven many athletes into soccer. Many parents choose soccer as an alternative to the physicality of football.  Others families may not be able or willing to pay for the significant expenses related to hockey and baseball at a young age.  If soccer can continue to win in the marketplace of youth participation, the consequences could be significant for other sports.

So here's the question for our blogger roundtable:

Which league does soccer threaten the most?

Matthew Hakimian- NFL

The NFL has to feel somewhat threatened by the growth of soccer in America. It seems like everyday more cases come out regarding players suing the league for health-related issues, including concussions. In turn, many American families are becoming reluctant in allowing their children to play such a physical sport. Moreover, it certainly does not help that we're one of the few nations in the world that refer to the NFL when talking about "football". 

Adam Malz- None

I don't think the growth of soccer is anywhere near the point of threatening any one of the four major sports leagues in the United States. It simply does not have the fan support that the MLB, NBA, NHL, and NFL currently do. Also, the fact of the matter is that the U.S. level of competition of soccer is very far from what it is in Europe. Perhaps it will pose a threat in the future, but I don't see it being a major concern for any of the major four leagues for a while.

 John Zakour- None/MLB

I don't think soccer especially threatens any of the major American sports. I suppose if it could reach popularity levels of the big four in America, then we might have a conversation. That day is probably far enough away that the dynamic of the big four will likely be very different. Soccer still struggles to get highlights on ESPN, and the MLS is still a second tier league, at best. 

But, If I had to choose, I'd say soccer threatens MLB the most. The prototypical soccer player is most similar to the prototypical baseball player, as neither sport really has "size requirements" (soccer and baseball players still look like non-giants, unlike the NFL and NBA) and both tend to attract Hispanic and Asian audiences. But I'm grasping at straws here. I doubt Bud Selig is losing sleep over it. 

Stephen Rosen- MLB

The sad answer is MLB. The 2013 World Series was the least watched World Series by Americans under 18 EVER. There is no way around the fact that baseball does not have a young core group of fans to continue its growth into the next 20 years. Baseball suffers from long breaks and extremely slow moving pace. Unlike soccer which ever game is almost always under 2 hours, baseball can have a non-delayed 9 inning game take 4 hours. Lastly baseball has lost one of its coolest aspects in the post season the day time game. The 9:07 start to ever World Series games means most kids will be long asleep by the time the late innings arrive. 

MLS instead went with a 4PM Saturday start to its classic MLS final on Saturday between Sporting Kansas City and Real Salt Lake that everyone could watch. Despite the fact the game went through extra time and a shootout it was still over by 8PM when every kid was awake. Major League Baseball may be America's pastime but soon it will be past its time as a major American sport.

Sandy Alderson: The Man With the Plan

 

Omar Minaya, the deposed GM of the New York Mets, once said towards the end of his tenure that New York's "not a market where you can go young. You have to bring in players." Meaning- you can't rebuild in New York. Just can't happen. Fans won't accept it, ownership wouldn't allow it. So the Mets fired Minaya at the end of the year and started rebuilding.

To steer their rebuilding effort, the Mets brought in Sandy Alderson. Sandy Alderson is very different from the last GM of the Mets. Alderson is very erudite, and when you hear him speak, he reminds you very much of the Harvard lawyer that he is. Alderson always seems like he's the smartest person in the room. Nothing seems to stick to Alderson, a good trait to have in the New York market. 

Alderson is an icon of Money Ball (ironically barely mentioned in the move adaptation) and analytics. Sandy Alderson is not the Met's answer to the appropriately named Brian Cashman, he's the Met's Billy Beane or Andrew Friedman. He's has been stockpiling years of cost controllability, and only spending on short term deals (minus the Wright extension). Sound familiar? 

The New York Mets are rebuilding like a small market team. They haven't taken on salary since 2009, and have a lot of money coming off the books this year. Jason Bay, Johan Santana, Jose Reyes, Carlos Beltran, and Francisco Rodriguez have all shipped off. The Mets 2010 opening day payroll was over $132 Million. Last season it was under $90 million, and the Mets 2014 payroll obligations for next year are a mere (roughly) $56 million. This an Oakland or Tampa Bay payroll, not the payroll of the biggest market in the US. The Phillies, who finished behind the Mets in the standings, already owe over $120 million for 2014. 

But since the start of the Alderson Era, 2014 was sold as a fulcrum point for the Mets. The 2014 Mets was suppose to be the most talented Mets team since 2008. This was the year money comes off the books, young talent starts producing while free agents are brought to Queens. But now rumors are swirling that Alderson has payroll constraints. The Wilpons are supposedly suffering sticker shock. They're surprised by free agent prices, and it seems a little too convenient. The Mets need to spend to appease their fan base, while Alderson is averse to large contracts. It's clear Jacoby Ellsbury and Robison Cano aren't arriving in Flushing any time soon. So the only way to avoid an uprising in Queens is to win. Soon. 

Future Met Noah Syndergaard

The Mets 2014 rotation was supposed to future and already aces  Zack Wheeler and Matt Harvey. Now with Harvey on the shelf, the pitching depth of the Mets will be tested. Jon Niese and Dillon Gee are already effective starters, but Neise has always underperformed his peripheral numbers. Jenrry Mejia, a once-former-prospect, has now regained promise with a string of good starts.

In double AA is 6 foot 6 Noah Syndergaard, who profiles as an ace at the major league level. Rafael Montero is also in Alderson's farm system, and while he might not be a future ace he could be a solid innings eater (or the next Greg Maddux, you never know). Notably, both prospects were the starters in the futures game, which fittingly took place at Citi Field, home of the Mets. And the next day, Matt Harvey started the All-Star game. 

It's not like there's no hope for the Mets. The All-Star game was an embodiment of that. Alderson has done as good a job as can be expected rebuilding the farm system through trades. It's just going to take awhile (small market, remember?). The Boston Red Sox going from 69 wins to World Series champs is probably the worst thing that could happen for the Mets front office. Since Alderson took over, it was clear handing out huge contracts would not be a regular occurrence. But the Red Sox were able to reload in a season, hand out responsible free agent deals, and improve by 28 wins.

Now there are expectations, however unreasonable, of the Mets to do something similar. But just because the Red Sox didn't hand out one large contract doesn't mean they didn't spend money. They handed out multiple multi year offers - including Victorino, Napoli, and Dempster- and essentially acquired half of their lineup via free agency, not to mention resigning Pedroia and Ortiz to big money. The Mets don't have money to burn anymore. 

So it's up to Alderson to get creative and try to build a contender. There are several free agents that could be fits for the Mets, and likely had at low enough cost. Chris Young was a start. Short stop Stephen Drew would be a good fit. The Mets still need another outfielder. Trades need to go down. This will be the offseason to see if Alderson really is the right man for the job. He won't have any shortage of work.

Blogger Roundtable: Which League Will Grow the Most? (Part II)

h/t to Business Insider

This is Part II in a two-part Blogger Roundtable.  To read what the SBS E-board had to say about sports revenues, see Part I.

The four major U.S. sports leagues in the United States generate massive amounts of revenue.  Although there is great disparity between the leagues, each has considerable potential for growth.  So here's the question we asked our featured bloggers::

Which of the four traditional major professional sports leagues (MLB, NBA, NFL, NHL) will experience the highest percentage growth in revenue over the next 20 years?


Matthew Hakimian (Featured Blogger)- NBA

Of the four traditional professional team sports leagues, the National Basketball Association will experience the most growth over the next 20 years. With Adam Silver coming to the helm as the league's new commissioner in February 2014, he will have the opportunity to further build off the tremendous job David Stern has done in expanding the global markets and international segments of the game. Over the next 20 years there's a chance that a team, or even an entire division potentially, will be featured in Europe. With the league's popularity at an all time high, it would not be shocking to see a 100 percent increase in revenue in 20 years from now as the revenue currently stands at slightly $5 billion.

Thomas Kroner (Featured Blogger)- NBA

Over the next 20 years the NBA will experience the most growth of the four major leagues in North American Sports. That is not to say that it will ever surpass the NFL’s popularity. The NFL just can’t get that much more popular than it already is. Last season’s NBA Finals drew some of the highest ratings in years. With young stars like Kyrie Irving, KD and D-Rose entering their prime, look for the NBA to increase its popularity and close the game between itself and MLB.

Joshua Goldstein (Featured Blogger)- NFL

Due to the high potential for both domestic and overseas expansion, I believe that the NFL will experience the most growth over the next 20 years. Commissioner Goodell has made it a goal to bring teams to both Los Angeles and London, which would result in two new, large market revenue generators for the league. The NFL’s expansion into Europe would spark excitement for American football among English youth, as well as a potentially greater interest from other European metropolises. The NFL’s long-term growth plans are promising!

John Zakour (Featured Blogger) -NBA/MLB

I believe the growth of the four major sports leagues will be tied to embracing the internet and globalization. The NFL is incredibly popular, but I don't think it's global. The NBA is both. I always thought MLB was in a bad position with their supposedly old and bleak demographics, but after hearing Pre-Play founder Andrew Daines talk about the strong online infrastructure they have I believe they're in better position than most think.

So I'd say NBA and MLB will be trending up the most in 20 years time, while the NFL will still be going strong in the US. And the NHL, is well, the NHL. I don't think the NHL will grow much outside of North America, and labor turmoil continues to hurt them.

This is Part II in a two-part Blogger Roundtable.  To read what the SBS E-board had to say about sports revenues, see Part I.

What do you think about our predictions? Let us know by answering our poll at the top of the blog and by leaving us comments below!

Tanking in Buffalo

 

A sports franchise's objective is to win games. But my favorite hockey team is not trying to win games. At least they're not trying their hardest.

The Buffalo Sabres are assuredly tanking. They are not trying to win games, intentionally. It happens more often than I'd like in sports, but its happens. But lets lay out why I feel comfortable saying an organization is tanking.

1) They're blowing it up. Big Time.

They traded Gaustad, Pominville, and Vanek in less than a year. The first two were tremendously popular among the fans, and the later was their most talented offensive player. The return has been picks and young players, although impressive, is not going to make the 2013 or 2014 iteration of the Sabres any good.

2) They're not done blowing it up. 

More trades are on the way. Matt Moulson (who was just acquired) will likely be traded. Ryan Miller, the former Vezina winner and star of the 2010 Olympics, will likely be exported. Drew Stafford, a former 30 goal scorer, is all but gone. Steve Ott, also acquired by trade albeit a year ago and one of their best puck possession players, will likely be traded as well. Veteran defender Henrik Tallinder would likely be a trade candidate if he wasn't thought of as a mentor to young defensemen Tyler Myers.

3) Ron Rolston is still their coach. 

Coach Ron Rolston

Rolston's squad is doing him no favors, but the Sabres were serious about winning soon he would still be coaching. Lindy Ruff, a former Sabre, was their head coach for 15 years. But I believe the Sabres ownership did not want Ruff around a tank job, so they cut ties with him. Ruff was picked up by the Dallas Stars. Rolston is a developmental coach, and has coached the the Sabres AHL affiliate Americans, but he has no NHL experience. The Sabres

4) They're awful. Like really Awful.

 The Sabres are on pace for about 132 goals this season, a pace of 1.61 goals per game (just for perspective Wayne Gretzky, in his his highest scoring season, averaged 1.15 goals per game). The Sabres are also averaging the fewest amounts of shots per game. Buffalo also features an abysmal 19.4% points percentage, or ten percent worse than the second worst team in the league. They are unquestionably the worst team in the league.

5) The Sabres are young as can be. 

They're probably too young, recklessly so. When the Sabres dressed four teenagers in Florida, Mikhail Grigorenko, Zemgus Girgensons, Nikita Zadorov, and Rasmus Ristolainen, they became the first since 1996 to do so. Ironically enough, the game accounted for one of the Sabres three wins. Coach Rolston even conceded that the Sabres have "eight guys in the lineup who are learning how to play hockey and develop at the NHL level." 

Let's be clear. I'm not accusing the Sabres of not doing what's best for their organization. Just the opposite. The Sabres are totaling eschewing any possibility of success for the year, and developing players on the fly at the NHL level. They're doing something unpleasant in the short term for the long term success of their franchise. The Sabres are undergoing the organizational equivalent of a colonoscopy.

In fact, its kind of reassuring the Sabres have the kind of ownership that feels comfortable doing this. They are forgoing any chance of maximizing short term interest or ticket sales for the long term health of the franchise. For years, the Sabres were a mediocre team, never quite bad enough to get a franchise changing top pick. But they were content to make a profit, break even, and maybe if the right pieces fell together make a playoff run. But it's different now. Billionaire Terry Pegula the owns the Sabres now. His checkbook is secure enough.

When Pegula took over he claimed, "From this point forward, the Buffalo Sabres' reason for existence will be to win the Stanley Cup." Now it's finally true. It's just not what most expected. It's going to take awhile. As the Blackhawks have shown, champions are built through the draft, and the best way to jump start that is to be bad enough to pick very early. 

Blogger Roundtable: The Yankees' $189MM Question

The New York Yankees enter unchartered territory for a team used to two things: winning and spending money.  The front office has stated its desire to reduce spending next season to below the Competitive Balance Tax (CBT) threshold of $189MM.  Doing so would not only alleviate the 50% tax on spending over the limit this season, but would reduce the rate to 17% in the next season they choose to spend big. 

But it will not be easy.  The team spent over $203MM last season and failed to make the playoffs for the second time in decades.  The team has some big holes to fill, along with a number of free agents who would demand big money to stay around.  And though internally the Yankees may wish to cut payroll, their fan base's expectations of October baseball are doubtful to change. Even GM Brian Cashman noted that $189MM "is a goal, not a mandate."

A possible attempt to slash CBT relevant spending appears to have failed in Derek Jeter's new $12MM contract.  It was thought that though it is an increase over the Captain's player option, that it would save on average annual value.  But though some complicated rules in the Collective Bargaining Agreement, the deal will cost the Yankees more in both real dollars as well as those which count for CBT purposes.

But there are reasons to be optimistic. With many expensive players coming off the books, the Bombers will have some room to work with.  If Alex Rodriguez misses all or most of next season due to suspension, upwards of $25MM could be saved.  Additionally, key target Masahiro Tanaka will be expensive, but his massive posting fee will not hurt the Yankees attempt to slide under $189MM.  It will take some creativity and maybe some restraint, but it's entirely possible the club makes its stated goal.

So here's the question for our esteemed panel:

Will the Yankees spend less than the $189MM competitive balance tax threshold in 2014?

Jesse Sherman (Director of Operations, SBS)- No

The 2013 Yankees payroll was well over $200MM- and I don't see it decreasing drastically below the threshold. The Yankees have three players making over $23MM for 2014 (Rodriguez, Teixeira, and Sabathia), and that's not including Robinson Cano who will command the highest salary on the team (unless the sides can agree to a back-loaded contract). The aged Jeter just received a pay increase, and the Yankees will have to bolster their pitching staff by spending some money this offseason. But with over 98MM already being committed to just 7 players, the only chance they have of getting below the threshold is by not resigning Cano or Granderson. But even removing Granderson's contract and finding a steady replacement won't do the trick.

Adam Kirsch (Co-president, SBS)- No

I don't think the Yankees will make it under the tax threshold next year.  A great deal depends on how they choose to address key free agents – most notably Robinson Cano's call for a monster contract. A few arbitration-eligible players, such as Brett Gardner and David Robertson, will also likely cut into the Yankees' thrifty efforts. After missing the playoffs this year, I think that Cashman and Co. will not be afraid to spend to keep their key pieces in the Bronx.  
 

Kevin Cole (Featured Blogger)- Yes

 

It seems like the Yankees are fairly determined to get under the $189MM number. The club's behavior over the last couple of seasons would be hard to explain should they abandon this attempt to get under the Competitive Balance Tax Threshold, and it does seem like they are poised to meet their goal of lowering payroll to this level. The Yanks have a lot of cash coming off of the books this offseason from the likes of Mariano Rivera, Andy Pettitte, Kevin Youkillis, and others. Salary write-ups that I've seen give the Yanks around $70 million to play with this off-season in filling about 18 big league roster spots.

 

The Yanks obviously plan on giving a large portion of that amount to Robinson Cano. But, they could have an extra $27MM to play with, should A-Rod's suspension be upheld. If that happens, A-Rod's spot will need to be filled for 2014, but the team will have some additional freedom in making some free agent signings. Some are speculating that the Yanks are poised for a nice spending spree this off season, possibly for the likes of Masahiro Tanaka, Brian McCann, Carlos Beltran, and others. We'll see about that, but I believe the team is set to meet the $189MM goal, resign Cano, and perhaps one or two other high profile free agents. Whether or not they field a playoff contender, though, remains to be scene.

 

John Zakour (Featured Blogger)- No

 

I don't believe the Yankees will spend less than $189MM, but I believe it will be close. The fact the Yankees are serious about Cano and Tanaka means they likely won't let a few mil stop them (who would?). There situation is fluid, and may even change depending on A-Rod's punishment. But the fact we're talking about this is noteworthy. It indicates a paradigm shift, and shows the Yankees might actually be (somewhat) responsible with their contracts. The title of the freest spenders in baseball rests safely with the Dodgers.
 

Matthew Hakimian (Featured Blogger)- No

 

Not a chance the Yankees have a payroll under $189 million heading into the 2014 season. Although the team was marred by an obscene amount of injuries throughout the course of the year, GM Brian Cashman will ultimately get his way. Not only does the team desperately need to resign Robinson Cano, but it also has no idea what the future of A-Rod holds. Look for the Bombers to be in the market for the likes of Brian McCann and Japanese product Masahiro Tanaka. Don't we all remember what took place after the Yanks missed the playoffs in '08?

Adam Malz (Featured Blogger)- No

While the Yankees front office has repeatedly stated that their objective is to reduce their payroll to $189 million, I believe they will end up going over that by the end of this offseason. The Yankees are set to embark on an offseason similar to that of 08-09 when they spent $423 million on CC Sabathia, Mark Teixeira, and A.J. Burnett. This year their targets include Robinson Cano, Carlos Beltran, Brain McCann, and Masahiro Tanaka. They will most likely end up spending over $300 million in contracts to the players that they ultimately sign. After this, it will be a huge financial challenge to get below the $189 million competitive balance tax threshold.
 

NBA Salary Cap Part 2: Solution

This is Part II of a two-part series.  To read Part I, click here.

So now you know how the new CBA is hurting competitive balance in the NBA. The small market teams just can't hold on to their own stars that they've developed. But before we address the issue, let's examine what we want an idealized NBA to look like.
No league is more popular or more balanced than the NFL. Part of this is because teams have roster sizes of 53, compared to 15, and just intrinsic differences between the game of basketball and football. But a large portion of this parity is owed to the fact the NFL features a hard cap, while the NBA features a soft cap with a luxury tax. The NFL playoffs almost always features a last place team from a year ago, and turnover rate for playoff teams is almost half. Seemingly every team in the league has a shot (except the Jaguars, but I digress).

The New York Jets just traded their best defender, Darrelle Revis to Tampa Bay because he was too expensive during a rebuild. A New York team traded their best player. To Florida. Because he was making to much money. This would never happen in the NBA. But a hard cap does not discriminate, and roster management is determined by your savvy, not by the size of your check book. Small market teams like Green Bay have won a title recently and are always contending. The best franchises are competitive every year, even if they aren't quite a mortal lock to make the playoffs.

If a hard cap is out of the question, I think the NBA should scrap the max contract. But only scrap the max contract for teams trying to resign their own players, a la achieving full "Bird rights." This way Orlando can offer over 30 million dollars annually to keep their star center Dwight Howard, while Houston can only offer around 20. This also likely prevents the formation of super teams like the Heat's big three, as one of them would have to take a serious pay cut to fill out a roster. If Cleveland could offer LeBron 35 million a year while Miami could only offer 20, he might be less inclined to leave. It might not be all about the money for Lebron, who can make another 20 million a year off the court, but for guys like Carmelo, Chris Paul, Dwight Howard, it could be a huge incentive to resign.

You always hear the incumbent team can offer so much extra money, but that's deceptive. They can offer an extra year, but take that away (elite players will just get a max the next time around and make up the extra year) and the difference is a lot smaller. That, combined with favorable tax rates in states like Texas and Florida, can completely mitigate the difference.

Let's look at Dwight Howard. The contract he signed with the Rockets is worth about $88 million over four years with an early termination option (ETO) after three years. This means Howard can activate his ETO and just resign with the Rockets, assuming they still want him, and resign for more money. In fact, in three years Howard is eligible for his five year max deal that he passed up in Orlando. So yes, its a gamble that Howard will command that max contract three years down the road, but Dwight can still get max money even though he didn't re-up with the team that drafted and developed him. Does this seem like the new CBA is working?

Now in my ideal NBA, Houston can only offer four years (like in the real NBA), but Orlando could offer six. Or seven. Hell, they could offer eight. Orlando can offer whatever they want, since they have full Bird rights. They could offer 30 million a year, if they so chose. But the key here is only the max deal amount counts against the cap. So if Orlando wanted to offer 30 a year, it would only count against the cap as 22 a year.

Another issue is a free agent signing with a new team can obtain a max deal in three years, less than the length of max deal. The issue with the bird rights is they apply to non-max guys as well (see Jeremy Lin) as they allow a team to go past the cap to sign their own player. A player should have to ride out the full length of his contract before these full Bird rights activate.

With David Stern retiring soon and Adam Silver stepping in, a new CBA could be a perfect time to make major changes. But, does the NBA feel the need to make these changes during a new height of popularity? Only time will tell.


This is Part II of a two-part series.  To read Part I, click here.

NBA Salary Cap Part I: The Problem

This is Part I in a two-part series.  To read the conclusion, click here.

After amnestying former math major Metta World Peace, the only contract on the Lakers books for 2015 is Steve Nash. In today's NBA, cap space is sacred. GM's wheel and deal, trying to clear their books so they can offer another max contract.

To contend it used to be an NBA franchise had to get bad enough to get in the lottery, get lucky enough to win it, draft carefully for years, and develop their players. The San Antonio Spurs, Thunder, and recently the Indiana Pacers, are examples of this philosophy. But the Heat, Knicks, Lakers, Rockets, and KG era Celtics are examples of a new way to rebuild- to varying degrees of success. It used to be the best franchise were card counters, playing the odds to the best they can. Now it’s just about buying out the best hands.

Draft picks are no longer the most sacred asset for building a contender. There's been a paradigm shift. Now draft picks are levied to get precious cap space. The Knicks give away draft picks like candy. Yet the team has gone from a bottom feeder to top two in the East, while only hitting on one pick in the process- Iman Shumpert. The Rockets look to be in the middle of a similar situation, if you swap Carmelo Anthony for Dwight Howard and Shumpert for Chandler Parsons. Although the jury is still out on their latest picks, the least important vertex of the drafting-free agency-trading triangle has undoubtedly been drafting.

This is unfathomable in any other sport (except maybe for the Yankees). The same goes for the two time defending champion Heat. Although Dwayne Wade was home grown, LeBron James, Chris Bosh, and Ray Allen, were all free agent signings or sign and trades. The Heat's most important draft pick among building this dynasty (besides the ones they traded away) was Norris Cole. The Rockets will have two players making max money on their books who were both drafted and developed by smaller market teams.

Could This Ever Happen?

Now the Lakers are taking a similar gamble. They believe there is a chance they could sign Lebron, Melo, or both and are willing to sacrifice the entirety of the 2014 season to do so. Whether they have a chance at either is a topic for another column (spoiler alert: no).

The Nets are going for it. So much, in fact their salary commitments for next year exceeds $100 million, in a league where the cap is set under $60 million. Brooklyn won't be under the cap until the 2016-17 season, and it will be interesting to watch how newly acquired Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett gel. Their owner is crazy rich, and teams like San Antonio, OKC, Indiana just can't go that deep into the luxury tax, as Brooklyn will be paying over 70 million dollars in luxury tax alone. The Nets total payroll obligations could touch $180 million. A team will be paying one hundred and eighty million dollars in a league where the cap is a third of that.

Although the goal of the new CBA was supposedly to help the balance of the NBA and prevent the big market teams from buying the best players, it seems to have done the opposite. It is certainly not impossible for small markets to win (as the Spurs just demonstrated), but their margin of error is a lot smaller. Even if a major market team has been plagued by bad drafting,it is easier for them to contend then their small market counter parts.

The result is major market teams are at a huge advantage. More troubling, small market teams are not keeping their home grown super stars. The luxury tax penalties are steep, but not steep enough to deter big markets for dipping into the tax to get another max guy. It's like an electric fence that hurts small market teams disproportionally when they try to run through it. 

The max contract is hurting the NBA. Or not. Ratings are up, and one of the best finals ever was played. The NBA has a real villain in the Miami Heat. Does David Stern or Adam Silver really want to change a winning formula?

This is Part I in a two-part series.  To read the conclusion, click here.

Blogger Roundtable: NFL in London?

Will the NFL Have a London-based franchise by the end of the decade (2020)?  We gave our thoughts, so now it's your turn.  Answer our poll at the top of the blog and then leave a comment at the bottom of this post explaining why. 

In last week's edition of Blogger Roundtable, our newest Sports Business Society bloggers argued over who was the best commissioner in sports.  Two of the panelists chose Roger Goodell, citing among other factors, the National Football League's success in international markets (particularly London). 

Then on the September 17, SBS Skyped with alumnus Hussain Naqi, SVP of  Fan Engagement for the Jacksonville Jaguars.  Naqi has been charged with marketing and branding the team in the UK.  Naqi was able to provide a great deal of incite into the potential NFL market, although he dismissed the possibility of his Jaguars making a permanent move across the Atlantic.


And now the possibility of a London-based franchise has received more media attention than ever before.  ESPN has launched a series of articles on the issue, including Greg Garber's "More Than Just A Nice Place To Visit".  Here's what Garber had to say:

The good news for the skeptics? Players, coaches and staff of the four teams get to jump on a plane afterward and return home. But what if they didn't? What if there were a franchise in London? What financial, logistical and competitive challenges would have to be overcome?  

It's time to start asking these questions, folks, because it's going to happen. Yes, with some serious thrust from commissioner Roger Goodell and a league with a powerful hunger to increase its revenue streams, it's quite likely there soon will be an NFL team in London.

In a separate piece on ESPN, Kristi Dosh examines a variety of legal concerns that arise from a full-time London team.  Tax laws, working visas, as well as competition and free movement labor laws could get in the way of the desires of the NFL's business and marketing brass.

But could legal or other logistical challenges (such as travel) really get in the way of the most powerful sports league in the history of the world?  Or will Roger Goodell and the NFL break down any barriers that stand in the way of their expansionary goals?  That was the question we asked our bloggers and E-Board members this time around:

Will the NFL have a London-based franchise by the end of the decade (2020)?

Adam Malz (Featured Blogger)- Yes

 Yes, I believe that the by the end of the decade an NFL franchise will call London home. This is going to happen eventually, regardless of whether fans or players think it is right. Owners and the League are pushing for it because of the fact that it opens up a brand new and tremendously large area of revenue, as the domestic market is peaking. There are still a lot of obstacles and kinks that will need to be worked out, which is why I’m thinking towards the end of the decade. But I think it is certainly in our near future.

Gabe Cassillo (SBS VP of Magazine)- NO

While the NFL has the ambition and no doubt the resources to make a move to the UK happen (eventually) I think it highly unlikely such a move would take place by the end of this decade. Fans often cite fairly trivial "issues" that would impact such a move. Travel, time differences, culture, lack of fan base, etc. In reality, the time frame seems too aggressive. For a league experiencing continual growth, I question whether the 32 owners would be in favor of taking the risk by adding a team based in London. If I was a betting man, yes, I agree that one day the NFL will have teams overseas. Do I think that day will be by 2020? Not at all.

John Zakour (Featured Blogger)- Yes

In both articles, Garber and Dosh discuss a litany of problems that an NFL team in London would face. Tax codes, food, jet lag, logistical issues, would all have to be ironed out. But they're just minor issues. If Goodell wills a NFL team in London, it will be so. Roger Goodell won't let these triflings stop him from realizing his dream of a truly international, intercontinental NFL. It wouldn't surprise me if we have a foreign Super Bowl in the near future, which would precede a London team. Goodell wants this, against all reason, and he will find a way to make it happen.

Jon Levitan (Featured Blogger)- Yes

The NFL will eventually put a team in London. The league almost always gets what it wants, and clearly wants to have a team.  With two games being played there this year, the only question is when a team will eventually be placed across the pond. I would say that a team will be there by 2020, and I would also guess that that team will be the Jaguars. The market of Jacksonville just isn’t big enough to support a franchise that isn’t firmly entrenched there. That much is already clear, by the fact that the Jags will play a game in London for the next four years, which will be far more lucrative for them than their normal home games. By the end of those four years, the team may very well have a solid following overseas, and hopefully a better product to put on display. Although the league may want to place an expansion team London, as Garber’s article showed, I think the Jaguars will lobby heavily to be relocated.

Jesse Sherman (SBS Director of  Operations) - NO

Word on the street is that an NFL team in London is imminent. We've seen some successful trips to Wembley in the past few years. But that being said, I don't see a London-based franchise emerging before 2020. The current NFL CBA runs through 2020 and some labor laws between the US and London differ significantly enough to raise doubt in my mind. I don't think it will happen.. yet.

Matthew Hakimian (Featured Blogger)- Yes

One of Roger Goodell's main priorities since he came into power as the commissioner in 2006 has been to innovate the National Football League in all facets of the game, both on and off the field. We all know that he is one of the main proponents of an NFL team permanently relocating to London and it's looking more plausible each year. The most likely team to move to the UK would have to be the Jacksonville Jaguars as the team is scheduled to be featured in a game overseas through the 2016 season.  With one of the league's lowest fan bases, and faced with yearly difficulties with local television blackouts, it makes way too much sense to move the struggling Jags to London.

Will the NFL Have a London-based franchise by the end of the decade (2020)?  We gave our thoughts, so now it's your turn.  Answer our poll at the top of the blog and then leave a comment at the bottom of this post explaining why.