NBA All-Stars teaming up in Miami, we’ve seen this movie
already, right? Well, sequels to big budget productions are as predictable as a
Michael Wilborn name-drop on “PTI.” The sports world is abuzz with talk of
Knick forward, Carmelo Anthony, joining up with his besties in South Beach.
Making the “Big 3” the “Fab 4” aka, the Heatles.
So every sports radio talk show, website and sports
related twitter feed are on fire. Most everyone is adamantly against this
union. Minus those who are Heat fans, of which there’s maybe 30,000 legit Heat
fans and another 3,000,000 enjoying their spot on the bandwagon. Of course, as
a Knick fan, I think this is a horrible idea. Losing your best player in 20
years is almost always a negative, and having him join a conference rival that
already has the best player in the game (maybe ever. Yes, I said it) isn’t
exactly raising my expectations for the Knicks. I don’t care how many rings
Phil Jackson has in his closet.
This potential union is bigger than the Knicks. It would also
be bigger than the NBA. What? No single player, or team is bigger than the
sport. Well, yes. That’s always been the case. While the “Big 3” shifted the
balanced of the league for four seasons, uniting four members of the 2012
Olympic team is a whole new monster. Ultimately, it would be bad for the game
of basketball.
On one hand, any time there’s a historically great team
playing, it’s good for the sport. No matter what sport it is. The Yankees of
the late 90’s, Jordan’s Bulls, Showtime, the Celtics, and Brady’s Patriots.
They were all among the greatest teams in their respective sports, and put
fannies in the seats and television’s tuned in. Just as we saw when Lebron
initially took his talent to South Beach.
And “the Decision” had a greater impact, than just
further breaking Cleveland’s heart into a million more pieces. Chris Paul first
tried to join Carmelo and A’mare Stoutemire in New York, before changing his
focus to joining Kobe and Pau on the Lakers. A move the NBA itself blocked, before
shipping him off to the Clippers. So Dwight Howard joined the Lakers, along
with future Hall of Famer, Steve Nash. That didn’t work out, so Howard went to
Houston. The Rockets had recently acquired James Harden from the Thunder,
because they couldn’t afford to sign him to a long term deal. Turns out, they
dealt him a year too soon for a ton too little. But that’s neither here nor
there. For now. Kevin Love has asked out of Minnesota, and the belief is that
he is looking for a chance to join a winning team. The point is, the league
changed. Superstar players are trying to join forces. It was the only way to
remain competitive. And the money remained largely unchanged. The best players
were going to get their max deals.
But for Melo to join James, Wade and Bosh in Miami, all
four players will have to take significant pay-cuts. I’m not saying just a million
or two (how can you ever say “just a million or two” and not throw up?). No,
they’ll have to take over 50% in pay cuts to make it work under the NBA salary
cap. In the end, they’ll each have to give up between $50 and $70m. But shouldn’t
we applaud them? Shouldn’t we appreciate that four friends want to work together
and live in a beautiful city, while making millions of dollars? Sounds good
like a pretty good gig to me.
And this is where I start questioning if this whole idea
is really that bad. As fans, we’ve become accustom to calling athletes greedy. But we can’t say that if this happens. We can’t
say they don’t care about winning, just their stats and paychecks, if they’re
willing to sacrifice so much just to win. Even if they’re creating a super team
and also depleting the level of the competition as a direct result of joining
forces. Like when Hulk fought alongside Iron Man and Thor in the Avengers. It
made them a whole lot stronger, and they didn’t have to worry about fighting
the Hulk anymore. Win-win, right?
Only not so much. We saw the stars of league quickly
trying to team up in sets of threes after “The Decision” and if there’s a
sequel, the rest of the league will have to act accordingly. Kevin Durant and
Russell Westbrook can’t compete without teaming up with two additional great
players. Kobe, who would love to do it alone, would have to play nice in
someone else’s sandbox. Basically, the rest of the league has to put together
their “Superman V Batman” cast, just as Zac Snyder is trying to do in Hollywood
to compete with the Marvel Universe.
This could really be a great thing, if we weren’t such a
greedy society. Rather than 30 NBA teams, imagine a league of 10 teams. 10
rosters filled up with the best of the best. The level of competition would be
insane, although there wouldn’t be a team in Oklahoma City or Portland. There
could be a second league, and maybe players could play their way into the top
tier. I’ve long thought that all four of the professional leagues should
contract some teams. It’s one of those situations, where less really is more.
Less teams would mean the remaining teams would have more talent.
After thinking it all through, I’d like to stand at the
wedding and object. Not because it’s unfair, or because it kills any chance my
Knicks have of winning a title, but for the same reasons I object to Time
Warner and Comcast merging. Or Sprint and T-Mobile, okay, bad example. That one
is purely personal. Corporate mergers make for boring news and even more boring
basketball.
No comments:
Post a Comment