Thursday, September 24, 2009

The NBA's European Dream

It was announced the other day that Russian billionaire Mikhail Prokhorov has reached an agreement to purchase the New Jersey Nets as well as contribute funding for the construction of a new arena in Brooklyn (as well as accompanying residential and commercial space). While I think this is a great deal for the NBA and international basketball, I can't help but wonder if this is going to reinforce David Stern's belief that the NBA could expand into Europe.

As much as I would love to see further expansion of the League itself and think that having European Division would be a great accomplishment, I just don't think it is feasible for a number of reasons, such as the extra travel incurred by the players and potential economic factors (exchange rates and tax issues). However, those are all solvable. One major issue just does not have a solution, at least that I can see.

That issue is a natural competitive imbalance. Even in a League with a salary cap, rookie wage scaling, and a draft, this will be unavoidable. Here's why:

1. Right now, highly regarded rookies are subject to a rookie wage scale. Euroleague teams are not subject to this constraint and can offer a better contract, financially, to an NBA draft pick (which is why Ricky Rubio is with is with FC Barcelona instead of the Minnesota Timberwolves). There will inevitably some rookies who will say to themselves, "If the London NBA team is offering me X dollars, but Real Madrid is offering me more than X dollars, I should go play for Real Madrid since either way I will be playing in Europe." NBA teams will still retain the rights to the drafted player, and after 3 years, the player will no longer be subject to the rookie scale, but even then, the NBA team can still be outbid by a Euroleague team.

2. Canada-based teams, and even some teams based in remote areas of the United States like Minnesota, have trouble recruiting players to come play for them. Why would any American-born star free agent who generates enough demand ever go play for a Europe-based team? Granted, some Europe-based teams might have an advantage in being able to recruit European-born players (could a Berlin based team sign Dirk Nowitzki away from Dallas?), but the edge will still be held by US teams.

3. Players who do not want to play for Europe-based teams will inevitably find ways to prevent trades to or force trades from those teams, either by threatening to retire or just not reporting, and will eventually even further limit the ability of Europe-based teams to acquire talent. This already happens with Canada-based teams (Steve Francis and Alonzo Mourning are well known examples).

4. In order to acquire talent that Europe-based teams need to compete, these team will likely have to overpay free agents to play for them. This leads to inefficiently built teams, because the premiums paid to entice players is less money under the salary cap to pay other players.

How can a team that is at a disadvantage in acquiring players via the draft, free agency, or trades unless use their resources inefficiently compete? I just don't see any way this is avoidable. The solution to establishing an NBA presence in Europe will take a much grander proposition than Commissioner Stern's. I think he has been an excellent commissioner and has expanded the NBA brand further than anyone could have dreamed, but I don't see this dream, in it's current form, coming to fruition.

Thursday, September 10, 2009

Putting Jeter, and the man he passes, in context

Congratulations to Derek Jeter on tying and passing (which is inevitable) of Lou Gehrig's Yankee hit record. Any time you break a record for an organization which has been around as long as the
Yankees have, it is quite an accomplishment. The thing that amazes me though is not what the record is, but who held it. Think about it...the New York Yankees. Over 100 years of history, including 26 world championship seasons. This is the organization that employed, among others:

Babe Ruth for 15 seasons
Yogi Berra for 18 seasons
Mickey Mantle for 18 seasons
Don Mattingly for 14 seasons
Bernie Williams for 16 seasons

All of those players were very good, if not great, hitters. Yet the record holder, before Jeter passes him, is Lou Gehrig. As everyone knows, the Iron Horse's career (and life) was cut short by ALS. Despite that, he was such a tremendous hitter that he accumulated more hits than all of the aforementioned players despite his career essentially ending at age 35.

It just seems to me that because of the premature end to his career, he would not be among the first people one would guess held the career hit mark for such a storied franchise. One comparison I can think of is the Red Sox single season home run record, which was set by David Ortiz in 2006. His 54 home run season was only the second season of 50 or more home runs in franchise history. The first, a season of 50 home runs exactly, was not accomplished by Ted Williams, Carl Yastrzemski, or Jim Rice, or Manny Ramirez, who are the names most people would first guess. The owner of that 50 home run season, and the previous record holder for the franchise, was Jimmie Foxx.

Jeter's accomplishment is a credit to him, and he is a great player. To me though, the more amazing thing that should not go unnoticed is the extent of Lou Gehrig's greatness and prowess as a hitter.