JONES ON THE NBA

Getting Pumped For the Finals

2009-06-03T15:57:00.001-07:00

If this doesn't get you pumped, I don't know what will.

Dwight Howard Ruins Kobe v. LeBron

2009-05-31T07:55:00.001-07:00

Did you see this coming?

Show L.O. Some Love

2009-05-28T08:50:00.000-07:00

The guy has been playing with a jacked up back and all folks seem to do is rag on him. Show the man some love for that performance last night.

Congrats to the 2009 NBA Defensive Player of the Year

2009-04-21T19:25:00.000-07:00

Nike, Kobe and Jordan Pay Tribute to Losers Via Sneakers

2009-04-15T15:29:00.000-07:00

Part of what makes Nike such a cultural icon is its ability to release shoes that pay tribute to moments in sports history. Recently they’ve release a few pairs of shoes that just ain’t right.

The first is a series of shoes released by Nike’s Jordan Brand line called the Six Rings. The Six Rings is a fushion shoe that combines elements of all of shoes Jordan wore during his six championship runs. That concept itself is cool, but recently Nike started releasing “tribute” packs in the colors of the opponents Jordan ripped the heart out of during his championship runs. A few years back, I wrote about how Jordan turned championship dreams into nightmares. The last thing fans of those teams want to see is Jordan selling “tribute” shoes in their favorite teams colors to commemorate the beating he gave all of them. As Charles Barkley would say: Magic Johnson, Clyde Drexler, Charles Barkley, Gary Payton, John Stockton and Karl Malone are all rollin’ over in their graves.

Nike has continued this “tribute” trend with their release of the Zoom Kobe IV in a Charlotte Hornets colorway with the 6.11.96 (the date they traded Kobe away) engraved on the back. I guess this is to pay tribute to the Charlotte Hornets making one of the biggest draft day bungles ever when they traded the draft rights to Kobe Bryant to the Lakers for Vlade Divac. Why you gotta do that to Nike? That’s just wrong.

(Via: kixandthecity)

Can the NBA Players Association Force the Owners to Negotiate Better Revenue Sharing Amongst Teams?

2009-04-12T00:12:00.000-07:00

I am a firm believer that the NBA's real economic problem is not out of control player salaries, but a lack of revenue sharing amongst its teams. It's a fact that the NBA might have the worst team revenue sharing plan in American professional sports. That lack of revenue sharing has caused small market NBA teams to suffer tremendously over the last few years. And now that the economy has gone down the toilet, the situation for these small market teams has only gotten worse. Yet, instead of petitioning to get more revenue sharing amongst the teams, these small market teams have hopped on the "players make too much money, that's why we suffer" bandwagon. Now it's going to be up to the NBA Players Association to get figure out a way to get the owners to come up with a better team revenue sharing system.

If the owners don't want to address the issue themselves, the Players Association might be able to force them to address the matter during the next round of collecting bargaining via the "mandatory subject" provision. Basically, the National Labor Relations Board has mandated that union and management must meet a reasonable number of times and discuss and bargain in good faith over mandatory subjects. Mandatory subjects include: Wages, hours and terms of employment; subjects that impact wages, hours and terms of employment; any proposed term that significantly effects/impacts above. The argument for revenue sharing amongst owners being a mandatory subject of CBA negotiations between the players and the owners is that team revenue sharing significantly effects/impacts wages, hours and terms of employment. I believe the Major League Baseball Players Union utilized this provision to promote negotiations of a better revenue sharing amongst Major League Baseball teams. The NBA Players Association should be looking to utilize the same tactic.

Responding to Yahoo’s AAU Basketball Expose

2009-03-17T13:40:00.000-07:00

I’m sure plenty of people felt sick to their stomachs after reading Yahoo! Sports’ Agents and AAU: Unrequited Love. Here are some of my thoughts after reading the piece:

First, it’s sad that many of the agents that dominate basketball do so because of how well they recruit, rather than what services they provide their clients. (Henry Abbott made this exact point last week). In almost every market, customers select businesses to purchase goods and services from based either on quality of the products and services combined, the price of the product and service relative to competing markets, or a combination of both. This is definitely not the case in the world of athlete representation.

If an agent's success in recruiting was simply based on being able to show the quality of services he/she provides relative to the price charged, that would be one thing. But when agents are signing players based simply on quid pro quo deals, the game just gets slimier and slimier. Part of this has a lot to do with current NCAA rules. Players and agents are not allowed to interact before a player declares for the draft. But precisely because of this rule, we get guys like Pat Barrett who are allowed to carve a niche for themselves as blue chip talent brokers. And it’s not just Barrett and AAU coaches taking part in the transgressions. I’ve heard of college coaches (both assistants and head coaches), family members (including parents!), etc. that have brokered blue chip talent off to agents. As well, because of the rules, we punish the good agents that follow the rules and stay away from heavily recruiting violations and reward the bad agents that will do anything to sign a blue chip talent.

I’m not going to weigh the pros and cons of allowing agents to have direct contact with players, but by blocking direct contact, you’re increasing incentives for agents to seek out and pay these brokers to deliver players to them, and for individuals with ties to blue chip talent to seek out agents to broker these players off to.

The sad part of this entire system is that players are the ones that end up getting screwed, by ending up with agents that are very good at recruiting and not much else. Here's what Henry Abbott had to say on the matter:

You'd think that all the competition to represent NBA players would make for extraordinary service. But in fact, players mostly choose their agents when they are too young to know much about such things, and instead often seem to choose the agent who does the best job of wooing new recruits.

As a result, service suffers. I have heard of players who haven't been able to get their agents on the phone for days and weeks. Many players have no one who is really thinking about long-term plans to maximize their unique talents to be more effective on and off the court. Or how about if a player has health trouble -- who's helping them get the best care? What if the player wants to be traded -- can the agent build the relationships to get that done?

The truth is that recruiting players -- the wooing of friends, family, AAU coaches and the like -- takes an agent's time and money. That's time and money they can't spend on existing clients.

Young players could fix all that, because they can choose any agent they want. They have the power.

I agree with Henry that players should be doing a better job selecting agents. However, one major issue that encourages the under ground market for blue chip talent is just be the lack of information available to players and their families about the potential agent pool. I'm not sure players and their families have the tools available to them to know which agents are right for them. Under those circumstances, it's easy to see why players would select agents based on gifts from agents and recommendations of brokers, and not on the merits of the actual agent.

The players association may be underfunded, but I think the organization should try to create an objective means to measure the success of agents and the pros and cons of signing with each particular agent. The data could then be made available to players and their families. Perhaps this is just wishful thinking. Notwithstanding, if there was a completely objective party printing information for players about agents, then future NBA players and their families would have a much easier time selecting an agent to meet the needs.

Maybe one aspect of objective measurement could be created through an anonymous agent evaluation system for players. SI polls players on a variety of subjects throughout the year. I’m sure if the players association gave its members a chance to anonymously evaluate their agents, you would get a good set of data. That type of evaluation system has worked pretty well for law schools in evaluating professors. Before I pick classes I look through evaluations. If a professor has bad evaluations, I’m likely to stay away from the guy. Could the NBPA come up with such an evaluation system for agents? I would love to hear your thoughts.

The NBA's Real Economic Problem: A Lack of Revenue Sharing

2009-03-10T03:40:00.000-07:00

Recently, NBA Agent David Falk spoke to the NY Times about the state of the league and its upcoming collective bargaining negotiations with NBPA. (Okay, so he probably just set up the interview to promote his new book, but that's not something I'm going to waste your time with right now.) Anyhow, Falk believes that the players are going to have to make significant concessions in the next CBA. Here's a little bit of what he had to say on the matter:

“I think [the labor battle is] going to be very, very extreme, because I think that the times are extreme. The owners have the economic wherewithal to shut the thing down for two years, whatever it takes, to get a system that will work long term. The players do not have the economic wherewithal to sit out one year.”

The players, he said, must recognize that the owners have the ultimate leverage. Many are billionaires for whom owning an N.B.A. team is merely a pricey hobby. Some of them are losing “enormous amounts of money” and would rather shut down the league for a year or two than continue with the current system.

I do agree with Mr. Falk that many owners are losing money. However, I don't think this is something that should be placed at the feet of the players and the current collective bargaining agreement. It seems the major problem with the NBA right now is not the players share of the money, but the way that the owner split up their share of the money amongst themselves. The simple fact is that the NBA has fallen way behind the MLB and the NFL in revenue sharing amongst its owners.

Here are some numbers to give you an idea of what I am talking about: In the NFL, the home team splits the gate 60-40 with the the away team. In the NBA, the home teams keep everything. In the NFL 70%-75% of team revenue comes from revenue sharing. In the NBA it is only 20%-25%. In the MLB 35% of each teams local media revenues (TV, Radio, etc.) are put into a pot and redistributed. There is no such agreement in the NBA. In the NBA $49 million was redistributed for revenue sharing (via the lux tax and the escrow system) in 2008, while the MLB redistributed $300 million in 2005.

Look at the NBA team income distribution from last year: Outside of the Spurs, the small market teams are struggling, while the large markets are thriving. The discrepancy is only going to get larger as the league is handing off local digital rights to the individual teams. Of course, the large market teams will pocket a ton of money, while the small markets will hardly see a dime from this arrangement.

The Players Association needs to take a strong position and force the owners to get their financial houses in check before they come and ask the players to give up money. Honestly, long term, not all of the league is doing poorly. The only teams that are really struggling are the small market teams. Even with more restrictions on player salaries, there will continue to be a major gulf between the large and small market teams in the league unless the proper revenue sharing system is implemented. I know there might be some hesitation by large market owners to go for a system like this, but all they need to do is look at the way revenue sharing systems have helped the MLB and NFL thrive.

For those of you that think the players see too much of the money, please recognize the escrow tax system that the league currently has in place. It was put in place partially to protect owners in tough economic times. If the players' total salaries are larger than their allocated portion of basketball related income (currently set at 57% of BRI), the percentage that they are over is kept by the league and (at least partially) re-distributed to the owners. Basically, if revenues fall significantly, the players are going to be taxed significantly. Changing the length of contracts or eliminating the mid-level exception is not going to change the total amount of the pie that the players get.

Of course, the owners and the NBPA could negotiate to give the players a smaller piece of the pie, but I still don't think that is really going to solve the economic inequity that is causing small market teams to suffer. Lowering the players piece of the pie might be part of the answer, but unless it is done in conjunction with a revenue sharing system that is in line with what the MLB and NFL currently utilize, the league's smaller market teams will continue to suffer.

Passion of the Weiss: The Lakers as Rappers

2009-03-05T10:03:00.001-08:00

Passion of the Weiss: The Lakers as Rappers.

Jeff Teague Has a Message For Players That Like to Take Charges

2009-03-04T08:48:00.000-08:00

Nate Robinson Interviewed by John Thompson

2009-02-27T20:09:00.000-08:00

Nate Robinson has been everywhere since his Slam Dunk Contest victory. He's also been averaging 29 points per game since the All-Star Break. Keep doing it big, Nate.

Fakes and Nate Robinson

2009-02-20T02:31:00.000-08:00

Nate Robinson put on a show during the 2009 Slam Dunk Contest. With success comes individuals that want to capitalize on your fame. First up, the fake Twitter accounts. I've confirmed that is indeed NOT Nate Robinson. I don't get the point of impersonating someone on Twitter. You're bound to get caught.

Next, you have to deal with people pretending to be selling your game worn merchandise. I feel sorry for whoever bought those shoes for $20K, since those are definitely not the shoes Nate Robinson wore during the Slam Dunk Contest.

On a happier note, check out Nate on David Letterman last night. I have to say, he did an exceptional job.

Video : Barack Obama's Basketball Skills Critiqued By NBA Greats

2009-02-17T22:51:00.000-08:00

Yeah, we've been inundated with Barack + Basketball news and information. But I honestly have no problem with it. The NBA/Basketball is largely ignored by Joe Sports fan and most of the major sports networks in favor of Football and Baseball. If it takes Barack Obama to draw attention to the most outstanding sport in the entire world, then I am all for it.

Anyhow, here is video of some past and present NBA greats critiquing President Obama's on court skills.

(via: Baller-in-Chief)

Shaq and the Jabbawockeez

2009-02-15T22:13:00.000-08:00

Shaq is still the most entertaining player in basketball. He knows what All-Star games are all about, and always gives the fans a good show.

Obscure and Forgotten NBA Player Party

2009-02-15T12:14:00.000-08:00

Next year I'm having an All-Star party where only obscure and forgotten NBA players are invited. Who should I invite? Leave your answers here and on Twitter.

The REAL 2009 NBA Slam Dunk Contest

2009-02-14T13:32:00.000-08:00

Skeets and Tas are killing their coverage of the 2009 NBA All-Star Weekend. Take a look at their "People's Slam Dunk Contest":

TBJ AZ 03: The People's Dunk Contest from The Basketball Jones on Vimeo.

Spencer Hawes Supporting Seattle Sonics

2009-02-11T15:51:00.000-08:00

I know this is old, but this had to be posted. I'm not the biggest Spencer Hawes fan. But I had to give him props for wearing a Seattle Supersonics 'fit to his game in OKC. Just awesome.

UPDATE: Possibly and even better photo on Basketbawful.

Bill Simmons Isn't a Kobe Hater, But He's Wrong About a Few Things

2009-02-10T20:55:00.000-08:00

Take a look at Bill Simmons’ latest column for ESPN the Magazine. Tired of people on the internets calling him a Kobe hater, Simmons provides evidence that he believes proves that he is definitely not a Kobe hater. I agree with most of the article, but I took offense with one portion of it. Take a look at what he says about Kobe and LeBron’s historic games against the Knicks last week.

"Really, it was the defining Kobe game. He elicited every reaction possible from lovers, haters and everyone in between. When LeBron arrived in New York two days later and notched his amazing 52/9/11, he didn't break Kobe's new record but definitely cheapened it. LeBron's 52 came in the flow of the offense. When the Knicks doubled him, he found the open man. When they singled him, he scored. He dominated every facet of the game. It was a complete performance, basketball at its finest, everything we ever wanted from King James. And it happened 48 hours after Kobe's big game … in the same building. Crazy."

"I've been comparing those two games ever since. Never has basketball seemed more simple to me: I would rather watch a 52/9/11 than a 61/0/3. I would. It's really that simple. It's a matter of preference. So don't call me a Kobe hater, call me a basketball lover."

"And if Kobe ever put up a 52/9/11, yes, I would love him, too."

A few thoughts came to mind a when I read this:

1) Does Simmons really think Kobe’s 61 points didn’t come within the flow of the game? Was Kobe forcing shots the entire game? I’ve probably watched 90% of Kobe’s games throughout his career, and I’m pretty sure that he wasn’t forcing anything in that game. And even if he was kinda forcing, the guy had a True Shooting Percentage above 76% (higher than in his 81 point game) and an overall shooting percentage of 61%. I don’t think you can fault a guy for looking for his shot when he is that hot and when the defense has no answer for him (but to send him to the free throw line).

2) Is Simmons sure LeBron did everything in that game within the flow of the game? I’ve talked about this before (and many agree), but it's pretty obvious LeBron came out in that game trying to top Kobe’s performance. Anyone that had a chance to watch that game knows that it wasn’t some beautiful masterpiece of a performance. It was as forced, bro. Here’s a FanHouse post I wrote on the subject.

3) Was it really important for Kobe to dominate the boards when he had two teammates with 14 or more rebounds? Yeah, Kobe should have stopped dominating on offense and hit the boards a few more times.

One of Simmons’ friends in New York sent him this message after Kobe’s historic night:

"That was the worst night maybe of my life in the Garden. How horrible it must be to play with Kobe. He was signaling constantly to his teammates to get him the ball. THREE ASSISTS AND NO REBOUNDS. Talk about a team guy."

I wonder if Simmons’ friend was thinking the same thing after Michael Jordan’s classic double nickel game at the Garden in 1995. Jordan only had 2 assists in that game. But yeah, Kobe is a terrible ball hog of a teammate. It’s just horrible to play with Kobe.

Was Simmons' friend saying that when Kobe got two triple doubles earlier this season? Was he saying the same thing when his teammates were calling him Kobe Nash?

Matt Moore -- a guy that isn’t a Kobe fan by any stretch of the imagination – has called Kobe the second best playmaker in all of basketball (Chris Paul is the first). Look at Kobe’s game log and tell from January and tell me this guy is a ball hog.

That’s the thing that people that don’t watch Kobe on a nightly basis fail to understand. Kobe Bryant doesn’t fit into whatever box you’re trying to fit him into. The guy is just a fundamentally sound winner that does whatever his team needs them to do to win. There are times where he’s going to get boards and assists. There are times where he is going to focus on shutting down the opposite teams best perimeter players.

Is Kobe going to get near triple doubles on a nightly basis the way LeBron does? No! They are different players with a different skill set. They also are on different teams with different roles. LeBron is AMAZING in his own right, just like Kobe is amazing in his own way. But against a sad defense, and with a hot hand, I am not going to knock Kobe for getting 61 points. Especially when he wasn’t really forcing anything.

The NBA is a Growth Industry

2009-02-10T11:47:00.000-08:00

My home slice, Darren Rovell, just posted some numbers that continue to prove my theory that the NBA is headed for world domination. I think Stern might end up the Emperor of China and India one day.

Lakers 1993-94 Starting Lineup

2009-02-09T23:04:00.000-08:00

Antonio Harvey

Trevor Wilson

Vlade Divac

Tony Smith

Nick Van Exel

When people get the urge to find flaws in this year's Lakers squad, I quickly realize they haven't been fans that long. I watched every game of the 1993-94 season. I know what flaws are.

Video: Dwight Howard adidas All-Star 2009 Video

2009-02-09T21:10:00.000-08:00

Kobe Bryant to Star in the Karate Kid 2009

2009-02-09T11:24:00.001-08:00

Jones on the NBA on Twitter...FOLLOW ME!

2009-02-08T10:59:00.000-08:00

Despite my best intentions, my 2005-06 daily long form posts are not going to come back any time soon. Law School just won't allow it. However, there are tons of tools out there that will let me get my voice out there with minimal effort. One of those is Twitter. I just joined. Follow me. Thanks!

P.S. More to come soon.

Tracy McGrady in Darfur

2009-02-05T10:27:00.000-08:00

Also, be sure to check out a write up by Tracy McGrady on the subject over at TrueHoop.

LeBron v. Kobe: Matt Moore Gets It Right

2009-02-05T08:41:00.001-08:00

I often battle it out with Hardwood Paroxysm's Matt Moore in the NBA Fanhouse Google Group threads. It's fun to have a back and fourth with a guy that knows a ton about basketball. We don't always agree, but I totally respect his opinions. Despite our fun disagreements, I have to say that I really enjoy his long form writing at Hardwood Paroxysm. Take a look at what he wrote on Kobe v. LeBron:

"What is it about us that force us to compare the two? I’m with those calling for us to recognize each one’s brilliance in their own way. But still, the conversation will turn to Kobe vs. LeBron. It’s become the Cold War. It’s impact is felt in every facet of our culture, and to ignore it is to ignore the real issue we’re faced with."

See the rest at Hardwood Paroxysm