There are lots of explanations for the lockout: parity, small markets being able to compete, and owners losing money are at the forefront of what we’ve heard. But when I was looking over NBA history, an interesting thing stood out:
- In 2010, LeBron James was coveted by multiple teams; getting LeBron meant being a contender. Instead of going to an expected destination, LeBron made a surprise move and ended up in Miami. He immediately turned the team into a contender. The next season the owners locked the players out.
- In 1997, Tim Duncan was coveted by multiple teams as a number 1 pick; getting Duncan meant being a contender. Instead of ending up at an expected destination, Duncan suprisingly ended up in San Antonio. He immediately turned the team into a contender. The next season the owners locked the players out.
In fact the same story goes back even further!
- In 1982 Moses Malone demanded a trade from Houston (this was before free agency). Getting Malone meant being a contender. Instead of staying with his old team, Malone ended up in Philadelphia. He immediately turned them into a favorite. The next season the owners enacted the first salary cap on the players.
In the history of the NBA, when an MVP has made a surprising or unexpected move near negotiations, the owners have been very punitive toward the players. In the case of Tim Duncan, this even happened when it wasn’t the fault of the player! Every owner wants a title, and that requires an MVP candidate. When one enters the market, they feel entitled to the player, and when they don’t get them, they can get very upset. And when the owners get upset, the fallout can be excessive.
During the lockout we’ve heard a lot of theories. The problem with things like parity and the owners losing money is that they don’t hold up to scrutiny. Owners feeling entitled has been going been going on for decades, as has owners being upset at missing out on top players. So when we ask what caused the lockout, the answer may be simpler than we think — maybe the owners are just angry that they didn’t get LeBron. And you won’t like them when they’re angry. . .
-Dre
This is kind of an odd post. There was a lockout in 1998 because San Antonio won the draft lottery??? Huh??? That doesn’t make any sense whatsoever.
In fact, rumor has it that there was a particular player who the owners pointed to in 1998 in connection with the lockout that year: Kevin Garnett, who just signed a 6-year $100+ million contract that some owners thought was excessive for a 20-year old.
I wouldn’t disagree with the general notion that certain situations are seen as emblematic for owners in the labor negotiations, however.
AKS,
No sense? At all? I hope you attack the other random theories for the lockout with as much gusto! There’s many sources on the internet.
That said the Garnett actually adds an interesting layer. In 1998 two small market teams get MVPs and the rest of the league misses out. I’m going to add it to the conspiracy theory!
While I could agree with some of LeBron’s fingerprints on the lockout (although with a different explanation: in 2010 small-market teams had a collective “what the hell? Superstar can sign for less in a chosen location to create super teams?! And another ones will follow by forcing trades? Oh no, when we can’t keep them let’s change the rules to make such move way more difficult”) but your point about Duncan IMHO is somewhere between laughable [is this whole post a joke? Then forget about this comment] and ridiculous. Here’s a proof in one sentence: they didn’t change anything about draft lottery! Longer version would include facts like “Duncan wasn’t MVP in 1998″, “That Robinson guy probably had something to do with Spurs’ record” and “after lockout big changes were about max salaries and rookie contracts” which IMHO points to that direction in terms of probable causes.
“No sense? At all?”
At all!
BTW, I think you should have added a link to the Xkcd cartoon: http://xkcd.com/386/
But seriously, as wiLQ pointed out, if the owners were upset about the 1998 draft lottery results, one might think that, you know, they would have done something to change the lottery.
AKS and wiLQ,
Not gonna say I’m super tied to this idea. I found it amusing and after a good discussion with Devin decided to post it. That said I don’t actually think this is as far-fetched as it’s being made out to be. Owners seem to act like entitled people. It is interesting that the lockouts occurred right after some seemingly “unfair” behavior resulted in one team winning out on a superstar sweepstakes. It’s not unreasonable to say that anger at this could contribute to them doing things like demanding hundreds of millions of dollars from the players. In terms of “if they were mad at Tim Duncan, why not change the draft?” well that would assume the owners react rationally to their anger. They’re not rational in general so why would they be here?
“It is interesting that the lockouts occurred right after some seemingly “unfair” behavior resulted in one team winning out on a superstar sweepstakes”
It would be more interesting if those were the only examples… but don’t forget about Shaq’s free agency, Duncan’s, Gasol/KG trades etc. Also we both omitted the obvious point: can lockout even happen with signed CBA in place?
Dre – but when the owners were upset about the draft – after the Patrick Ewing draft, for instance – they actually changed the draft more to their liking. So they know perfectly well how to fix the draft if that is upsetting them.
As I mentioned above, I think you are right that the owners see certain individual player situations and get p*ssed off about them. I don’t think it was Duncan in 1998, but rather Garnett. And you could argue that, now, it is also players like Eddy Curry and Gilbert Arenas that have the owners all upset so that they want to change the system.
wiLQ, A.K.S.: Yes, this isn’t a totally serious post. Dre meant to include a disclaimer, but we somehow missed it during editing. Originally, Dre had something like:
“But with no basketball to entertain us, we are left to create our own stories.”
It’s a bit of a conspiracy post. But as Dre says, perhaps there is some truth to it.