Before anyone asks, I have no idea why Stephon Marbury has left his team on the West Coast and flown back to NY. One story has it that he was upset to hear rumors that the Knicks were going to take away his starting spot and were trying to trade him. I can understand that might be a message that Marbury wouldn’t have any basis to deal with because all of his “quirky behaviors” in the past seem to have been overlooked because he could play basketball. He says that he had permission to leave the team and the Knicks say he is welcome back. Fine; let’s wait for the next shoe to drop here because you know there is another shoe to drop. And that shoe is not likely to be a “Starbury”…
Oh, and with regard to the idea that the Knicks might trade Marbury consider:
His salary is one of the top five in the NBA. Marbury and Allen Iverson both make $20.1M this year.
He will make $21.9M next year.
Maybe he will have trade value in the middle of next year because his contract expires at the end of next year; but as of now, a team would owe him a guaranteed $42M over the next two years.
Memo to Stephon: You’re not going to be traded; No one would want the burden of your $42M salary PLUS the baggage you bring.
Since I started with an NBA item today, let me continue on that track. When the owner of the Sonics announced that he would move the team to Oklahoma City, my first reaction was that this was part of the larger “mating dance” that was going on between the team and the folks in Seattle relative to a new arena. But as soon as David Stern jumped into the fray with guns a-blazing, I realized this was more than just ritualized kabuki theater.
Stern said rather definitively that if the Sonics left town, no NBA team would replace them. His exact words were, “…not in any conceivable future plan that I could envision.” Now since David Stern fancies himself as the “World’s Smartest Biped”, that means any replacement team would have to come from a series of events inconceivable even to his 10-acre brain. That’s heavy.
The stumbling block is an ordinance saying that any monies used to build an arena would have to earn a rate of return to the city equal to the return on a US Treasury bill. And therein is a potential poison pill for sports franchises in various places.
When politicians cave in to owners and leagues to build them new facilities with the taxpayers’ dollars, the politicos love to trot out the fiction that these are developmental funds that will increase the local economy and provide great paybacks to the locality over the years. In reality, I doubt that too many of the venues ever earn back their costs for the cities let alone ever “show a profit”. But as long as the politicians have that kind of “cover”, they can trot out that explanation when they’ve gotten cozy with the owners/leagues. Now, the questions are very simple.
If a new arena is such a great deal in terms of development, how come it can’t earn back a rate equivalent to a US Treasury bill?
And oh, by the way, if a new arena can’t earn that rate of return in Seattle, how come it will earn any kind of profit in some other city?
If the Sonics move to Oklahoma City, I have a very real suggestion for the NBA. Take the team that demonstrated that Oklahoma City had an interest in NBA basketball – the New Orleans Hornets – and move the Hornets to Seattle. Forget all the feelgood stories about how the Hornets have returned to the Katrina-ravaged city and have sparked hope in the residents there. That’s the nonsense of the PR-world; it has little to do with reality.
New Orleans is not a basketball city. They had a team and lost it because of poor attendance. They got a replacement when the Hornets – actually its owner – were less than politely asked to leave Charlotte. But after the novelty wore off, the Hornets were not playing to 90% capacity crowds in the pre-Katrina days. Now the city has a significantly smaller population and no greater interest in basketball; so, it’s not all that surprising that the Hornets have already had home crowds less than 10,000 this year. For the NBA, I think the Hornets franchise is like the guy in the old Fram oil filter commercial:
You can move it now; you can move it later…
One last NBA item today, if I may. ESPN did one of those polls that has no real scientific validity recently, but it does say something clearly about the NBA. Fans were asked to name their favorite NBA team. Almost 60% of the respondents said they had no favorite NBA team. That should send chills down the backs of the folks in charge of “growing the NBA brand”…
In NHL news, Eric Lindros announced his retirement recently. How many of you knew he was still playing? How long has it been since a team could pretend that he was a top-shelf player and one that fans needed to come out and see?
The folks who run the PGA are not happy when commentators refer to this time of year as golf’s “Silly Season”. But that’s what it is with all of its concocted events. And the silliness is becoming even worse since the top name golfers aren’t even showing up to collect paychecks without the exertion of a 72-hole tournament. The Skins Game started all of this nonsense and it used to have Jack Nicklaus and Arnold Palmer on the course; in later years, Tiger Woods was a “regular” and Anika Sorenstam participated. If you are looking for a polite way to describe this year’s field, you might say that it features three new faces and one link to the past glory of golfdom. Here’s the field:
Stephen Ames
Zach Johnson
Brett Wetterich
Fred Couples
Conceding that Zach Johnson won the Masters and might be recognized on sight in Augusta or Savannah, I think the first three guys on that list would be a great example of “athletes who can transit an airport without being hounded for autographs.” Fred Couples has been an ambassador of golf for a while now; that’s a polite way of saying he can’t play any more.
So, put The Skins Game on your list of television programs that will provide you with easy access to nap-time should you need some extra sleep as the rush of the Holiday Season begins…
Finally, have you ever noticed that infomercials tell you that you can have whatever they are hawking for “four easy payments of $39.95”? So exactly how is that different from a “four complicated payments of $39.95”…?
But don’t get me wrong, I love sports…