DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan

All  

Sixers

, all the time

New Owners Off To A Good Start

I am very excited about the new ownership, but totally agree about the lockout being bad timing for them.

I can't wait for basketball, now even more so due to the promising new ownership.

The promising new ownership? You mean the one that hasn't done anything yet?

Being neutral is an improvement over previous ownership, no?

They've decided that the basketball team's success is their only priority. That in itself is a huge improvement over a company that cared about basketball mostly within the framework of their arena, network, cable company, PR.

Even if you take the most jaundiced view the new owners only care about increasing the teams net worth, then the obvious solution would be to get out of perennials mediocrity mode, land a high profile star and put out a compelling product. The only other profitable model is the Clipper one- and I'm not thinking that is where these owners are headed.

So even without any specific actions apart from separating the team from the Comcast-Specatacor monolith, they have already made a huge improvement with their simplified business model.

And they slayed the final 2 heads of the 3 Ed'd Monster, which is a tremendous start. I also think keeping Collins/Thorn/Dileo around for the start was a good idea. It shows they are making judgment calls regarding what is currently in place, rather than wholesale changes or standing pat.

user-pic
jsmoove reply to tk76 on Oct 19 at 16:29
+/-

Is it comfirmed that DiLeo is in fact staying on? I saw where Thorn was but didn't see any mention of DiLeo?

user-pic
jsmoove reply to tk76 on Oct 19 at 16:35
+/-

nvmnd. just saw it below in atricle linked

Talk is cheap - and spin - what do you expect them to say when they are introduced as the new owners. Actions are indicators. They can say all the right things, BFD, any PR firm can tell them what to say. I am not 'excited' about new ownership yet until they do something to make me excited, and since Stefanski was already marginalized once thorn was hired, the 'announcement' that made Stefanski no long the GM was just a press release letting everyone know what everyone already knew.

They've done nothing but talk - and I don't hear anything I wouldn't expect to hear from any new owner - no matter what they really wanted to do or planned to do.

I am excited that Comcast and Snider are out of the picture- and that the new ownership is focused solely on the Sixers. IMO that is a big step in the right direction.

user-pic
Stan reply to GoSixers on Oct 20 at 16:14
+/-

I don't think they made any promises of bringing in a superstar or promising a championship in a few years.

They've already done something- lower the ticket prices.

For seats they couldn't sell anyway? BFD - like the guy said - lower season ticket prices - then we'll talk

So stern is definitely taking the negotiations seriously i can see - must be a pretty horrid flu dave

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7127448/nba-lockout-david-stern-sent-home-illness-likely-miss-mediation-session

user-pic
Tom Moore on Oct 19 at 8:33
+/-

Whereas I think the decision regarding Thad is big (even though I think he returns) IMO the decision regarding Hawes will be more reflective of the new owners thinking/direction!

I'm not sure I'd say that, considering the coach and the President are the ones making basketball decisions.

There really shouldn't be a decision on Hawes. They made the qualifying offer, it's doubtful they'll rescind it. If someone else signs him to an offer sheet, you thank your lucky stars and move on, but I think that's pretty doubtful.

user-pic
Walter reply to Brian on Oct 19 at 10:55
+/-

I just can't justify spend that much on him. I'm not one of those people that thinks Hawes is garbage. He can be decent at times when he hits his jumpers and makes good passes. I wouldn't have a problem with getting paid in the 1.5 - 2.5 million range.

Well, he's probably going to make a little over $4M this season on his qualifying offer.

BTW, whats your cut off price for Thad per season?

Some of you guys see him as a career bench player. Is 8 million a season too much to give a guy who is going to play 22 mpg?

Hard to say without knowing what the new CBA will be like. With shorter contracts there is less risk.

Yah. Need to be able to look at it as a percentage of the total cap, see the penalty for the luxury tax and what kind of moves teams will be able to make before we can assess what a palatable contract for Thad will be. And the Sixers are going to have to make those calculations very, very quickly.

Which partly explains why Thorn is still in charge instead of Levien stepping in right away.

Or it's just 'we can't do any damn thing anyway so why bother making moves'? Maybe Thorns buy out isn't worth firing him?

What's the point of making a GM switch when all the GM can do is sit with his thumbs up his ass?

The GM is going to have to make some big decisions very quickly once the lock-out is done.

So they have until next summer to worry about it?

Seriously - WTF does it mean that Thorn wasn't fired the day they took over? Absolutely nothing

Keeping Thorn is neither here nor there for me. He hasn't done anything since taking over except draft the Voose and trade Willie Green, so he's batting .500 as far as I'm concerned. I'm fine w/ keeping him around as long as the organization shifts from trying to cut costs to trying to win basketball games. I don't feel like he's been operating under those conditions since he got here. Nothing about the owners says they won't be creating that type of environment, so I'm optimistic.

Reitterating my view: The Sixers are working in an environment where the new owners just officially took over- and have never been allowed to speak with any players or agents due to the strike. Then they will have to make multiple informed decisions once the lock-out ends.

If they attempted to do this with a completely fresh/blind ownership/management team it would be both arrogant and unwise. The lock-out really places the new owners in a bind. You need something beyond watching old game film to make informed player-personnel judgments. That is why keeping well respected people like Thorn and Dileo in place for the short term is the right course. This is a very common management approach. If you make changes at too many levels right away you risk taking two steps back before you even know the best way forward.

I'm not saying this is a reason to love the new owners. Just that I don't have any problem with there current approach as new owners. I am sure that a more power-geek type like Cuban would jump right in and re-invent the wheel. That would make them popular with the pitchfork wielding angry masses- but is not the most well thought out approach. I prefer the MBA method to the geek/saber-metric/fan type approach to ownership, although both can be successful especially if you take the best of both worlds.

user-pic
Cin reply to tk76 on Oct 20 at 5:05
+/-

I tend to agree with your second point. As far as I'm concerned, blocking the Lamar Odom trade (if rumors are true) and retaining key staff may not be 'moves' but are indeed wise decisions. If anything is to be learned from the Eagles and the NFL lockout it's that in the event of an abbreviated pre-season continuity is key.

I'm also of the belief this team has more to gain by reaching the playoffs than trading off assets or following the OKC model at this point. We aleady have a stable of young prospects and had our shot at "the one" so at this point it's more worthwhile to embed a winning mentality in them while developing tradeable assets. Keep in mind that Iguodala and Brand will appreciate in value as their contracts run out.

Great news, 50-50 split is in the cards. All hail JaVale McGee. This will all be over soon. I'm pumped for the debut of my boy Vucevic!

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=AkC8NXvXl764tPBuSk0hPNw5nYcB?slug=aw-wojnarowski_nba_labor_talks_progress_101911

Good to hear they are actually negotiating. Hope it turns into a deal but I'm not yet optimistic.

Is there even a point to bringing Vucevic around for any extended period of time if there's a season? Stern is stating when the new CBA is agreed upon that the regular season would begin just up to thirty days after its signing. We'll have Hawes on his QO, Speights in his last year before RFA, and Brackins likely absorbing Battie's minutes. Would we give Vucevic the Brackins treatment of last season to familiarize himself? Isn't it more for beneficial for him to stay with his Montenegro squad for another year?

I'm not expecting anything from the Voose, but if your hope is that he'll turn into a serviceable NBA big man, I don't think it's beneficial to have him spend another year as the biggest guy on the floor playing against less physical big men.

user-pic
ItAintEZ on Oct 20 at 8:39
+/-

Listening to Adam Aaron the new CEO of the sixers on WIP. I am really impressed with this guy. Grew up a sixers fan and is a local guy. Can't hurt to actually have a guy at the top that is a true fan of the team.

Now if we can just have a season to see what they are going to do.

user-pic
Tom Moore on Oct 20 at 8:50
+/-

Jury today in Doylestown today. All set up in jury room. Was an alternate, but they called one number beyond me. Bright side is this satisfies the requirement for at least three years.

user-pic
Stan reply to Tom Moore on Oct 20 at 16:22
+/-

I've always wanted to be a part of a jury. I don't know why I've never been picked. I can tell whether or not a person is lying just by looking at them. I don't understand why the gov doesn't use my skills.

user-pic
Tom Moore on Oct 20 at 8:53
+/-

Asked Joshua Harris after Tuesday's news conference if he had any input in team president Rod Thorn not making a trade (read: Iguodala) prior to the lockout while his group was negotiating with Comcast-Spectacor. "We, we – no. Quick answer," he said, smiling.

user-pic
Sharone Wright on Oct 20 at 8:54
+/-

Did you guys notice they act like white knights lowering licket prices, but it stays the same for season ticket holders like me? Should I just dump my season tickets and walk-up?

user-pic
Tom Moore reply to Sharone Wright on Oct 20 at 9:53
+/-

CEO Adam Aron said that season ticket-holders already get a discount on the best seats in the house. He said the new reduced tickets are less desirable and harder to sell.

user-pic
Sharone Wright reply to Tom Moore on Oct 20 at 10:20
+/-

I'm in lower bowl section 106, face value $54. I pay $44 for them with the discount, but the website says single game prices will be $29 for my section. Therefore, walk-up is 34% less than season tickets, even with the ST discount. Any other ST holders bothered by this?

I'd be bothered by that. Maybe call your ticket agent and complain, they probably won't want to give you money back, but they may upgrade your seats for the same price.

user-pic
Sharone Wright reply to Brian on Oct 20 at 10:35
+/-

You don't have ST, Brian?

Nah, live too far away.

Brian is the Joshua Harris of Sixer blogging.

minus about 8 zeroes on the net worth.

user-pic
Stan reply to tk76 on Oct 20 at 16:25
+/-

I wish there was a like button

I don't think I've seen this mentioned anywhere, but one thing the owners should push for very hard once the revenue split is taken care of is removing the transferability of Bird Rights. That clock should reset when a player is traded. Make that move and the true intention of Bird Rights, to allow teams to re-sign their star players, will be the only thing they're good for. Bird Rights are meaningless when Carmelo can force his team to trade him and still get the most money from the new team.

INteresting, I don't think I've seen anyone indicate that that is something they'd want. I have seen talk of only 'one' bird rights player under contract per team - but that's pretty easy to work around

user-pic
Stan reply to Brian on Oct 20 at 16:27
+/-

Interesting. People blame Jordan but Larry Bird might be the one who ruined the NBA.

The Boston Celtics were the first team to employ the exception, exceeding the cap to re-sign Larry Bird. Since then, it has been known as the "Bird Exception."

Who the hell blames jordan for ruining the NBA by the way? He's the one who helped elevate it to a global sport that it is today.

user-pic
Stan reply to GoSixers on Oct 20 at 17:56
+/-

People say that his super stardom influenced younger generations to become more selfish in trying to become the "man". They have abandoned defense and passing in order to score as much points as possible. Before Jordan no player had lead the NBA in scoring and won an NBA championship in the same year.

- I don't really agree with that premise but that's the argument that people make.


I'm pretty sure michael jordan played defense - and went to college at least one or two years

user-pic
Stan reply to GoSixers on Oct 20 at 18:00
+/-

Did the NBA create the exception for the Celtics or were the Celtics the first team to use an exception that was already allowed?

According to what I read (and quoted) it seems liek the exception was quoted and it was given that stupid name because the celtics were the first to use it - so it's a matter of timing - and neither larry bird NOR michael jordan did anything to 'ruin' the NBA

Kevin Garnett could be held more responsisble for ruining the NBA than either bird or jordan (he was the first since shawn kemp wasn't he - mostly cause he couldn't find any school willing to relax its standards enough to let him in?)

user-pic
Stan reply to GoSixers on Oct 20 at 19:58
+/-

wow. I completely misunderstood the origin of that exception. Funny thing is that they didn't use to the exception to sign Larry Bird. Basically they resigned their own players including Bird prior to the new CBA and prior to the 3.6 million salary cap. They actually used the exception on Cedric Maxwell.

source- http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/sports_blog/2010/05/sports-legends-revealed-how-did-the-larry-bird-exception-to-the-nba-salary-cap-get-its-name.html

Interesting stuff. Yeah I always thought it was originally designed for the Celtics to keep Bird, though I never knew if it was actually used on him.

If something was negotiated into a CBA so one team could keep one player that wouldn't make any sense

Dude - Gumble went nuts - I mean I think stern wants to crush the union but

In his closing commentary on Tuesday's "Real Sports," the longtime TV host said Stern had "always seemed eager to be viewed as some kind of modern plantation overseer treating NBA men as if they were his boys."

user-pic
Stan reply to GoSixers on Oct 20 at 20:04
+/-

Did he have to use the word "plantation"? He could have made the same point without bringing in race

Race was his intention, so the plantation thing was the key component. I think Gumbel is still made about the dress code. Get over it Bryant.

The NFL has a dress code too - that never upset him when CBS was paying his life style.

good point.

user-pic
Stan reply to stoned81 on Oct 20 at 22:04
+/-

What a tool.

Oh come on Mr Wade, talking about people being greedy when you're guaranteed your contract even if you miss half a season? When you don't work you stil get all your money - when you perform badly you still get all your money - talking about greed is a ridiculous negotiating point. All you players need to shut up

user-pic
Sharone Wright on Oct 21 at 11:11
+/-

The owners have the leverage, and they'll probably get what they want. The players seem to be desperately clinging to their last few negotiating points. Although I think the owners tactics are distasteful and a power play, I do think something needs to happen about the salary cap. For some teams (like my 6ers) there is no hope of being competitive for years and years if a stupid GM's makes a bad signing.

That's not generally what this power struggle is about. It's a money grab, not something that's actually going to change the cba fundamentally.

user-pic
Sharone Wright reply to Derek Bodner on Oct 21 at 11:30
+/-

Agree! I am hoping that any improvement to the cap rules will be a collateral benefit of the owners' greed.

Eve if we had a ton of cap space, I don't think we could have done much with it.

Yes - the owners are making a power play - because they are losing money while the players continue to collect their guaranteed salaries - many of whom don't play up to those contracts

Seriously

The owners aren't really losing money when you factor in the appreciation of the value of their franchise.

That presumes a constant increase in appreciation of the value of the franchise, which is not guaranteed see bubble, internet, bubble, real estate for examples of where sometimes what goes up DOES come down

Trust me, I know about bubbles. You can hit me off list if you want details about how it hit me in real life. Remember my day job.

But this is neither the housing nor the technology sector. The average franchise is valued at $368 million. In 2005 that was $326m. And that was only over a 6 year span. Back in 1996, the Sixers were bought for $130 million, and are currently valued at $330m, and they haven't been profitable in a few years, in a league where revenue went up during a financial crisis.

Owning an NBA team is a good, stable business, despite the pity party owners are throwing.

It is perfect that we can receive the business loans and this opens new opportunities.

and rumor has it he couldn't pull a trade off before the draft even if he wanted to. both happened before he came to Philly last summer, link building services


Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment


back-to-story.gif