Should the Blazers buy the a D-League team?

by mrwonderfull on Jul 15, 2007 4:03 AM PDT

The Spurs became the 2nd NBA team to own their D-League affiliate after talking to the Lakers about their experience with it. One obvious advantage is control: offensive and defensive sets, playing time, etc. The Spurs mentioned that owning a D-League team is now what using a private jet was to teams 20 years ago. Now all NBA teams use private jets.

Each D league team has 10 players who sign a contract with the NBA not with the team itself. NBA affiliates can assign up to 2 players at a time, who are first and second year NBA players. Each D league team can have no more than 12 players no matter how many players its affiliates have sent down.

D-League players are professionals. If they play at least 3 games they get over 30k and are generally paid 50k. NBA teams retain contract rights to any player they draft for one year. That is extended every year that the player plays professionally. I believe that means the Blazers would have the option of stashing unsigned draft picks in the D-League system and still retain their NBA contract rights the following year.

One problem with counting on European teams to be a quasi farm system for the NBA is playing time. Freeland received very little playing time last year, even though he claims he was better than the players that played ahead of him. A second problem is contracts. According to Koponen's coach, if Koponen goes back to Europe, there is always the danger that he could be signed to a multi-year contract.

The Idaho Stampede (Boise) has been in existence 10 years, the last two affiliated with the NBA-D league. With Paul Allen's penchant of giving the Blazers every conceivable advantage, it would seem natural that he would attempt to buy the Stampede.

First and second year signed players, like Green, McRoberts and Sergio are already eligible to be sent to the Stampede, even if Portland doesn't own the D-League team. But Blazer ownership of the Stampede would insure that they get valuable playing time and that the offense and defensive schemes are the same as Portland's. In addition, under Blazer ownership, the unsigned players, Koponen and Freeland could play for the Stampede. This would also allow them to get valuable playing experience, learn Portland's system, and become familiar with the Blazer players. Their might be other on the bubble players that Portland would be interested in keeping on a Stampede team like Mancinelli.

Make it so! Number one...er Paul.

More information is in the wikipedia and the following links:

http://www.nba.com/dleague/idaho/

http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/basketball/nba/spurs/stories/MYSA062907.04D.BKNspurs.toros.357336 c.html

http://www.nba.com/news/spurs_toros_070628.html

http://www.nba.com/spurs/news/summerleague_070705.html?rss=true

Tweet Comment 13 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I totally agree

Each NBA team should have their own minor league team, and they should be be able to put X-number of people on it that don't count against the roster.

Roster limits should be 12 with no inactive component, but players on the minor league team should not count against it. Those 13th-15th spot roster guys would be better served playing than inactive.

I wonder if the NBA is hesitant to put a minor league head-to-head with Europe, however. A more robust, talented d-leaugue would syphon talent from Europe. It's important to the NBA that basketball in Europe gains in popularity, which would be difficult if the USA was taking both their first AND second teir talent levels.

Still, a proper minor league team system is needed, especially with how young most draft picks are now (the 1-year postponement just means the draft is heavy 19-year-olds instead of 18-year-olds).

Since I also think its ludicrous to force kids to go to one year of college to get into the NBA (universities should be ashamed of participating in that farce), perhaps there should be a rule that highschool kids CAN be drafted, but they can only play in the d-league their first couple of years.

Every options has problems, I'm just brainstorming.

by matthewcc on Jul 15, 2007 6:38 AM PDT reply actions

I'm wondering

if it's more the college programs that are in the way of a minor league. Personally I dislike the colleges being the minor leagues and agree with matthewcc that requiring college attendance is ludicrous. (It's one of my sturdiest soap boxes, but I'll stay off it right now.) But the colleges get revenue from games and if the greatest players bypassed even one year revenues might fall. I'm one of the very few people I know who attended college baseball games - and I don't remember having to pay either. The top high school kids might bypass college and but would know they will likely end up in the minor leagues - which at least means playing time.

If there were actual minor leagues (or league) for basketball, look how much more playing time Martell would have gotten. He spent 3 weeks in the D League. 3 weeks. And look at Freeland - didn't play much at all last season but if we could have D-Leagued him they would have made sure he played. Being able to get all the kids playing time seems like a no-brainer to me. If you have an injury, put that guy on the inactive list and bring up a D-Leaguer that you know instead of reaching out for a Jeremy Richardson or Luke Schenscher.

Good place for aspiring coaches too...

by jorga on Jul 15, 2007 7:29 AM PDT reply actions

Another Option

Instead of owning a D-league team, own a European team. A lot of the same benefits, and a few more as well.

I think we should do it. After all, it isn't MY money, so I have no hesitation in spending it....

by jscot on Jul 15, 2007 8:12 AM PDT reply actions

You beat me to it

I just signed up for an account on here to suggest buying a euroleague team. I think the downside would be player movement, but the NBA should work that out.

by danielfarrell on Jul 15, 2007 8:14 AM PDT up reply actions

give back

The team should buy a D. league team and stack it with our prospects along with men like Ime. men that love the game and played it all their lives. The whole NBA should do this. leave the Europeans in Europe. There are enough good players out there that could male the league competitive and what better way to improve the image of the NBA than to actually help the players that didn't make it whether it be cause of an injury or family issues. etc. Who knows maybe some of these guys could make it if they had another chance just like what happened to Ime this year. what's better than that? P.S. We gotta keep him.

M. E.

by midget on Jul 15, 2007 10:10 AM PDT reply actions

buy a D-League team

and put it in Eugene when the new Oregon arena is built.

--Dave

Addicted to Quack SBN's Oregon Ducks Blog

by David Piper on Jul 15, 2007 10:31 AM PDT reply actions

The best prospects

Would not play in the NBDL for 50k. Only guys who think they can be in the NBA in he next year or two would do it. Maybe Freeland would, but not for the 30k or 50k. He wants to sign his rookie scale NBA contract. In which case you're paying guys the only 'low' salary (meaning the bargain rookie scale) they'll ever have in their career to play for the Idaho Stampede. Euroleague will pay more, and who wouldn't rather lounge around the Canary islands or Southern France instead of Boise? I think the Blazers should have their own team nonetheless. The NBA probably subsidizes it anyway, and if Paul Allen loses a million bucks it's only a drop out of the bucket.

by morescrillaigots on Jul 15, 2007 10:37 AM PDT reply actions

Do it in Summer

The D-League should play during the no-sports-lull (aka baseball season). Then if Portland owned a D-League team, it could have it play right here in Portland, maybe split some games with Eugene or Salem, etc. Maybe all 30 teams could have summer teams that play serious ball, say a 50-game schedule from late June to October, splitting games between the major city and smaller markets in the state/region to drum up support from a broader market.

I've always wondered how it is that baseball has retained a farm/minor-league system, when it's behind basketball and football in terms of popularity and almost surely in terms of numbers of people in the country who play the sport. If minor league baseball is financially tenable--why wouldn't NBA-affiliated, farm-system summer minor league basketball be, too?

by manireik on Jul 15, 2007 10:49 AM PDT reply actions

Why Summer?

It would seem to me that running it like MLB does it's farm system during the season as a source to replace players due to injury, or in some cases non-performance. God forbid that one of our guys goes down, pick up the phone, call and get a guy for the duration of our guys stay on the DL. I think the D-League should scrap it rule about the player having less than two years of service. I'm thinking in terms of the NBDL being run like Triple A baseball.

On Paul Allen's cash it should say "In Pritchard We Trust"

by kevingiard1 on Jul 15, 2007 10:58 AM PDT up reply actions

2-year limit

I had forgotten about that limit... Does that mean Zendon Hamilton is ineligible for the D-League? He seems like the textbook D-Leaguer that gets called up occasionally.

by rockingharder on Jul 16, 2007 12:16 AM PDT up reply actions

2-year limit

only applies to players on NBA teams, ie contract and roster spot, sent down to the D-League. Guys like Zendon are not even considered rookies yet and could spend their entire life on one of the D-League teams.

by mrwonderfull on Jul 17, 2007 12:07 AM PDT reply actions

another point from the LA. Lakers

made in the article (they were the first to own their own team) was that it has to be made easier for teams to move players to and from D-League. With that mind set, perhaps some of the barriors will come down.

by mrwonderfull on Jul 17, 2007 12:09 AM PDT reply actions

location location location summer summer summer

from a marketing/business perspective I think it would be best to leave the Stampede in Boise. The Sampede has been in business for 10 years only the last two have been afliated with the NBA. This shows that it's a succesful and stable business in Boise.

With the Blazers-Stampede connection you are likely to see increased ratings and other marketing benefits for the Blazers in the Boise market and the Stampede in Portlands. I could easily imagine Blazers cable contract getting a bit bigger as their cable games hit the Boise cable in a regular way. Vice Versa with Stampede games on in Portland cable TV. I'd watch. Heck I bought NBA-TV just to watch 5 lousy summer games.

Eugene is already in the Blazers marketing pocket. No benefit to keeping them their unless you want to actually attend the games.

I can see "best prospects" post above point about the best prospects being paid a lot more to go to Europe. But with NBA teams owning their own D league team they can afford to pay those players a lot more. And as someone already said, if they would relax the rules so anyone below the 12 players kept in the NBA team could play, that's 3 well played players going down to the D'league, I think the D league becomes a more attractive option for guys that feel they are close to making it in the NBA.

by mrwonderfull on Jul 17, 2007 12:23 AM PDT reply actions