Spears: LaMarcus Aldridge Exploring Spain, Turkey, Australia?

Marc Spears of Yahoo! Sports reports that Portland Trail Blazers power forward LaMarcus Aldridge is once again considering his overseas options during the ongoing NBA lockout.
------------------------------
Portland Trail Blazers forward LaMarcus Aldridge will take a closer look at his options abroad. Aldridge said he is attracted to possibly playing in Spain, Turkey or Australia. He isn’t optimistic the lockout will end soon.

"It could get bad," Aldridge said. "We thought it was going to be a good negotiation this time. We didn’t actually think this was going to happen. But we prepared for the worst. It’s a little more dramatic for me now that two weeks of the season are canceled.

"If this is what it takes, then I guess we have to do it. I definitely want to play. I don’t think fans really understand it. We didn’t want this lockout; the owners wanted it. I’m reading that the fans are attacking the players because they think we are not working with the owners, but we are. The owners are not working with us."
------------------------------

Aldridge first wondered about the international option in July and was still interested in August and September. This makes four straight months. Aldridge could very well be the Cal Ripken, Jr. of expressing interest in playing overseas when this is all said and done.

-- Ben Golliver | benjamin.golliver@gmail.com | Twitter

8 months ago Ben Golliver 77 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Perhaps the owners will start budging..

when all of the top tier basketball players start taking their services across seas. From a business perspective, if you don’t value your employees and continue to deny them rights, the worker may take their talents and go to work for your competitor.
Hope our boys can stay healthy while playing across seas, specifically Batum and Aldridge

by RepTHEpinwheel on Oct 11, 2011 9:07 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs

there is no competitor

the players who choose to go overseas are going to realize that the grass is very much not greener. And the rank and file who don’t get those few high paid, high profile overseas job are going to be clamoring hard for the NBA to gear up again.

No one is being “denied rights” here – give me a break. These guys get unbelievable perks on top of ridiculous salaries.

"Well, you can always sell your team."

by douglast on Oct 11, 2011 10:34 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

The point is that money is made because of the players.

No players, no league. The league needs the players more than the players need the league.

If you had the best players in the world refusing to play for an organization, they can play elsewhere. Hell, they can FORM THEIR OWN organization.

But the owners cannot genetically engineer equivilent players. They would need to wait years and years for more players to come out of college, and THAT is only if those players wouldn’t just decide to join the player-made league, which they probably would.

Your point, that the players make a lot of money, is irrelevant because the SHARE of the money is mind-blowing for owners and players alike. That’s like saying you or I make a lot of money, which from a global perspective we do, but our share of what’s being made by our company is probably quite small.

The players control what happens. Period. And I support them because THEY ARE THE REASON I watch basketball. Loyalty to my team means my team and the memories I keep, not the operational structure of the business aspect of the Blazers franchise.

by Corvallis, OR on Oct 11, 2011 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs

the idea of the players forming their own league is fantasy land. they neither have the capital or would be willing to risk the capital required to setup the league. for the bulk of the NBA playerbase, there is no other realistic option that is viable medium to long term. they need the league and the league needs them.

the point about money is relevant – because the owners put money in up-front to run the teams – they risk a not insignificant amount of capital and have a lot of overhead. Most of the 43% they get (actually on aggregate, more than the 43%) goes to paying costs. The players 57% is ALL income. That’s a huge difference. Even if the split comes down to 50/50 in the end, every dime of the players half goes directly into their pocket. The owners will be lucky to pocket 5%, with the other 45% going to costs.

"Well, you can always sell your team."

by douglast on Oct 11, 2011 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions 3 recs

That's how capitalism works.

If the players really wanted to form their own league, they would. They’re the commodity, they’re the talent, they’re the labor, the product, etc. They are what is being sold.

If the players really wanted to form their own league, the current NBA admin would go away, period.

Would this new league be as successful? Probably not, for tons of reasons. Would it both exist and mean the end of current NBA owners and admin? Yep.

by Corvallis, OR on Oct 11, 2011 12:30 PM PDT up reply actions

Nope

the NBA would come back shortly there after, probably one season or less. It would not take long for the players to realize they need the owners more then the owners need them. The owners make money else where, most players don’t. Lebron isn’t going to keep is Nike contract if he’s not playing a sport.

by AR-15 on Oct 11, 2011 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions

What makes the owners and the NBA unique?

- They have ties with broadcasting companies
- Owners have money and business acumen
- They have systems that are proven to work.

All good points, but very much replaceable. The players have:

- The most talented 300 or so basketball players in the country

Assuming that players who would follow would WANT to join the player-led league, the NBA and its entities would quickly find out they offer nothing special, and that the players are the draw.

This isn’t even debatable. What’s debatable is whether it would happen. And of course it probably (almost certainly) won’t.

by Corvallis, OR on Oct 11, 2011 6:41 PM PDT up reply actions

it's heavily debateable

1) you vastly under estimate the up front costs involved, barriers to entry, and overall complexities (TV money, arena availability to name a few) in starting a new league, therefor you vastly over estimate has simple it would be to replace

2) you think players would flock to this new league and never look back. Sure, it would be great for the elite few superstars who would call the shots and stand to make more money (potentially) then they would in the NBA, but for the vast majority of those 300 players, the paychecks would be bigger, and the risk much smaller, by returning immediately to the proven commodity of the NBA, especially given that they only have a handful of years to make money.

"Well, you can always sell your team."

by douglast on Oct 11, 2011 7:04 PM PDT up reply actions

I’m not saying it’s realistic, I’m trying to establish that the players are infinitely more important to the sport of professional basketball than are the owners.

And if push came to shove, if for whatever reason the players decided to make their own league, it would be dependent on them getting the better players of the crop coming out of college and from overseas, or in 7-10 years it would certainly fail.

But if the entire cast of NBA players said “we’re doing this,” they would be INSTANTLY miles better than any other league the NBA owners could throw together in a few months, and would remain so for years, during which time they’d start netting the deals that would allow them to provide not only the MORAL incentive but the MONETARY incentive to draw out the talent.

by Corvallis, OR on Oct 12, 2011 8:06 AM PDT up reply actions

well, it's a nice pipe dream

but we will never know, because it’s completely unfeasible.

"Well, you can always sell your team."

by douglast on Oct 12, 2011 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions

..says every to-be-overthrown autocrat, government, company, and entity, ever.

My argument was to support this claim: payers mean more to professional basketball than NBA owners. Using hypotheticals is one way to do that. What is your problem?

by Corvallis, OR on Oct 12, 2011 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions

I think I stated my "problem" pretty well

Many of the assumptions you base your entire hypothetical on are just plain faulty to the core, which completely dismantles your entire premise.

"Well, you can always sell your team."

by douglast on Oct 12, 2011 11:58 AM PDT up reply actions

Amar'e Stoudamire is considering support for a new player-led league.

link:

Now I made a post about it. I would start seriously considering my argument. As I end my post, stranger things have happened.

by Corvallis, OR on Oct 12, 2011 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions

theres a long way between Amare talking about it, and all the things coming together to make it happen

Anyone can give a 5-minute soundbite about something. Talk is cheap.

Come talk to me when they actually starting putting a plan in place to start a league.

"Well, you can always sell your team."

by douglast on Oct 12, 2011 4:49 PM PDT up reply actions

no one disputes players are more important than owners

does that automatically mean they should make maximum profit with no (monetary) investment, to the point that the vast majority of owners have ZERO hope of both competing and even breaking even?

That the point here. The system in the last CBA was unsustainable from the day it was signed. The owners made a bad deal. The deal expired, and now they realize they need a more balanced deal – one that will still give the players HUGE salaries with no finanicial risk — salaries which cannot be matched anywhere else on the whole – and especially not in some upstart league that will likely fold, and even if it doesn’t would take years if not decades to for average and mean salaries to reach the levels they would be in the NBA this coming season, at whatever BRI split ends up happening.

"Well, you can always sell your team."

by douglast on Oct 12, 2011 12:04 PM PDT up reply actions

We have learned the players are all about money

on a scale of 300 players, they will make NOT EVEN CLOSE to what they make now in any other league in the world.

by AR-15 on Oct 11, 2011 9:50 PM PDT up reply actions

Agreed

“They neither have, nor would willingly risk the capital required”

Maybe, but who’s to say that they wouldn’t partner with a Paul Allen type to work on the business side of things? I bet there would be quite a few investors willing to spend good money to get into the sports entertainment business.

by Batumshakalaka on Oct 11, 2011 5:59 PM PDT up reply actions

I disagree with your last sentence, since rich, willing investors are a rare commodity.

Yet, even if somebody like Larry Ellison tried to form a basketball league to compete with the NBA, it’d almost assuredly fail like Vince McMahon’s attempt to compete with the NFL a decade ago.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Oct 11, 2011 7:49 PM PDT up reply actions

Remind me again, how many players left the NFL to join that league?

by Corvallis, OR on Oct 12, 2011 8:01 AM PDT up reply actions

The only XFL player I, and probably most fans, remember is

He Hate Me

I JUST WANT MY BASKETBALL BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by Sean in Vancouver on Oct 12, 2011 6:57 PM PDT up reply actions

I remember Tommy Maddox.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Oct 12, 2011 9:42 PM PDT up reply actions

Fine, let's go with the USFL instead.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Oct 12, 2011 9:43 PM PDT up reply actions

Sounds simplistic...

…but I believe the truth is that it’s not whether the league needs the players more than the players need the league. The truth is they need each other. The N.B.A. is still the world wide premier league in terms of players salaries, and exposure, and respected talent level. But we won’t reach resolution until both sides realize they need each other.

"Mother Nature started this fight, I think it's about time we ended it!"

by Krang on Oct 11, 2011 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions

"they can play elsewhere."

Do you know where they wouldn’t play? Portland.

If a new first tier professional basketball league were to crop up in the U.S. — which’ll never happen, but bear with me here — Portland wouldn’t be a part of it.

Not that I’d care, since I live north of Seattle. You should care, though.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Oct 11, 2011 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions

"Do you know where they wouldn’t play? Portland."

Seems true, but isn’t Portland really, really good for its size?

…

That’s my excuse. anyway.

by Corvallis, OR on Oct 11, 2011 6:44 PM PDT up reply actions

More than anything else, Paul Allen wouldn't allow a basketball team from a competing ...

league play at his Rose Garden. He’d put the kibosh on that before it even got off the ground.

Portland’s Memorial Coliseum wouldn’t be a feasible option, either, especially when places from Vancouver to Seattle to San Jose to Anaheim to Las Vegas to St. Paul to Kansas City to St. Louis to Louisville to Pittsburgh to Buffalo to Tampa have arenas that could house teams.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Oct 11, 2011 8:38 PM PDT up reply actions

That needed to be said

I am a fan of the USA, that doesn’t mean I support all the political behavior of the USA, I love the USA because of the dedicated people not the structure of our current government. On paper they look to be great, in reality they are greedy shameful leeches.

by BBK on Oct 12, 2011 5:45 AM PDT up reply actions

I think many of the players have gone back and forth on the idea of playing overseas.

by Natsthecat on Oct 11, 2011 9:28 AM PDT reply actions

Baa, baa, baa...

“No, really, it’s the owners that aren’t working with us, no, really. I can’t believe the fans would ‘attack’ the players, no, really.” But don’t worry, LaMarcus, all the little peons that don’t understand will have to get behind you at some point against the evil owners. “You all do think the owners are evil don’t you? I’m starting to question my entire perception of reality.”

by signal_lost on Oct 11, 2011 9:47 AM PDT reply actions

I'm more on the owners side than the players.

I feel obligated to see which side benefits the fan more and that is the owners by more than a hair. The advantage is that the owners are looking to make the league more competitive. The players, from my perspective, don’t appear to want much otherthan money. Based on what I’ve read they arent giving up enough.

Being a Blazer fan is not exactly healthy.

by dpnim on Oct 11, 2011 1:20 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions

not to mention

if the players had their way, they would actually hurt competitive balance by a wide margin. looser salary cap, more unrestricted free agency, more exceptions, two MLE’s, etc.

"Well, you can always sell your team."

by douglast on Oct 11, 2011 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions

It's not the players' fault the new owners overpayed for their teams

and are used to having power coddle them and pay for their mistakes. Par for the course.

by Hipster Olympic Team! on Oct 11, 2011 3:20 PM PDT up reply actions

I'm still waiting to hear that Oden will play his first game back somewhere else.

Won’t that be fitting?

by superfly05 on Oct 11, 2011 10:11 AM PDT reply actions

this unfortunate quote makes LA look out of touch with reality:

Aldridge said. "We have to get even closer now, even more united, during these tough times."

Tough times? These guys either have no idea what tough times are, or for those who grew up in tough times, have conveniently forgotten. Missing paychecks when you’ve already banked $30 million in the last 5 seasons isn’t anywhere near “tough times”

"Well, you can always sell your team."

by douglast on Oct 11, 2011 10:37 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs

It is when you have spent it all

Of course that is their fault, just saying.

by AR-15 on Oct 11, 2011 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions

I have less than zero sympathy

for anyone who blows $30 million in 5 years, and doesn’t have considerable hard assets and/or investments to show for it.

"Well, you can always sell your team."

by douglast on Oct 11, 2011 11:01 AM PDT up reply actions

You and me both

by hoodieNation on Oct 11, 2011 11:16 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions

O I dont either

I’m just saying, it could be hard times for the players, not that they deserve sympathy for those times.

by AR-15 on Oct 11, 2011 12:34 PM PDT up reply actions

I have zero sympathy for owners who spend hundreds od millions for a toy...

And expect the players who bring value to that toy to make all the concessions in a negotiation. Sorry but the owners knew what they were getting into when they signed the players contracts and to expect them to accept massive pay cuts because owners have never had any restraint when competing with each other is kind of unrealistic.

I know this is probably a bit reactive but all owners lost credibility with me when Jon Koncak became the highest paid player in the NBA in the mid 80s.

PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04

by tssbro on Oct 11, 2011 10:11 PM PDT up reply actions

If these players had to live on 1200 a month

plus retirement benefit with the cost of living. then I would say they are in hard times. Until then, I too have 0 sympathy for them, but that is not the point of the lock-out. It is just a power play between two giants, Owners and Players.

by BBK on Oct 12, 2011 5:52 AM PDT up reply actions

the whole mindset is one of 'winning' by sticking together...

as if this is a ball game we ‘win’ by getting our way- a ‘clash of wills’.
‘Losing’ in this case is signing up to play ball for the best league in the world for the highest pay available. The ‘solidarity’ against ‘oppression’ paradigm just is not working here. I guess these guys need a while to figure that out. Unfortunate.

Wake me when the game is on.

by Berkeley on Oct 11, 2011 11:12 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs

I know, right? A sports figure using a hyberbole?

It’s a real shocker.;)

by Hipster Olympic Team! on Oct 11, 2011 3:21 PM PDT up reply actions

go. to. nancy

PHILLY!

by CleBlazer on Oct 11, 2011 11:08 AM PDT reply actions

iirc

wessy wes was looking at australia as well, and patty is already playing on a team there. i just hope LA goes to a team with another blazer on it, so that they either develop some chemistry or prevent any loss of it.

PHILLY!

by CleBlazer on Oct 11, 2011 11:11 AM PDT reply actions

how about a whole bunch of Blazers go to a team with Blazers on it ?

:-)
Game on !

Wake me when the game is on.

by Berkeley on Oct 11, 2011 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions

It could be like 'pre season' practice,

except no Nate….. hmmmmm

Wake me when the game is on.

by Berkeley on Oct 11, 2011 11:15 AM PDT up reply actions

that would require effective coordinated action by the players

How likely is that ?

Wake me when the game is on.

by Berkeley on Oct 11, 2011 11:19 AM PDT up reply actions

idk if he was joking

but wes and patty were interacting quite a bit on twitter about both possibly playing in australia

PHILLY!

by CleBlazer on Oct 11, 2011 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions

effective coordinated action

Lockout League

Miami All-star game (whatever they called it)

Jimmer’s exhibition

just a few examples of players organizing events, I’m pretty sure a few individual players could pull off playing for the same team.

I JUST WANT MY BASKETBALL BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by Sean in Vancouver on Oct 11, 2011 11:50 AM PDT up reply actions

maybe the agents can get involved

i know they are much maligned, but they have the resources (both financially and contacts wise) to get it done.

PHILLY!

by CleBlazer on Oct 11, 2011 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions

Most teams are limited to only a couple international players.

Atleast in Euro league.

Being a Blazer fan is not exactly healthy.

by dpnim on Oct 11, 2011 1:12 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions

That would be awesome if LA and Wes both went and plagued with Mills

by hoodieNation on Oct 11, 2011 11:18 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions

Plagued? Is that part of the injury curse of the Blazers?

by Norsktroll on Oct 11, 2011 11:29 AM PDT up reply actions

yes, patty mills is a plague.

i like it here, there, everywhere.

by Name's Ash on Oct 11, 2011 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions

Haha

I mess so many words up on my phone.

by hoodieNation on Oct 11, 2011 1:10 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions

I bet the Aussie fan support would be Blazerseque

What about Crash ?

Wake me when the game is on.

by Berkeley on Oct 11, 2011 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions

Patty put up like 28 in his debut, correct?

Either Aldridge or Crash would instantly be the best player in the history of that league.

I JUST WANT MY BASKETBALL BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by Sean in Vancouver on Oct 11, 2011 11:47 AM PDT up reply actions

yeah, the other teams would need to 'upgrade' to keep it interesting

hmmm, maybe more fan support → more income → better pay for more players → repeat

Wake me when the game is on.

by Berkeley on Oct 11, 2011 11:52 AM PDT up reply actions

would be interesting

helluva sales pitch

“Come play basktball, make money, be a legend, and hang out in Sydney.”

I JUST WANT MY BASKETBALL BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by Sean in Vancouver on Oct 11, 2011 11:56 AM PDT up reply actions

make pennies

compared to your NBA salary.

by AR-15 on Oct 11, 2011 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions

pennies compared to NBA salary

are dollars compared to no salary during a lockout

I JUST WANT MY BASKETBALL BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by Sean in Vancouver on Oct 11, 2011 11:07 PM PDT up reply actions

My point exactly

all they have to do is sign a contract and the lockout is over and the are back to making millions.

by AR-15 on Oct 11, 2011 11:37 PM PDT up reply actions

Sydney?

by simoninaustralia on Oct 11, 2011 4:14 PM PDT up reply actions

Sydney, Melbourne......

My knowledge of Australia is basically limited to what I learned from the Olympics. But isnt Sydney home to many a pro sports team, and generally a cool place to be?

I JUST WANT MY BASKETBALL BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by Sean in Vancouver on Oct 11, 2011 11:09 PM PDT up reply actions

Ooooh Patty plays in Melbourne

now it all makes sense, lol.

I JUST WANT MY BASKETBALL BACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by Sean in Vancouver on Oct 11, 2011 11:10 PM PDT up reply actions

Sydney Kings - Basketball

Syndey Swans – Aussie Rules Football
Greater Western Sydney – Aussie Rules Football
about 8 Rugby League Teams
about 10 Rugby Union Teams
A pro soccer team
A pro baseball team

Melbourne Tigers Basketball
10 Aussie Rules teams
1 Rugby League Team
1 Rubgy Union Team
2 Pro Soccer Teams
1 Pro Baseball Team

So much pro sports in those places, id rather live in Melbourne though.

by benfti on Oct 13, 2011 3:53 PM PDT up reply actions

hey lookie here

nicolas88batum

….@aldridge_12 come to France

aldridge_12

@nicolas88batum get me on a Team I will

PHILLY!

by CleBlazer on Oct 11, 2011 11:49 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs

It’s no surprise that Stern came out aiming to frame the issue — this is what men in power do, they spin like Techs; this is basically the job of a high-powered lawyer — but the way he ended up doing it was, well, nasty. He said that the owners made “concession after concession” in the talks. This bugs me so, so much.

The concessions Stern cites? They were willing to keep guaranteed contracts alive, willing to drop their push for rollbacks on existing contracts and abandoned the hard salary cap concept.

How generous of the owners to drop three demands that they created themselves in these very negotiations! This is like a 6-year-old demanding three cookies, a bowl of ice cream and a bag of M&Ms. “OK, we’ll make a concession on the M&Ms, I’ll take three cookies and some ice cream. Hey, I made a concession!” It doesn’t work that way. One side is not allowed to “invent” a compromise from the start and claim it has negotiated in good faith to get there.

BOOM