Irrational exuberance: The Neemias Queta thread

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,047
Yea there is a huge demand for SPORTS from linear TV & the mega tech companies

The G-League is an untapped gold mine:
1. Get a TV contract
2. Add NBA 2-way contracts
3. Pay the G-League players more which will lead to NCAA/Euro talent wanting to play
4. Start the G League season on Labor Day
5. End the G-league season at the All-Star game (Championship game on Friday night)
6. Experiment with rules in the G-League to increase PACE of play
7. Critically grade refs at the G-League level and promote 5 a year and CUT the 5 worst NBA Refs
8. Aggressively develop officiating technology with an eye on quicker decision-making
9. Use larger college arenas. Kids U-13 free admission
Which do you think breaks out first and/or has the higher upside…G-League or WNBA?

Personally I’m not a fan of either but one is a minor league that nobody cares about while the other could gain significant momentum based off the success of the college game and individual stars entering the league next year.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,871
Santa Monica
Which do you think breaks out first and/or has the higher upside…G-League or WNBA?

Personally I’m not a fan of either but one is a minor league that nobody cares about while the other could gain significant momentum based off the success of the college game and individual stars entering the league next year.
I'm not a fan of either and it's all about how you define success.

There has been a million times larger investment in the women's game at the NCAA & WNBA level than the G-League. The WNBA has been a money loser every year for over two decades. I guess Caitlin Clark & 18MM viewers will attempt to change that. BUT I expect billionaire owners to continue to shell out.

The G-League is an undervalued opportunity (monetarily/talent-wise) for the NBA & clever teams IMO.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
31,544
The WNBA has been a money loser every year for over two decades. I guess Caitlin Clark & 18MM viewers will attempt to change that.
Would be interesting if Caitlin Clark / Angel Reese provided the same type of catalyst to the women's game that Bird-Magic did for the men's game.

People don't remember (or don't even know) that pre-Bird-Magic, the NBA had its playoffs being aired on tape-delay on TV. on the East Coast. Things have certainly changed since then. :)
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,871
Santa Monica
Would be interesting if Caitlin Clark / Angel Reese provided the same type of catalyst to the women's game that Bird-Magic did for the men's game.

People don't remember (or don't even know) that pre-Bird-Magic, the NBA had its playoffs being aired on tape-delay on TV. on the East Coast. Things have certainly changed since then. :)
Great analogy, that would be very cool if that happened. For the most part, I enjoyed the Iowa/USC Finals. Nice tempo to the game, great shooting, passing... the only part of the game that was tough to watch was the play around the rim.
 

Justthetippett

New Member
Aug 9, 2015
2,757
Would be interesting if Caitlin Clark / Angel Reese provided the same type of catalyst to the women's game that Bird-Magic did for the men's game.

People don't remember (or don't even know) that pre-Bird-Magic, the NBA had its playoffs being aired on tape-delay on TV. on the East Coast. Things have certainly changed since then. :)
There's definitely some momentum here. Between personalities and excellent outside shooting (the stuff around the rim is not going to be what drives the interest), and perhaps the world catching up to the USWNT, basketball could see a big bump.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,047
I'm not a fan of either and it's all about how you define success.

There has been a million times larger investment in the women's game at the NCAA & WNBA level than the G-League. The WNBA has been a money loser every year for over two decades. I guess Caitlin Clark & 18MM viewers will attempt to change that. BUT I expect billionaire owners to continue to shell out.

The G-League is an undervalued opportunity (monetarily/talent-wise) for the NBA & clever teams IMO.
I think the opposite. When has a minor league anything been a cash cow on a national level?


Would be interesting if Caitlin Clark / Angel Reese provided the same type of catalyst to the women's game that Bird-Magic did for the men's game.

People don't remember (or don't even know) that pre-Bird-Magic, the NBA had its playoffs being aired on tape-delay on TV. on the East Coast. Things have certainly changed since then. :)
This is what I’m expecting to happen. There is finally a significant buzz among casual fans. This had never been the case prior….not with Griner, not with Taurasi, not with Sue Bird. This is different.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,871
Santa Monica
I think the opposite. When has a minor league anything been a cash cow on a national level?
It wouldn't be easy. BUT start it up 2 months ahead of the NBA season & end it at All-Star weekend. Pay the players more (steal all the best 18-year-olds and Euro players). Take all the G-League teams to different cities during the year (Vegas, Seattle, Kansas City, San Diego)

NBA teams are going for 4-5B now, the development process for players is pretty archaic.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
22,848
Pittsburgh, PA
NBA teams are going for 4-5B now, the development process for players is pretty archaic.
Ok, but at the same time, what % of non garbage minutes are played by players who were drafted, and never were sent down to the G for more than a cup of coffee? It's gotta be well over 80%, maybe even 90%. The player development engine, such as it is, isn't overlooking a whole lot of non-draftees. Sure, you can name some, but not many impact players, right? Even your Derrick Whites were still a late first rounder. The second round catches plenty of players who may have been low percentage to have an NBA career, but who panned out, from Jokic and IT4 and Tony Parker on down. If there were a third or fourth round, the players who mostly go to the G league, how many NBA players would really be found there?

Now, that's not a reason not to have a second-division league of good pros who play hard and entertain smaller crowds. They'll never make a fortune as players, but the market is there for them, especially in colder places. But I'm not sure that the player-development angle, as a reason to invest in it, really moves the needle for NBA owners.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,871
Santa Monica
Ok, but at the same time, what % of non garbage minutes are played by players who were drafted, and never were sent down to the G for more than a cup of coffee? It's gotta be well over 80%, maybe even 90%. The player development engine, such as it is, isn't overlooking a whole lot of non-draftees. Sure, you can name some, but not many impact players, right? Even your Derrick Whites were still a late first rounder. The second round catches plenty of players who may have been low percentage to have an NBA career, but who panned out, from Jokic and IT4 and Tony Parker on down. If there were a third or fourth round, the players who mostly go to the G league, how many NBA players would really be found there?

Now, that's not a reason not to have a second-division league of good pros who play hard and entertain smaller crowds. They'll never make a fortune as players, but the market is there for them, especially in colder places. But I'm not sure that the player-development angle, as a reason to invest in it, really moves the needle for NBA owners.
If your team is worth $5B it's worth tossing in ~ $5MM/yr in G-League player salaries. IMO

Developing min players (Hauser, Kornet, now Queta) for multiple years helps when you're paying tax bills. Frankly, the C's/Danny were late to the game & unsurprisingly Brad has been really good at it.

After watching Toronto develop FVV & Siakam in the G-League I've been sold on it
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
45,274
Melrose, MA
Ok, but at the same time, what % of non garbage minutes are played by players who were drafted, and never were sent down to the G for more than a cup of coffee? It's gotta be well over 80%, maybe even 90%. The player development engine, such as it is, isn't overlooking a whole lot of non-draftees. Sure, you can name some, but not many impact players, right? Even your Derrick Whites were still a late first rounder. The second round catches plenty of players who may have been low percentage to have an NBA career, but who panned out, from Jokic and IT4 and Tony Parker on down. If there were a third or fourth round, the players who mostly go to the G league, how many NBA players would really be found there?

Now, that's not a reason not to have a second-division league of good pros who play hard and entertain smaller crowds. They'll never make a fortune as players, but the market is there for them, especially in colder places. But I'm not sure that the player-development angle, as a reason to invest in it, really moves the needle for NBA owners.
Maybe what there should be is expansion.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,047
Maybe what there should be is expansion.
The other owners sure would want some of each teams $2.5B franchise fee.

It wouldn't be easy. BUT start it up 2 months ahead of the NBA season & end it at All-Star weekend. Pay the players more (steal all the best 18-year-olds and Euro players). Take all the G-League teams to different cities during the year (Vegas, Seattle, Kansas City, San Diego)

NBA teams are going for 4-5B now, the development process for players is pretty archaic.
It’s such a bad product though. Think college basketball without all the best players. I don’t see where the demand would be…..whereas we saw this past season and last week what the demand is for Caitlin.