hooka

Keep up the good work!

In fact, much if not all of that endorsement income is NBA-induced or basketball-related. While the comparison to Mr. Buss may be a little difficult to align without contrasting bases/arguments, we all agree that Bryant’s extra income was a result of him playing in the NBA and for the many-time champion Lakers to which he played a pivotal role.

Would Nike pay that much had Kobe not won a title or him playing on another team overseas? I guess not.

NBA income was the result of Opportunity and hardwork/dedication. The NBA/Lakers provided the opportunity and Kobe provided the next. Same goes for Sponsorship income. Sponsors presented the opportunity, Kobe did what? Hardwork and dedication? Hmmm… must have been a double count here. If signing sponsorship deals is hardwork, I wonder what tantamounts to serving drinks is. So, if you drive a cabbie during the day and serve drinks at night, that mine friend is totally different.

Another case study is Michael Jordan. I’ll let your creative mind do the analysis.

It can be largely argued that endorsement is a job. If Clinton convinced a lot of people that oral sex is not sex, I think that statement on endorsement as not being a job is very legitimate.

I put this together today:

http://ballerblogger.com/2008/07/17/fools-gold/

It touches on the Nuggets salary cap situation.

I think the Lakers have glaring weaknesses at center and small forward. My hope is that Ariza and Bynum can shore up those weaknesses. If that’s the case, both players will be eligible for large contract extensions. Which will put the Lakers farther into luxury tax territory.

But the Lakers need a bench too. Because of their payroll now, they might not be able to re-sign Tufiaf. Who’s next? Do you see what I’m getting at?

The 2002-2003 Lakers taught us that you can’t expect to win a championship on the backs of one or two great players. That’s why we went out and got Karl Malone and Gary Payton. But both of those guys signed for less than market value. That isn’t likely to happen again.

So our best chance of building a winner is if guys take less than max deals. Contrary to popular opinion, there are limits to what Buss can spend and make a reasonable profit (more than his highest paid employee).

I really didn’t intend to compare Kobe’s salary AND endorsement money to Buss’ total income. Whatever Kobe makes from endorsements is separate from his earnings with the team. But that doesn’t change the fact that he makes nearly $20,000,000 from the Lakers.

Philip Anschutz is the largest minority owner but I don’t think he owns more than 20% of the team.

Everyone knows there’s no such thing as a guaranteed title. What I said was – almost guaranteed title with quotations. But weren’t you alluding to it on the basis that the Lakers ended up short in the recent NBA championship? What you said about that in order for Kobe to cement his legacy of multiple championships excluding those won with Shaq, he has to make a financial sacrifice to make way for a piece or two (and with the expected return of Bynum) sounds to me like you’re insinuating an improvement to say the least if not the title. Im sorry if I screwed up your message. On the other hand, how do you assess or qualify if a team has improved its chance of a title? The Lakers are already runners-up. So would anything less than a trip to say the Western Conference finals next year an indication of a deterioration even with Bynum and a new quality guy in tow? Hmm.. tough question. Maybe you would question next if indeed the new quality guy is really the missing piece. because if he were then they would have advanced further? but then again, what is further? The title? Then we go back to the guaranteed title discussion.

With the expiring contracts of key players after next season and the Lakers not ‘improving their position’ in spite of shoring up their line-up, would we not hear rebuilding, trading of key players or perhaps axing the coach? Compare that to the Dallas Mavs story.

Kareem

I have no problem with Kobe getting a raise or not sacrificing. Relatively, his salary is not outrageous. Percentage-wise it’s not large (due in part to the fat contracts of the other Lakers). But to command a hefty percentage and let your teammates settle for the left-overs is also not good. Is that how you treat your ‘demanded’ quality supporting cast? Kobe is an elite player but the recent finals proved that he’s not unstoppable. Basketball is still a team sport. If he had been in a perennial lottery-bound team, his stature will not be as big as it is now. He became big because of the three championships he’s had albeit largely regarded as more of Shaq-powered than his. In any sport, you’ll only gain elite prominence if you have reached the centerstage, the Finals that is. He owes this renewed comparison (well.. kinda short on this) with the great Michael Jordan to his teammates and his team in general. Kobe is certainly better than Paul Pierce. Pierce was suffering from near-obscurity before his first taste of glory. In the finals, he upstaged Kobe and now he appears to be as large or larger than Kobe (ask the Boston fans). That’s what championship success can bring. In short, Kobe (just like MJ was without Pippen and the gang) can’t do it by himself. You seem too engrossed on the idea that Kobe is almost everything of the Lakers’ success both as a title-chasing team and as a marketed product. The Celtics-Lakers rivalry has a rich history. I know you know that. But one thing you may have neglected was, the basketball world lusted for a Celtics-Lakers series, not a Celtics vs Kobe finals.

My point is, there’s no compelling reason to give your resident star player an enormous percentage of the team’s salary. I did not say outright for Kobe to take the paycut. I did mention here about max of 30%. And I also suggested the teams must stick to the salary cap. thus, eliminating the gross disadvantage of poor markets. The fact that there were teams who failed miserably in spite of exceeding the salary cap is more of the exception rather than the rule.

My LAL dream team scenario is an extreme or perhaps unfair argument but what better way to highlight a message? What if the Lakers successfully bidded for Elton Brand, Josh Smith and Maggette by just throwing away Odom, Turiaf, Radmanovic and Walton? Sure, the trio of Brand, Smith and Maggette can be convinced for less money than they can get from the free agency market as long as they don’t sacrifice so much and they get to play for a championship-caliber team and Mr. Buss wouldn’t mind committing say another $10M. Is still that extremely impossible? What did the basketball world say with the Gasol trade? Even Popovich was a little resigned to the idea of anyone beating the Lakers after that. If getting a talented player for a bunch of low-class is already being sneered upon what would those I enumerated result to?

When I followed the link, I’m surprised to find out that the average NBA team EBITDA in 2006 was only $6.9M, likely not even 1.5 times the MLE. Minus the paper appreciation of the team’s value, it’s not entirely a rewarding venture. tsk! tsk!

The 35 million is plus 15 million of outside sales. If I worked as a waiter and an ‘extras’ actor, and somehow made more money than my supervisor, would their be unfairness in that? The basketball team is a market, but there are also other markets where players can make money–like shoes and other advertising. But you can’t lump them together and compare salaries.

According to Forbes, Philip Anschutz is also part-owner. He’s got 7.6 billion dollars. That’s a lot of money. I wonder how much of the Lakers he owns.

You know and I know that that would ruin any enjoyment that most have watching the sport and signal financial disaster for the league. You don’t need to fashion an argument of extremes to discuss this. Obviously there are parameters that allow the NBA to function as a profitable form of entertainment. The Lakers always having the Dream Team is not within those parameters (but for one failed experiment of a year).

My argument is very simple: If Jerry Buss can pay, why would Bryant take a pay cut? I would assume its an obligation of Bryant’s to press for what he is worth to the organization–easily twenty-two million next year. The product of the NBA doesn’t dissolve if he earns 22 million, or even 25 million. Obviously the FO holds some of the cards in determining how far they’ll go, but Kobe is doing a brilliant job of making what the market will bear; AND he’s utilizing that as a conduit of major upward mobility. That’s called the American thing, right?

Returning to “The Tim Duncan Rule”, Hoffman says, “If Bryant is serious in his desire to cement his legacy with multiple championships, he’ll opt out and follow KG and Duncan’s lead by signing for less money.”

There is no reason for Kobe to opt out of his contract and take less money for his team. The market can bear it. Buss can bear it (trust me, Buss can bear it). The NBA can bear it (they’re loving the international sales right now). Buss can resign everyone if he wanted to, and he doesn’t need an excuse like Tim Duncan’s valiance to cry poor. If this team falls apart, its not the 3 million a year Bryant potentially saves this team.

Here is some financial data that you guys might find interesting.

Forbes.com Business of Basketball:

http://www.forbes.com/2007/01/25/NBA-team-valuations-biz_cz_kmozcs_06nba_0125nbaintro.html

The valuation of the Lakers as estimated by Forbes:

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2007/32/biz_07nba_Los-Angeles-Lakers_320250.html

Los Angeles Lakers salaries:

http://hoopshype.com/salaries/la_lakers.htm

Kobe Bryant’s career earnings:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bryanko01.html

Scroll to the very bottom.

Sports Illustrated’s 50 highest-earning athletes in the U.S.:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/more/specials/fortunate50/2008/index.html

Kobe is 5th at $35,490,625 per year.

I didn’t say that Buss “only” made $30 million in 2006-2007. And he didn’t make “double” what Bryant made. My point was that Buss doesn’t make that much more than Kobe. And is it too much to ask that Buss make more than his highest paid employee? I can assure you that there aren’t too many owners who make more than their highest paid player.

Should Bryant expect the owner to make less than him? Should Kobe feel that the franchise owes it to him to build a winner, despite luxury tax concerns?

Where does Buss draw the line?