Jason Kidd feels that Super Teams (like Miami's New 3 Kings) will hurt the NBA?

Question

Jason Kidd recently said that when superstar players join forces on one team, it hurts the NBA in terms of revenue that is loss when a team loses their main star.

"Well, I think we would love to spread everybody out. We had 10 or 15 of the top players on separate teams, where guys were coming into town and they could sell tickets. It's not going to be easy for teams to sell tickets in Cleveland or Toronto now because those guys aren't on the team. I think everybody can say Miami will sell out wherever they go all year, but that hurts the NBA in the sense of selling tickets. It's just for them to go West, teams are only going to see them once, and then on the East coast they only go there twice, so it may be disappointing on that aspect but when you talk about just straight basketball it will be interesting and fun to watch."

However, I'd like to offer a counter perspective to Kidd's analogy.  When a team loses a star player, it opens up the door for another player to grow.  Teams may suffer for a season or 2 but they could quickly turn things around by drafting a potential star rookie like John Wall, sign another big name free agent, or make a trade.  Before you know it, they could be back in the limelight.  In the long run, the NBA will have more quality players in the league because of the increased opportunities.

If Kevin Durant was drafted by Portland instead of OKC, would he have became the superstar he is today?  Or would he settle for a 3rd string fiddles behind Roy and Aldridge?  With NBA teams focused on building around their main stars, sometimes, there isn't much touches for younger players to develop.  Gerald Wallace became an All-Star because he benefited from playing for an expansion Bobcats team instead of being buried at the end of the Sacramento bench.

Who knows.  Maybe LeBron's absence could open the door for JJ Hickson to become an All-Star. Or maybe the Cavs will hit rock bottom next year and win the lottery where they can draft Harrison Barnes to replace the King.

Anything can happen and if the rumors are true about Melo and CP3 joining forces in New York, that will leave a void in Denver that could be filled by another young up-n-coming player.  Chris Paul's absence will give Darren Collison the opportunity to become one of the best young point guards in the league.

What do you think?

Tha Doc · Accepted Answer

I agree with J-Kidd...No I'm not "Hating" On the Super Heat..But I feel that Stars need to be spread out along the league...and how's J-Kidd being jealous? He's jus saying the truth and there's a reason why he's one of the smartest NBA players ever...

Rob K · Answer

1. I think you're correct on the fact that it certainly does allow a new door to be opened in terms of a new player to become a "Star in the making."

2. However, this takes time; and during that "down time" -- teams and their revenue suffer greatly. When you don't have a marketable star -- it fails to bring in not only the necessary revenue due to slacking attendance, but it fails to create the exposure to your team, that would allow for the said team in question to sign future NBA "stars." You really think anybody is interested in coming to Minnesota? And for example, the Nets had so much cap room -- yet failed to acquire any free agent stars, not because they didn't have the money, but because their exposure at the moment is low (playing in Newark, NJ doesn't help much), which equals less marketability -- which equals, even lesser revenues. So while a guy like Gerald Wallace, has "emerged" -- he's far from a "Star" in terms of what a team needs on the market-side of business. 

3. The NBA is a league that had very little parity to begin with -- hence why you seen the same teams continue to make the playoffs, nearly year after year with little changes. So any time you're "combining forces" of three superstars into one team -- you're hurting many other teams chances of not only winning, but improving from a marketing standpoint, and improving overall. 

4. A better league is a more competitive league -- any time you put three of arguably the Top 15 best players in the league on a single team -- you're hurting the competition somewhere else in the league. Now, if the NBA were to say "contract" (aka get rid of) a few teams, the playing field might be more level. 

But, all in all; the NBA is a league of marketability -- Miami now has 3 guys to market, while most NBA teams can barely scrounge up 1. Marketing = money.

rskha · Answer

First, majority of American folks have developed a short attention span by watching 2 minute -3 minute coverages on a specific topic or their daily news. We, as a broad society are moving away from reading to getting our news sources through video.

Secondly, you're right. There is a superstar right around the corner. Saying that the absence of a superstar player on the roster will not draw crowds isn't enough. Golden State Warriors are a perfect example of that. I believe it depends mainly on the organization and scouts to seek out the next LeBron, Dwight, and Chris Paul.

? · Answer

Agreed. nicely written, well thought out. However ,ladiesman has a valid point not every player is a superstar, most are only serviceable. Plus waiting for a draft player is a year of low sales and fan attendance. there's also the possibility of them drafting incorrectly, which leaves the team languishing for another year. I still agree in that it's better for the NBA in general just worse for that particular franchise.

? · Answer

Didn't Jason Kidd wanna go to the Spurs in '03/'04 after they beat his Nets in the Finals?

GZA, ARIZA, and ODB · Answer

Jason kidd is another hater that is mad that he didn't get the same chance in his prime to do the same.  He sounds like he wants the NBA to be fair and balanced, maybe he should also suggest that nobody keep score in game so no one has to be a loser, and maybe all bench players get playing time too, and how about trophies for everybody.

STEVE · Answer

Oh yes, a Lockout is looming, and a Hard Cap may be imposed to FORCE teams like the Heat and Lakers to break up their rosters, and prevent the Knicks from obtaining both CP3 and Carmelo Anthony

dwade all day · Answer

i think kidd is right. i also think you are right but to a point. what if the young player replacing the star player that left in free agency is a bust? there is a way greater chance the replacement player is a bust then a superstar. there are no guarantees in life.

Veritas et Aequitas () · Answer

Guys like Jason Kidd are jealous losers. I am tired of the whining. I am a big Magic Johnson fan. All those speaking out about the Heat are just crybabies. Jason Kidd is washed up. Go cry me a river Jason. You big loser. He should have learned how to shoot and maybe he could have won titles. The bum shoots 40% for his career. He should have just kept passing. Nothing but a bricklayer!

Magic, Worthy, Kareem
Lebron, Wade, Bosh

GET REAL!

Jordan, Pippen, Cartwright
Lebron, Wade, Bosh

BETTER! BUT GET REAL!

Bird, McHale, Parish
Lebron, Wade, Bosh

C'mon, you get my point? Any of those guys who slam Miami are just busters, plain and simple. Magic Johnson, if any, has the worst case to make when speaking ill of Lebron James. Don't throw stones, Magic!

andyyoun88 · Answer

Too long. I don't think it matters anymore, it already happened.


Just wait for the Heat to fail like the Cavs did for the last 2 years.

Having the best record doesn't mean squat if they're bound to crumble in the play-offs. 

Especially if it's best record in the East. Hahahhaa. 4 good teams and rest are all free wins.

Trending News

Jason Kidd feels that Super Teams (like Miami's New 3 Kings) will hurt the NBA?

13 Answers