Should NBA Owners Allow Their Players to Compete Internationally?

by

It’s a difficult question. One that refuses to die. Eventually a team owner will play Bartleby to David Stern’s perplexed narration, and maybe that time has come. The NBA technically forbids its teams from interfering with their players participation in summer events. If a player wants to play for his country, it’s his prerogative. But as recent events in Dallas indicate, the NBA’s directive to owners is not airtight.

Mark Cuban recently denied Dirk Nowitzki the opportunity to represent Germany at EuroBasket, citing a long-standing agreement with Nowitzki. As Dirk Nowitzki’s employer, Mark Cuban is best served to guard his asset against injury.

Kevin Arnovitz reacts to the news in this way:

[Mark Cuban] said that the practice of lending out $100 million assets for free wouldn’t fly in any other commercial industry, yet NBA owners are expected — as a goodwill gesture — to hand over their superstars for months at a time….

…what happens when that same player signs an eight-figure deal with a professional franchise? Doesn’t that binding contract supersede any symbolic expression of national duty and/or service? If you’re a business person, do you really want your employee moonlighting for some other entity, particularly if his extracurricular activity has the potential to undermine his ability to do the job you’ve hired him to do?

Arnovitz quotes Rob Mahoney, who asks us to “keep in mind that Dirk is functionally a free agent next season.” Dirk Nowitzki wants to avoid injury. At 31, Nowitzki’s next contract is his last big score. In all likelihood, that contract will come from Mark Cuban. Being on the best possible terms with Cuban, and in the best possible shape for potential suitors, is good business too.

Fans of the San Antonio Spurs know this all too well. Manu Ginobili injured his ankle during last summer’s international competition. Manu Ginobili’s injury was, in hindsight, a diagnosis of terminal illness for the Spurs. The Spurs were dead men walking. The Spurs may not have won the title even with a healthy Manu Ginobili, but do you think that a few more home games during the playoffs wouldn’t have helped Peter Holt’s pocketbook? If Manu Ginobili had remained healthy last season, would the Spurs have extended his contract this summer? How much money did the injury cost Ginobili?

This question remains fresh for the Spurs. The recent flap over Tony Parker’s ankle injury was a moment of discord rarely seen in Alamo City. Peter Holt’s tax-paying anguish will cause an entire city to turn their face and gag if Parker sustains a major injury prior to this season. The Spurs title hopes will be dashed. Their offseason financial gamble-an all-in maneuver-will have lost everything before it got to the table.

Gregg Popovich, giving credence to the league’s policy, spoke in code when asked about Parker’s decision to play for France. “I’ve learned that I’m limited as to the comments that can be made, due to a variety of agreements and such,” Popovich said Wednesday. “One could probably just look at my face, or at the comments I’ve made in the past — that I’m not making now — and you can glean from that how happy I am about some of the guys playing in the summertime.”

But this goes beyond Parker and pocketbooks. Tony Parker’s participation in international competition plays fast and loose with the career aspirations of Tim Duncan, Antonio McDyess and Manu Ginobili. Tim Duncan’s quest for a fifth title is entirely related to the health of Tony Parker. As unpopular as this statement may make me, Tony Parker is not far behind Duncan in the Spurs’ superstar pecking order. Parker is entering his prime as Duncan exits his own. Tony Parker is not only one of the Spurs’ best players, he’s one of the league’s best players.

Tony Parker is sensitive to the concerns of an owner. Parker exhibits the professionalism every team craves from its players. And besides, Parker is part owner of French professional team ASVEL. He’s anything but oblivious to the vested interest of an owner in the extracurricular activities of his employees. Somewhere inside him resides a strong prohibition against mopeds and base jumping.

I take Parker’s loyalty to the French team for what it is, patriotism. The worst possible way to misconstrue this issue is to paint Parker as a malcontent or rebel. And that’s why this is such a thorny issue:Â Tony Parker is caught up in a conflict of virtues. On the one hand, Parker is confronted by a loyalty to professional commitments. On the other, Parker is hamstrung by an indebtedness to country.

Having said this, I want to turn the conversation in a different direction.

Mark Cuban doesn’t believe the NBA’s practice of loaning out their best payed athletes, or any of their players for that matter, would fly elsewhere. This seems right, but there may be one notable exception. To my knowledge, there is no controversy in Europe over whether Caja Laboral objects to loaning Tiago Splitter out to the Brazilian national team. Euroleague teams freely “loan” their players out to their home countries. I suspect there is a cultural divide at play here. It would be nice to know if this is a controversy for Euroleague stars.

I want to stretch this comparison a little further.

Suppose David Lee signed a contract with Olympiakos this summer. Big money. He and Yiannis Bourousis anchor their frontcourt, transforming them into a Euroleague dynasty. Along comes Jerry Colangelo, who sees Lee as an a vital part of America’s 2012 gold medal aspirations. “Tsk, tsk,” says Panayiotis Angelopoulos, “he’s my employee. We’re worried about the wear on his legs. Go on home, Mr. Colangelo.” That’s not inconceivable, right? Does that change our opinions on the Parker-Holt debate?

Or try this variation. What if Dan Gilbert and Jerry Buss banded together and put the kibosh on Colangelo? “We’re sorry, Jerry,” they’d say, “but did you see how much money we paid our guys last summer? The health of basketball in Cleveland depends on the health of LeBron James. The bronze isn’t so bad, is it?”

In that sense, the debate about whether the Spurs should allow Parker to play for the French team is a debate about whether we should revert back to a U.S. Olympic team comprised of amateurs. Don’t fool yourself into thinking we’re talking about something less, because that’s the logical end of the discussion. Are we willing to sacrifice American Olympic success in a principled stand to privilege the money-holders?

Ultimately, the answer may lie in letting contract concerns carry the day. Should a player’s freedom to compete in international competition be contractually negotiated? Tony Parker’s basketball skill is an asset, it’s his product to sell. If Peter Holt wants exclusive rights to that product, he’ll have to pay for it. In this scenario, Tony Parker would get a salary bump in his next deal if he withdraws from international competition, but at the cost of a dream and, perhaps, the esteem of his countrymen. If Parker is not willing to accept those terms, the cost is a loss of guaranteed money.

Edit: My initial draft indicated that Tiago Splitter played for the Spanish national team, which is incorrect. He plays for the Brazilian team. See the comment thread for discussion of this point.

  • Alain

    Quite a good summary of the international play question. A couple of extra thoughts :
    1) When Mark Cuban invested in Dirk Nowitzki, he knew that Dirk would be intent on playing for team Germany. The same goes for Ginobili. In fact, the same goes for any superstar (including american) probably willing to play for his country. The injury risk is to be factored in the GM’s decision making, along with all the countless risks involved in signing a player to a guaranteed multiyear deal.
    2) Not only do Euroleague teams let players play for their countries, but the same holds true in soccer, to a much larger extent. Soccer stars are let go to play for their countries, year-round, even during the pro season. A difference comes in the fact that a great performance on a national team will increase the player’s value, thus potentially benefiting the pro team in future trades. Not so in basketball, where NBA teams couldn’t care less about how well Wade or Nowitzki play in the olympics.
    3) Finally, NBA teams use international play to find players able to shine at a high level. Examples : Manu Ginobili, Rudy Fernandez. It cannot be acceptable to forbid these players from further playing for their national teams on the grounds that they are now employed by an american corporation.

  • Nick (Italy)

    Tim,

    I think you are right in suspecting that the cause of this “misunderstanding” is a cultural divide between the US and the FIBA countries.

    In order to clarify the issue, it may also be useful to consider that most FIBA countries heavily invest in the young players since they are very very young. This is made both indirectly, by funding or allowing full tax exemptions in favor of institution that raise new players (of every sport), and directly, by creating state owned training facilities in which the best prospects of each class can improve and fullfill their potential. The very best athletes also join the National teams of their ages, which give them the possibility to face the highest competition available and thus improving even more.

    Tony Parker (as well as almost any French player) is the product of such system.

    Please consider that such state aids are not reserved to major sports (soccer, basket and so on), but are also granted to minor sports, which cannot sustain themselves with their revenues.

    The athletes competing in such minor sports are also often hired by the state in the “sport groups” of the army in order to provide them with an (albeit small) income.

    A final note: Splitter changed his nationality to Spanish (for Euroleagues and ACB foreign players limits), but continues to play international ball for Brazil.

    Best!

    N

  • Guilherme

    Tiago Splitter is from Brazil.

  • Pingback: 48 Minutes of Hell » Blog Archive » Should NBA Owners Allow Their … | France Today()

  • Chris

    I don’t think they should force their players to not play but they should know the players that are going to be playing for their national team and know the risks they take by drafting them or signing them. For a lot of the international players playing for their NT is very important to them. In Manu’s case his main dream and goal was just be good enough to make it as a member on the NT and never even thought about making it into the NBA.

  • Cory Clay

    This is of course tricky ground. Who knows how good Manu Ginobili would have been without not only the ankle injuries but also his and the National Team’s decision to play him on that injured ankle.
    Ginobili’s whole rookie year in 2002-2003 was touch and go due to his injury that he recieved in the World Championships, but it is hard to argue with Ginobili b/c this is also the tournament where Argentina became the first country to beat a USA “Dream” Team.

    Parker’s case is also difficult, France is a team that has not made any noise in recent national play, yet he has watched Tim and Manu be integral parts of Medal Teams, he has seen Fab when medals, and Bowen try out for the Redeem Team. So now that France looks like not only could they make some noise but could also be one of the top teams of course Tony is going to want to play. He was the first French superstar in the NBA, and let’s face it what drives a majority of NBA players is ego and competitiveness so no way would Tony Parker want to sit home and watch his country do well for the first time without him while he was not injured, knowing that he would be the Captain and best player on the team.

    The flip side of this is I promise you the Spurs have absolutely no problem with Ian Manihimi or Nando De Colo playing for their National team, because these young player are projects and the more they play against top competition the better they will be. So if the National Team plays are part in making these players better when they are younger shouldn’t they also benefit from these same players when they are playing at their peak level?

    Having said all of that here is the closest thing that I can come up with as a solution.
    If a player decides he wants to play in national competition he must first go through a full physical evaluation (Which I would assume already happens), and then if he is cleared to play a team representative must have full access to that player while they are with the National Team, this includes workouts, shootarounds, practices, and games. If that representative sees any problem or potential problems, then just like the Spurs recently did with Tony Parker, that player must immediately come back to the U.S. and complete another evaluation with his NBA team.

    I am all for players playing international (these guys are going to be playing during the summer anyway) but we have to be realistic and know that a National Team has thier interest above an NBA team’s interest and if a player can play at 80% and help that team Medal than I think we all know what is going to happen and that in my opinion is the biggest problem in all of these scenarios. The NBA team’s interest MUST be protected.

  • Impitoyable

    A bit off topic but French newspaper Le Monde reports that Spur Ian Mahinmi will replace ex-Nugget, now free agent, Johan Petro on the roster for today’s game against Finland.

    This news also serves the point that the level of play in FIBA competitions enables young players to develop their game. Batum is a good example, his offensive role on the NT is larger than in Portland, he gets to drive, handle the ball and create for him and others instead of just shooting corner threes. Same with Parker, during his rookie contract he could defer to others or even be benched during crucial part of Spurs games. But on the NT, he was THE guy from day 1 with all the expectations associated with being an NBA champion, no room for error there. This experience prepared him to be able to carry the Spurs through the ineluctable decline or injuries of Duncan and Ginobili.

    While it stinks for the owner and the fan base that their next season hinges on whether or not some unknown Austrian guy will crash into Tony’s leg, national teams showcase young foreign NBA players and allow them to hone skills that may not yet be NBA-ready. Cuban sure objects to let his superstar Nowitzki play for Germany but is he against JJ Barrea and Rodrigue Beaubois playing internationaly during the summer? Minutes on that big of a stage don’t come around often for these guys and they might need them to be good enough to be subbed in for Jason Kidd without killing Dallas.
    All in all, the injury risk is real but the player development potential is huge. It would be unfair to the rest of the world for nba owners to prevent their foreign stars from playing for their countries and allow bench players to do so. So it’s all or nothing, everybody can play for NTs or nobody can. In the big picture, knowing that depth is paramount to survive the regular season without reliying too much on your stars, the trade-off between the injury risk and the near sure fire player development isn’t as bad a deal as it first looks.

  • Will

    Tiny comment: to know who wrote an article we have to go back t the main page… not very good not to give yourself credit on the main post page!

    So, Tim, I don’t think that’s one of your best articles because you didn’t push it far enough - on the other hand you’re getting very good comments :)

    Let me add a few more:
    - as somebody mentioned Cuban is generally wrong (wouldn’t be the first time), it happens in all sports for a variety of reasons. A good example is soccer since it’s after all the biggest sport on this planet (whatever angle you choose to consider). Some clubs have been PITA to let their players go, but they simply have to, the public wouldn’t understand if they didn’t. There are tons of other examples, look at e.g. motor sports where a guy like Loeb (5-time world rally champion and most likely the best rally driver in the history of the sport) goes to try a Formula 1 or to run the famous Le Mans race - would you say that’s not dangerous?

    - there’s a cultural divide about this because the US are their own “mini-world” to US citizens, which can be seen in many ways, including in our case when US leagues crown “world champions” (yeah, right). Therefore it’s well known that whatever happens internationally, especially in team sports, is not quite as important as the domestic scene. The rest of the world tends to think the other way around. The other aspect of this cultural divide is the sheer size of the US: Europe has 30+ national teams, the US have… one. Just imagine if each US state wanted their players for some international tournaments. Suddenly this issue wouldn’t be about a few US stars to make one team, the whole of the US players in the NBA would be called on by each state. That’s a good representation of what happens in Europe (and other b-ball countries)

    - this being said I agree this is a new issue for the NBA due to the surge in international players, especially at the star level. Pretty much each and every contender has a foreign player who is key to their success. In this context it’s clear that people won’t come with solutions about this overnight, it will take time.

    - next: there are ways to mitigate this. One was the insurance issue, which doesn’t solve everything. I remember Cuban asking the German federation for an insurance they basically couldn’t pay, I wonder if he would keep his mouth shut if Dirk was injured but he got his money back? Probably not… because he wants to win, too. Another way to mitigate this, and which is widely used, is to learn to pick your fights. The FIBA doesn’t ask for too many games anyway (unlike the soccer federation for example), and it’s true that between the world tournament, the euro tournament and the olympics there’s a good chance players will be busy every summer. But that’s only 5-10 games, almost negligible compared to the grind the NBA season is + playoffs + all-star stuff (nobody worried about injury there and it’s the most meaningless event ever) + pre-season, etc. Most of the time soccer teams keep their best players out of friendlies or low stakes international games by saying they are “injured”. Every sees through this but everybody understands it’s more important to have your star player when it really counts. International play doesn’t have to be automatic and I think I remember Parker foregoing some games in the past that weren’t important.

    - which brings me to my next point: Parker and the Spurs. Parker got a taste of international success as a young player (there are separate tournaments for them) and wants to reproduce that on the big stage. What I’m mystified about that people don’t think to understand is that it’s a HUGE chip on his shoulder, and I believe his confidence level would EXPLODE if the French NT could shine. Typical “monkey off his back” kind of stuff. It’s also important to consider that it’s not “any other year” for the French NT. If they don’t go to the Euro championship they basically don’t go anywhere on the international scene in the next few years because they won’t even be allowed to compete at all. Although it’s on another level (financially at least) I feel the French federation has tried hard to get their act together this year, new (finally good) coach, lots of work on communication and working with the teams, especially in the NBA (see Parker, Batum, Noah, Mahinmi…). Another thing to remember (and that’s not a dig to SA in any way, shape or form) is that if the French NT does somebody big, that represents a lot to a community (France) that’s basically 30 times as big as SA (in terms of population). It’s not like it’s nothing.

    - finally, not everybody in the US thinks this way either. Interestingly enough a guy like Larry Brown (been there, done that) is much more supportive of this, he publicly commented that it was a mistake by Chicago not to let Noah play, he would definitely learn so much (not to mention seriously pissed off if France goes anywhere this year). I understand Pop has other aspirations this year but it still strikes me as an interesting case of double-standard from a guy who’s been looking to coach the US team before.

  • http://www.48minutesofhell.com Timothy Varner

    Will,

    Well, we’re only a few comments in and I’ve already learned a ton from our readers. So, yeah, you’re probably right.

  • http://www.48minutesofhell.com Timothy Varner

    Impitoyable,

    I’m watching the game. It’s nice to see Mahinmi playing. Thanks for the alert. And you’re absolutely correct about FIBA aiding in the development process. My only quibble is that there is not a 1:1 carry over from FIBA to the NBA. Sometimes a guy will look great in international competition but stink in the NBA, or just the opposite. But in general, I think your point is spot on. But again, that leads to the question of whether it wouldn’t just be better to restrict Olympic play to amateurs?

  • Marcos

    Just look into soccer and FIFA. There is always controversy, but for the major tournaments, every team let their best players play for their national squad. Basketball should be no different. And Mark Cuban is wrong, ask Barcelona FC when FIFA made them lend Lionel Messi (arguably the best player in the world) to play for Argentina in the 2008 Olympics and eventually winning gold.

    There is a calendar, for the sport, just as in basketball, and all international competitions are in the summer time when they do not interfere with their “jobs” with their clubs.

  • Impitoyable

    Good point Timothy, quality games in international competitions don’t always translate to the NBA. But at the same time, the Association is the top league for a reason. There is no level of play like it. Be it the D-League, Summer League or Euroleague, no setting can match the skill and athleticism level of the NBA.

    The Olympics would be unwatchable if only amateurs were there. USA could send 19 to 23 year old college players, all good ballers about to be drafted. But european countries often carry teenage pro on their NT’s roster. And more over, by the time they’re 20, most good european players have already signed their first contract so the pool of quality amateurs is very restricted over here.

    Besides, when the best athletes aren’t involved, the level of interest for the event drops considerably. The Olympic soccer tournament, for example, is an afterthought in Europe. Why? Because we send our 21 and Under national teams there. Sure Messi and the Argentines won the all thing but how much top level talent was there in China exactly?

  • juan H.

    guys, i just want to let you know what happens in soccer.

    clubs vs national teams is the dilemma.

    while soccer is more of a globalized sport than the NBA and the clubs are forced by FIFA (the international entity) to lend their players to for their national teams for international competitions.

    the NBA is just behind in this topic and everything is too americanized.

    what ends up happening in case a player is injured while playing for its national team? well the national team is in charged of playing part of his contract to the club….but im sure they insure their players before the games.

  • NL

    I think, like anything else, it should be part of the player’s contractual agreement. If the player and the organization know up front what the player can and can’t do, it’s best for both the owners and the players.

    This could even change the incentive structures of contracts. Owners may be willing to give more money to those players who willingly state they will not play for their country. If owners are taking the risk that they get hurt, then they could pay them less. Some may argue that’s not fair, but this is a business, and players opt in to contracts, they are not forced into them.

    It’s all about trade offs - I think we could let the market determine what they can and cannot do, just like they do for riding motorcycles, etc.

  • NL

    sorry, you made that point already. in any event, i concur.

  • Latin_D

    Hm, I came in ready to speak my part on this debate, and then I read Will’s comment. I agree 100% with him, so now all I have left is nod along.

    We’ve had this discussion many, many times in PtR. The cultural divide you mention is even bigger than you think: in Argentina if Manu refused to play for the national team during the Olympics some would’ve called him “traitor”. It’s ridiculous, but sports are regarded differently here. Manu Ginobili was as much a product of the Argentinian league as of the national team. He grew playing with the same 10 guys for Argentina all over the world, so I imagine that quitting is particularly difficult for him, especially when many of them are still playing out the last years of their careers decked in light blue and white. Very few care in Argentina about the Spurs, but everyone will always remember Manu’s last second shot versus Serbia and Montenegro in the Olympics. He earned the gratitude of his entire country that day, and that’s something a player from the USA won’t ever experience.

    Anyway. The situation will change if more and more foreign players join the league. We’ve had a German MVP now - when half of the league has to play in different Olympic teams, the media and the fans will pay attention and start caring. That’s my theory, at least.

  • zainn

    I think Poppovich should encourage George Hill to play internationally in the offseason even though he’s American if he can. It will speed up his process into elite status as a combo guard in the nba. And this comment thread is intense man it took me about 20 full minutes to just read the article and the comment. great ya’ll

  • buns

    The comparison between basketball and football (meaning soccer) is interesting — so is the cultural differences, by the way.
    The only thing that prevent basketball to handle those kind of problems like football does is that FIFA really rules football, and the sanctions they inflict to clubs that don’t let their players go to NTs are heavy.
    FIBA is way far from such a position. The NBA is too powerful for FIBA to impose anything.

  • http://www.48minutesofhell.com Timothy Varner

    Latin_D,

    And of course Manu being branded a traitor is a financial loss for him. If he’s hated, his sneakers won’t sell so well back home.

  • Justin

    Perhaps an apt comparison could be made to international soccer. The biggest players in the world play year-round for their national teams. Everyone involved is certainly mindful of the travel and the possibility for injury, but you don’t often hear complaints to this effect.

  • Bill

    I agree with NL. There is no need to have a uniform solution that is supposed to fit all. Let the contract negotiations spell it out. If the NBA imposes a blanket rule that no player can play for their national team, it will make it more difficult for players to choose to jump to the NBA.

    The NBA can help, though, by being more flexible. In order to make it easier to recruit overseas players, they need to adjust the cap rules. If a player is injured, an insurance policy could cover the financial loss, but the team should get cap relief to bring in some help if that happens.

    With those types of changes, I can see players that are adamant about playing for their national team accepting a lower salary for that concession. The NBA team could use the savings to purchase insurance against his injury. Then, if the player gets hurt, the team should at least have the salary space cleared from the cap calculation so they can bring in someone else to replace him. If they feel strongly enough about the situation, a clause of the contract could be that, if the player is injured in non-NBA play, the team can void the contract altogether.

    A player who is not so adamant about playing for his national team may be willing to accept a bump in salary for his concession.

    There are all sorts of things that can be done. Contracts could be tailored for specific players, with their specific wants and needs, and for specific organizations with their wants and need.

  • Latin_D

    Hm. Well, I’m sure it’d be a financial loss for him in terms of ads and commercials - we really don’t have that sneakers craze in Argentina. But your point still stands.

    Still, considering how rich he already is, I imagine public opinion is more important than a few more millions at this point in his career.

  • Will

    Bill (and NL), you can of course decide to let the market play out, but this discussion is mostly about stars, not role players, and I can pretty much guarantee that Cuban would have been ready to outbid everybody else to sign Dirk just the same whether Dirk had included a clause that he would play for the German NT or not. In a way I feel some owners are using the NBA directive as a scapegoat (business as usual) but would have done the exact same thing even if the rules had been different (except they wouldn’t have been in a position to complain).

    In a way I think there’s a huge communication problem too - it should have been Dirk saying he wasn’t going to go to the Euro, and giving whatever excuses he wants - not Cuban who now looks like an inhibitor.

    From another point of view I would seriously reconsider the motivation of any player who would choose to opt out of national team play for more money. As has been pointed out many times, if you want to have the best competitors in one field you can’t ask of them to be competitive one day and not the next - these guys step up to the next challenge, whatever it may be.

    Finally as you pointed out a flat out rule that NBA players can’t play for their home country would have quite a few consequences, including a battle with FIBA that would leave pretty much everyone in a worse situation than right now. Look at the number of young players in Europe who don’t even WANT to come play in the NBA after being drafted, often because of the rookie scale or the fact that they’ve been pros for many many years before being drafted, unlike US players - but also because it’s just more appealing to play for a top Euro team than for the bottom of the NBA (which is actually the majority of franchises right now). The NBA has a good product but it’s definitely not as dominating as it once was either.

  • Robby

    Alot of discussions and great points had been made… as for NBA players being allowed to play Internationally, I think the normal answer will be YES!

    Most Players from different countries take pride in representing their country and they want it to have the best lineup/talent as possible. (even the US assembles teams of allstars right).

    For the sake of patriotism and respect for the game it should be this way….

    Now NBA owners might not all agree (they are paying alot of money for these stars). But when they signed them to a contract, they know that there is that possibility (Playing for the country)…

    Injuries happen along the way and players also don’t wan’t them to happen it is a thing that is sometimes beyond our (players and owners alike..) control.

    Now one can argue that with rest (instead of playing competitive basketball) a potential injury might not happen (as in Manu’s case). But the reality is Injuries can happen all the time and If you are a player with great skills and talent and you’d love to represent your country how would you feel if it is denied?

    Ultimately, I think ? I should always be the players’ prerogative because:

    1. He knows his body more than anyone.

    2. Despite playing Internationally, a player would
    always have the caution to take care of himself.
    (He knows that skills and talent is the product
    he sells and has to take care of it)

    3. No one should deny anybody the honor, pride
    and great feeling of competing for your own
    country…

    (Did you guys see how happy Argentina celebrated when they won the Gold?… those are moments that money can’t buy…)

  • Diego

    a lot of good points.
    I think the reason they dont negotiate it in the contracts is that Stern understands that
    a) International exposure means more revenue for the league
    and
    b) in the end the players that get chosen for the olympics/NT play are the best players and they would have all the leverage.
    and
    c) ultimately you have to understand those best players are the best precisely because they are basketball junkies and want to compete all the time. would you rather a player that second guesses his body, or one that plays through it?

    I mean, is it really much better for an owner to have a player injured playing “for him” than for their country? they still lose that player and worse probably dont have insurance for the contract (which they require for internationals). injuries suck, but they happen. Its a physical sport with a long season.
    in the end the current system works fine. teams know which players are hurt/fragile and which arent. whether they play for their NT shouldnt affect their worth as employees, and Im 99.99% sure that players like Lebron, Kobe, Gino and Dirk would always be able to get an equal offer from another team without the “no olympics” clause.

  • David

    Did anybody worry about Magic, Jordan, Bird etc etc etc getting injured on the first Dream Team?
    I don´t think so! And the risk was the same.
    So think if you want the U.S team to be a second level team, as every time U.S sends second level players.
    The players that already reached the top spots on their professions play in their national teams, not for money but for reasons of the heart.
    Everyone wants their team stars to have a huge heart, the difference shows in crucial playoff games.
    The price of that kind of players is that you have to take a risk, as they will give themselves away for what they love, not only for their NT but also for wanting to play for their teams even when injured.

  • Pingback: 48 Minutes of Hell » Blog Archive » Ordering the Acronyms: Are FIBA and FIFA Useful Analogues?()

  • Pingback: Links and Thoughts » Boston Celtics Basketball - Celtics news, rumors and analysis - CelticsHub.com()

  • Andrew

    I was wondering, if anyone knows, is there a penalty ie fee or something like that that the players get charged if they get hurt while playing for another team? I personally dont care if they play for other teams during the off season because it could help their game but the bad side is that overall it also takes a toll on their bodies. If there is no penalty imposed right now then i feel if they get hurt and only if it ends up effecting the season then why dont they get charged for it after all they are getting paid to perform. Once again i am only refering to injuries that effect the players season not injuries that they can heal from in a couple of weeks.

  • http://fundamentally-sound.blogspot.com Jaceman

    I find that average US fans are generally very spoiled because of the plethora of talent that the US has to offer. While countries like Argentina and Spain are gaining ground in fielding impressive basketball talent, the cream-of-the-crop still resides in the US. However, the disrespect US has for foreign games, fueled by the dominance of the Dream Teams from 1992 through 1996 (even maybe to 2000) has a lot of fans seeing things through a skewed lens. As always Tim, I greatly appreciate your insight on this matter, and find that what you bring up is always well thought out and well-written.

    First, when we look at the Redeem Team, we see the best of the best, spearheaded by Dwayne Wade, LeBron James, and Carmelo Anthony, anchored by Kobe Bryant and Jason Kidd, I mean, the “worst” player on the team is arguably Carlos Boozer or Tayshaun Prince. These are all, well-known household names, generally icons for whatever NBA franchise they play for, usually one of the best players on whatever franchise they play for. If one of the members couldn’t play due to injury, we go down the list and call up Caron Butler or something. Even if we look at the list of players not playing we see the likes of Kevin Garnett and Tim Duncan. One of the most common excuses I’ve heard is that because other teams like France don’t have as many superstars, the superstars (like Tony Parker or Dirk Nowitzki) have to work that much harder, whereas with Team USA everyone works easier than they normally do. Beyond showing a certain level of disrespect to international competition, the excuse leveled doesn’t curtail the simple risk of getting on the basketball court. That is why I greatly appreciate the hypothetical example of Jerry Buss pulling Kobe Bryant out of the Redeem Team to rest him. What would US fans think of that?

    The second issue is the inherent assumption that basketball players don’t play basketball if it’s not in official leagues. Certainly the level of play is different, but the inherent risk of jumping in pickup games is the same as stepping onto a court during international play, I would argue more dangerous because it isn’t really organized. A lot of players play pick-up games with each other, and run the equal risk of pulling a muscle, landing on an ankle funny, or taking a charge the wrong way as they would in any sort of organized international competition. Are we now to say that LeBron can’t play pickup games in his own camp? He can’t touch a basketball at all during the offseason?

    It’s a fairly ridiculous comparison, but to me, it’s kind of like asking teachers not to travel during summer vacation because they might come back too tired and drained to effectively teach their students when the school year starts back up. I have yet to see a school board enforce something like that, but somehow when it comes to entertainment in the form of sports owners feel compelled to bubble-wrap their superstars? Certainly there is a risk of Tony Parker playing internationally, he doesn’t have a Tim Duncan to take some of the offensive load and attract the opposition’s defense. There certainly is a risk of Tony Parker not playing too that no one talks about, that being that he feels like he’s letting his country down and thereby mopes through the entire season, having his performance suffer drastically, it runs both ways.

    Owners I think need to remember they own the team and the contracts, not the players. This is a good point that fans need to remember too. What would you do if your employer suddenly told you; “You can’t do x, y, and z on your vacation because it might impair your performance when you get back.” Certainly there are rules built into the contract, like mopeds and motorcycles and things, but remember this, players like the rest of us are people too.

  • Pingback: The Frenchness of Tony Parker | 48 Minutes of Hell()

  • Pingback: Ordering the Acronyms: Are FIBA and FIFA Useful Analogues?()

  • Pingback: The Frenchness of Tony Parker()