The Best Basketball Players: "Pound Per Pound"

In an article somewhere I've read on line - I'd give it credit, but I honestly can't remember what it was - a WNBA defender spoke about the foolish dismissals of the WNBA where some fool makes the argument because "my favorite NBA team/college team/local high school team could be a WNBA team". The approach to this defense was one I formulated before, but the article beat me to putting it in print.

Namely, that this argument is never made in boxing. Could Vladimir Klitschko beat up Manny Pacquiao? Probably, since Klitschko is physically stronger than Pacquiao and none of Pacquiao's opponents have hit Pacquiao as hard as Klitschko could. In boxing fandom, there is much discussion as to who is the best "pound per pound" fighter - who is the best fighter taking into account the differing weight classes.

As it turns out, we have a nice "one value" metric to assign worth to a ball player - John Hollinger's Player Efficiency Rating, or PER. PER can be calculated for both NBA players and WNBA players. I therefore decided to count NBA PER as essentially equal to WNBA PER. This equalizes male and female basketball players.

For WNBA players, only players who have played more than 5000 career minutes are included. Sorry, Cynthia Cooper. You probably would have been on this list, but the WNBA started too late.

Top PER Values for NBA and WNBA Players
(min 5000 minutes WNBA, min 15000 minutes NBA)

1. Lauren Jackson (28.55)
2. Michael Jordan (27.91)
3. LeBron James (26.86)
4. Tamika Catchings (26.67)
5. David Robinson (26.18)
6. Wilt Chamberlain (26.13)
7. Dwyane Wade (25.67)
8. Yolanda Griffith (25.49)
9. Bob Pettit (25.37)
10. Tim Duncan (25.02)
11. Neil Johnston (24.72)
12. Diana Taurasi (24.67)
13. Charles Barkley (24.63)
14. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (24.58)
15. Lisa Leslie (24.24)
(T) Sheryl Swoopes (24.24)
17. Magic Johnson (24.11)
18. Karl Malone (23.90)
19. Dirk Nowitzki (23.76)
20. Kevin Garnett (23.59)

So is Lauren Jackson better than Michael Jordan? That's up for you to decide. (As for me, go Lauren.)

In the 14th Season

In the 14th season....

..of Major League Baseball (1889) theree were still two leagues - the National League and American Association.

The National League was still an unstable league. The Indianapolis franchise was $30,000 in debt ($700,000 in 2010 money) and ownership basically walked away from their franchise, saying "here you go, league, see if you can make baseball work in Indianapolis". An ownership group led by John T. Brush took over the franchise.

Even big teams like the New York Giants had to face their own humiliations. The City of New York wanted to build new streets through the Polo Grounds. Supporters of the Giants tried to get a bill passed in the New York State legislature that would block the construction, but New York Governor David Hill vetoed the bill after
it passed - the right of a city over its domain was to be respected, regardless of what he thought of the act.

The Giants had to move to Staten Island to the St. George's Cricket Grounds; the right fielder was basically playing on open soil that served as a stage in the off-season.

Players were unhappy with their low pay, and trouble was brewing. John Montgomery Ward was planning on a strike, but was going to hold off - for now. His plan would be to start a brand new league that would give players greater control over their sport. Players were assigned to look for capital, as it were, in their home cities. Later in the season, the players would issue a manifesto. In November, the National League would denounce the manifesto, and the war was on.

In conservative Cincinnati, church was considered more important than baseball, and the Red Stockings were kept twice by police from playing on Sunday. The American Association, founded by brewers, was the Beer and Whiskey league that played on Sunday; the NL was the league that didn't. Cincinnati and Brooklyn jumped from the American Association to the National League. Kansas City left the AA to join the Western League, and then the Baltimore Orioles dropped out, leaving a four-team league. The American Association would be scrambling for teams at the end of the 1889 season.

Particularly damaging was Brooklyn jumping to the National League - the Bridegrooms were the American Association champions! But the American Associations biggest test would come the following year.

In the 14th season....

...of the National Football League (1933), the league decided to split into two divisions following the success of the 1932 playoff game. "Hey! We shouldn't give the championship to whomever finishes at the top of the league! We should have a playoff!" I'm surprised that the league didn't think of this earlier.

There was a lot of NFL franchise movement. Pittsburgh, Philadelphia and Cincinnati joined the league. Staten Island suspended operations for the 1933 season, in hopes of coming back the following year. It didn't happen.

Furthermore, the NFL made a decision to separate itself from the college game. For a long time, both the NFL and big-time college football followed the same rules. Now, there would be new rules. Inbounds lines. Hashmarks. The goal post placed on the goal line. The most important rule was that the forward pass would be legal anywhere behind the line of scrimmage. Before that, one had to be five yards behind the line of scrimmage to throw a legal forward pass.

The year ended with the first real NFL Championship Game, with the Chicago Bears beating the New York Giants 23-21. The title game was still being held in December, weeks before Christmas.

In the 14th season....

...of the National Basketball Association (1959-60), the NBA was doing better than the year before. There was a brand new kid playing in the NBA called Wilt Chamberlain. He was not just the Rookie of the Year, but the Most Valuable Player, sort of the Candace Parker of his era.

However, the Minneapolis Lakers still weren't making money in Minnesota. Given that Bob Short couldn't make basketall work in Minneapolis, and given that Los Angeles was interested, Short relocated the Lakers to Los Angeles. For two years, the Lakers would be all alone out on the West Coast.

And the league was still an eight-team league.

In the 14th season....

...of the WNBA (2010), there will be twelve teams. A new team in Tulsa. I just keep telling myself, "three more months"...!

NBA or WWE?

From Deadspin, one can find excerpts from a book written by disgraced referee Tim Donaghy. The book is called "Blowing the Whistle" and was scheduled to be released by Triumph Books, a subsidiary of Random House. Then the NBA threatened to sue and Random House told Triumph to pull the book.

Some excerpts from the unreleased book:

Relationships between NBA players and referees were generally all over the board-love, hate, and everything in-between. Some players, even very good ones, were targeted by referees and the league because they were too talented for their own good. Raja Bell, formerly of the Phoenix Suns and now a member of the Charlotte Bobcats, was one of those players. A defensive specialist throughout his career, Bell had a reputation for being a "star stopper." His defensive skills were so razor sharp that he could shut down a superstar, or at least make him work for his points. Kobe Bryant was often frustrated by Bell's tenacity on defense. Let's face it, no one completely shuts down a player of Kobe's caliber, but Bell could frustrate Kobe, take him out of his game, and interrupt his rhythm.

You would think that the NBA would love a guy who plays such great defense. Think again! Star stoppers hurt the promotion of marquee players. Fans don't pay high prices to see players like Raja Bell-they pay to see superstars like Kobe Bryant score 40 points. Basketball purists like to see good defense, but the NBA wants the big names to score big points.

If a player of Kobe's stature collides with the likes of Raja Bell, the call will almost always go for Kobe and against Bell. As part of our ongoing training and game preparation, NBA referees regularly receive game-action video tape from the league office. Over the years, I have reviewed many recorded hours of video involving Raja Bell. The footage I analyzed usually illustrated fouls being called against Bell, rarely for him. The message was subtle but clear-call fouls against the star stopper because he's hurting the game.

So what does this have to do with the WNBA, you might ask? Well, one of tne of the reasons that the NBA took off in the 1950s was because of a point-shaving scandal in college basketball. The former college basketball fans couldn't be sure if their games were on the up-and-up, and transferred their allegiances to the NBA.

Anything that causes fans to question the veracity of what they're seeing can cause fans to shift allegiances. (I shifted my allegiance to the WNBA after baseball's steroid scandals.) Fans of competing leagues in the same sport end up benefiting. Men's college basketball, women's college basketball and the WNBA could all come out the winners. It's not that I'm rooting for the a decline in NBA attendance; I'm merely stating that this tends to be the result of sportwide scandals.

One can argue that the WNBA should be free of such chicanery because the stakes are too low. (Then again, with Michael Price behind the whistle, you never know.)

In The 13th Season

In the 13th season....

...of Major League Baseball (1888) there were two leagues - the National League and the American Association. The National League was the "purer" of the two leagues, the AA was the upstart. (Since the American Association was called the "Beer and Whiskey League" what better initials for it than AA?)

The leagues were in direct competition with each other. There were probably too many teams in baseball at the time - there were sixteen - but the AA was still holding on. Each league played each other in what could loosely be called a "World Series" but there was no fixed number of games between the two leagues. Each league was quite happy to poach the other's players when it could.

Already, the AA was instituting cost-cutting measures. There might not have been giveaway tickets, but prices were lowered to 25 cents and visiting teams were denied a percentage of the gate - they simply got a flat $130 for showing up.

There were still franchises in trouble. Oddly enough, the franchise that was in trouble was Detroit of the National League. One reason the AA made the move to limit visiting gate receipts was to kill Detroit - the Wolverines knew the only way they could survive was to sign big stars and hope for a big showing at the gate while on the road. Home attendance wasn't good enough to keep the team alive, and it disbanded after the 1888 season.

Detroit was gone at the end of the year. The National League stole the AA's Cleveland team and the AA replaced that team with one from Columbus.

Oddly enough, not only did the Detroit team disband in the 13th season of Major League Baseball, that Detroit team won the league championship the previous year.

In the 13th season...

...of the National Football League (1932) the fortunes of the NFL were at their lowest ever. In the midst of a Depression, the league had contracted to just eight teams. The previous season, the Frankford Yellow Jackets folded in mid-season. In the off-season, the Providence Steam Rollers and Cleveland Indians called it quits.

Generally, the rule of the previous 12 seasons was that the regular season champion was also the league champion. However, there were a lot of tied football games in those days - the Bears finished 6-1-6 - and the championship was given by winning percentage with ties excluded. Chicago and Portsmouth each finished 6-1 (not counting ties) and rather that split the title the NFL decided to have a playoff game.

Unfortunately, it couldn't be played at Wrigley Field due to severely cold weather. It was moved indoors to Chicago Stadium, which wasn't large enough for a full-sized football field. In spite of that, the idea of a playoff game was very popular.

You could say that the playoffs rejuvinated the sport. The following year, the NFL expanded with two more teams.

In the 13th season....

...of the National Basketball Association (1958-59), the league was actually doing very well. However, there was quite a bit of relocation going on, mostly from small cities to big cities. There were still the Minneapolis Lakers and the Philadelphia Warriors. The Celtics finished the year by winning their second NBA championship. It was only Bill Russell's third year as a Celtic, and Bob Cousy was still with the squad.

Looks good doesn't it? Oh by the way, the size of the NBA in 1958-59? Eight teams.

At the end of the 13th season....

...of the WNBA (2009)...it looks like there will be a 14th season to follow.

NBA Clubs Not Required to Contribute to WNBA

From Sportsbiz - The Business of Sports Illuminated:

Forest City Enterprises, the majority owner of the New Jersey/Brooklyn Nets is a public company, with its stock traded on the New York Stock Exchange (FCE.A). As a result, its recent 10-K/A filed with the SEC last week in connection with the sale of the Nets to Russian oligarch Mikhail Prokhorov, provides us with the most detailed look to date into the financial affairs of a NBA team.

The post gives some ideas of operating an NBA team like the New Jersey Nets. This paragraph is particularly interesting:

There are four NBA subsidiaries reflected in the financials: NBA Media Ventures, Planet Insurance, WNBA Holdings and NBDL Holdings. Two things related to these struck me. The club received distributions of $3.5 million, $5 million and $5.2 million in 2009, 2008 and 2007 respectively, and the Nets are not required to contribute any funding to the operations of any subsidiary. That tells me that either they are all making money or the league is using league-wide revenues to fund any deficit incurred by the WNBA or the NBDL.

Some greater detail: In the financial documents submitted, there is a section called "Investments in NBA-Related Entities". These entities include:

* NBA Media Ventures (LLC)
* Planet Insurance Ltd.
* National Basketball Association
* WNBA Holdings (LLC)
* NBDL Holdings (LLC)

The Nets own 3.4 percent of all of these entities. (Each of the 30 clubs in the NBA appears to own an equal piece.) The Nets contributed to only two of these entities: NBA Media Ventures ($6.5 million in 2008, $7.8 million in 2009) and in Planet Insurance ($240K in 2008, $190 K in 2009). The Nets contributed nothing to either the WNBA or NBDL.

Basically, these limited liability companies don't have to pay certain taxes and can distribute profits (if any) any way they want to. The WNBA Holdings LLC might be a temporary company. But in any case, the Nets aren't contributing anything to it.

Which means that clubs can decide whether they want to support the WNBA or not. This implies that the money from the NBA - if there is any - is coming from somewhere else in the budget, and not from NBA ticket holders or the clubs. (The same is true for the NBDL). So for those who want to claim that their ticket costs for NBA games are going to the WNBA, they can be set straight.

WNBA Game Explained to NBA Fans

Someone named "Stop-n-Pop" on the Canis Hoopus blog - a blog devoted to the NBA Timberwolves - begins a blog post with:

"One of the big goals for this site over the summer is to build some interest in the women's game, specifically the Minnesota Lynx. It will never cease to amaze me that the women's professional game does not have a greater following."

The post is primarily directed to NBA fans and details the differences between the NBA game and the WNBA game. He speaks with Jim Petersen, television commentator and assistant coach for the Lynx:

"The women don't rely on dunking and the 3 pointer or backing people into the deep post," continues Petersen. "They are more true to the pass and cut game which is predicated on ball movement and player movement. So often in the NBA you'll see a point guard dribble to the sideline and run a pick and roll and that's it. In the women's game you'll see a ton of weakside action that is just as important as the initial strongside action and I'm amazed at how good the players are with this type of game."

I must admit that I used the post for a different purpose than it was written - since I don't watch the NBA, the post told me about how the NBA works as well.

"Continuity basketball means that there is not just a single option, or a quick hitter. There are 2nd and 3rd options built into the playsets and you just don't see that in the NBA all that much. In the NBA you'll see the defense broken down on a pass or two. In the WNBA they might not play the greatest defense at all times but you may have to get to a 2nd or 3rd option in order to score."

It's a great post, and it's worth a read.

The Phoenix Lifelock - A Proud Tradition

Scott Ostler over at the San Francisco Chronicle brings some historic perspective with regards to the Phoenix Lifelock and Los Angeles Farmers:

"Memo to knee-jerk WNBA haters laughing at the Phoenix Mercury and L.A. Sparks for wearing a sponsor on their jerseys, instead of team-name/city: It's a grand tradition. The Detroit Pistons began in Fort Wayne, Ind., as the Zollner Pistons, named for their owner and his business. Also in the NBL, no joke, were the Akron Firestone Non-Skids, the Akron Goodyear Wingfoots and the Toledo Jim White Chevrolets."

I don't think they were laughing so much as they were terrified, like a bunch of old people yelling at the girls to Get Off Their Lawn.

Can You Be a Fan of the WNBA and Not of the NBA?

While following the various Twitter feeds, the talk turns to basketball. Many WNBA fans are distracted by the NBA Playoffs, which have finished their first round and are now moving into the conference semi-finals. WNBA fans talk about the amazing Boston-Chicago series which went a full seven games. Players like Chamique Holdsclaw and longtime reporters of women's basketball Twitter away regarding their observations during the NBA playoffs.

This begs the question: "can a person be a fan of the WNBA and not a fan of the NBA?"

The answer: yes. Because I'm one of those people. The real question should be, "how many WNBA fans are not NBA fans?"

As a side note, I read the Got Man Answers blog while looking for WNBA info. (There's no point in visiting, I just wanted to be able to point to a site.) The author "Man Answers" (or "Manswers") wishes to be the arbitrer of All Things Masculine, a Petronius of the frat. Someone asks him if one can still be "manly" (I suppose) and know about the LPGA. The author replies that the only way you can avoid losing manliness points is if:

a) you are a fan of the corresponding male event, or
b) you have a daughter, friend or relative on the team.

The telling quote:

It's ok for a man to love women's sports, but never at a level exceeding his love for the same men's sport, unless a loved one is a participant or social deviant terrorists are involved.

If that's not the definition of chauvinism - "extreme partisanship" - there isn't one. The word "chauvinism" would become officially devoid of meaning, to be replaced with "wiksdgo" or "fnord". The excuse would be that such a "manly man" (I can't help but laugh; the men who seek manliness search to fill an infinite void) would give for watching an WNBA game is that he loves basketball so much that his love even spills out to clearly inferior sports like the WNBA. To such a specimen, all I can say hope he got his cootie shot before the Liberty and Sparks tip off.

Here's the problem: I've tried to watch the NBA, but I'm just not a fan. Everything the haters say about the WNBA - that's it's dull, boring, predictable - applies to the NBA, but for different reasons.

* The season takes friggin forever. The regular season is virtually meaningless - I recently read Phil Jackson's latest book and he pretty much says so. To paraphrase PJ: "the regular season record would be nice for our fans, but we just want to get into the playoffs". With so many games, playoff contenders can build an insurmountable lead, and then phone it in from February onwards. If the players don't care about the outcomes of the games, why should I care? The WNBA's 34 game season is much more thrilling than the 82-going-on-250 game season of the NBA.

* The game takes friggin forever. I just don't have patience for 12-minute quarters. Ten, yes, twelve, no. That extra eight minutes is stretched to at least thirty minutes by fouls, commercials, and various time-out related activities. Why does every NBA game I watch appear to be The Most Boring Thing Ever?

* No one seems to play much defense. Hell, no one seems to even know how the game is played. One guy carries the ball, and stuffs it in with a dunk that looks...well, pretty much like every other dunk I've ever seen. (I have never figured out what is so amazing about dunking. Even supposedly spectacular dunks look pedestrian to me.) Sometimes, it's a one-handed dunk. Sometimes, it's a two-handed dunk. (When they do a three-handed dunk, wake me up.) The team might only have two designated scorers; anyone else touches the ball apparently by accident, shooting only when the 24-second clock is about to expire.

While this is going on, a half-hearted attempt at defense is usually attempted by the opposing team. I think four players - two on offense, two on defense - could walk off the court and no one would notice they were missing.

* Height simply dominates the game. Friend-o, a man who is six feet eight inches tall and can dunk a basketball is not interesting. It would be much more interesting if he was a tall, powerful specimen who couldn't dunk the ball. That would at least make him a character. The WNBA detractors say the rims in the women's game should be lowered; I counter that the men's rims should be raised. It's easy to shoot three percentage points better when you're a friggin foot closer to the basket from height alone.

Oh. But then they couldn't dunk so easily, now could they? Well, never mind then.

* I don't really like any of the players. Most of this is due to the preferential treatment they were given since seventh grade, which has caused some sort of free-standing ego disease.

* Anyone who might be a hero is cleaned up to the point of irrelevance by the NBA marketers. The NBA doesn't have heroes, it has salesmen. Yes, LeBron James is a great athlete, but his athleticism isn't enough to compel me to watch him. I don't know who he is or what he represents in the most existential sense of the term. He's an okay pitch-man. He can move product. He can score large numbers of points on the basketball court. But where does LeBron stand in relevance to me? What is LeBron James besides his athletic skill?

So there it is. My horrible secret. I just don't like the NBA. Maybe someone can enlighten me as to how I can approach the conundrum that is the NBA differently, but there you go. If this means I have to turn in my man-badge, well sheriff, you can find it on my desk. I'm keeping the gun. And as the saying goes, I don't need no stinkin' badges.

NBA Tix Sales Flat; WNBA Considering Corporate Logos

She's the Real Thing!

At the Sports Business Journal (paysite), there is an article about how basketball has been able to keep its revenue flat, usually by deep discounting of tickets.

Even though six of the thirteen WNBA clubs are independently owned from the NBA, both detractors and well-wishers look to the health of the NBA for a sense of the health of the WNBA.

Part of the reason that sales are good is because most of the NBA's sales were made before the recession hit. If the recession continues into 2010, we'll soon learn whether the experience of seeing an NBA game is enough to get teams to dig down into their wallets.

The biggest gains at the gate:

New Orleans Hornets: 20.3 percent
Indiana Pacers: 17.5 percent
Philadephia 76ers: 7.0 percent

The biggest drops at the gate:

Sacramento Monarchs: 10.2 percent
Washington Wizards: 7.8 percent
Miami Heat: 6.4 percent

Teams in bold are in cities that also have WNBA franchises. Oddly enough, Washington is probably one of the healthiest WNBA franchises around. The Mystics backers have a lot of money and are willing to spend it. Furthermore, the WNBA team that is on the watch list is the one in Indianapolis. It's not that the Simons don't have money, but its that they're complaining about leaving Indiana unless Indianapolis gives them the same kind of sweetheart deal that the city gave the Colts - and it looks like the Fever is simply hostage to the negotiations.

On News Google, one can only read a sentence or two of articles behind the "pay wall" at Sports Business News - the disappointment comes when you click the link and all you get is a sales pitch. This was one sentence from such a "for-pay" article at SBN:

Now we hear the WNBA is shopping a deal (or deals) under which corporate logos would be sold on the league's game uniforms. The WNBA has not sold such a ...

Frankly, I'm not shaking in my boots. European player uniforms are bedecked with corporate sponsorship. If wearing Coca-Cola's logo keeps the Dream in Atlanta for a few more years, well, "Things go better with Coke!"

UPDATE: The ever-resourceful RebKellians found a free link to the article quoted above. The consensus at RebKell is approval if it ever comes to selling logos on uniforms; I concur.

Even the NBA Must Suffer

From BusinessWorldOnline:

LONDON — The National Basketball Association will play only two preseason games in Europe this year, including one between the Chicago Bulls and the Utah Jazz in October, NBA Commissioner David Stern said yesterday.

Last year four European three season games were played. If this keeps up, the players are going to have to put wholesale whitewalls on their Bentleys.

NBA Losing More Money than WNBA

David Stern, head of NBA, patron of the WNBA, and Lord High Wizard of All in Basketball just stated something that might turn conventional wisdom on its ear - if anyone listens to it.

With the NBA quivering under the winds of our recession/depression, Stern was asked about the health of the WNBA:

"The NBA is far less profitable than the WNBA," he said. We're losing a lot of money amongst a large number of teams. We're budgeting the WNBA to break even this year."

Now that's a stunner. Although it's not hard to believe. NBA tickets are more expensive than WNBA tickets, and NBA depends a lot more on corporate sponsorships whereas the WNBA depends more on gate receipts.

Next time some jock commenter says that the WNBA is losing money...tell 'em David Stern sent ya. (/smile)

Basketball Fans Interviewed about the W

Jason Burke on Vimeo talks about how he likes the NBA and doesn't like the WNBA. He decided to interview three people who watched the NBA (at least occasionally) and asked them about their feelings regarding the WNBA.

The blog link is here where you can read his inital comments about the process. It inspires me to grab my own camera and see what people think about the W.


NBA vs WNBA from Jason Burke on Vimeo.

WNBA Not Only League Feeling Economic Pinch

This article is from Outsports, a gay sports site. Perhaps not safe for work, if you/your employer is squeamish about OH N OES TEH GAY!!1!

It looks like both the NFL and NBA are starting to feel the pain as well. The NFL is "rightsizing" 15 percent of its staff in an effort to save $50 million dollars. The NBA is "eliminating redundancies" in the name of 80 employees. Even in the middle of the season, it looks like intake != outflow where it comes to cash.

I wonder how many of baseball's minor league franchises will survive.

NBA Attendance Numbers Begin to Sag

There's a story at YaHoo! Sports about how NBA teams are seeing noticable declines in attendance. One commenter proposes the following theory, with which I agree.

1. Yuppie fans are flush with money, can pay high ticket prices and prices for merchandising, which leads to
2. ...an increase in the NBA's operating costs and salaries.
3. The financial crisis hits, and yuppies have better ways to spend their money.
4. However, NBA teams have to generate revenue based on an earlier financial model. They assumed these free-spending yuppies would always be there. In order to raise more revenue, they....
5. ...raise ticket prices.
6. This drives the "financially marginal fans" out. The "financially marginal fans" are the ones most sensitive to ticket prices, which leads to....
7. ...notable decreased attendance at NBA games.

First, yuppies generally don't go to WNBA games. The purpose of a yuppie is not to watch the game, but to be seen by the power elite. Since a NBA (and not a WNBA) franchise is a massive vanity purchase, it's more likely that the power elite would be at an NBA game and not an WNBA game. You're more likely to see a) lesbians, b) ordinary families bringing their daughters and sons, and c) women's basketball fanatics - these groups can overlap by the way - than the elite in the audience at a WNBA game. The disappearance of the yuppie contigent would have less impact on the W than on the NBA.

Second, the salary cap in the WNBA isn't that large. Hell, it's only around $1 million dollars. This is the cost of two replacement NBA players, neither having any NBA experience. I'm sure that most of the money involved in running a WNBA franchise is in operating costs, and not salaries. Unless NBA teams sharing arenas with WNBA teams attempt to charge more in arena operating rents to make up their decreased incomes, that shouldn't change.

Third, WNBA fans don't pay much in ticket prices compared to their NBA counterparts. Rises in ticket prices would hit them more proportionally than the rise in NBA tickets - remember the concept of "utility" in ECON 101?
There are probably more financially marginal fans in the WNBA. It's a game that people without a lot of money (but a lot of heart) can affordably attend.

Either one or two things would happen - either a rise in WNBA tix prices would drive out the marginal fans, or the cost of the rise would be so much smaller (compared to a similar percentage rise of a NBA team's tickets) that the WNBA fan would be more willing to pay the difference. The NBA has basically priced poor and middle class fans out of attending games; WNBA fans that aren't making $100 K a year can actually afford tickets.

Fourth, WNBA fans are probably more...uh...fanatical than NBA fans. There's the joke among WNBA fans that you can't give away WNBA tickets to your friends...because your friends are also season ticket holders. WNBA fandom is a real labor of love, and I think the community there is a bit tighter. The yuppies can take a casual attitude toward game attendance; WNBA fans arrange their whole evening around it.

In the NBA, the price is above the quality of the product. In the WNBA, the price is either at quality or below the product quality - in which case, you get a bang for your buck.

In this recession/depression/deflation, will the WNBA be taking a financial hit? Yes. Everyone will be taking a financial hit, particularly sports like the WNBA. But as a commenter at RebKell put it, "The WNBA will be the first to feel the pain...but the NBA will be doing all of the hemorrhaging."

WNBA: Better Than the NBA?

nickv1025 over at RebKell posts the following for comparison.

For the 12th season:
WNBA
Games played: 34
Teams: 14
Semi Finals Series: 3 Games
Conf Finals Series: 3 Games
Finals: 5 Games
Average Attendance: 7,918

NBA
Games played: 72
Teams: 8
Semi Finals Series: 3 Games
Conf Finals Series: 7 Games
Finals: 7 Games
Average Attendance: 4,824

For 13th season:
NBA
Games played: 72
Teams: 8
Semi Finals Series: 3 Games
Conf Finals Series: 7 Games
Finals: 7 Games
Average Attendance: 5,077

(* * *)

Of course, comparing two different leagues over a span of fifty years of time is like comparing apples and oranges. But like I said in an earlier post, "one statistic doesn't mean everything". Think about this the next time some one throws attendance stats at you to knock the W.

P. S. I wonder how much those NBA attendance stats were being...inflated.

P. P. S. The W had a better field goal percentage than the nascent NBA when comparing 12th seasons. The same for comparing 13th seasons.

The NBA: "Boy, They Sure Can Jump!"

There's an article from Rethinking Basketball where Cheryl Ford criticizes the men's game, claiming that the NBA's game is simply about who can jump the highest. (This post started as a comment to his blog, but his commenting system is temporarily broken.)

Can't see the video, because I'm at work. However, the linked article is an interesting look at NBA Combines. The WNBA also holds such combines.

It seems that the NBA has borrowed the worst idea from the NFL -- that of the combine. I suspect that the general managers of big-money pro sports are so terrified about making a bad decision that their philosophy is "measure everything we can possibly measure, and something good will come of it". Millions of dollars are at stake, you know.

Thus in football you get all this emphasis on the Wonderlic and vertical leap and speed in the 40, all of which are atomized skills that could only serve as parts of a big picture, but there's no way to know how -- or if -- they'll work in combination. (If speed were all it took to make a great wide receiver, we'd be singing the praises of Renaldo Nehemiah even in 2008.)

I also believe that since NBA players are naturally taller and stronger than WNBA players, brute force is at a greater premium in the NBA than in the WNBA. There's always the hope that some draftee's strength and power will be enough to give him an edge over his future opponents if his comprehension of team defense, ball handling, or essential skills is lacking. (I still can't figure out why Lebron's dunkalicious dunks don't get stopped mid-dunk by a punch to the stomach, unless the NBA *really* doesn't know how to play defense.)

However, in the WNBA -- where it's rarer for one player to be physically dominant over the others -- team play skills are at a higher premium.

Q also suggested the idea of promoting the sport through mock WNBA drafts. Hey, I'm game for a mock WNBA draft! There are all kinds of WNBA blogs out there, so how do we make this happen in '09?

"You Can't Handle the Truth!"

This is an article by Jay Mariotti, of all people about the NBA potentially fixing games through injudicious instructions to referees.

When I read stuff like this, I think, "You know, the WNBA has to take a lot of crap from people. But think about it.

"Because the Las Vegas oddsmakers don't know the game, no one bets big money on it -- Las Vegas lines aren't even PERMITTED to take bets greater than $500 because they're afraid that WNBA fans know the game better than the bookies do.

"Because the jock/fratboy sports media expresses open contempt for the W, they want series to be shortened, not expanded. (Hell, they want the entire league to disappear.)

"Therefore, whatever you think of the WNBA's refereeing, at least as a WNBA fan I can sleep soundly knowing that WNBA president Donna Orender isn't leaning on anyone to fix games. You might not like WNBA basketball, jack, but at least our games are on the up-and-up."