NBA Lockout 2011: Suits V. Shorts, Part III: The Decision

As fans, we are constantly reminded by professional athletes that professional sports are indeed businesses in which success and the almighty dollar reign supreme. That's why we can't take it personal when Player X leaves our favorite team in favor of more money elsewhere, or when Lebron James flees town in order to chase rings more easily. These guys have mouths to feed, entourages to support, and brands to legitimize. It's just a business, man, and to varying degrees, these athletes are all individual businessmen who are driven and motivated by the bottom line. We accept it, and the older we get, the less personal we take these business decisions.

With that said, I find it extremely hypocritical that so many NBA writers and fans are siding with the players and blaming the owners for the lockout, which has shut down the league and is threatening the 2011-12 season. Now, I understand that many of the writers and talking heads that cover the league have their own personal agendas and are fearful of alienating or pissing off the players they cover. But honestly, how can anyone demonize the owners for treating the NBA like the money-making business it is just as the players do?

It's just hypocritical to do so when you consider that the purpose behind every business entity, regardless of scope or size, is to become as successful and profitable as possible. Nobody decides to operate—or become involved with—a business to fail and lose money because that's just stupid and doesn't make sense. That's just Business 101, and you're welcome for the lesson.

The owners, if you believe them, are claiming to have lost a collective $300 million last year with 22 of the 30 franchises operating in the red. Meanwhile, the average salary for NBA players is just over $4.5 million, the highest in all of professional sports. It doesn't take a genius to realize that the owners are getting the short end of the straw in this whole thing, particularly when you consider how badly they got burned in the CBA following the last lockout.

Union supporters might point out that the players make the league; fans pay to watch the players play, not to watch the owners own. Therefore, they deserve to be paid lucratively enough to receive 57 percent of all Basketball-Related Income. Furthermore, these union supporters claim that the players shouldn't be punished for bad decisions made by the owners. After all, nobody pointed a gun at the members of the Atlanta Spirit - the group that owns the Hawks - and demanded they sign Joe Johnson to that ridiculous 6-year, $119 million contract, just like nobody forced Knicks' owner James Dolan to give Eddy Curry a $60 million contract.

On the surface, there is truth in both those points.  I don't watch the NBA to watch Mark Cuban bitch at the refs or Dan Gilbert write letters. I watch the NBA to see the basketball skills and athletic abilities of guys like Blake Griffin, Kevin Durant, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James and all the other superstars that make the league great. Of course the players make the league. I'm not disputing this at all.

However, just like it takes both a male and a female to make a baby (at least the old fashioned way), the NBA also needs the owners. It is imperative that they keep these super wealthy men happy and even richer because, like all businesses, there's an established business hierarchy in the NBA, and the owners reside at the top.

After all, the owners are the ones that pay these players their fat ass contracts. It's not like these guys are willing to play for free. They might love the game, but to play in the NBA is a job, and the money from the owners is what they work for.

And as far as the owners being responsible for the hole they put themselves in, I'm not denying that there's definitely some truth within that statement. Like I said previously, several owners have made terrible business decisions that have set their respective franchises back for years to come. However, the owners are the ones that take all the financial risk. If someone decides to give Hedo Turkoglu a five-year, $53 million deal, then Hedo decides to sleepwalk through the first year or so of that contract, it's not like they can take it back. Hedo's still getting paid millions.

Which is why I agree completely with the owners' proposal to do away with the luxury tax and implement a hard cap of $62 million. Not only would that help protect the owners from themselves to a certain extent, but it levels the playing field. The issue becomes not how much money owners are willing to spend, but rather how wisely they spend the available money.

Regardless, the bottom line is that these teams and players are the owners' investment (I did not say property). Since this is America, and not North Korea, the owners have a right to profit off their investments.

After all, the NBA is a business, man, and these owners are all businessmen. Just like the players.