Yesterday Forbes Magazine released their annual list of the NBA’s most valuable NBA franchises, and to the surprise of anyone that has ever played Dr. James Naismith‘s game of basketball, or follows the NBA, the New York Knickerbockers topped the list, again.
What? Are you kidding me? How can they honestly say that the Knicks are the most valuable franchise? Haven’t we already learned that they are without a doubt the worst franchise in the history of professional sports because they completely lack value?
The goal here is to win games folks. A poorly performing team in an expensive stadium selling overpriced tickets can only stay in business for so long. That kind of value will never survive in the free market. Not even in New York.
I think the most telling statistic they provide is the “wins-to-player cost ratio”. The Knicks scored a ratio of 30. Sounds alright. Then compare that to the rest of the top-five ranked teams. The Lakers ratio is 170, the Bulls 75, Pistons 173 and Cavs 106. Even the last-ranked Milwaukee Bucks have a wins-to-player cost ratio of 60.
If they wanted to make the argument that the Knicks are the most costly team, I’d back that up 100%. But most valuable? Come on, that’s absurd.
If Forbes is the Business and News publication that they claim to be, they need to take a look at these professional sports organizations with the same eyes they look over the business world with. Think of Stephon Marbury and Jerome James as “toxic assets”, just like all the ones so many banks have been found to have. When a bank like Citigroup, Inc. is found to have a heaping pile of steaming bad mortgages on their books, they do something like lose 75% of their value over a twelve month period. So how is it that the Knicks have at least two players that are now known to be worth pennies on the dollar of their contracts, and still remain to be the top-ranked team, for fourth straight year?
As Mark Jackson would say, Forbes, “you’re better than that.”