Sun Sentinel Palm Beach Edition
Awards could alter offseason
Latest twist to NBA free agency could be media driven
WASHINGTON
— I won’t be voting for the NBA’s postseason awards this year, and I’m not sure how any team beat writer, or media member, still can, in light of the changing landscape and impact of the process.
To refresh: Under the collective-bargaining agreement that will be in place in time for this summer’s free agency, certain awards will factor into players being eligible for massive salary increases from their current teams. Among the awards factoring into the process are Most Valuable Player, Defensive Player of the Year and the three All-NBA teams.
For example, based on the new salary calculus, if Indiana Pacers forward Paul George makes firstsecondor third-team All-NBA, he would be eligible for a super-max contract of about $212 million over six years from the Pacers this summer. That’s compared to otherwise being eligible for a maximum contract of four years at $123 million from other teams next summer, one that would make it easier for outside teams to make competitive bids.
Although it would not impact his status this summer as a free agent, if Utah Jazz forward Gordon Hayward receives such AllNBA status, he could wait for a 2018 free-agency splash when the split between a return to the Jazz or an outside signing would be even more disparate than that with George.
This has been an ongoing debate for years, such media involvement, including the years I participated in the process. But it is one thing for a player to earn a contract bonus for a postseason award. And it is one thing in voting for the Hall of Fame in various sports and whether the media should both cover and reward. But such votes do not impact the competitive balance of the sport.
This, however, is different.
For example, a media member in Indianapolis voting George All-NBA would significantly enhance the Pacers’ chances of retaining George. Or for that matter, by bypassing such a designation, could increase the chances of a free-agency departure.
Similarly, for a voter in an outside market — OK, let’s take Miami — who bypasses such All-NBA designation, it would place the team they cover in an enhanced position to be able to sign such a player (or, by contrast, with an All-NBA vote, reduce the chances).
This has nothing to do with objectivity, credibility, ethics. It is tangibly impacting the potential balance of power. You wouldn’t ask media covering teams to call balls and strikes, fouls, penalties.
And this is not shirking. In the media, you constantly have to weigh opinion against ramifications.
For example, for a photo gallery, I was asked this past week by the Sun Sentinel to rank the NBA’s top centers, as a means of providing a read on the perception of the Heat’s Hassan Whiteside. I placed him fifth.
Wednesday, at the gameday shootaround in Charlotte, Whiteside was asked about potentially leading the NBA in rebounding. He smiled and said it would be meaningful, “especially where Ira ranks me as the fifth best center in the league.”
No issue there. He smiled. I smiled.
Sometimes — actually often these days in the changing media landscape — the job is to offer opinion, accept the ramifications.
But when it plays into potentially impacting the roster construction of a team, even a league, that’s when even the most cogent reasoning becomes misplaced.
For awards that don’t impact free agency, there is no issue with such whimsical debate. But this year the mandate from the NBA to the electorate is vote for all of the awards, or vote for none.
Yes, the NBA has removed team-employed media members from the process this year. But while the cases will remain extremely rare, the reality is the media now will impact the structure of the future of the NBA.
That should be for a designated panel of experts or even metrics to decide, because those who cover the games shouldn’t shape the game.