this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2025
18 points (100.0% liked)
NBA
5626 readers
1 users here now
East - Atlantic |
---|
Boston Celtics |
Brooklyn Nets |
New York Knicks |
Philadelphia Sixers |
Toronto Raptors |
East - Central |
---|
Chicago Bulls |
Cleveland Cavaliers |
Detroit Pistons |
Indiana Pacers |
Milwaukee Bucks |
East - Southeast |
---|
Atlanta Hawks |
Charlotte Hornets |
Miami Heat |
Orlando Magic |
Washington Wizards |
West - Northwest |
---|
Denver Nuggets |
Minnesota Timberwolves |
Oklahoma City Thunder |
Portland Trailblazers |
Utah Jazz |
West - Pacific |
---|
Golden State Warriors |
Los Angeles Clippers |
Los Angeles Lakers |
Phoenix Suns |
Sacramento Kings |
West - Southwest |
---|
Dallas Mavericks |
Houston Rockets |
Memphis Grizzlies |
New Orleans Pelicans |
San Antonio Spurs |
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I’m surprised this isn’t more common. I guess the hefty fines that were imposed previously with the Wolves is a deterrent, but I imagine rich people have ways to pay someone off the books unlike what the Clippers did. Also, occam’s razor: Most owners are cheap and wouldn’t want to pay a dime more than what is officially agreed.
With the exception of the moment you sell it, owning a professional sports team is a giant money sink. The obscenely rich do it for the attention and to rub it in the faces of all their friends. No matter how rich you are, you cannot own an NBA team unless an existing owner wants to sell or unless you pay off the existing owners to allow an expansion team.
Both attention and bragging rights increase the more a team wins. No owner wants to be in a position where they paid a lot to buy a team, have to pay a lot in team payroll, but still lose. If an owner is already heavily invested in a team and sees an opportunity to invest a little bit more for a lot more success, it makes sense to take it.