Why Carmelo Anthony Should Be Banned From Joining the Miami Heat

There are rumors Carmelo Anthony will join the Miami Heat next year. But should he be allowed to?

Jun 14, 2014 at 8:15AM

Will the Miami Heat's Big Three be the Big Four next season? If a recent ESPN report is to be believed, it might. According to the outlet, the 2012 and 2013 NBA champions are interested in Carmelo Anthony, who can become a free agent this summer.

If "Melo," as he is known, were to join LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, and Chris Bosh in Miami, the team could start four potential future Hall of Famers. And assuming Ray Allen comes back, that number would swell to five. Of course, this is only possible if James, Wade, and Bosh agree to a pay cut and Anthony decides to leave the New York Knicks.


Wade (3), James (6), Bosh (1), and other Miami Heat team members on a mural in Miami. Via Alberto Cabello, Flickr.

But it's a mind-blowing scenario to consider, and one that has many fans outside of South Beach questioning its legitimacy. Is it fair? And should Anthony be banned from joining the team?

The parity problem
A growing body of research reveals that parity can boost the popularity of sports, and it makes sense. Competitive balance breeds excitement, unpredictability, and it allows fans to believe that next year is their year.

Among the four major North American sports, the numbers suggest NBA competition is the most imbalanced. Between 1984 and 2013, eight different franchises won the NBA Finals. During that period, 18 different MLB teams won the World Series, 15 NFL teams won the Super Bowl, and 16 NHL teams won the Stanley Cup.

Sports blogger Ben Flack sums it up nicely: "Just about every year when we go into a new NBA [season] you have a really good idea right from the start which teams have a realistic shot at winning the championship."

That's a sharp contrast with professional football, which makes a habit of turning losers into Super Bowl hopefuls -- the Arizona Cardinals, New Orleans Saints, and San Francisco 49ers are just a few recent examples. The MLB, too, typically features a handful of surprising contenders each season, like the Milwaukee Brewers and Toronto Blue Jays this year.

The dollars and cents
Financially speaking, the NBA isn't in a position to ignore this issue. The average franchise is worth $634 million, according to Forbes, versus $811 million in the MLB, and over $1 billion in the NFL.

Likewise, leaguewide revenue -- estimated to be near $5 billion -- is far behind baseball and football, and pro basketball is losing the battle for TV ratings. In 2013, just two NBA games were among the 50 most watched sporting events of the year, according to Sports Media Watch. A whopping 46 of the top 50 were NFL games.

Why does the NBA's parity problem exist?
Some pundits posit the NBA's parity problem is a result of how the sport is structured. A five-on-five basketball game may be easier for a single superstar -- or a group of superstars -- to dominate, in comparison to football, baseball, or hockey. Because of this, the NBA's best players may win more often than their counterparts in other sports. This thinking may be naive, though.

Recent history suggests a phenomenon called "reverse collusion" might also be to blame. According to new research from Florida State's Ryan Rodenberg and Justin Lovich, who analyzed the issue in the Harvard Journal of Sports and Entertainment Law, the Miami Heat may be a perfect example of reverse collusion.

Traditionally, collusion in sports, whether it's used to curb salaries or blacklist certain players, has occurred between owners. U.S. antitrust law generally forbids this behavior, and collective bargaining agreements between leagues and player associations have been tailored to prevent it over the years. Rodenberg and Lovich, however, argue Miami's Big Three is evidence reverse collusion -- between players, not owners -- could be happening in the NBA. They write (emphasis mine):

At its core, assemblage of the Miami 3 [James, Wade, and Bosh] was the result of a select subset of players within the union, supposedly free to offer their individual labor services to the market, acting in concert to collectively impact the market for their services.... In other words, their agency was not "free." 

By this, Rodenberg and Lovich are referring to the summer of 2010, when James, Wade, and Bosh were free agents. Instead of pursuing max salaries with other teams, each member of the trio agreed to a $15 million pay cut to join the Heat. Wade admitted that he and several of that year's free agents discussed teaming up, implying the Big Three's creation was premeditated. Despite criticism from prominent figures like Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, then-Commissioner David Stern insisted the Big Three didn't violate the NBA's collective bargaining agreement.

How to fix it
While Stern was technically right -- James, Wade, and Bosh didn't do anything wrong under the existing rules -- that's only because the CBA didn't prohibit reverse collusion at the time. And it still doesn't. So should it be rewritten?

In a league that actively attempts to promote parity through a salary cap, luxury taxes, revenue sharing, and its draft structure, Rodenberg and Lovich think the answer to that question might be yes. They warn that by "restricting the labor market through collective action ... reverse collusion could undermine the many institutional mechanisms intended to establish and protect competitive balance."

Whether it's forbidding players from talking during free agency, or capping how many superstars a team can sign, the NBA would be wise to address reverse collusion in the CBA. Unfortunately, the next agreement can't be renegotiated until 2017, and at that point, Carmelo Anthony will have already taken his talents to South Beach, if the cards fall right.

The bottom line
In theory, there's reason to think Anthony should be banned from the Heat. Given that he and James are reportedly close friends, the same potentially collusive process that created the Big Three could form the Big Four. Signing with Miami would require Anthony, James, Wade, and Bosh to take a collective, synchronized pay cut far below what other teams can offer.

But theory is not the same as reality. Most likely, Commissioner Adam Silver won't block Anthony from joining the Heat. Free agency is less than a month away, and the league still has its hands full with the Donald Sterling saga. Alas, the NBA's parity problem might be about to get a lot worse.

Warren Buffett vs. His Worst Nightmare 
Warren Buffett just called this emerging technology a "real threat" to his biggest cash-cow. While Buffett shakes in his billionaire-boots, only a few investors are embracing this new market which experts say will be worth over $2 trillion. It won't be long before everyone on Wall Street wises up, that's why The Motley Fool is releasing this timely investor alert. Click here to learn more about what's keeping Buffett up at night and the one public company we're calling the "brains behind" the technology.

Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

4 in 5 Americans Are Ignoring Buffett's Warning

Don't be one of them.

Jun 12, 2015 at 5:01PM

Admitting fear is difficult.

So you can imagine how shocked I was to find out Warren Buffett recently told a select number of investors about the cutting-edge technology that's keeping him awake at night.

This past May, The Motley Fool sent 8 of its best stock analysts to Omaha, Nebraska to attend the Berkshire Hathaway annual shareholder meeting. CEO Warren Buffett and Vice Chairman Charlie Munger fielded questions for nearly 6 hours.
The catch was: Attendees weren't allowed to record any of it. No audio. No video. 

Our team of analysts wrote down every single word Buffett and Munger uttered. Over 16,000 words. But only two words stood out to me as I read the detailed transcript of the event: "Real threat."

That's how Buffett responded when asked about this emerging market that is already expected to be worth more than $2 trillion in the U.S. alone. Google has already put some of its best engineers behind the technology powering this trend. 

The amazing thing is, while Buffett may be nervous, the rest of us can invest in this new industry BEFORE the old money realizes what hit them.

KPMG advises we're "on the cusp of revolutionary change" coming much "sooner than you think."

Even one legendary MIT professor had to recant his position that the technology was "beyond the capability of computer science." (He recently confessed to The Wall Street Journal that he's now a believer and amazed "how quickly this technology caught on.")

Yet according to one J.D. Power and Associates survey, only 1 in 5 Americans are even interested in this technology, much less ready to invest in it. Needless to say, you haven't missed your window of opportunity. 

Think about how many amazing technologies you've watched soar to new heights while you kick yourself thinking, "I knew about that technology before everyone was talking about it, but I just sat on my hands." 

Don't let that happen again. This time, it should be your family telling you, "I can't believe you knew about and invested in that technology so early on."

That's why I hope you take just a few minutes to access the exclusive research our team of analysts has put together on this industry and the one stock positioned to capitalize on this major shift.

Click here to learn about this incredible technology before Buffett stops being scared and starts buying!

David Hanson owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway and American Express. The Motley Fool recommends and owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway, Google, and Coca-Cola.We Fools don't all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

©1995-2014 The Motley Fool. All rights reserved. | Privacy/Legal Information