NBA/Blazers 2025-26 Thread

Moderators: greenyellow, UOducksTK1

Post Reply
User avatar
Phalanx
Senior
Posts: 4880
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:50 pm

Re: NBA/Blazers 2025-26 Thread

Post by Phalanx »

squintsdd wrote: Tue Jul 28, 2026 7:53 pm
Fat profit or not, it's an issue when they were quite literally the only team without a sponsorship.
It's only an issue if those sponsorships are impossible to get in Portland. Otherwise, it's an opportunity for revenue growth, which I suspect is one of the reasons Dundon bought the team in the first place. The Blazers were an attractive team to buy because they were valued in the bottom third of the league, but with clear room to improve the bottom line with smarter management. A lot of the measures Dundon is taking are very common for an outside group taking over a business that has become bloated and inefficient over decades from a previous owner. Anyone who follows the finance page will often see hand-wringing when a new group takes over and the first thing they do is cut the work force. That hand-wringing is often accompanied by wild attempts from the media to act like the whole company is going down in flames. Look at when Musk bought twitter: the media over and over depicted him as someone who didn't know what he was doing, that he was ruining the company, that he was losing all his sponsors, and that his financing was going to fall through or banks that lent to him were going to lose all their money because his debt had no demand in the market. All of this turned out not to be true. He cut the labor force in half and the company runs far more efficiently now, the sponsors came back, and the banks were able to sell his debt at the same initial company valuation of $44 billion without a problem. Those same media writers still have their jobs despite being completely wrong about everything, just like Canzano still has a job, because there is no accountability for media saying dumb things.

Dundon knows the Blazers will be winning more in future years, because it actually isn't that hard for a smart owner to run an NBA team better than the Blazers have been run the past 20 years. I have spelled this out many times on this site: If you manage the cap well and stay disciplined in signing players, not giving in to demands like Lillard made all those years for ridiculous contracts when his production didn't merit it, or making stupid FOMO signings like Evan Turner, Jeramie Grant, Anfernee Simons, etc. you will eventually end up with a more talented and deeper team with contracts that perform better. This leads to more revenue from playoffs, sponsorships, tickets, etc. He just has to have the resolve to ride through the idiots in the media the same way Elon did. Improvement on the court is not a hope, it is a certainty barring a slew of catastrophic injuries. It just takes discipline that Olshey and Cronin never had.
User avatar
Boom
All Pac-12
Posts: 5775
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 10:32 pm
GM: Houston Rockets

Re: NBA/Blazers 2025-26 Thread

Post by Boom »

bellsduck wrote: Tue Jul 28, 2026 7:13 pm Peyton Watson anyone?
I'd be willing to swap Shaedon Sharpe for him, but I wouldn't include any first-round picks in the deal. I don't think he would change the trajectory of this team next season.
User avatar
Phalanx
Senior
Posts: 4880
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:50 pm

Re: NBA/Blazers 2025-26 Thread

Post by Phalanx »

I don't know why Denver is floating sign-and-trade scenarios when that just adds huge money to their repeater tax. Nuggets are going to lose Watson because they overpaid for Murray and Gordon. Great lesson for anyone who thinks salaries are not important. Some team might be able to swoop in and get a good deal with a front-loaded offer sheet. The problem is that Watson wants too much - he's looking for upwards of $25 million/yr according to one article I saw, and the Nuggets only offered him $14 million/yr. We'll see if he gets an offer tomorrow. I don't think from the Blazers - Dundon probably likes that revenue sharing from other teams' luxury taxes too much. He only has around $8 million under the tax - a little more if he waives one or two of the non-guaranteed guys.
User avatar
pezsez1
All Pac-12
Posts: 6224
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 10:30 pm
Location: RIP CITY

Re: NBA/Blazers 2025-26 Thread

Post by pezsez1 »

City Council approved the term sheet last night for the city's share of the funding. Funny enough it still wasn't enough for the more progressive council members, even though it's probably still a hard "no" from Team Dundon. I guess now we'll find out how much leverage the city really has on behalf of the NBA.
Willie Taggart is a dick.
User avatar
Phalanx
Senior
Posts: 4880
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 11:50 pm

Re: NBA/Blazers 2025-26 Thread

Post by Phalanx »

I understand the City not wanting to bid against itself. Dundon needs to show the respect to engage and counter instead of leaking sniping comments to Oram and others. He's asking for it all to be paid for and then turning up his nose when the subject of oversight comes up. Well it isn't your money, Hoss. You can't say that it isn't your building and you shouldn't have to pay, while also demanding the money with no plan for how it will be used. The logic breaks down somewhere in there.

The politics of this situation are funny to me. Us Blazer fans want all the parties to agree so we can keep having the team here. But we are not the most interested parties. The unions smell a public works project and are swarming city and county meetings like bees to honey. Meanwhile the city is going to get the bulk of their money from something called a Clean Energy Community Benefits Fund, which apparently is derived from taxing large businesses. So it turns out, this really idealistic legislation ends up being just another slush fund for city officials to use as they see fit, and they see fit to spend it on sports. Color me shocked. Maybe they will throw in some solar panels or something just to make it kosher. :lol:
User avatar
pezsez1
All Pac-12
Posts: 6224
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 10:30 pm
Location: RIP CITY

Re: NBA/Blazers 2025-26 Thread

Post by pezsez1 »

So it turns out, this really idealistic legislation ends up being just another slush fund for city officials to use as they see fit, and they see fit to spend it on sports. Color me shocked.
I don't want this to turn into a political thread. But honestly, if the overall GOP wasn't so anti-Portland at this point in time, I think this could be an issue that might either turn the City Council red or at the very least cost the progressive council members their seats. This clean air fund is something I would have supported in the past, but over the past several years I've been completely turned off by "climate" initiatives in the city. It's such a massive (and idealistic) waste of money at a time when most of the world (and even our country) isn't on board with trying to fix anything meaningful. Not to mention a lot of these initiatives (like road diets) are just total bull****. And we're seeing now that there are just better ways to spend this money to benefit the city.

I'm glad the bulk of the council is at least willing to approve this term sheet, but damn.

I also think you're 100% correct about Dundon needing to sit down and negotiate. Don't like the city's term sheet? Fine, then man up and make a counter offer. As much as I don't really like the city's term sheet, it's also not absurdly unreasonable and it commits to making the funding available. We're about to find out if Adam Silver has any kind of spine. If he does, then Dundon will negotiate. And he absolutely should share his renovation plans with the city. This is the city's building, and the city needs to be 100% aware of how its money should be spent, with the freedom to make alterations to the plans. The Blazers are the only tenant, but the renovated Moda must be equipped to handle all kinds of shows and events. This can't just be Tom Dundon's basketball monetization palace.

EDIT: I still personally feel that completely bowing down to Dundon and making the funding available with no strings attached would clearly be in the city's best interests. I don't think that' s a hot take, either. That's why I don't think the city really has that much leverage. What really needs to happen is Silver needs to lean on Dundon and just tell him to give the Portland City Council a couple of token wins. I'd be thrilled with just starting the 20-year Portland commitment upon completion of the renovated arena. Then maybe the city should take some business classes and figure out how to properly monetize its arena. Seems like it shouldn't be too hard to make its $100 million back over 20 years with or without Dundon's help.
Willie Taggart is a dick.
Post Reply