Balmer isn't the one making the moves, it's freaking Jerry West. What culture is Balmer making? Again, it's all Jerry West all Balmer does is sit in the stands and write the checks. The great thing about Balmer is he is a super billionaire who doesn't care about the money and just wants to win, that is def commendable but that doesn't set him apart from other owners like Cuban, Dan Gilbert, James Dolan and even the previous Nets owner Prokhorov so why is Balemr no 1? All these people have deep pockets and want to win, the only difference is Balmer was the dude who hired Jerry West. The no 1 owner for me is still GSW majority owner Joe Lacob and the rest of his ownership team. That group got GSW when they weren't successful and turned them into the dynasty they are today while also empowering their FO to really win at all cost. Unlike Balmer who just hired an expert who had an impeccable track record like Jerry West that team made sweeping changes to their FO and coaching staff and hired key personnel like Kerr and whoever their GM is now. They also made correct calls like not trading Klay Thompson for Kobe. While not a super billionaire former owner Leslie Alexander was also a pretty great owner IMO, he correctly identified the importance of analytics in the NBA and got Morey from the Celtics FO team. He also correctly hired MDA when the rest of the league and all the analysts were making fun of the coaching hire. He also made the Rox the 4rth most profitable NBA team despite not having a large market. All of these make these people better owners than Balmer, as Balmer is just totally dependent on his GM and if he was unlucky enough to have a gotten a noob GM like Gilbert or Dolan nobody would be talking about how amazing Balmer is now.
Please tell me people have enough sense to understand the difference between what that $100m is designed to do vs what they claim it's for.
That was obviously the most important move of all, but it also takes the right kind of owner to get out of the GMs way, and let him work. Some owners are really bad about that, and will trade away a championship team for a chance at signing next year's big fish of free agency.
Terrible Microsoft CEO, but great NBA owner. Like what he's doing in the community and trying to increase the Clipper brand in an unholy land. But f*ck him and everyone that looks like him when the season starts.
That's an absurd thing to say. Sure, everyone wants and endless supply of money. It's IMPOSSIBLE for other NBA teams to spend money like the Clippers can because there are 32 teams in the NBA, and there are only 18 other people IN THE WORLD with more money than Balmer. Fertitta is around #400.
He can win your heart all he wants, but we're in Rockets country and we're gonna win it all this year regardless.
I don't care about Steve Ballmer as an owner but don't compare him to James freaking Dolan. Dolan used to be deeply involved and meddled in operations, he stuck by Isiah Thomas's side even through the sexual assault scandal, kicked Oakley out of MSG, and banned a fan for heckling. The guy is a huge douche and is detested throughout the league. Has a player in the last 20 years even enjoyed their time on the Knicks?
In Generous Stadium Deal, Steve Ballmer Sets A New Standard For Team Owners Joe Barnathan Contributor SportsMoney I write about sports with a focus on the business of basketball. Steve Ballmer seems to understand the massive privilege he’s been granted as the owner of the Los Angeles Clippers. Sure, he paid handsomely for the franchise in 2014 when it was purchased for $2 billion. However, where other franchises have sought public funding for new stadiums, Ballmer is going in the opposite direction. He hasn’t simply opted to privately the new venture set to be constructed in Inglewood, he has also pledged $100 million of his own money to go back into the community. NEW YORK, NY - NOVEMBER 01: Steve Ballmer, Founder, USAFacts and Former C.E.O., Microsoft speaks onstage during the 2018 New York Times Dealbook on November 1, 2018 in New York City. (Photo by Michael Cohen/Getty Images for The New York Times) Getty Images for The New York Times For perspective, the next largest contribution from any NBA team was the Golden State Warriors who have invested between $18 million and $29 million into their community overall, according to ESPN. Both contributions are meaningful and ought to be praised. This is not the common trend in professional sports. Typically, when franchises seek to build a new venue, the money goes in the opposite direction. Teams turn to their local community to help foot the bill. And often times things end up disastrous for the cities and lucrative for the franchises. The most extreme example is the deal Cincinnati struck with the Bengals in 2000, which reportedly has cost the city nearly $1 billion in taxpayer dollars. These sorts of deals can be catastrophic for local governments, often forcing them to slash their budgets just to stop themselves from going bankrupt. According to a report by the Brookings Institute from 2016, the federal government has lost over $3 billion subsidizing sports stadiums, despite no tangible way of calculating the positive economic impact of these projects. Unfortunately, sports is an emotional business. Teams align themselves with a particular city or state as a means of generating loyalty. However, that loyalty cuts both ways, as when it’s time for a team to build a new stadium, they will threaten to leave the city as the Milwaukee Bucks did. Bucks owners Marc Lasry and Wes Edens claim they were justified in asking the city for $250 million. The team argued that if they could not get the public funding, that they’d be forced to moved the team for economic reasons. Of course, they also argued that the new arena will be a boost for the local economy. Whether or not that’s true remains to be seen. For Steve Ballmer and the Clippers, there will be no hand-wringing about whether their new venue will be worth leaning on taxpayers because they didn’t ask for a dime. The optics of a man worth more than $50 billion asking the local government for financial assistance would be awkward to say the least. However, Ballmer could’ve certainly made the argument that it is common practice to secure some public financing. Instead, he made the call that while the public enjoys his team, it is not their responsibility to fund his ventures. For Steve Ballmer to go above and beyond by donating $100 million to the local community– after not seeking any public funding– sends a strong message. Ballmer wants to put a top-notch product out on the court and wants his team to step out of the Lakers’ shadow by leaving Staples Center. And thankfully he’s going to do it in a way that should be welcomed by fans of the team as well as the citizens of Inglewood. Bravo, Steve Ballmer. Other owners ought to take note. https://www.forbes.com/sites/joebar...-a-new-standard-for-team-owners/#3e63466419aa
This is also LA and I would imagine part of the appeal is owning a nice chunk of land and redeveloping into a commercial hub. All the new basketball courts his donated money will build will feature something about the Clippers. It’s a smart move to kill two birds with one stone, build good will in the community while trying to build the brand. I like Balmer as an owner but he’s trying to build a brand in a city full of brands. Kudos to him for using his own money, but it’s not due to altruism.
How can you disregard Ballmer's move to hire Jerry West? It was his decision, so he can take some credit too.
