NBA Star Power

[Brodels]

www.fullsportpress.com/soucier3.html

NBA Star Power
Larry and Magic, the Next Jordan, and Marketing Basketball

By Andy Soucier
FSP Contributing Writer

Larry Bird had the ability to hit jumpers over anyone. Magic Johnson delivered pinpoint passes while leading the high-octane Los Angeles offense. David Stern worked to expand the popularity of basketball beyond the borders of the United States. Bird's hustle and fundamental play and Magic's court vision and leadership translated to success on the basketball court in the form of several combined NBA championships. Stern used their marketability to transform the game from a popular domestic sport to an international moneymaking powerhouse. These men were largely responsible for the quality and financial success of the game in the 1980s.

If Larry, Magic, and David put the NBA on the international map, Michael Jordan's personality, ability, and penchant for winning brought the sport to new heights. Youngsters across the globe gained a seemingly superhuman idol. Jordan regularly took and made big shots in high-pressure situations while playing in the third-largest market and one of the most rabid sports cities in the nation. The NBA needed a marketable star after Bird suffered from back injuries and Magic announced that he had contracted HIV, and the transfer of NBA power from Bird and Magic to Jordan was seamless.

When Jordan retired from the Bulls after his sixth NBA championship, there was no clear candidate to become the next larger-than-life basketball persona. Karl Malone was at the top of his game, but he lacked the athleticism and exposure to become the next NBA legend. Shaq dominated as much as any player had during the 1990s, but he couldn't take over games in the biggest moments. His offensive game was limited and he was unable to consistently hit free throws. Allen Iverson cultivated his bad boy image and gained credibility on the street, but many Americans couldn't relate to his occasional legal troubles or understand his willingness to clash with his coaches and the organization. Other players like Gary Payton, Scottie Pippen, and Hakeem Olajuwan had already completed their most productive years.

As the Lakers and Spurs found success in the years following Jordan's Bulls, Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, and Tracy McGrady became some of the most skilled players in the game. But none of them enjoyed the same widespread popularity as Jordan. Duncan's quiet demeanor and below-the-rim game overshadowed his fundamental play and overall dominance. In nine NBA seasons, Kevin Garnett has made it beyond the first round of the playoffs only once and has clashed with teammates. McGrady has also been criticized for being a poor teammate and he hasn't developed the charisma or enjoyed the team success to become the next larger-than-life figure. While their talent and ability cannot be questioned, these players are hindered by fundamental flaws in their games and personalities that render them incapable of matching the marketing power of Jordan.

The league was marketed through three charismatic superstars for almost twenty years, but it has suffered from the current vacuum of personable, exciting, young, and ultra-marketable superstars. Nobody has filled the void left by Jordan. More than any other player, Kobe Bryant has the collection of skills and personality to become the next Jordan: he's great with the media, can score from anywhere on the court, and plays in a large market. With Shaq in Miami, Kobe would seemingly have unlimited opportunities to finally demonstrate his leadership capabilities. But despite his ability, Kobe's recent legal troubles will probably limit his marketability for the remainder of his career.

If no current NBA star is capable of leading the marketing effort like Jordan did in the 1990s, what does the future hold? If a larger-than-life figure doesn't surface over the next few years, the NBA will need to become more successful at promoting several different stars, each with recognizable flaws. Bird, Magic, and Jordan served as international ambassadors for the game even if they didn't necessarily intend to - their influence helped to popularize the game in places traditionally dominated by soccer and rugby. Can a collection of less-recognizable stars expand the game even more? The National Hockey League enjoyed its greatest years during the reign of Wayne Gretzky. Major League Baseball has survived by promoting several stars, but most would argue that the sport is on the decline. The NBA's "golden years" were undoubtedly in the 1980s and 1990s. Among these three sports, each has experienced the most success when larger-than-life personas dominated both on the playing surface and in the media. For years, the NBA was Bird, Magic, and Jordan.

The NBA is at a crossroads. Stern can either continue to market several different stars and accept that none will become as marketable as Jordan or he can attempt to cultivate a new mega-star. The decision is critical to the success of the NBA: interest in the sport has possibly peaked domestically, and the continued growth of the sport in the United States may depend on the emergence of the next Jordan. International interest in the sport continues to grow, and it is likely that a marketing effort focused on several international and domestic stars would create national icons and pique interest in the sport in new regions. The best ways of marketing the sport globally could contribute to the domestic decline of basketball. NBA basketball has been successful domestically when one or two players dominated the sport, and it will become more popular globally when several international stars are promoted.

But does Stern even have a choice? A larger-than-life mega-star does not currently exist. Will Lebron James and Carmelo Anthony become the next Bird and Magic? Is it finally time for a new ambassador to rise? The answer is unclear, but the decision to market several international stars or to develop one mega-star will determine how successful the league is over the next two decades, both domestically and globally.

[spursfaninla]

This is a non-issue.

The NBA has already tried to market its marquee players as "the next jordan". You can't create that, it has to be a natural growing process of a player actually being that legendary superstar.

We cannot, nor should not, expect there to be "another Jordan." because there really wasn't one before him, nor after.

There will be other great players who, in their own ways, leave their mark on the game. Other players that might one day crack to top 20 all time. But to expect another Jordan? He is the best of all time, that is too big to expect for another 10-20 years, if ever.

The NBA can market its players differently, depending on the country, without anyone even really noticing in the USA. For instance, the chinese broadcast can have different segments produced to focus on the players of interest, while in the US they hype players that regionally/locally are of interest, and for national broadcasts they can focus on the most popular players.

I don't see the dilema.

[Brodels]

The NBA either has to choose a larger-than-life figure to carry the league image-wise or it needs to take a broader approach. It can't do both.

The point is that by marketing Jordan as a larger-than-life figure, as the central focus of the game, the NBA had great success in expanding the game and creating a worldwide sports idol. It isn't about Jordan's talent or whether another player ever reaches his level of ability. It's about what the league wants to market.

You're not going to be able to market Scot Pollard as the next Jordan. But if Lebron comes to dominate the game like many believe he will, the NBA will have an opportunity to market him like Jordan.

The league can put the focus on local stars in foreign countries, but it will do so at the expense of creating another Jordan. Considering that the league was very successful with the Jordan model, is this a good idea?

I think that's supposed to be central issue.

There needs to be a marketing strategy. What path Stern chooses will certainly influence the game.

[spursfaninla]

If "the star" to the chinese is Yao, the NBA, when showing the Chinese their Broadcast, would do well to focus on him.

I understand that as a whole the NBA has to have a marketing strategy, and that they do trade off with each other, but why not have different "main figures" for each country/area, depending on their interest?

Unless Lebron has the success that Jordan had, or something like it, all the marketing in the world will not make him as legendary, and people can't be tricked into believing otherwise. Unless a player rises to the top, another Jordan will not be. You CAN hype players, feature their games, protect them through the refs and focus media attention on them constantly, but if they don't get rings, mvp's, and clutch wins, they will be a "paper Jordan", both in popularity and result.

I think breaking up into regional marketing foci is the strategy that has the most chance of success at this point because there is no figure that will do what it takes to become the next advertising engine for the NBA.

Of course, if someone proves me wrong, change gears and greet the next jordan.

[Brodels]

If "the star" to the chinese is Yao, the NBA, when showing the Chinese their Broadcast, would do well to focus on him.

I understand that as a whole the NBA has to have a marketing strategy, and that they do trade off with each other, but why not have different "main figures" for each country/area, depending on their interest?

Unless Lebron has the success that Jordan had, or something like it, all the marketing in the world will not make him as legendary, and people can't be tricked into believing otherwise. Unless a player rises to the top, another Jordan will not be. You CAN hype players, feature their games, protect them through the refs and focus media attention on them constantly, but if they don't get rings, mvp's, and clutch wins, they will be a "paper Jordan", both in popularity and result.

I think breaking up into regional marketing foci is the strategy that has the most chance of success at this point because there is no figure that will do what it takes to become the next advertising engine for the NBA.

Of course, if someone proves me wrong, change gears and greet the next jordan.

A particular sport simply does better when there is a larger-than-life star. Hockey's golden years were when Gretzky dominated. Same with Jordan and basketball. Putting the emphasis on Yao in China is a smart thing to do, but unless Yao becomes a worldwide idol, he'll never have the impact of a true global star.

It's true that nobody has stepped up as the next Jordan, but in a lot of ways, Jordan's worldwide success was attributable in large part to the way he was marketed. Tim Duncan simply doesn't fit that mold. Garnett doesn't either. But Lebron might. Even if Lebron doesn't turn out to be as good as Jordan, which is likely, he still could become a true global star if he becomes the best player in the game.

I think the NBA will end up going with the regional strategy because it might not have a choice. But if it does have a choice, that is, if Lebron or another very marketable player becomes the best player in the game, the NBA would be better off creating a global star. The global star model has simply had great success. If it's possible, you have to do it. And the player doesn't necessarily need to have abilities similar to Jordan. The next global star simply needs to be the best player in the game in addition to being really marketable.

[total spurs homer]

Another factor in the NBA's popularity is that, whether we like it or not, the league is most successful when it has megastar players on successful teams in large markets. And if that team happens to be the Lakers, the NBA couldn't ask for more than that.

As for the topic....If the NBA does prefer to go with the "marquee, banner carrying guy" strategy, my best bet guess at who could end up being the choice would be Yao. Factors that would help Yao meet the criteria are:
1. His playing level...he must continue to develop his game and his on court "at ude" and he must CONSISTENTLY deliver the performances that we've seen glimpses of. "IF" he puts it all together, he could definitely dominate the league.
2. His personality...great sense of humor, very quotable, well rounded and grounded guy. It's hard to find anyone, media or fan, who flat out doesn't like the guy.
3. Marketability and Popularity...on a worldwide level, almost certainly already the most well known current NBA player.
4. His Team and Market...now partnered with another player with MVP type talent of his own on a team with a measure of historical success and in a large market. At ages 24 and 25, and with both Yao and TMac expressing their intention to stay with the Rockets long term, Houston's chances for future les increase greatly.

And so do Yao's chances to be the NBA's poster child.

[Brodels]

Another factor in the NBA's popularity is that, whether we like it or not, the league is most successful when it has megastar players on successful teams in large markets. And if that team happens to be the Lakers, the NBA couldn't ask for more than that.

As for the topic....If the NBA does prefer to go with the "marquee, banner carrying guy" strategy, my best bet guess at who could end up being the choice would be Yao. Factors that would help Yao meet the criteria are:
1. His playing level...he must continue to develop his game and his on court "at ude" and he must CONSISTENTLY deliver the performances that we've seen glimpses of. "IF" he puts it all together, he could definitely dominate the league.
2. His personality...great sense of humor, very quotable, well rounded and grounded guy. It's hard to find anyone, media or fan, who flat out doesn't like the guy.
3. Marketability and Popularity...on a worldwide level, almost certainly already the most well known current NBA player.
4. His Team and Market...now partnered with another player with MVP type talent of his own on a team with a measure of historical success and in a large market. At ages 24 and 25, and with both Yao and TMac expressing their intention to stay with the Rockets long term, Houston's chances for future les increase greatly.

And so do Yao's chances to be the NBA's poster child.

Yao certainly has a lot of worldwide appeal. But in my mind, he has a few strikes against him:

1. He's not American. It shouldn't matter, but it will hurt his ability to become a megastar in the United States. The global popularity of the game isn't to be underestimated, but all of the teams are still based in North America and people living in the United States pay money to see games. From a merchandising standpoint, there are certainly great international opportunities. But even so, if Yao doesn't catch on in the United States, he isn't going to have a chance to become the next Jordan as far as marketing goes.

As a sidenote, I believe that relations between China and the United States will deteriorate in coming years. The reasons for that don't belong in this forum, but if it happens, Yao will be viewed less favorably here whether we like it or not.

2. English isn't his first language. He would need to become very proficient at speaking the language. If he doesn't master the language, he'll never be as popular in the United States. And, as stated above, the United States still matters most even though the international growth in popularity of the game is impressive.

3. He's a center. It's difficult for a center to become mega-marketable because they generally aren't high-flying, crossover-dribbling, highlight-reel producing types of players. Centers dominate with height first and foremost. Swing players are always going to be most popular because they have a combination of size and athleticism that point guards and big men can't boast. An example is Vince Carter. He's way more popular than his abilities dictate he should be.

In addition, you're right about his ability: he simply isn't good enough at this point to merit consideration. But he might be skilled enough someday.

In my mind, there isn't a clear candidate to play that role right now. I think that Lebron could possibly become that. He has the potential more than any other player. Kobe certainly was the frontrunner until he got into legal trouble. I truly believe that Kobe would have become that kind of marketing presence if he would have kept his nose clean.

[spursfaninla]

During Kobe's "ring years", he had everything you would need to be called the game's best and perhaps most exciting perimeter player.

He was hindered in that regard only by being accompanied by the best post player in the game.

What that the only thing that kept him from reaching "jordan" acclaim worldwide? He was marketable, flashy, successful, clutch, young, (I am told) good looking, and good on camera. Of course, his trial has forever ended his chance as league spokesman, but during that time he did everything you could ask of a perimeter player.

Here is a question; Magic was able to shine, and become a "league spokesman superstar" with other stars and even superstars on his team, so why couldn't Kobe?

And does the marketing model here lend itself to team success? Isn't a team with 2 superstars MUCH more likley to go all the way? Wouldn't it be ironic if the Jordan model ("best" perimeter player, 1 all-star level sidekick), though most marketable, were to be the historically less likely recipe for success compared to "2 top 10 players on same team, one a post player."

[Brodels]

During Kobe's "ring years", he had everything you would need to be called the game's best and perhaps most exciting perimeter player.

He was hindered in that regard only by being accompanied by the best post player in the game.

What that the only thing that kept him from reaching "jordan" acclaim worldwide? He was marketable, flashy, successful, clutch, young, (I am told) good looking, and good on camera. Of course, his trial has forever ended his chance as league spokesman, but during that time he did everything you could ask of a perimeter player.

Here is a question; Magic was able to shine, and become a "league spokesman superstar" with other stars and even superstars on his team, so why couldn't Kobe?

And does the marketing model here lend itself to team success? Isn't a team with 2 superstars MUCH more likley to go all the way? Wouldn't it be ironic if the Jordan model ("best" perimeter player, 1 all-star level sidekick), though most marketable, were to be the historically less likely recipe for success compared to "2 top 10 players on same team, one a post player."

Kobe wasn't even the best player on his team. He didn't win those finals MVPs, Shaq did. He didn't lead his team anywhere by himself. He won those les because Shaq was the best player in the game at that time.

Magic was the best player on that team. He was considered to be one of the best two players in that decade, period.

Nobody is saying that the Jordan model is the best recipe for team success. And team success is an important part of marketing the NBA, but history tells us that it has been best to have a dominating player on a great team.

[ducks]

good article:white

[spurster]

The NBA cannot make Jordans, Birds, and Magics appear when it pleases. They need to promote the league as it is. The NFL in the past had their big stars (e.g., Montana, Deon), but now they don't have them, but it's still very popular.

The problem is that the NBA have promoted "pre-stars" as the next big one, but that is a chancy thing. They need to focus on what is good right now, rather than guessing the future.