Epidemic of Entitlement Plagues Pro Basketball
I have been a basketball fan as long as I can remember, and I imagine that I will always be a basketball fan, but the sense of entitlement worn like a proud badge by many modern pro basketball players is difficult to fathom or accept. There are many examples, but I will cite just three.
The first example is from a recent podcast during which DeMarcus Cousins reflected on his time as Nikola Jokic's teammate, and noted that Jokic indicated that he might retire early instead of signing a contract with a total value of $300 million. Cousins advised Jokic that retiring early would be crazy, and that even if Jokic did not want to play he should just sign the deal--for guaranteed money--and then "just get fat at worst." Cousins' mentality makes it clear (1) why he washed out of the NBA at just 32 years old, and (2) why it often seems like many players are more focused on making money than earning money: players likes Cousins think that they are entitled to be paid as opposed to thinking that they have a responsibility to earn the money that they are paid.
The second example is from the WNBA. At the 2025 WNBA All-Star Game, players wore t-shirts bearing the phrase, "Pay Us What You Owe Us." The NBA has a majority ownership interest in the WNBA and fully subsidizes the WNBA, which has lost money in every single year since it was founded 28 years ago. The WNBA's losses averaged around $10 million per year prior to 2023, but leapt to around $50 million in 2024. A quip making the rounds is that WNBA stands for Welfare National Basketball Association. Perhaps the WNBA's players should chip in to pay the league for the opportunity to be on TV and thus become well known enough to get endorsement deals, because without the WNBA most people would have no idea who many of these players are. Much like Cousins thinks that NBA players are entitled to be paid without making any effort to stay in shape, WNBA players think that they are entitled to huge paychecks even though the business that hired them is losing money.
The third example involves the NBA and the WNBA. After demanding to be paid money that they have not earned, the WNBA players laughed and giggled their way through an uncompetitive 2025 WNBA All-Star Game. In that regard, they are following the example of the NBA, a league whose All-Star Games have degenerated from must-see TV to unwatchable farces.
Perhaps there have always been athletes with an overgrown sense of entitlement, but the problem seems to be more widespread than before.
The way that far too many modern athletes focus on being entitled as opposed to earning respect contrasts markedly with the attitude displayed by the man who was for many years the face of pro basketball: Julius Erving. In 1984, near the end of his Pantheon-level career, Erving explained how he perceived his place in basketball history:
I'd say I've had an effect in three main areas. First, I have taken a smaller man's game, ball-handling, passing, and the like, and brought it to the front court. Second, I've taken the big man's game, rebounding, shot-blocking, and been able to execute that even though I'm only six-foot-six. What I've tried to do is merge those two types of games, which were considered to be separate—for instance, Bill Russell does the rebounding, Cousy handles the ball—and combine them into the same player. This has more or less changed the definition of what's called the small forward position, and it creates a lot more flexibility for the individual player, and, of course, creates a lot more opportunities for the whole team. The third thing I've tried to do, and this is the most important thing, is to make this kind of basketball a winning kind of basketball, taking into account a degree of showmanship that gets people excited. My overall goal is to give people the feeling they are being entertained by an artist—and to win.
You know, the playground game … refined.
Note how much thought Erving put into how he played the game, and how much work he did to hone his craft. Note, also, that he considered it his responsibility to help his team win while entertaining the fans. Erving laid the groundwork for non-centers like Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Michael Jordan, Kobe Bryant, and LeBron James to become MVPs and become leaders of championship teams, two roles that before Erving were predominantly filled by centers.
I have long argued that Erving is underrated by commentators who do not know or understand basketball history. The example that Erving set about how to think about the game and the responsibility--not entitlement--of being a professional athlete is one that modern players should learn about and emulate.
Labels: DeMarcus Cousins, Julius Erving, NBA, Nikola Jokic, WNBA
posted by David Friedman @ 8:50 PM
10 Comments:
What’s especially irritating about the WNBA players demanding more money is their spiteful refusal to acknowledge why ratings are up, which is their primary argument for why they deserve more money. Prior to the arrival of Caitlin Clark, my knowledge of the WNBA was limited to the following: Lisa Leslie, the Los Angeles Sparks, the New York Liberty, and Candace Parker. That’s it. I didn’t even know that Indiana had a WNBA team. The players want to cash in on the Caitlin Clark phenomenon while refusing to acknowledge that the phenomenon exists. It’s also worth mentioning that their petty scheme to not have Clark on the Olympic team might have been the most costly mistake in sports history.
That's unfortunate by Cousins, but almost surprisingly his yearly salaries reflect his actual production. He's probably one of the few NBA players not overpaid. But, the most interesting thing about his quote is about Jokic actually considering retiring already and his mentality. Cousins is right giving up $300 million would be crazy, but that doesn't mean Jokic should just collect and sail away though.
That's really odd the WNBA is going to lose the most amount of money in a year while its popularity is at an all-time high in 2024. Whoever is in charge of the WNBA is doing something extremely wrong if that's the case. The NBA continues to support the WNBA, but what incentive does the NBA have in doing this?
It's great the best women basketball players in the world have a league to play in, but good boys HS teams would destroy an AS WNBA team. The product overall isn't that great. Michael is right that Clark is by far the #1 reason why the WNBA's popularity is way up and why so many players are feeling more entitled.
Michael:
WNBA players as a collective group are incredibly tone deaf, as demonstrated by their reactions to Caitlin Clark and by their ludicrous demands for pay increases despite working for a business that has lost money every year since its inception.
Anonymous:
The NBA's incentive for subsidizing the WNBA is that it can market itself as an organization that supports and uplifts women. Think of sponsoring the WNBA as an advertising/promotional expense for the NBA. The NBA must believe that the good will engendered by sponsoring the WNBA leads to tangible rewards that outweigh the WNBA's lack of profitability.
Many media outlets go along with this and help the NBA by perpetuating the myth that WNBA basketball specifically and the women's game in general feature a fundamentally sound brand of basketball; the reality, as you correctly note, is that men's teams from leagues far below the NBA level would destroy the best WNBA team.
Women's sports are important--I took my daughter to a WNBA game this summer and we had a great time--but that does not mean that the WNBA players are as good as NBA players or that they should be paid as much as NBA players are paid. NBA players are better players than WNBA players, and NBA players are playing in a league that makes money as opposed to playing in a league that has to be subsidized to survive.
Yes, a lot of the WNBA is tone deaf. But, something is way off. Attendance and popularity of the WNBA is way up, but they're losing much more money. The opposite should be happening. Their salaries are very meager, so that's not the issue. Whoever is making the important decisions to make the league profitable is doing a horrible job. But anyway, the players should be thankful to be able to play and make decent money for less than half a year of work.
Women's sports are important and it's good if they can continue as far up the ladder as possible, but this just isn't possible in most sports. No WNBA player could even sniff a D-1 men's roster. It's just the way it is.
Anonymous:
The WNBA is losing money for the same reason that any person or company loses money: spending exceeds revenues.
I have seen some authors--including "stat guru" Dave Berri, who was fired several years ago by Forbes because of his (in their words) "sloppy" and "misleading" commentary on this very subject--assert that the WNBA is not really losing money but these are "paper losses," much like the NBA claims that teams are losing money when it is time to negotiate the Collective Bargaining Agreement with the players. Supposedly, to even mention that the WNBA is losing money is to engage in misogyny.
Without doing a whole dissertation on economics, sports economics, and the NBA, it should suffice to point out the obvious fact that the NBA is able to operate entirely on its own, while the WNBA has been heavily subsidized by the NBA since day one. It is not an exaggeration to say that the WNBA would not exist without the NBA's funding.
If the WNBA ever makes on its own a fraction of the money that the NBA makes on it own, then perhaps the players would have justification for lobbying to be paid more. For now, though, the main reason that WNBA players make less total money than NBA players and receive a lower percentage of their league's revenues is that the WNBA needs a cash infusion every year from the NBA just to survive. If the WNBA becomes popular enough to be a self-sustaining enterprise, then the players could argue that they are worth more than they are being paid.
"Epidemic of Entitlement Plagues Pro Basketball" --> or "Epidemic of Entitlement Plagues Society, Particularly, Millenial Generation" ?
Marcel
When the TV contracts hit they will turn a profit
The problem is they want 50 percent and they should get 20 percent of the profits
They get 9 right now
Anonymous:
That is a valid point.
Marcel:
If the WNBA continues its propensity to spend beyond its means because it can depend on NBA sponsorship then it will not turn a profit even after obtaining more TV money. The league's leaders have not yet learned how to live within their means, and giving them more money will not necessarily help them learn that skill.
Post a Comment
<< Home