- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 7/22/25 at 12:20 pm to Vood
it’s a 5 game sample but she’s has been a beast in July
I think her slash line is like 18.8/12.8/3.6
I think her slash line is like 18.8/12.8/3.6
Posted on 7/22/25 at 12:22 pm to SammyTiger
It’s easy to do that on a shitty team, per TX Tiger
Posted on 7/22/25 at 12:24 pm to TX Tiger
quote:
the women want the same percentage of revenue sharing as NBA players get, which is 50%. The women currently receive something like 9%.
They deserve negative 7 percent
Posted on 7/22/25 at 1:25 pm to TX Tiger
quote:
As I understand it the women want the same percentage of revenue sharing as NBA players get, which is 50%. The women currently receive something like 9%.
How are they losing money spending 9% on their product?
what do they spend money on?
Posted on 7/22/25 at 1:26 pm to TX Tiger
Why are you so proud of reese stats on a shitty team? I thought that was bad.
Posted on 7/22/25 at 2:26 pm to SammyTiger
quote:It's the slice, not the percentage. If the WNBA has $200MM in revenue, and the NBA has $12B in revenue, then that means the WNBA after revenue share has ~$180MM vs $6B for the men to cover all costs, franchise disbursements, etc. The NBA also gets 42% off the top of all revenue made by the WNBA for covering their losses for the first 28 years and keeping it solvent when it would have went belly up by the end of year 2. So the WNBA after paying the players and the NBA only has about $96MM to cover everything else. The NBA then will use a portion of their cut to cover the losses. Which takes their cut from 42% to around 10-15% each year on a good year, most of the leagues history it has been a wash or net loss for the NBA to subsidize.
How are they losing money spending 9% on their product?
what do they spend money on?
I think if the WNBA could go from $200MM to $500MM plus then you can start making the argument the players deserve 25-30% of the revenue. Until it's $750MM or higher, I don't think +40% is realistic, and on par with the NBA is far from realistic until you're talking about a $1B in revenue.
This post was edited on 7/22/25 at 2:27 pm
Posted on 7/22/25 at 2:29 pm to TX Tiger
Posted on 7/22/25 at 2:37 pm to AwesomeSauce
quote:
The NBA also gets 42% off the top of all revenue made by the WNBA for covering their losses for the first 28 years and keeping it solvent when it would have went belly up by the end of year 2.
well that alone explains a lot
Posted on 7/22/25 at 2:46 pm to SammyTiger
IMO, I think you will see the NBA move to take a smaller cut from 42 down to around 30, and that will go to the players. So they would then be around 21% or more than double the current without it effecting the bottom line of the league. It makes it look like a win, but in reality it's just the NBA banking on the losses not being greater than 30% so they can still make back some of the million to hundreds of millions they have sunk into the league. If the media deal is right, the NBA might even go down to 20-25% to allow for a greater increase, but IMHO whatever increase they get will be from that...maybe a small 2-5% concession by the owners if the holdout looks to be going too long.
Posted on 7/22/25 at 3:38 pm to TideSaint
The travel in that gif right before the shot is the cherry on top 
Posted on 7/22/25 at 3:50 pm to TX Tiger
quote:
TX Tiger
I feel like you don't watch the NBA or WNBA at all and are just running this act for attention on this board (which is weird behavior).
Not sure how anybody who watches basketball would have never heard of either TS% or eFG%, and then also think that "combined stats" is a thing.
Posted on 7/22/25 at 4:06 pm to Oilfieldbiology
No, as usual he’s making shite up
Posted on 7/22/25 at 4:08 pm to MusclesofBrussels
quote:
Not sure how anybody who watches basketball would have never heard of either TS% or eFG%
Did he really say this lol
Posted on 7/22/25 at 4:08 pm to TackySweater
He doesn’t watch it
Posted on 7/22/25 at 4:38 pm to MusclesofBrussels
quote:Here are the WNBA top players in TS%:
Not sure how anybody who watches basketball would have never heard of either TS% or eFG%, and then also think that "combined stats" is a thing.
Leonie Fiebich 73.2
Kalani Brown 69.1
Te-Hina Paopao 66.0
Kennedy Burke 66.0
eFG%
Fiebich 71.6
Paopao 66.3
Brown 65.7
Emma Cannon 64.4
Exactly ZERO of those players were in the all-star game. That's how important those stats are.
Posted on 7/22/25 at 6:14 pm to BatonProv
quote:The top shooter in the league is a center hitting 56.3% (Aliyah Boston).
She is 50% on open layups
So if you're trying to say Angel is among the top shooters, you wouldn't be totally wrong.
Reese ranks 30th in the league in FG% at 44.6%.
For reference, A'ja Wilson is 19th at 48.2%.
Posted on 7/22/25 at 7:51 pm to TX Tiger
Reread what I wrote
Basically, she misses half her bunnies
Basically, she misses half her bunnies
Posted on 7/23/25 at 8:08 am to TX Tiger
Too bad another one of your shitty WNBA threads got anchored.
Was looking forward to the update after her amazing stat line of 11p, 11r, 3a, 1b last night in her team’s 23 pt loss
Was looking forward to the update after her amazing stat line of 11p, 11r, 3a, 1b last night in her team’s 23 pt loss
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News