This is something that we've all suspected, but until now, have never been able to confirm with a study: The New York Knicks don't know what they're doing.
When it comes to spending money on players to win games -- the most basic and most important component of professional sports -- the Knicks are statistically the least-efficient spenders compared to franchises across the NFL, MLB and NBA, according to NerdWallet, an online financial planning company. (The NHL and MLS weren't included in the study. But, come on, no one is worse than the Knicks.)
Yep, those are the Knicks at the bottom.
By NerdWallet's calculations, over $113 billion has been spent on roster payroll by NFL, MLB and NBA teams since 2000. NBA franchises alone have spent $28 billion, and the Knicks account for a league-high $1.3 billion of that.
But all that money has only netted the team a disappointing total of 513 wins, one playoff series and no championships for the Knicks.
On average, one Knicks win costs owner James Dolan (whose family is worth $4.8 billion, according to Forbes) $2.6 million, or $700,000 more than the next highest amount by an NBA team. (That would be the forsaken Minnesota Timberwolves by the way, who have shelled out $1.9 million per win since 2000.)
Here's how NerdWallet crunched the numbers on their blog:
Our rankings of all 92 baseball, basketball and football franchises are based on financial efficiency -- roster spending vs. team performance.
In our analysis, we counted regular season victories over the past 15 years and factored in whether the team had won any championships to create an “adjusted wins” total for each franchise.
We then divided each team’s share of the league’s total adjusted wins since 2000 by the team’s share of the league’s total payroll over that same time.
To nobody's surprise, the New England Patriots and San Antonio Spurs, winners of basically everything, were the two most efficient U.S. teams of the 21st century.
