Sneaker News 
The landscape of signature basketball shoes is well populated, with stars like KD, LeBron, Kobe, Melo, CP3, Rose, Wall, Howard, and Wade making up most of the exclusive club. Throw in the names that aren’t technically signature guys but well-recognized brand ambassadors (Westbrook, Griffin, Curry, Lillard, Parsons, Garnett, Harden), the soon-t0-become signature guys (Kyrie, Paul George), and the mass influx of Retros (Shaq, Kemp, Penny, Barkley, Hill, Ewing), and you might feel its a bit…crowded. What makes it appear even tighter is the fact that brands have put on the brakes on non-signature models as well.
There’s no denying that star power is a huge influencer in sneaker purchasing. Jordan Brand only exists because of Nike’s vision for Michael Jordan, and the same goes for why a guy like Penny Hardaway is even relevant today. Even the bidding war for KD proves that signature athletes are all the more necessary. For today’s Sneaker News Twitter Conversation, we asked our readers if there are just too many signature shoes out there, how it affects their purchasing behavior, and more. Check out some of the key responses that we gathered below, and be sure to participate in our next Twitter Conversation next week.
To participate in our next installment of Twitter Conversations, make sure to follow @SneakerNews.
@SneakerNews nope it’s only a small percent of the nba, different playing styles = different shoe types, plus your gonna want fav plrs shoes
— Ethan Price (@EthanPrice_23) September 10, 2014
@SneakerNews i don’t think so, only because they aren’t all coming from one brand. — Josiah Brewster (@JosiahBrewster) September 10, 2014
No, the diversity is great and the players deserve it.
The resounding response to our question was “no”. The athletes listed above is only a small percentage of the NBA, and they happen to represent a wide range of brands. The basketball industry consists of several labels doing what they can to chip away at the market dominated by Nike and Jordan, and that only means a larger selection for the consumer.
@SneakerNews Kobe LBJ & Kd are the only ones that are selling though.. Let’s be real
— D Hackk (@D_Hackk) September 10, 2014
@SneakerNews: There are quite a bit, but most of those become over shadowed by the predominate trio from Nike.
— Calvin Tucker (@cmt_ii) September 10, 2014
No, because despite the wide range, Nike’s big three is by far the most relevant.
Nike, specifically, dominates performance basketball, so while brands like adidas, Under Armour, Li-Ning and others come through with their offerings, the Big Three of Kobe, LeBron, and KD will always dominate.
@SneakerNews hyperdunk will always be a go-to shoe.
— 1 Fresh M’F’Ka (@daxman16) September 10, 2014
@SneakerNews sometimes the non signatures are just as good. We buy for the name attached. I’m guilty of it, we all are.
— Brandon Nacho Tharp (@Brandon_Tharp) September 10, 2014
No, because non-signature performance models still get the attention they deserve.
Even if there are a lot of signature performance shoes, other flagship models get plenty of love. The Hyperdunk has always been considered a top performer for true basketball fanatics, as is the Crazy Light series, which just released the Boost version.
@SneakerNews it’s all about the money, the more signature lines they have the more money they’ll make
— Tyler Henderson (@i_Tendy) September 10, 2014
@SneakerNews the trend has been add a name add to the price. There will always be a need for shoes for people who can’t afford Js or Kobe’s.
— Wilfred Reyes III (@wereyes3) September 10, 2014
Not necessarily a yes or a no, but some believe that the push in sig shoes is an attempt to make a big profit.
Some readers understand why brands are going extra hard with signature athletes, because the added name will mean added value and brand presence. However, there are extra costs in reeling in these superstars – just look at how much Nike had to pony up to KD in their stable.
