The Official NBA Collective Bargaining Thread vol Phased in Hard Cap

[pmatic]

A couple of SI articles.

Stern continues to skew facts in media tour

For better or worse, commissioner David Stern and union chief Billy Hunter have used part of the lull before next week’s series of meetings with a federal mediator to conduct one-on-0ne interviews with various members of the media. Stern has been a bit more prolific, having appeared in extensive interviews over the last 24 hours with WFAN’s Mike Francesa, NBA TV’s David Aldridge and ESPN’s “Mike & Mike in the Morning

 

[CP1708]

Originally Posted by Statis22


You're laughing but Stern and Adam Silver are running a clinic on Fisher & Hunter. The union driving this hard bargain is getting them nowhere. But keep on laughing while players hold out for what 120 million while the league as a whole loses out on well over 250 million a month. Money players won't get.

Oh, cool.  Stern is running a clinic on lying to everybody and @#$%^& around with the league we love, support him, the overseer of the God damn league, lying about the players that play in it.  Great, nice clinic, so happy he's "trying to find a solution"  Yeah, root for that guy, so savy. 

You right, they've already agreed to give up 160 million dollars, why shouldn't they give up MORE?  You right, bend over players, just enjoy it.

Please, in really small words I'll understand, why the @#$% do you back Stern so much?  I'm dead serious that I think you are related to him.  Are you?  Cousins, in law, what?  Every time he opens his mouth, you should be wanting to cringe, but you keep on truckin along with ol boy, what the hell man? 

  

 

[CP1708]

Originally Posted by Statis22


You're laughing but Stern and Adam Silver are running a clinic on Fisher & Hunter. The union driving this hard bargain is getting them nowhere. But keep on laughing while players hold out for what 120 million while the league as a whole loses out on well over 250 million a month. Money players won't get.

Oh, cool.  Stern is running a clinic on lying to everybody and @#$%^& around with the league we love, support him, the overseer of the God damn league, lying about the players that play in it.  Great, nice clinic, so happy he's "trying to find a solution"  Yeah, root for that guy, so savy. 

You right, they've already agreed to give up 160 million dollars, why shouldn't they give up MORE?  You right, bend over players, just enjoy it.

Please, in really small words I'll understand, why the @#$% do you back Stern so much?  I'm dead serious that I think you are related to him.  Are you?  Cousins, in law, what?  Every time he opens his mouth, you should be wanting to cringe, but you keep on truckin along with ol boy, what the hell man? 

  

 

[everysingletime]

grittyman20 wrote:
Couple of things just off the top of my head...

• The players offered to adjust the BRI enough to basically cover the (alleged) 300 mil in losses (although teams not in the red = extra spending money for the owners)
• The dollar amount on the contract isn't guaranteed, all depends on percentages...the players received their agreed upon salary amounts last year only because the BRI was set at 57%. I read somewhere the owners are talking about lowering it to 47% (I'd be pissed if I was forced to take a 10% pay cut, especially when for the most part business is booming)
• I don't know how the league plans on implementing this version of a " hard" cap, but that's just less money that's available to the players...pie just keeps on shrinking.
• I can't think of an industry where profits are so dependent on the unique skills of the "employees" and they aren't compensated accordingly, do you?

Well, the players are compensated.  The question, I guess, is whether they're being compensated enough.  I feel they are.  And some of you guys don't. 

And if a total loss in 300 million dollars only amounts to a 10 percent pay cut from each player than that doesn't seem that bad.  If their salaries were as low as 60k or 80k a year to start then I can see how it would hurt. 

 

[everysingletime]

grittyman20 wrote:
Couple of things just off the top of my head...

• The players offered to adjust the BRI enough to basically cover the (alleged) 300 mil in losses (although teams not in the red = extra spending money for the owners)
• The dollar amount on the contract isn't guaranteed, all depends on percentages...the players received their agreed upon salary amounts last year only because the BRI was set at 57%. I read somewhere the owners are talking about lowering it to 47% (I'd be pissed if I was forced to take a 10% pay cut, especially when for the most part business is booming)
• I don't know how the league plans on implementing this version of a " hard" cap, but that's just less money that's available to the players...pie just keeps on shrinking.
• I can't think of an industry where profits are so dependent on the unique skills of the "employees" and they aren't compensated accordingly, do you?

Well, the players are compensated.  The question, I guess, is whether they're being compensated enough.  I feel they are.  And some of you guys don't. 

And if a total loss in 300 million dollars only amounts to a 10 percent pay cut from each player than that doesn't seem that bad.  If their salaries were as low as 60k or 80k a year to start then I can see how it would hurt. 

 

[CP1708]

And if a total loss in 300 million dollars only amounts to a 10 percent pay cut from each player than that doesn't seem that bad.  If their salaries were as low as 60k or 80k a year to start then I can see how it would hurt. 
So because they make good money, they should be ok to make less then?  But not the owners?  Noooooo, the billionaires shouldn't take a little less because they are rich, but the millionaires should.  Just want to make sure I understand your argument.  Bill Gates shouldn't take a paycut either, but one of his employees that makes 2 mil a year should, cuz Gates is the one taking all the risk......

Simmons

G. The owners, who wanted to miss two months of games all along and even went as far as investigating this summer how they'd legally go about filling their arenas during nights when they "had" NBA home games in November and December. (The answer: You can't schedule other events in your arena without violating labor laws. But if you want to schedule a musical act for two nights before a home game, then "play it by ear" and "add" a third night at the last minute — wink, wink — that's ostensibly legal.) These guys are prepared to reset their system, break the players and reposition themselves for the rest of the decade, when attendance revenue will continue to slide in the HD/Internet/Fun-To-Be-Home Era and small-market teams will continue to suffer without contraction or revenue sharing (neither of which can happen without a more favorable CBA). There was no chance they were playing 82 games this year. It was a charade.
And yes, I'm still waiting for the owners to take some accountability for all the horrific contracts they handed out — especially the ones from the summer of 2010, when they knew a lockout was coming and couldn't help themselves from shelling out indefensibly dumb deals like they were 30 Charlie Sheens unable to stop themselves from snorting coke off a stripper's navel because the stripper lay down naked, cut the lines herself and said, "Here." And then they have the gall to cry poverty? Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh-kay.

(In case you're wondering, there is no "good" side in this disgrace of a battle. It's like the end of War Games when the computer realizes that there's no way to win a nuclear war because everyone will blow up. That's what we're watching. Everyone is a loser, everyone should be ashamed. Everyone.)

H. David Stern, the commissioner of a 26-team league with 30 franchises, who can't seem to understand why they're not making money. Gee, I wonder, David. That's a real head-scratcher. Once considered the greatest commish ever,[sup]5[/sup] Stern could have gotten creative about ways to change the revenue stream, protect the owners, incentivize overachieving players, add a play-in tournament for the 8-seeds, get sponsored jerseys, merge two struggling teams, take advantage of the Chicago market (by adding a second team there) and any other idea that could have prevented us from missing games, and instead, just did the second grade bully routine of "You have too many cookies, I WANT SOME OF YOUR COOKIES!" before finally bending to a reasonable place these past two weeks. But too much damage was done. Now it's a staring contest and a ****-swinging contest. Nobody wins. Everyone loses.

I have been writing this for three months and I will write it again: The fair and logical compromise if we're not contracting (and we should) would be a 50/50 BRI split, four-year max deals for contracts, the elimination of sign-and-trades, a reduced midlevel exception (I think it should be chopped in half), some sort of luxury tax to penalize anyone who spends 15 percent more than the cap and one Larry Bird exception per team (so that teams have a built-in advantage to keep their best player). I promise you, that's where we will end up — there's no real imagination to it, either. We're missing games to get there. Possibly an entire season. And it's playing out that way for a variety of reasons, but mainly because the players can't accept that owners are terrified about where attendance revenue is going (the whole reason this is happening); owners can't accept that players simply don't trust their numbers, intentions or judgment; and both sides waited too long to get serious.

And flipping things around, the best guys — the ones who carry their teams, fulfill their commitments and make the league relevant — should be getting even more than they already do. Why shouldn't LeBron make $30 million a year? Or Dwight Howard? I'm totally fine with that. They deserve it. They're worth that much to their team. I had a connected NBA friend tell me recently that Kobe was probably worth $75 million a year to the Lakers. Easy. You could argue the best guys are underpaid.

And I do see that angle that Simmons talks about.  Paying the stars big money, but less money to the mid level guys, (he used acting as his example, Leo makes big dollars, regular actor makes little dollars) that I can understand.  But since they are the "same" as the big stars, the players have to get the side.  Unless they start tiering the players within the league.  He mentioned specifically James Posey making 7 million dollars.  How do you sell that deal when 25-40 guys will get 20+ mill a year, but the others have to all drop down to less than 5 mil say, that's 350 players, vs 40.  It's the same as having 5 of the richest owners vs 25 poorer ones.  Unless they find a way to divide that money somehow, no reason I'm backing the liars and the dudes hiding their books, and all that.  No way. 

 

[CP1708]

And if a total loss in 300 million dollars only amounts to a 10 percent pay cut from each player than that doesn't seem that bad.  If their salaries were as low as 60k or 80k a year to start then I can see how it would hurt. 
So because they make good money, they should be ok to make less then?  But not the owners?  Noooooo, the billionaires shouldn't take a little less because they are rich, but the millionaires should.  Just want to make sure I understand your argument.  Bill Gates shouldn't take a paycut either, but one of his employees that makes 2 mil a year should, cuz Gates is the one taking all the risk......

Simmons

G. The owners, who wanted to miss two months of games all along and even went as far as investigating this summer how they'd legally go about filling their arenas during nights when they "had" NBA home games in November and December. (The answer: You can't schedule other events in your arena without violating labor laws. But if you want to schedule a musical act for two nights before a home game, then "play it by ear" and "add" a third night at the last minute — wink, wink — that's ostensibly legal.) These guys are prepared to reset their system, break the players and reposition themselves for the rest of the decade, when attendance revenue will continue to slide in the HD/Internet/Fun-To-Be-Home Era and small-market teams will continue to suffer without contraction or revenue sharing (neither of which can happen without a more favorable CBA). There was no chance they were playing 82 games this year. It was a charade.
And yes, I'm still waiting for the owners to take some accountability for all the horrific contracts they handed out — especially the ones from the summer of 2010, when they knew a lockout was coming and couldn't help themselves from shelling out indefensibly dumb deals like they were 30 Charlie Sheens unable to stop themselves from snorting coke off a stripper's navel because the stripper lay down naked, cut the lines herself and said, "Here." And then they have the gall to cry poverty? Ohhhhhhhhhhhhh-kay.

(In case you're wondering, there is no "good" side in this disgrace of a battle. It's like the end of War Games when the computer realizes that there's no way to win a nuclear war because everyone will blow up. That's what we're watching. Everyone is a loser, everyone should be ashamed. Everyone.)

H. David Stern, the commissioner of a 26-team league with 30 franchises, who can't seem to understand why they're not making money. Gee, I wonder, David. That's a real head-scratcher. Once considered the greatest commish ever,[sup]5[/sup] Stern could have gotten creative about ways to change the revenue stream, protect the owners, incentivize overachieving players, add a play-in tournament for the 8-seeds, get sponsored jerseys, merge two struggling teams, take advantage of the Chicago market (by adding a second team there) and any other idea that could have prevented us from missing games, and instead, just did the second grade bully routine of "You have too many cookies, I WANT SOME OF YOUR COOKIES!" before finally bending to a reasonable place these past two weeks. But too much damage was done. Now it's a staring contest and a ****-swinging contest. Nobody wins. Everyone loses.

I have been writing this for three months and I will write it again: The fair and logical compromise if we're not contracting (and we should) would be a 50/50 BRI split, four-year max deals for contracts, the elimination of sign-and-trades, a reduced midlevel exception (I think it should be chopped in half), some sort of luxury tax to penalize anyone who spends 15 percent more than the cap and one Larry Bird exception per team (so that teams have a built-in advantage to keep their best player). I promise you, that's where we will end up — there's no real imagination to it, either. We're missing games to get there. Possibly an entire season. And it's playing out that way for a variety of reasons, but mainly because the players can't accept that owners are terrified about where attendance revenue is going (the whole reason this is happening); owners can't accept that players simply don't trust their numbers, intentions or judgment; and both sides waited too long to get serious.

And flipping things around, the best guys — the ones who carry their teams, fulfill their commitments and make the league relevant — should be getting even more than they already do. Why shouldn't LeBron make $30 million a year? Or Dwight Howard? I'm totally fine with that. They deserve it. They're worth that much to their team. I had a connected NBA friend tell me recently that Kobe was probably worth $75 million a year to the Lakers. Easy. You could argue the best guys are underpaid.

And I do see that angle that Simmons talks about.  Paying the stars big money, but less money to the mid level guys, (he used acting as his example, Leo makes big dollars, regular actor makes little dollars) that I can understand.  But since they are the "same" as the big stars, the players have to get the side.  Unless they start tiering the players within the league.  He mentioned specifically James Posey making 7 million dollars.  How do you sell that deal when 25-40 guys will get 20+ mill a year, but the others have to all drop down to less than 5 mil say, that's 350 players, vs 40.  It's the same as having 5 of the richest owners vs 25 poorer ones.  Unless they find a way to divide that money somehow, no reason I'm backing the liars and the dudes hiding their books, and all that.  No way. 

 

[duba169]

WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski
Y! Sources: After relenting on a strict lockout edict, NBA will allow its teams to scout NCAA practices. tinyurl.com/3voh48w


alanhahn Alan Hahn
Amar'e tells Newsday "Sarver, for sure" is a hardline owner and "probably the main guy who is pushing for this lockout." #NBA
20 seconds ago

alanhahn Alan Hahn
Amar'e adds of Sarver: "It wouldn't have been a big deal if he had just re-signed some kid named Stoudemire. Then he'd be in good shape."
jadande J.A. AdandeJaVale McGee on NBPA meeting: "definitely some guys in there saying that they’re ready to fold. But the majority are ready to stand strong"31 seconds agoUnion already starts to crumble SMH.

 

[duba169]

WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski
Y! Sources: After relenting on a strict lockout edict, NBA will allow its teams to scout NCAA practices. tinyurl.com/3voh48w


alanhahn Alan Hahn
Amar'e tells Newsday "Sarver, for sure" is a hardline owner and "probably the main guy who is pushing for this lockout." #NBA
20 seconds ago

alanhahn Alan Hahn
Amar'e adds of Sarver: "It wouldn't have been a big deal if he had just re-signed some kid named Stoudemire. Then he'd be in good shape."
jadande J.A. AdandeJaVale McGee on NBPA meeting: "definitely some guys in there saying that they’re ready to fold. But the majority are ready to stand strong"31 seconds agoUnion already starts to crumble SMH.

 

[dacomeup]

JaVale McGee, 1st player to leave today's meeting, said "Definitely some guys in there saying that they are ready to fold."


Hope that this isn't the consensus.

 

[dacomeup]

JaVale McGee, 1st player to leave today's meeting, said "Definitely some guys in there saying that they are ready to fold."


Hope that this isn't the consensus.

 

[CP1708]

Oh the players will cave, no doubt about that.  I'm not rooting for the owners obviously, but make no mistake, they are going to clean house in this.  I already knew that coming in, as did a lot of us.  I'm surprised the players have held out this long honestly.  The Max guys can hang on longer, but the low pay guys are going to start begging to take a deal pretty soon.  And the owners know that, and have all along.  Another reason nobody should root for the owners/Stern. 


Sarver  

  I hope the Suns are one of the ones to get contracted in a few years, would make me so happy. 

 

[CP1708]

Oh the players will cave, no doubt about that.  I'm not rooting for the owners obviously, but make no mistake, they are going to clean house in this.  I already knew that coming in, as did a lot of us.  I'm surprised the players have held out this long honestly.  The Max guys can hang on longer, but the low pay guys are going to start begging to take a deal pretty soon.  And the owners know that, and have all along.  Another reason nobody should root for the owners/Stern. 


Sarver  

  I hope the Suns are one of the ones to get contracted in a few years, would make me so happy. 

 

[JD617]

I wish there was a camera rolling for that KG/Stern confrontation.

 

[JD617]

I wish there was a camera rolling for that KG/Stern confrontation.

 

[duba169]

What confrontation.

JaValeMcGee34 Pierre McGeeh
I never said anyone is ready to fold! Media always wanna turn it!

Haha

 

[duba169]

What confrontation.

JaValeMcGee34 Pierre McGeeh
I never said anyone is ready to fold! Media always wanna turn it!

Haha

 

[statis22]

Owners had to give up that 160 million regardless as it pertained to the old CBA. They were getting that money anyway.

Owners are without fault I did agree with you, DubA, & Nas that owners demands were too high and that needed to change, and most of those demands have been ceded. Players just don't want respinsibility of sharing the BRI.

As I said before I have no issue with players driving this hard bargain trying to get every penny they can but when they try and run a "Let Us Play" campaign then the come off as hypocritical.

At this point th owners rhetoric is was more plausible that the union.

But yeah keep fighting so owners can give out Rashard Lewis type deals to guys who can't live up to that. Makes a ton of sense.

 

[statis22]

Owners had to give up that 160 million regardless as it pertained to the old CBA. They were getting that money anyway.

Owners are without fault I did agree with you, DubA, & Nas that owners demands were too high and that needed to change, and most of those demands have been ceded. Players just don't want respinsibility of sharing the BRI.

As I said before I have no issue with players driving this hard bargain trying to get every penny they can but when they try and run a "Let Us Play" campaign then the come off as hypocritical.

At this point th owners rhetoric is was more plausible that the union.

But yeah keep fighting so owners can give out Rashard Lewis type deals to guys who can't live up to that. Makes a ton of sense.

 

[krazy88s]

Maybe he didn't say it, but they'll still fold. Oh yes, they will.

 

[hankmoody]

Originally Posted by Statis22

Originally Posted by CP1708

Statis22 wrote:

---

Are we still debating for th players because I mean they are the ones still holding out at this point?

Whether folks choose to believe Stern or not he is the one giving out details. That owners have pretty much ceded the hard cap & the hard luxury tax and the union is still playing the victim. I mean do they even take responsibility in splitting their share of the BRI when Stern has said that at the end of the day the players will get the same amount?

You mean after the owners take the 300 mil off the top or what are you saying?  Did that part change and I missed it? 

at Stern giving out the details.  Of course he is.  He's known about them for....what it say last page, 3 years now? 

  But you'll just take everything he says at face value huh? 

  

You're laughing but Stern and Adam Silver are running a clinic on Fisher & Hunter.

The union driving this hard bargain is getting them nowhere. But keep on laughing while players hold out for what 120 million while the league as a whole loses out on well over 250 million a month. Money players won't get.


Pretty much.


That market debate caused me to lose brain cells. Thank you CP.



What's the deal with a barnstorming tour/league?

 

[hankmoody]

Originally Posted by Statis22

Originally Posted by CP1708

Statis22 wrote:

---

Are we still debating for th players because I mean they are the ones still holding out at this point?

Whether folks choose to believe Stern or not he is the one giving out details. That owners have pretty much ceded the hard cap & the hard luxury tax and the union is still playing the victim. I mean do they even take responsibility in splitting their share of the BRI when Stern has said that at the end of the day the players will get the same amount?

You mean after the owners take the 300 mil off the top or what are you saying?  Did that part change and I missed it? 

at Stern giving out the details.  Of course he is.  He's known about them for....what it say last page, 3 years now? 

  But you'll just take everything he says at face value huh? 

  

You're laughing but Stern and Adam Silver are running a clinic on Fisher & Hunter.

The union driving this hard bargain is getting them nowhere. But keep on laughing while players hold out for what 120 million while the league as a whole loses out on well over 250 million a month. Money players won't get.


Pretty much.


That market debate caused me to lose brain cells. Thank you CP.



What's the deal with a barnstorming tour/league?

 

[krazy88s]

Maybe he didn't say it, but they'll still fold. Oh yes, they will.

 

[lawdog1]

Originally Posted by DubA169

What confrontation.

JaValeMcGee34 Pierre McGeeh
I never said anyone is ready to fold! Media always wanna turn it!

Haha

Whether he said it or not (and I think he probably did, considering two different people quoted him), I'm sure its true.  But the question is how many of them are ready to fold?  If its still only minority, it may not matter that much.   

  

 

[lawdog1]

Originally Posted by DubA169

What confrontation.

JaValeMcGee34 Pierre McGeeh
I never said anyone is ready to fold! Media always wanna turn it!

Haha

Whether he said it or not (and I think he probably did, considering two different people quoted him), I'm sure its true.  But the question is how many of them are ready to fold?  If its still only minority, it may not matter that much.