PDA

View Full Version : NBA owners drop insistence on non-guaranteed contracts



FriedTofuz
06-17-2011, 09:35 PM
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/nba/2011-06-17-non-guaranteed-labor-owners_n.htm

NEW YORK (AP) — NBA owners relaxed their insistence on non-guaranteed contracts in a new collective bargaining agreement Friday, but players cautioned that isn't enough because the league is still seeking a hard salary cap.

Even so, the proposal by the owners during a 4-hour meeting was perhaps their most significant movement yet as the sides try to agree to a new deal before the current one expires June 30.

"We think it's significant. Very significant, actually," Commissioner David Stern said.

Much more is needed, though. The sides set up another meeting for Tuesday, which Stern indicated would be crucial for determining if enough progress can be made in time to avoid a work stoppage.

"I really think that the time to have an optimistic or pessimistic view is at the close of the day on Tuesday," Stern said. "I think Tuesday's a very important day in these negotiations."

daleja424
06-17-2011, 10:42 PM
Thats the first domino... players will counter with 59% revenue to Owners if they agree to ditch the idea of a hard cap. Owners will ask for 65% for them to drop the hard cap. Players will agree to 61% with better revenue sharing... and the idea of a hard cap will die. The system will be essentially the same as it has been... with the owners getting a little more of the money pie...

daleja424
06-17-2011, 10:46 PM
players going back to 39% revenue will mean about a 10% salary cut across the board for players.

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2011/32/basketball-valuations-11_rank.html

according to forbes numbers from this year giving back that money will mean that only 9 teams would have reported a loss this year... and the league would be at a huge net gain...with a little better revenue sharing all the teams would be in the green easily...

...and then everyone will be happy...

FriedTofuz
06-17-2011, 11:15 PM
players going back to 39% revenue will mean about a 10% salary cut across the board for players.

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2011/32/basketball-valuations-11_rank.html

according to forbes numbers from this year giving back that money will mean that only 9 teams would have reported a loss this year... and the league would be at a huge net gain...with a little better revenue sharing all the teams would be in the green easily...

...and then everyone will be happy...

Those 9 teams could be big market teams. Everyone will get happy in time, but i doubt it will be soon since players would not want to lose pay.

daleja424
06-17-2011, 11:18 PM
The only teams that would be seriously in the read still (by more then 2 million lets say) are: Sacramento, NJ, Denver, Indiana, Charlotte, and Orlando.

Only three of the those teams would be in the red with improved revenue sharing: Indiana, Charlotte, Orlando.

Those three teams are not going to hold up the rest of the league working...

daleja424
06-17-2011, 11:18 PM
players won't love to give back 10% of their salaries... but it is a reasonable compromise...

FriedTofuz
06-17-2011, 11:23 PM
players won't love to give back 10% of their salaries... but it is a reasonable compromise...

is that the proposed comprise, if they give up 10% of their salaries? that would be loseing anywhere from 82,500 - 2.3 million :speechless:

daleja424
06-17-2011, 11:26 PM
I think that they will agree to that paycut if it means no hardcap and ensures guaranteed contracts...

Thay all make enough money that if they have to give back 10% to make te league financially stable... I think they would agree...

Think about it like this... if the company you were working for needed 10% for your salary to keep everyone working (and there was no competitor for you to turn for)... you would have to agree... no?

llemon
06-17-2011, 11:27 PM
Aren't players already kicking back 10% of their salaries?

daleja424
06-17-2011, 11:28 PM
nope. If they had agreed to that already then the owners would already be getting the 61-39 split they want...

probably you read that giving back 10% is a good option... but as far as I know...no such compromise has been made.

FriedTofuz
06-17-2011, 11:30 PM
I think that they will agree to that paycut if it means no hardcap and ensures guaranteed contracts...

Thay all make enough money that if they have to give back 10% to make te league financially stable... I think they would agree...

Think about it like this... if the company you were working for needed 10% for your salary to keep everyone working (and there was no competitor for you to turn for)... you would have to agree... no?

Most players will probably recieve guranteed contracts though. Not many players will accept contracts where a year isnt guranteed.

daleja424
06-17-2011, 11:33 PM
Most players will probably recieve guranteed contracts though. Not many players will accept contracts where a year isnt guranteed.

well originally the owners wanted nonguaranteed contracts like the NFL for everyone... they have since backed off that idea...

all they need to do now if settle the money and the hard cap issue... and the rest will be easy

BigCityofDreams
06-17-2011, 11:34 PM
If the players give back 10% is there anyway they can make that up? Not saying they can recoup of all it but IMO the game hasn't been this popular in yrs and this season can be a building block to increase the growth of the game and it's players.

llemon
06-17-2011, 11:38 PM
nope. If they had agreed to that already then the owners would already be getting the 61-39 split they want...

probably you read that giving back 10% is a good option... but as far as I know...no such compromise has been made.

See Question#15 in Larry Coon's CBA/FAQ site. It says 10% of players salary is held in escrow, and the players may get all, some or none of it back at the end of the season.

daleja424
06-17-2011, 11:39 PM
They have always gotten it back. The cap every year is based on the leagues revenue. So in that sense if the league continues to grow the salary cap increases, the Max increases, the mle increases (bc they are all based on %s)

daleja424
06-17-2011, 11:42 PM
Llemon,

Thats not what I mean though. I am talking about an additional 10% above the current system.

BigCityofDreams
06-17-2011, 11:46 PM
They have always gotten it back. The cap every year is based on the leagues revenue. So in that sense if the league continues to grow the salary cap increases, the Max increases, the mle increases (bc they are all based on %s)

Thanks for clearing that up.

GREATNESS ONE
06-17-2011, 11:52 PM
The NBA is going to get this done fast and make the NFL look really bad.

BigCityofDreams
06-17-2011, 11:56 PM
The NBA is going to get this done fast and make the NFL look really bad.

Hopefully they do because the NBA needs build on their momentum.

0nekhmer
06-18-2011, 12:14 AM
makes sense! players are getting treated like queens these days

Punk
06-18-2011, 01:39 AM
The players are now gonna have to make a compromise as well. The only I way I see this moving into a deal before July 31st is if the players give into something.

We know James Dolan and another owner is open to revenue sharing which is something the players really want. Yet, Stern is cockblocking that.

FriedTofuz
06-18-2011, 02:04 AM
The players are now gonna have to make a compromise as well. The only I way I see this moving into a deal before July 31st is if the players give into something.

We know James Dolan and another owner is open to revenue sharing which is something the players really want. Yet, Stern is cockblocking that.

In order to solve problems, you will eventually have to comprimise. I think players would like to do so, but not at the expense of their pay cheque.

Tmath
06-18-2011, 02:17 AM
Here's an Idea STOP OFFERING THEM RIDICULOUS CONTRACTS. Lock the players out, if they don't want to take a pay cut let them to go to europe because at the end of the day the majority want to play in the NBA and in the US so either take a pay cut or GTFO, why should anyone get payed so much for playing a game?

Hellcrooner
06-18-2011, 03:05 AM
Here's an Idea STOP OFFERING THEM RIDICULOUS CONTRACTS. Lock the players out, if they don't want to take a pay cut let them to go to europe because at the end of the day the majority want to play in the NBA and in the US so either take a pay cut or GTFO, why should anyone get payed so much for playing a game?
you dont want Usa players to test europe, you simply dont.

What? team is paying my taxes? and i get 100% of the contract?

they provide me a house and car and pay my bills?¿

only 50 to 70 games TOTAL in a seaosn deppending on succes? no back to backs at all? no heavy travelling? lots of days off, time to train my skills between the season, less grinding to my body? so longer career, and more contracts to earn?

what? i can sign for whoever i want whenever i want?

I can always decide where to play, and how much to earn with no limits?

Team can spend ALL they want to give me help to win?

What¿?? theres more than 1 trophy to win?

If i want to be traded to a determined team, that team only has to pay MONEY to the team im in and not lose any valuable players hainvg to match salarys in teh trade?

What?


Belive me if 12 of the top 20 players in the Nba decided to Test europe theres a GOOD CHANCE that there would never be an NBA again.
or at least Nba would have to accept the rules from the rest of the world.

FREE MARKET

FriedTofuz
06-18-2011, 10:54 AM
Here's an Idea STOP OFFERING THEM RIDICULOUS CONTRACTS. Lock the players out, if they don't want to take a pay cut let them to go to europe because at the end of the day the majority want to play in the NBA and in the US so either take a pay cut or GTFO, why should anyone get payed so much for playing a game?

They have to offer them ridiculous contract sometimes. The reason for this, is to aquire them via free agency so they wouldnt sign with another team. The money is used to influence the free agents decision and thats why teams throw big bucks out there.

llemon
06-18-2011, 11:41 AM
They have always gotten it back. The cap every year is based on the leagues revenue. So in that sense if the league continues to grow the salary cap increases, the Max increases, the mle increases (bc they are all based on %s)

Mr. Coon states that that in the 2009-2010 season, $191.8 mil of players salary was held in escrow, of which the players got $21.6 mil back, meaning they forfeited 8.874% of their salaries in that season.

BALLER R
06-18-2011, 12:36 PM
looking at the success of this years playoffs(Ratings) they is no way either side can afford to have a lockout next season. This could be the step in the right direction but then you have a lockout and you come back after next year you might of lost some viewers. the league needs there to be a season.

Mobsterkel
06-18-2011, 12:53 PM
they both already get enough damn money, who cares just play ball u babies, that what it should be about not, oh i get paid only 65 million instead of 75. Take what u have and be greatfull. And quit crying owners and players. its stupid that we have to go through this agian. hopefully they will not be like the nfl, and come up with a god damn deal.

llemon
06-18-2011, 12:57 PM
they both already get enough damn money, who cares just play ball u babies, that what it should be about not, oh i get paid only 65 million instead of 75. Take what u have and be greatfull. And quit crying owners and players. its stupid that we have to go through this agian. hopefully they will not be like the nfl, and come up with a god damn deal.

Hardly anyone ever feels they make enough money.

FriedTofuz
06-18-2011, 01:13 PM
Hardly anyone ever feels they make enough money.

Exactly, This makes it even more unlikely for players to comprimise. We will probably have a lockout until someone caves in.