PDA

View Full Version : CBS's Ken Berger tweets about CBA negotiations



lakers4sho
06-21-2011, 03:48 PM
David Stern: Owners proposed guaranteeing no less than $2 billion per year in salary over 10-year CBA. #NBA


Stern: "This is we think the best shot we have ... to avoid a lockout." #NBA


Stern says cap "target" is $62 million per team, with a max above that to allow for exceptions such as the Bird exception." #NBA


Stern on owners' proposal: "It's all out there. ... I'm never saying final, final to anything other than we made our offer." #NBA


Players' response was to reconvene Friday after meeting as a group on Thursday. #NBA

http://twitter.com/#!/KBerg_CBS

Thoughts?

godolphins
06-21-2011, 03:53 PM
At least they took the $45 million hard cap off the table

njnets
06-21-2011, 04:02 PM
yea, i saw tweets discussing the cap at 62 million also. im actually kinda surprised that the cap would be going up. the owners seemed adamant about lowering the cap.

ive seen tweets about the bird rights still being there. anything about mle?

dnewguy
06-21-2011, 04:03 PM
what? 62 million is a surprise.

DoMeFavors
06-21-2011, 04:06 PM
This seems fair, please no lock out.

JIDsanity
06-21-2011, 04:08 PM
This is a good sign, sounds like its getting somewhere. A final decision could be made soon. Is the amnesty clause still in play, or no?

SA5195
06-21-2011, 04:09 PM
I just hope there's no lockout :pray:

Chill_Will_24
06-21-2011, 04:10 PM
A flex cap? How does that help small market teams? If anything it helps large market teams with rich owners like Cuban

DoMeFavors
06-21-2011, 04:12 PM
A flex cap? How does that help small market teams? If anything it helps large market teams with rich owners like Cuban

and us

lakers4sho
06-21-2011, 04:20 PM
yea, i saw tweets discussing the cap at 62 million also. im actually kinda surprised that the cap would be going up. the owners seemed adamant about lowering the cap.

ive seen tweets about the bird rights still being there. anything about mle?


This is a good sign, sounds like its getting somewhere. A final decision could be made soon. Is the amnesty clause still in play, or no?

He hasn't reported anything that wasn't on the original post. So those issues are still to be discussed, I'm guessing.

DMasta718
06-21-2011, 04:22 PM
Reading and catching up on what's been said, I feel confident we wont' have a lockout

fin_frenzy_84
06-21-2011, 04:29 PM
Is this good news?

DMasta718
06-21-2011, 04:40 PM
The way its looking now, it is good news.

daleja424
06-21-2011, 04:53 PM
This is a good sign, sounds like its getting somewhere. A final decision could be made soon. Is the amnesty clause still in play, or no?
No, no need for one with a flex cap and guaranteed deals...


yea, i saw tweets discussing the cap at 62 million also. im actually kinda surprised that the cap would be going up. the owners seemed adamant about lowering the cap.

ive seen tweets about the bird rights still being there. anything about mle?
No word yet, but I am sure there will be some sort of provision for signing FAs with the flex space.


Is this good news?
Yes... in one week time the owners have pretty much backed off all of their craziest demands it seems. If the players are willing to give up some money... the deal will eventually get done.

daleja424
06-21-2011, 04:55 PM
I will say this though... unless there is a lot of "flex" in this cap scheme... a lot of teams are going to be running into trouble pretty soon (Miami, Chicago, New York, Oklahoma City, etc)

fin_frenzy_84
06-21-2011, 04:57 PM
I don't understand cap that well.but how would Chicago be in trouble we are under th3 cap now

JordansBulls
06-21-2011, 04:58 PM
I will say this though... unless there is a lot of "flex" in this cap scheme... a lot of teams are going to be running into trouble pretty soon (Miami, Chicago, New York, Oklahoma City, etc)

Chicago is under that now. They will be in trouble though once they extend Rose unless they trade Noah/Boozer or Deng.

NYman15
06-21-2011, 05:00 PM
Awesome news! Means owners are conceding a bit to get the deal done. For the Knicks, its awesome news! especially looking towards the 2012 free agent class. If the cap was at 62 million, that would most likely give the Knicks enough room for a max contract. At the end of 2012 Knicks have 3 guaranteed contract that adds up to 41-42 million. With a 62 million dollar cap that would give the Knicks almost 20 million to play around with. Awesome news for Knicks and the NBA.

justinnum1
06-21-2011, 05:00 PM
I don't understand cap that well.but how would Chicago be in trouble we are under th3 cap now

Rose is going to get payed.

NBAfan4life
06-21-2011, 05:05 PM
If the owners have made these kind of consessions and the players don't take it they're stupid. It will not get any better than this.

daleja424
06-21-2011, 05:05 PM
I don't understand cap that well.but how would Chicago be in trouble we are under th3 cap now


Chicago is under that now. They will be in trouble though once they extend Rose unless they trade Noah/Boozer or Deng.

I said pretty soon... as in... as soon as Rose gets paid you all are done...


Awesome news! Means owners are conceding a bit to get the deal done. For the Knicks, its awesome news! especially looking towards the 2012 free agent class. If the cap was at 62 million, that would most likely give the Knicks enough room for a max contract. At the end of 2012 Knicks have 3 guaranteed contract that adds up to 41-42 million. With a 62 million dollar cap that would give the Knicks almost 20 million to play around with. Awesome news for Knicks and the NBA.

Yes but with this crappy "flex" idea... you will be unable to get anymore guys for your team besides those four guys...

fin_frenzy_84
06-21-2011, 05:06 PM
Rose is going to get payed.

Imo when rose gets payer booze or Noah will be gone!!!

daleja424
06-21-2011, 05:07 PM
If the owners have made these kind of consessions and the players don't take it they're stupid. It will not get any better than this.

Bullcrap... this s negotiations... the owners havent put their final offer out there yet. The players need to continue to squeeze the owners.

Players should make some concessions here but continue to make a couple minor demands...

The owners clearly want to deal now... so they will give in a little more.

daleja424
06-21-2011, 05:07 PM
Imo when rose gets payer booze or Noah will be gone!!!

how? They both just got resigned...

Punk
06-21-2011, 05:10 PM
PLEASE no lockout. This is the best deal and don't screw it up.

daleja424
06-21-2011, 05:10 PM
PLEASE no lockout. This is the best deal and don't screw it up.

As a Knicks fan... you should be staunchly opposed to this as is...

Punk
06-21-2011, 05:14 PM
As a Knicks fan... you should be staunchly opposed to this as is...

Getting Chris Paul would be great but It's not exactly a problem to stick to the roster we have and mold it.

fin_frenzy_84
06-21-2011, 05:17 PM
how? They both just got resigned...

Because obviously if signing rose will be a problem of course they will be gone. It's obvious

daleja424
06-21-2011, 05:18 PM
Getting Chris Paul would be great but It's not exactly a problem to stick to the roster we have and mold it.

This deal means that there would basically be no free agency for NY... a .500 team that was one and done last year...

how is that not a problem?

ManRam
06-21-2011, 05:20 PM
Sounds optimistic, but I still don't think it's going to be resolved this easily.

daleja424
06-21-2011, 05:22 PM
Because obviously if signing rose will be a problem of course they will be gone. It's obvious

That was my point obviously...

This deal is a problem for Miami, Chicago, OKC, etc b/c it means hard decisions have to be made and good players have to be let go (down the line). Even more immediately it is a problem for LA and Dallas.

Some examples of teams that would be in trouble:

Dallas will have to let Chandler, Barrea, Butler, and Stevenson walk (or at least 3 of them likely)

LA would have to cut people (next year they owe 94 million)

Boston would reach the hard cap with about 8 players

Orlando will be stuck as is (at best)

Miami will be stuck as is

OKC will pretty much be stuck as is

NY will be stuck as is

Chicago will be stuck as is

ETC ETC ETC

fin_frenzy_84
06-21-2011, 05:30 PM
That was my point obviously...

This deal is a problem for Miami, Chicago, OKC, etc b/c iii means hard decisions have to be made and good players have to be let go.

Some examples of teams that would be in trouble:

Dallas will have to let Chandler, Barrea, Butler, and Stevenson walk (or at least 3 of them likely)

LA would have to cut people (next year they owe 94 million)

Boston would reach the hard cap with about 8 players

Orlando will be tuck as is

Miami will be stuck as is

OKC will pretty much be stuck as is

NY will be stuck as is

Chicago will be stuck as is

ETC ETC ETC

as a bulls fan I would love boozer out of here. Good thing about the bulls is in a couple years we can possibly have a lottery pick

Punk
06-21-2011, 05:44 PM
This deal means that there would basically be no free agency for NY... a .500 team that was one and done last year...

how is that not a problem?

I highly doubt the final deal will be anything that harsh. Besides we are already looking at drafting to fill our needs.

But I agree, It's not a good idea. But I highly doubt they will keep it that harsh, Stern wouldn't allow that.

NYman15
06-21-2011, 05:51 PM
The thing is in 2012 they could decide not to go for a third max and instead build around Melo and Amare. They could have 20 million in cap room which would give them flexibility to make trade or sign players. Something a team like Miami would have more of a problem to do.

Punk
06-21-2011, 05:57 PM
The way I see it is It will only be a problem to us if it limits us signing Dalembert, Foster, Stevenson, Fields, etc.

Outside of that, we really don't need another superstar. Adding Paul is the final piece to a puzzle that people thought was a wedding joke but If it comes down to the NBA being screwed out of another great relevant year in 2011-2012. Then I'm willing to step back from it.

Unless Paul takes less money which he has said.

Kevj77
06-21-2011, 06:14 PM
That is much more fair. If the owners want a hard cap it has to be at least over the current soft cap 45 million was laughable. It would be a harder cap without MLE, but allowing team to go over to resign player with Bird rights to keep homegrown players is much better.

They also need to phase it in over a few years so teams don't have to break up rosters just because of the new CBA.

TylerSL
06-21-2011, 06:48 PM
Unlike the NFL, the NBA Owners dont want a lockout.

ackar
06-21-2011, 10:27 PM
this is a great sign NBA and players learn from the NFL. that lesson is still ongoing. funny thing if all these things on the up and up it all up to the players now. I am nearly anti-owner but this great.

BigCityofDreams
06-21-2011, 11:22 PM
I will say this though... unless there is a lot of "flex" in this cap scheme... a lot of teams are going to be running into trouble pretty soon (Miami, Chicago, New York, Oklahoma City, etc)

So that's David Aldridge said the players haven't moved off of keeping a soft cap in place.

DrDre94
06-21-2011, 11:36 PM
Wait... can someone explain how this hurts big teams like the Knicks?

MGB
06-22-2011, 01:00 AM
I will say this though... unless there is a lot of "flex" in this cap scheme... a lot of teams are going to be running into trouble pretty soon (Miami, Chicago, New York, Oklahoma City, etc)

Chicago and OKC would be just fine under this. The flex cap isn't going to remove the "Bird Rule," so both teams would be allowed to go over the cap to re-sign their own guys they already have rights to (ie Rose, KD, etc.) The teams it'd be REAL bad for are the Heat and Knicks because they wouldn't be able to offer much of a contract to anyone outside the young guys they already have Bird Rights for.

The way I understand it, that's the only reason the "flex" part of the cap would exist. I love the idea of this kind of cap.

LOOTERX9
06-22-2011, 01:12 AM
Sounds optimistic, but I still don't think it's going to be resolved this easily.

OMG! I love the video in your sig!!!!:clap:

Punk
06-22-2011, 11:05 AM
Sounds like we might have a 2-3 month lockout but nothing to interrupt the season.

ragee
06-22-2011, 11:45 AM
Can someone help me out here please? How is this different from what the NBA has right now? First, the cap is going to increase just like every year except last year... Then there will still be ways for teams to sign players even if they are over the cap such as Bird Rights... I don't see the difference...

ragee
06-22-2011, 11:51 AM
Ok, I am missing something here... Flex schemes? what the hell is that anyway?

todu82
06-22-2011, 11:51 AM
Looks promising, with the NFL lockout looking like it may end soon we might not have the shortage of the major sports many people feared.

daleja424
06-22-2011, 11:52 AM
Chicago and OKC would be just fine under this. The flex cap isn't going to remove the "Bird Rule," so both teams would be allowed to go over the cap to re-sign their own guys they already have rights to (ie Rose, KD, etc.) The teams it'd be REAL bad for are the Heat and Knicks because they wouldn't be able to offer much of a contract to anyone outside the young guys they already have Bird Rights for.

The way I understand it, that's the only reason the "flex" part of the cap would exist. I love the idea of this kind of cap.

Wrong... the flex is a league defined amount of space. Unlike the current system you cannot go over the cap by any amount to resign your guys... only the league determined flex amount. Eventually you would still hit a hard cap ceiling.


Can someone help me out here please? How is this different from what the NBA has right now? First, the cap is going to increase just like every year except last year... Then there will still be ways for teams to sign players even if they are over the cap such as Bird Rights... I don't see the difference...
The difference is that instead of having a luxury tax threshhold above the soft cap like there is now, you would have a hard cap above the soft cap. If implemented immediately, t is likely that several teams would have to dismantle over the next couple years as a result.

Anyways, no need to fret over this b/c this offer was a JOKE to the players. Not only did the nba keep the hard cap in place... but they also are trying to take the players from 57% of revenues to under 40% of revenues bu 2020. LMAO! Not going to happen!

daleja424
06-22-2011, 11:54 AM
For all of you that find this promising... don't be too encouraged. As of two days ago the two sticking points were money and a hard cap... as of today the two sticking points are still money and a hard cap. Those two fundamental differences are immense. The gap is huge right now.

ragee
06-22-2011, 12:00 PM
Wrong... the flex is a league defined amount of space. Unlike the current system you cannot go over the cap by any amount to resign your guys... only the league determined flex amount. Eventually you would still hit a hard cap ceiling.


The difference is that instead of having a luxury tax threshhold above the soft cap like there is now, you would have a hard cap above the soft cap. If implemented immediately, t is likely that several teams would have to dismantle over the next couple years as a result.

Anyways, no need to fret over this b/c this offer was a JOKE to the players. Not only did the nba keep the hard cap in place... but they also are trying to take the players from 57% of revenues to under 40% of revenues bu 2020. LMAO! Not going to happen!

Well, that's a lot better than the hard cap they were proposing before... Both sides needs to compromise... The owners have done their part I guess... What can the players come up with that would somehow help the owners with their dilemma?

daleja424
06-22-2011, 12:04 PM
Well, that's a lot better than the hard cap they were proposing before... Both sides needs to compromise... The owners have done their part I guess... What can the players come up with that would somehow help the owners with their dilemma?

No, it really isn't a whole lot better than a straight hard cap... unless the cushion is like 15-20 mil (in which case you might as well continue to play with a soft cap).

And the money is not even close. The players have talked about being willing to go from 57% down to around 54% over the course of 5 years... well the league wants them to go fro 57% down to 39% over ten years... That is absurd!

This is not nearly as big of a compromise by the owners as it would seem. The owners have to give in on the hard cap if they expect the players to give in on the money.

ragee
06-22-2011, 12:21 PM
No, it really isn't a whole lot better than a straight hard cap... unless the cushion is like 15-20 mil (in which case you might as well continue to play with a soft cap).

And the money is not even close. The players have talked about being willing to go from 57% down to around 54% over the course of 5 years... well the league wants them to go fro 57% down to 39% over ten years... That is absurd!

This is not nearly as big of a compromise by the owners as it would seem. The owners have to give in on the hard cap if they expect the players to give in on the money.

We only have a couple of more days left... Lockout it is? Yikes!

Daleja, you seem to be one of the most knowledgeable posters here when it comes to this topic... So if you are in the middle of the players and the owners, what do you think would be the best way to resolve this? What should be the new CBA that would not lean towards any side?

nycericanguy
06-22-2011, 12:27 PM
Great news for NY. They only have $40m committed for 2012 so at 62-70m they'd have enough to resign Fields, Douglas and get a third max. Or they could resign all their role players and draft picks and then sign a very good $10m type of player.

I told you guys that hard cap with a lower cap with no MLE was not happening.

daleja424
06-22-2011, 12:28 PM
We only have a couple of more days left... Lockout it is? Yikes!

Daleja, you seem to be one of the most knowledgeable posters here when it comes to this topic... So if you are in the middle of the players and the owners, what do you think would be the best way to resolve this? What should be the new CBA that would not lean towards any side?

The players seem unwilling to compromise on the hard cap issue... so whatever the resolution ultimately is I would guess that it doesn't include a hard cap.

The question is...how much money do the players have to give up to get the owners to give up the hard cap.

The only other wrinkle is that the players want a 5 year deal and the owners want a 10 year deal.

I would say that a reasonable compromise would be a 50-50 split of money (achieved gradually over the first 7 years of a 10 year deal) with no hard cap (a luxury tax system similar to what we have now, and maybe a wrinkle that takes away the MLE/BAE once you exceed the lux tax).

I think that would make both sides happy. The money works. We already know that this cap system works.

Heater4life
06-22-2011, 12:51 PM
The players seem unwilling to compromise on the hard cap issue... so whatever the resolution ultimately is I would guess that it doesn't include a hard cap.

The question is...how much money do the players have to give up to get the owners to give up the hard cap.

The only other wrinkle is that the players want a 5 year deal and the owners want a 10 year deal.

I would say that a reasonable compromise would be a 50-50 split of money (achieved gradually over the first 7 years of a 10 year deal) with no hard cap (a luxury tax system similar to what we have now, and maybe a wrinkle that takes away the MLE/BAE once you exceed the lux tax).

I think that would make both sides happy. The money works. We already know that this cap system works.

I dont think there is much of an issue with the current CBA's structure. I do like your lux tax wrinkle for the MLE, makes sense.

The problem here is simple. Team financing. Ratings are soaring and teams are losing money? Thats like saying my business sales are through the roof yet my business is losing money. Im obviously doing something wrong.

daleja424
06-22-2011, 12:55 PM
I dont think there is much of an issue with the current CBA's structure. I do like your lux tax wrinkle for the MLE, makes sense.

The problem here is simple. Team financing. Ratings are soaring and teams are losing money? Thats like saying my business sales are through the roof yet my business is losing money. Im obviously doing something wrong.

Thats why I have the players giving back a substantial amount of money over the next 7 years.

That plus some better revenue sharing so take care of the losses.

Heater4life
06-22-2011, 01:16 PM
Thats why I have the players giving back a substantial amount of money over the next 7 years.

That plus some better revenue sharing so take care of the losses.

Thats why i think theres going to be a long lock out. I look at it from the players perspective and im saying .

"wait a second, ratings are soaring, most teams are making a decent profit and a select amount are pulling down the whole league. Why should I give you my money when im the product and the product is selling? There is a clear lack of financial structure and a flaw in revenue sharing. "

KingPosey
06-22-2011, 03:01 PM
i dont know if anyone else posted this but here is a little more.

Now all of you making assumptions can prob shut up for a little bit. It looks like there isnt going to be a hardcap.

http://ken-berger.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/11838893/30170072

Lakerfrk
06-22-2011, 03:12 PM
Thats why i think theres going to be a long lock out. I look at it from the players perspective and im saying .

"wait a second, ratings are soaring, most teams are making a decent profit and a select amount are pulling down the whole league. Why should I give you my money when im the product and the product is selling? There is a clear lack of financial structure and a flaw in revenue sharing. "

I love being a Republican. :)

BigCityofDreams
06-22-2011, 03:27 PM
i dont know if anyone else posted this but here is a little more.

Now all of you making assumptions can prob shut up for a little bit. It looks like there isnt going to be a hardcap.

http://ken-berger.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/11838893/30170072

I'm all for that

Chronz
06-22-2011, 04:38 PM
A flex cap? How does that help small market teams? If anything it helps large market teams with rich owners like Cuban

Basketball is a sport of markets anyways, you take away the home teams ability to extend their own players beyond that hard cap and what incentive does the star have to stay put?

Besides a hard cap wouldnt be possible without dramatic restructuring of existing contracts or come into effect 3-5 years down the road. If owners want to get to a hard cap then the first step is to reduce the guaranteed years, bring the hard cap into effect once future pay roll is drastically reduced and come up with a model when it becomes plausible. **** they could be doing it as we speak, we dont know whats going on but they will figure out whats best for the league.

North Yorker
06-22-2011, 06:14 PM
NBPA Player President Derek Fisher on owner's 'flex cap' proposal: "Total distortion of reality...It's a hard cap."5 minutes ago

http://twitter.com/#!/WojYahooNBA

daleja424
06-22-2011, 07:39 PM
LOL... ya the owners are trying to create a positive public perception... but they are just distorting reality to do so. I remain firmly on the players side. The owners need to stop telling the public they are making compromises... and actually do so.

daleja424
06-22-2011, 07:40 PM
I stay on the players side b/c the NBA is working right now and the players ideally want the NBA to stay just as it is. It is the owners that are looking for fundamental changes...

daleja424
06-22-2011, 07:42 PM
To echo what I said earlier in this thread:


NBPA Player President Derek Fisher on owner's 'flex cap' proposal: "Total distortion of reality...It's a hard cap."

Derek Fisher on Stern/owners trying to reclaim money from players already earned in 2010-'11 season: "It speaks to their arrogance."

After Billy Hunter and Fisher met with a few reporters in NY, still no sense gulf between owners-players can be closed to avoid a lockout.

http://twitter.com/#!/WojYahooNBA

BigCityofDreams
06-24-2011, 10:36 AM
Here is an interview with David Stern on Wfan NY a couple of hours before the draft. He touched on a number of subjects: potential teams in Europe, the CBA negotiations, the popularity of the league, etc.

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/?podcast_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.podtrac.com%2Fpts%2F redirect.mp3%2Fnyc.podcast.play.it%2Fmedia%2Fd0%2F d0%2Fd0%2FdY%2Fd1%2FdG%2FdH%2FY1GH_3.MP3%3Fauthtok %3D5561491245307872988_kbIm39pOqi9fFVOHPAVNjecRIPc&podcast_name=David+Stern&podcast_artist=Mike+Francesa&station_id=62&tag=pages&dcid=CBS.NY

Detroit's Time
06-24-2011, 04:07 PM
I don't see any chance whatsoever that they avoid a lockout. None. The NBA is in a worse financial situation than the NFL. This lockout is going to be a long one

B'sCeltsPatsSox
06-24-2011, 04:15 PM
"Stern said he has an agreement with players not to discuss the substances of Friday's negotiations."
Ken Berger

JWO35
06-24-2011, 04:19 PM
Too many NBA Teams losing money...they want a change, I feel a major lockout worse than the NFL is going to rock the NBA.

At this point, you can't say "There won't be a season.." but an abbreviated season is more likely to happen than a regular one or none at all

justOmazing
06-24-2011, 04:49 PM
don't worry, even if there is a brief lockout, there will be a season... they are at least headed in the right direction

Sly Guy
06-24-2011, 06:08 PM
At least they took the $45 million hard cap off the table

well that wasn't gonna fly no matter which way you spun it. It was just a starting point for bargaining.

JordansBulls
06-27-2011, 12:58 PM
So how is this looking right now? When is the next meeting?

PhillyFaninLA
06-27-2011, 01:21 PM
The problem the NBA has is that the players gave the players power and its hurting most of the league.

Now the owners have to say we screwed and gave you to much and the league cannot sustain self itself long term with the situation we created.

They then have to restrict what they gave the player to save the league. Any company that has 2/3 of its locations struggling will eventually go belly up.

They need a hard cap, they need a strong revenue sharing deal that is fair to both sides, and the only way that happens is if the players give up a substantial portion of what the owners gave them (I don't think the players even asked for it). The players are going to have to get screwed if there is going to be an NBA in 20 years from now.

edit:

Basically the owners gave power and money on a higher level then they should have to the players, they gave the players more then the asked for over the past 10 years or so.

The owners mistakes are killing the league right now.

The only way to save the league long term is for the owners to get the players to give up a ton of money (more so at the middle and bottom of the rosters) which they players where given by the owners without a fight. The league has to demand a proper revenue sharing deal which requires no independent TV or Radio deals only league deals.

The owners created a horrible situation but the only way we are watching NBA games in 20 years is if the owners win most of what they want and have a structure in place that prevents them from repeating there mistakes.

jiggin
06-27-2011, 01:58 PM
I stay on the players side b/c the NBA is working right now and the players ideally want the NBA to stay just as it is. It is the owners that are looking for fundamental changes...

its not working right now...thus why they are talking and negotiating. You may think its working, but you aren't losing millions of dollars like the owners are currently.

got to look beyond your own situation. put yourself in the owners shoes...losing millions on your business...don't think about the past...think about now; how you going to fix it and keep the paying customers happy?

you are very good at picking a side and pointing out blame...but do you have a realistic solution that keeps the doors open on the business side of the NBA but also makes the players and fans happy? I would love to hear it.

jiggin
06-27-2011, 02:05 PM
The owners created a horrible situation but the only way we are watching NBA games in 20 years is if the owners win most of what they want and have a structure in place that prevents them from repeating there mistakes.

I didn't read your entire post but caught this last blurb.

Very true...

...and the owners have ALL THE POWER right now. The players don't seem to understand that, yet. As I said before, its a business. The players have WAY MORE TO LOSE than the owners do...so their firm stance to fight for their millions of dollars won't last too long. The players on the bottom of the feeding chain will start to panic (they don't have the millions the super stars have)...but they get the same equal vote on the CBA as the big payday players. Once it looks bad, those small payday players will sign on with the owners and their proposal because they just need to get paid.

PS - if the contract is up for these players, so is their benefits...medical/dental/family insurance from the team ect... it effects more than just their paychecks if they don't get another contract outlining their pay and benefits.

waveycrockett
06-27-2011, 02:20 PM
NBA players have wayyyyy tooo much power. They make ridiculous salaries compared to the other 2 major sports and out of all 3 are the least financially viable. Makes no sense. The Players have to give back.

Rivera
06-27-2011, 02:21 PM
theres no avoiding a lockout and a shortened season IMO

if we even have an NBA season next year....the nba just had its most successful season since jordan left this past year so the owners are kind of dumb in a sense that people will care about the nba if we loose a whole season

past and todays owners have been spending irresponsibly and its not the players fault players like gilbert arenas/rashard lewis got max contracts so at the end its really there own fault the teams are in the red financially

owners are gonna hold out until they can get everything they want they believe they can break the union when the checks are not coming in september/october....i can promise you that

Raidaz4Life
06-27-2011, 02:27 PM
Wow fantastic news!

qbanheatfan
06-27-2011, 02:56 PM
NBA players have wayyyyy tooo much power. They make ridiculous salaries compared to the other 2 major sports and out of all 3 are the least financially viable. Makes no sense. The Players have to give back.

How is it that the players have too much power when they get drafted they are not allowed to choose where to go. When once drafted they can't become unrestricted free agents for over 6 or 7 years. Oh yea the players have all the control in the world lol....that's a joke.

Yes the players get paid lots of money but whose fault is that? Why is it assumed that every good player within a team deserves the max? Why did Joe Johnson get the max? Is that the players fault or the owner's? Owners just want to protect themselves from making dumb mistakes. You know how that can be accomplished? Do your homework and you won't make dumb mistakes like that. And if you make mistakes you have to pay the consequences. Why do we feel the need to bail out everyone nowadays? If you mess up then u learn from the mistake and move on. Why should everyone else have to help you with your ill advised decisions?

Baseball has no salary cap and is doing just fine. Yes the bigger markets spend a lot more money but they also make a lot more money. Why should the margin for error in bigger markets not be greater then in smaller markets when they are making more money. I understand all of this is to help the smaller market teams but you just have to find a way to make it work. San Antonio and OKC have why can't others. Plus one last note the way the CBA is constructed now smaller market teams have the leverage on resigning their franchise players because they can offer them more years and money. So again I ask are the players really in control? I don't think so, every owner has total control over their player for pretty long periods of time.

Let's take the most recent case, LeBron. He was in Cleveland for 7 years before he became an unrestricted free agent and after he leaves people complain that the system is broke. Really was LeBron not playing for your team for 7 years? 7 Years is about half an NBA career. People need to put emotions aside and begin analyzing logically. What is better for the league and who really has the control?

BigCityofDreams
06-27-2011, 04:00 PM
theres no avoiding a lockout and a shortened season IMO

if we even have an NBA season next year....the nba just had its most successful season since jordan left this past year so the owners are kind of dumb in a sense that people will care about the nba if we loose a whole season

past and todays owners have been spending irresponsibly and its not the players fault players like gilbert arenas/rashard lewis got max contracts so at the end its really there own fault the teams are in the red financially

owners are gonna hold out until they can get everything they want they believe they can break the union when the checks are not coming in september/october....i can promise you that

Exactly the NBA hasn't been this hot in yrs and they are going to lockout. Is David Stern forgetting that yr after yr during and at the end of the season he would go on various stations and spin the populairty and buzz in the league. When ppl would question the interest in the league he would always come up with a response. NBA.com is doing this, attendance is up from 3 yrs ago, ratings are higher than they were in this particular yr, etc. But he didn't have to do that this season because the interest was genuine not artificial.

BigCityofDreams
06-27-2011, 04:23 PM
How is it that the players have too much power when they get drafted they are not allowed to choose where to go. When once drafted they can't become unrestricted free agents for over 6 or 7 years. Oh yea the players have all the control in the world lol....that's a joke.

Yes the players get paid lots of money but whose fault is that? Why is it assumed that every good player within a team deserves the max? Why did Joe Johnson get the max? Is that the players fault or the owner's? Owners just want to protect themselves from making dumb mistakes. You know how that can be accomplished? Do your homework and you won't make dumb mistakes like that. And if you make mistakes you have to pay the consequences. Why do we feel the need to bail out everyone nowadays? If you mess up then u learn from the mistake and move on. Why should everyone else have to help you with your ill advised decisions?

Baseball has no salary cap and is doing just fine. Yes the bigger markets spend a lot more money but they also make a lot more money. Why should the margin for error in bigger markets not be greater then in smaller markets when they are making more money. I understand all of this is to help the smaller market teams but you just have to find a way to make it work. San Antonio and OKC have why can't others. Plus one last note the way the CBA is constructed now smaller market teams have the leverage on resigning their franchise players because they can offer them more years and money. So again I ask are the players really in control? I don't think so, every owner has total control over their player for pretty long periods of time.

Let's take the most recent case, LeBron. He was in Cleveland for 7 years before he became an unrestricted free agent and after he leaves people complain that the system is broke. Really was LeBron not playing for your team for 7 years? 7 Years is about half an NBA career. People need to put emotions aside and begin analyzing logically. What is better for the league and who really has the control?

Excellent post.

I don't like the way Lebron left the Cavs but as you said he was on the team for 7 yrs and the best the Cavs could do was get Jamison(who wasn't as good as he used to be), Shaq(who was past his prime), Wallace( who was aldo past his prime, and a host of other players who were no that good. I remember one off season that had a number of shooters on the market. The Cavs made a play for Ray Allen, Michael Redd, and Bobby Simmons but Allen and Redd resigned to the teams they were currently on and Simmons signed with the Bucks. So the Cas had to settle for Larry Hughes. There are some places that players don't want to go or play for. Lebron reportedly tried to recruit Bosh and Chris flat out told him he's not going to Cleveland.

"He was in Cleveland for 7 years before he became an unrestricted free agent and after he leaves people complain that the system is broke"


That's what I don't get how can the system be broken because two players left their teams and went to South Beach. How come the system wasn't broken when Shaw went to LA???? Fans of other teams make it seem like it was a mass exodus. Amare left a team that was in the WCF and signed on with a franchise that had a decade long PS drought. Melo was traded to the Knicks. Guys like Dirk and Joe Johnson resigned with their teams so where is this belief that players are bolting their teams at a fast pace.

"Plus one last note the way the CBA is constructed now smaller market teams have the leverage on resigning their franchise players because they can offer them more years and money. "

Bird rights, restricted free agency, and the ability to offer more money than any opposing team but that's not good enough. They want franchise tags because players are "leaving their teams" Yes after 7 yrs on one team that either can't get over the hump or only makes lateral upgrades the player should stay forever until they get it right.

waveycrockett
06-27-2011, 04:38 PM
How is it that the players have too much power when they get drafted they are not allowed to choose where to go. When once drafted they can't become unrestricted free agents for over 6 or 7 years. Oh yea the players have all the control in the world lol....that's a joke.This post is so ridiculous I don't even know where to begin. How about you looking up the definition of a draft? How is the NBA draft any different than any other draft in a pro sports? If they want to choose what team they play for then do what Reggie Jackson of OKC just did or do what Steve Francis or Kobe did.



Yes the players get paid lots of money but whose fault is that? Why is it assumed that every good player within a team deserves the max? Why did Joe Johnson get the max? Is that the players fault or the owner's?
It doesn't matter whose fault it is the system is broke and half the teams are losing a ton of money b/c of it. Do you want an NBA in 10 years? Blame doesn't matter.



Baseball has no salary cap and is doing just fine. Yes the bigger markets spend a lot more money but they also make a lot more money. Why should the margin for error in bigger markets not be greater then in smaller markets when they are making more money.NBA and MLB are NOTHING alike. 1) NBA franchises are less valuable as a whole yet cost as much to buy as an MLB franchise. 2)Revenue sharing allows Small Markets to rake in alot of money and they can still compete in MLB. Doesn't work like that in NBA.





Let's take the most recent case, LeBron. He was in Cleveland for 7 years before he became an unrestricted free agent and after he leaves people complain that the system is broke. Really was LeBron not playing for your team for 7 years? 7 Years is about half an NBA career. People need to put emotions aside and begin analyzing logically. What is better for the league and who really has the control?I don't care about LeBron, the Cavs or the Heat. I care that the going rate for a 6th man in free agency is $40 Million. LeBron has nothing to do with it.

Tom Stone
06-27-2011, 04:38 PM
I see alot of people saying, it's the owners fault, there the one's that gave those bad contracts......it obvious .....It doesn't matter how we got to this point the fact is, the system is broken....now that your done being petty.....you can understand the two choices we have..., to let things spin out of control and do nothing, to the point we start losing teams and championships are bought not won.....or the owners fix the problems they started , by re adjusting the system.....Anyone who can't understand this I would concider you a low brow, walking around frowning at everything you don't understand.

Lake_Show2416
06-27-2011, 05:10 PM
62 million but wut kind of cap cuz if its a hard cap the players wont agree to it

waveycrockett
06-27-2011, 05:18 PM
62 million but wut kind of cap cuz if its a hard cap the players wont agree to it
It's going to be hard or the owners wont agree. At the end of the day Owners can out last the union though both will lose lots of money.

Lake_Show2416
06-27-2011, 05:25 PM
It's going to be hard or the owners wont agree. At the end of the day Owners can out last the union though both will lose lots of money.

ya sux the NBA wont b able to avoid a lockout, but i think a flex will work too

u would think the NBA would b more active to getting a deal done cuz unlike the NFL where all they do is profit, the NBA is losing money & this just hurts even more

Punk
06-28-2011, 11:54 AM
It is the owners fault. Which is why they will lose this stare down contest.

Look at Orlando, they trade for J-Rich, Arenas and Hedo. Otis Smith said he would add more depth at the center and PF positions but he never did. Didn't even look at D-league talent.

Orlando MADE NO MOVES IN THE NBA DRAFT. Things like this will get your stars annoyed and they will leave. It has nothing to do with cap space and limits or markets.

D-Will left Utah because he did not like the Ronnie Brewer trade, they let Boozer walk, they never got a legit center to put next to Al Jefferson. Who on earth would depend on Okur who is not the same player as your starting center?

Things like that, get your stars annoyed.

Melo never had a change of roster since they made the WCF. They never added any depth, they never put any trades together to get a player to help them out. He walked away due to their uncertainty.

The Pistons signed Ben Gordon and Charlie V to 40 million dollar contracts. I don't think I need to say anymore.

It's always and is the owners fault. Anyone could die tomorrow, the question is.....Will you be happy with the way your career went? Half of these players want to experience the post-season and atleast get to the Finals. The owners are not putting them in situations to do that and they will league to places where the grass is green.

The reason why Kobe, Jordan never got traded was because both teams did an outstanding job of putting talent and player after player around them to make them a good team time and time again.

BigCityofDreams
06-28-2011, 12:22 PM
There is some truth to that. I think there are owners in all sports that do enough just to be relevant but never make the right moves to put the team over the top.

Chronz
06-28-2011, 12:46 PM
You guys do know Bron CHOSE to RESIGN with Cleveland once before right? He wasnt just stuck there for 7 years.

D-Will4Prez
06-28-2011, 01:13 PM
The players said they wanted they wanted it to be fair for small market teams, so that they could compete, and the only way I see of doing that is implementing a hard cap, so why are the players opposed to that?

chitown85
06-28-2011, 01:42 PM
The players said they wanted they wanted it to be fair for small market teams, so that they could compete, and the only way I see of doing that is implementing a hard cap, so why are the players opposed to that?
True...I think there should be a flex though within reason...I will probably get berated for sticking up for the larger market teams (but oh well). One reason logistically that I believe players playing in a larger market city should get paid more is: Cost of living. Have you ever tried to price upscale real estate in LA,NYC,OR CHI? Compare those numbers to what it would cost to live in an upscale (no choice, have to avoid paparazzi and get their mail without being bombarded by people wanting autographs) community in OKC or Charlotte...
Not saying they don't make a ridiculous amount of money, just saying that all things are not necessarily equal (my opinion).

chitown85
06-28-2011, 01:49 PM
It's not only property and house prices it's also cost of living in general. The disparity between what it cost to live comfortably in Memphis to what it cost to acquire the same utility in Chicago is crazy. Just going out to eat, and the basic everyday transactions make a huge difference. A flex gives larger market teams room to account for these gross differences in cost of living. Of course, from a strictly utopian perspective I could say let's make everything equal...but then cost of living and every other factor would have to be equal as well.

Tony_Starks
06-28-2011, 02:55 PM
The bottom line is the owners want a guaranteed profit for every team regardless of foolish money squandering and extremely poor personel decisions. That is totally unreasonable. As long as they have that stance I can't see anything getting done soon.

And don't be fooled by the "flex" cap mumbo jumbo. It's basically just a hard cap with a different spin on it.......

BigCityofDreams
06-28-2011, 03:17 PM
The bottom line is the owners want a guaranteed profit for every team regardless of foolish money squandering and extremely poor personel decisions. That is totally unreasonable. As long as they have that stance I can't see anything getting done soon.

And don't be fooled by the "flex" cap mumbo jumbo. It's basically just a hard cap with a different spin on it.......

Exactly re-wrap the same gift but present it as a new one.