PDA

View Full Version : NBA Headed for lockout next week?



daleja424
06-22-2011, 11:37 PM
There is some serious confusion on here centering around the most recent round of CBA bargaining. Stern and the owners feel like they have a great offer on the table for the players... while the players are ready to walk away they are so appalled at the owners offer.

I have been trying to stay on top of all the details that have come out and the owners are simple being entirely unfair.

The players are offering to give enough money back to cover the owner losses... but the owners are pushing for billions of dollars more than that. I am actually appalled at the level of greed being displayed by the owners right now, especially when they have the balls to come out and say it is a good deal :facepalm:

Anyways, here is a good article explaining the standoff right now that I thought I would share with anyone interested to know why the NBA is headed for a lockout. I bolded some of the key parts. Enjoy.


NEW YORK – NBA players association chief Billy Hunter on Wednesday assailed the owners’ latest collective bargaining proposal and said he is prepared for owners to vote on a lockout at next Tuesday’s Board of Governors meeting in Dallas.

“Their demand is gargantuan and we just can’t meet it,” Hunter told reporters at the Manhattan hotel where players are staying for crucial meetings and draft-related activities this week.

A day after commissioner David Stern seized control of the message by disclosing details of the owners’ latest proposal, Hunter gathered reporters in an effort to respond and “set the record straight,” he said. At the meeting, also attended by union president Derek Fisher of the Lakers, executive committee member Maurice Evans of the Wizards and union staff, Hunter said the owners’ latest proposal would cost the players $8.2 billion over 10 years compared to the current system and $7 billion compared to the players’ standing offer.

“Under their proposal, over five or six years, they would reap a profit of over $1.8 billion after expenses – after their alleged expenses,” Hunter said.

Hunter and Fisher also clarified a point that was lost after Tuesday’s bargaining session: As part of their proposal to guarantee the players $2 billion in salary and benefits per year during their 10-year proposal, owners are seeking to keep the $160 million in escrow money withheld from players’ paychecks for the 2010-11 season. Eight percent of player salaries is withheld under the current agreement and returned each August to ensure that players ultimately wind up with 57 percent of basketball-related income (BRI).

“That’s money that players have already earned, worked for this past season,” Fisher said. “That’s off the table, as far as we’re concerned. To me, it speaks to the arrogance that they feel in approaching us with their proposal, to be able to go back and reach for those dollars.”

Fisher also assailed Stern’s characterization of a new cap system verbally proposed by owners as a “flex cap,” with a $62 million target per team and an undetermined maximum and minimum.

“We view that as just a total distortion of reality,” Fisher said. “It’s not a flexible cap, it’s a hard cap. … It’s flexible as long as you’re below what the hard level is.”

The so-called flex-cap concept disclosed by Stern Tuesday “has not been in a written proposal, with any teeth or any details,” Fisher said.

In response to the union's complaints, Stern said Wednesday night: "Players have benefited from the current system more than the teams. For them it has been a much better partnership. We are sorry that the players' union feels that way since it doesn't seem designed to get us to the agreement that is so important to the teams, and we had hoped, the players."

In briefing players around the league on the state of negotiations, including teammate Kobe Bryant, Fisher said players “are in total disbelief. They have asked us point-blank why we are even talking.”

Despite the grim turn these talks have taken in the past 48 hours, there's no need to panic. There is a blueprint for getting sports labor deals done when the sides are far apart, and the NBA talks are following it to a tee. I'll let the sports labor veteran I spoke with Wednesday take it from there.

"You curse each other out, go to marriage counseling, then blow the house up and stay away from each other for a while," the person said. "And you bring everybody back together when the bills come due. There's a deal to be made in there, but not now. No way."

With eight days before the current labor agreement expires, union officials will meet Thursday with player representatives of all 30 teams and as many as 20 other players who have elected to attend. Hunter said union officials will then determine what, if any, counterproposal to make in Friday’s scheduled bargaining session – likely the last one before the owners’ full Board of Governors convenes Tuesday in Dallas, where Hunter said he expects a lockout vote to occur.

“I’m sure that there’s going to be a vote,” Hunter said. “Whether or not they lock out, that’s going to be up to them. We’ve been threatened with that for the last two years … so I’m assuming that, from their perspective, (June 30) is the drop-dead date.”

Hunter and Fisher explained how they arrived at their offer of a more than $100 million-a-year salary reduction in their five-year proposal, saying it amounts to 57 percent of what Fisher described as the owners’ “true losses” – the same share of BRI they currently receive. By the players’ estimation, the owners’ $300 million annual loss figure is actually less than $200 million when interest expenses are deducted. Hunter stopped short of calling it an ambush, but he and the players clearly were blindsided when Stern characterized this offer as “modest.”

“I guess at this stage, the question is to what extent are they willing to kill this thing,” Hunter said of the owners.

Hunter also said owners have proposed adding $900 billion to the $600 billion that currently is deducted from gross revenues before the money is shared with the players, bringing the total to $1.5 billion under the owners’ proposal.

And a key sticking point remains the fact that owners have refused to collectively bargain a revamped revenue-sharing plan, an area the owners believe should be kept separate from the negotiations. Hunter referred to a group of small-market owners who wrote a memo to Stern in 2007 asking for enhanced revenue sharing, saying the fight is between small- and big-market owners as much as it is between owners and players.

“They have not disclosed to us one iota of what their proposed revenue-sharing plan would look like,” Hunter said. “… We want the assurance that it’s not all coming off the backs of the players.”

Hunter again derided the owners’ offer of a flat $2 billion pay scale for 10 years, saying the players would not regain the $2.17 billion level of salary and benefits they received for the 2010-11 season until the 10th year of the owners’ proposal. The union is projecting 4-5 percent annual revenue growth for the league over the next decade, a figure that is expected to rise after the current broadcast and digital rights agreements with ABC/ESPN and TNT expire in 2016.

Hunter was careful to stop short of saying the negotiations are at an “impasse,” a legal term that would signal that talks have irretrievably broken down – paving the way for a lockout, possible decertification of the union, and an antitrust lawsuit similar to the case filed by the NFL Players Association.

“We’re not at an impasse because there’s so many issues that we haven’t discussed,” Hunter said. “We’ve gotten stuck on economics.”

Asked if he trusts Stern to negotiate a fair deal, Hunter said, “We’re engaged in hard-knuckle negotiations. It ain’t about trust.”

“We have an idea what we’re willing to do and what he’s willing to do,” Hunter said. “And what we’ve indicated to them is that the perception is that it’s really becoming a game of power vs. power. And right now, I think that they feel as though they have the leverage or the upper hand.”
http://ken-berger.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/11838893/30198918

daleja424
06-22-2011, 11:42 PM
Here is one more article with some good information (again, bolded the key parts):

NBA players and owners each made new financial proposals Tuesday at a three-hour collective bargaining meeting, emerging from the discussion cautiously optimistic that progress was being made.

The current CBA expires June 30, and the two sides are trying to prevent an impasse like the one that has stopped NFL business.

The union made the first proposal, asking to retain the current "soft" salary-cap system but with a half-billion dollar reduction in salaries -- $100 million in each of the next five years in a proposed five-year agreement, according to a source who was briefed on the negotiations.

The owners, who are asking for a 10-year agreement, then came back with a counterproposal of their own. Owners offered what they called a "flex cap" system that would earmark at least $2 billion per season toward player salaries.

The owners also moved their position on cap exceptions, saying the Larry Bird Exception and the mid-level exception would remain in a new system, although teams could not exceed an as-yet-determined maximum team salary.

The sides agreed to meet again Friday in New York.

"We both made real moves, but we're still very far apart," union attorney Jeffrey Kessler said.

Commissioner David Stern called the league's offer "virtually the best shot we think we have" to avoid a work stoppage. He refused to call this his last offer, but said the "cupboard is getting barer and barer."

"It's all out there," he said. "The owners to a person feel that this is what we have to give."

The "flex cap" system had been brought up in prior discussions between the sides but was never formally proposed. That changed when the owners came out of their caucus late in the bargaining session, which was held across the street from league headquarters.

"We would have liked to have seen more, but we thought it was directionally better than what we had before," said Stern, who labeled the players' $500 million giveback "modest."

Under the owners' new proposal, the luxury tax would be eliminated and players would give back the 8 percent "escrow tax" that is currently withheld from all NBA paychecks. The financial terms would evolve over the first few years of the agreement.

"We're prepared to take less in the early years of a 10-year deal because we would come out in the latter years with something we are satisfied with," deputy NBA commissioner Adam Silver said.

Stern said the average NBA salary would drop to about $5 million, and that the owners are still seeking a 50-50 split of basketball-related income, which would be recalculated under the new deal. Silver said the owners' new proposal looks like the NHL's labor agreement and less like the NFL's "hard cap" system. It targets a "mid-point" payroll for all 30 teams of $62 million.

"Today was productive and there was movement, but we're still very far apart and ... the hard salary cap system is still something that we're really having difficulty trying to get past," players' association president Derek Fisher of the Lakers said. "Our players just don't see that as the best way to tackle some of the things at least we've been given by owners as to reasons why we need a hard salary cap."

The source who was briefed on the negotiations said the owners' proposal would increase salaries only minimally over the 10-year period, having the effect of cutting the players' portion of basketball-related income, as currently calculated, from 57 percent last season to less than 40 percent in the latter years of the proposed 10-year agreement.

The proposal presented by the players Tuesday would cut the players' guarantee of BRI from 57 percent to 54.3 percent, rising to 55 percent in the fifth year, the source said.

Last week, the league withdrew its insistence for all contracts to be non-guaranteed in a new deal, offering to leave the system as is, where teams and players can negotiate individually.

The players have argued that was not truly a concession, because they were given something they already have.

"We've had guaranteed contracts for 40 years, so it's almost like somebody walks into your house and they take something that belongs to you, and then they want to sell it back," union executive director Billy Hunter said. "And you say, 'It was mine from the get-go, so why should I pay for it? And I didn't authorize you to take it, and I never said it was available for you to take or use or abuse.' "

Hunter had long said he was nearly certain of the league's first work stoppage since 1998, but now says he sees signs owners are interested in making a deal.

But both sides caution they aren't close to one yet. Asked if they were 100 miles apart going into Tuesday how far they were now, Hunter said, "What, 99?"

Though the league's newest proposal would mean an 8 percent pay cut in the first year, owners have moved from their initial proposal that players rejected in February 2010. Stern said there have now been 10 proposals exchanged between the sides and the players could offer another Friday.

They still must sort through the differences in the cap, with Stern saying the sides have a "different characterization" of what the league proposed.

The players' executive committee was joined by stars such as Tony Parker of the Spurs and Atlanta's Al Horford. Fisher said all the players have expressed their willingness to be flexible but "there are certain parts of it we have no interest in moving on and right now that's where we stand."

Following Friday's bargaining session, the owners are scheduled to meet Tuesday in Dallas.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=6688397

daleja424
06-22-2011, 11:50 PM
In terms that we would all understand... this is the situation.

Lets say you run a business with your friend. Right now you own 57% of the business and it is doing well, but your friend's 43% is losing money. Your friend tells you that he is losing 300 dollars a year. So you offer to give your friend 300 dollars a year to cover his losses... and he responds by saying, "Screw your 300 dollars... I demand you give me an extra thousand dollars each year and a majority stake in the company or I am shutting down the business."

Oh, and if that wasn't bad enough, you friend wants to rewrite the business plan that was so successful too...

And while he is making all of these demands, he is off telling all of your other friends that he is doing his best to reconcile things with you... that he is making really fair offers and you are the bad guy.

Byronicle
06-22-2011, 11:50 PM
I swear if there is a lockout, I am going to resort to watching golf...and I would really hate to do that

clutchski
06-23-2011, 12:02 AM
Interesting stuff daleja thanks for posting.

tredigs
06-23-2011, 12:03 AM
In terms that we would all understand... this is the situation.

Lets say you run a business with your friend. Right now you own 57% of the business and it is doing well, but your friend's 43% is losing money. Your friend tells you that he is losing 300 dollars a year. So you offer to give your friend 300 dollars a year to cover his losses... and he responds by saying, "Screw your 300 dollars... I demand you give me an extra thousand dollars each year and a majority stake in the company or I am shutting down the business."

Oh, and if that wasn't bad enough, you friend wants to rewrite the business plan that was so successful too...

And while he is making all of these demands, he is off telling all of your other friends that he is doing his best to reconcile things with you... that he is making really fair offers and you are the bad guy.

The 57/43 earnings divide between the two is just one of many logistical issues they're dealing with, unfortunately.

The owners can't all be clumped together, either. There are multiple factions of large-market, small-market, recently-bought (for far more money) and bought pre 1980 that are all looking for different results from this CBA.

It's a cluster ****, and the players are FAR from without blame (see: demanding things that no other worker would have the moxie to bother demanding) in this whole mess. I'd be surprised to see the NBA before November.

cle12152433
06-23-2011, 12:05 AM
You know, seeing as how the Indians have sucked for 8 of the last 10 years, baseball free agency doesn't mean much in my house. But NFL and NBA free agency may not happen?!!!!!!!

December 21, 2012 is a cakewalk compared to this.

And yes I can see you all typing. I know the Browns are bad. But they still try...at least THEY make sucking exciting...

daleja424
06-23-2011, 12:06 AM
The 57/43 earnings divide between the two is just one of many logistical issues they're dealing with, unfortunately.

The owners can't all be clumped together, either. There are multiple factions of large-market, small-market, recently-bought (for far more money) and bought pre 1980 that are all looking for different results from this CBA.

It's a cluster ****. I'd be surprised to see the NBA before November.

I agree that various owners are in very different boats... but enough of them agreed on enough to make that heinous proposal to the players...

JIDsanity
06-23-2011, 12:07 AM
Damn i really thought it was headed in the right direction. I couldnt stand to see a lockout, actually yeah I could Im a Tar-Heel. 2012 national champs!!!!!!!!

daleja424
06-23-2011, 12:07 AM
Seriously... NBA free agency and trading is so freaking exciting... really going to miss that this year.

cle12152433
06-23-2011, 12:12 AM
Seriously... NBA free agency and trading is so freaking exciting... really going to miss that this year.

Yes sir. I look forward to it every year.

If the NBA goes into lockout, there really will be no excuse. They saw what happened to the NFL and had plenty of time to prepare. I thought an NFL lockout would prevent an NBA one. Shows what I know...

daleja424
06-23-2011, 12:16 AM
Yes sir. I look forward to it every year.

If the NBA goes into lockout, there really will be no excuse. They saw what happened to the NFL and had plenty of time to prepare. I thought an NFL lockout would prevent an NBA one. Shows what I know...

There really is no excuse. With all the momentum the NBA has going right now, it would be a travesty to go into lockout.

The irony of the whole thing is that if the players arent going to accept the NBAs 40% of revenue deal right now, why on earth would they accept it once a lockout starts (knowing that a lockout will hurt the brand and the 40% will be worth even less then)?

The owners have to realize that the players are going to be even more stingy once the league starts to depreciate in value (if a lengthy lockout happens).

The players have the leverage right now... especially since they can start heading overseas for wealthy contracts too.

TheDetroitBlue
06-23-2011, 12:17 AM
Not to seem like I dont like basketball cause I love it,

But if I had to choose between the two sports that are in a lockout, I would choose football

Theres just something special about that sunday afternoon

BigCityofDreams
06-23-2011, 12:18 AM
Yes sir. I look forward to it every year.

If the NBA goes into lockout, there really will be no excuse. They saw what happened to the NFL and had plenty of time to prepare. I thought an NFL lockout would prevent an NBA one. Shows what I know...

The NBA hasn't been this popular in yrs and they want to lockout wtf. Are they aware how many ppl said "I came back to the NBA this yr or I was always a fan but this season had my attention from the summer of Lebron to the NBA Finals."

Why kill the momentum?

tredigs
06-23-2011, 12:19 AM
I agree that various owners are in very different boats... but enough of them agreed on enough to make that heinous proposal to the players...

It was a ridiculous proposal to make a week before the official deadline (as a supposed last ditch), I will definitely agree with that. I just feel that both sides are being unnecessarily unreasonable. It's pretty sad to see democracy fail this badly.

@BigCity above me, I feel ya. They're destroying what could be another HUGELY popular season and continued momentum builder for the NBA. But this CBA has been on the horizon for years, they didn't just randomly choose this year.

daleja424
06-23-2011, 12:21 AM
It was a ridiculous proposal to make a week before the official deadline (as a supposed last ditch), I will definitely agree with that. I just feel that both sides are being unnecessarily unreasonable. It's pretty sad to see democracy fail this badly.

The thing is... I don't think the players are really being unreasonable. They are saying... "the league is working... lets keep it the same... but we will decrease our share down to 54% to cover your losses"

That seems very reasonable to me...

Unreasonable is countering the 54% with 38% (+ owners get to hold 1.5 billion out of the pie all together) and a complete restructuring of the league...

cle12152433
06-23-2011, 12:25 AM
It just makes no sense. A year ago, the world renowned Lakers won yet another title, LeBron and the decision set cable tv records, the league sets new highs in revenue due to the Miami Big 3, a new, young PG wins the MVP, and a fan favorite in Dirk finally wins a title. Then the feel good story of the Cavs getting the first overall pick, and one week later, Lockout. If this truly does happen, I want someone's head on my desk.

How can there be no NFL OR NBA free agency????

daleja424
06-23-2011, 12:29 AM
So hyothetically...if the league is worth 5 billion...

currently Players get about 2.508 billion of that [(5.0-0.6)*57%]... or about 50% total

Players are offering to take 2.376 billion [(5.0-0.6)*54%]... or about 47% total

The owners are offering the players a deal that in its 10th year will get them only 1.33 billion of that 5 billion [(5.0-1.5)*38%]... or about 26% total

Note that the league currently would get 2.5 billion a year... and with their proposed deal they would end up with 3.67 billion...and increase of 1.17 billion

Meanwhile they are reporting a loss of around 300 million (and the players even dispute that it is actually about 200 million)

So the owners want the players to cover their losses and throw in an extra billion or so for the heck of it... righhhttttt....

(note: these calculations are very very rough...but just intended to give an idea what we are looking at here)

iggypop123
06-23-2011, 12:58 AM
remember martin luther king. cause his holiday is when we will next see basketball. this is gonna drag on

dodie53
06-23-2011, 03:50 AM
they should listen to jesse james

JPHX
06-23-2011, 03:56 AM
The 57/43 earnings divide between the two is just one of many logistical issues they're dealing with, unfortunately.

The owners can't all be clumped together, either. There are multiple factions of large-market, small-market, recently-bought (for far more money) and bought pre 1980 that are all looking for different results from this CBA.

It's a cluster ****, and the players are FAR from without blame (see: demanding things that no other worker would have the moxie to bother demanding) in this whole mess. I'd be surprised to see the NBA before November.

couldn't have said it any better.

dodie53
06-23-2011, 03:59 AM
they should listen to jesse james

Kevj77
06-23-2011, 04:12 AM
And a key sticking point remains the fact that owners have refused to collectively bargain a revamped revenue-sharing plan, an area the owners believe should be kept separate from the negotiations. Hunter referred to a group of small-market owners who wrote a memo to Stern in 2007 asking for enhanced revenue sharing, saying the fight is between small- and big-market owners as much as it is between owners and players.This to me is as important as anything else in that article. You have two fights going on player vs. owners and another between big-market owners vs. small-market owners.

Let the owners work out their profit sharing differences first. If the owners can't even agree, how do they bargain with the players?

BigCityofDreams
06-23-2011, 10:28 AM
It was a ridiculous proposal to make a week before the official deadline (as a supposed last ditch), I will definitely agree with that. I just feel that both sides are being unnecessarily unreasonable. It's pretty sad to see democracy fail this badly.

@BigCity above me, I feel ya. They're destroying what could be another HUGELY popular season and continued momentum builder for the NBA. But this CBA has been on the horizon for years, they didn't just randomly choose this year.

True they didn't just choose this yr. It's crazy that the lockout is coming after a season like this. It's sucks.

BigCityofDreams
06-23-2011, 10:31 AM
It just makes no sense. A year ago, the world renowned Lakers won yet another title, LeBron and the decision set cable tv records, the league sets new highs in revenue due to the Miami Big 3, a new, young PG wins the MVP, and a fan favorite in Dirk finally wins a title. Then the feel good story of the Cavs getting the first overall pick, and one week later, Lockout. If this truly does happen, I want someone's head on my desk.

How can there be no NFL OR NBA free agency????

And then add in all the other story lines: Melo going to NY, young teams on the rise, the upsets in the playoffs, etc.

Did they pay attention to the yr they had.

metsfanssince05
06-23-2011, 10:35 AM
**** i will cry my self to sleep every night if this happends. .

KnicksR4Real
06-23-2011, 10:55 AM
i hope not. i love the nba

NYY 26 to 7
06-23-2011, 11:31 AM
In terms that we would all understand... this is the situation.

Lets say you run a business with your friend. Right now you own 57% of the business and it is doing well, but your friend's 43% is losing money. Your friend tells you that he is losing 300 dollars a year. So you offer to give your friend 300 dollars a year to cover his losses... and he responds by saying, "Screw your 300 dollars... I demand you give me an extra thousand dollars each year and a majority stake in the company or I am shutting down the business."

Oh, and if that wasn't bad enough, you friend wants to rewrite the business plan that was so successful too...

And while he is making all of these demands, he is off telling all of your other friends that he is doing his best to reconcile things with you... that he is making really fair offers and you are the bad guy.

Completely disagree because you left out one major point. You (the players) do not own the business and have no financial risk invested in the business. You are an employee making millions while the company loses money. A normal business respose is to cut expense (salary/benefits) or in the NBA case contraction (layoffs and less jobs for players). THIS is the reality they face as players. The owners run the buisness and need to see a reasonable ROI that honestly they deserve. They put up the capital to run this game we love and the players benefit from. I really think that this was a reasonable cap and revenue sharing proposal and should be very close. Is it basically a hard cap yes but prob around $70-75 million which is reasonable.

This is a much different situation than the NFL that doesn't have guaranteed contracts, very short average careers, lower average salaries, serious medical problems post retirement, and the owners are making more money than they can count.

NYY 26 to 7
06-23-2011, 11:40 AM
So hyothetically...if the league is worth 5 billion...

currently Players get about 2.508 billion of that [(5.0-0.6)*57%]... or about 50% total

Players are offering to take 2.376 billion [(5.0-0.6)*54%]... or about 47% total

The owners are offering the players a deal that in its 10th year will get them only 1.33 billion of that 5 billion [(5.0-1.5)*38%]... or about 26% total

Note that the league currently would get 2.5 billion a year... and with their proposed deal they would end up with 3.67 billion...and increase of 1.17 billion

Meanwhile they are reporting a loss of around 300 million (and the players even dispute that it is actually about 200 million)

So the owners want the players to cover their losses and throw in an extra billion or so for the heck of it... righhhttttt....

(note: these calculations are very very rough...but just intended to give an idea what we are looking at here)

How about working on calculations of Net and not total revenues, and factor in risk that is all on the owners. The players have no expense, they are employees. You don't run a business to break even. Salaries in any company should reflect the success of the business.

If I were Stern or a large market team my answer would be simply... contraction - less jobs, less expense, better product, and no more small market teams hemoraging money. Its not the Knicks, Lakers, Celtics and Bulls driving this lockout thats for sure. But that is the players nightmare.