PDA

View Full Version : Bill Simmons - Fixing the NBA



adidas2307
07-08-2011, 10:56 PM
http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/6749669/if-ruled-nba-world


Greed in its rawest form. That's the National Football League's lockout. Both sides were like two billionaire drug cartels splitting up a massive cocaine shipment who got pissed off and just started shooting each other. "You took too much! I saw that!!!" They will settle next week and slink into the sunset with their kilos. We'll forgive them immediately because we love football and just want our Sundays back. The end.

Stubbornness in its rawest form. That's the National Basketball Association's lockout. The owners want to "fix" the system without actually fixing it. The players want everything to remain the same even if that "same" makes no sense. Both sides spent the past few weeks poking holes in each other's arguments, leaking unflattering tidbits to trusted writers1 and excreting code-word spin control BS like "we're unified" and "we're in this for the long haul." I never heard anyone say the words, "Hold on a second what's really wrong here?"

You know what it reminds me of, actually? That scene in Dave after Bill Mitchell impersonator Dave Kovic (played by Kevin Kline) secretly takes over Mitchell's presidency, when Dave gets his nerdy accountant buddy (played by Charles Grodin) to balance the budget so they can save the First Lady's homeless program. They meet with the Cabinet, and Dave starts laying out Grodin's ideas. What if we slashed this by $47 million? What if we cut this program, that's another $50 million? Every decision is totally logical. Dave ends up finding the extra money in about six minutes, followed by the Cabinet applauding in disbelief.2

Totally improbable scene and yet, you feel like it's totally probable as you're watching it. Why? Because Dave threw out everyone's agendas and said, "This is extremely important to me, we're not leaving this room until we figure it out." Then he did it.

With the NBA's lockout, we're hopelessly mired in the "he said/she said" phase of things only we're stuck with David instead of Dave. If Dave's owners lost $340 million last year, he wouldn't say, "We need to get that money back from the players!" No, he'd say things like, "Wow, David did a terrible job, I can't believe he left me this mess" and "How could a league that just enjoyed one of its best and most interesting seasons ever be losing money?" Then Dave would gather everyone in a room and figure it out. Maybe not in six minutes but he'd figure it out...

Full article when you click the link. I found it to be a very good read and I recommend you basketball fans to read it as well. :clap:

stuckyfreshhh
07-08-2011, 11:06 PM
Bill Simons is the M**** ********* MAN.

Look up his recap of this years draft it's awesome. (More exciting than the draft itself).

SlimKid
07-08-2011, 11:08 PM
Bill Simmons is such a tool..(No offense to the OP) It's really hard to take anything he says seriously. He's the TMZ of Basketball..

flea
07-08-2011, 11:10 PM
Bill Simmons is such a tool..(No offense to the OP) It's really hard to take anything he says seriously. He's the TMZ of Basketball..

This a million times, not to mention he doesn't edit or organize his articles anymore. They're all overlong and rambling. As a journalist, he's poor. As a writer, he's very poor. As a GM, David Kahn is better. As a pop culture referencist, he's a 7 on a scale of 1 to MST3K.

Sixerlover
07-08-2011, 11:21 PM
I actually like Simmons, did either of you above me read this article? I'm in the middle of it, but just want to point something out

"1. We settle on a $52 million hard cap but promise players we'll spend 52 percent of the BRI on salaries, which should average out to $56 million to $58 million per season, depending on how we're doing. All extra wiggle room from $52 million to that $56 million to $58 million that we DON'T spend goes into an escrow fund. If we're over, we get the extra money. If we're under, the players get it. But we're going to spend that money. Watch.
"2. Going forward, we define an 'All-Star' as someone who's played four consecutive years with one team and made two All-Star teams OR an All-NBA team during that time. Any 'All-Star' automatically gets a $12 million cap figure, but his original team can pay him up to 25 percent more than the cap figure (max: $60 million for four years). A new team can only pay him that cap figure (max: $48 million for four years).
"3. We define a 'Franchise Player' as someone who's played at least four consecutive years with one team and made three All-Star teams OR two first or second All-NBA teams during that time. Any 'Franchise Player' automatically gets a $17 million cap figure, but can be paid $500,000 per years of service beyond that number without it counting on the cap. For instance, if Dwight Howard wants to sign with the Lakers next summer, they could offer only his franchise cap number ($68 million over four years). Orlando gets the benefit of that $500k bump — eight Howard/Orlando seasons multiplied by $500,000 — so they can offer him a four-year deal worth $87 million.13 The longer he stays in Orlando and keeps playing at a 'Franchise' level, the more money Howard can earn.
"4. Anyone who graduates from 'All-Star' to 'Franchise Player' during his four-year deal gets an automatic salary bump to 'Franchise' status. For instance, Russell Westbrook's second-team All-NBA would make him eligible for an "All-Star" extension right now ($15 million per year for four years, but with a $12 million per year cap figure). Let's say he makes second-team All-NBA again this season. Boom! He jumps to "Franchise" status; his cap figure bumps to $17 million, along with the corresponding $500k bumps for each year in Oklahoma City.14 In other words, he's incentivized to keep kicking *** even after he gets paid.
"5. If you can't maintain 'All-Star' or 'Franchise' status during your deal, you lose those privileges for the next deal.15
"6. Any All-Star who gets traded keeps his salary/cap figure disparity for his new team. Franchise players can veto any trade — if they accept the deal, they lose their accumulated $500k bumps and revert back to the $17 million cap figure.
"7. Nobody else can sign for more than $10 million per year unless he made an All-NBA team OR two All-Star teams within the past three years, giving him a 33 percent bump (and enabling him a deal or extension for $13.3 million per year, with the salary doubling as the cap number). Yes, we're calling this the Zach Randolph Exception.


No way the players association agrees to half of those stipulations. Their allegiance is to the entire group of players not just the top tier. They wouldn't want to sacrifice one tier to please the other

Bruno
07-08-2011, 11:38 PM
^The owners are trying to split the players union, as to match the divide within the owners themselves (big vs small market). It's better for the owners to keep this dynamic as complicated for the players as they can. They don't want the players union 100%...unified?

Sixerlover
07-08-2011, 11:41 PM
^The owners are trying to split the players union, as to match the divide within the owners themselves (big vs small market). It's better for the owners to keep this dynamic as complicated for the players as they can. They don't want the players union 100%...unified?

Agreed, but these opinions came from Simmons who is pretty neutral to both parties. I doubt the players association would agree. How could Derek Fisher explain to Matt Barnes that he'll lose money so Kobe could make more kind of thing.

C_Mund
07-08-2011, 11:52 PM
I thought this was a great article. It obviously has its flaws but generally describes how the whole situation might have to shake down. I'm not a huge fan of awarding the best players even more money, but the idea of allowing cap-free bonuses that reward loyalty is intriguing. Part of the owners' problem is that the small market teams can't compete because they have no real draw to keep homegrown talent and this could (over time) help teams that try to rebuild.
I could do without the catogorization of players based on all-star and all-nba ballots because a flash-in-the-pan type of player could have a couple of good seasons and start lobbying for a higher-tier salary, but then I think about how long-term mid-level contracts handicap teams for years and would love to see an end to that.
....also I loved the movie Dave when I was growing up. Solid