PDA

View Full Version : Letter sent to players by seven agents from six major agencies



allSUAVE
10-04-2011, 12:21 AM
Heres A copy of the letter sent to players by seven agents from six major agencies that represent some of the NBA's biggest stars. See for yourself what they are advising the players to do going into Tuesday's pivotal meeting:


http://ht.cdn.turner.com/si/nba/AgentsLetter100311.pdf

likemystylez
10-04-2011, 12:26 AM
this thing is all over isnt it?

CeeDub15
10-04-2011, 12:31 AM
This stuff is just ridiculous.

Jay
10-04-2011, 12:37 AM
I actually took time to read the letter.

Apparently, agents don't understand the terms of an "adjusted" market, and are grossly exaggerating the whole thing.

They better get rid of their tunnel vision soon or the players will eventually call their bluff.

likemystylez
10-04-2011, 12:39 AM
Im hoping that players wont buy this

naps
10-04-2011, 12:40 AM
Agents = Greedy bastards :facepalm:

Jay
10-04-2011, 12:41 AM
Im hoping that players wont buy this

Guys like Fisher are much smarter than this.

This is clearly an act of agents looking out for number one.

likemystylez
10-04-2011, 12:44 AM
Guys like Fisher are much smarter than this.

This is clearly an act of agents looking out for number one.

Considering that fisher doesnt make a dime for all the time and work that he has put into this, Im hoping that the players would take his word... he has no alternate motives- he is out there trying to work out a solution for everyone of the players... without a penny to be made to himself

likemystylez
10-04-2011, 12:47 AM
Agents = Greedy bastards :facepalm:

I dont even completely understand it though- if the agents comments cause there to be no season... Im failing to see how that could bennefit the agents? if there is no season, then nobody is getting paid anything? Also if there is no season than there is likely less money to be made in the following seasons.

Unless the agents truly believe that the owners will cave in time to save the season- but it just doesnt look like the case, the owners havent moved at all

RipCity32
10-04-2011, 01:05 AM
Might be a little bit of a wait boys.

naps
10-04-2011, 01:50 AM
I dont even completely understand it though- if the agents comments cause there to be no season... Im failing to see how that could bennefit the agents? if there is no season, then nobody is getting paid anything? Also if there is no season than there is likely less money to be made in the following seasons.

Unless the agents truly believe that the owners will cave in time to save the season- but it just doesnt look like the case, the owners havent moved at all

It's a business. Owners can't afford to lose a season. Too much risk involved. We as human beings always find alternative ways of entertainment. NBA can't risk losing any fans. No fans = No money. There will have to be a season. It's not a rocket science. Agents know this as well. If the union accept owners proposal that will also affect agents salaries. Hence, the agents are trying to manipulate the players. It's all business and everybody will take care of himself before taking care of others. Normal rule.

iggypop123
10-04-2011, 01:55 AM
looks like fisher already responded and sent his own letter. i still think the owners are going to say take our deal or we will wait till you bleed out of money.

DodgerBulls
10-04-2011, 02:06 AM
Where is the fine print that says, us agents ofcourse are going to be affected if there is a decrease on your salaries.

Sactown
10-04-2011, 02:15 AM
I dont even completely understand it though- if the agents comments cause there to be no season... Im failing to see how that could bennefit the agents? if there is no season, then nobody is getting paid anything? Also if there is no season than there is likely less money to be made in the following seasons.

Unless the agents truly believe that the owners will cave in time to save the season- but it just doesnt look like the case, the owners havent moved at all

These Agents can be agents for the next 40 years so if sacrificing one year to set the standard for the next 40 is well worth it to them

naps
10-04-2011, 02:40 AM
Where is the fine print that says, us agents ofcourse are going to be affected if there is a decrease on your salaries.

Agent salaries depend on players contract along with other factors.

http://www.become-a-sports-agent.com/salary.asp

jmoney85
10-04-2011, 02:43 AM
I dont even completely understand it though- if the agents comments cause there to be no season... Im failing to see how that could bennefit the agents? if there is no season, then nobody is getting paid anything? Also if there is no season than there is likely less money to be made in the following seasons.

Unless the agents truly believe that the owners will cave in time to save the season- but it just doesnt look like the case, the owners havent moved at all

agents get paid a percentage of the contract that is signed ....if the players sign contracts for less money than the ones they signed in the past the agents will make less money hence why they dont want the players to make less money

knicks_champ
10-04-2011, 03:07 AM
At least we have MLB playoffs and the NFL to get us through these rough times. haha

ttam68
10-04-2011, 08:09 AM
The agents could also collect large legal fees if the union decertifies and this process drags on, not to mention their egos play a role in this.

likemystylez
10-04-2011, 08:45 AM
agents get paid a percentage of the contract that is signed ....if the players sign contracts for less money than the ones they signed in the past the agents will make less money hence why they dont want the players to make less money

Hmm good point, then this is a joke. No player in their right mind should buy this... The agents already got their take... so they dont care if the players are throwing away a season of their limited carreers and limited contracts

likemystylez
10-04-2011, 08:46 AM
The agents could also collect large legal fees if the union decertifies and this process drags on, not to mention their egos play a role in this.

LOL fees from all the players who dont have any money??

daleja424
10-04-2011, 08:47 AM
As over-the-top as much of that was, there were a couple of GREAT points being made:

1. Lowering the MLE and salary cap WILL prevent a lot of free agents from establishing a market and getting what they are worth. Decreases in these area will mean that a lot of guys are going to get low-balled and severely underpaid. Lets take MLE player for example: Last year a MLE guy would have gotten the full thing at nearly 6 million a year. Now the same guy will get 3 million a year for less years. That seems absurd to me. If last year the NBA admitted that the guy was worth 6 million, how can they justify only paying him 3 million now?

2. The players have been more than willing to give money back. They have gone down to 52% now, while the owners still have not budged. There was a 300 million dollar gap last year according to the owners and the players have offered to give back 220 million of that (5% of growth adjusted BRI). The players have made a more than fair offer, assuming three quarters of a loss that is not their fault to begin with.

3. The NBA really has never ever enjoyed this kind of success before, and the owners don't want to lose this season anymore than the players do. Both stand to lose a lot of money and goodwill if this season doesn't happen.

likemystylez
10-04-2011, 09:11 AM
As over-the-top as much of that was, there were a couple of GREAT points being made:

1. Lowering the MLE and salary cap WILL prevent a lot of free agents from establishing a market and getting what they are worth. Decreases in these area will mean that a lot of guys are going to get low-balled and severely underpaid. Lets take MLE player for example: Last year a MLE guy would have gotten the full thing at nearly 6 million a year. Now the same guy will get 3 million a year for less years. That seems absurd to me. If last year the NBA admitted that the guy was worth 6 million, how can they justify only paying him 3 million now?

2. The players have been more than willing to give money back. They have gone down to 52% now, while the owners still have not budged. There was a 300 million dollar gap last year according to the owners and the players have offered to give back 220 million of that (5% of growth adjusted BRI). The players have made a more than fair offer, assuming three quarters of a loss that is not their fault to begin with.

3. The NBA really has never ever enjoyed this kind of success before, and the owners don't want to lose this season anymore than the players do. Both stand to lose a lot of money and goodwill if this season doesn't happen.

Yeah- Im having a hard time figuring out what the motive is for the owners being so unwilling to move on this. Or why they think the obvious deal that is there is so unreasonable.

I personally think the 300 million is a joke or atleast a ploy, and just a big number to get peoples attention and get the public behind them. By now, I think most of the public who are paying attention to this negotiation realize that this negotiation hasnt been much of a negotiation at all. The owners have basically made one offer, appear willing to wait this out.

MY best guess- is that this isnt about money at all. The league is doing great relative to the rest of the economy. I think a lot of the owners are concerned about the competitive balance in the league. This problem looks to have gotten out of control over the last couple years. I'm not sure if a new CBA would solve this problem though.

daleja424
10-04-2011, 09:23 AM
It won't. All it will do is make it easier for the good teams to get better.

I say this, b/c instead of a team like Miami having 6 million in MLE money to sell a guy like Dalembert... they will have to say we only have 3 mill in MLE money...

and guess what... he will probably still take it.

Guys want to play in Miami, Boston, NY, LA, Dallas and have shown that they are more than willing to sacrifice to do so. That isn't going to change. No matter what you do, guys are still going to rather play in those places than in the crappier markets.

There is nothing this CBA can do about geography and market...

daleja424
10-04-2011, 09:24 AM
And the amnesty clause is just laughable... it is going to infuse the market with a bunch of Baron Davises and Rashard Lewises...

Well those guys are already getting paid their amnesty money... where do you think they are all going to end up. CHEAP TALENT FOR GOOD TEAMS.

likemystylez
10-04-2011, 09:45 AM
And the amnesty clause is just laughable... it is going to infuse the market with a bunch of Baron Davises and Rashard Lewises...

Well those guys are already getting paid their amnesty money... where do you think they are all going to end up. CHEAP TALENT FOR GOOD TEAMS.

True- but the clause is going to put more free agents out on the market.... making the likelyhood of any team getting a quality free agent atleast a little bit better?

daleja424
10-04-2011, 09:50 AM
And the amnesty clause is just laughable... it is going to infuse the market with a bunch of Baron Davises and Rashard Lewises...

Well those guys are already getting paid their amnesty money... where do you think they are all going to end up. CHEAP TALENT FOR GOOD TEAMS.

True- but the clause is going to put more free agents out on the market.... making the likelyhood of any team getting a quality free agent atleast a little bit better?

doubt it... the salary cap is going down... and the exceptions shrinking... meaning teams will have less to spend. If you can get 3 mil a year (with state taxes) from Milwaukee OR 1.5 mil a year (without state taxes) to play in Miami...which would you choose?

By leveling the playing field... they are just making it more enticing for guys to take min deals to play for good teams.

Sure there will be exceptions... but honestly I fail to see where they are trying to go with this.

likemystylez
10-04-2011, 09:56 AM
[QUOTE=likemystylez;19379347]

doubt it... the salary cap is going down... and the exceptions shrinking... meaning teams will have less to spend. If you can get 3 mil a year (with state taxes) from Milwaukee OR 1.5 mil a year (without state taxes) to play in Miami...which would you choose?

By leveling the playing field... they are just making it more enticing for guys to take min deals to play for good teams.

Sure there will be exceptions... but honestly I fail to see where they are trying to go with this.

Less money chasing a larger number of free agents? makes it more likely to get a better free agent. Its still no guarentee.

Perhaps the larger bennefits will come in time... not immediatly with the player you sign with the freed up cap space. Perhaps its like a make up signing, and this time the teams each have another chance not to sign a baron davis or rashard lewis to huge deals.

This way 2-3 yrs from now- they might be in far better financial shape than they would have been without the clause

mttwlsn16
10-04-2011, 09:58 AM
lockout sucks
fk owners

iliketurtles24
10-04-2011, 09:59 AM
so are the players gonna cover the stadium costs, or split the expenses with the owners?
if they dont, there is no reason they should make close to half of the profits

daleja424
10-04-2011, 10:14 AM
so are the players gonna cover the stadium costs, or split the expenses with the owners?
if they dont, there is no reason they should make close to half of the profits

The players cover ALL OF THE STADIUM COSTS AND ALL OF THE EXPENSES!

BRI= basketball related income= the money players make by playing basketball

da ThRONe
10-04-2011, 10:33 AM
so are the players gonna cover the stadium costs, or split the expenses with the owners?
if they dont, there is no reason they should make close to half of the profits

Are the owners going to learn how to play a sport well enough to get tens of millions of people to pay billions of dollars to watch them play?

likemystylez
10-04-2011, 10:54 AM
Are the owners going to learn how to play a sport well enough to get tens of millions of people to pay billions of dollars to watch them play?

I dont know if they need too. Any given owner in the NBA could probably figure out atleast 5 ways to make 20 million dollars over the next fiscal year.... How many ways can the average player do that?

I guess my point is- its not who is morally in the right, its who has the leverage, and unfortunately for the players....its not even close.

da ThRONe
10-04-2011, 11:22 AM
I dont know if they need too. Any given owner in the NBA could probably figure out atleast 5 ways to make 20 million dollars over the next fiscal year.... How many ways can the average player do that?

I guess my point is- its not who is morally in the right, its who has the leverage, and unfortunately for the players....its not even close.

That wasn't his point.

I don't deny that the owners have more leverage, but to think the owners can just handle a missed season easily isn't accurate either. No matter how much money they claim to be losing not having a season will cost them more.

likemystylez
10-04-2011, 11:30 AM
That wasn't his point.

I don't deny that the owners have more leverage, but to think the owners can just handle a missed season easily isn't accurate either. No matter how much money they claim to be losing not having a season will cost them more.

thats true... which makes me continue to wonder whats pushing this and why isnt common sense coming through? Is this just an ego thing, where the owners are willing to take a loss to show their dominance... maybe to set themselves up for future cba agreements?

daleja424
10-04-2011, 11:30 AM
That wasn't his point.

I don't deny that the owners have more leverage, but to think the owners can just handle a missed season easily isn't accurate either. No matter how much money they claim to be losing not having a season will cost them more.

A LOT more... and people seem to not realize this.

Even with no season they still have a staff and FO to pay salaries to, they still have to do stadium maintenance, they still have a ton of costs...

AND they have to pay back season ticket holders...

And they have to do all of that out of pocket, b/c there is no BRI

sixer04fan
10-04-2011, 11:42 AM
Agents are gonna **** this whole thing up. Anyone who says they support the players holding out to get the best deal possible is full of it. I just wanna see some basketball, I don't really care what the players make. They make enough already. I'm gonna be pissed if we miss some games.

daleja424
10-04-2011, 11:45 AM
Agents are gonna **** this whole thing up. Anyone who says they support the players holding out to get the best deal possible is full of it. I just wanna see some basketball, I don't really care what the players make. They make enough already. I'm gonna be pissed if we miss some games.

I'm not full of it. I don't want to see the players get raked over the coals here. I don't want to miss games... but I don't the owners to win either. If we miss games...it is all on the owners being unwilling to compromise...

da ThRONe
10-04-2011, 11:51 AM
Agents are gonna **** this whole thing up. Anyone who says they support the players holding out to get the best deal possible is full of it. I just wanna see some basketball, I don't really care what the players make. They make enough already. I'm gonna be pissed if we miss some games.

At this point it seems to be the owners greed holding things up. They want to take and give nothing in return. This stop being a negotiation and started becoming a heist sometime ago.

Sure the player are well compensated, but they generate the revenue. No players no product, no product no money. Second at what point do they stand up for themselves. The players seem to clearly understand that this labor situation is about them making pretty much all the concessions, but at some point they have to make a stand are the would eventually be making under 25% of the BRI.

ink
10-04-2011, 11:53 AM
It's funny how most of the items the agents are "flagging" are actually desirable if you think about it.

I don't care if the players get less, don't care if the max salaries are lower, they should be. I definitely don't care if there are limitations to the MLE and Bird rights; those have been exploited by agents for mediocre players for some time now. This would only make it harder for management to overpay stiffs just because they have the cap room. As for the first point the agents are warning about, the escrow, they are completely misleading the players by suggesting that this is a clawback. Escrow goes into a collective pool in case the salary cap moves up or down. It does not just go back to the owners.

The agents represent the mediocre element in the whole system, the guys who can only make money off someone else's talent, and they are desperate to protect THEIR earning power, and no one else's. They are only operating out of self-interest and should be booed off the stage by the players.

daleja424
10-04-2011, 12:00 PM
Ya, but arguing the system is STUPID. If they settle on a 50-50 split of BRI, for example, the players get 50% regaurdless of whether the MLE is for 6 mil or 3 mil. So why cut into the MLE if it doesnt impact the bottom line but it helps players get more market value?

Also, I think the clawbacks were in reference to the fact that the NBA wants players to take salary cuts on existing deals of up to 10%. That part really bothers me, b/c it is rediculous that owners would sign guys last year to big deals knowing that they were going to make them give it back in new deals. I feel like the owners should have to write the checks they committed to writing.

iliketurtles24
10-04-2011, 12:00 PM
so for a regular business, say making jet engines, the employees should
hold out and make half of the profits, no the owners are the owners, they make the money cause they are making the risk of owning the team, the players make no monetary risk.

likemystylez
10-04-2011, 12:01 PM
It's funny how most of the items the agents are "flagging" are actually desirable if you think about it.

I don't care if the players get less, don't care if the max salaries are lower, they should be. I definitely don't care if there are limitations to the MLE and Bird rights; those have been exploited by agents for mediocre players for some time now. This would only make it harder for management to overpay stiffs just because they have the cap room. As for the first point the agents are warning about, the escrow, they are completely misleading the players by suggesting that this is a clawback. Escrow goes into a collective pool in case the salary cap moves up or down. It does not just go back to the owners.

The agents represent the mediocre element in the whole system, the guys who can only make money off someone else's talent, and they are desperate to protect THEIR earning power, and no one else's. They are only operating out of self-interest and should be booed off the stage by the players.

we need someone credible to say that outloud though.

daleja424
10-04-2011, 12:08 PM
so for a regular business, say making jet engines, the employees should
hold out and make half of the profits, no the owners are the owners, they make the money cause they are making the risk of owning the team, the players make no monetary risk.

1. Jet engine builders are HIGHLY replaceable.
2. The players pay for everything... not the owners. The owners are only on the hook if they spend the money that the players allocate for them to spend irresponsibly. Owning a basketball team is an investment. If well managed you can triple your money in 10 years with basically NO RISK.

iliketurtles24
10-04-2011, 12:18 PM
1. Jet engine builders are HIGHLY replaceable.
2. The players pay for everything... not the owners. The owners are only on the hook if they spend the money that the players allocate for them to spend irresponsibly. Owning a basketball team is an investment. If well managed you can triple your money in 10 years with basically NO RISK.

do you know how to build a jet engine? i dont, yes they can be replaced but so can basketball players. People forget they are plying a game, they are entertainment, they are not necessary to life, and there is a risk with owning a team, how many teams made a profit last year( i am asking, idk) but i thought teams were losing money ?

daleja424
10-04-2011, 12:23 PM
do you know how to build a jet engine? i dont, yes they can be replaced but so can basketball players. People forget they are plying a game, they are entertainment, they are not necessary to life, and there is a risk with owning a team, how many teams made a profit last year( i am asking, idk) but i thought teams were losing money ?

1. I do not know how to build a jet engine... yet if I wanted to learn... I could. I cannot dunk... yet if I wanted to learn...oh.

2. NBA guys are playing a game that makes over 4 billion dollars a year. They are a product. A highly valuable one.

3. Owners may lose a small amount of money in a given year, but the long term trend in increased team value shows that team value tends to at least double every ten years. NBA team value is a no-risk investment. You buy a team...have fun with it for a little while...and then sell it for a lot more down the road. No NBA team in history has been sold for a loss. That is what makes it low risk.

4. The reason teams lose money year to year is that the owners do not spend the 43% they are allocated for expenses correctly. Non player expenses have increased an average of 11% per year over the last five years, AND THAT IS THE SINGULAR DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MAKING MONEY IN 2006 AND LOSING IT IN 2011!

likemystylez
10-04-2011, 12:28 PM
do you know how to build a jet engine? i dont, yes they can be replaced but so can basketball players. People forget they are plying a game, they are entertainment, they are not necessary to life, and there is a risk with owning a team, how many teams made a profit last year( i am asking, idk) but i thought teams were losing money ?

1) I dont think he meant to insult or belittle (jet engine builders??). They have a marketable skill and thats great. Even if Him or I or YOu dont know how to build a jet engine, the fact is that far more people could be trained to do that for a living than play NBA basketball.

2) I completely understand that they are playing a game and there are far more important things in life. They are still generating revenue in a healthy business and think they should be compensated. Another thing- the average NBA player has this super high earning potential for a very very short amount of time relative to typical proffessions. (Average is about 4.5 years).... there is a stronger desire and more urgency to cash out on these abilities while you are phisically able to "work" in this industry.

3) Supposidly 22 teams lost money (in operations), but likely more than made up for it if gains in equity are considered. Most of the teams are making more than 10% a year in equity (even in a down economy). that's as solid investment.

4) Even if you want to linger on the supposid opperating losses (which are likely grossly overstated for the purpose of these negotiations), It's difficult to convince anybody that those losses are the fault of the players as oppose to poor decisions in the front office of the organization.

iliketurtles24
10-04-2011, 12:31 PM
im not saying they shouldn't make a lot of money, i just dont think they should make half of the profits.
and i could dunk much easier than making a jet engine

likemystylez
10-04-2011, 12:33 PM
1. I do not know how to build a jet engine... yet if I wanted to learn... I could. I cannot dunk... yet if I wanted to learn...oh.

2. NBA guys are playing a game that makes over 4 billion dollars a year. They are a product. A highly valuable one.

3. Owners may lose a small amount of money in a given year, but the long term trend in increased team value shows that team value tends to at least double every ten years. NBA team value is a no-risk investment. You buy a team...have fun with it for a little while...and then sell it for a lot more down the road. No NBA team in history has been sold for a loss. That is what makes it low risk.

4. The reason teams lose money year to year is that the owners do not spend the 43% they are allocated for expenses correctly. Non player expenses have increased an average of 11% per year over the last five years, AND THAT IS THE SINGULAR DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MAKING MONEY IN 2006 AND LOSING IT IN 2011!

Ok umm thats kinda creepy

likemystylez
10-04-2011, 12:34 PM
im not saying they shouldn't make a lot of money, i just dont think they should make half of the profits.
and i could dunk much easier than making a jet engine

could you play nba basketball easier than you could make jet engines?


If your answer is yes, then I suggest you start siding with the players :D

daleja424
10-04-2011, 12:36 PM
im not saying they shouldn't make a lot of money, i just dont think they should make half of the profits.
and i could dunk much easier than making a jet engine

It was an example... the point is the average person can learn to assemble a jet engine...the average person cannot learn to be an NBA player.

da ThRONe
10-04-2011, 12:39 PM
do you know how to build a jet engine? i dont, yes they can be replaced but so can basketball players. People forget they are plying a game, they are entertainment, they are not necessary to life, and there is a risk with owning a team, how many teams made a profit last year( i am asking, idk) but i thought teams were losing money ?

OK if it's as simple as just finding another 200+ guys to play hoops why aren't the owners doing so? Or even threating to do so? The have that right to if they thought it would generate similar revenue. It's been done before in sports.

iliketurtles24
10-04-2011, 12:39 PM
Maybe they should all make less and lower the ticket prices and the jersey prices, not as much in nba, but nfl is worse in this.

and i just wanna see my team play, so ultimately, get the deal done, and players dont listen to the agnets, they just want more money and dont really car about players, they just leach money off the players talents and the owners money.

smith&wesson
10-04-2011, 12:53 PM
agents are spreading awareness. its no secret that some of these athletes are dumbasses going along for the ride with out actually knowing whats going on. this to me just encourages the players to know whats going on, and stand up for them selves.

i find nothing wrong with this. an agents job is to protect a players best interest and thats exactly what they are doing. it is irrelevant that it benefits them as well because they are employed by the players.. thats a given.

ink
10-04-2011, 12:59 PM
agents are spreading awareness. its no secret that some of these athletes are dumbasses going along for the ride with out actually knowing whats going on. this to me just encourages the players to know whats going on, and stand up for them selves.

i find nothing wrong with this. an agents job is to protect a players best interest and thats exactly what they are doing. it is irrelevant that it benefits them as well because they are employed by the players.. thats a given.

Problem with that is the players dont actually NEED any of the things these agents are "defending". But we know damn well the agents DO. They are a very clever form of parasite.

smith&wesson
10-04-2011, 01:07 PM
Maybe they should all make less and lower the ticket prices and the jersey prices, not as much in nba, but nfl is worse in this.

and i just wanna see my team play, so ultimately, get the deal done, and players dont listen to the agnets, they just want more money and dont really car about players, they just leach money off the players talents and the owners money.

the more money a player makes the more money an agent makes. is that what your basing this opinion on ? If i was a player i would want the guy whos pay check depends on my pay check to rep me. who else would fight harder for me ? no one!

Shmontaine
10-04-2011, 01:14 PM
what the agents left out of their letter

"the 10-15% increase in our agent fees with lower contracts"

this is the biggest piece of propaganda and should be used for toilet paper... the agents care about themselves, and as soon as these players decline, they move on to the new talent...

smith&wesson
10-04-2011, 01:18 PM
Problem with that is the players dont actually NEED any of the things these agents are "defending". But we know damn well the agents DO. They are a very clever form of parasite.

confused :confused: what do the agents need that the players dont ? every thing the agents NEED is to help them in contract negotiations for the players.

Agents are greedy sure, but so are owners and so are players. i beleive the agents have the best intentions for theyre clients as theyre jobs rely on theyre clients jobs.

smith&wesson
10-04-2011, 01:19 PM
what the agents left out of their letter

"the 10-15% increase in our agent fees with lower contracts"

this is the biggest piece of propaganda and should be used for toilet paper... the agents care about themselves, and as soon as these players decline, they move on to the new talent...

you mean just like teams do ? what would you do if you were an agent ? hold on to mike james for dear life ?

players get old and decrease in value its the nature of the business and also, thats life.

smith&wesson
10-04-2011, 01:25 PM
its like saying your lawer is money hungry. he wont settle in court because he wants a bigger settlment. well guess what ? i want a bigger settlement too and my lawer is right to fight for a bigger settlement for the both us. that is just smart business. why settle for the least amount and not fight for what you can get ?
If the players give in to "scare tacticts" the owners can essentially do this every time a new bargaining agreement comes up. decreasing salaries the owners themselves handed out.

if i sign gilbert arenas to a dumb *** contract whos fault is that ? now the guys getting paid a mill a year have to get theyre contracts cut by as much as 20% how is that fair ?

da ThRONe
10-04-2011, 01:31 PM
It's funny how people are vilifying the agents for doing the samething all parties in this dispute are doing. Looking out for their own best interest. Their best interest just happens to be directly tied to the players earning potential.

The only person in the middle of all of this who has the least amount of self interest is Derek Fisher. At this point in his career the CBA will effect him the least.

ink
10-04-2011, 01:34 PM
confused :confused: what do the agents need that the players dont ? every thing the agents NEED is to help them in contract negotiations for the players.

Agents are greedy sure, but so are owners and so are players. i beleive the agents have the best intentions for theyre clients as theyre jobs rely on theyre clients jobs.

They need players and owners (i.e. the ones with the actual skills; playing and running a large commercial enterprise, respectively) to keep raising salary levels so they can skim off their cut. They NEED to protect the status quo because they have fought hard to drive the costs/salaries as high as possible so they can benefit.

No player NEEDS the extra $500,000 or whatever it might be. And I'm the last person in the world to say that owners DESERVE the profit they make but that is the way capitalism works and they put up the money, take the financial risk, and run the corporation.

Just because Apple or Nike or CNN make a ****ing fortune for themselves doesn't mean the owners of the company feel compelled to share EQUALLY with those that supply the talent that makes them great right? It's the same with any sports league. If the players want to put up the money and do ALL the management, financial, talent, everything, then they would be in a position to call the shots the way the owners do. A few try: I believe they're called the Bobcats. ;) But last time we all checked, it is the owners and GMs who do all the decision making in season. They run the show, they own the show, whether we like it or not.

ink
10-04-2011, 01:40 PM
its like saying your lawer is money hungry. he wont settle in court because he wants a bigger settlment. well guess what ? i want a bigger settlement too and my lawer is right to fight for a bigger settlement for the both us. that is just smart business. why settle for the least amount and not fight for what you can get ?
If the players give in to "scare tacticts" the owners can essentially do this every time a new bargaining agreement comes up. decreasing salaries the owners themselves handed out.

if i sign gilbert arenas to a dumb *** contract whos fault is that ? now the guys getting paid a mill a year have to get theyre contracts cut by as much as 20% how is that fair ?

And that's why people hate lawyers. btw both sides use scare tactics every time they go into these negotiations.

NYman15
10-04-2011, 01:48 PM
If the agents get involved, then this could really turn into a mess. And if they decide to decertify, then it makes the possibility of losing a whole season much greater. Not good news.

likemystylez
10-04-2011, 02:12 PM
If the agents get involved, then this could really turn into a mess. And if they decide to decertify, then it makes the possibility of losing a whole season much greater. Not good news.

much greater as in like 100% LOL

RevisIsland
10-04-2011, 02:24 PM
We're not starting until February at the earliest.

beasted86
10-04-2011, 02:26 PM
No player NEEDS the extra $500,000 or whatever it might be. And I'm the last person in the world to say that owners DESERVE the profit they make but that is the way capitalism works and they put up the money, take the financial risk, and run the corporation.

Yes, but that also means they should share blame in the losses instead of asking for a 100% giveback from the players.

As I've said in another thread, the 76ers paid 3 head coaches last season: Maurice Cheeks (signed extension 2008, fired 2009), Eddie Jordan (hired 2009, fired 2010), and Phil Collins (present head coach). The owners should accept 100% blame for this contributing to their losses. This is just one example of how a team can have legitimate financial statements having real money contribute to losses through no fault of the players.

The owners seem to be the more greedy ones that want profit no matter how bad of decisions they make.

I think both sides agree that there needs to be changes to the system and players need to receive less, but the sticking point is how much less, and how much blame is the format of the system.

likemystylez
10-04-2011, 02:26 PM
We're not starting until February at the earliest.

any real info coming out... or are you just being negative?

smith&wesson
10-04-2011, 02:31 PM
They need players and owners (i.e. the ones with the actual skills; playing and running a large commercial enterprise, respectively) to keep raising salary levels so they can skim off their cut. They NEED to protect the status quo because they have fought hard to drive the costs/salaries as high as possible so they can benefit.

No player NEEDS the extra $500,000 or whatever it might be. And I'm the last person in the world to say that owners DESERVE the profit they make but that is the way capitalism works and they put up the money, take the financial risk, and run the corporation.

Just because Apple or Nike or CNN make a ****ing fortune for themselves doesn't mean the owners of the company feel compelled to share EQUALLY with those that supply the talent that makes them great right? It's the same with any sports league. If the players want to put up the money and do ALL the management, financial, talent, everything, then they would be in a position to call the shots the way the owners do. A few try: I believe they're called the Bobcats. ;) But last time we all checked, it is the owners and GMs who do all the decision making in season. They run the show, they own the show, whether we like it or not.


And that's why people hate lawyers. btw both sides use scare tactics every time they go into these negotiations.

i understand what your saying. the owners are the boss. i get that. but these players are like sub contractors. the owners are dependant on the players because they cant really replace them. the nba markets stars and are dependant on them to lure fans and revenue. sure you can get dleague players or players from overseas but the sport will take a hit in popularity for sure thus making even less profit they claim to be making now.

the problem with having unionized employees is that they are contracted and these contracts are driven up as high as possible by the agents sure but again that is in favour of the player first and the agent second. the players want to make theyre money as much as the owners do and the agents job is to get that player as much money as he can. thats what makes a good agent in a players eyes im sure.

every one has a reason to be greedy and every one is. but as a player i wouldnt mind having these "money hungry agents" to counter these "money hungry owners" in my favour. i think every one involved is over paid personally and every one needs to make sacrifices to get a deal in place.by the looks of it the players have already offered to make that sacrifice and to the owners its not enough. the owners are really asking for somthing durastic here and that to me is unfair to expect and a reason for the player to stand up and say look were willing to sacrifice but how much ??

this letter looks like a last call to all players to come together as they are getting closer to a deal and want to make sure all players are united in the efforts to get the best deal possible. i dig it. its too easy to just sign and say lets play ball only to be shocked out of your *** when you recieve your first pay check lol

If its one thing ive learned in this world is that you have to fight to get yours, and if you dont youll get what they give you.

and every one hates defence lawers not all lawers = )

ink
10-04-2011, 03:02 PM
i understand what your saying. the owners are the boss. i get that. but these players are like sub contractors. the owners are dependant on the players because they cant really replace them. the nba markets stars and are dependant on them to lure fans and revenue. sure you can get dleague players or players from overseas but the sport will take a hit in popularity for sure thus making even less profit they claim to be making now.

the problem with having unionized employees is that they are contracted and these contracts are driven up as high as possible by the agents sure but again that is in favour of the player first and the agent second. the players want to make theyre money as much as the owners do and the agents job is to get that player as much money as he can. thats what makes a good agent in a players eyes im sure.

every one has a reason to be greedy and every one is. but as a player i wouldnt mind having these "money hungry agents" to counter these "money hungry owners" in my favour. i think every one involved is over paid personally and every one needs to make sacrifices to get a deal in place.by the looks of it the players have already offered to make that sacrifice and to the owners its not enough. the owners are really asking for somthing durastic here and that to me is unfair to expect and a reason for the player to stand up and say look were willing to sacrifice but how much ??

this letter looks like a last call to all players to come together as they are getting closer to a deal and want to make sure all players are united in the efforts to get the best deal possible. i dig it. its too easy to just sign and say lets play ball only to be shocked out of your *** when you recieve your first pay check lol

If its one thing ive learned in this world is that you have to fight to get yours, and if you dont youll get what they give you.

and every one hates defence lawers not all lawers = )

Thing is, the owners aren't any more money hungry than anyone else with a successful enterprise. We can't blame them for being good at what they do, any more than we blame Steve Jobs or the Bronfman family. I think what the owners have been trying to do is what any management group always wants to do: iron the loopholes out of the CBA. We see it in every league and in every CBA renegotiation. Many of us who follow the NHL know that after their lockout 6 years ago there was a massive loophole that allowed a couple of players' (DiPietro, Luongo) massive contracts to be ameliorated over a ridiculously long period of time so the cap hit wouldn't be as big each year. The league sees all the exceptions in the current CBA and wants to try to eliminate or reduce them as much as possible to try to get expenses under control during a massive recession.

The players don't need as much and the agents definitely don't deserve as much for what they do. Obviously the owners don't need as much either but it's their show and we're still foolish enough to buy tickets and merchandise to support them. I really don't think the agents are doing anything in the players' interest at all, since players would be fine if the base salary and max salaries were more reasonable. It's like insisting that we have a right to buy the iPhone 5 for $100. No, we don't, they're entitled to make as much money as the market will allow. And here's the big difference: the talent that makes the iPhone 5 only gets what their contract says they should. It's all in the negotiations, and the agents right now are the wild card that are driving the most dangerous greed factor.

It's actually in the agents' WORST interests for the players to be reasonable at this juncture. The agents are the ones with the most to lose, both for their present clients and their future clients.

smith&wesson
10-04-2011, 03:28 PM
Thing is, the owners aren't any more money hungry than anyone else with a successful enterprise. We can't blame them for being good at what they do, any more than we blame Steve Jobs or the Bronfman family. I think what the owners have been trying to do is what any management group always wants to do: iron the loopholes out of the CBA. We see it in every league and in every CBA renegotiation. Many of us who follow the NHL know that after their lockout 6 years ago there was a massive loophole that allowed a couple of players' (DiPietro, Luongo) massive contracts to be ameliorated over a ridiculously long period of time so the cap hit wouldn't be as big each year. The league sees all the exceptions in the current CBA and wants to try to eliminate or reduce them as much as possible to try to get expenses under control during a massive recession.

The players don't need as much and the agents definitely don't deserve as much for what they do. Obviously the owners don't need as much either but it's their show and we're still foolish enough to buy tickets and merchandise to support them. I really don't think the agents are doing anything in the players' interest at all, since players would be fine if the base salary and max salaries were more reasonable. It's like insisting that we have a right to buy the iPhone 5 for $100. No, we don't, they're entitled to make as much money as the market will allow. And here's the big difference: the talent that makes the iPhone 5 only gets what their contract says they should. It's all in the negotiations, and the agents right now are the wild card that are driving the most dangerous greed factor.

It's actually in the agents' WORST interests for the players to be reasonable at this juncture. The agents are the ones with the most to lose, both for their present clients and their future clients.

I like your I phone metaphore but its a little different here. ppl making the iphone are not contracted they are working directly for apple. which means a couple warning letters and they are fired if need be. Gilbert arenas brought guns to work and although was charged, the wizards could not get out of paying his bloated contract. sad but true.

when do the owners say " you know what gilbert is not worht this contract let him and his blood sucking agent lure some other franchise to pay him this amount"

the owners need to walk away from bad deals. i remember when orlando gave reshard lewis that stupid contract. seatle could have matched owning his bird rights but they let him walk and that was the right move to make. more owners need to take responsibility for giving in to these agents. sometimes a player is simply not worth the asking price and the owner shouldnt throw his house and every thing he ownes at him to win some kind of bidding war with another team.

ink you def know more details in regards to these cba negotiations then i do. you said "I think what the owners have been trying to do is what any management group always wants to do: iron the loopholes out of the CBA. "
I agree and i think its needed just dont know the details of how they are trying to change some of the loop holes. players like hedo should not get 10 mill a year in free agency and thats just an example of what owners need to do to take the power away from agents to drive up these salaries. def agree with that.

nyKnicks126
10-04-2011, 03:36 PM
I am on the players side, but if they are fighting about the BRI, the owners should attack the players and say they want a piece of their individual endorsements throughout the NBA season. example. Nike, Adidas. Only makes it fair? Probably not..

ink
10-04-2011, 03:38 PM
I like your I phone metaphore but its a little different here. ppl making the iphone are not contracted they are working directly for apple.

I think more people are on contract than on staff in today's labour market ... at least that's the trend.

the owners need to walk away from bad deals.

True, but with the CBA exceptions that exist, owners and management will always compete with each other to grab whatever possible talent they can. Their fan base wouldn't forgive them if they weren't seen to be proactive. Just look at the MLE that was used on Kleiza -- had BC not made that move people would have been pissed. In hindsight, it wasn't so hot. This is what the owners want to prevent, and the only way they can is to remove the exceptions. We all know that if they get together and refuse to sign FAs at top dollar it is called collusion.


ink you def know more details in regards to these cba negotiations then i do. you said "I think what the owners have been trying to do is what any management group always wants to do: iron the loopholes out of the CBA. "

I was locked out about 5 years ago so I went through it first hand. The issues are almost always the same, regardless of the line of work. My best friends were the negotiators for the union side and I blogged about the impasse right through the lockout.

btw, don't get me wrong. I'm probably way closer to the Occupy Wall Street (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/occupy-wall-street-protests-spread-to-dc-boston-la-and-chicago/2011/10/04/gIQA9IOOLL_story.html) protests than I am to absolute free enterprise. But at the same time, we have to be realistic about who stands to benefit (relative to talent level) from an impasse here.

It sure won't be the fans either way. Salaries go up, ticket prices go up; the lockout is prolonged, we get no basketball season. We already lose in both scenarios.

The agents are the ones who need to try to preserve the status quo. They don't want to give any ground that they've worked for in the past, even though they and their players have been compensated more per year than some of us will make in a lifetime.

likemystylez
10-04-2011, 03:50 PM
I am on the players side, but if they are fighting about the BRI, the owners should attack the players and say they want a piece of their individual endorsements throughout the NBA season. example. Nike, Adidas. Only makes it fair? Probably not..

doesnt the league have its own endorsement deals as well.. that arent a part of BRI. For example... all spalding balls that are listed as nba official size and weight, official nba team shirts, sweaters, hats, etc. Not to mention basically all toys and what-not with the nba logo on it... basketball hoops, pumps, nets, etc.

LOl I know that gear is not as sexy as the lebron mcdonalds commercials or the wade cell phone commercials, but there will always be a market for the nba stuff.

ink
10-04-2011, 03:57 PM
I am on the players side

That's the thing. I have no idea how any fan could take either side. This is a festering mess with both sides equally guilty of letting the scale grow wildly out of control. Most fans can't ever afford to go to games any more. I don't see either side giving a damn about that. So, no, I don't take any side. In fact, I can live without the NBA and watch NCAA. Most basketball people I know prefer it anyway ...

I really don't care if we lose one, two or three seasons. Why do we waste emotion on ******** problems of the uber-rich anyway??? Seriously.

smith&wesson
10-04-2011, 03:58 PM
I think more people are on contract than on staff in today's labour market ... at least that's the trend.

the owners need to walk away from bad deals.

True, but with the CBA exceptions that exist, owners and management will always compete with each other to grab whatever possible talent they can. Their fan base wouldn't forgive them if they weren't seen to be proactive. Just look at the MLE that was used on Kleiza -- had BC not made that move people would have been pissed. In hindsight, it wasn't so hot. This is what the owners want to prevent, and the only way they can is to remove the exceptions. We all know that if they get together and refuse to sign FAs at top dollar it is called collusion.



I was locked out about 5 years ago so I went through it first hand. The issues are almost always the same, regardless of the line of work. My best friends were the negotiators for the union side and I blogged about the impasse right through the lockout.

btw, don't get me wrong. I'm probably way closer to the Occupy Wall Street (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/occupy-wall-street-protests-spread-to-dc-boston-la-and-chicago/2011/10/04/gIQA9IOOLL_story.html) protests than I am to absolute free enterprise. But at the same time, we have to be realistic about who stands to benefit (relative to talent level) from an impasse here.

It sure won't be the fans either way. Salaries go up, ticket prices go up; the lockout is prolonged, we get no basketball season. We already lose in both scenarios.

The agents are the ones who need to try to preserve the status quo. They don't want to give any ground that they've worked for in the past, even though they and their players have been compensated more per year than some of us will make in a lifetime.

fans dont win in this scenerio either way. with the bolded statement i agree 100%. the owners are dambed if they do and dambed if they dont in a sence and somthing needs to be done in that regard. there are players that handicap the rest of the league with theyre salaries and those players names have been circleing around .. but what about the player that makes one mill a year does he deserve to have his pay reduced by 20%. there must be a way to directy adress the big salaries that are undeservingly being handed out?

"the occypy wall street" protest is somthing i havent been following but I cant imagine what our econmy will look like in a year. its really scary. . the american economy directly effects our economy and thats the only thing i know for sure. im reading the article now. thanks ink

likemystylez
10-04-2011, 04:03 PM
That's the thing. I have no idea how any fan could take either side. This is a festering mess with both sides equally guilty of letting the scale grow wildly out of control. Most fans can't ever afford to go to games any more. I don't see either side giving a damn about that. So, no, I don't take any side. In fact, I can live without the NBA and watch NCAA. Most basketball people I know prefer it anyway ...

I really don't care if we lose one, two or three seasons. Why do we waste emotion on ******** problems of the uber-rich anyway??? Seriously.

because we love basketball??

ink
10-04-2011, 04:09 PM
because we love basketball??

Already covered that: NCAA is damn good ball.

I just don't understand why we take on other people's issues the way we do.

smith&wesson
10-04-2011, 04:19 PM
Already covered that: NCAA is damn good ball.

I just don't understand why we take on other people's issues the way we do.

your right we really cant take sides its a dispute between an organization and its employees. looking from the out side in its impossible to know whos right or wrong. specially when its soo complex and not just about one or two things.

heres a link from d. fisher in responce to the agents and theyre letters.

http://www.prosportsdaily.com/articles/derek-fisher-sends-letter-to-players-answering-agents-571404.html

ink
10-04-2011, 04:22 PM
your right we really cant take sides its a dispute between an organization and its employees. looking from the out side in its impossible to know whos right or wrong. specially when its soo complex and not just about one or two things.

heres a link from d. fisher in responce to the agents and theyre letters.

http://www.prosportsdaily.com/articles/derek-fisher-sends-letter-to-players-answering-agents-571404.html

Good for Fisher for pointing out the misinformation in the agents' letter. Must suck to be caught in the middle like he is.

Thanks for posting the link SW.

smith&wesson
10-04-2011, 04:25 PM
because we love basketball??

we all love basketball thats why were here and it is frustraiting no doubt because we just want to watch ball. .

but to take sides seems kind of silly because we dont actually know whats going on. writers are creating stories due to a lack of basketball news and they need to write somthing.. we dont know whats fact or fiction. i doubt they even know.

smith&wesson
10-04-2011, 04:28 PM
Good for Fisher for pointing out the misinformation in the agents' letter. Must suck to be caught in the middle like he is.

Thanks for posting the link SW.

np man,

ya when a player himself is saying the letters are full of misinformation you cant help but wonder what the agents motives are