PDA

View Full Version : Where does each owner stand?



daleja424
10-22-2011, 11:56 AM
I think this is an important question in all of this: What side is each owner on?

For simplicity sake I have listed each team (instead of owner, b/c many teams have multiple owners) that I know their stance as either DEAL (looking to make a deal, willing to compromise) or NO DEAL (hardline owners). If you know the stance of your particular owner please help me complete the list. (Keep in mind that for a few of these owners I am using a best guess)

This will give us an idea where the owners stand...and how many need to be swayed for us to have a season.

Please provide a link if possible....

DEAL
Chicago Bulls
Dallas Mavericks
Golden State Warriors
LA Lakers
Miami Heat
New Jersey Nets
New York Knicks

NO DEAL
Boston Celtics
Cleveland Cavaliers
Denver Nuggets
New Orleans Hornets
Phoenix Suns
Portland Trail Blazers
Sacramento Kings
San Antonio Spurs

UNKNOWN (best guess in parenthesis)
Atlanta Hawks (no deal)
Charlotte Bobcats (deal.. MJ)
Detroit Pistons (no deal)
Houston Rockets (no deal)
Indiana Pacers (deal... Bird)
LA Clippers (deal... need bird rights/soft cap)
Memphis Grizzlies (deal...need bird rights/soft cap)
Milwaukee Bucks (no deal)
Minnesota Timberwolves (no deal)
Oklahoma City Thunder (deal.. need bird rights/soft cap)
Orlando Magic (deal...don't want to lose Dwight)
Philadelphia Sixers (deal...just bought by new group)
Toronto Raptors (no deal)
Utah Jazz (no deal)
Washington Wizards (no deal)

So if I am correct on my guesses I would say that today the split is probably something like 16-14 in favor of hardline owners. So realistically, it is possible that only a couple owners need to be swayed before the ones that want to deal could make a play for power.

Again, please update me if I got any of these wrong... and feel free to come up with your own lists and tallies....

Sactown
10-22-2011, 12:02 PM
I'm guessing by last name and on the opposite side of the players

daleja424
10-22-2011, 12:05 PM
The reason this is important is b/c I feel like there will not be a deal done if it is on the terms of the hardliners. Only chance for a season IMO is for the major market owners to get enough support from other owners to negotiate a deal.

D1JM
10-22-2011, 12:06 PM
If Dan Gilbert had lebron, he would be in the deal section

daleja424
10-22-2011, 12:08 PM
If Dan Gilbert had lebron, he would be in the deal section

Yup.

And if the HEAT hadn't have pulled off what they did last summer, the Celtics owner would be there too.

And if the Spurs were 3 years younger...they would be too.

There is an abundance of owners who loved the old system when it was their team taking advantage of it...but now that someone else is getting a turn to shine they are whining about competitive balance.

NYman15
10-22-2011, 12:08 PM
I think you're list is pretty accurate. I'll just give you where my team is on this. The Knicks are clearly one of the teams that want to get a deal done. It's been reported by multiple sources that James Dolan wants to get a deal done. Unfortunately, it seems like right now the small market owners/hardline owners have the power and majority right now and it seems like they're calling the shots.

ink
10-22-2011, 12:27 PM
I think where Spurs owner Peter Holt stands is exactly right. That is a classy organization from top to bottom and has proven to be a model franchise. If they can't make money there is something fundamentally wrong with the NBA.

ink
10-22-2011, 12:30 PM
It's notable that almost all the "DEAL" owners in the list want to exploit the current flawed CBA and hoard talent. Hardly surprising that Bulls, Knicks, Heat, Mavericks, and Nets want to continue pumping the system.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 12:30 PM
I think where Spurs owner Peter Holt stands is exactly right. That is a classy organization from top to bottom and has proven to be a model franchise. If they can't make money there is something fundamentally wrong with the NBA.

1) They made money when they were successful
2) They lost money the last two years b/c they tried to be competitive with an old *** team.
3) I don not deny they should have the chance to make money... but that is not the debate here. The biggest issue to date is the system. A system that he had no problem with when he was the one winning...

ink
10-22-2011, 12:40 PM
1) They made money when they were successful
2) They lost money the last two years b/c they tried to be competitive with an old *** team.
3) I don not deny they should have the chance to make money... but that is not the debate here. The biggest issue to date is the system. A system that he had no problem with when he was the one winning...

How do you know he had no problem with it? And why do you assume he made that much money when he was winning? The team hasn't exactly tanked you know.

There is no drop in attendance whatsoever in this chart. It doesn't include last year but even if there was a drop off it wouldn't change his mind over night. Fans might change their minds overnight but not businessmen.


San Antonio Spurs Attendance

Year Total Avg
2010-11 18,314 (home attendance added from ESPN)
2009-10 741,676 18,089
2008-09 749,048 18,269
2007-08 761,149 18,564
2006-07 764,823 18,654
2005-06 770,677 18,797
2004-05 750,970 18,316
2003-04 739,706 18,042
2002-03 736,970 17,975

http://basketballreference.com/teams/teamatt.htm?tm=sas&lg=N

Those figures represent well over 90% attendance for years with little change.

The fact that the franchise does things the right way and has been rock solid in a small market shows that Peter Holt is one of the best measuring sticks in the league. He is looking beyond himself and his team to the health of the league.

Sactown
10-22-2011, 12:42 PM
1) They made money when they were successful
2) They lost money the last two years b/c they tried to be competitive with an old *** team.
3) I don not deny they should have the chance to make money... but that is not the debate here. The biggest issue to date is the system. A system that he had no problem with when he was the one winning...

Ummm they were winning last season.. they finished with the best record in the west

ManRam
10-22-2011, 12:45 PM
It's notable that almost all the "DEAL" owners in the list want to exploit the current flawed CBA and hoard talent. Hardly surprising that Bulls, Knicks, Heat, Mavericks, and Nets want to continue pumping the system.

Of course.

Which is why, even with the Dwight situation, I can't imagine Orlando being a "deal". They need help some how to fix that roster...and it won't come as is.

Dade County
10-22-2011, 12:47 PM
Ummm they were winning last season.. they finished with the best record in the west

But their owner said in the press conference, that they have not been doing so good, these past 2yrs.

So some how, they lost money or just broke even.


Of course.

Which is why, even with the Dwight situation, I can't imagine Orlando being a "deal". They need help some how to fix that roster...and it won't come as is.

it's to late for the magic... Howard is gone unless they can get Cp3 or D will.... Not going to happen.

ugafan
10-22-2011, 12:50 PM
I think this is an important question in all of this: What side is each owner on?

For simplicity sake I have listed each team (instead of owner, b/c many teams have multiple owners) that I know their stance as either DEAL (looking to make a deal, willing to compromise) or NO DEAL (hardline owners). If you know the stance of your particular owner please help me complete the list. (Keep in mind that for a few of these owners I am using a best guess)

This will give us an idea where the owners stand...and how many need to be swayed for us to have a season.

Please provide a link if possible....

DEAL
Chicago Bulls
Dallas Mavericks
Golden State Warriors
LA Lakers
Miami Heat
New Jersey Nets
New York Knicks

NO DEAL
Boston Celtics
Cleveland Cavaliers
Denver Nuggets
New Orleans Hornets
Phoenix Suns
Portland Trail Blazers
Sacramento Kings
San Antonio Spurs

UNKNOWN (best guess in parenthesis)
Atlanta Hawks (no deal)
Charlotte Bobcats (deal.. MJ)
Detroit Pistons (no deal)
Houston Rockets (no deal)
Indiana Pacers (deal... Bird)
LA Clippers (deal... need bird rights/soft cap)
Memphis Grizzlies (deal...need bird rights/soft cap)
Milwaukee Bucks (no deal)
Minnesota Timberwolves (no deal)
Oklahoma City Thunder (deal.. need bird rights/soft cap)
Orlando Magic (deal...don't want to lose Dwight)
Philadelphia Sixers (deal...just bought by new group)
Toronto Raptors (no deal)
Utah Jazz (no deal)
Washington Wizards (no deal)

So if I am correct on my guesses I would say that today the split is probably something like 16-14 in favor of hardline owners. So realistically, it is possible that only a couple owners need to be swayed before the ones that want to deal could make a play for power.

Again, please update me if I got any of these wrong... and feel free to come up with your own lists and tallies....

Hawks just got sold to a new owner so I would think they're for a deal.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 12:53 PM
How do you know he had no problem with it? And why do you assume he made that much money when he was winning? The team hasn't exactly tanked you know.

There is no drop in attendance whatsoever in this chart. It doesn't include last year but even if there was a drop off it wouldn't change his mind over night. Fans might change their minds overnight but not businessmen.


San Antonio Spurs Attendance

Year Total Avg
2010-11 18,314 (home attendance added from ESPN)
2009-10 741,676 18,089
2008-09 749,048 18,269
2007-08 761,149 18,564
2006-07 764,823 18,654
2005-06 770,677 18,797
2004-05 750,970 18,316
2003-04 739,706 18,042
2002-03 736,970 17,975

http://basketballreference.com/teams/teamatt.htm?tm=sas&lg=N

Those figures represent well over 90% attendance for years with little change.

The fact that the franchise does things the right way and has been rock solid in a small market shows that Peter Holt is one of the best measuring sticks in the league. He is looking beyond himself and his team to the health of the league.

I know he didn't have a problem with it b/c he didn't dump talent to even out the league. He didn't offer Manu or TP to another team b/c he wanted fair competition. He just wanted to win. The cry for parity at this point is a reflection of him knowing his dynasty has run out of time, and he wants to make rebuilding easier.


Ummm they were winning last season.. they finished with the best record in the west
But they didnt go deep into the playoffs... Holt said so himself. They lost a ton of revenue by not being a contender and making a deep playoff run.


Of course.

Which is why, even with the Dwight situation, I can't imagine Orlando being a "deal". They need help some how to fix that roster...and it won't come as is.
If there is no season the Magic will lose Dwight for nothing and have very little chance of actually retaining him.

ink
10-22-2011, 01:07 PM
I know he didn't have a problem with it b/c he didn't dump talent to even out the league. He didn't offer Manu or TP to another team b/c he wanted fair competition. He just wanted to win. The cry for parity at this point is a reflection of him knowing his dynasty has run out of time, and he wants to make rebuilding easier.

He built his team the right way and of course he's going to retain the talent he developed. Have you read anyone anywhere saying they don't want to be competitive?


If there is no season the Magic will lose Dwight for nothing and have very little chance of actually retaining him.

They will probably lose him for nothing anyway, especially since Dwight is part of the generation that only cares about themselves. The pendulum has swung too far, now it needs to swing back to restabilize a flailing league.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 01:15 PM
He built his team the right way and of course he's going to retain the talent he developed. Have you read anyone anywhere saying they don't want to be competitive?


They will probably lose him for nothing anyway, especially since Dwight is part of the generation that only cares about themselves. The pendulum has swung too far, now it needs to swing back to restabilize a flailing league.

So what if he developed it? So did OKC. Yet he is trying to break that team up. He didn't have a problem with the system when it allowed him to bird right all of his guys and build a dynasty. And now that he is near the end of his reign... he is taking issue with it. That is highly hypocritical.

Orlando doesn't have to lose him for nothing if they trade him during the season for pieces or make other trades to actually put a team around him. You act like he owes Orlando something. Why? What have the Magic ever done for him that they deserve his loyalty? And what makes you think Orlando would show him the same kind of loyalty? People want to claim the NBA is a business...but then when players make business decisions...people say they are selfish... :eyebrow:

daleja424
10-22-2011, 01:18 PM
And how exactly is it selfish to want to be able to pick where you want to live and who you want to work for? Isn't that something that everyone in America has the right to decide for themself?

ink
10-22-2011, 01:28 PM
So what if he developed it? So did OKC. Yet he is trying to break that team up. He didn't have a problem with the system when it allowed him to bird right all of his guys and build a dynasty. And now that he is near the end of his reign... he is taking issue with it. That is highly hypocritical.

No, he was working within a system, not exploiting it, there's a big difference. His team's draft history is phenomenal. Each of the big 3 on his team were drafted and developed by that team.


Orlando doesn't have to lose him for nothing if they trade him during the season for pieces or make other trades to actually put a team around him. You act like he owes Orlando something.

In other sports players are much more dedicated to their teams. Yes, he does owe something to the team that developed him. It's a balance, and right now it's "all about the superstars". It's sickening to watch that level of self-love, and it's hard to watch the lack of intelligence of some of these "stars". Seriously, the lack of intelligence does contribute to the narcissism some of these guys suffer from. I'm not looking at any one player in particular, just pointing out the elephant in the room.

gotoHcarolina52
10-22-2011, 01:39 PM
Last I heard, Micky Arison appears willing to take a 90-10 BRI split in the players' favor. He just wants to see some damn basketball.

Hellcrooner
10-22-2011, 01:49 PM
I think the Deal owners should trheaten the league with creating a NEW LEAGUE .

Hey Gilbert you KNEW lebron was leaving 4 year in advance, didnt you watch espn?

its YOUR fault that you did not trade him for a kings ramson when he was still locked for 3 years.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 01:50 PM
I think the Deal owners should trheaten the league with creating a NEW LEAGUE .

Hey Gilbert you KNEW lebron was leaving 4 year in advance, didnt you watch espn?

its YOUR fault that you did not trade him for a kings ramson when he was still locked for 3 years.

no. It's Gilbert's fault that Mo Williams is the best teammate Lebron had in 7 years playing for the Cavs.

Dade County
10-22-2011, 02:03 PM
no. It's Gilbert's fault that Mo Williams is the best teammate Lebron had in 7 years playing for the Cavs.

Wouldn't it be the couch & GM's fault more then the owner.




In other sports players are much more dedicated to their teams. Yes, he does owe something to the team that developed him. It's a balance, and right now it's "all about the superstars". It's sickening to watch that level of self-love, and it's hard to watch the lack of intelligence of some of these "stars". Seriously, the lack of intelligence does contribute to the narcissism some of these guys suffer from. I'm not looking at any one player in particular, just pointing out the elephant in the room.

I see what you are saying, but when that contract is up, it's up. If a player leaves that means that player was not truly happy in that situation in the first place. A team would trade a loyal dedicated player in a heart beat, if they can make an up grade; players know this, this is why they make business decisions.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 02:06 PM
Wouldn't it be the couch & GM's fault more then the owner.

Owner has final say on everything... and he is the one who hired those people.

ChiSox219
10-22-2011, 02:08 PM
Wouldn't it be the couch & GM's fault more then the owner.

No, everything is Dan Gilbert's fault.

Hellcrooner
10-22-2011, 02:09 PM
i think people shoudl watch the original 70s Rollerball movie.

Thats what is happening.

Dade County
10-22-2011, 02:14 PM
Owner has final say on everything... and he is the one who hired those people.

Come on, his a wealthy business man not an NBA scout. He hired basketball minds to do their job, they sucked at their job... All he can do is fire them, and hope to hire better decision makers.



No, everything is Dan Gilbert's fault.

lol...

daleja424
10-22-2011, 02:17 PM
Come on, his a wealthy business man not an NBA scout. He hired basketball minds to their job, they sucked at their job... All he can do is fire them, and hope to hire better decision makers.

Then maybe he shouldn't be running a business he knows nothing about...

He has the final say on every decision coming out of Cleveland... either b/c he is involved in the decision or b/c he hired the guy that is involved.

You cannot counter with "He doesn't know what he is doing" b/c that was my point to begin with... Bad management has run the Cavs into the ground...not the system.

ChiSox219
10-22-2011, 02:20 PM
The issue is not bad management, no matter how bad the GMs (or owner's if you insist) manage teams, they still pay out 57% of BRI and the league as a whole loses money.

imagesrdecievin
10-22-2011, 02:23 PM
Clippers should be shifted to no deal territory. Their owner could care less about retaining talent via bird rights. He has proven time and time again that his team is a business and shall be run as such.

As far as I am concerned - as much as I hate him he is one of the few owners who has been consistent all along as far as running his franchise for profits first and winning a distant second.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 02:28 PM
The issue is not bad management, no matter how bad the GMs (or owner's if you insist) manage teams, they still pay out 57% of BRI and the league as a whole loses money.

and the players have compromised on that... offering a 50-53% band that is based on revenue.

So that point is no longer very relevant to this discussion... (obviously the players needed to give money back to help owners make money...but the owners need to help themselves as well)

ChiSox219
10-22-2011, 02:33 PM
and the players have compromised on that... offering a 50-53% band that is based on revenue.

So that point is no longer very relevant to this discussion... (obviously the players needed to give money back to help owners make money...but the owners need to help themselves as well)

It is still relevant, that's the entire issue, future profitability of the NBA. The owners have their issues over how to split the pie among themselves but until BRI is settled between players and owners everything else is irrelevant.

If at 50% of BRI the league cannot maintain profitability, the GMs can give out perfect contracts to everyone and the league still loses money.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 02:37 PM
It is still relevant, that's the entire issue, future profitability of the NBA. The owners have their issues over how to split the pie among themselves but until BRI is settled between players and owners everything else is irrelevant.

If at 50% of BRI the league cannot maintain profitability, the GMs can give out perfect contracts to everyone and the league still loses money.

The league has already conceded it can reach its goals at 50%...

ManRam
10-22-2011, 02:43 PM
They will probably lose him for nothing anyway, especially since Dwight is part of the generation that only cares about themselves. The pendulum has swung too far, now it needs to swing back to restabilize a flailing league.

I agree with this 100%. The players, more so than any other sport, have more power than the owners to decide what teams succeed and what don't. Some may argue that's great and that's how it should be...but it isn't good for parity at all. It will continue to cripple the small market teams. The same 5-6 teams will win year in and year out.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 02:47 PM
I agree with this 100%. The players, more so than any other sport, have more power than the owners to decide what teams succeed and what don't. Some may argue that's great and that's how it should be...but it isn't good for parity at all. It will continue to cripple the small market teams. The same 5-6 teams will win year in and year out.

What is your proposed solution? Should the league be able to legislate where players have to live and play?

ChiSox219
10-22-2011, 02:47 PM
The league has already conceded it can reach its goals at 50%...

And yet the players haven't.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 02:49 PM
And yet the players haven't.

Actually the players offered a 50-53% band...

ChiSox219
10-22-2011, 02:51 PM
Actually the players offered a 50-53% band...

Which is not the same thing.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 02:55 PM
Sure it is. It means that if the league is doing poorly and the owners need more money the players get a smaller share...but it also protects the players if the league makes a ton of money. Pretty perfect solution actually if you ask me.

You could set it up so that the default # is like 52%.

Then if the owners are around even...the players go back to 51% to give some profits back.

If the owners are losing money...players roles back to 50%

And if owners are making money...they give some of that up to the players (by raising them to 53%)

How does that not make sense? It is a genius solution that all but guarantees that no one feels cheated...

daleja424
10-22-2011, 02:57 PM
...oh...and the players were willing to negotiate further on their share....

ChiSox219
10-22-2011, 02:57 PM
Sure it is. It means that if the league is doing poorly and the owners need more money the players get a smaller share...but it also protects the players if the league makes a ton of money. Pretty perfect solution actually if you ask me.

You could set it up so that the default # is like 52%.

Then if the owners are around even...the players go back to 51% to give some profits back.

If the owners are losing money...players roles back to 50%

And if owners are making money...they give some of that up to the players (by raising them to 53%)

How does that not make sense? It is a genius solution that all but guarantees that no one feels cheated...

Didn't the players shut down the owners offer of the same thing except 51-49?

Not the same thing.

daleja424
10-22-2011, 02:59 PM
Didn't the players shut down the owners offer of the same thing except 51-49?

Not the same thing.

No...they didnt shut it down. They just refused to accept it on the spot... and so the owners refused to talk to them

You see...one side is actually willing to negotiate...while the other side makes threats and demands.

Bravo95
10-22-2011, 03:06 PM
In other sports players are much more dedicated to their teams. Yes, he does owe something to the team that developed him. It's a balance, and right now it's "all about the superstars". It's sickening to watch that level of self-love, and it's hard to watch the lack of intelligence of some of these "stars". Seriously, the lack of intelligence does contribute to the narcissism some of these guys suffer from. I'm not looking at any one player in particular, just pointing out the elephant in the room.
Buying into stereotypes. What's next, the Bell Curve?

The players might be money-hungry, but the owners (with the degrees and business savvy) have only themselves to blame for this mess and everyone paying attention to all of this knows it.

Dade County
10-22-2011, 03:07 PM
Then maybe he shouldn't be running a business he knows nothing about...

He has the final say on every decision coming out of Cleveland... either b/c he is involved in the decision or b/c he hired the guy that is involved.

You cannot counter with "He doesn't know what he is doing" b/c that was my point to begin with... Bad management has run the Cavs into the ground...not the system.

Come on man, these people that make basketball decision spend their entire lives, living and breathing basketball.

You can't expect a business man to have the same knowledge as them, just because they own a team for 5 to 10yrs. This time length doesn't make you basketball smart (if you get what I am saying).

These owner are billionaires... They don't sleep, they have companions/countries to take over ... lol

Wade>You
10-22-2011, 05:53 PM
I know he didn't have a problem with it b/c he didn't dump talent to even out the league. He didn't offer Manu or TP to another team b/c he wanted fair competition. He just wanted to win. The cry for parity at this point is a reflection of him knowing his dynasty has run out of time, and he wants to make rebuilding easier.Exactly. The Spurs should have their titles revoked if this new system gets into place, since it is the former system that afforded the Spurs their 4 NBA championships.

Cal827
10-22-2011, 05:58 PM
Toronto is probably on the "Deal" side. They aren't drowned in bad contracts, have a good young nucleus, (which would grow this year as it would be likely they would be lottery bound in a loaded draft year) and likely one of the "eight" teams (although I'm pretty sure that Stern was lying when he said only 8) that made money this year (MLSE is very good at money management, and ESPN articles mentioned that we would be paying into a revenue sharing pot along with the Knicks, Bulls, Heat, Lakers etc).

I'm not sure about OKC though. Didn't they lose money, despite making it to the WCF and having some rookie based contracts on some of their good players (Harden/Westbrook) (I remember a thread posted by someone mentioning that)?

Wade>You
10-22-2011, 06:06 PM
The fact that the franchise does things the right way and has been rock solid in a small market shows that Peter Holt is one of the best measuring sticks in the league. He is looking beyond himself and his team to the health of the league.If Peter Holt really cared about the health of this league, he should've spoken up at the previous CBA when his team was winning championships, not afterwards when his team was on the decline.

Tony_Starks
10-22-2011, 06:25 PM
Simply put the large market owners are ready to deal and the small market owners could care less if there is a season or not. Since they are the majority they are pretty much holding basketball hostage until their demands are met.........

Tom Stone
10-22-2011, 06:48 PM
and the players have compromised on that... offering a 50-53% band that is based on revenue.

So that point is no longer very relevant to this discussion... (obviously the players needed to give money back to help owners make money...but the owners need to help themselves as well)



I did like that proposal from the players, I think it was pretty fair, and I'm mad the Owners, for ending it there......It looks to me, like there is a plan to make the players break....the Owners are led by the majority of the small market teams, and losing money and never having a fair chance to win, will keep them in a hardened stance......the lock-out will go on for a while until, the players cave......it's that simple......when you look at it like... small market owners lose money vs players guarantee 53%........you wonder who's willing to last, the guys who guaranteed 53%......or the guys who don't have a fair Chance to win, and lose money.......I'm a Warrior, I will fight any fight....but even I wouldn't dare go up against that situation if I was a player........I understand their, playing hard ball stance, but this is a fight they can't win......Hard Cap = Basketball Saved

THE MTL
10-22-2011, 08:08 PM
I also like how big markets are being exploited when they actually managed their teams properly over the last two years to get to the point where they are now.

Bulls- let Ben Gordon walk in order to save cap. And then spent a boatload in 2010 and got lucky in the draft for Rose

Knicks- TANKED and I mean TANKED! The last two years to have the flexibility we have now. Knicks played within the system and sacrificed alot (respectability). Now, we have flexibility for 3 stars if we wanted, but dont think we didnt pay the price to be in a position we are in now.

Nets- became the laughing stock of the league and had one of the worst NBA seasons we seen in a long time. And they have D-Will and looking at Dwight. They paid a steep price.

Miami- amazing management! SIMPLY put. Every contract besides one was going off the books for 2010.

Lakers- always amazing management

THE MTL
10-22-2011, 08:11 PM
Btw, the Spurs lose money because they play a boring brand of basketball.

ManRam
10-22-2011, 08:20 PM
Btw, the Spurs lose money because they play a boring brand of basketball.

So...???

Should they sacrifice boring for exciting...and thus sacrifice great for average? Just to make money? No, that's laughable.

The Spurs of the last few seasons haven't played boring basketball at all. Manu is as fun to watch as anyone in the league. They hoist threes. They run the court. The look to score at a much higher rate than they did in their recent years.


I don't buy your logic nor do I think it's relevant.

beasted86
10-22-2011, 08:24 PM
I just wonder if this is all about money, or if owners really think players will flock to Minnesota and the league's talent will really even out?

daleja424
10-22-2011, 08:33 PM
Come on man, these people that make basketball decision spend their entire lives, living and breathing basketball.

You can't expect a business man to have the same knowledge as them, just because they own a team for 5 to 10yrs. This time length doesn't make you basketball smart (if you get what I am saying).

These owner are billionaires... They don't sleep, they have companions/countries to take over ... lol

I stand by what I said... if you buy a team...you are responsible for it.

I wouldn't buy a restaurant and expect it to succeed if I knew nothing about running a restaurant.

justinnum1
10-22-2011, 08:36 PM
I have a feeling stern guaranteed certain owners certain things.

Dade County
10-22-2011, 08:36 PM
T

I'm not sure about OKC though. Didn't they lose money, despite making it to the WCF and having some rookie based contracts on some of their good players (Harden/Westbrook) (I remember a thread posted by someone mentioning that)?

If this is true, thats crazy:facepalm:



I just wonder if this is all about money, or if owners really think players will flock to Minnesota and the league's talent will really even out?

Nobody is going to Minnesota for **** ... lmao

It's always about money, and the owners want their league back.

Sactown
10-23-2011, 12:12 AM
I agree that the lower end of the league should retain their money.. Pooh Jetter is going to have a max 5 year length in the league for around 3 1/2 million before taxes.. he has that to live on for the rest of his life unless he wants to get another job.. and I'm fine with his salary, but common.. 24 million a year plus endorsements!? I wonder what 10 year old Kobe, Wade, Dirk, Bosh, Lebron, Joe Johnson would think about their future selfs refusing to play basketball because they won't give back some of their wealth..

Badluck33
10-23-2011, 12:41 AM
Why would you think Boston is listed as "NO DEAL?"

I consider them a major market team and I coulda swore I heard by some reporter/journalist that about 8 teams were ready to make a deal. Your list stands at 7. I think Boston could be added to that as well and your list would be pretty spot on...

abe_froman
10-23-2011, 12:57 AM
i'm surprised.i would have thought the bulls would be in the hardliner column :shrug:

kblo247
10-23-2011, 01:29 AM
So...???

Should they sacrifice boring for exciting...and thus sacrifice great for average? Just to make money? No, that's laughable.

The Spurs of the last few seasons haven't played boring basketball at all. Manu is as fun to watch as anyone in the league. They hoist threes. They run the court. The look to score at a much higher rate than they did in their recent years.


I don't buy your logic nor do I think it's relevant.

5 words - Richard Jefferson and Luis Scola

The spurs are in the mess they are in because they chose to reward Jefferson with that over priced extension after not producing, and they can't compete with elite bigs because they gave Scola away and opted to not develop Splitter last season.

They made their own bed and hurt their own profits with the way they managed contracts, and don't give me the they didn't take advantage of the system stuff. They had a big 3 for years even when duos were the fad. They also after Pops tirade of a trade committee went out and abused the system by doing a wink wink deal with Seattle for Barry and Kurt Thomas where they got back who they traded and essentially gave up noting to benefit their team. they also used the amnesty to their advantage with Finley and tried with Van Exel.

The fact is they had no problem when they had an open window to win, but now that they don't they are complaining. It is the same for teams like Orlando and Celevland who abused the trade and cap until LeBron and now Dwight looks like he is out the door.

It is all just spoiled milk.

You don't want to have bad contracts, don't give them out (Lewis) or trade for (Arenas and Turk). You don't want full guaranteed contracts use incentives (Dampier). You don't want your guy to leave after spending 6 or 7 years an extension later, bring talent in during the window you promised to them (Kobe and Buss in 08. You don't make the same tv revenue, cry me a river and sell your team if you cat compete Michael Jordan just like you told the Wizars owner in the last lockout.

kblo247
10-23-2011, 01:31 AM
I agree that the lower end of the league should retain their money.. Pooh Jetter is going to have a max 5 year length in the league for around 3 1/2 million before taxes.. he has that to live on for the rest of his life unless he wants to get another job.. and I'm fine with his salary, but common.. 24 million a year plus endorsements!? I wonder what 10 year old Kobe, Wade, Dirk, Bosh, Lebron, Joe Johnson would think about their future selfs refusing to play basketball because they won't give back some of their wealth..

Get what a guaranteed contract means. They have legally binding deals that say money is owed to them. They didn't Honda gun to an owners head and make them give them the offer. You make a commitment and honor it, not ask for a bailout

ink
10-23-2011, 01:56 AM
If Peter Holt really cared about the health of this league, he should've spoken up at the previous CBA when his team was winning championships, not afterwards when his team was on the decline.

How do you know he didn't? Do you think all CBAs are unanimous? They're not. Your point was brought up earlier and it's along the same lines as the old fan cliche line ... "oh you're just jealous". Fans think that way; professionals don't.

naps
10-23-2011, 03:42 AM
Micky Arison is probably the only one who would make a deal literally at any cost.

YungDaSensai
10-23-2011, 05:17 AM
IMO if the no deal owners got their way; the majority of them still wouldn't succeed and probably still would lose money, while the same teams would still make a profit. At the end of the day it is all about the money, but at the same time you got to know how to run your team. Can't get mad at the owners who played the current system to a T. When this deal gets done, its going to be the same owners *****ing when the next deal needs to get pushed whenever that is.

MILLERHIGHLIFE
10-23-2011, 08:34 AM
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=ArpQmvsikeWm_B82vduLnGG8vLYF?slug=ap-nbalabor

Small markets dragging there feet for NFL/NHL cap. Bout time. Season is lost cause these rules will take a whole season lockout. But its better for the future. Equal playing field! I'll take a whole season lockout and have the same draft order besides for 2012!

Tom Stone
10-23-2011, 08:50 AM
Portland's Owner Allen is the face of the lock-out......this guy really doesn't care if there is an NBA Season......This guy is so Rich, he will wait until every player goes bank robbed, if he has to.....and got the money and other investments to do just that.....The players should be scared.......there options are

1. Try to outlast the owners........it can't be done.
2. De-certify the union......won't help them at all....the NBA will open under the current offer maybe worse, players will come running back....and they lose all current contracts....not a good option.
3.swallow there pride, choose hard cap......and then with the hard cap the owners might give the band the players wanted 53% if the NBA does well, and 50% if it doesn't....plus they get all current contracts and lose no money from the canceled season.

It takes a dumb man to fight a fight he can't win, knowing he will take a worse offer later and you can't out last them......there is a saying I like....Too much pride can Kill a Man, if Billy and Fisher let there pride get in the way and can't get a deal done, are they really willing to choose options 1 or 2.....If the players are at this point and I think they are, it's soon going to be time for them to speak up, get the best offer they can from the Owners and take a vote.....Hopefully the players understand just what Billy and Fisher are up against, and they choose to not go down with the ship like there captain's Billy and Fisher.

Hellcrooner
10-23-2011, 01:18 PM
Portland's Owner Allen is the face of the lock-out......this guy really doesn't care if there is an NBA Season......This guy is so Rich, he will wait until every player goes bank robbed, if he has to.....and got the money and other investments to do just that.....The players should be scared.......there options are

1. Try to outlast the owners........it can't be done.
2. De-certify the union......won't help them at all....the NBA will open under the current offer maybe worse, players will come running back....and they lose all current contracts....not a good option.
3.swallow there pride, choose hard cap......and then with the hard cap the owners might give the band the players wanted 53% if the NBA does well, and 50% if it doesn't....plus they get all current contracts and lose no money from the canceled season.

It takes a dumb man to fight a fight he can't win, knowing he will take a worse offer later and you can't out last them......there is a saying I like....Too much pride can Kill a Man, if Billy and Fisher let there pride get in the way and can't get a deal done, are they really willing to choose options 1 or 2.....If the players are at this point and I think they are, it's soon going to be time for them to speak up, get the best offer they can from the Owners and take a vote.....Hopefully the players understand just what Billy and Fisher are up against, and they choose to not go down with the ship like there captain's Billy and Fisher.

You are forgeting something.

Unlike NFL , nba players have somwehre to go collect PAYCHEKS.

Tony_Starks
10-23-2011, 01:40 PM
Portland's Owner Allen is the face of the lock-out......this guy really doesn't care if there is an NBA Season......This guy is so Rich, he will wait until every player goes bank robbed, if he has to.....and got the money and other investments to do just that.....The players should be scared.......there options are

1. Try to outlast the owners........it can't be done.
2. De-certify the union......won't help them at all....the NBA will open under the current offer maybe worse, players will come running back....and they lose all current contracts....not a good option.
3.swallow there pride, choose hard cap......and then with the hard cap the owners might give the band the players wanted 53% if the NBA does well, and 50% if it doesn't....plus they get all current contracts and lose no money from the canceled season.

It takes a dumb man to fight a fight he can't win, knowing he will take a worse offer later and you can't out last them......there is a saying I like....Too much pride can Kill a Man, if Billy and Fisher let there pride get in the way and can't get a deal done, are they really willing to choose options 1 or 2.....If the players are at this point and I think they are, it's soon going to be time for them to speak up, get the best offer they can from the Owners and take a vote.....Hopefully the players understand just what Billy and Fisher are up against, and they choose to not go down with the ship like there captain's Billy and Fisher.


A couple things you're forgetting. The owners stand to lose over a billion dollars from a missed season. Also with some teams on the brink of extinction already ticket sale wise, its more than likely that at least one of the small market teams would not be able to recover from a season off. Also if the players win their unfair bargaining suit they have in court the lockout is temporarily lifted and the power now swings to the players.

You're right that the owners have leverage but its not as one sided as you think....

daleja424
10-23-2011, 04:55 PM
Why would you think Boston is listed as "NO DEAL?"

I consider them a major market team and I coulda swore I heard by some reporter/journalist that about 8 teams were ready to make a deal. Your list stands at 7. I think Boston could be added to that as well and your list would be pretty spot on...

http://twitter.com/#%21/AlexKennedyNBA/status/127229327740907520

Wade>You
10-23-2011, 05:25 PM
How do you know he didn't? Do you think all CBAs are unanimous? They're not. Your point was brought up earlier and it's along the same lines as the old fan cliche line ... "oh you're just jealous". Fans think that way; professionals don't.
How do you know he did?

If you mean a unanimous vote, I'm guessing they are, or we'd have basketball right about now.

I'm not sure what you mean, but either way, I don't think anyone is arguing jealousy or not, we're debating the claims and the facts.

Wade>You
10-23-2011, 05:27 PM
http://twitter.com/#%21/AlexKennedyNBA/status/127229327740907520Put him and Peter Holt in the same class "Oh no, my window to win a title has closed, let's blow up the system up!"

It's a joke at this point that the franchise that pioneered "Bird Rights" is fighting to take it away.

ink
10-23-2011, 09:54 PM
How do you know he did?

If you mean a unanimous vote, I'm guessing they are, or we'd have basketball right about now.

They do not need a unanimous vote to ratify a CBA. They only need 16 out of 30 owners to approve.


Put him and Peter Holt in the same class "Oh no, my window to win a title has closed, let's blow up the system up!"

It's a joke at this point that the franchise that pioneered "Bird Rights" is fighting to take it away.

Maybe they're not as hung up on "being right" or "who's at fault" as some fans. They can see that their approach didn't work. Anyone can see that their approach didn't work and there's no shame in admitting it. The only shame is in ignoring that fact.

Tony_Starks
10-23-2011, 10:04 PM
They do not need a unanimous vote to ratify a CBA. They only need 16 out of 30 owners to approve.



Maybe they're not as hung up on "being right" or "who's at fault" as some fans. They can see that their approach didn't work. Anyone can see that their approach didn't work and there's no shame in admitting it. The only shame is in ignoring that fact.


I think his point is they're saying it doesn't work now only because they are no longer reaping the benefits. If they were still sitting on top of the league there's no way in the world Holt would be so adamant about wholesale changes.

Just like if Paul Allen had took Durant instead of Old Man Oden no way he would be the face of the hard line right now, he'd be over there with Buss and Dolan and the rest saying "whatever it takes to get this season started!"

ink
10-24-2011, 12:16 AM
I think his point is they're saying it doesn't work now only because they are no longer reaping the benefits. If they were still sitting on top of the league there's no way in the world Holt would be so adamant about wholesale changes.

I get that but it's a lot deeper than that. They realize that the league is dysfunctional as is and can't continue this way.


Just like if Paul Allen had took Durant instead of Old Man Oden no way he would be the face of the hard line right now, he'd be over there with Buss and Dolan and the rest saying "whatever it takes to get this season started!"

It's just not that simplistic. But I agree that of the owners who want to start the season (and there aren't many breaking ranks at all) it's the owners who have hoarded talent. Fortunately not all of them are that short-sighted.

Dade County
10-24-2011, 12:29 AM
It's just not that simplistic. But I agree that of the owners who want to start the season (and there aren't many breaking ranks at all) it's the owners who have hoarded talent. Fortunately not all of them are that short-sighted.

You make that word sound so Bad ... It feels like a curse word right now. lol


And I hope your not talking about Micky Arison :burn: ... Just because of the free agency thing last year.

JLynn943
10-24-2011, 12:53 AM
All this talk about the Spurs... no one forced them to increase the salaries paid to their players per year by around $34 million in a 5 year period (from 04-05 to 09-10, it went from $44 million to $78 million). If that didn't pan out for them, that's too bad. Think next time.

Hellcrooner
10-24-2011, 12:59 AM
Spurs should have thought bout Duncans age two or three years ago and TRADE parker and Manu for building blocks.

THey decided to go on hanging on a slim chance to win rings and destroyed their future.

Cal827
10-24-2011, 01:14 AM
I wish we were the owners of the NBA franchises. Cause based on the Knowledge here, we would be able to make the sensible decision, rather than hand out the ridiculous contracts. The errors that some of these guys make....It makes it hard to believe that some of these guys are billionaires lol