PDA

View Full Version : R.I.P 11/28/11 NBA Player's Leverage



KnIckNy212
10-29-2011, 12:37 AM
I am all for the player's trying to negotiate any and everything they can get but after Stern has officially cancelled all games up to November 30th and pretty much guaranteed there will not be a full season the players have lost all of there leverage, if it is right what is being reported that the owners are willing to cancel the entire season to get the deal they want. The little that the two sides have agreed on is out of the window now after the cancellation of the first month of the season has the league losing close to $350 million. When and if they get back to the table what do the players have as leverage now that the owners are losing money and are willing to keep cancelling games. The players played hard ball which I have no problem with but the owners didnt budge. The players are in a tough spot and I cant see a few(BIG MARKET) owners (Dolan,Buss,Cuban,Reinsdorf, and maybe a few others) talking these small market team owners into budging. I want to get a deal done dont care who comes out on top just get it done. Not looking good right now:facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepa lm:

bholly
10-29-2011, 01:25 AM
firstly, isn't this sort of opinion the exact thing the labour + lockout thread is for? why do you think your opinion deserves its own thread?

secondly, what do you think has changed that has given the players less leverage than they had yesterday?

beasted86
10-29-2011, 01:36 AM
firstly, isn't this sort of opinion the exact thing the labour + lockout thread is for? why do you think your opinion deserves its own thread?

secondly, what do you think has changed that has given the players less leverage than they had yesterday?

This.

Also players don't have NBA contract money coming in, but owners also aren't getting NBA revenue and on top are getting bills each month on top of no money coming in.

Hellcrooner
10-29-2011, 01:40 AM
^not to mention some cities starting to think about suing owners

ewmania
10-29-2011, 02:01 AM
its funny how easy it is to bash players... being fellow workers ourselves we always want the proper money we are suppose to receive

but yet people disrespect players for the same thing because they arent getting they dunks and alley oops fast enough... owners are just mad they can't rape players like they did in the 80's 70's 60's, etc.

magic signed a 20 yr contract... like gimme a break

GodsSon
10-29-2011, 02:03 AM
its funny how easy it is to bash players... being fellow workers ourselves we always want the proper money we are suppose to receive

but yet people disrespect players for the same thing because they arent getting they dunks and alley oops fast enough... owners are just mad they can't rape players like they did in the 80's 70's 60's, etc.

magic signed a 20 yr contract... like gimme a break

You want to compare minimum wage to a max contract? Nobody should feel sorry for ANY of the players considering some earn more money in ONE year then everyone on PSD combined.

Knowledge
10-29-2011, 02:12 AM
A lot of owners make more money in business ventures away from the nba. Owning a team is just a hobby/secondary business for many of them. I know the new owner of the 76ers still works his regular job even though he is already a billionaire.

Also those city cases will probably take a while to develop. Not to mention their will be opposition from plenty of people (conservatives who are anti union) who will say it is a waste of tax payer money to even get involved in this labor dispute. By the time this stuff goes to court and gets ruled on the players would have probably already caved.

Players only hope is for the NLRB to rule in their favor which once again I wouldnt hold out hope for. Unless they have some secret plan we dont know about to compensate players in their league while this lockout is going on.

ugafan
10-29-2011, 02:12 AM
You want to compare minimum wage to a max contract? Nobody should feel sorry for ANY of the players considering some earn more money in ONE year then everyone on PSD combined.

That's probably not true...

Monta is beast
10-29-2011, 02:16 AM
The players are still getting paid so how have they lost leverage. Minimum contract players are getting a hundred thousand next month so imagine what max contract players are getting.

GodsSon
10-29-2011, 02:17 AM
That's probably not true...

Who knows...You get the point I'm trying to make though

Considering what they do is non-guaranteed work/results, they're grossly overpaid.

Dade County
10-29-2011, 02:24 AM
Both side are delusional ...

Players want teams that are in the tax, to still be able to sign mid level players... WTF!

And owners have enough in the current deal "Players BRI at 52.5" to cover all their loses... but know they want MORE!

This **** needs to go to court.

ink
10-29-2011, 02:29 AM
Both side are delusional ...

Players want teams that are in the tax, to still be able to sign mid level players... WTF!

And owners have enough in the current deal "Players BRI at 52.5" to cover all their loses... but now they want MORE!

This **** needs to go to court.

You do realize they don't want "more" don't you? What they want is already theirs. It's THEIR money since it's their franchise. All they're doing is saying that the players can only have so much of their money. Surely you can understand that they can make decisions about their own $$$$ can't you?

It's the players who are demanding more pay, more of someone else's money.

It's neither right or wrong but in the end at least let's get it straight who owns what.

Hellcrooner
10-29-2011, 03:01 AM
You do realize they don't want "more" don't you? What they want is already theirs. It's THEIR money since it's their franchise. All they're doing is saying that the players can only have so much of their money. Surely you can understand that they can make decisions about their own $$$$ can't you?

It's the players who are demanding more pay, more of someone else's money.

It's neither right or wrong but in the end at least let's get it straight who owns what.

good, no players no money for owners.

bholly
10-29-2011, 03:10 AM
The players are still getting paid so how have they lost leverage. Minimum contract players are getting a hundred thousand next month so imagine what max contract players are getting.

what?

beliges
10-29-2011, 05:44 AM
its funny how easy it is to bash players... being fellow workers ourselves we always want the proper money we are suppose to receive

but yet people disrespect players for the same thing because they arent getting they dunks and alley oops fast enough... owners are just mad they can't rape players like they did in the 80's 70's 60's, etc.

magic signed a 20 yr contract... like gimme a break

Are you kidding me? Are you implying that the players get taken advantage of by the owners? NBA players are the best paid athletes with the most player friendly contracts out of any American sport. How exactly are the owners trying to "rape" the players? Each and every player in the league has the opportunity to compete for as lucrative a contract as any team is willing to pay. Now, on top of the contract money players generate for themselves, are you saying that the owners should just give the majority of their earned revenue back to the players as a bonus? You do realize that its the owners who invest billions of their own dollars in running the franchise right? And you think just because they want to share all the basketball revenue generated evenly with the players that they are trying to "rape" them? Nothing personal to you but why is it that those who have taken the players' side in this ordeal dont argue their case but rather justify by painting the illusion that owners are trying to take advantage of the players? How exactly are owners trying to take advantage of players when those players are being paid millions of dollars by these owners and want to share the revenue equally?

beliges
10-29-2011, 05:51 AM
good, no players no money for owners.

No owners and you wouldnt have heard of 95% of the NBA players. No owners, no Nike deals, no television commercials, no nationally televised games, no millions of dollars for every single player, no stadiums. No owners and half the league ends up on the street, dead or in jail. These owners already had money. And they used their money to buy and run a team.

bholly
10-29-2011, 06:49 AM
No owners and you wouldnt have heard of 95% of the NBA players. No owners, no Nike deals, no television commercials, no nationally televised games, no millions of dollars for every single player, no stadiums. No owners and half the league ends up on the street, dead or in jail. These owners already had money. And they used their money to buy and run a team.

but there's nothing special or unique about these owners. it could be any rich guys.
these players, on the other hand, have a virtual monopoly on that level of basketball.

get rid of all these owners and another league would spring up, or the players would go and play elsewhere - if the fans want to see them play they'll pay to see them in the new place too.
get rid of these players and fans just give up on pro ball.

the players are the employees AND the product. your insinuation that there's nothing without the owners is wrong - these guys would still be playing ball, just for some other league - and they'd take the fans with them.

icon1914
10-29-2011, 07:00 AM
You want to compare minimum wage to a max contract? Nobody should feel sorry for ANY of the players considering some earn more money in ONE year then everyone on PSD combined.

It not about the amount of the money... its about how much they are making for the league... Sure no one can complain when you are making millions.... unless you are making someone else billions. The NBA makes a lot of money, its only fair to find to find a split... that split happens make NBA players a lot of money... I see no issue with that...

If I was one of 350 employees of a company that made billions I'd want my fair share... and to hell with anyone that thinks I'm being greedy.

netsgiantsyanks
10-29-2011, 09:13 AM
You want to compare minimum wage to a max contract? Nobody should feel sorry for ANY of the players considering some earn more money in ONE year then everyone on PSD combined.

seems like you're mad that some people make more money than you.

ewmania
10-29-2011, 09:16 AM
You want to compare minimum wage to a max contract? Nobody should feel sorry for ANY of the players considering some earn more money in ONE year then everyone on PSD combined.

oh so just because they earn more than the average man that makes them in the wrong?

so its there fault they have a talent that brings in over a billion dollars a year so they should get rape in they contracts because they make more than a waitress or a construction worker

yeah that makes perfect sense :facepalm:

ewmania
10-29-2011, 09:20 AM
but there's nothing special or unique about these owners. it could be any rich guys.
these players, on the other hand, have a virtual monopoly on that level of basketball.

get rid of all these owners and another league would spring up, or the players would go and play elsewhere - if the fans want to see them play they'll pay to see them in the new place too.
get rid of these players and fans just give up on pro ball.

the players are the employees AND the product. your insinuation that there's nothing without the owners is wrong - these guys would still be playing ball, just for some other league - and they'd take the fans with them.

exactly... u know how many billionairs could take the place of james dolan or the guy who owns heat and still do the same thing with lebron james

sure nikey is a billion dollar franchise now... but who made that possible, what player put his name on that organization to make it what it was today

people need to stop acting like these guys are just street bums who know how to ball... I swear only with basketball people act that way towards

GiantsSwaGG
10-29-2011, 09:32 AM
It seems like alot of you don't see the bigger picture...

Yes the players lost some leverage, the lower end players NOT the superstars. The owners can afford cancelling the entire NBA season as well as the NBA superstars, but the lower end players can't. Right iimo the lockout is not about the BRI, its about egos. Right now both sides are putting their egos above the NBA & it got to the point where there willing to lie about eachother & the negotiations. The biggest thing stopping an agreement is pride not money.

zB_#85
10-29-2011, 09:46 AM
its funny how easy it is to bash players... being fellow workers ourselves we always want the proper money we are suppose to receive

but yet people disrespect players for the same thing because they arent getting they dunks and alley oops fast enough... owners are just mad they can't rape players like they did in the 80's 70's 60's, etc.

magic signed a 20 yr contract... like gimme a break

and also got a percentage of ownership with the team....so to this day I guarantee Magic doesn't regret that deal.

...so yea- players were getting raped in the 60's, 70's, and 80's. c'mon man; you give me a break lol.

the difference in those eras is that the players weren't such greedy and arrogant bastards. they knew that they were being compensated handsomely to play a game they love and didn't try to squeeze every last dime out of it. they were just happy to have the life of an NBA player- which millions would have (and still to this day) would kill for. the way America works is that the owner makes the money and tells the employee how much he will make. an agreement is made (ie player contracts) and if the employee doesn't like it, he doesn't work there. employees do not dictate to owners how to run their business and as long as these players are trying to do this I have no respect for them and no desire to even watch the NBA. these *******s think they are entitled to more than your average american and they are not. they are already lucky and blessed so to hell with them. I stand by the owners- entrepenuership is the american way and as successful business owners they have the right not to be told by their employees how to run their business.

if the entire NBA season is lost but the players don't get what they want, then it will be worth it to me. I won't mind missing all the games just on the principle.

saucy1
10-29-2011, 09:50 AM
these players better wake up half this country is out of work or working underemployed nobody feels for you anymore sorry but take it or cancel the season most of us will get over it.

zB_#85
10-29-2011, 09:53 AM
the players are the employees AND the product. your insinuation that there's nothing without the owners is wrong - these guys would still be playing ball, just for some other league - and they'd take the fans with them.

lol I'd love to see this. If it were true, why does Deron Williams and so many other players have exit clauses in their contracts with other teams in other leagues when the NBA lockout ends? How many Turkish games have you seen televised since he's gone over there? Ask Vince McMahon how the XFL worked out for him, even with big time money and backing leagues can't just pop up overnight and be successful. No new league will have the success anytime in these players playing era as the NBA. Players are playing hard ball and their going to get owned.

I bet 50% of NBA players if not more would take any deal on the table right now. It's just the upper echelon of players trying to play hard ball to squeeze out every last dime because they think they are bigger than the game. I agree that they are the employees and the product, but until they are the OWNERS- they can't call the shots!

GodsSon
10-29-2011, 10:12 AM
seems like you're mad that some people make more money than you.

How am I mad? You can tell people's emotions by reading letters and words on a computer screen? Lol. I work in the public sector and definitely don't make minimum wage. Millions of dollars? No. But I'm more than content for now.

Now you tell me why anyone should feel sorry for the players. All they have to do is sign a contract and slack off (like many of them do), and not worry about any type of financial risk. Can you say the same for the owners?

GodsSon
10-29-2011, 10:18 AM
oh so just because they earn more than the average man that makes them in the wrong?

so its there fault they have a talent that brings in over a billion dollars a year so they should get rape in they contracts because they make more than a waitress or a construction worker

yeah that makes perfect sense :facepalm:

You consider millions of dollars a year rape? They're being MORE than fairly compensated for playing the GAME of basketball.

Construction workers make a good living and can work for some companies who get contracts worth hundreds of millions. What do you think would happen if the workers on a given site stormed into their foremans office saying they wanted 52% of the earned revenue? I mean after all, they are the ones creating the project, right?

Rego247
10-29-2011, 10:22 AM
oh so just because they earn more than the average man that makes them in the wrong?

so its there fault they have a talent that brings in over a billion dollars a year so they should get rape in they contracts because they make more than a waitress or a construction worker

yeah that makes perfect sense :facepalm:

You know what this is? :violin:

It's the world's smallest violin playing just for the players.

LakersKB24
10-29-2011, 10:42 AM
oh so just because they earn more than the average man that makes them in the wrong?

so its there fault they have a talent that brings in over a billion dollars a year so they should get rape in they contracts because they make more than a waitress or a construction worker

yeah that makes perfect sense :facepalm:


Tell that to a single mother of 2 children who works as a nurse and makes like 1200 $ a month and has to raise her children on her own... If the players even earned half of their money, it would still be PLENTY! They basically have to "work" one year and they don't have to worry about money anymore.

And you talk about raping them if they got 7% less then they do now???
May I remind you of a guy named Stephon Marbury who got like 20 million bucks for sitting courtside every game???

It doesn't bother me that they get so much money, because they generate a lot of revenue and so it's just fair that they get their share, but if you only consider what they're doing, which is PLAYING basketball there is no way they should get that kind of money.
There is just NO relation between a basketball player whose job is to entertain people with money coming out of his ears and a nurse who SAVES LIFES and has to work he butt off to get her children through the next month financially.

THAT is what bothers me the most. The players get MILLIONS GUARANTEED and there a still people siding with them, although all those guys who are involved in the lockout are a bunch of ignorant idiots (including the owners)

Catoblepas
10-29-2011, 10:51 AM
On October 31, 2004, the Minnesota Timberwolves offered Sprewell a 3-year, $21 million contract extension, substantially less than what his then-current contract paid him. Claiming to feel insulted by the offer, he publicly expressed outrage, declaring, "I have a family to feed ... If Glen Taylor wants to see my family fed, he better cough up some money. Otherwise, you're going to see these kids in one of those Sally Struthers commercials soon."


I always think of Latrell talking about not being able to feed his family with 21mill over 3 years when I hear about the current lockout. The guy must have some hungry children.

Rego247
10-29-2011, 11:10 AM
You consider millions of dollars a year rape? They're being MORE than fairly compensated for playing the GAME of basketball.


Construction workers make a good living and can work for some companies who get contracts worth hundreds of millions. What do you think would happen if the workers on a given site stormed into their foremans office saying they wanted 52% of the earned revenue? I mean after all, they are the ones creating the project, right?

This.

imagesrdecievin
10-29-2011, 11:29 AM
Those calling the players greedy and saying they should accept a deal because they are more than fairly compensated do realize that by definition you are supporting the owners?

Yeah those billionaires who make so much damn money that it is literally sickening. Those billionaires that have so much money they can afford to invest it in a luxury business that centers around 'spoiled greedy athletes'. Those same billionaires got/get rich by firing American's, outsourcing jobs and importing parts because of profits.

Yeah screw the greedy basketball player - it's the altruistic billionaire owner who deserves my sympathy?!?!

imagesrdecievin
10-29-2011, 11:35 AM
You consider millions of dollars a year rape? They're being MORE than fairly compensated for playing the GAME of basketball.

Construction workers make a good living and can work for some companies who get contracts worth hundreds of millions. What do you think would happen if the workers on a given site stormed into their foremans office saying they wanted 52% of the earned revenue? I mean after all, they are the ones creating the project, right?

They'd be replaced - because they have an (relatively)easy skill to replace.

The basketball players are highly skilled employees who represent the top 1% of their craft in a multi-billion dollar industry. It doesn't matter that it's just a game - they are still master craftsmen.

netsgiantsyanks
10-29-2011, 11:35 AM
How am I mad? You can tell people's emotions by reading letters and words on a computer screen? Lol. I work in the public sector and definitely don't make minimum wage. Millions of dollars? No. But I'm more than content for now.

Now you tell me why anyone should feel sorry for the players. All they have to do is sign a contract and slack off (like many of them do), and not worry about any type of financial risk. Can you say the same for the owners?

you never know ;)

and im ****ing around, just talking out of my ***. but i understand where you're coming from.

ink
10-29-2011, 11:44 AM
good, no players no money for owners.

NCAA would be fine. Something would fill the void and then we wouldn't have to watch the whiny big egos of the superstars. Or the constant fights over who was better than MJ. :laugh2: All of it is so far removed from actual basketball.

Jamiecballer
10-29-2011, 11:45 AM
good, no players no money for owners.

the players don't realize ultimately how replaceable they are.

Hellcrooner
10-29-2011, 11:48 AM
the players don't realize ultimately how replaceable they are.

they are?


:rolleyes: good luck with that.

ink
10-29-2011, 11:48 AM
You consider millions of dollars a year rape? They're being MORE than fairly compensated for playing the GAME of basketball.

Construction workers make a good living and can work for some companies who get contracts worth hundreds of millions. What do you think would happen if the workers on a given site stormed into their foremans office saying they wanted 52% of the earned revenue? I mean after all, they are the ones creating the project, right?

It's a culture of entitlement. The pendulum has swung too far in one direction and now it needs to swing back. Yes, the players have lost a lot of leverage.

That's sad for them because they didn't have a lot at the outset. I have to say, having Billy Hunter on your side is a bit of a liability. He is too inarticulate with the media and given that the players are already dealing with a largely unsympathetic public who don't really feel much pain for the "poor" millionaires, it's a real disadvantage to have a leader who struggles to express basic ideas like Hunter does.

Jamiecballer
10-29-2011, 11:50 AM
Those calling the players greedy and saying they should accept a deal because they are more than fairly compensated do realize that by definition you are supporting the owners?

Yeah those billionaires who make so much damn money that it is literally sickening. Those billionaires that have so much money they can afford to invest it in a luxury business that centers around 'spoiled greedy athletes'. Those same billionaires got/get rich by firing American's, outsourcing jobs and importing parts because of profits.

Yeah screw the greedy basketball player - it's the altruistic billionaire owner who deserves my sympathy?!?!

massive generalization alert

netsgiantsyanks
10-29-2011, 11:52 AM
On October 31, 2004, the Minnesota Timberwolves offered Sprewell a 3-year, $21 million contract extension, substantially less than what his then-current contract paid him. Claiming to feel insulted by the offer, he publicly expressed outrage, declaring, "I have a family to feed ... If Glen Taylor wants to see my family fed, he better cough up some money. Otherwise, you're going to see these kids in one of those Sally Struthers commercials soon."


I always think of Latrell talking about not being able to feed his family with 21mill over 3 years when I hear about the current lockout. The guy must have some hungry children.

latrell sprewell is a ****ing ********, as well as a idiot. 7 million in a lifetime is enough for a regular family, let alone a year.

imagesrdecievin
10-29-2011, 11:54 AM
massive generalization alert

Thank you for your insightful contributions to this thread.

I wasn't sure how you'd be able follow up your brilliant comment that the best basketball players on the planet are easily replaceable - but you were able to do it.

Bravo.

RaptorFan89
10-29-2011, 11:58 AM
Does anybody eles find it funny how the players willing to play anywhere from China to Spain for 1/10th of the NBA pay....but in the NBA they want more money for the same service.

ink
10-29-2011, 12:08 PM
Does anybody eles find it funny how the players willing to play anywhere from China to Spain for 1/10th of the NBA pay....but in the NBA they want more money for the same service.

Good point.

KnicksR4Real
10-29-2011, 12:12 PM
Why didn't they just accept it for god's sake.

Jamiecballer
10-29-2011, 12:17 PM
they are?


:rolleyes: good luck with that.


Thank you for your insightful contributions to this thread.

I wasn't sure how you'd be able follow up your brilliant comment that the best basketball players on the planet are easily replaceable - but you were able to do it.

Bravo.


i'll be happy to explain it for the benefit of you both.

there are literally hundreds of players that are playing professionally around the globe that could step in and replace the current group of players in the short term, leaving the current group out in the cold. the product would be good, maybe not as good but plenty talented and far more team oriented as players from the european and south american leagues flooded our shores.

this group of players, feeling incredibly fortunate to be able to make a fortune to play a game, be famous and bang all the hot American chicks they want would probably be more than willing to play for the pittance that the NBA players aren't willing to accept.

then, having reached a new, more reasonable CBA with the new group of players, what do you think subsequent graduating classes of college players are going to do? they are going to accept that if they want to make a fortune to play a game, be famous and bang all the hot American chicks they want that they will have to settle for their measly 5 million dollar a year contracts.

it might take 8-10 years but the league will get back to where it was talent wise. and that's assuming some of the current group of weasels don't come crawling back with their tail between their legs.

like i said these players are 100% completely replaceable.

as for my second comment, imagesrdecievin - i can't do anything for that level of ignorance. maybe you were raised to believe that everyone who is wealthy is evil - i can't help you with that.

ps why is it that the players haven't simply said f u to the owners and started their own league? do you suppose it's because then it would be their money on the line for once?

Dade County
10-29-2011, 12:23 PM
Does anybody eles find it funny how the players willing to play anywhere from China to Spain for 1/10th of the NBA pay....but in the NBA they want more money for the same service.

This should be on the front page of every major news paper :clap:

ombada
10-29-2011, 12:29 PM
Those calling the players greedy and saying they should accept a deal because they are more than fairly compensated do realize that by definition you are supporting the owners?

Yeah those billionaires who make so much damn money that it is literally sickening. Those billionaires that have so much money they can afford to invest it in a luxury business that centers around 'spoiled greedy athletes'. Those same billionaires got/get rich by firing American's, outsourcing jobs and importing parts because of profits.

Yeah screw the greedy basketball player - it's the altruistic billionaire owner who deserves my sympathy?!?!

This is a direct contradiction to the post you made underneath it. What percentage of the population is made up of billionaires? Would you say they are in the top percentage of their craft in multi billion dollar businesses?

robrobert13
10-29-2011, 12:45 PM
i guess no one noticed it's October 28, not November 28 :)

imagesrdecievin
10-29-2011, 01:52 PM
i'll be happy to explain it for the benefit of you both.

there are literally hundreds of players that are playing professionally around the globe that could step in and replace the current group of players in the short term, leaving the current group out in the cold. the product would be good, maybe not as good but plenty talented and far more team oriented as players from the european and south american leagues flooded our shores.

this group of players, feeling incredibly fortunate to be able to make a fortune to play a game, be famous and bang all the hot American chicks they want would probably be more than willing to play for the pittance that the NBA players aren't willing to accept.

then, having reached a new, more reasonable CBA with the new group of players, what do you think subsequent graduating classes of college players are going to do? they are going to accept that if they want to make a fortune to play a game, be famous and bang all the hot American chicks they want that they will have to settle for their measly 5 million dollar a year contracts.

it might take 8-10 years but the league will get back to where it was talent wise. and that's assuming some of the current group of weasels don't come crawling back with their tail between their legs.

like i said these players are 100% completely replaceable.

as for my second comment, imagesrdecievin - i can't do anything for that level of ignorance. maybe you were raised to believe that everyone who is wealthy is evil - i can't help you with that.

ps why is it that the players haven't simply said f u to the owners and started their own league? do you suppose it's because then it would be their money on the line for once?

Everyone that is wealthy isn't evil - they just aren't the kind of guys that I find myself sympathizing with as far as this labor dispute goes. They are like most other big businesses right now that are using a poor economy to justify taking back more than they need from labor solely to add to their profits.

Sure the players are going to be perceived as greedy by most - but if we are going to paint them as greedy - then we need to recognize that the owners are disgustingly greedy.

imagesrdecievin
10-29-2011, 01:57 PM
This is a direct contradiction to the post you made underneath it. What percentage of the population is made up of billionaires? Would you say they are in the top percentage of their craft in multi billion dollar businesses?

The owners are definitely tops - my point about players being tops in their craft however was to illustrate the point that anyone who is one of the few best at what they do get paid - regardless of whether it is a game or not.

The owners however are playing both sides of the fence in that owning a sports franchise is a hobby business. If it were something that were done for profits - then they wouldn't need a way to 'protect themselves'. Being they are the best at making money they would make decisions based solely on business(like Donald Sterling does).

da ThRONe
10-29-2011, 02:28 PM
these players better wake up half this country is out of work or working underemployed nobody feels for you anymore sorry but take it or cancel the season most of us will get over it.


You realize the alternative is feeling sorry for the billionaires? Some of the very same people responsible for this economic down turn.

beasted86
10-29-2011, 02:31 PM
Does anybody eles find it funny how the players willing to play anywhere from China to Spain for 1/10th of the NBA pay....but in the NBA they want more money for the same service.

No, I don't.... because in those leagues they are getting a higher percentage than they are in the NBA.

Percentage of revenue is what's at debate here. In China some of these guys are breaking records for highest contracts ever and making 50x what other players are making.

Wade>You
10-29-2011, 02:32 PM
Does anybody eles find it funny how the players willing to play anywhere from China to Spain for 1/10th of the NBA pay....but in the NBA they want more money for the same service.The leagues they play in aren't trying to exploit them like the owners in the NBA are. And the fact that they're playing for less says it's not about the money, but more about a fair deal.

da ThRONe
10-29-2011, 02:34 PM
For those who are questioning why the players are willing to go overseas for less money. You should realize that first the players aren't stopping the season the owners could have let the CBA expire next year. Second these deals generally last a decade. So if they sign a terrible deal their stuck with it for 7-10 years. Lastly the more concede these negotiations the less they will have when the next CBA discussions start when this CBA has ended.

beliges
10-29-2011, 02:40 PM
The leagues they play in aren't trying to exploit them like the owners in the NBA are. And the fact that they're playing for less says it's not about the money, but more about a fair deal.

How exactly are the owners trying to exploit the players again? You do realize that these owners pay these players whatever contract the players can generate for themselves. These owners put up billions of dollars to get huge arenas, to get television coverage so the players can get all the publicity in teh world, and get lucrative shoe deals, and Mc Donalds commercials and etc.. Its funny when people say stuff like the owners are trying to exploit the players. In fact its quite the opposite. The players want more and more of the owners money. So I guess getting your contract's worth is not enough but the players should also get the majority of whatever the owners are able to bring in? Get out with that nonsense. If these other owners elsewhere are so much better than the NBA then the owners would have no leverage and the players could just go and play around the world. The reason why 98% of the NBA players have not gone elsewhere and played is because they will not earn nearly the same amount of money in those leagues, they will not get nearly the same amount of popularity in those leagues and they will not have nearly the same opportunity to earn extra money from endorsements in those leagues. The NBA is the least player exploiting league out of any of the American sports. So to say that the NBA owners are trying to exploit these players is as far based as you can get.

Wade>You
10-29-2011, 02:47 PM
How exactly are the owners trying to exploit the players again? You do realize that these owners pay these players whatever contract the players can generate for themselves. These owners put up billions of dollars to get huge arenas, to get television coverage so the players can get all the publicity in teh world, and get lucrative shoe deals, and Mc Donalds commercials and etc.. Its funny when people say stuff like the owners are trying to exploit the players. In fact its quite the opposite. The players want more and more of the owners money. So I guess getting your contract's worth is not enough but the players should also get the majority of whatever the owners are able to bring in? Get out with that nonsense. If these other owners elsewhere are so much better than the NBA then the owners would have no leverage and the players could just go and play around the world. The reason why 98% of the NBA players have not gone elsewhere and played is because they will not earn nearly the same amount of money in those leagues, they will not get nearly the same amount of popularity in those leagues and they will not have nearly the same opportunity to earn extra money from endorsements in those leagues. The NBA is the least player exploiting league out of any of the American sports. So to say that the NBA owners are trying to exploit these players is as far based as you can get.The player givebacks/concessions, despite the owners not opening up their books, are enough to sustain the NBA until at least the next CBA. A deal should've been made. What the owners are demanding go beyond the good of the game.

The players (and fans) are also being led to believe that the NBA is dying. As we all know, that's one of the greatest lies of the 21st century.

A lot of owners have funding from the cities for the arenas. And that's why their respective cities are looking to file legal action against them for their lockout and the lost business/jobs their lockout is costing those cities. Only a few owners actually own and have their arenas paid off.


Maybe 10-20 players, out of 400 +/-, get those lucrative shoe deals and mcdonalds ads. You have to consider every player, and those small % points mean a ton more to the majority of players than the superstars.

So is that why the player's have conceded twice in the previous CBAs, and 3 times in this CBA? I'm sorry, but your lack of understanding and knowledge about the NBA is really beginning to show up if you argue the player's are being greedy.

You really think the player's are walking out with everything the owners make? I suggest you read this article and educate yourself on why rich, smart people buy NBA franchises: http://www.nba.com/2011/news/features/steve_aschburner/10/27/lockout-q-and-a-kevin-murphy/index.html

The players are the reason the NBA exists and is successful in the first place. People don't pay to see David Stern or Donald Sterling shoot hoops.

If the NBA were to die today, another league would form, with largely the same owners that run the NBA now, and just hire those same players. it may be a different name, but basketball will live and eventually return to the same level (including pay).

That's capitalism, and when one company dies, another one is born that takes over and fulfills the needs of the public.

Hellcrooner
10-29-2011, 03:10 PM
Does anybody eles find it funny how the players willing to play anywhere from China to Spain for 1/10th of the NBA pay....but in the NBA they want more money for the same service.

i guess you missed that yesterday real madrid offered the equivalent of a MAX NBA CONTRACT to Marc Gasol.

10%? MY ***.

Hellcrooner
10-29-2011, 03:14 PM
i'll be happy to explain it for the benefit of you both.

there are literally hundreds of players that are playing professionally around the globe that could step in and replace the current group of players in the short term, leaving the current group out in the cold. the product would be good, maybe not as good but plenty talented and far more team oriented as players from the european and south american leagues flooded our shores.

this group of players, feeling incredibly fortunate to be able to make a fortune to play a game, be famous and bang all the hot American chicks they want would probably be more than willing to play for the pittance that the NBA players aren't willing to accept.

then, having reached a new, more reasonable CBA with the new group of players, what do you think subsequent graduating classes of college players are going to do? they are going to accept that if they want to make a fortune to play a game, be famous and bang all the hot American chicks they want that they will have to settle for their measly 5 million dollar a year contracts.

it might take 8-10 years but the league will get back to where it was talent wise. and that's assuming some of the current group of weasels don't come crawling back with their tail between their legs.

like i said these players are 100% completely replaceable.

as for my second comment, imagesrdecievin - i can't do anything for that level of ignorance. maybe you were raised to believe that everyone who is wealthy is evil - i can't help you with that.

ps why is it that the players haven't simply said f u to the owners and started their own league? do you suppose it's because then it would be their money on the line for once?

ok, so you take mediocre players from around the globe and place them in nba.

the current superstars, do you think they stay pat?

nope, the SIGN in europe.


who do you think espn is gonna broadcast,? the Pete Mickeal led Lakers vs Oscar Torres led Knics or the Kobe Bryant led Bologna vs the Lebron led Olympiakos?

Who will ncaa players want to play with, The gasols in barcelona or Trahan langdom in milwaukee....

:rolleyes:


get down of your cloud please.

bholly
10-29-2011, 06:54 PM
lol I'd love to see this. If it were true, why does Deron Williams and so many other players have exit clauses in their contracts with other teams in other leagues when the NBA lockout ends? How many Turkish games have you seen televised since he's gone over there? Ask Vince McMahon how the XFL worked out for him, even with big time money and backing leagues can't just pop up overnight and be successful. No new league will have the success anytime in these players playing era as the NBA. Players are playing hard ball and their going to get owned.

the premise was what we'd do without the owners. without these owners, ie without the nba, a new league would start in the usa. people don't watch deron because it's in turkey during a lockout - the game has only been stopped a few months and it's expected it will start again before too long, so people don't care. if the owners walked completely, so the nba wasn't ever coming back, then of course people would start tuning in to the alternatives.

and lol, ask vince mcmahon how the xfl worked out? seriously? that has nothing to do with this situation. the xfl was designed as a secondary league to the nfl that had mostly little-known players while all the top players stayed in the nfl. if the best nfl players couldn't play in the nfl anymore, and played in the xfl instead, then of course people would've watched. the problem wasn't that it was a new league and that setting up a new league is hard, it was that the product sucked - ie the players sucked - and the nfl was still there so nobody watched.
if we removed all the current players from the nba, then started a league called 'xba' that they all signed for, then you're insane if you think people would watch the nba with replacement players rather than the xba just because it has different jerseys. people would be bummed to lose all the nba team history, but there's no doubt they'd follow the players - the players are the product.

Hellcrooner
10-29-2011, 10:55 PM
i say players should appear to the negotiation table with guy faulkes masks the 5th of november

ink
10-29-2011, 11:21 PM
the players are the product.

Biggest myth on the internet right now, and that's saying a lot. If the players were the product people would go to the local outdoor court and pay upwards of $100-200 bucks to see the stars play with no facilities at all. It wouldn't happen for a thousand reasons. You might get a crowd for the first games but soon enough everyone would realize the obvious: no arena, no high quality court, no decent backboards, no coaches, no trainers, no safe playing surface so more injuries, no jerseys, no history, no star pampering, no seats for fans, no crowd control, no organization, no beer lol, no food, no management, no decent camera angles, no talent development and acquisition, no defence, nothing that we associate with the actual PRODUCT. All of those things and a lot more are the product.

da ThRONe
10-29-2011, 11:32 PM
Biggest myth on the internet right now, and that's saying a lot. If the players were the product people would go to the local outdoor court and pay upwards of $100-200 bucks to see the stars play with no facilities at all. It wouldn't happen for a thousand reasons. You might get a crowd for the first games but soon enough everyone would realize the obvious: no arena, no high quality court, no decent backboards, no coaches, no trainers, no safe playing surface so more injuries, no jerseys, no history, no star pampering, no seats for fans, no crowd control, no organization, no beer lol, no food, no management, no decent camera angles, no talent development and acquisition, no defence, nothing that we associate with the actual PRODUCT. All of those things and a lot more are the product.

Dude people show up for high school games. The reason why people are willing to pay more for NBA games are all the luxury and amenities, but the players put the butts in the seats. Nobody is paying for the price of an NBA ticket just to watch empty courts, backboards, safe playing surfaces, jerseys, history and especially not over priced consessions.

ink
10-29-2011, 11:36 PM
Dude people show up for high school games. The reason why people are willing to pay more for NBA games are all the luxury and amenities, but the players put the butts in the seats. Nobody is paying for the price of an NBA ticket just to watch empty courts, backboards, safe playing surfaces, jerseys, history and especially not over priced consessions.

And the owners put the seats under their butts. Trust me, without all of the infinite number of amenities, facilities, coaching, development, scouting staffs, and everything else, the actual professional sport would not be possible. It would die off as some unorganized mess that literally only hundreds of people would be able to see, and then under poor conditions, and with poorly managed/developed teams. It wouldn't be viable. The raw material may be the players, but the PRODUCT is a joint effort between players and owners.

da ThRONe
10-29-2011, 11:48 PM
And the owners put the seats under their butts. Trust me, without all of the infinite number of amenities, facilities, coaching, development, scouting staffs, and everything else, the actual professional sport would not be possible. It would die off as some unorganized mess that literally only hundreds of people would be able to see, and then under poor conditions, and with poorly managed/developed teams. It wouldn't be viable. The raw material may be the players, but the PRODUCT is a joint effort between players and owners.

The point is nobody shows up to watch or partake in amenities. They show up for hoops at highest levels. If the quality of amenities were on the NBA level, but the level of on-court play was at the college level how many people still support the league? Now if the quality of on-court play was on the NBA, but the amenities were on the college level how many people show up? Sure having the best facilities play a huge role in how much money you can extract from the wealthier fans, but it's all a moot point without elite level on-court play. I don't know how you can even make a rebuttal. You make it seems like they league was born with high priced state of the art arenas.

bholly
10-29-2011, 11:56 PM
Biggest myth on the internet right now, and that's saying a lot. If the players were the product people would go to the local outdoor court and pay upwards of $100-200 bucks to see the stars play with no facilities at all. It wouldn't happen for a thousand reasons. You might get a crowd for the first games but soon enough everyone would realize the obvious: no arena, no high quality court, no decent backboards, no coaches, no trainers, no safe playing surface so more injuries, no jerseys, no history, no star pampering, no seats for fans, no crowd control, no organization, no beer lol, no food, no management, no decent camera angles, no talent development and acquisition, no defence, nothing that we associate with the actual PRODUCT. All of those things and a lot more are the product.

I actually agree with this and have come pretty close to posting a similar thing a few times.

So let me clarify the point I was trying to make: The players are the irreplaceable part of the product. They're the cornerstone of the product.

daleja424
10-29-2011, 11:57 PM
^ Ya... I agree. The structure of the NBA is a critical component. But by no means is it more important than the talent.

ombada
10-30-2011, 12:05 AM
The owners are definitely tops - my point about players being tops in their craft however was to illustrate the point that anyone who is one of the few best at what they do get paid - regardless of whether it is a game or not.

The owners however are playing both sides of the fence in that owning a sports franchise is a hobby business. If it were something that were done for profits - then they wouldn't need a way to 'protect themselves'. Being they are the best at making money they would make decisions based solely on business(like Donald Sterling does).

But arent you generalizing the owners? It sounds like your speaking mostly of the large market teams which make up a lower percentage of owners.

also with dealing with such large investments of money, i would think an owner to be dim not to protect himself. Are the players also not seeking protection in these bargaining agreement discussions?

ombada
10-30-2011, 12:12 AM
I actually agree with this and have come pretty close to posting a similar thing a few times.

So let me clarify the point I was trying to make: The players are the irreplaceable part of the product. They're the cornerstone of the product.

Personally i disagree. The NBA brand and the affiliating clubs are the cornerstone. The players are replaceable. If the players arent satisfied with their NBA contracts/bargaining agreement they could take their talents elsewhere, and in my belief, whoever left, would be replaced by new up and comers out of college or overseas or the like. They would be happy to get those contracts.

I admit that losing star power wouldnt be beneficial in the short term, but a career only lasts so long. Star players are replaced naturally, it would only hasten the replacement process.

ink
10-30-2011, 12:25 AM
The point is nobody shows up to watch or partake in amenities. They show up for hoops at highest levels. If the quality of amenities were on the NBA level, but the level of on-court play was at the college level how many people still support the league? Now if the quality of on-court play was on the NBA, but the amenities were on the college level how many people show up? Sure having the best facilities play a huge role in how much money you can extract from the wealthier fans, but it's all a moot point without elite level on-court play. I don't know how you can even make a rebuttal. You make it seems like they league was born with high priced state of the art arenas.

I love the game more than I love the stars. It's that simple. I could easily do without the NBA and the superstars. All I'm saying is that the players need the league just as the league needs the players in order to produce a product. It's over-simplification to say that the players are the product. And the owners' contribution is a lot more than amenities: they provide scouting, drafting, talent acquisition, team building, trainers (to keep the athletes on the court), and most importantly, coaching. I'm sure a player with integrity like Tim Duncan would happily say that Gregg Popovich is one of the most important parts of the San Antonio Spurs product. It's indisputable. It's simplistic to say that nobody goes to a game to watch Popovich. When you watch his team play you are unmistakeably watching his work.

ink
10-30-2011, 12:27 AM
Personally i disagree. The NBA brand and the affiliating clubs are the cornerstone. The players are replaceable. If the players arent satisfied with their NBA contracts/bargaining agreement they could take their talents elsewhere, and in my belief, whoever left, would be replaced by new up and comers out of college or overseas or the like. They would be happy to get those contracts.

I admit that losing star power wouldnt be beneficial in the short term, but a career only lasts so long. Star players are replaced naturally, it would only hasten the replacement process.

I agree with this. Proof positive is the fact that the Chicago Bulls are now one of the most exciting and dynamic teams in the league, having had to struggle through the post-MJ years. Even MJ can be replaced and few would dispute that he was the best player to ever step on a basketball court.

ink
10-30-2011, 12:38 AM
I actually agree with this and have come pretty close to posting a similar thing a few times.

So let me clarify the point I was trying to make: The players are the irreplaceable part of the product. They're the cornerstone of the product.

I see what you mean. I could go along with players being the cornerstone, but I think they can still be replaced. At least if there was more of a sense that might happen we might see more professionalism from the athletes, and less entitlement.

da ThRONe
10-30-2011, 01:15 AM
I love the game more than I love the stars. It's that simple. I could easily do without the NBA and the superstars. All I'm saying is that the players need the league just as the league needs the players in order to produce a product. It's over-simplification to say that the players are the product. And the owners' contribution is a lot more than amenities: they provide scouting, drafting, talent acquisition, team building, trainers (to keep the athletes on the court), and most importantly, coaching. I'm sure a player with integrity like Tim Duncan would happily say that Gregg Popovich is one of the most important parts of the San Antonio Spurs product. It's indisputable. It's simplistic to say that nobody goes to a game to watch Popovich. When you watch his team play you are unmistakeably watching his work.

If you truly would watch any player the league trouts out on the court simply because it's in an arena and they are wearing NBA gear you are in the super rare minority and the numbers prove it.

Nobody is trying to disregard the impact of the coaches however who's paying to see coach Pop coach an AAU team? Even if it's at the MSG.

If players were so easily replaceable the owners would do so.

Bramaca
10-30-2011, 01:21 AM
If you truly would watch any player the league trouts out on the court simply because it's in an arena and they are wearing NBA gear you are in the super rare minority and the numbers prove it.

Nobody is trying to disregard the impact of the coaches however who's paying to see coach Pop coach an AAU team? Even if it's at the MSG.

If players were so easily replaceable the owners would do so.

And if the owners & the league with their financing, marketing, scouting, facilities, etc. were so replaceable then the players would do so.

da ThRONe
10-30-2011, 01:33 AM
And if the owners & the league with their financing, marketing, scouting, facilities, etc. were so replaceable then the players would do so.

Some of the players have already and many more could follow.

What do you think is more marketable a league with a bunch of multi-millionaires ownership groups, and the best ball players in the world or the best owners in the world and a bunch of D league level players?

Bramaca
10-30-2011, 01:47 AM
Some of the players have already and many more could follow.

What do you think is more marketable a league with a bunch of multi-millionaires owners group, and the best ball players in the world or the best owners in the world and a bunch of D league level players?

I've read about some of the games set up by the players, not going that great for them either. Personally, I'm not even close to interested in watching them play random meaningless games. There is nothing invested in it. If they set up a league it would depend how it was set up. But I guarentee that it would take decades for a player run league to come even close to generating the revenue that the NBA does so the players wouldn't be making anything close to what they make now. What would happen though when the current players get older and the new players become the stars though? Lebron or Kobe are not going to give up future profits on something he helped build. So then the old players become the owners and the new players probably get the shaft compared to now.

If it is a direct competition this season between a new star player run and driven league and the NBA with lesser talent but better competition, no doubt I watch the NBA.

da ThRONe
10-30-2011, 02:23 AM
I've read about some of the games set up by the players, not going that great for them either. Personally, I'm not even close to interested in watching them play random meaningless games. There is nothing invested in it. If they set up a league it would depend how it was set up. But I guarentee that it would take decades for a player run league to come even close to generating the revenue that the NBA does so the players wouldn't be making anything close to what they make now. What would happen though when the current players get older and the new players become the stars though? Lebron or Kobe are not going to give up future profits on something he helped build. So then the old players become the owners and the new players probably get the shaft compared to now.

If it is a direct competition this season between a new star player run and driven league and the NBA with lesser talent but better competition, no doubt I watch the NBA.

I was talking about going overseas not starting a players' league. However I disagree I think a players' league would be lucrutive fairly soon if they were able to secure aduquate arenas and tv deals.

ink
10-30-2011, 03:24 AM
If you truly would watch any player the league trouts out on the court simply because it's in an arena and they are wearing NBA gear you are in the super rare minority and the numbers prove it.

If you're accidentally missing the point I'm not sure how and if you're intentionally missing the point I'm not sure why. No one said that was the reason people watch the game. The point was that the owners make it possible for us to watch the games. They provide, build, facilitate, coach, manage, scout, and create the product: the team.

da ThRONe
10-30-2011, 04:33 AM
If you're accidentally missing the point I'm not sure how and if you're intentionally missing the point I'm not sure why. No one said that was the reason people watch the game. The point was that the owners make it possible for us to watch the games. They provide, build, facilitate, coach, manage, scout, and create the product: the team.

This is the least important aspect. They can provide, build, faciliatate, coach, manage, and scout to the cows come home. If the players can't be amazing on the court all of that is useless. However if you have amazing play on court any group of stiffs with money can market that.

Bramaca
10-30-2011, 10:47 AM
I was talking about going overseas not starting a players' league. However I disagree I think a players' league would be lucrutive fairly soon if they were able to secure aduquate arenas and tv deals.

I already watch euroleague, in general I find it more entertaining. Adding star players from the NBA wouldn't make me watch it any more then I do.

Initially, a player league might bring in some money (not close to the amount of the NBA) but the structure of the league would likely start to fall apart fairly quickly. Look at how much trouble they are having setting up exibition games, a league wouldn't be much better.

ink
10-30-2011, 12:27 PM
This is the least important aspect. They can provide, build, faciliatate, coach, manage, and scout to the cows come home. If the players can't be amazing on the court all of that is useless. However if you have amazing play on court any group of stiffs with money can market that.

See that's what I find wrong with the NBA and the fanbase they've cultivated: hero worship. I actually just read a post that says that coaching and scouting are the least important aspect. :eyebrow: Yet supposed bad team building is why some of the biggest whiners in the league cry until they can go play with other "superstars". Even without that, coaching, management, scouting, all of those things are vital. What we're left with is hero worship. I'm with the other posters on the board who don't need to see the big egos of the league. I want to watch the game.

3XDouble
10-30-2011, 12:31 PM
It not about the amount of the money... its about how much they are making for the league... Sure no one can complain when you are making millions.... unless you are making someone else billions. The NBA makes a lot of money, its only fair to find to find a split... that split happens make NBA players a lot of money... I see no issue with that...

If I was one of 350 employees of a company that made billions I'd want my fair share... and to hell with anyone that thinks I'm being greedy.

To say this statement demonstrates the complete and utter lack of financial aptitude demonstrated throughout this thread and others like it is an understatement. The league is not making billions of dollars. It is generating billions of dollars in revenue. It is losing approximately $350 annually.

Please, PLEASE, all of you who do not seem to grasp this concept need take a moment to grasp the difference. The league generates 4.2B in revenue and has approximately 2.1B in expenses, leaving the owners a player’s a net of approximately 2.1B to split between profit for the players and salaries for players (the employees). Of course, this equation exists in every business. The difference is in every other business you can be absolutely sure that management is going to assure salary expenses are managed in a fashion that assures a profit and the normal target for net income is somewhere north of 10%.

In this case, if the owners were looking for a “normal profit, the owners could afford to pay out $1.7B in salaries or an average of approximately 4.2M per player and $57M/team. So, in any other industry in a free market economy, the viability of the industry and these pay scales would be relatively simple to validate by answering a couple of questions. Is there a competing employer who would offer our employees a higher wage? In this case, the question would be could players make more than 4.2M on average in Europe. What is the total compensation per team in Europe. If the answer is that players could not make more in Europe, we just need to answer one other question. Is there another form of employment where these players could make more than $4.2m on average or is there another form of employment where they would accept less compensation for some reason.

I don’t think there is any question that a pool of $1.7B would provide an income substantially higher than any alternative form of these players services. The fact is that the owners have opted to pay out an additional $400M or roughly $1M/player more than they could get anywhere else.

So, the reality of this situation is that after expenses there is roughly 2.1B to be split between owner’s profit and player’s salaries. The owners are offering the players %100 (every last dime of profit) and the players are saying that’s not enough. We want an extra $10M on average from each owner. Oh and by the way, we also want our pay guaranteed no matter how poorly we under perform.

Anyone that still does not understand how the dollars are divided up?

ICON1914 do you still think the players are only seeking their fair share?

Bramaca
10-30-2011, 12:42 PM
To say this statement demonstrates the complete and utter lack of financial aptitude demonstrated throughout this thread and others like it is an understatement. The league is not making billions of dollars. It is generating billions of dollars in revenue. It is losing approximately $350 annually.

Please, PLEASE, all of you who do not seem to grasp this concept need take a moment to grasp the difference. The league generates 4.2B in revenue and has approximately 2.1B in expenses, leaving the owners a player’s a net of approximately 2.1B to split between profit for the players and salaries for players (the employees). Of course, this equation exists in every business. The difference is in every other business you can be absolutely sure that management is going to assure salary expenses are managed in a fashion that assures a profit and the normal target for net income is somewhere north of 10%.

In this case, if the owners were looking for a “normal profit, the owners could afford to pay out $1.7B in salaries or an average of approximately 4.2M per player and $57M/team. So, in any other industry in a free market economy, the viability of the industry and these pay scales would be relatively simple to validate by answering a couple of questions. Is there a competing employer who would offer our employees a higher wage? In this case, the question would be could players make more than 4.2M on average in Europe. What is the total compensation per team in Europe. If the answer is that players could not make more in Europe, we just need to answer one other question. Is there another form of employment where these players could make more than $4.2m on average or is there another form of employment where they would accept less compensation for some reason.

I don’t think there is any question that a pool of $1.7B would provide an income substantially higher than any alternative form of these players services. The fact is that the owners have opted to pay out an additional $400M or roughly $1M/player more than they could get anywhere else.

So, the reality of this situation is that after expenses there is roughly 2.1B to be split between owner’s profit and player’s salaries. The owners are offering the players %100 (every last dime of profit) and the players are saying that’s not enough. We want an extra $10M on average from each owner. Oh and by the way, we also want our pay guaranteed no matter how poorly we under perform.

Anyone that still does not understand how the dollars are divided up?

ICON1914 do you still think the players are only seeking their fair share?

Great post, many people seem to think that the owners should only expect to break even at best and that the players deserve to be paid that much. If an employee isn't creating enough revenue for a profit they are being paid too much.

MR.TRIPDUB
10-31-2011, 10:07 AM
I dont like the idea of fans siding on either. Fans should be pro nba basketball. Not pro-Owners or pro players. Let me ask this question to all the posters who are for the players and thinks that they should not givein to the owners? Would it still upset you if they did givein to 52-48? Or even 60-40,hell even 80-20? I dont think so coz we all want the same thing, to watch nba games.

What reallt upsets me is that theyve already agreed to the part of the negotiations where the imrpovement of the whole league is concerned such as salary caps and contract negotiations. Now theyre just fighting for the extra millions they want to accept.

Hellcrooner
10-31-2011, 12:27 PM
^ i couldnt give a damm about the bri split.

what i dont want players to cave in is in losing freedom of choice where to play after a while.

beliges
10-31-2011, 02:45 PM
This is the least important aspect. They can provide, build, faciliatate, coach, manage, and scout to the cows come home. If the players can't be amazing on the court all of that is useless. However if you have amazing play on court any group of stiffs with money can market that.

The money doesnt come with the players being amazing. Its comes from the game being popular, the game being on television for us all to watch, from the game being in huge arenas which provide an entertaining atmosphere. It comes from mass popularity. It comes from all the money pumped into the team and thus the league by the owners. If it wasnt for the billions pumped into each team, none of us would have heard of 95% of the current NBA players. On top of that, the majority of these players in the league would be uneducated, unemployed and it would be likely that these guys would either be on the street or in jail.