PDA

View Full Version : Aldridge: Cut off at every turn, union has one choice: Take the deal



ink
11-02-2011, 06:16 PM
This about sums it up.


The NBA's players are out of moves, like Jonathan Poe, the chess prodigy who ultimately had to give in to Josh Waitzkin, an even better prodigy, who saw the end of their match 12 moves before Poe did in "Searching For Bobby Fischer". In similar ways this NBA lockout has been predestined, the owners knowing exactly what they were going to get, and how, and when, and the union, full of very smart and good chess players itself, is trying desperately to avoid where it is now, 12 moves from oblivion, with nothing it can do about it.

The union must take the deal now. For it will take a far worse deal a month from now, or later, and lose half a billion or more in the process.

No NLRB ruling nor decertification nor Solidarity Forever chant is going to change that now. The NBA's owners are not looking for a decision; they want a knockout, and they're going to get it. They will blow up the season if they don't like the deal, and they're going to, unless the union folds its 2-3 hand with the flop coming, calls it a day, gets this season started by mid-December and lives to fight again. It is out of moves.


The players aren't going to get 52, or 51, or 50.5, or 50.000001, and if they hold out for those numbers, they're not going to have a season. You'd have to be crazy not to see that now, so it's this for the players: take the deal this week or next, or lose the season. If they are willing to die on principle, they wouldn't be the first. But they will die, in the metaphorical sense.


This is about the NBA putting its house back in order -- naked, real-world realpolitik. If you understand nothing else about these negotitations, understand this: this isn't just about money, at least not totally; this is about re-establishing who's in charge.

For three years, starting in 2008, NBA teams twisted themselves into pretzels to clear cap space for the free-agent class of 2010. No single group of players ever wielded more brute force than that one, headlined by LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh and Amar'e Stoudemire. On the mere hope of getting James, the Knicks basically went into receivership for 36 months. The Bulls similarly cleared the decks; having lucked into Derrick Rose via the 2007 Draft, Chicago dumped the likes of John Salmons and Kirk Hinrich for almost nothing while it waited. Miami became a JUCO team for two seasons, while Riles and Andy Elisburg -- the smartest cap guy in the league -- bided their time and worked their spreadsheets.

And James lorded it over them, making them come to him in Ohio those first two weeks in July last year, then making the whole league watch his Decision on the Four-Letter Network, reality TV writ large, making all these billionaires and multi-millionaires nothing more than pawns, waiting for LeBron Trump to tell them who was fired and who was hired. Dan Gilbert went Comic Sans Crazy as his franchise lost $100 million in worth in the blink of an eye, and it scared the other owners out of their minds. It ticked them off, too.

Carmelo Anthony -- also, like James, Wade and Bosh a member of the Draft class of 2003 -- would wield his cudgel a year later, holding the Nuggets hostage for more than six months before he got traded to the team he wanted to be traded to all along, the Knicks (who, coincidentally, signed Stoudemire after missing out on Bosh, Wade and James). And the owners in small markets, already mad at the Commish for not having more "robust" (the league's favorite word on this topic) revenue sharing, already feeling like they were falling further behind, got their backs up. The Jazz didn't even wait for Deron Williams to humiliate them, sending him on his way to the Nets a year before they had to.

But the Players' Spring has ended, cracked down with brute force, and now their options are bad or worse, and bad is on the 3:30 train out of town.

http://www.nba.com/2011/news/features/david_aldridge/10/31/nba-lockout-next-steps/?ls=iref:nbahpt1

Hawkeye15
11-02-2011, 06:18 PM
the players are really the only ones with something to lose at this point. While the owners are coming off as arrogant and selfish, and rightly so, they hold all the cards.

Just with the players union would take the soft cap they got, and just roll with it.

Dankster
11-02-2011, 06:23 PM
I never thought the players held any cards at any point of these meetings TBH. The players are the owners glorified product and just seeing how things have unraveled the past few weeks, It's pretty evident the owners had a gameplan from the get-go and weren't looking to budge much if at all.

The owners can take the hit of losing a year, however >70% of the players don't have that luxury. It's going to get even uglier and the concessions that the players thought they'd be screwing themselves by signing will look like a Willy Wonka golden ticket in a few months from now whenever they sign what will be almost assuredly a terrible, terrible CBA.

GodsSon
11-02-2011, 06:24 PM
This has been apparent for the longest time that the players really have no leverage, and that the owners offers will only continue to get worse as time goes on. It's good to see everyone slowly starting to realize that.

Players will take the deal soon or lose the season, and Hunter will soon be unemployed. It's as simple as that folks.

Grifftiggs
11-02-2011, 06:40 PM
This has been apparent for the longest time that the players really have no leverage, and that the owners offers will only continue to get worse as time goes on. It's good to see everyone slowly starting to realize that.

Players will take the deal soon or lose the season, and Hunter will soon be unemployed. It's as simple as that folks..

I 100% Agree.

Dade County
11-02-2011, 06:59 PM
If the players don't take this deal (which I think they wont)...

Soon as the owners make a worser offer, the union has no choice but to decertify; because the players are not going to except that.

That mean no season to me.

SteBO
11-02-2011, 07:01 PM
I hate it, and think the owners are in the wrong here, but I agree with all of you. You got a soft cap, which is a big win for the players in a way.

beliges
11-02-2011, 07:04 PM
Of course the players have no leverage here. Its not their money that is in question. Its the owners' money. The players want the majority of the owners' money and the owners want to do a 50/50 split. The players are lucky they will eventually gett 50/50 of ALL basketball generated income ON TOP of their highly lucrative contract salaries. Stop being so damn spoiled and get back to work.

smith&wesson
11-02-2011, 07:07 PM
This has been apparent for the longest time that the players really have no leverage, and that the owners offers will only continue to get worse as time goes on. It's good to see everyone slowly starting to realize that.

Players will take the deal soon or lose the season, and Hunter will soon be unemployed. It's as simple as that folks.

so what the hell are they waiting for lol

DoMeFavors
11-02-2011, 07:08 PM
No lie I think the majority of the players want the union to take the deal, but the union is only listening to the veterans that have made enough money in the past 14 years and All Stars. Most young players that I can see from twitter just want to play.

The goods
11-02-2011, 07:19 PM
Take the deal its only going to get worse from here but they won't take it,they believe they have some imaginary leverage that they don't have. Then when the deal gets worse their going to be mad,and no season for any of us

imagesrdecievin
11-02-2011, 07:23 PM
Of course the players have no leverage here. Its not their money that is in question. Its the owners' money. The players want the majority of the owners' money and the owners want to do a 50/50 split. The players are lucky they will eventually gett 50/50 of ALL basketball generated income ON TOP of their highly lucrative contract salaries. Stop being so damn spoiled and get back to work.

You are really off.

MagicBucsSox
11-02-2011, 07:25 PM
You can tell the difference on sports between those who went to college to those who didn't. The NFL players were more educated and smarter about their stance . As to the NBA players thinking you'll actually be in a business were your percentage income is more than your boss lmao


It's like an actor expecting a bigger cut than the studio. Robert Downey won't make more(or equal) or ironman3 than Disney/Marvel even though hes the draw or face. I watched enough Ari Gold to learn that

PlezPlayDKnicks
11-02-2011, 07:30 PM
Of course the players have no leverage here. Its not their money that is in question. Its the owners' money. The players want the majority of the owners' money and the owners want to do a 50/50 split. The players are lucky they will eventually gett 50/50 of ALL basketball generated income ON TOP of their highly lucrative contract salaries. Stop being so damn spoiled and get back to work.

Owners money... Bwahahaha.. They have the leverage but the reason they are holding firm is because the players have direct control over how successful
A franchise can be. Gilbert is crying to break the players now bcuz he knows the Cavs won't be worth squat for the next decade at least. Even if Irving becomes Cp3 prime this season he can't pull the Cavs out the slums. And after his rookie deal he will prob leave. This generation of stars aren't the loyal warriors of the past. They understand the business of basketball unlike their older counterparts. And those same hard line owners will be screwed by players in the future. Which stars with options will want to sign with any of those guys. Owners are sticking to their guns bcuz they know if they don't draft the next star they are gonna suck until they do

oak2455
11-02-2011, 07:32 PM
No lie I think the majority of the players want the union to take the deal, but the union is only listening to the veterans that have made enough money in the past 14 years and All Stars. Most young players that I can see from twitter just want to play.

I would agree its the few stars that don't wanna give in:mad:

topdog
11-02-2011, 07:38 PM
It tickles me just a bit to see how this whole overseas thing has died down. Like I have said before: there is nowhere in the world and no way that the NBA players can make th kind of money they do without the owners.

Get a deal done and get me some basketball!

gotoHcarolina52
11-02-2011, 07:49 PM
No season for you! (http://dwellingintheword.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/no_soup_for_you.png)

beliges
11-02-2011, 08:25 PM
You are really off.

Ohh? Is that so? You do understand that it is a fact that not only do these players make what they do from their immensely lucrative contracts, but they are also making the majority of all profits the league makes. How exactly is that wrong?

Bruno
11-02-2011, 08:50 PM
Short of giving up their careers, money and primes, which they'll never do-- the players have no real options here. Take it and play ball.

Hawkeye15
11-02-2011, 08:58 PM
It tickles me just a bit to see how this whole overseas thing has died down. Like I have said before: there is nowhere in the world and no way that the NBA players can make th kind of money they do without the owners.

Get a deal done and get me some basketball!

give us some puppy time!

McPeak92
11-02-2011, 09:02 PM
been saying this for a while now.

barreleffact
11-02-2011, 09:07 PM
I would agree its the few stars that don't wanna give in:mad:

I think those few stars have that right. They have worked long enough to have a say. The newly drafted players should't be able to say anything by comparison. That's like a fresh soldier disagreeing with the CSM. The CSM has been in way longer, knows the game, and has earned his opinion.

I see no reason the players should just take whatever they can get, and if I were a star, I would travel overseas, decertify, wait on the ABA, start my own league with only a few teams like the NBA originally had. There are options. I would definitely do something because the owners are crazy. And there is no way I would sign any deal that would keep me or any player committed to a city for a career. That is just dumb.

The league should have: revenue sharing, 4 year max contracts guaranteed contracts, a more flexible trade option, less games, and a 52%+ split for the players. Lets face it. the players make the money. This league isn't like football with 16 game seasons. It is not like a corporation with thousands of workers (that are easily fired when outsourcing is cheaper). It isn't like anything else. The players should use their cards because nobody would watch a scrub league if the stars went elsewhere.

You guys are mostly on the wrong side. The owners represent economic slavery and cheap labor/outsourcing. You guys are in favor of them like the cops that beat up the occupy Wall-street protesters. It is sickening, honestly.

Badluck33
11-02-2011, 09:16 PM
I really do respect David Aldridge. He doesn't talk to be heard and not be forgotten.

Good stuff.

LA_Raiders
11-02-2011, 09:23 PM
I hate those proud greedy players... Let the owners lead the teams...

We all know how smart they are...**** them...

ink
11-02-2011, 09:30 PM
I think those few stars have that right. They have worked long enough to have a say. The newly drafted players should't be able to say anything by comparison. That's like a fresh soldier disagreeing with the CSM. The CSM has been in way longer, knows the game, and has earned his opinion.

I see no reason the players should just take whatever they can get, and if I were a star, I would travel overseas, decertify, wait on the ABA, start my own league with only a few teams like the NBA originally had. There are options. I would definitely do something because the owners are crazy. And there is no way I would sign any deal that would keep me or any player committed to a city for a career. That is just dumb.

The league should have: revenue sharing, 4 year max contracts guaranteed contracts, a more flexible trade option, less games, and a 52%+ split for the players. Lets face it. the players make the money. This league isn't like football with 16 game seasons. It is not like a corporation with thousands of workers (that are easily fired when outsourcing is cheaper). It isn't like anything else. The players should use their cards because nobody would watch a scrub league if the stars went elsewhere.

You guys are mostly on the wrong side. The owners represent economic slavery and cheap labor/outsourcing. You guys are in favor of them like the cops that beat up the occupy Wall-street protesters. It is sickening, honestly.

Yep, 400 millionaire slaves with a union and mansions in multiple cities. No doubt it's a cruel life for them.

btw the point of the article is that the longer they wait, the worse the offer will become.

topdog
11-02-2011, 09:32 PM
I think those few stars have that right. They have worked long enough to have a say. The newly drafted players should't be able to say anything by comparison. That's like a fresh soldier disagreeing with the CSM. The CSM has been in way longer, knows the game, and has earned his opinion.

I see no reason the players should just take whatever they can get, and if I were a star, I would travel overseas, decertify, wait on the ABA, start my own league with only a few teams like the NBA originally had. There are options. I would definitely do something because the owners are crazy. And there is no way I would sign any deal that would keep me or any player committed to a city for a career. That is just dumb.

The league should have: revenue sharing, 4 year max contracts guaranteed contracts, a more flexible trade option, less games, and a 52%+ split for the players. Lets face it. the players make the money. This league isn't like football with 16 game seasons. It is not like a corporation with thousands of workers (that are easily fired when outsourcing is cheaper). It isn't like anything else. The players should use their cards because nobody would watch a scrub league if the stars went elsewhere.

You guys are mostly on the wrong side. The owners represent economic slavery and cheap labor/outsourcing. You guys are in favor of them like the cops that beat up the occupy Wall-street protesters. It is sickening, honestly.

If one more ignorant person compares the NBA to slavery of any sort I am going to have an f'n meltdown. Getting paid slightly less on a million dollar contract that one freely enters into is good fortune not the "slave trade."

Have some respect for people who are really suffering/have suffered. This is millionaires versus billionaires not corporate America versus the American Dream.

Tmath
11-02-2011, 09:39 PM
I think those few stars have that right. They have worked long enough to have a say. The newly drafted players should't be able to say anything by comparison. That's like a fresh soldier disagreeing with the CSM. The CSM has been in way longer, knows the game, and has earned his opinion.

I see no reason the players should just take whatever they can get, and if I were a star, I would travel overseas, decertify, wait on the ABA, start my own league with only a few teams like the NBA originally had. There are options. I would definitely do something because the owners are crazy. And there is no way I would sign any deal that would keep me or any player committed to a city for a career. That is just dumb.

The league should have: revenue sharing, 4 year max contracts guaranteed contracts, a more flexible trade option, less games, and a 52%+ split for the players. Lets face it. the players make the money. This league isn't like football with 16 game seasons. It is not like a corporation with thousands of workers (that are easily fired when outsourcing is cheaper). It isn't like anything else. The players should use their cards because nobody would watch a scrub league if the stars went elsewhere.

You guys are mostly on the wrong side. The owners represent economic slavery and cheap labor/outsourcing. You guys are in favor of them like the cops that beat up the occupy Wall-street protesters. It is sickening, honestly.

Not gonna happen.

At the end of the day fans want to cheer for there home team, not some random super league/team in europe.

blahblahyoutoo
11-02-2011, 09:45 PM
I see no reason the players should just take whatever they can get, and if I were a star, I would travel overseas, decertify, wait on the ABA, start my own league with only a few teams like the NBA originally had. There are options. I would definitely do something because the owners are crazy. And there is no way I would sign any deal that would keep me or any player committed to a city for a career. That is just dumb.

The league should have: revenue sharing, 4 year max contracts guaranteed contracts, a more flexible trade option, less games, and a 52%+ split for the players. Lets face it. the players make the money. This league isn't like football with 16 game seasons. It is not like a corporation with thousands of workers (that are easily fired when outsourcing is cheaper). It isn't like anything else. The players should use their cards because nobody would watch a scrub league if the stars went elsewhere.

You guys are mostly on the wrong side. The owners represent economic slavery and cheap labor/outsourcing. You guys are in favor of them like the cops that beat up the occupy Wall-street protesters. It is sickening, honestly.

we'll see if the players have all the options you think they do if they don't accept the deal.

cheap labor? LMAO. the owners are losing money by paying these guys $10M+ guaranteed contracts.

da ThRONe
11-02-2011, 09:56 PM
I hate it, and think the owners are in the wrong here, but I agree with all of you. You got a soft cap, which is a big win for the players in a way.

Which is the one thing I'd hope the owners would have been adamant about changing.

Like I just said on another site. I was with the players fighting even though they are fighting a losing battle. Simply because you can't just lay down, but at this point both sides are willing to cut the baby in half out of stubbornness and that makes both parties dead wrong. So my pro player stance have shifted to ****'em both. Where I should have been to start out with because when this all started I was pro owners. Until it became clear fixing the league wasn't their agenda. It was assuring most/all owners turned a profit at the expense of the players. While refusing to compensate the players with other consessions.

mdm692
11-02-2011, 10:24 PM
:facepalm:
I think those few stars have that right. They have worked long enough to have a say. The newly drafted players should't be able to say anything by comparison. That's like a fresh soldier disagreeing with the CSM. The CSM has been in way longer, knows the game, and has earned his opinion.

I see no reason the players should just take whatever they can get, and if I were a star, I would travel overseas, decertify, wait on the ABA, start my own league with only a few teams like the NBA originally had. There are options. I would definitely do something because the owners are crazy. And there is no way I would sign any deal that would keep me or any player committed to a city for a career. That is just dumb.

The league should have: revenue sharing, 4 year max contracts guaranteed contracts, a more flexible trade option, less games, and a 52%+ split for the players. Lets face it. the players make the money. This league isn't like football with 16 game seasons. It is not like a corporation with thousands of workers (that are easily fired when outsourcing is cheaper). It isn't like anything else. The players should use their cards because nobody would watch a scrub league if the stars went elsewhere.

You guys are mostly on the wrong side. The owners represent economic slavery and cheap labor/outsourcing. You guys are in favor of them like the cops that beat up the occupy Wall-street protesters. It is sickening, honestly.
:facepalm: youre so wrong in so many ways i dont even know where to begin. Are you mentally challenged??

daleja424
11-02-2011, 10:24 PM
Its time. We could still start this year December 1st if they NBPA takes the 50-50 deal this weekend...but I just feel like they wont. :sigh:

barreleffact
11-02-2011, 10:27 PM
Yep, 400 millionaire slaves with a union and mansions in multiple cities. No doubt it's a cruel life for them.

btw the point of the article is that the longer they wait, the worse the offer will become.
No doubt you are too inept to understand the reality of our economic structure. For them it is spending 20 years (if lucky) in a city they may hate and with owners they may hate as well. Money does not make someone happy if there are other factors.

As far as the point, I mixed it up with the other one I was reading and got pissed because the responses in this one. Regradless, I addressed that the players DO have options.

Kobe was offered over a million a game to play in Euope. Lebron would get the same, I am sure. If the Owners succeed in getting their limit down to 43% for the players, that is an overall cut of about 14% BRI, but that is a cut of about 20-28% of their actual salaries. Thus, a 20 mil contract would now be about roughly 15 or less. That is not that far off from role players getting 5 mil tax free (Josh Childress)


If one more ignorant person compares the NBA to slavery of any sort I am going to have an f'n meltdown. Getting paid slightly less on a million dollar contract that one freely enters into is good fortune not the "slave trade."

Have some respect for people who are really suffering/have suffered. This is millionaires versus billionaires not corporate America versus the American Dream.

If one more ignorant person tries to correct me without knowing what ECONOMIC slavery is I am going to have an f'n meltdown. Learn before you disagree with a statement.

Suffered/have suffered? I am a black soldier in a white army that grew up in the south! Please enlighten me on what I am unaware of...

This is exactly corporate America vs the American Dream. In what way does it differ? The owners are trying to rape the players. They care not about parity, or being able to sustain a business, they are trying to maximize profit at the players and fan's expenses. IE corporate America vs everyone else.


Not gonna happen.

At the end of the day fans want to cheer for there home team, not some random super league/team in europe.

The NBA and every other league started somewhere. There are so many bandwagon fans. The team is irrelevant. The location is everything and the advertising. Nobody would care for a league of scrubs if there was a better alternative. Hell, everyone dislikes the league for being corruptly officiated and bad rules anyway.


we'll see if the players have all the options you think they do if they don't accept the deal.

cheap labor? LMAO. the owners are losing money by paying these guys $10M+ guaranteed contracts.
They aren't losing money at all. They can claim their losses during taxes. They are claiming losses associated with buying the new team, which should be completely irrespective of this whole labor dispute. On top of this, THEY are the ones who approve the contracts. Why give Joe Johnson a max contract BEFORE any other team even has the chance to discuss a contract? Further, they are going to make an excessive amount of money once the new TV deals come into effect. They have not lost anything, they are just attempting to double their returns because they can, and because they want the players to think they are not in control of their own futures...they are.

barreleffact
11-02-2011, 10:29 PM
:facepalm:
:facepalm: youre so wrong in so many ways i dont even know where to begin. Are you mentally challenged??

please, enlighten me in every way that I am incorrect... Odds are you cannot articulate your thoughts to come up with an intelligent counter-argument for me to disprove.

ink
11-02-2011, 10:33 PM
No doubt you are too inept to understand the reality of our economic structure.

You can make your points without the insults. It doesn't make your argument any stronger.

barreleffact
11-02-2011, 10:42 PM
wrong intended response. The comment was unnecessary.

NBA_Starter
11-02-2011, 10:43 PM
So in other words no season :mad:

sixer04fan
11-02-2011, 10:46 PM
You can make your points without the insults. It doesn't make your argument any stronger.

:clap:

NBA_Starter
11-02-2011, 10:46 PM
Hopefully the players do the right thing and give in but I wouldn't bet money on it.

barreleffact
11-02-2011, 10:49 PM
^What makes it the "right" thing? It could be the smart thing, the logical thing, the cowardice thing, the reasonable thing, or any number of adjectives, but why in your opinion is it the "right" thing?

barreleffact
11-02-2011, 10:51 PM
:clap:

but inputting sarcasm strengthens your arguments? That was the start to the whole thing, but please applaud. :clap:

NBA_Starter
11-02-2011, 10:51 PM
^What makes it the "right" thing? It could be the smart thing, the logical thing, the cowardice thing, the reasonable thing, or any number of adjectives, but why in your opinion is it the "right" thing?

I think 50/50 is just the right thing, it's still not right to work for someone and make more or as much money for them but that would do until the next CBA.

barreleffact
11-02-2011, 10:58 PM
I think 50/50 is just the right thing, it's still not right to work for someone and make more or as much money for them but that would do until the next CBA.

So the owners should make more in your opinion? You do realize that the most successful owners still make more than the players, I hope. Also, I hope you realize that no other company has owners that gross 50%% of the income. Further, I hope you realize that regardless of the outcome of this CBA, the next one the owners will try to do even more damage. I hope you also realize that another solution could be a multitude of different revenue sharing options, such as a basic system, a luxury tax system, etc.

Never mind. Just never mind...obviously the owners should have their cake and eat it too...and take the players cakes as well.

topdog
11-02-2011, 11:09 PM
If one more ignorant person tries to correct me without knowing what ECONOMIC slavery is I am going to have an f'n meltdown. Learn before you disagree with a statement.

Suffered/have suffered? I am a black soldier in a white army that grew up in the south! Please enlighten me on what I am unaware of...

This is exactly corporate America vs the American Dream. In what way does it differ? The owners are trying to rape the players. They care not about parity, or being able to sustain a business, they are trying to maximize profit at the players and fan's expenses. IE corporate America vs everyone else.

Again, people being paid millions of dollars to play a game and doing so freely is not slavery of any sort. Economic slavery pertains to those who have no other choice than to take the abuses of their employer for lack of escape from their circumstances such as the poor Taiwanese folks who get paid cents on the dollar to make NBA players' $150 shoes. They are suffering. NBA players who didn't bother to learn how to manage their money are not.

So, essentially you want to use the ace card in your second argument? You're black, therefore you're right when it comes to inequality? Your statements somehow have greater validity because of your implied adversity? I appreciate your contribution as a soldier, but I will not give any credence to your argument simply because you are black.

The American Dream is more-or-less the idea that anyone can make a comfortable living. The NBA does not represent this. Only the top percentile of athletic people are able to enjoy its luxuries and excess. Millionaires do not represent normal Americans any more than billioaires do.

Finally, "rape?" Seriously, you have no respect for the gravity of words nor their connotations. I can't take you seriously and so as far as your future posts are concerned, I will imagine they do not exist because as you know: ignorance is bliss.

Badluck33
11-02-2011, 11:17 PM
Its time. We could still start this year December 1st if they NBPA takes the 50-50 deal this weekend...but I just feel like they wont. :sigh:

I have a feeling they will.

Billy Hunter is going to start feeling pressure of 450+ nba players on Friday and I expect something big to happen this weekend....

I still stick to my gut.

Players give in to a 50/50 split

Billy Hunter resigns.

Bramaca
11-02-2011, 11:22 PM
So the owners should make more in your opinion? You do realize that the most successful owners still make more than the players, I hope. Also, I hope you realize that no other company has owners that gross 50%% of the income. Further, I hope you realize that regardless of the outcome of this CBA, the next one the owners will try to do even more damage. I hope you also realize that another solution could be a multitude of different revenue sharing options, such as a basic system, a luxury tax system, etc.

Never mind. Just never mind...obviously the owners should have their cake and eat it too...and take the players cakes as well.

If by gross amount of income you mean the revenue minus the salary of the top 5% of employees and nothing else then you are right, no other companies owners gross 50%, they gross more along the lines of 90-95%.

Arch Stanton
11-02-2011, 11:27 PM
If by gross amount of income you mean the revenue minus the salary of the top 5% of employees and nothing else then you are right, no other companies owners gross 50%, they gross more along the lines of 90-95%.

I guess that makes us non-NBA Players in a situation beyond slavery. We're getting tossed in the oven.

barreleffact
11-02-2011, 11:32 PM
Again, people being paid millions of dollars to play a game and doing so freely is not slavery of any sort. Economic slavery pertains to those who have no other choice than to take the abuses of their employer for lack of escape from their circumstances such as the poor Taiwanese folks who get paid cents on the dollar to make NBA players' $150 shoes. They are suffering. NBA players who didn't bother to learn how to manage their money are not.

So, essentially you want to use the ace card in your second argument? You're black, therefore you're right when it comes to inequality? Your statements somehow have greater validity because of your implied adversity? I appreciate your contribution as a soldier, but I will not give any credence to your argument simply because you are black.

The American Dream is more-or-less the idea that anyone can make a comfortable living. The NBA does not represent this. Only the top percentile of athletic people are able to enjoy its luxuries and excess. Millionaires do not represent normal Americans any more than billioaires do.

Finally, "rape?" Seriously, you have no respect for the gravity of words nor their connotations. I can't take you seriously and so as far as your future posts are concerned, I will imagine they do not exist because as you know: ignorance is bliss.

Ignorance is bliss indeed. Those than cannot understand and those that refuse to acknowledge are one and the same. You just severely limited the definition of economic slavery. Economic slavery exists in many forms and every monopoly. Basketball is definitely a monopoly.

Not all players in the league are lavishly paid. This CBA is mostly for the players that will not be superstars. They need the income because the stars will get paid. The players DO represent the American dream. The dream that they won't be sold short (Britain), that they can prosper, that they are masters of their own future, that they can decide where to live. They represent the majority entirely regardless of their financial capabilities.

As to the gravity of the word, it makes no difference to me. Take it at face value as intended or the true word, I care not for censorship. Commenting on it is pointless and meaningless.

Don't appreciate me as a soldier and then discredit me for being black after you brought up suffering and disrespect to it. I neither need nor want your appreciation. Someone with so little class to do that disgusts me. Have some respect for racial suffering if you want to continue to discuss suffering, OR preferably drop the suffering period and purely discuss the economic and business views that pertain to the CBA.

barreleffact
11-02-2011, 11:38 PM
If by gross amount of income you mean the revenue minus the salary of the top 5% of employees and nothing else then you are right, no other companies owners gross 50%, they gross more along the lines of 90-95%.

no they don't. The majority of owners make far less. They have to pay employees, taxes, land, materials, distribution costs, etc...the costs to run the business. They generally make nowhere close to 50% and definitely not 900-95% of gross income. Most of it is redistributed. Look up the ave corporate CEO salary. Compare that salary to the amount Walmart brings in. I would be surprised if it is even 1-5% annually. It is likely far less than 1% for a large corporation. The CEOs and share holders collectively may make significantly more, but no single entity or even collective entity make anywhere close to even 50%.

oak2455
11-02-2011, 11:39 PM
I think those few stars have that right. They have worked long enough to have a say. The newly drafted players should't be able to say anything by comparison. That's like a fresh soldier disagreeing with the CSM. The CSM has been in way longer, knows the game, and has earned his opinion.

I see no reason the players should just take whatever they can get, and if I were a star, I would travel overseas, decertify, wait on the ABA, start my own league with only a few teams like the NBA originally had. There are options. I would definitely do something because the owners are crazy. And there is no way I would sign any deal that would keep me or any player committed to a city for a career. That is just dumb.

The league should have: revenue sharing, 4 year max contracts guaranteed contracts, a more flexible trade option, less games, and a 52%+ split for the players. Lets face it. the players make the money. This league isn't like football with 16 game seasons. It is not like a corporation with thousands of workers (that are easily fired when outsourcing is cheaper). It isn't like anything else. The players should use their cards because nobody would watch a scrub league if the stars went elsewhere.

You guys are mostly on the wrong side. The owners represent economic slavery and cheap labor/outsourcing. You guys are in favor of them like the cops that beat up the occupy Wall-street protesters. It is sickening, honestly.

dude wow you are pretty lost carry on:facepalm: whatever:confused:they can get whatever they want over seas goodluck with that.. owners in the end are Billionares, they are bigger than the players... as the game is bigger than the players:eyebrow: bottom line players will loose this fast and its sad when someone says ohhh the poor players who make millions upon millions:eyebrow:

barreleffact
11-02-2011, 11:40 PM
^says the guy that defends the billionaires...very convincing argument btw....

and owners may be bigger than the players to many extent, but they too are not bigger than the game.

oak2455
11-02-2011, 11:43 PM
I have a feeling they will.

Billy Hunter is going to start feeling pressure of 450+ nba players on Friday and I expect something big to happen this weekend....

I still stick to my gut.

Players give in to a 50/50 split

Billy Hunter resigns.

couldnt agree more:clap::clap:

oak2455
11-02-2011, 11:46 PM
^says the guy that defends the billionaires...very convincing argument btw....

and owners may be bigger than the players to many extent, but they too are not bigger than the game.

listen seems like your on a island all by yourself.. comical:clap::clap: keep this up its funny reading your post:laugh::laugh:

barreleffact
11-02-2011, 11:47 PM
^so you think they are bigger than the game?

oak2455
11-02-2011, 11:52 PM
^so you think they are bigger than the game?

some of your quotes are sad, racially not correct at all:o I think the owners have a bigger stance....who can out wait who?? I think the owners can...tell me when those 400 plus players are working at the Home Depot....then get back to me....sorry Owners will win this....doesnt mean that there right, just means theyll win:eyebrow:

barreleffact
11-02-2011, 11:55 PM
some of your quotes are sad, racially not correct at all:o I think the owners have a bigger stance....who can out wait who?? I think the owners can...tell me when those 400 plus players are working at the Home Depot....then get back to me....sorry Owners will win this....doesnt mean that there right, just means theyll win:eyebrow:

Did I EVER say they would NOT win? No. I said the players have options. Tell me one statement I made that was incorrect, and proves its inaccuracies. Please!

oak2455
11-02-2011, 11:57 PM
Did I EVER say they would NOT win? No. I said the players have options. Tell me one statement I made that was incorrect, and proves its inaccuracies. Please!

players going over seas... that right there is false :eyebrow: never ever will they make even close to what there making now.....and thats just the stars:D how bout the little guys, they'll be doing what?? protesting downtown too:confused:

Bramaca
11-02-2011, 11:59 PM
no they don't. The majority of owners make far less. They have to pay employees, taxes, land, materials, distribution costs, etc...the costs to run the business. They generally make nowhere close to 50% and definitely not 900-95% of gross income. Most of it is redistributed. Look up the ave corporate CEO salary. Compare that salary to the amount Walmart brings in. I would be surprised if it is even 1-5% annually. It is likely far less than 1% for a large corporation. The CEOs and share holders collectively may make significantly more, but no single entity or even collective entity make anywhere close to even 50%.

I know you are trying to make a point but read your own post. The nba owners currently pay 57% (possibly down to 50% soon) to 5-10% of their employees. So in the gross of 50% that you are calculating you are not including the other 90-95% of employees, taxes, marketing, travel, hotels, arenas, practice facilities, medical costs of treating players, scouting, etc. You are literally missing billions of dollars in expenses in a 4 billion a year industry in order to try and make your point.

Your argument is similar to saying that Walmart pays its top 5-10% of employees 1 billion a year and the company brings in 20 billion so the owners gross 95% of the revenue. It's a poor argument.

ink
11-03-2011, 12:02 AM
I know you are trying to make a point but read your own post. The nba owners currently pay 57% (possibly down to 50% soon) to 5-10% of their employees. So in the gross of 50% that you are calculating you are not including the other 90-95% of employees, taxes, marketing, travel, hotels, arenas, practice facilities, medical costs of treating players, scouting, etc. You are literally missing billions of dollars in expenses in a 4 billion a year industry in order to try and make your point.

Your argument is similar to saying that Walmart pays its top 5-10% of employees 1 billion a year and the company brings in 20 billion so the owners gross 95% of the revenue. It's a poor argument.

I get the feeling that a few people here think the owners only pay the players' salaries and nothing else.

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 12:03 AM
players going over seas... that right there is false :eyebrow: never ever will they make even close to what there making now.....and thats just the stars:D how bout the little guys, they'll be doing what?? protesting downtown too:confused:

Branden Jennings made a few million overseas as did Josj Childress. Kobe was offered over a million PER GAME. Get your facts straight. There is plenty of money to be made for role players AND stars.

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 12:05 AM
I get the feeling that a few people here think the owners only pay the players' salaries and nothing else.

they do not pay the players...the 57% currently pays the players. The owners cover the other expenses and the staff for the vending machines and advertising, etc. They pay may people with that 43%. But when you slice it all down, they still get a LARGE chunk that goes specifically to them.

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 12:10 AM
I know you are trying to make a point but read your own post. The nba owners currently pay 57% (possibly down to 50% soon) to 5-10% of their employees. So in the gross of 50% that you are calculating you are not including the other 90-95% of employees, taxes, marketing, travel, hotels, arenas, practice facilities, medical costs of treating players, scouting, etc. You are literally missing billions of dollars in expenses in a 4 billion a year industry in order to try and make your point.

Your argument is similar to saying that Walmart pays its top 5-10% of employees 1 billion a year and the company brings in 20 billion so the owners gross 95% of the revenue. It's a poor argument.

Those other employees make far less than those 5-10% employees. Additionally, the main focus is BRI...that implies that there is non BRI that also goes to the owners. Also "billions" annually is an understatement. if 4.3 billion came in and 2 went to the players, billions would imply 2 more billion went to the costs of business. That is NOWHERE near the case.

Bramaca
11-03-2011, 12:10 AM
they do not pay the players...the 57% currently pays the players. The owners cover the other expenses and the staff for the vending machines and advertising, etc. They pay may people with that 43%. But when you slice it all down, they still get a LARGE chunk that goes specifically to them.

You are very enthusiastic about making your points but I get the feeling you have very little experience with business.

Bramaca
11-03-2011, 12:14 AM
Those other employees make far less than those 5-10% employees. Additionally, the main focus is BRI...that implies that there is non BRI that also goes to the owners. Also "billions" annually is an understatement. if 4.3 billion came in and 2 went to the players, billions would imply 2 more billion went to the costs of business. That is NOWHERE near the case.

Considering the owners say they lost money and the players aren't disagreeing (they only disagree on how much the league lost) it is not an exageration.

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 12:20 AM
It is still a huge exaggeration. Considering how much you think was actually spent makes me believe you have little business experience...Especially if the simple math I just displayed didn't prove billions to be an exaggeration.

Bramaca
11-03-2011, 12:33 AM
It is still a huge exaggeration. Considering how much you think was actually spent makes me believe you have little business experience...Especially if the simple math I just displayed didn't prove billions to be an exaggeration.

Your simple math didn't display anything of the kind. I'm sorry, but you don't understand what you are talking about so thats where this conversation will end.

By the way I have quite a bit of experience with corporate taxes, accounting, financial planning, and managing businesses.

beasted86
11-03-2011, 12:36 AM
I think Derek Fisher and Billy Hunter's next plan of attack should be trying to split the ownership group.

Get a sitdown with Jerry Buss, James Dolan, Mark Cuban, Micky Arison, Jerry Reinsdorf, and Mikhail Prokorov and tell them.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_o8gxFGAh9w

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 12:38 AM
^^ and still you can't evaluate simple math? There is NO equation to prove the business costs are 2 billion dollars. none. it isn't logical. They are likely extensive, but 2 billion annually is extreme. I can't understand? That is laughable. If you knew my background you would laugh at that statement as well.

JayHunter
11-03-2011, 12:53 AM
I'm with the owners on this one.

heyman321
11-03-2011, 01:27 AM
Caaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan you diiiiiiiiiiig ittttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt?????

Bramaca
11-03-2011, 01:30 AM
^^ and still you can't evaluate simple math? There is NO equation to prove the business costs are 2 billion dollars. none. it isn't logical. They are likely extensive, but 2 billion annually is extreme. I can't understand? That is laughable. If you knew my background you would laugh at that statement as well.

NBA BRI last year - 3.817 billion
NBA players salary last year - 2.176 billion
Difference - 1.541 billion
NBA claimed losses - 300+ million
NBPA claimed losses - 150 million
Business costs (high side) - 1.841+ billion
Business costs (low side) - 1.691 billion

You already mentioned the extra income that wasn't included in BRI, according to some around 500 million. Some say that money isn't actually NBA revenue, some say it is but in both cases it is recognized that the extra money aslo has corresponding expenses associated with it.

So if you include it then there is anywhere from 2.191-2.341 billion in business costs (outside of player salaries) and if you don't include it then there is anywhere from 1.691-1.841 in business costs (but then you are accepting that the 500 million isn't NBA revenue). Not laughable, just a hell of a lot more facts then you saying;


Also "billions" annually is an understatement. if 4.3 billion came in and 2 went to the players, billions would imply 2 more billion went to the costs of business. That is NOWHERE near the case.

What kind of equation is that? Its more like a random comment with nothing to back it up.

Oldmantrash
11-03-2011, 01:42 AM
I think those few stars have that right. They have worked long enough to have a say. The newly drafted players should't be able to say anything by comparison. That's like a fresh soldier disagreeing with the CSM. The CSM has been in way longer, knows the game, and has earned his opinion.

I see no reason the players should just take whatever they can get, and if I were a star, I would travel overseas, decertify, wait on the ABA, start my own league with only a few teams like the NBA originally had. There are options. I would definitely do something because the owners are crazy. And there is no way I would sign any deal that would keep me or any player committed to a city for a career. That is just dumb.

The league should have: revenue sharing, 4 year max contracts guaranteed contracts, a more flexible trade option, less games, and a 52%+ split for the
players. Lets face it. the players make the money. This league isn't like football with 16 game seasons. It is not like a corporation with thousands of workers (that are easily fired when outsourcing is cheaper). It isn't like anything else.
The players should use their cards because nobody would watch a scrub league if the stars went elsewhere.

You guys are mostly on the wrong side. The owners represent economic slavery and cheap labor/outsourcing. You guys are in favor of them like the cops that beat up the occupy Wall-street protesters. It is sickening, honestly.

Idealistic fool who doesn't live in the real world?...

Hawkeye15
11-03-2011, 01:52 AM
I think those few stars have that right. They have worked long enough to have a say. The newly drafted players should't be able to say anything by comparison. That's like a fresh soldier disagreeing with the CSM. The CSM has been in way longer, knows the game, and has earned his opinion.

I see no reason the players should just take whatever they can get, and if I were a star, I would travel overseas, decertify, wait on the ABA, start my own league with only a few teams like the NBA originally had. There are options. I would definitely do something because the owners are crazy. And there is no way I would sign any deal that would keep me or any player committed to a city for a career. That is just dumb.

The league should have: revenue sharing, 4 year max contracts guaranteed contracts, a more flexible trade option, less games, and a 52%+ split for the players. Lets face it. the players make the money. This league isn't like football with 16 game seasons. It is not like a corporation with thousands of workers (that are easily fired when outsourcing is cheaper). It isn't like anything else. The players should use their cards because nobody would watch a scrub league if the stars went elsewhere.

You guys are mostly on the wrong side. The owners represent economic slavery and cheap labor/outsourcing. You guys are in favor of them like the cops that beat up the occupy Wall-street protesters. It is sickening, honestly.


I am sure the average person making 40k a year would LOVE to enter into that slavery

MrPeytonManning
11-03-2011, 02:37 AM
When, in any dispute between bosses and employees, in any industry or walk of life, has the employee had any leverage whatsoever? He who has the most money has all the power, that's how the world works. And the owners are billionaires, so they get to dictate everything. It's just how life works.

beliges
11-03-2011, 02:45 AM
When, in any dispute between bosses and employees, in any industry or walk of life, has the employee had any leverage whatsoever? He who has the most money has all the power, that's how the world works. And the owners are billionaires, so they get to dictate everything. It's just how life works.

Owners are not trying to dictate everything. Theyre trying to dictate their business. Thats how life works in this country. Hey you get to invest billions into owning a franchise but you cant dictate anything and you have to give the majority of all your profits to the players.....ummmm I dont think so.

Punk
11-03-2011, 02:47 AM
Yeah, I agree. Take the deal. It's not worth holding out the point they are trying to make.

They will not get 50% or nowhere near the amount of 5 million overseas, they aren't going to get any pay doing charity games and they aren't going to get better offers going forward.

Just take it.

da ThRONe
11-03-2011, 02:50 AM
When, in any dispute between bosses and employees, in any industry or walk of life, has the employee had any leverage whatsoever? He who has the most money has all the power, that's how the world works. And the owners are billionaires, so they get to dictate everything. It's just how life works.

The thing is the NBA is a "side hustle" to the owners. For some it's a hobby. So they make their real money doing other non-basketball related things. This is what really screw the players.

If this was a labor dispute in their main business it would cost the owners a lot more.

abe_froman
11-03-2011, 02:54 AM
The thing is the NBA is a "side hustle" to the owners. For some it's a hobby. So they make their real money doing other non-basketball related things. This is what really screw the players.

If this was a labor dispute in their main business it would cost the owners a lot more.

this.

...and its why this whole thing,especially the "poor me" line from owners,is so absurd...but hey if you have the power to grab more

beliges
11-03-2011, 03:03 AM
this.

...and its why this whole thing,especially the "poor me" line from owners,is so absurd...but hey if you have the power to grab more

Dude, NBA players get paid on average more than any other American professional athlete. Gimme a break with that. NBA players get plenty of money to not have to demand a greater amount of the overall revenue than the owners.

abe_froman
11-03-2011, 03:09 AM
Dude, NBA players get paid on average more than any other American professional athlete. Gimme a break with that. NBA players get plenty of money to not have to demand a greater amount of the overall revenue than the owners.

i never said they dont,but it's still a drop in the bucket to what the owners have.(dont see why its so wrong to acknowledge this.i get the "damn millionaires" line,but they're still fighting with billionaires over this )

da ThRONe
11-03-2011, 03:19 AM
i never said they dont,but it's still a drop in the bucket to what the owners have.(dont see why its so wrong to acknowledge this.i get the "damn millionaires" line,but they're still fighting with billionaires over this )

How's a billionaire suppose to feed his kids breaking even with his NBA franchise?:D

metswon69
11-03-2011, 03:21 AM
The longer they draw this out, the more the balance tilts in the owners direction (they still get their money from advanced season ticket sales and tv money)

So if the players were smart they would do the best they can to get a 50/50 deal while they can still have a season otherwise if this gets drawn out into the next calendar season the players are going to get killed in the next deal and the NBA is gonna suffer as a whole from the fan backlash

da ThRONe
11-03-2011, 03:47 AM
The longer they draw this out, the more the balance tilts in the owners direction (they still get their money from advanced season ticket sales and tv money)

So if the players were smart they would do the best they can to get a 50/50 deal while they can still have a season otherwise if this gets drawn out into the next calendar season the players are going to get killed in the next deal and the NBA is gonna suffer as a whole from the fan backlash

While I don't agree with the owners tactics

A) I don't care about the BRI split non of that money will make it's way back to me.

B) I am a fan of a small market team. So a flex cap or an really expensive luxury taxs works to the benefit of my team.

So it's win-win for me. Especially considering I've become a huge advocate of reducing to regular season 20+ games.

UnWantedTheory
11-03-2011, 07:05 AM
.....

UnWantedTheory
11-03-2011, 07:09 AM
So the owners should make more in your opinion? You do realize that the most successful owners still make more than the players, I hope. Also, I hope you realize that no other company has owners that gross 50%% of the income. Further, I hope you realize that regardless of the outcome of this CBA, the next one the owners will try to do even more damage. I hope you also realize that another solution could be a multitude of different revenue sharing options, such as a basic system, a luxury tax system, etc.

Never mind. Just never mind...obviously the owners should have their cake and eat it too...and take the players cakes as well.


Bakers prerogative.

UnWantedTheory
11-03-2011, 07:19 AM
Branden Jennings made a few million overseas as did Josj Childress. Kobe was offered over a million PER GAME. Get your facts straight. There is plenty of money to be made for role players AND stars.

For 400+?

blahblahyoutoo
11-03-2011, 08:35 AM
i never said they dont,but it's still a drop in the bucket to what the owners have.(dont see why its so wrong to acknowledge this.i get the "damn millionaires" line,but they're still fighting with billionaires over this )

so because they have money coming in from side investments, it's ok for them to lose money in this business?
this is your logic?
are they some sort of a charity?

abe_froman
11-03-2011, 08:39 AM
so because they have money coming in from side investments, it's ok for them to lose money in this business?
this is your logic?
are they some sort of a charity?

to me? yeah it is.why should i care or even gleefully want a billionaire to have a bigger slice of the pie than they already get?(as many here do)its a fallacy that most are even losing money in this.but to those that are,they can afford it..its not my job to say please take more,make loads of profit in every venture you invest in.

its a free country.if someone wants to invest in a something thats a loss,isnt that they're right.no,instead we have re write the rules so that they always must come out ahead? yes?

Sinestro
11-03-2011, 09:07 AM
Why don't they agree on all the system changes, then have a vote with all the players and owners as to the BRI split

daleja424
11-03-2011, 09:14 AM
If I was the players I would come back and offer the league 50%...BUT the players get their way on the remaining system issues (mainly that lux tax teams CAN use exceptions and there is no additional penalty for going over the tax several years in a row).

Both sides can walk away with some semblence of respect that they accomplished something.

nycericanguy
11-03-2011, 09:17 AM
so because they have money coming in from side investments, it's ok for them to lose money in this business?
this is your logic?
are they some sort of a charity?

agreed, anyone that owns any sort of business and invests millions in it wants to make money and frankly they should!. you're not going to have millionaires lining up to buy franchises to lose money. This idea that they don't have to make money because its not their main gig is beyond silly. I want to make money in everything I invest in.

Fact is the NBA lost money, so the players have to give in. arguing over 2% is pointless when they are starting to lose that money now anyway now that they're missing checks. Say what you want about doing this for "future" players, they already came down from 57 to 52, 1 or 2 % isn't going to save the future players. NBA players have GUARANTEED contracts and are guaranteed to make money every year, why shouldn't the owners? NBA players are already among the highest paid athletes in any sport.

nycericanguy
11-03-2011, 09:19 AM
to me? yeah it is.why should i care or even gleefully want a billionaire to have a bigger slice of the pie than they already get?(as many here do)its a fallacy that most are even losing money in this.but to those that are,they can afford it..its not my job to say please take more,make loads of profit in every venture you invest in.

its a free country.if someone wants to invest in a something thats a loss,isnt that they're right.no,instead we have re write the rules so that they always must come out ahead? yes?

you shouldn't let anger or jealousy override common sense and logic. Just because you think owners have too much money doesn't mean they don't deserve to make money.

Hunter himself has said the NBA lost AT LEAST 150m, Stern says its much higher, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle, but the fact is they did lose money. Not all the owners of course.

nycericanguy
11-03-2011, 09:22 AM
If I was the players I would come back and offer the league 50%...BUT the players get their way on the remaining system issues (mainly that lux tax teams CAN use exceptions and there is no additional penalty for going over the tax several years in a row).

Both sides can walk away with some semblence of respect that they accomplished something.

I don't know, Stern seems pretty dead set on those, I think the NBA would much rather take 48% then give up on those 2 issues.

nycericanguy
11-03-2011, 09:24 AM
Ric Bucher: I'm hearing that the owners' resolve and they are willing this: to lose the entire season and get the absolute best deal that they can is gaining strenght at this point. ESPN.com

Chris Broussard: I'm hearing a lot of the same things that Ric has heard. At the beginning of the week I was told that if a deal is not done within a week and a half to two weeks, the 50/50 will no longer will be on the table from the owners. They will go now on the 46, 47 percent of BRI. They feel like if they lose this season the money they'll lose they will gain it back in over the next ten years because they will have a very favorable CBA if they not have this season. ESPN.com

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 09:25 AM
you shouldn't let anger or jealousy override common sense and logic. Just because you think owners have too much money doesn't mean they don't deserve to make money.

Hunter himself has said the NBA lost AT LEAST 150m, Stern says its much higher, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle, but the fact is they did lose money. Not all the owners of course.

If some of the owners lost money, but some of the others grossed exorbitant amounts, why is revenue sharing not an option or at least an additive? I mean, the Lakers are making 150mil just off a Time Warner deal. None of the successful owners could share?

nycericanguy
11-03-2011, 09:27 AM
If some of the owners lost money, but some of the others grossed exorbitant amounts, why is revenue sharing not an option or at least an additive? I mean, the Lakers are making 150mil just off a Time Warner deal. None of the successful owners could share?

I agree, it should be and I'm sure it was discussed. But if the league as a whole lost money, there is a problem.

nycericanguy
11-03-2011, 09:28 AM
On Wednesday, 16-year NBA veteran Jerry Stackhouse, who most recently had a cup of coffee with the Miami Heat in 2010-2011, torched Fisher in a ESPN radio interview, delivering arguably the harshest critique of the union president to date. "Not to say anything against Derek Fisher, it's not that I don't think he's a great guy," Stackhouse said, "But I don't want him negotiating my contract. I want an agent who knows the lingo negotiating my contract. Derek Fisher, he doesn't negotiate his own contract. He has an agent. So why would I want him negotiating something even bigger than his contract? This [Collective Bargaining Agreement] is something more important to everybody." CBSSports.com

"David Stern, he's made this league what it is," Stackhouse said. "He's one of the greatest commissioners in sports. He's got that title, he's got the NBA at the place where it is because he's a shrewd businessman and knows how to work his way, play the media, play things up to get what he wants. We don't do that. Players are emotional. Players get emotional. So no, I don't necessarily, particularly want Derek Fisher or any of the executive committee negotiating a contract for me." CBSSports.com

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 09:51 AM
I agree, it should be and I'm sure it was discussed. But if the league as a whole lost money, there is a problem.
That is definitely a problem, but the players have already surrendered 5% of BRI which about covers the losses if you believe the owners lost 150mil. Each percent was 43mil or something like that annually. Throw in revenue sharing and a luxury tax version of the luxury tax and each team is fine. In addition, the new TV contracts are coming in a few ears which will add a HUGE amount to their salaries as well.


On Wednesday, 16-year NBA veteran Jerry Stackhouse, who most recently had a cup of coffee with the Miami Heat in 2010-2011, torched Fisher in a ESPN radio interview, delivering arguably the harshest critique of the union president to date. "Not to say anything against Derek Fisher, it's not that I don't think he's a great guy," Stackhouse said, "But I don't want him negotiating my contract. I want an agent who knows the lingo negotiating my contract. Derek Fisher, he doesn't negotiate his own contract. He has an agent. So why would I want him negotiating something even bigger than his contract? This [Collective Bargaining Agreement] is something more important to everybody." CBSSports.com

"David Stern, he's made this league what it is," Stackhouse said. "He's one of the greatest commissioners in sports. He's got that title, he's got the NBA at the place where it is because he's a shrewd businessman and knows how to work his way, play the media, play things up to get what he wants. We don't do that. Players are emotional. Players get emotional. So no, I don't necessarily, particularly want Derek Fisher or any of the executive committee negotiating a contract for me." CBSSports.com

As much as this is against the player's cause, I his argument is valid.

tbone2171
11-03-2011, 10:09 AM
You guys are mostly on the wrong side. The owners represent economic slavery and cheap labor/outsourcing. You guys are in favor of them like the cops that beat up the occupy Wall-street protesters. It is sickening, honestly.

:facepalm:

nycericanguy
11-03-2011, 10:15 AM
That is definitely a problem, but the players have already surrendered 5% of BRI which about covers the losses if you believe the owners lost 150mil. Each percent was 43mil or something like that annually. Throw in revenue sharing and a luxury tax version of the luxury tax and each team is fine. In addition, the new TV contracts are coming in a few ears which will add a HUGE amount to their salaries as well.



As much as this is against the player's cause, I his argument is valid.

Well thats what Hunter admits to, Stern says its more like $800m. Again the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

But even taking the $150m as truth, even with the players giving back 5% that leaves the league breaking even. I don't think its reasonable to expect the NBA to operate at a "break-even" cost.

But again I suspect the actual losses are somewhere in the middle in the $400-500m range.

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 10:18 AM
Well thats what Hunter admits to, Stern says its more like $800m. Again the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

But even taking the $150m as truth, even with the players giving back 5% that leaves the league breaking even. I don't think its reasonable to expect the NBA to operate at a "break-even" cost.

But again I suspect the actual losses are somewhere in the middle in the $400-500m range.
Was the 800m in total or annual? The 5% guarantees about 200mil annually. Regardless I think both should be implemented because I do agree that break even is not how any for-profit organization should be run.

nycericanguy
11-03-2011, 10:23 AM
Was the 800m in total or annual? The 5% guarantees about 200mil annually. Regardless I think both should be implemented because I do agree that break even is not how any for-profit organization should be run.

For last season. And actually I was wrong, Stern said the league lost $400m last season. So the middle point between what he says and what hunter says is $275m

nycericanguy
11-03-2011, 10:24 AM
Alright lets stay on topic here...lol. this is not a discussion on degrees...which I personally think are near worthless anyway these days.

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 10:31 AM
For last season. And actually I was wrong, Stern said the league lost $400m last season. So the middle point between what he says and what hunter says is $275m
275mil with 200 being compensated for by the players sounds fair IMO. They could drop the extra 2%, but if they do not stand at some point, what happens n the next CBA. Even in this CBA the owners never officially offered 50%. If the players budge from 52, what happens when the owners say you dropped again and we want to go lower to 46 now? It's a slippery slope.


Alright lets stay on topic here...lol. this is not a discussion on degrees...which I personally think are near worthless anyway these days.

I think most are worthless these days as well. There are a few that still have value, but I am inclined to agree in part.

Chi City23
11-03-2011, 10:41 AM
So you think the cops should beat the protesters that are actually protesting to help them too? It's foolish. Favoring the owners here is a similar concept except the CBA benefits you in no way unless you have child prodigy. The owners aren't fighting for stability. They want power. They miss the days of paying MJ <4mil a year. Supporting them is just backwards when most argue they think the players should play for millions in support of the billionaires. Its *** backwards.

So you are comparing owners who provide luxury 5 star hotels, top airline luxury travel, and god knows how much in food and spending for when their players are on the road (oh yeah did I mention the millions of $$$ they pay their players on top of that) to economic slavery?? And you say you are educated?? Get your head out of your ***!!

I don't care what business you are talking about but name me one business where the product/salesman/player should make more than the actual owner!

You obviously don't have a degree in business thats for sure lol

sixer04fan
11-03-2011, 10:43 AM
A hell of a lot better than a drop like such as yourself. I assume you are a drop out since you are so stuck on my credentials but have provided none of your own. It just seems glaringly apparent you have done nothing to take pride in.I could be wrong, but I sincerely doubt it.

There are similarities. Quite a few of them. You obviously have no concept of monopolies or economic slavery or any other part of ACTUAL reality. You just probably follow the mold, research nothing, and perceive ignorance to be bliss. I, however, would much rather look into every angel and see truths in every context.

If you can't prove your point without having to provide your credentials, then you aren't proving your point well enough to begin with. And your "credentials" are completely irrelevant to the topic of discussion.

I wasn't gonna go here, but since you asked, I have a BS in Energy Engineering from a prestigious university. I now have a job at a start up company, doing energy efficiency projects for buildings in the federal sector. I am damn proud of that and I worked hard for it.

Does anyone here care about that? No, and they shouldn't. Does my background have anything to do with the NBA lockout? Not at all. And neither does yours.

The point of this site is that people come together from any type of background and we're all on the same playing field. People here know me as a sports fan first, and that's all I want. If you feel the need to brag about being a med school applicant then that's your prerogative. If you think that saying that you were in Iraq helps your case in some way, it doesn't, at all. Thank you for serving our country, but based on how you've been talking yourself up and treating people in this thread, my opinion of you is pretty ****ing low regardless of whether or not you have a college degree.

nate2usmc
11-03-2011, 10:45 AM
Barreleffact, you're really using race and your occupation as a cause for suffering and ofcourse use the word slavery. Since youve been to Iraq, tell me that the lower income Iraqis have suffered less than you or anyone else here, while we're sittin here talkin about sports on a computer.

Stop using the slavery **** man. Seriously. Makes you look like a typical black man living in the past. Time to move forward and stop living in the past.

nate2usmc
11-03-2011, 10:48 AM
And no I'm not white. Stop lookin at things in terms of race and racism will be done in our generation. People who act and live like they do in the past will keep that **** going.

nate2usmc
11-03-2011, 11:00 AM
fjhtfdklashkaerfjkls;ghfsiduvoc kglfrmsdafmiweqashft83158fjkeufirjerfjshkrfirdfhc

This. lol


Time for the players to take the damn deal. They get soft cap, MLE and Max contracts. Players got the deal last cba, tough economic conditions lead to owners winning (if splitting 50/50 is considered a win lol) and when the economy gets better, players will get back to 57% again in next cba.

VillaMaravilla
11-03-2011, 11:25 AM
why should owners give in to players when they show no loyalty to the teams that draft them (lebron) and then leave that team trying to pick up the pieces, the owners are doing what they need to do to make money and make this league competiive.....

VillaMaravilla
11-03-2011, 11:28 AM
im glad this is happening to the players because with what has transpired in the last couple of year with players joining forces and others forcing their way out of teams making this a 2 or 3 team league has been B.S., the players really thought they were going to run this league lmao

blahblahyoutoo
11-03-2011, 11:36 AM
Well thats what Hunter admits to, Stern says its more like $800m. Again the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

But even taking the $150m as truth, even with the players giving back 5% that leaves the league breaking even. I don't think its reasonable to expect the NBA to operate at a "break-even" cost.

But again I suspect the actual losses are somewhere in the middle in the $400-500m range.

who here enjoys entering a business venture knowing that at best, he will break even?

blahblahyoutoo
11-03-2011, 11:48 AM
to me? yeah it is.why should i care or even gleefully want a billionaire to have a bigger slice of the pie than they already get?(as many here do)its a fallacy that most are even losing money in this.but to those that are,they can afford it..its not my job to say please take more,make loads of profit in every venture you invest in.

its a free country.if someone wants to invest in a something thats a loss,isnt that they're right.no,instead we have re write the rules so that they always must come out ahead? yes?

you really think anybody here WANTS the owners to make more money?

the only reason anyone here is on the owners "side" is based off of principal.
not that because they are owners, that they're entitled to make a profit (although that is the basic premise behind owning a business). i personally feel that bailouts are bad, poorly run businesses should fail.

but i do believe that they are allowed to take steps that would hopefully lead towards profitability.
the current CBA expired and this is their moment to right the ship and they have every right to negotiate terms that are beneficial to their business.

i don't understand how anyone as an NBA fan could be against this. if your team is incurring huge monetary losses year after year, how are they going to put forth a competitive team?
worse yet, they could file for bankruptcy, get bought out and shipped to another city, or just cease to exist altogether.
maybe if you're for league contraction I guess...

iliketurtles24
11-03-2011, 12:46 PM
great thread, haha, i just want bball

Lim
11-03-2011, 01:09 PM
Take a ****ing deal already you spoiled bastards, there are ppl starving all over the world

nate2usmc
11-03-2011, 01:22 PM
Take a ****ing deal already you spoiled bastards, there are ppl starving all over the world

Yes but these are millionaire slaves we're talkin about right :rolleyes:. They can't let THE MAN get to em. I only feel sorry for rich people (that includes athletes) if health issues and death are involved, other than that I really don't wanna hear the whining from these millionaires (players) **** What's the league minimum again? 500k A YEAR right? Don't wanna hear from the low end guys either. Troops puttin their lives on the line for less than 10% of the league minimum...really can't get butt hurt over a 50/50 split.

Chronz
11-03-2011, 01:27 PM
who here enjoys entering a business venture knowing that at best, he will break even?
If you want to make a profit, sell the team. If you want to own a sports team, deal with the realities of the sport (not a business but a sport)

3XDouble
11-03-2011, 01:28 PM
I would like to pose a question here that might put things in perspective in terms of if 50/50 is fair. The question is ... If this were like any other business and employees were paid based on market competition for their services, what would the average NBA player make or what would be the average team salary? Basketball is a global business so there are obviously many compeitors for players services. I guess I am saying is that the most pertinent measure of what a "fair" nba salary is to compare their compensation at 50/50 to what the market rate is for their services. This is how is works in a free market economy for CIOs or Janitors.

Chronz
11-03-2011, 01:31 PM
When, in any dispute between bosses and employees, in any industry or walk of life, has the employee had any leverage whatsoever?
lol are you serious, in ANY situation where the TALENT is the one bringing in the money.


He who has the most money has all the power, that's how the world works. And the owners are billionaires, so they get to dictate everything. It's just how life works.
If that were true the NBA wouldnt have made the giant strides it has, players would still be operating under the rules laid out in the leagues infancy. Fact is players have always had leverage, or dont you remember the strike right before the All-Star game?

Dade County
11-03-2011, 01:32 PM
im glad this is happening to the players because with what has transpired in the last couple of year with players joining forces

Do you have a problem with players having the right to be free agents, and or playing for any team they desire? It doesn't matter if that team has no stars or 5 stars, it's that players decision to go where he sees fit.



and others forcing their way out of teams making this a 2 or 3 team league has been B.S., the players really thought they were going to run this league lmao

So a player went to their GM office, pulled out a gun, and started demanding for a trade to a specific team.

I don't understand how a player holds a team hostage, I see how organizations, hold very talented players hostage.

The organization knows when that player contract is up, they can either try to resign that player or trade that player ( but the media and fans see it a totally different way).

Fans see it as, that star player should resign before that contract is even up :crazy:... what sense does that make.

The player has earned the right to place his services on the free market... To earn how much they possible can (because teams are bidding for him).

And the media is just a big joke.... whatever gives them "hits" on their webpage.

If a star player goes to a bad team, and takes the biggest contract out their, well then, that player doesn't care about winning (it's all about the MONEY) But they are the first ones to point out, tha the player has no rings 3 yrs later ... smh

If a star players goes to a team with other good star players ( CONSPIRACY ) ... he's taken the easy way out... He has no respect for the game... But the truth of the matter is, it's all about what sales.

And hating on Lbj sales:D

And if He would have went to NY with Amare his a good guy, teamed up with rose, his a hero.

It's a big problem because it's Miami (Not a big enough market for the media)

So the media machine starts to say:
D wade is already their, Horrible fan base, he should have stayed in Cleveland if he wasn't coming to NY... WTF is that:confused: I actually heard this on sports radio.

beliges
11-03-2011, 01:33 PM
If you want to make a profit, sell the team. If you want to own a sports team, deal with the realities of the sport (not a business but a sport)

Ha! This is a business first and foremost. It is entertainment more so than it is basketball. If you want to make ALL the money as a player, then invest every penny you have into owning a franchise. If not, then shut up and try to get a team to pay you as much money as possible. These owners take ALL the risk with these franchises as they invest billions into turning their product successful. To say that the players should get the majority of the profits the owners make ON TOP of what they are getting paid on their contracts is repugnant. The players are employees, they need to do their job. If you dont like it, go play elsewhere. Nobody in the planet will be able to offer you guaranteed contracts and endorsement deals as lucrative as you would get playing for the NBA. Quit being greedy and just get back to work.

Chronz
11-03-2011, 01:35 PM
I would like to pose a question here that might put things in perspective in terms of if 50/50 is fair. The question is ... If this were like any other business and employees were paid based on market competition for their services, what would the average NBA player make or what would be the average team salary? Basketball is a global business so there are obviously many compeitors for players services. I guess I am saying is that the most pertinent measure of what a "fair" nba salary is to compare their compensation at 50/50 to what the market rate is for their services. This is how is works in a free market economy for CIOs or Janitors.
Do you think the owners want players making what they are worth? I wonder if allowing the superstars to make whatever they are worth and leaving the role players to take what little is left would be best for the league. In this kind of system Kobe takes home +50M and Gasol/Odom make like 10 combined or something.

blahblahyoutoo
11-03-2011, 01:38 PM
If you want to make a profit, sell the team. If you want to own a sports team, deal with the realities of the sport (not a business but a sport)

oh, so the NBA isn't a business right? no lawyers, accountants, back office, or other departments that a business might use right?
:rolleyes:

is school out early or something?

phoenix_bladen
11-03-2011, 01:47 PM
I think the only players even worth the 50% of the revenue are all stars and superstars

those are the players that fans come to watch so i agree they should be paid the most.

but who the hell comes to watch scrubs ? In my opinion they shouldn't even deserve 50% of the cut

beliges
11-03-2011, 01:49 PM
Dude NBA players on average make more money than any other professional athlete in American sports. So not only do they have the most player friendly contracts and financial situation, but they also want the majority of all basketball profits? Ya, not gonna happen. These guys all have guaranteed contracts. If they get hurt on the court and cannot play, they still get paid. If they mail it in after signing a huge deal they cannot get cut and they get paid. The players have so much on their side that its beyond ridiculous for them to continue to demand the majority of all profits. Again, if you dont like the situation in the NBA, im sure there is always a team that will pay you to play for them outside the NBA. Have a good time.

nate2usmc
11-03-2011, 02:03 PM
Dude NBA players on average make more money than any other professional athlete in American sports. So not only do they have the most player friendly contracts and financial situation, but they also want the majority of all basketball profits? Ya, not gonna happen. These guys all have guaranteed contracts. If they get hurt on the court and cannot play, they still get paid. If they mail it in after signing a huge deal they cannot get cut and they get paid. The players have so much on their side that its beyond ridiculous for them to continue to demand the majority of all profits. Again, if you dont like the situation in the NBA, im sure there is always a team that will pay you to play for them outside the NBA. Have a good time.

Agreed. I also laugh at the idea when the players, especially STAT (love the dude) saying that players start their own league and bump the NBA. Fans are not gonna loyally flock to And1 games in rucker park or HS gyms unless it's like $5 a ticket. Good luck gettin $20 mil a year from a 2nd rate circuit league after paying all the costs that come with keeping up a business.

Chronz
11-03-2011, 02:17 PM
How's a billionaire suppose to feed his kids breaking even with his NBA franchise?:D

LOL there are lives at stake people, give the wealthy the money they desperately need, I mean its not like the NBA is a game, its strictly a business. Thats why owners never sell their teams, because they should be guaranteed profit making machines.

beliges
11-03-2011, 02:28 PM
LOL there are lives at stake people, give the wealthy the money they desperately need, I mean its not like the NBA is a game, its strictly a business. Thats why owners never sell their teams, because they should be guaranteed profit making machines.

Youre never guaranteed a profit when running a business. Its a risk one takes. But it should be the one taking that substantial risk that deserves the higher end of the profits. Of course certain owners were losing money. Not only do they have to pay these players guaranteed contracts but on top of that they have to give away the majority of their profit to their players? Ha

Chronz
11-03-2011, 02:31 PM
oh, so the NBA isn't a business right? no lawyers, accountants, back office, or other departments that a business might use right?
:rolleyes:

is school out early or something?
Its a hobby that involves alot of money, thats all I get out of your post. Besides even if we agreed, in what business should an owner be guaranteed to make a profit? Isnt that the risk that comes with owning a business?

Anyways this is a game, not a business. If you want to make money then sell the team otherwise you have to deal with the reality that your playing a competitive game.

A guy like Donald Sterling exemplifies the mindset a business man would have entering the NBA, hes let countless FA go and has rarely signed anyone and almost never gos above the cap. The end result is that the team is not very competitive but because costs are so low and hes moved the team to LA hes been making a profit. Its only when he tries to win that the costs of owning a team are felt. Thats the price that comes with trying to make your team competitive.

If anything the NBA is kind of like owning stock thats always rising. If you want to cash in youve got to sell the team and let someone else raise the teams value so he can take a turn at this HOBBY.

Chronz
11-03-2011, 02:36 PM
Youre never guaranteed a profit when running a business. Its a risk one takes. But it should be the one taking that substantial risk that deserves the higher end of the profits. Of course certain owners were losing money. Not only do they have to pay these players guaranteed contracts but on top of that they have to give away the majority of their profit to their players? Ha
This shouldnt be about money, it should be about competition. And I have a feeling that all this talk about money is really just smokescreen so that teams can spend even more. How else do you explain the fact that teams want an amnesty rule that does more than save money, it allows them to spend more of it in the form of CAP space. Obviously teams want to be able to spend money they just dont want the commitment that comes with a bad move.

Which is fine, competition should be at the heart of the matter and the reducing cost is definitely a way to accomplish this, Im just saying the focus should be on that, not the fact that owners are losing money. If the owners want to make a profit then they should sell the team and get out of the hobby of owning a sports team.

Do you really think there will ever be a CBA in which every team in the league is profiting, if not why chase the impossible? I honestly just think the owners are trying to cut cost but are still looking forward to spending incessantly, they just want a system that protects them from themselves as best they can.

beliges
11-03-2011, 02:37 PM
Its a hobby that involves alot of money, thats all I get out of your post. Besides even if we agreed, in what business should an owner be guaranteed to make a profit? Isnt that the risk that comes with owning a business?

Anyways this is a game, not a business. If you want to make money then sell the team otherwise you have to deal with the reality that your playing a competitive game.

A guy like Donald Sterling exemplifies the mindset a business man would have entering the NBA, hes let countless FA go and has rarely signed anyone and almost never gos above the cap. The end result is that the team is not very competitive but because costs are so low and hes moved the team to LA hes been making a profit. Its only when he tries to win that the costs of owning a team are felt. Thats the price that comes with trying to make your team competitive.

If anything the NBA is kind of like owning stock thats always rising. If you want to cash in youve got to sell the team and let someone else raise the teams value so he can take a turn at this HOBBY.

Very inaccurate. Basketball is a game. The NBA is a business that sells the game of basketball. Thats just how it is. If the NBA didnt pay the players the most money out of any basketball league in the world, the players would take their abilities to another league. The owners are not guaranteed to make money but they should be guaranteed their profits if any. And the fact that they have to give a substantial amount of their generated revenue to the players is wrong. And this is why the players will give in. The owners have a hell of a lot more to lose than the players do.

beliges
11-03-2011, 02:40 PM
This shouldnt be about money, it should be about competition. And I have a feeling that all this talk about money is really just smokescreen so that teams can spend even more. How else do you explain the fact that teams want an amnesty rule that does more than save money, it allows them to spend more of it in the form of CAP space. Obviously teams want to be able to spend money they just dont want the commitment that comes with a bad move.

Which is fine, competition should be at the heart of the matter and the reducing cost is definitely a way to accomplish this, Im just saying the focus should be on that, not the fact that owners are losing money. If the owners want to make a profit then they should sell the team and get out of the hobby of owning a sports team.

Competition is money. The more competitive and successful a product you put out there, the more profit will be generated. The going rate for players these days is extremely high given the fact that this is an open market and players are free to sign with the highest bidder. But make no mistake about it, this is a business for everyone involved. The players are in this to make money and the owners are in this to make a profit. The difference however is that the players are playing on the owners teams, they are getting paid with the owners' money and there is no other place they can go to make as much.

Chronz
11-03-2011, 02:51 PM
Competition is money. The more competitive and successful a product you put out there, the more profit will be generated.
Its not that cut and dry, Sterling was making more money when the Clips were missing the playoffs and now he has the fortune of drafting a PLAYER who generates even more revenue. Imagine if stars were forced to stay with their original teams, had Sterling not become a man willing to spend Blake would be ****ed for the rest of his career. Sterling would be happy with the money train, should that be all that matters? The fact that hes making money?


The going rate for players these days is extremely high given the fact that this is an open market and players are free to sign with the highest bidder.
Again, not that cut and dry. Im not good at business terminology but shouldnt a free market come with less restrictions? They can only sign with teams that have a certain amount of CAP space that is totally independent of the players actual monetary worth, which is why a guy like Bron is ridiculously underpaid but bums like Eddy Curry can be overpaid. How do you even begin to fix that?


But make no mistake about it, this is a business for everyone involved. The players are in this to make money and the owners are in this to make a profit. The difference however is that the players are playing on the owners teams, they are getting paid with the owners' money and there is no other place they can go to make as much.

I suppose your right about that, I wont say its not a business any more I just dont think it changes anything. Without the players there is no NBA, no teams for the owners to run.

tbone2171
11-03-2011, 03:02 PM
Wait...where did the angry double A go?

blahblahyoutoo
11-03-2011, 03:06 PM
Very inaccurate. Basketball is a game. The NBA is a business that sells the game of basketball. Thats just how it is. If the NBA didnt pay the players the most money out of any basketball league in the world, the players would take their abilities to another league. The owners are not guaranteed to make money but they should be guaranteed their profits if any. And the fact that they have to give a substantial amount of their generated revenue to the players is wrong. And this is why the players will give in. The owners have a hell of a lot more to lose than the players do.

the guy's not worth responding to if he can't see that the NBA is a business.

owners should not be guaranteed profits but they are allowed to do their best in an attempt to make a profit.
that's exactly what this lockout is about.
they're negotiating the terms with their employees and if they can't come to an agreement, they have every right to close their doors to the business. and if the players don't like the terms, they have every right to walk out and find lucrative employment elsewhere.

da ThRONe
11-03-2011, 03:22 PM
If I was the players I would come back and offer the league 50%...BUT the players get their way on the remaining system issues (mainly that lux tax teams CAN use exceptions and there is no additional penalty for going over the tax several years in a row).

Both sides can walk away with some semblence of respect that they accomplished something.

I made this point right before the last talks fell apart. The players should concede the BRI and ask for some middle ground on the luxury tax and maybe some other concession like years under contract.

On a side note I'm surprised owners want shorter contracts when they want to try and limit the players power. When free agency is the players only source of power.

ink
11-03-2011, 03:28 PM
I made this point right before the last talks fell apart. The players should concede the BRI and ask for some middle ground on the luxury tax and maybe some other concession like years under contract.

On a side note I'm surprised owners want shorter contracts when they want to try and limit the players power. When free agency is the players only source of power.

But as it is the luxury tax proposal is a disaster. It will probably do the opposite of what is intended. I can't see a single owner really being happy with what they've accomplished. This new CBA is going to be another mess tbh. The big markets are going to pay massively to conduct business the way they currently do, but they'll do it. Basically the luxury tax punishment effectively allows rich teams to have salary caps of $120M+. And they'll spend it. I can't see any owner agreeing to watering down the already flawed salary cap.

nate2usmc
11-03-2011, 03:32 PM
Wait...where did the angry double A go?

LOL probably having a *****fest with Al Sharpton.

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 04:05 PM
Barreleffact, you're really using race and your occupation as a cause for suffering and ofcourse use the word slavery. Since youve been to Iraq, tell me that the lower income Iraqis have suffered less than you or anyone else here, while we're sittin here talkin about sports on a computer.

Stop using the slavery **** man. Seriously. Makes you look like a typical black man living in the past. Time to move forward and stop living in the past.


And no I'm not white. Stop lookin at things in terms of race and racism will be done in our generation. People who act and live like they do in the past will keep that **** going.

I have never said anyone has suffered less than I have...ever! Even the players have been through their struggles. I have not used race or anything you said as a CAUSE for suffering. Reread the posts and come up with a different word that more accurately fits your intentions.

Typical black man? Really? What is a "typical" black man from your seemingly racist perspective? Most people are not stuck in the past. It is more often the people of today that are too forgetful of the past and prefer to act like it never existed. We are too quick to ignore the racial debates in favor of alternative motives despite how the obvious racial intentions.

Race has very little to do with this issue. However, the whole "typical" black man line, and the whole move forward saying clearly say a lot about your hypocritical character. You have some audacity. Your view is INCREDIBLY flawed. If I stopped looking at things as having any involvement in race I would be degraded racially at every corner. The simple fact is, we are all racist in some form. We all believe in at least a few stereotypes. Racism still exists very clearly. It becomes more apparent when people like you try to ignore it.

da ThRONe
11-03-2011, 04:07 PM
But as it is the luxury tax proposal is a disaster. It will probably do the opposite of what is intended. I can't see a single owner really being happy with what they've accomplished. This new CBA is going to be another mess tbh. The big markets are going to pay massively to conduct business the way they currently do, but they'll do it. Basically the luxury tax punishment effectively allows rich teams to have salary caps of $120M+. And they'll spend it. I can't see any owner agreeing to watering down the already flawed salary cap.

I commented on this back when the owners gave up on the flex cap. This could completely back fire on small rev teams. I see a scenario where this becomes even more elites league. And owners may be able to start spending 4 to 1 in salary then some other teams. With out a set limit teams can't exceed leaves this system open to being exploited.

These are the same management groups that think Rashard Lewis, Ed Curry, and Joe Johnson are worth the contracts they signed them to.

ink
11-03-2011, 04:08 PM
I have never said anyone has suffered less than I have...ever! Even the players have been through their struggles. I have not used race or anything you said as a CAUSE for suffering. Reread the posts and come up with a different word that more accurately fits your intentions.

Typical black man? Really? What is a "typical" black man from your seemingly racist perspective? Most people are not stuck in the past. It is more often the people of today that are too forgetful of the past and prefer to act like it never existed. We are too quick to ignore the racial debates in favor of alternative motives despite how the obvious racial intentions.

Race has very little to do with this issue. However, the whole "typical" black man line, and the whole move forward saying clearly say a lot about your hypocritical character. You have some audacity. Your view is INCREDIBLY flawed. If I stopped looking at things as having any involvement in race I would be degraded racially at every corner. The simple fact is, we are all racist in some form. We all believe in at least a few stereotypes. Racism still exists very clearly. It becomes more apparent when people like you try to ignore it.

Last personal comment ok? This thread is not about race. It is about the union's need to make a decision or possibly lose the entire season and a lot more money. Let's stick to that. I am letting this response go and would ask that no one responds. The thread may have run its course if we are this far off topic, in which case, it can be closed.

ink
11-03-2011, 04:11 PM
I commented on this back when the owners gave up on the flex cap. This could completely back fire on small rev teams. I see a scenario where this becomes even more elites league. And owners may be able to start spending 4 to 1 in salary then some other teams. With out a set limit teams can't exceed leaves this system open to being exploited.

These are the same management groups that think Rashard Lewis, Ed Curry, and Joe Johnson are worth the contracts they signed them to.

I agree. I see these negotiations as being critically flawed and the outcome may prove to be just as unworkable as the previous CBAs were. That's why I would rather see the players turn down the 50/50, see the two sides reach a complete stalemate, then see the owners pull all offers off the table. I don't think any of them can be happy with this deal. It seems to be a deal for the sake of making a deal. Recipe for more trouble and more floundering.

oak2455
11-03-2011, 04:11 PM
I don't understand how ppl are still posting after everything said...that being said this weekend I hope they settle...despite all that the poor players have gone through:rolleyes:

barreleffact
11-03-2011, 04:14 PM
Last personal comment ok? This thread is not about race. It is about the union's need to make a decision or possibly lose the entire season and a lot more money. Let's stick to that. I am letting this response go and would ask that no one responds. The thread may have run its course if we are this far off topic, in which case, it can be closed.

You would likely be better served just to delete mine and every comment that was off topic, honestly.

ink
11-03-2011, 04:16 PM
You would likely be better served just to delete mine and every comment that was off topic, honestly.

I think I got most of them. Let's just let it go and get back on topic. Thanks for the response. I appreciate that it is annoying to have your posts deleted but I'm just trying to guide the thread back on topic. :)

da ThRONe
11-03-2011, 04:49 PM
I agree. I see these negotiations as being critically flawed and the outcome may prove to be just as unworkable as the previous CBAs were. That's why I would rather see the players turn down the 50/50, see the two sides reach a complete stalemate, then see the owners pull all offers off the table. I don't think any of them can be happy with this deal. It seems to be a deal for the sake of making a deal. Recipe for more trouble and more floundering.

Yeah this could get really ugly for all parties involved. The only team that can really charge with ever whether they're good or not is the NYK. So we will see teams like the Mavs, Lakers, Heats, etc spending a ridiculous amount of money just in luxury taxes simply because their franchises worth are directly tied to being great. While the small/mid rev teams get the scrap players left over just to be able to stay under the lux tax and turn a profit.

UnWantedTheory
11-04-2011, 04:42 AM
If you want to make a profit, sell the team. If you want to own a sports team, deal with the realities of the sport (not a business but a sport)

The reality is that the sport is a business.

nate2usmc
11-04-2011, 09:14 AM
Ahhh INK, I wish I could respond to the "off-topic" issue!!!

but I'll stay on course :sigh:

Some of the 50 players willing to decertify are Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, Dwayne Wade and Dwight Howard. :facepalm:

nate2usmc
11-04-2011, 09:24 AM
The longer this drags on, the more disdain I have toward the players or whatever Bryant Gumbel calls them these days...

jezzyman05
11-04-2011, 09:38 AM
I think those few stars have that right. They have worked long enough to have a say. The newly drafted players should't be able to say anything by comparison. That's like a fresh soldier disagreeing with the CSM. The CSM has been in way longer, knows the game, and has earned his opinion.

I see no reason the players should just take whatever they can get, and if I were a star, I would travel overseas, decertify, wait on the ABA, start my own league with only a few teams like the NBA originally had. There are options. I would definitely do something because the owners are crazy. And there is no way I would sign any deal that would keep me or any player committed to a city for a career. That is just dumb.

The league should have: revenue sharing, 4 year max contracts guaranteed contracts, a more flexible trade option, less games, and a 52%+ split for the players. Lets face it. the players make the money. This league isn't like football with 16 game seasons. It is not like a corporation with thousands of workers (that are easily fired when outsourcing is cheaper). It isn't like anything else. The players should use their cards because nobody would watch a scrub league if the stars went elsewhere.

You guys are mostly on the wrong side. The owners represent economic slavery and cheap labor/outsourcing. You guys are in favor of them like the cops that beat up the occupy Wall-street protesters. It is sickening, honestly.

Words can not describe how stupid this bold statement is.....clearly you have no idea what you are talking about.........:facepalm:

sixer04fan
11-04-2011, 09:51 AM
Words can not describe how stupid this bold statement is.....clearly you have no idea what you are talking about.........:facepalm:

Haha trust me he took his fair share of hits after multiple comments like that, from myself and others... Most of them have been deleted in all fairness though.

nate2usmc
11-04-2011, 10:01 AM
Haha trust me he took his fair share of hits after multiple comments like that, from myself and others... Most of them have been deleted in all fairness though.

LOL apparently getting over certain ignorant aspects of the past will hinder progress :confused: GET OVER IT. It's all about hard work, focus and determination. The past is just an excuse. The POTUS said the same thing and came under fire for making sense. But he's probabaly a sellout now to barreleffact :pity:

Shmontaine
11-04-2011, 11:09 AM
get your jesus on, everybody...

beasted86
11-04-2011, 11:39 AM
But as it is the luxury tax proposal is a disaster. It will probably do the opposite of what is intended. I can't see a single owner really being happy with what they've accomplished. This new CBA is going to be another mess tbh. The big markets are going to pay massively to conduct business the way they currently do, but they'll do it. Basically the luxury tax punishment effectively allows rich teams to have salary caps of $120M+. And they'll spend it. I can't see any owner agreeing to watering down the already flawed salary cap.

That's the trade off and there's really no way around it.

You had owners making huge profits paying the luxury tax, all while working under 57%. You give them the ability to only pay 50% to the players, and any "punitive tax" you add on they are never going to really feel the effects of because now they are making a super profit paying players that much less. What they gained in lesser payroll just goes to the harder tax, and they are making the same profits they were before. Only smaller difference is teams will not go as far as before. Teams can only go $5-$10M into the tax instead of $15-20M like they were before.

The only thing the new tax system would do is hurt small market teams that occasionally would go into the tax to compete. Teams like Denver, Phoenix, Cleveland, and Orlando who over the past few years dipped into the tax to try and make a run while they had stars will no longer be able to afford to do that, because even under the first $5M tranche at a 1.5:1 ratio would cripple profits.

nate2usmc
11-04-2011, 11:46 AM
get your jesus on, everybody...

:sigh:


:pray: :pray: :pray:

ink
11-04-2011, 12:12 PM
That's the trade off and there's really no way around it.

You had owners making huge profits paying the luxury tax, all while working under 57%. You give them the ability to only pay 50% to the players, and any "punitive tax" you add on they are never going to really feel the effects of because now they are making a super profit paying players that much less. What they gained in lesser payroll just goes to the harder tax, and they are making the same profits they were before. Only smaller difference is teams will not go as far as before. Teams can only go $5-$10M into the tax instead of $15-20M like they were before.

The only thing the new tax system would do is hurt small market teams that occasionally would go into the tax to compete. Teams like Denver, Phoenix, Cleveland, and Orlando who over the past few years dipped into the tax to try and make a run while they had stars will no longer be able to afford to do that, because even under the first $5M tranche at a 1.5:1 ratio would cripple profits.

We may disagree on the need for a hard cap, but we definitely agree that this luxury tax proposal accomplishes little to nothing. My position all along has been that the previous two CBAs were bad compromises and this CBA is going to be a bad compromise. It will lead to more muddled contract negotiations where one side is demanding too much and the other is too tempted not to give in. From what I can gather, the luxury tax idea is simply a makeshift substitute for an actual functioning system.

topdog
11-04-2011, 12:28 PM
Ahhh INK, I wish I could respond to the "off-topic" issue!!!

but I'll stay on course :sigh:

Some of the 50 players willing to decertify are Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, Dwayne Wade and Dwight Howard. :facepalm:

Superstars are killing the league :(

I really feel like the wrong people are representing the players.

nate2usmc
11-04-2011, 12:32 PM
Superstars are killing the league :(

I really feel like the wrong people are representing the players.

That's where I'm coming from. Have the rookies even seen a dime of their contracts yet?

beasted86
11-04-2011, 12:41 PM
We may disagree on the need for a hard cap, but we definitely agree that this luxury tax proposal accomplishes little to nothing. My position all along has been that the previous two CBAs were bad compromises and this CBA is going to be a bad compromise. It will lead to more muddled contract negotiations where one side is demanding too much and the other is too tempted not to give in. From what I can gather, the luxury tax idea is simply a makeshift substitute for an actual functioning system.

It does accomplish the theory of competitive balance, because as I said teams will no longer go $90M into the luxury tax as the Lakers, Mavs, and Magic did last season. I don't care how big a wallet teams' owners have... role players aren't worth a 2.5:1 tax hit.

The reason why I only say theory is because while players were taking slightly less to play in bigger markets, they will only take increasingly less. So by way of less money spent, yes, the playing field will be leveled competitively. By by actual talent balance, the same will go on, because players will just take even less money to go where they want.

blahblahyoutoo
11-04-2011, 02:00 PM
We may disagree on the need for a hard cap, but we definitely agree that this luxury tax proposal accomplishes little to nothing. My position all along has been that the previous two CBAs were bad compromises and this CBA is going to be a bad compromise. It will lead to more muddled contract negotiations where one side is demanding too much and the other is too tempted not to give in. From what I can gather, the luxury tax idea is simply a makeshift substitute for an actual functioning system.

this is true.
the rich owners are still going to spend because they can, and the "poor" owners are going to find it even harder now to justify going over the cap.