No announcement yet.

The Lockout & the Raptors: Players approve CBA, Owners too! (1944)

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • MyMomLovesMe wrote: View Post
    If Canada had its own Basketball league, this lockout would be the golden moment of opportunity. Imagine all the players that would join the league due to proximity. Imagine the turnout for games in Hamilton or London, Ontario if they had one or two NBA players on their rosters.

    It's times like these, where 2nd'ary leagues earn their rep. Too bad we got nada, and the players have next to zero options on this continent.
    Well there is the newly founded NBL of Canada. The Quebec, Halifax and Saint John franchises from the PBL have decided to start their own league and have tentative agreements to put teams in Barrie, Oshawa, Kingston, London and Charlottetown, PEI. I don't think it's the type of league that you are thinking of necessarily - the entire salary cap for the teams will be 150k after all - but it's still going to be the only professional basketball league in Canada.

    I'm pumped for the upcoming year of NCAA. As down of a year I thought last season was from a talent perspective, the 2011-12 campaign should make up for it. There should be numerous great teams with a whole lot more elite players than we saw last year. Bring it on.


    • Great article from ESPN (I know, rarely is this trash considered 'great', but I thoroughly enjoyed the conversation.)

      Couple of snippets:

      2. Which player or team would benefit most from a shortened season?

      J.A. Adande, The Spurs. They could've used a shorter season in 2010-11, when they finished off a 57-13 start by losing 12 times in their final 18 games, including a first-round series loss to the Grizzlies. They got injured and looked tired at the end. Fifty games must sound really appealing right about now.

      Joe Gerrity, Hornets 247: The Spurs. They seem to be a little too old and creaky to go the distance lately. A shortened season could give them one more chance to steal a title before the dynasty fades into the distant past.

      Zach Harper, Daily Dime Live: If he were on a team, I'd have a killer Eddy Curry joke right now.

      Instead, I'll say Tim Duncan. If we end up with a 50-game season again, Timmy will be able to give the Spurs more on offense. Even if the games are jammed together, he can really let opponents have it on the block.

      Brendan Jackson, Celtics Hub: The Miami Heat and LeBron James. A shortened season is good for any young, athletic, streaky team, and Miami happens to be the best one. Veteran-laden teams need to add pieces, and those pieces have to build chemistry. The Heat proved that they can get to the Finals with James, Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh and a bag of balls.
      4. Whose side are you on: the owners' or the players'?

      J.A. Adande, I'm with the players. **People spend money to watch players play, not owners own.** NBA players have already accepted a salary cap, a rookie wage scale and a maximum salary, and owners still want more to cover their own mistakes. The owners are the ones who want to deprive us of basketball to suit their needs; **when the players are fiscally irresponsible they don't shut down the league.** (HE STOLE THE WORDS RIGHT OUT OF MY MOUTH.)
      Jared Wade, 8 Points, 9 Seconds: The hot dog vendors. So far, neither side seems to be negotiating in earnest. There has been no urgency, and both camps have dug in, resigned to the inevitability of a lockout that is now imminent. And if this delay in taking the negotiations seriously in favor of juvenile posturing leads to missed games, it won't be the millionaires or the billionaires who suffer the most.
      Last edited by Joey; Mon Jul 4, 2011, 11:07 AM.


      • David Aldridge on the lockout. A good read.


        • Key dates according to

          The problem with a lock out of players having been imposed is it now resets the clock.

          Both sides of this dispute were trying aggressively to reach a deal before the July 1st deadline. With no deal in hand and with the hammer of a work stoppage having fallen, the clock resets to a date much further down the calendar.
          NBA Training Camps are schedule to open the first week of October, meaning in order for a season to go off unaffected by this, a deal would need to be reached in September, meaning both sides can again posture on a deal without having to make any real progress for at least 70 days.

          That's not to say a deal couldn't be reached before September, it is just far more likely that the labor deal that gets done gets done at the 11th hour than early in the process.

          The NBA Players' Association says it wants to scrap the existing offers on the table from both sides and craft a new deal together with the Owners.

          If that is genuinely what's going to happen, then the process will be starting from square one again, and the NBA lockout will continue for several more months.

          The key dates to know:

          September 15th (72 days): It will be almost impossible to pull off free agency, training camp and a full preseason if a deal is not reached by September 15th.

          October 1st (88 days): It will be impossible to have a full slate of pre-season games if a deal is not in place by October 1st, in fact failing to have a deal by October 1 jeopardizes regular season games.

          November 1st (119 days): Failing to reach a deal before November 1st means regular season games are missed and a full 82 game season is lost.

          January 6th (185 days): This was the drop dead date in 1999 and should be viewed as the last day to make a deal. A deal in January means no All-Star game and a compressed regular season.

          February 1st (211 days): If a deal is not reached by February 1st the entire 2011-2012 season will be lost and the Players will lose $2.1 billion in salaries and benefits

          So while labor meetings are a good thing, don'expect a lot to happen on the labor front in the NBA, mainly because it does not have to.

          The NBA's Lockout simply buys both sides more time, let's hope they use this time to reach a deal not build further impasses to making a deal.

          Read more NBA news and insight:


          • There is some really good information on this page. Thanks for posting it Matt, Brandon and Joey.


            • http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...medium=twitter

              At midnight on Thursday, the N.B.A. locked out its players in what could be the start of a long labor dispute. Some observers, like ESPN’s Michael Wilbon, believe the entire 2011-12 season could be threatened.

              Such a move would not be without precedent: the N.H.L. canceled its 2004-5 season. But the N.B.A.’s current financial condition is different than the N.H.L.’s in one important respect. Whereas there was almost no doubt that the N.H.L. was in fact losing money in advance of its lockout — player salaries had mushroomed by more than 400 percent from 1994 to 2004, according to independent estimates — the N.B.A.’s claims of financial hardship should be viewed more skeptically.

              Instead, independent estimates of the N.B.A. financial condition reflect a league that has grown at a somewhat tepid rate compared to other sports, and which has an uneven distribution of revenues between teams — but which is fundamentally a healthy and profitable business. In addition, it is not clear that growth in player salaries, which has been modest compared to other sports and which is strictly pegged to league revenue, is responsible for the league’s difficulties.

              Put another way, there is no reason to assume that the N.B.A.’s actual financial condition falls somewhere in between the two figures: it may be just as likely that Forbes is underestimating rather overestimating the league’s profits. For instance, The Times reports the league’s revenues (not profits) to have been $4.3 billion in 2010-11, more than the $3.8 billion estimated by Forbes for 2009-10. (One reason that the Forbes estimates could be too low: it has become more difficult to measure ticket revenue since teams are now designating some of their most expensive tickets as ‘premium seating,’ and these seats are not reflected in publicly-available estimates of ticket prices.)

              None of this means that the N.B.A. is without problems. For instance, the sluggish growth in ticket revenues may suggest that the league’s fans, who are younger than those for other sports and more likely to be African-American, are being priced out of the stadium experience.

              In addition, the fact that a significant number of teams are failing to turn a profit, even by the Forbes estimates, reflects a potential lack of competitive balance in the league. Since 1990, a total of eight distinct N.B.A. teams have won a championship, compared to 13 teams in each of the other major sports leagues. Although some of this has to do with factors intrinsic to the structure of basketball, the current salary cap rules may worsen matters by limiting player movement, making it difficult for teams to rebuild. Fans in many cities have little realistic hope of seeing a championship any time soon.

              Nor does this mean that we aren’t in for a long lockout. Rather, the fact that the N.B.A. has released financial data that is so at odds with estimates provided by credible and unbiased organizations like Forbes suggests that the league’s owners are armed to win the public relations battle — a key part of what could be a yearlong war of words with their players.

              Beginning and end above. The middle has some interesting stuff too.



                Do you think some NBA players will make the bounce? It would be really nice!


                • Post #216 had a link to an article by NYTimes blog questioning the financial losses of the league. Obviously this struck a nerve with David Stern. Here is the rebuttal:

                  NBA responds to blog based on inaccurate info The league office released this official statement earlier this evening:

                  The information from Forbes that serves as the basis for this article is inaccurate and we do not know how they do their calculations. Forbes does not have the financial data for our teams and the magazine's estimates do not reflect reality.
                  Precisely to avoid this issue, the NBA and its teams shared their complete league and team audited financials as well as our state and Federal tax returns with the Players Union. Those financials demonstrate the substantial and indisputable losses the league has incurred over the past several years.
                  The analysis that was posted this afternoon has several significant factual inaccuracies, including:
                  "(The NBA) is a fundamentally healthy and profitable business"

                  • The league lost money every year of the just expiring CBA. During these years, the league has never had positive Net Income, EBITDA or Operating Income.
                  "Many of the purported losses result from an unusual accounting treatment related to depreciation and amortization when a team is sold."

                  • We use the conventional and generally accepted accounting (GAAP) approach and include in our financial reporting the depreciation of the capital expenditures made in the normal course of business by the teams as they are a substantial and necessary cost of doing business.
                  We do not include purchase price amortization from when a team is sold or under any circumstances in any of our reported losses. Put simply, none of the league losses are related to team purchase or sale accounting.
                  "Another trick...moving income from the team's balance sheet to that of a related business like a cable network..."

                  • All revenues included in Basketball Related Income ("BRI") and reported in our financial statements have been audited by an accounting firm jointly engaged by the players' union and the league. They include basketball revenues reported on related entities' books.
                  "Ticket revenues... are up 22% compared to 1999-2000 season"

                  • Ticket revenues have increased 12% over the 10 year period, not the 22% reported.
                  "17 teams lost money according to Forbes ... Most of these losses were small..."

                  • Forbes' claim is inaccurate. In 2009-10, 23 teams had net income losses. The losses were in no way "small" as 11 teams lost more than $20M each on a net income basis.
                  "The profits made by the Knicks, Bulls and Lakers alone would be enough to cover the losses of all 17 unprofitable teams."

                  • The Knicks, Bulls and Lakers combined net income for 2009-10 does not cover the losses of the 23 unprofitable teams. Our net loss for that year, including the gains from the seven profitable teams, was -$340 million.
                  "Forbes's estimates -- a $183 million profit for the NBA in 2009-10, and those issued by the league, which claim a $370M loss..."

                  • Forbes's data is inaccurate. Our losses for 2009-10 were -$340 million, not -$370 million as the article states.
                  "The leaked financial statements for one team, the New Orleans Hornets, closely matched the Forbes data..."

                  • This is not an accurate statement as operating income in the latest Forbes data (2009-10) is $5M greater than what is reported in the Hornets audited financials.


                  • until stern shows me his books, I'll trust independent analysts, even if they are estimating.
                    "They're going to have to rename the whole conference after us: Toronto Raptors 2014-2015 Northern Conference Champions" ~ ezzbee Dec. 2014

                    "I guess I got a little carried away there" ~ ezzbee Apr. 2015

                    "We only have one rule on this team. What is that rule? E.L.E. That's right's, E.L.E, and what does E.L.E. stand for? EVERYBODY LOVE EVERYBODY. Right there up on the wall, because this isn't just a basketball team, this is a lifestyle. ~ Jackie Moon


                    • ezz_bee wrote: View Post
                      until stern shows me his books, I'll trust independent analysts, even if they are estimating.
                      Thing is, even if you take the NBA at its word, a lot of the proposed "solutions" don't really seem to solve the systemic problem. If certain markets aren't making money then you can slice up the BRI pie anyway you want but it won't really benefit the bad-market teams over the long run - if BRI keeps increasing cause the increases are all going to be from the exact same teams making money now. The NHL is the perfect example of this. Same with a hard cap. The hard cap just keeps going up.

                      The only solution to the bad-market problem is revenue sharing like the NFL has done. Of course, that ticks off the good-market teams that are the backbone of the entire league but I don't see any other long-term solution for certain markets.


                      • what occurs if by the end of next season there is no agreement?
                        (not like i think this will happen but..) Could the NBA dissolve completely because of a lockout, or would there be some serious court action to save the league?
                        The Baltic Beast is unstoppable!


                        • ezz_bee wrote: View Post
                          until stern shows me his books, I'll trust independent analysts, even if they are estimating.
                          Im sorry but no NYtime Blogger could convince me with those kind of stats. The NBA and the owners are not HAPPY about this lockout, if there was no real economic issue with the league, there would be no lockout.
                          The Baltic Beast is unstoppable!


                          • No one is disputing that there is an economic issue, its just that its a world issue, and the league is using its leverage to get a new CBA advantageous to the current economic plight.

                            The players did not get locked out out in the middle of the old CBA. The lockout, co-incites with a new deal that is to be structured for another decade or so.

                            The league is in a good place, the average guy cutting his grass, paying his cable and occasionally putting on the NBA can not understand these ridiculous sums of money the players are making, especially when his prospects are so lowly.

                            The league is playing it off like the players are the greedy ones even though they have not done anything but abide by the last terms the NBA locked them out for, and the OWNERS & Stern themselves 'of course' are immune to greed, they only want what is right for the game.

                            Those of us who have followed the economic side of this game, know that the owners are the greedier of the bunch. They are the ones in control of the ship, and they should bear responsibility for its management. The last CBA was advantageous to the owners like no other in this leagues history.

                            The other thing to consider is that all the losses that are being shown in operational expenses can be written off in capital gains many years down the road. The franchise values continue to increase, and what momentary pitfalls we find ourselves in now, are by no means an indicator of the health of this brand.

                            There is a lot of acting on the part of the owners, and I understand that the average fan does not want to really dig too deeply into the facts. We have lives, but there is a lot calculated risk being taken to gain a better position, mainly at the expense of fans, and the timming is right to take advantage of the PU.
                            Last edited by MyMomLovesMe; Thu Jul 7, 2011, 04:41 PM.


                            • Personally, I like that players can make large sums of money. It is the one thing in this world, that I know a kid in the slums of Brazil can suddenly become someone if they work hard.

                              The benefits for hard work and dedication are there for all to see, maybe this is why I like PRO ATHLETES. The transparency of it all. They represent the common man amongst us rising above it all by sheer will and determination and heart.

                              I trust the athletes more so than I do the owners. They made it by honing their physical skill, the owners made it by honing their tactical skills.


                              • Great posts MMLM. I fully agree. Couldn't have said it better myself.