Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bendit
    replied
    I dont see where a Heat scenario signings of at least 2 max deals cannot be repeated in the future. They just have to time it again where they have a bare bones team for a year (get way under the cap), tank a season...get a high draft choice and sign 2 great talent f/as each to 20 mill contracts and have enough to fill out the roster for a theoretically good to great team.

    Leave a comment:


  • RaptorsFan4Life
    replied

    Leave a comment:


  • Apollo
    replied
    They have no mechanism in place in this CBA to keep star players in town. I see no franchise tag even. This is a load of crap. I may sound like a broken record here but this is biggest load of crap I've seen in a while. Big talk, no walk.

    Leave a comment:


  • mcHAPPY
    replied
    Apollo wrote: View Post
    Yeah but even then it's kind of a let down. I think both sides didn't want to go to court.

    It really irks me that extend and trades aren't going away. They're abolishing sign and trades all together and so now what's going to happen is that the player will cause the disruption during the season leading up to free agency. Abolishing S&T is kind of pointless if you're going to keep the E&T in play. The same crap is going to happen, it's just going to happen earlier now.
    It bothers me too - especially the 2 year wait. But if a player is willing to accept $45M less guaranteed, then so be it.

    I think it had more to do with sponsorship agreement and national TV deal having approaching out clauses in case of labour disputes causing work stoppage. I feel it is safe to say there will be an opt out in 2018.

    Sign and trades not abolished. Tax teams cannot participate in one that takes them $4M over the luxury tax. Two non tax teams can most definitely participate in such a trade.
    Last edited by mcHAPPY; Sat Nov 26, 2011, 11:28 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Apollo
    replied
    Yeah but even then it's kind of a let down. I think both sides didn't want to go to court.

    It really irks me that extend and trades aren't going away. They're abolishing sign and trades all together and so now what's going to happen is that the player will cause the disruption during the season leading up to free agency. Abolishing S&T is kind of pointless if you're going to keep the E&T in play. The same crap is going to happen, it's just going to happen earlier now.
    Last edited by Apollo; Sat Nov 26, 2011, 11:28 PM. Reason: .

    Leave a comment:


  • mcHAPPY
    replied
    Apollo wrote: View Post
    So basically everything the Owners were fighting for, which benefited the fans, has been tossed aside to seize a bigger chunk of the BRI. They better get team revenue sharing done after this.

    The Owners are dropping a lot of terms. I don't care what some players are saying they're dropping because to me it looks like the Owners are caving more at this point.
    For the first two years - it looks like.

    Any real systemic changes that could alter 'competitive balance' won't come for 2 years.

    Leave a comment:


  • Apollo
    replied
    So basically everything the Owners were fighting for, which benefited the fans, has been tossed aside to seize a bigger chunk of the BRI. They better get team revenue sharing done after this.

    The Owners are dropping a lot of terms. I don't care what some players are saying they're dropping because to me it looks like the Owners are caving more at this point.

    Leave a comment:


  • mcHAPPY
    replied
    I wish I had seen this before I looked through CBS article looking for differences in proposal 2 weeks ago and this tentative agreement. Memo from Billy Hunter:


    The parties settled the litigation because the owners either gave in or sufficiently compromised on all of the open issues:

    1. BRI Split - Players receive a 49-51 band of BRI, with the expectation that players will receive 51% of BRI by year 6. The split is set on a base case of 50%, with the players receiving 60.5% of every incremental dollar beyond the targeted amount, which is based on the mid-point of the agreed upon projections, or a symmetrical reduction in our share if revenues fall short of the targeted amount. The players' share this first season (2011-12) will be 51.2% of BRI.

    2. System

    a. Mid-Level Exception for Non-Taxpayers: The Mid-Level Exception's contract length is 4 years, every year.

    b. Player Options: Player options are allowed for all players, as per the prior CBA. Owners dropped their demand to eliminate player options for high-paid players.

    c. Escrow: 10% max withholding, 1% New Benefits Pool, system adjustments as necessary to avoid forecasted overage. Owners dropped their demand for unlimited escrow, carry over, true up, or banking.

    d. Qualifying Offers: Beginning in 2012-13, players defined as "starters" - 41 games started or 2000 minutes, average over prior 2 seasons - will receive substantially higher qualifying offers. A first-round pick will receive the greater of his existing qualifying offer or the qualifying offer amount made to the 9th pick of the draft ($4.67 million for the 2010-11 draft class). A second-round pick or undrafted player will receive the qualifying offer amount made to the 21st pick. A first-round pick drafted 1-14 who is not a "starter" receives the amount offered to the 15th pick.

    e. Max Salary: A player finishing his rookie scale contract will be eligible to receive a maximum salary equal to 30% of the Cap (up from 25%) if he signs with his prior team and is either: 1st, 2nd or 3rd team All-NBA 2 times; an All-Star starter 2 times; or 1-time MVP.

    f. Minimum Salary: The owners dropped their demand to reduce the minimum salary scale by 12%. The current amounts will not be reduced.

    g. Rookie Scale: The owners dropped their demand to cut the rookie wage scale. The current amounts will not be reduced.

    h. Extend-and-Trade: The owners dropped their demand to eliminate extend-and-trades. As with sign-and-trades, players moving pursuant to an extend-and-trade may not receive Bird annual increases or one year longer maximum contract length.

    i. Annual Increases: Annual increases will be set at 7.5% for Bird players and 4.5% for non-Bird players.

    j. Taxpayers' Use of Mid-Level Exception & Sign-and-Trade: The owners agreed to a $4 million "apron" above the tax threshold. Teams may go above the tax threshold by $4 million to use the entire $5 million mid-level exception, or acquire a player via sign-and-trade. Teams above the $4 million apron may use a $3 million/3-year mid-level exception every year.

    k. Cliff: No change to prior proposal to reduce the cliff by 50%.

    http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/pos...emo-to-players

    I have picked up on one discrepancy between league and players:

    League says extend and trade is 3 year deal, Billy says 4 years.

    Leave a comment:


  • mcHAPPY
    replied
    A good example of the significance to changes for max players coming off rookie deal:

    KCJHoop K.C Johnson
    That MVP DRose won? Expected to take his max salary extension from $14.5M to $17.4M in Year One. And from $84.2M to $101.6M overall. Wow.

    Leave a comment:


  • mcHAPPY
    replied
    Three things to remember:

    1. Sign and trade restriction for tax team does not start until 2013-14 (cannot exceed luxury tax by $4M)


    2 .
    ZachLowe_SI Zach Lowe
    League source tells me repeater tax clock starts immediately w/ '11-12 season.

    3.
    ZachLowe_SI Zach Lowe
    Fundamental thing to remember: Two-year grace period before harsher luxury tax kicks in. Huge for Dallas and the Lakers. Boston, too.

    Expect things to pretty much run the same for 2011-12 and 2012-13.

    Leave a comment:


  • mcHAPPY
    replied
    SUMMARY

    So this is what the players achieved holding out:

    a few tenths of a percent of BRI if revenue projections go beyond projections;

    3 year mini-MLE with 3% raise in year three

    full MLE are 4 years - no alternating 4-3-4-3-4-3-etc years;

    the repeater tax - tax payer 4 of 5 years - is an additional $1 for $1 (owners wanted $1.50);

    no restrictions on sign and trades for 2 years, afterwards only for tax teams if doesn't exceed $4M beyond tax;

    extend and trades permitted but with 3 year deal and 4.5% raises (versus 5 years and $7.5% to resign);

    increased qualifying offers, especially for players with high performance on rookie deal;

    escrow will be 10% and owners dropped demand for carryover to future years in any way, shape, or form;

    players added 1% raises to original proposal (7.5% Bird/4.5% FA versus 6.5% Bird/3.5% FA);

    no cut to rookie or minimum contracts;

    player options remain - owners wanted them only to have choice to opt out with $0 owed;

    Leave a comment:


  • mcHAPPY
    replied
    Berger with the most comprehensive breakdown of the proposed 'settlement' I have seen:

    * BRI: The players will receive between 49-51 percent of basketball-related income based on the extent of revenue growth. But whereas under the owners' prior proposals, the players felt it would've been nearly impossible to achieve the 51 percent ceiling, sources said they'll have a realistic chance of hitting it by the fifth or sixth year of the deal with robust revenue growth. The players will receive 60.5 percent of incremental revenues beyond projections each season, up to 51 percent in aggregate. Previously, the owners were offering only 57 percent of marginal revenues up to a total of 51.

    * Mid-level exception: For non-tax-paying teams, they're four-year deals starting at $5 million in the first two years, with the starting point increasing by 3 percent in subsequent years. Owners had been pushing for alternating 3- and 4-year deals for non-taxpayers. For tax-payers, the so-called "mini" mid-level will be for three years starting at $3 million in the first two years, with the starting point increasing 3 percent in subsequent years. This is an enhancement of the owners' previous offer of a two-year "mini" mid-level starting at $2.5 million.

    * Room exception: Teams under the cap get an additional two-year exception starting at $2.5 million (same as previous offer).

    * Luxury tax rates: The same dollar-for-dollar as in the previous CBA for the first two years. Starting in Year 3, the rates increase to $1.50 for the first $5 million over; $1.75 for $5-$10 million over; $2.50 for $10-$15 million over; $3.25 for $15-$25 million over; and an additional 50 cents for each additional $5 million (same as previous proposal).

    * Repeater Tax: A dollar-for-dollar additional tax for teams that are above the tax line for a fourth time in five years (same as previous proposal). Owners at one time had been pushing for a $1.50 repeater rate, while the players wanted 50 cents. Voila, compromise.

    * Sign-and-trades: Available to all teams in the first two years of the agreement. Starting in Year 3, teams that are close to the tax line would only be able to acquire a free agent via a sign-and-trade transaction to the extent that it put the team no more than $4 million over the tax. The maximum length of such contracts will be four years with 4.5 percent annual increases. Previously, the owners had been seeking to eliminate sign-and-trades for all tax teams or teams that would exceed the tax after the transaction. This was a key issue for the players, and the more player-friendly definition of a tax-paying team also applies to use of the mid-level exception. So, if a team is $500,000 under the tax, it could use $4.5 million of the full mid-level. If a team already is over the tax, it would be restricted to the "mini" mid-level.

    * Extend-and-trades: With the so-called Carmelo Anthony rule, owners were trying to take away a player's ability to force a trade to a team and sign an extension. The compromise is that teams can acquire player via an extend-and-trade but can only offer a three-year deal (including whatever is left on the player's contract) with 4.5 percent increases.

    * Qualifying offers: The players feel they made significant gains here for restricted free agents. Qualifying offers will be guaranteed with the potential to be significantly enhanced based on performance. So for example, a first-round pick between picks 10-30 would be eligible to receive a qualifying offer as high as the ninth pick's if he's a starter for half the regular season games or 2,000 minutes. Second-round picks and undrafted players could be eligible for QO’s as high as the 21st pick based on the same criteria. Similarly, picks 1-14 could have their qualifying offers reduced if they don't meet the criteria. It's a nice compromise that provides opportunities for players who perform and gives owners protection against having to overpay players who don't.

    * Escrow: Withholding from player paychecks to account for a potential overage in their BRI share is capped at 10 percent. Owners dropped their demand for an escrow carryover from season to season.

    * New player benefits pool: One percent of BRI will be used for annuities and welfare benefits (such as health, life and disability insurance, long-term care and education expenses for themselves and their children). In the unlikely event that 10 percent doesn't cover the players' BRI overage, up to 1 percent of the pool could be used to account for that.

    * Contract lengths: All the same as in the previous proposal. Bird free agents can get five-year deals with their own teams, with other deals being capped at four years. Each team can designate one player eligible for a five-year extension of his rookie contract with his own team. A team can have only one player so designated on the roster at a time. The owners had been pushing for four- and three-year contract lengths until recently.

    * Annual increases: 7.5 percent for Bird players, 4.5 percent for others. This is up from 6.5 percent and 3.5 percent, respectively, in the owners' prior proposal.

    * Minimum salaries and rookie scale: Frozen for the first two years and then will begin growing consistent with BRI growth. Previously, owners were seeking to cut both by 12 percent -- another win for the players.

    * Maximum salaries: Same formula as in the previous CBA, with this exception in the players' favor: Star players who outperform their rookie contracts will be eligible to extend with their teams at 30 percent of the cap -- up from 25 percent. A player would be eligible by satisfying any of the following criteria: 1) winning MVP; 2) being named first-, second- or third-team all-NBA twice; or being voted as an All-Star starter twice. The Bulls' Derrick Rose, for example, would be eligible.

    * Player options: Same as in the previous CBA. Owners had been seeking to eliminate player options for players who make more than the league average.

    * Stretch and amnesty provisions: Same as in the prior proposal.

    * The luxury tax cliff: Same as most recent proposal. Owners have agreed that a tax-paying team will only lose half the tax money it otherwise would've received by remaining under the tax.

    * Minimum team payroll: It's set at 85 percent of the cap in the first two years, and 90 percent thereafter. The cap ($58 million) and tax ($70 million) levels can be no lower than last season's levels in the first two years.

    * Deal length: 10 years, with each side able to opt out after Year 6. (Same as previous proposal.)

    Source: Berger, CBSSports.com

    Leave a comment:


  • Bendit
    replied
    Matt52 wrote: View Post
    From the horses mouth. Extend and trades are for only 3 seasons - two years less than players could get resigning with original team. That would be a sacrifice of $46M guaranteed.
    That is terrific. We are just going to have to wait for the final document to really assess all the issues. I would be quite surprised if there is not at least one important item that might be contentitious when put into written/legalese form (from what was understood to be discussed). This is a complicated document (understatement!).

    Thank you for keeping us all informed.

    Leave a comment:


  • mcHAPPY
    replied
    RaptorDan wrote: View Post
    Thanks Matt. You kept me informed throughout the CBA negotiations with the most up to date information and interesting articles. I'm happy that we will soon get to see some basketball. Cheers.
    No problem. I hope we get some live Raptors action soon too.

    File this one under: Buzz Kill


    If all goes as planned, the free agency period will begin on Dec. 9, the regular season will begin on Christmas Day and the players' and owners' agreement will last 10 years, with each side able to opt-out after six.
    All may not go as planned, however, as the league and its players -- some of whom are playing overseas -- still have a number of pressing obstacles to overcome in what are shaping up as frantic days ahead.

    Contentious "B-List" issues remain

    Put bluntly, owners and players have not yet resolved the so-called "B list" issues and have little time to do so. The "B-list" moniker understates the importance of these issues and why they could throw a wrench into the new-found labor harmony.

    The list includes the NBA's controversial "one-and-done" eligibility rule, which under the expired CBA required that U.S. players be 19 years old plus one year removed from high school. The NBA would like to see the rule changed so that eligible players are at least 20 years old plus two years removed from high school, as players would then play longer in college and be easier to market when they enter the league. Such a change would mean that two of the top three prospects for the 2012 NBA draft -- Connecticut freshman Andre Drummond and Kentucky freshman Anthony Davis -- would be ineligible until the 2013 draft. The players' association has long opposed raising the eligibility rule on grounds of fairness and irrationality (as SI.com's Zach Lowe recently explained), but did so in 2005 when it agreed to raise the limit from 18 years old to 19 as part of the now-expired CBA.

    The union will probably compromise this time around as well since, A) raising the limit would only directly impact those players not yet in the union and thus those who have no voice and; B) a higher limit would mean that more veterans keep their jobs every year. Still, there are many NBA players who believe firmly in not raising the age restriction and this is not an easy issue to resolve over a weekend.

    Other unresolved "B-list" items include the NBA's demand for a third round in the NBA draft (another round would allow teams to control and set costs for more of the available labor pool) and a tougher drug testing policy (both NFL and MLB players have agreed to stricter testing, including testing for Human Growth Hormone, in their new CBAs). The two sides similarly disagree about the commissioner's powers to discipline players, the Development League's operations as a true minor league for developing talent and the calculation of pension benefits.

    While the players and league have made progress in reconciling the B list, their focus has understandably lied elsewhere. Yet they do not have much time to reach a total agreement: If they cannot work out remaining issues, the players are unlikely to withdraw their lawsuit, and free agency starting on Dec. 9 and a season starting on Dec. 25 would become less and less likely.

    It is possible that owners and players could borrow from the labor-relations playbook of their NFL counterparts from earlier this summer. After resolving the main issues that gave rise to the NFL's lockout, the NFL and its players could not completely agree on HGH testing procedures. Instead of allowing their disagreement to prevent consummation of a new CBA, the two sides essentially punted and agreed to deal with HGH testing later. While their strategy has led to Congressional hearings and further disagreements, they -- more importantly -- played the 2011 season. Particularly in regards to drug testing or even eligibility (the next NBA draft is not until June 2012), the NBA and NBA players could similarly postpone finalized details until a later date. However, the league could be wary of such a maneuver; it would have to be certain to later reach an agreement with players, since the could not impose any additional details without those details being subject to antitrust law and the risk of treble damages.


    Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz1eqpHDPnH
    Article goes on to talk about legal system stuff and ends with:

    Can all of these steps happen in a mere few weeks? Sure. But even a small hiccup could prevent NBA fans from getting what they want most on Christmas Day.

    Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz1eqpuJYXS

    Leave a comment:


  • RaptorDan
    replied
    Thanks Matt. You kept me informed throughout the CBA negotiations with the most up to date information and interesting articles. I'm happy that we will soon get to see some basketball. Cheers.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X