Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

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

  • • Do not underestimate the owners' obsession with creating a competitive system that mimics the NFL, through whatever vehicle gets them there.
    "In the NFL, every team has a chance," one team executive said. "That's what makes it great, and we don't have that. We're like Euro League. Until we have revenue sharing and a hard cap, we not going to be a fair league."

    http://ken-berger.blogs.cbssports.co...38893/32801973
    The report cited sources that said the players would accept 52 percent of BRI and the owners would accept 49 percent, leaving the sides about $85 million to $90 million apart on the division of over $4 billion in annual revenue.

    http://www.hoopsworld.com/nba-owners...closer-on-bri/

    Given that Billy Hunter said they could reach an agreement in 2 hours if the owners were willing to negotiate, I'm not too sure as we pass the 7 hour mark of 'negotiations'.

    Comment


    • jimmie wrote: View Post
      You think the league couldn't generate revenues without Lebron? Nonsense -- they'll just prop up and saturate the market with the Next Big Thing, and fans will lap it up. The game is bigger than any player. I loved Magic vs Bird, but I didn't stop watching the NBA when they retired. There will always be elite athletes to draw the attention of fans. The league can withstand the loss of ANY of these guys and still make a huge profit. That marketing power is what the owners and their money bring to the table in this "partnership" that isn't really a partnership at all, but an over-glorified employee/employer relationship.
      Never said the league couldn't generate revenues. I said they couldn't generate AS MUCH. And that's a FACT.
      I remember reading that Kobe Bryant, on his own, brings in $70M for Jerry Buss Every Season.
      You don't think that if you add up what Kobe, Lebron, Wade, Durant, Rose, CP etc. all contribute, and take that out of the Overall BRI number, it wouldn't be SIGNIFICANTLY smaller? Of course it would. And it'd be ALOT more than the 3% the Owners are insisting on getting.

      You can't serve someone a Burger, and expect them to pay for a Steak.
      If the owners tried to turn around and tell me that Earl Clark is the best Player in the world, and he's some Elite Level player, I would LAUGH at the NBA and Never Give it another thought. I can promise more than a few fans would do the same.

      I don't care what anybody says, the NBA is NOT the NBA without the Best Players in the World. Period.
      That's it. There's no two ways about it.
      If they want to generate the most money, they have to pay the most to the best players.
      That is how the world works.

      You can't take away Kobe and Lebron and DWade and Dirk, and still try and tell people its the best in the World, while Luke Walton and Ridnour are making All-Star teams.
      Last edited by Joey; Tue Oct 18, 2011, 07:31 PM.

      Comment


      • Something to consider....

        I can't believe I did not think or realize this before.


        What three teams have the most to lose in a hard(er) cap situation?

        LAL, BOS, and MIA.


        What three stars showed up October 4th derailing progress?

        KOBE, KG, and Wade.


        Coincidence? I don't think so.

        Comment


        • "I don't care what anybody says, the NBA is NOT the NBA without the Best Players in the World. Period.
          That's it. There's no two ways about it.
          If they want to generate the most money, they have to pay the most to the best players.
          That is how the world works."

          You could drop out the top twenty highest paid NBA players in the league and still have the best league in the world but the NBA would save $362,000,000. Hell, drop the top 30 and reduce roster spots to 14 and save another $147,000,000. Unbelievable but the top 30 players salaries adds up to over a half a billion dollars. http://hoopshype.com/salaries.htm

          I would enjoy the game almost as much without those guys, and in 4 years you would hardly be able to see any difference in play because other guys would get more time and step up, new players would flood into the league and in a reshuffled deck league competitiveness would improve for at least a few years.

          Comment


          • Puffer wrote: View Post
            You could drop out the top twenty highest paid NBA players in the league and still have the best league in the world but the NBA would save $362,000,000. Hell, drop the top 30 and reduce roster spots to 14 and save another $147,000,000. Unbelievable but the top 30 players salaries adds up to over a half a billion dollars. http://hoopshype.com/salaries.htm

            I would enjoy the game almost as much without those guys, and in 4 years you would hardly be able to see any difference in play because other guys would get more time and step up, new players would flood into the league and in a reshuffled deck league competitiveness would improve for at least a few years.
            Are you implying that just because Rashard Lewis is making the most money, he's the the best player in the league?
            That is not how it works.
            I said best players. Not highest paid. BIG difference.

            And I'm not talking about 20 or 30 guys.
            Imagine the players go off and create their own league with Nike and Reebok and a select few owners (couple Chinese Businessmen, maybe a few Russians. Maybe Mark Zuckerberg? "The Golden State Facebooks" would generate some Buzz, I'm sure. haha You've already got more wealth than all of the NBA owners combined.) who are willing to try it out. You don't think they couldn't recruit the Top 150 guys, on the premise that there are no restrictions on salary? Betcha they could.



            I am also wondering what is being put in place that will stop Mr. Moneybags from giving Yogi Stewart his $7M?
            IF Moneybags feels Yogi deserves it at the time, (which is the ONLY way they would actually sign a contract like that) whats stopping him from doing so? And as SOON as he does, the system is broken again, as that sets the Market Value for anyone to say "Look what Yogi got. I deserve more."
            Only with a Hard Cap, they have even less room to fix their mistake.
            Last edited by Joey; Tue Oct 18, 2011, 08:11 PM.

            Comment


            • And I'm curious; do you guys think that Movie Stars deserve the money they make?
              I mean $20M to stand in front of a camera?? Crazy. They should take their $2M and Suck-it.
              And if a movie doesn't generate the kind of Box Office stubs it expects, they should give some of it back.


              Sure they could hire some No Name Guy and pay him $10.
              But they hire Tom Cruise, and Denzel and Johnny Depp because they bring in the REAL money.
              Spend money to make money.

              I don't see any Movie Producers after a HUGE flop, and lost $100M on ONE MOVIE, saying, "Oh Poor me, The System is broken. It forced me to pay so-and-so that much."

              (I realize they are different systems, but they are both paid-for-entertainment industies, and both part of an American Labor Union. So I'm a little curious.)
              Last edited by Joey; Tue Oct 18, 2011, 08:12 PM.

              Comment


              • joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
                Never said the league couldn't generate revenues. I said they couldn't generate AS MUCH. And that's a FACT.
                I remember reading that Kobe Bryant, on his own, brings in $70M for Jerry Buss Every Season.
                You don't think that if you add up what Kobe, Lebron, Wade, Durant, Rose, CP etc. all contribute, and take that out of the Overall BRI number, it wouldn't be SIGNIFICANTLY smaller? Of course it would. And it'd be ALOT more than the 3% the Owners are insisting on getting.

                You can't serve someone a Burger, and expect them to pay for a Steak.
                If the owners tried to turn around and tell me that Earl Clark is the best Player in the world, and he's some Elite Level player, I would LAUGH at the NBA and Never Give it another thought. I can promise more than a few fans would do the same.

                I don't care what anybody says, the NBA is NOT the NBA without the Best Players in the World. Period.
                That's it. There's no two ways about it.
                If they want to generate the most money, they have to pay the most to the best players.
                That is how the world works.

                You can't take away Kobe and Lebron and DWade and Dirk, and still try and tell people its the best in the World, while Luke Walton and Ridnour are making All-Star teams.
                I read sometime last year that when Lebron James left Cleveland the value of the Cavaliers was estimated to drop 25%, approx. 110 mil dollars. (from 440 mil to 330 mil or something like that)

                Cleveland actually sold tickets pretty well last season (and if I remember the article correctly part of that was due to pre purchased season tickets, but do not quote me on that, and reduced ticket prices) . What I'd love to see is a comaprison between the Cavs revenues between 2009/10 and 2010/11.

                Would people still watch NBA basketball without Lebron James, Kobe, Dwight etc? Sure they would. But not as many will go, they will not go as often and they won't spend as much to do it.

                Comment


                • MEMPHIS, Tenn. - The city of Memphis is considering getting involved in the NBA owners' lockout of the players. Memphis taxpayers stand to lose a lot of money if game revenue doesn't come in to pay off the bonds used to build the FedExForum.

                  Early estimates show the taxpayers could be on the hook for $18 million if the entire season is cancelled.

                  With the first two weeks of regular season games already cancelled, the city says it wants to stay proactive. At the suggestion of Chairman Myron Lowry, the council is considering a resolution that would ask City Council Attorney Allan Wade to explore all options, including a lawsuit against the NBA.

                  http://www.myfoxmemphis.com/dpp/news...t-mfo-20111018
                  Class action time?

                  Comment


                  • "You don't think they couldn't recruit the Top 150 guys, on the premise that there are no restrictions on salary? Betcha they could."

                    Your assumption is that the astute business men mentioned would want to repeat the exact same mistakes as the current NBA owners. Not sure why they would want to do that.

                    I was just blue skying a situation in which the whole league was dissolved due to irreconcilable differences and the current owners started over, with their last offer to the players. Every owner gets a clean slate, hard cap in place, 50/50 split of revenues or 53/47 in owners favour...what would that look like?

                    Where would Lebron or Wade go to play under those circumstances? No place. they would come back to the new NBA, take their $9 million offer (or whatever) and be pissed off at Billy Hunter and Derek Fisher for costing them $7 million a year.

                    Comment


                    • joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
                      And I'm curious; do you guys think that Movie Stars deserve the money they make?
                      I mean $20M to stand in front of a camera?? Crazy. They should take their $2M and Suck-it.
                      And if a movie doesn't generate the kind of Box Office stubs it expects, they should give some of it back.


                      Sure they could hire some No Name Guy and pay him $10.
                      But they hire Tom Cruise, and Denzel and Johnny Depp because they bring in the REAL money.
                      Spend money to make money.

                      I don't see any Movie Producers after a HUGE flop, and lost $100M on ONE MOVIE, saying, "Oh Poor me, The System is broken. It forced me to pay so-and-so that much."

                      (I realize they are different systems, but they are both paid-for-entertainment industies, and both part of an American Labor Union. So I'm a little curious.)
                      Are you trying to justify it to us or yourself? A.) I think max contract amount is a side issue. B.) This isn't the movie industry C.) You're pulling numbers out of thin air with no analysis D.) How many big movies did Josh Hartnett do after do after the super stinker "30 Days of Night"?

                      Matt52 wrote: View Post
                      MEMPHIS, Tenn. - The city of Memphis is considering getting involved in the NBA owners' lockout of the players. Memphis taxpayers stand to lose a lot of money if game revenue doesn't come in to pay off the bonds used to build the FedExForum.

                      Early estimates show the taxpayers could be on the hook for $18 million if the entire season is cancelled.

                      With the first two weeks of regular season games already cancelled, the city says it wants to stay proactive. At the suggestion of Chairman Myron Lowry, the council is considering a resolution that would ask City Council Attorney Allan Wade to explore all options, including a lawsuit against the NBA.

                      http://www.myfoxmemphis.com/dpp/news...t-mfo-20111018
                      Class action time?
                      Good luck to them. They're going to need it.

                      GarbageTime wrote: View Post
                      Would people still watch NBA basketball without Lebron James, Kobe, Dwight etc? Sure they would. But not as many will go, they will not go as often and they won't spend as much to do it.
                      I don't think anyone in here has been arguing about max contracts... So what's your point?

                      Comment


                      • GarbageTime wrote: View Post
                        Would people still watch NBA basketball without Lebron James, Kobe, Dwight etc? Sure they would. But not as many will go, they will not go as often and they won't spend as much to do it.
                        This is the fundamental shortsightedness that you and Joey have: The best players in the NBA -- AT ANY GIVEN TIME -- are the best players in the world. When Lebron and Wade etc. retire, or get injured, or whatever, you think the league is going to fold? It won't even make less money, I bet. Out of sight, out of mind is how the fan mentality works. Hell, as many people would be happy to see them gone as would lament their exit.

                        The idea that some new bunch of billionaires could step in and start their own league is theoretically a possibility. But if it were even a remote one, the players would already be using that concept as leverage. And they're not. Which means that wise minds among them realize the mere idea of it is ridiculous. The NBA didn't get where it is today overnight. And, to remind everyone, the guy who largely got it where it is today is David Stern. So when you question his motives, it's appropriate to keep history in mind. He's been a main reason all these guys have gotten so rich.
                        Definition of Statistics: The science of producing unreliable facts from reliable figures.

                        Comment


                        • Apollo wrote: View Post
                          Are you trying to justify it to us or yourself? A.) I think max contract amount is a side issue. B.) This isn't the movie industry C.) You're pulling numbers out of thin air with no analysis D.) How many big movies did Josh Hartnett do after do after the super stinker "30 Days of Night"?
                          A) I'm more speaking to how the players are constantly being called 'greedy' and 'overreaching'.
                          B) I already said I realize they are different. But I also pointed to how they are similar enough to make a comparison.
                          C) I used three numbers in the whole post ... and I'm not sure why exact numbers are relevant? Once again, it's concept of laying out a comparison. Which I think is valid.
                          D) Josh Hartnett? How much did Johnny Depp make after his Super Stinker "The Tourist"?

                          jimmie wrote: View Post
                          This is the fundamental shortsightedness that you and Joey have: The best players in the NBA -- AT ANY GIVEN TIME -- are the best players in the world. When Lebron and Wade etc. retire, or get injured, or whatever, you think the league is going to fold? It won't even make less money, I bet. Out of sight, out of mind is how the fan mentality works. Hell, as many people would be happy to see them gone as would lament their exit.
                          This is what we've been saying... If you take away ALL of the Best players in the NBA, it is No Longer the Best League in the World.
                          To say the owners don't need the Top Half of the NBA is ridiculous.

                          Comment


                          • joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
                            A) I'm more speaking to how the players are constantly being called 'greedy' and 'overreaching'.
                            They're hurting the union's chances of making a good deal for everybody. I'm not sure anyone called them overreaching. I think it was more along the lines of 'tactless' and 'self centered'.

                            joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
                            B) I already said I realize they are different. But I also pointed to how they are similar enough to make a comparison.
                            We'll have to agree to disagree. The Actors guild's relationship with the entertainment industry is much different than the PA's relationship with the NBA


                            joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
                            C) I used three numbers in the whole post ... and I'm not sure why exact numbers are relevant?
                            You're trying to progress a point using random numbers and no analysis. How about you give us real examples if you're going to make the comparison? As is I don't agree with what you're saying.

                            joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
                            D) Josh Hartnett? How much did Johnny Depp make after his Super Stinker "The Tourist"?
                            The Tourist grossed $278M so I don't follow.
                            joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
                            This is what we've been saying... If you take away ALL of the Best players in the NBA, it is No Longer the Best League in the World.
                            To say the owners don't need the Top Half of the NBA is ridiculous.
                            People are going to watch what's on network and local cable. The players who are going to dominate the minds of the fans are the players the NBA markets around. They're not going to care about Deron Williams playing in Turkey then any more than they do now.

                            Comment


                            • Apollo wrote: View Post

                              I don't think anyone in here has been arguing about max contracts... So what's your point?

                              cutting salaries is cutting max contracts to. But thats not even the point so why are you bringing it up?

                              Comment


                              • jimmie wrote: View Post
                                This is the fundamental shortsightedness that you and Joey have: The best players in the NBA -- AT ANY GIVEN TIME -- are the best players in the world. When Lebron and Wade etc. retire, or get injured, or whatever, you think the league is going to fold? It won't even make less money, I bet. Out of sight, out of mind is how the fan mentality works. Hell, as many people would be happy to see them gone as would lament their exit.

                                The idea that some new bunch of billionaires could step in and start their own league is theoretically a possibility. But if it were even a remote one, the players would already be using that concept as leverage. And they're not. Which means that wise minds among them realize the mere idea of it is ridiculous. The NBA didn't get where it is today overnight. And, to remind everyone, the guy who largely got it where it is today is David Stern. So when you question his motives, it's appropriate to keep history in mind. He's been a main reason all these guys have gotten so rich.
                                And those top players will be replaced by the next top players, just like the current top players replaced the previous crop of top players.
                                But they are top players. Like Joey pointed out. If your best player is Luke Ridnour you are not going to get as many fans as Lebron James or Michael Jordan etc.

                                Your shortsightedness is assuming fans are all hardcore fans and just want to watch basketball. The majority of fans are casual fans. They have other things they can and will spend their dollars on.

                                I'm not even arguing for a new league. No doubt it would take decades to build up to what today is. But this idea that fans will just come watch basketball no matter what product you put on the floor is untrue. There is a reason the NBA needs to support the D-League and WNBA.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X