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

[Joey]

Why is no one talking about this?!

Guys, this could STOP THE LOCKOUT FROM EVER HAPPENING.

Sorry for caps. But this is bigger than Jan Veseley.

[mcHAPPY]

Why is no one talking about this?!

Guys, this could STOP THE LOCKOUT FROM EVER HAPPENING.

Sorry for caps. But this is bigger than Jan Veseley.

There are three sides to every story, in this case: the owners, the players, and the truth.

In my opinion, the only thing this is going to do is start making things dirrrrty where they have been relatively clean, at least publicly, until now.

At the end of the day, I hope the system is more with the vision the owners have. Not because I want billionaires getting richer but because it will create a more balanced league.

[Joey]

There are three sides to every story, in this case: the owners, the players, and the truth.

In my opinion, the only thing this is going to do is start making things dirrrrty where they have been relatively clean, at least publicly, until now.

At the end of the day, I hope the system is more with the vision the owners have. Not because I want billionaires getting richer but because it will create a more balanced league.

I don't disagree. But at the same time, now having an outside opinion, it will allow them to come to an agreement that is fair and timely, without resorting to Brutish tactics like Lock Outs. Those don't do anything except, like the article says, allow the owners to get even more out of the deal, without having to consent to anthing. Thats not how Collective Bargaining works. Thats Solo Bargaining, and thats all the NBA was interested in.

I think the best deal is what is right in the middle, and hopefully, this will help determine what that is.

[mcHAPPY]

I don't disagree. But at the same time, now having an outside opinion, it will allow them to come to an agreement that is fair and timely, without resorting to Brutish tactics like Lock Outs. Those don't do anything except, like the article says, allow the owners to get even more out of the deal, without having to consent to anthing. Thats not how Collective Bargaining works. Thats Solo Bargaining, and thats all the NBA was interested in.

I think the best deal is what is right in the middle, and hopefully, this will help determine what that is.

And I would imagine the middle is where it will end as well. The players were doomed from the beginning trying to keep things status quo whereas the owners were seeking radical changes - this is what happens when millionaires try to take on billionaires - or vice versa. lol

[Raptors_]

There are three sides to every story, in this case: the owners, the players, and the truth.

In my opinion, the only thing this is going to do is start making things dirrrrty where they have been relatively clean, at least publicly, until now.

At the end of the day, I hope the system is more with the vision the owners have. Not because I want billionaires getting richer but because it will create a more balanced league.

What does paul pierce have to do with this?

[Apollo]

Wow ... this is big news.
Source




NBAPA is basically saying the NBA Owners aren't playing fair, and don't actually want to avoid the lockout.
I don't disagree with these charges either.

David Stern got some 'splainin' to do.

A great organization like the NBA is going to cover all scenarios in a labor dispute. They also have a legion of lawyers. I'm thinking they're confident in their position and this is a desperation move by the PA.

I don't disagree. But at the same time, now having an outside opinion, it will allow them to come to an agreement that is fair and timely, without resorting to Brutish tactics like Lock Outs. Those don't do anything except, like the article says, allow the owners to get even more out of the deal, without having to consent to anthing. Thats not how Collective Bargaining works. Thats Solo Bargaining, and thats all the NBA was interested in.

I think the best deal is what is right in the middle, and hopefully, this will help determine what that is.

Actually lockouts and strikes are pretty common tactics by the party with the leverage when labor negotiations aren't going in the direction they see is best. If the PA were in the position of power and a strike would hurt the owners far more than the players you don't think the players would walk? Come on now... Typically both parties start far apart and begin to work their way to a neutral ground but that does not mean they land in a place of neutral ground. It's not uncommon for one party to win. The NBA isn't trying to dominate the PA based on everything I've read. They're clawing back to a place where all teams can be profitable and where parity is a reality.

[slaw]

They're clawing back to a place where all teams can be profitable and where parity is a reality.

Ah, yes, the good ol' days of the NBA where parity was king. Like in the 1960s when the Celtics won 9 championships...erm, the 90s when the Bulls only won 6 times! Yeah, that was the decade of parity! Or the 80s where the Lakers/Celts won 7 titles between them. The only decade where you could even argue that parity existed in the NBA was in the 70s and I know we are all anxious to get back to those glory days for the NBA where it almost folded. There will never be parity in the NBA because of the nature of the game and the marginal value of single players (see, Spurs, San Antonio).

The owners can also spare me the profitability claims. League revenues are up yet again. By the owners own modelling (the only number they are revealing), they are walking away with $1 billion in profit. If the goal is to make all 30 teams profitable then why won't they consider forced revenue sharing? Right, cause it ain't about profitability for all 30 teams - it's about franchise value. The NHL peddled the same garbage a few years ago. Now Atlanta is moving to Winnipeg, Phoenix loses ~$30mm a year, and a handful of the same team are in trouble. Sorry, a hard cap isn't going to make Minnesota a successful basketball market.

Hey, if the owners want a lockout so they can cap costs and try to increase their franchise values that's their prerogative. But don't serve me Alpo and tell me it's steak tartar.

[Apollo]

No, the new days, similar to the NFL where we see new teams rise to greatness all the time. A place where teams win due to management's abilities and are not handicapped by not being able to spend $20-40M over cap. You can toss out obsolete examples of 40 and 50 years ago all you want but the NBA is trying to step towards what the NFL has been doing for so long. It's a highly successful model that is far more rewarding to the fans. It's a more stable setup.

If there is a hard cap, if players are more greatly rewarded for staying in their current location, if contracts are not guaranteed then parity can be a reality in the NBA. It's beyond me how anyone who is a Raptors fan could be against what the owners are trying to bring forward.

[MyMomLovesMe]

NFL is one of the most exploitative models of the players that I know. These guys are basically sent to glue factories after their careers.

It's a league that is rich and has a lots of success and talent, but a horrible employment and benefit record. One of the worst examples in the world for the size of the revenue streams and popularity involved.

[Apollo]

"sent to the glue factories"? For real? Give me a break. NFL players make loads of money and unlike many other pro leagues, teams routinely renegotiate players' contracts to give them raises if their production warrants it. Not only that but I can't think of a league that offers more incentive laden contracts than those that NFL players get. The NFL rewards player for production. Most of society is rewarded based on their production so why must we hold these spoiled players to a higher standard? If you can't perform your job then you shouldn't be doing that job. If you can't fulfill the expectations of a contract then that contract should be able to be terminated or at the least be open to renegotiation to match production with compensation.

[ceez]

the only broke former nfl's are idiots. you don't make that much money and not save any. if you're broke down the line, unless you were actually robbed at gunpoint, its your own fault.

[MyMomLovesMe]

A few of them make lots of money these are large rosters, but for the majority its a couple of seasons and a roller coaster in life. The old guys are not being taken care of by the league, lots of health problems among the linemen. Problems with medical down the road, insurance companies do not like to touch pro football players.

It is a very greedy league. The players are paid for production, the fans are shaken for funds regardless of how badly their teams do.


I think the NFL model is one of the most regressive labour models in sports. The path of the league is paved with a lot of sob stories.

[slaw]

If there is a hard cap, if players are more greatly rewarded for staying in their current location, if contracts are not guaranteed then parity can be a reality in the NBA. It's beyond me how anyone who is a Raptors fan could be against what the owners are trying to bring forward.

I am not sure why all the proponents of a hard cap think it is going to keep players in the same city. The NFL has a massive amount of player movement (see, Patriots, NE) and the NHL has experienced it as well (see Blackhawks, Chicago). The NBA will be no different. Quality, popular players will constantly be shuffled out of town to save cap room. Teams that draft and trade well will be punished for developing quality players by having to ship them off to other teams. Same as in the NHL.

As a basketball fan, I don't worship at the altar of "parity" (aka, mediocrity). I don't want to see 30 average teams if it means that every time a great team comes along it has to be dismantled immediately. I loved watching Isiah Thomas and his Pistons battle for years to beat the Celtics, and the Bulls struggle to get past those Pistons. As a kid, nothing was better than Lakers-Celtics and as an adult I appreciated the efficiency of the great Spurs teams - their rise and fall. In any case, we all know that you win with great players. How could small markets like OKC and Memphis have awesome years under the soft cap? Oh right, it's cause they have Kevin Durant and Zach Randolph. Funny how that works. Of course, great players won't matter once a hard cap is in place.

Couple of reasons why I don't like it as a Raptors fan. The only advantage Toronto has right now (and other 'small' markets have) over the glamour markets is the ability to pay their key players more to keep them. That advantage will go away with the hard cap. Second, windows for teams will be shortened. On the off-chance the Raptors ever get good again, it won't be for 5 or 6 years but for 1 or 2. Then everyone will be traded away for bags of balls. Everyone here will love the hard cap until the Raptors have to dismantle a top 8 team and go back to the lottery, then no one will like it.

[Joey]

so why must we hold these spoiled players to a higher standard? If you can't perform your job then you shouldn't be doing that job. If you can't fulfill the expectations of a contract then that contract should be able to be terminated or at the least be open to renegotiation to match production with compensation.

What if a guy gets injured and can't play another game in his life?
The team that he sacrificed his livelyhood for should be allowed to just drop his contract because he can no longer produce? That doesn't seem fair to me.

And without these "spoiled players" then the owners wouldn't be making any money at all in this business. What then?
It is because of the athletes that the owners are able to bring in the money that they do.
Yes they provide the Venue with which to play, but it is the Athletes that fill those seats.
You think bringing in the Globe Trotters will sell 20,000 tickets every night?

[MyMomLovesMe]

These are the BIG Names, lots of no names not even getting youtube time.


Imagine 106K quote for insurance. To the insurance company it makes no difference if you were an allstar or role player, its the same risk. The guys that made a few hundred K a year, and worked for 2-3 seasons are facing the same premiums and it just means that they have no medical coverage and their families are further burdened with their health.