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

[mcHAPPY]

Via SheridanHoops.com:

“But sometimes illumination comes to our rescue at the very moment when all seems lost; we have knocked at every door and they open on nothing until, at last, we stumble unconsciously against the only one through which we can enter the kingdom we have sought in vain a hundred years – and it opens.”
― Marcel Proust, Remembrance of Things Past

I will add one more before taking my son bowling, this lifted from Answers.com, regarding today’s Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur (which is being observed today by David Stern and Adam Silver of the league office, and union attorneys Jeffrey Kessler and Ron Klempner):

“This day, the holiest and most solemn in Judaism, is also among the most joyous, as it affords one the opportunity to rectify past wrongs and face the future with a slate wiped clean.”

Hope afterall? No doubt the posturing is in full effect on both sides.

[Joey]

And by the way, this is what I think is really at the root of the stalemate:

"the players thinking that THEY'RE the primary reason basketball is so popular today, and therefore they deserve a bigger piece of the pie"

And they are wrong in thinking this??

Fans pay to see the best athletes in the world play and compete.
Not the richest people in the world own.
It's certainly not the owners that the fans to pay to see.

[mcHAPPY]

Keeping in mind the owners initially started 'negotiating' unrealistic, they started wanting 60% of BRI and players with 40%.

The last few months they have moved up to 46% which is a much better starting point, in my opinion, but they did not budge until this week.

The players had 57% under the last deal and have been reportedly privately stating they would do 52%.

The owners upped the offer to 47%. Not significant in percentage but significant in that it was the first budge since the lockout began at 46%.

Then the owners upped the offer to 50% but with deductions (around $350M) that really make it 53/47 owners.

Now they have offered 50/50 with no initial deductions.

(Lets forget the owners original 40% offer because that was bullsh!t to begin with.)



The owners have officially offered 50% up 4%.

The players have officially offered 53% down 4%.

If the egos got out of the way (on both sides) it would appear 51.5% is quite the compromise.

Or a system of 51% that can rise to 52% if the good times continue.


This is no longer about dollars and percents. This is about each side's 'leaders' being able to claim victory because the ramifications of either side not giving another 1-1.5% each will cost them much more than that original 1-1.5% ever would have.

[mcHAPPY]

And they are wrong in thinking this??

Fans pay to see the best athletes in the world play and compete.
Not the richest people in the world own.
It's certainly not the owners that the fans to pay to see.

NCAA March Madness has a much more devoted following than the NBA in my opinion. The NCAA certainly does not have the best athletes in the world playing and competing. Fans pay and give up their time to watch an entertaining product. Once college ball starts, the hardcore fans will put their attention there (at least I will) and the fickle fans have already put their time and energy elsewhere.

The fans may not pay to see the owners own but they certainly are not 'only' paying to watch players. Look at the Las Vegas Impact league. That was a major flop. Look at the number of foreign teams who can barely afford to pay the insurance costs of NBA contracts - let alone the cost of a contract of an NBA talent. The players nor other leagues do not have the money or infrastructure to promote themselves as the NBA does. The reality is there is no basketball league in the world that treats its players as well as the NBA from travel to hotels to training staff to salary to marketing.

Personally, I think 95% of the players are really overvaluing themselves and really are going to shoot themselves in the foot before they pull the trigger at their head.

Look at Wilson Chandler: his qualifying offer alone was $3M. No doubt he would command more than this as a free agent. He signed for somewhere around $2-$2.5M but he had to go to China to get it. There is also no gaurantee he will get fully paid unlike the NBA.

[jimmie]

Yes, in my opinion, the players are wrong for thinking they are the primary reason for the league's success.

Fans pay to see who they imagine to be the best athletes in the world play and compete. But fans are terrible judges of that. Fans would pay to see a completely different set of NBA players, if that's what was offered. Fans would switch allegiance to the Euroleague if the lockout continued and it were easy to watch on network TV here. Fans will watch NCAA basketball if there's no NBA. Fans want to watch the game -- the players are secondary.

Don't get me wrong -- I think the players deserve to be treated fairly; I just think they have a skewed idea of what defines "fair" in this context. And I don't support the owners, either; they've proven to lack foresight in terms of fiscal responsibility when handing out contracts over the past 10+ years. But blame for the current situation is not the issue. It's about course correction and moving forward in a way that helps to ensure the long-term viability of the league.

[jimmie]

And another thing: This notion that "an organization I'm a part of is doing better today than it was when I started here, so I should share in the profits" is simply nonsense (forget the fact that the NBA is purportedly not actually doing better now than it was 10 years ago). We're sure in an era of entitlement and inflated ego when that's the prevailing attitude. If this were actually the case, then today's players should be kicking back a large chunk of their earnings to the players of the 80s and 90s, since that was REALLY the era of the NBA's greatest growth. Without Magic and Bird and Jordan, Lebron and Wade and Carmelo would not be making 20M salaries.

[Apollo]

Keeping in mind the owners initially started 'negotiating' unrealistic, they started wanting 60% of BRI and players with 40%.

Guys, this is how negotiations work. You never come to the table with what you actually want or what you're willing to settle for. You do that and you get hosed. The owners have come down significantly and I think to the point where they're at the point of take it or leave it. They've negotiated in good faith. The players need to take this, it's not getting better from here on out in my opinion.

[mcHAPPY]

Guys, this is how negotiations work. You never come to the table with what you actually want or what you're willing to settle for. You do that and you get hosed.

Yes. But at the same time everyone else knows this too - including the other side.

40% was a joke as was the players proposal to keep it the same at 57%.

Regardless, we're now at 50/50 and the players still do not realize they do not hold the leverage.

[Apollo]

Yes. But at the same time everyone else knows this too - including the other side.

40% was a joke as was the players proposal to keep it the same at 57%.

Regardless, we're now at 50/50 and the players still do not realize they do not hold the leverage.

Of course the other side knows. They all went to college. I'm just saying that when people were complaining about the owners not negotiating in good faith they were in fact negotiating like anyone who's been trained in labor negotiations. It's been text book and now they're at their real terms, the make or break items that they feel they need. I agree, the owners still have the leverage but they now seem done with the games. If the players don't take this and games start getting cancelled the owners' offer will start shrinking as they(the players) start to collectively hurt. I think this is why the agents are stepping up now to offer assistance. The PA's mistakes are going to hurt their income.

Based on things I've read recently it seems like some of the players are taking this personal while the owners are treating this like business, which it is.

[mcHAPPY]

Of course the other side knows. They all went to college. I'm just saying that when people were complaining about the owners not negotiating in good faith they were in fact negotiating like anyone who's been trained in labor negotiations. It's been text book and now they're at their real terms, the make or break items that they feel they need. I agree, the owners still have the leverage but they now seem done with the games. If the players don't take this and games start getting cancelled the owners' offer will start shrinking as they(the players) start to collectively hurt. I think this is why the agents are stepping up now to offer assistance. The PA's mistakes are going to hurt their income.

Based on things I've read recently it seems like some of the players are taking this personal while the owners are treating this like business, which it is.

+1

[mcHAPPY]

GT: further to the point I was trying to make earlier and is why a straight 50/50 split is fair to all, in my opinion:

A few days back, we noted that New Jersey Nets All-Star point guard Deron Williams, who signed to play with Besiktas of Turkey during the ongoing NBA lockout, is struggling to adapt to the European game.

On Friday, Williams penned a diary entry on ESPN.com in which he discusses the transition to Besiktas. He notes that its a great bonding experience for his family, that he's still getting used to the spacing of the European game, that he's slowly building chemistry with his new teammates and that he's still getting back into 5-on-5 game shape.

All interesting details. But the following was buried at the bottom, and it sure jumps out.

The arena we play at seats 3,200 people max, so it's not quite the same environment of an NBA game and it hasn't been full yet because these aren't the really big games. Once we start the Turkish league games, it will be different, I think. But the fans that have been at the games are really good fans. They're really into the game nonstop from tip-off and knowledgeable about it. They've been great to play in front of.

Yes, you read that correctly. A high-profile NBA All-Star who is arguably one of the top 10 basketball players in the world cannot fill a 3,200 person stadium while playing for one of the higher-profile international professional teams. Williams isn't necessarily a high-flyer, but he plays an exciting game, boasting great vision, an array of attacking dribble moves and an ability to finish in a variety of ways. He's one of those guys near the top of the list of NBA players you would "pay to see," as the saying goes, yet he's drawing a crowd that is no more than 20 percent of an averge NBA crowd.

There's certainly value in landing a high-flight player like Williams, and perhaps Besiktas has some incredible marketing campaigns going on outside the arena to further capitalize on his presence, but it's fair to wonder whether they are getting their money's worth on the multi-million dollar contract they reportedly paid him. Ticket sales are the bread and butter of basketball economics. That base generally needs to get covered if you hope to recoup a major salary investment like the one Besiktas and its sponsor made in Williams.

On the bright side, at least Besiktas is outdrawing the Las Vegas "Lockout League," which struggled to bring in 50 fans on some days. In the end, Williams' experience is Turkey is simply further proof that the NBA and its players badly need each other to reach their respective economic best interests.

EDIT: I did not include link:

http://eye-on-basketball.blogs.cbssp...48484/32585693

[mcHAPPY]

Larry Coon has been gold this entire lockout. Another good article:

So saying "no" now comes with potential consequences. That's a real choice.

"Until you get to that point," says Holmes, "you don't really know how you feel about the case. You don't really start asking the hard questions."

What does this have to do with the NBA labor negotiations? The players had to make their first real choice this week.

"The risk started when the owners put something on the table that the players might regret saying 'no' to," Holmes said. "When the owners were demanding a $45 million hard cap or offering the players 46 percent of revenues, it was easy to say 'no.' That's not a real choice. It's just a formality."

Once the owners' offer increased to 50 percent, it became a different ballgame. Holmes, experienced at negotiating in these situations, thinks NBA commissioner David Stern made a strategic error.

"At that point, the players needed to absorb the offer and think about what they really wanted to do," he said. "I fault Stern for taking so long to get to that point. When he finally got there, it was the end of the day and the players who were present were already locked into a 'no' answer. They didn't have time to truly come to grips with a real choice."

It's now soul-searching time for the players. For now they have drawn a line in the sand at 53 percent. Players like Kobe Bryant and Kevin Garnett are leading the charge to hold firm and not give another inch. But Bryant and Garnett don't necessarily represent the interests of the rank-and-file players. Neither do the agents, who have already made it clear that they are against an agreement even at 53 percent.

According to Chris Mannix of SI.com, three rank-and-file players texted to say that, pending further details, a 50/50 split sounded fair. Three players is admittedly a small sample, but it could signal a shift in the players' tenor. Union chief Billy Hunter and president Derek Fisher need to find out where their constituents really stand, now that they're faced with a real choice.

Depending on what Hunter and Fisher discover, Holmes sees at least four possible scenarios:

• If Hunter and Fisher discover that the rank and file will settle for 50 percent, then the union and the players will need to save face. The union will make some sort of counter-proposal, and the parties will hammer out a deal. "Stern will understand this," Holmes said. "It will look like the union got a better deal, but that will mostly be window dressing to save face for the union and the players."

• If Hunter and Fisher discover that the rank and file will not accept 50 percent, but are willing to settle for something less than 53 percent, then the next logical step is a small group meeting with the owners. In that meeting Hunter could make clear that the players are willing to come down from 53 percent if the owners are willing to meet somewhere in the middle.

• If Hunter and Fisher discover that the rank and file are locked in at 53 percent, then the union will just stand its ground.

• Hunter and Fisher could also discover that the rank and file are deeply divided. "This is the hardest scenario for the union," Holmes said. "They will need to force players to come to meetings to talk it out. They will need to find a way to reach a consensus."

The two sides in the NBA labor dispute are now faced with real choices. Saying "no" now comes with significant risk. After two years of rhetoric, and through a flurry of recent activity, we are now reaching the endgame.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/...k-time-players

[GarbageTime]

Clearly the "product" is not what you think it is. The product is basketball. Not the players. If you don't think people would pay to watch a completely different set of players play the same game, you're crazy, because the Euroleague, NCAA, and hell, even US high school basketball are still drawing big crowds. What made the NBA what it is today is David Stern. I don't like the way he's playing this current lockout game, either, but you have to give credit where it's due. The owners' money (and granted, subsequent bad decisions with said money) combined with Stern's marketing and organizational acumen are the reason the players are making such ridiculous salaries today.

Sure, I'm on board with the argument that the owners made their own bed by offering those salaries, and I certainly don't blame the players for taking them. But the players thinking that THEY'RE the primary reason basketball is so popular today, and therefore they deserve a bigger piece of the pie -- well that's crazy, and has nothing to do with a union protecting the "rights" of its members.

Professional basketball isn't a 'partnership' between the owners and players -- never has been, never will be -- and the sooner the players get back to begrudgingly realizing they are glorified employees, like the rest of us in unionized jobs who DON'T make multimillions a year, the sooner we'll get to watch basketball again.

So should we expect explosive growth in the D-league and WNBA if there is no NBA season? Its easy to say other leagues that have historically done well will still do well... but IF the product is simply basketball itself, then every form of basketball should benifit greatly from a potentially lost NBA season.

The NBA was going Bankrupt until about the time Stern took over and he did a great job turning the league around. But how did he do that? By focusing on individual players. Namely Magic and Bird and later Jordan and Shaq. His marketing campaign was focused on them and he began to change the rules of NBA basketball to give individual players more freedom One can give Stern credit for doing an excellent job marketing these guys, but he still needed the players in order to do it.

I agree that there is a partnership between the players, teams and league. But no one can convince me that the NBA gave these players the platform to perform, without realizing that that platform was built and is still maintained by those very same players.

[mcHAPPY]

So should we expect explosive growth in the D-league and WNBA if there is no NBA season? Its easy to say other leagues that have historically done well will still do well... but IF the product is simply basketball itself, then every form of basketball should benifit greatly from a potentially lost NBA season.

The NBA was going Bankrupt until about the time Stern took over and he did a great job turning the league around. But how did he do that? By focusing on individual players. Namely Magic and Bird and later Jordan and Shaq. His marketing campaign was focused on them and he began to change the rules of NBA basketball to give individual players more freedom One can give Stern credit for doing an excellent job marketing these guys, but he still needed the players in order to do it.

I agree that there is a partnership between the players, teams and league. But no one can convince me that the NBA gave these players the platform to perform, without realizing that that platform was built and is still maintained by those very same players.

Then why didn't Impact Basketball become a huge success?

Why haven't the players started their own league?

Why aren't the players getting contacts as valuable as they get in the NBA to play elsewhere?

Just as much as the league needs the players, the players need the league.

If the players didn't need the league:

Deron Williams would have signed his $15M contract in Turkey instead of only $5M.
Bogut would be playing in Australia for $13M instead of sitting out because the teams cannot even come up with the $1M needed to insure his contract.
None of the European contracts would have opt out clauses to return to the NBA.
JR Smith and Wilson Chandler would get more than the approximate $2.5M each is receiving in China.
Earl Clark wouldn't be leaving the team he signed with in China.
Kobe wouldn't be turning up his nose at $8M to play in Italy.


I respect your opinion on the importance of the players, however, the owners and league have the same value. This is why a straight 50/50 split of revenues seems very fair to me. Neither group can go it alone without the others (actually, the NBA could but it would not be the same).

[Apollo]

Union Standing Firm At 53 Percent

In Miami meeting on Saturday night, union source says players were united on holding firm at 53 percent of BRI. Owners want 50-50 split.

Source: Twitter @WojYahooNBA

Time to lower your hopes people.