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

[slaw]

Nobody forces the players to play in the NBA.

There is the NBADL. There is the new league in Canada. Many countries in South America, Europe, and Asia have their own professional leagues. The players can take their talents elsewhere.

If you actually believe that these leagues are competitors in the US marketplace with the NBA then there isn't any point in discussing this. It's like arguing Joe's Abacuses and Sundials on the corner is a direct competitor for market share with Apple and Microsoft.

[mcHAPPY]

If you actually believe that these leagues are competitors in the US marketplace with the NBA then there isn't any point in discussing this. It's like arguing Joe's Abacuses and Sundials on the corner is a direct competitor for market share with Apple and Microsoft.

No, the point is the players have the CHOICE to work for and play in the NBA.

Nobody is telling them you HAVE to play in the NBA.

If they do not like the terms of employment, go find another job - but don't forget it will never be as good or profitable as the one they are currently turning down.

[TheGloveinRapsUniform]

I've got a few dozens unwatched movies, 2K12, GTAIV (freshly bought for 20 bucks), the newest seasons of Breaking Bad and Futurama...and I'm going through the 5th season of The Wire. 1000+ unlistened songs, a ton of anime, college ball is starting soon, and I could still watch Jonas play and develop before he comes in (the pick is looking even better with how things are right now)...the whole going to university thing...and....I'd still rather watch the Raptors speed that tank towards another high draft pick.

This is going to get ugly for the players. The owners incentive to save games is going to drop exponentially until the halfway point of the season. I think Stern even has the balls to cancel all of it. The owners are being unreasonable ("guaranteed profitability", are you kidding me?) and the players are being greedy. I'm only on the Raptors' side.

I still find it amazing that they could meet for so long and still be reportedly very far on a lot of issues.

GT4 for 20? or do you mean GT5? If GT5, where can i buy it??

[WhatWhat]

GT4 for 20? or do you mean GT5? If GT5, where can i buy it??

I mean Grand Theft Auto 4 with Niko as the protagonist. I got it at Wal-Mart.

[Joey]

I mean Grand Theft Auto 4 with Niko as the protagonist. I got it at Wal-Mart.

Oh Niko Bellik. Class Act that guy.
Great game. I probably logged 200 hours on that, back in the day.

[Apollo]

No, the point is the players have the CHOICE to work for and play in the NBA.

Nobody is telling them you HAVE to play in the NBA.

If they do not like the terms of employment, go find another job - but don't forget it will never be as good or profitable as the one they are currently turning down.

Exactly. There are many, many, many pro leagues out there. They don't have to play in the NBA. It's not even the only option in North America. I can safely say that no other pro basketball league in the world treats its players close to as well as the NBA does. For them to turn down a 50/50 split with the owner backing off some of their biggest, most important demands is going to bite the PA in the ass.

[slaw]

The structure isn't working and the MLB system doesn't promote any of the 30 brands but those who can spend the most money. Are you a big market team fan who just likes posting on Raptors Republic? Your views run counter to everything that could help the less established clubs who can't/won't compete in a spending war to win more games. You put in place a MLB system and suddenly it's Cuban, Buss, Dolan and a few others buying up the league and the rest becoming farm teams. That's really healthy for the game, sure...

The NBA is a league where each year the 4 or 5 teams lucky enough to have one or two of the 7 or so truly elite players will win. That's the way it's been for 60 years. There are only so many of those guys to go around. There aren't 30 Michael Jordans. Unless Toronto is lucky enough to draft one of those guys it has no chance to win anything. That's the reality of it. There is no system in the world that is going to change that. If that angers people then they shouldn't watch the NBA cause it won't change.

As for my fan status, I am a basketball fan first and a Raps fan second. The Raps had a chance with Carter to build a truly elite team. They failed. They had a chance in 2006 to rebuild from scratch and build a winner. They failed. The system wasn't the problem. The Raptor management team was. As a Raps fan if you want to blame someone or something for the lack of success, you need look no further than the current front office, which has continually mismanaged assets and spent money foolishly. Rather than gaming the system to protect them from themselves, maybe they should just hire people who are better at the job....

[TheGloveinRapsUniform]

I mean Grand Theft Auto 4 with Niko as the protagonist. I got it at Wal-Mart.

Oh, my bad. But thats still a good deal. Im getting it. Thanks!

[Apollo]

The NBA is a league where each year the 4 or 5 teams lucky enough to have one or two of the 7 or so truly elite players will win. That's the way it's been for 60 years. There are only so many of those guys to go around. There aren't 30 Michael Jordans. Unless Toronto is lucky enough to draft one of those guys it has no chance to win anything. That's the reality of it. There is no system in the world that is going to change that. If that angers people then they shouldn't watch the NBA cause it won't change.

No, teams who can't spend big bucks don't usually win. There are exceptions but those teams also come to a crossroad where they have to either decide to start spending big bucks or let their guys leave town and thus become mediocre again in the process. There are many examples of teams having big name stars and not being able to afford them or not being able to afford to put the pieces around him to win. That's the real truth of the NBA, it's not an even playing field and because of that it forces lesser teams to take gambles that they can't afford to lose.

As for my fan status, I am a basketball fan first and a Raps fan second. The Raps had a chance with Carter to build a truly elite team. They failed. They had a chance in 2006 to rebuild from scratch and build a winner. They failed. The system wasn't the problem. The Raptor management team was. As a Raps fan if you want to blame someone or something for the lack of success, you need look no further than the current front office, which has continually mismanaged assets and spent money foolishly. Rather than gaming the system to protect them from themselves, maybe they should just hire people who are better at the job....

Yes, management made mistakes and they are ultimately to blame but the system put them into situations which were high risk. You shouldn't have to take big gambles to stay competitive or to become competitive. The system is highly flawed and I hope you don't get too angry as a basketball fan once it's fixed and Raptors take a few steps forward because of it.

[stretch]

It's just wishful thinking, but I would love to see LeBron playing in the NFL this season. He has been hinting around at having an interest. The Bills receivers having been dropping like flies of late. Imagine a guy with tight end size and wide out speed. But could he take getting hit?

[mcHAPPY]

Exactly. There are many, many, many pro leagues out there. They don't have to play in the NBA. It's not even the only option in North America. I can safely say that no other pro basketball league in the world treats its players close to as well as the NBA does. For them to turn down a 50/50 split with the owner backing off some of their biggest, most important demands is going to bite the PA in the ass.

I agree.

I hope the owners put the hard cap back in play.

Lets go with 50% of BRI divided by 30 (2,000,000,000 divided by 30 would be $66.7M) or, if the owners feel generous, give the players their 53% of BRI divided by 30 (2,120,000,000 divided by 30 would be $70.7M).

15 players per roster gives an average salary of $4.44M or $4.8M with 14 players at $66.67M
15 players per roster gives an average salary of $4.7M or $5.05 with 14 players at $70.67M

No guaranteed deals - if they feel generous they could treat all contracts like rookie contracts (pick up 1 year in advance).

No more exemptions (i.e. true hard cap), no more Bird's Rights.

Actually, maybe they could relent on a solid solid hard cap by allowing only 1st round rookie deals to go over in the first 2 guaranteed years. That would really up the value of a high draft pick for weaker teams as well.

Take away all the silly rules on trades (i.e. 125% +/- $100K, BYC, etc.)

At this point, if it takes a season to get it done right, I can live with that.

NCAA starts Monday, November 7.
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bask...?date=20111107

Schedule of every NCAA team found here:
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/teams

[Shantz]

According to Al Iannazzone (http://twitter.com/#!/Al_Iannazzone) and backed up by Larry Coon (http://twitter.com/#!/LarryCoon), Billy Hunter announced today that him and David Stern will meet on Monday with a Federal Mediator. Not sure where this goes, but it could end up being positive.

[Shantz]

According to Al Iannazzone (http://twitter.com/#!/Al_Iannazzone) and backed up by Larry Coon (http://twitter.com/#!/LarryCoon), Billy Hunter announced today that him and David Stern will meet on Monday with a Federal Mediator. Not sure where this goes, but it could end up being positive.

[Apollo]

I agree.

I hope the owners put the hard cap back in play.

Lets go with 50% of BRI divided by 30 (2,000,000,000 divided by 30 would be $66.7M) or, if the owners feel generous, give the players their 53% of BRI divided by 30 (2,120,000,000 divided by 30 would be $70.7M).

15 players per roster gives an average salary of $4.44M or $4.8M with 14 players at $66.67M
15 players per roster gives an average salary of $4.7M or $5.05 with 14 players at $70.67M

No guaranteed deals - if they feel generous they could treat all contracts like rookie contracts (pick up 1 year in advance).

No more exemptions (i.e. true hard cap), no more Bird's Rights.

Actually, maybe they could relent on a solid solid hard cap by allowing only 1st round rookie deals to go over in the first 2 guaranteed years. That would really up the value of a high draft pick for weaker teams as well.

Take away all the silly rules on trades (i.e. 125% +/- $100K, BYC, etc.)

At this point, if it takes a season to get it done right, I can live with that.

NCAA starts Monday, November 7.
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bask...?date=20111107

If there is a hardcap then trade exceptions are useless. If they elect to go with a soft cap then the trade rule exceptions, in my opinion, are needed because it's tough to match contracts in trades sometimes.

I agree with the bulk majority of your points. A hard cap won't be a cure all but it's a positive step in the right direction to a healthier and more fair league for all.

[mcHAPPY]

BusinessWeek: A guide to the NBA lockout

For those just tuning in and not wishing to go through over 700 posts:

Some questions and answers about the NBA's labor impasse:

Q: What's the damage so far?

A: NBA Commissioner David Stern canceled the first two weeks of the regular season Monday, with both owners and players estimating losses at hundreds of millions of dollars.

Q: What happens next?

A: No meetings are currently scheduled, and Stern warned that more games could be lost with each passing day.

Q: What were the NBA's revenues last season?

A: The league brought in about $4.3 billion, of which $3.8 billion fell into the category of basketball-related income (BRI). BRI is basically all the money made through basketball operations, including gate receipts, broadcast revenues, in-arena sales of novelties and concessions, arena signage revenues, game parking and program revenues, sponsorship revenues, etc.

Q: So what's the problem?

A: Players were guaranteed 57 percent of BRI, and the league says owners were destined to lose money when they only kept 43 cents of every dollar.

Q: How bad was it for owners?

A: They say they lost $300 million last season, after losing hundreds of millions in every year of the previous collective bargaining agreement that was ratified in 2005. The league says 22 of its 30 teams lost money, including losses of $20 million or more for 11 of them.

Q: Couldn't they avoid those problems if the teams that made money shared more with the others?

A: That's what the players say, calling the NBA's revenue-sharing program "insignificant." The league says a more robust revenue-sharing plan is coming, but not until after a new CBA with the players, because right now all it would be doing is sharing losses.

Q: What do the owners want?

A: The league has two goals in the negotiations: A system that would guarantee owners a chance to make a profit, and a system where all teams would have a chance to compete equally for a championship.

Q: How far apart are they financially?

A: Each side's last formal proposal was a 53-47 revenue split in its favor. Given each full BRI percentage point was worth nearly $40 million last season, the sides are officially around $240 million apart in the first year of a deal.

Q: Why is competitive balance a problem now?

A: Because the NBA's "soft" salary cap system allows teams to spend above it by using various exceptions. There is a luxury tax level in which teams have to pay a $1 tax for every $1 they exceed the threshold by, but big-market teams simply absorbed the penalty that smaller-market clubs were unable to. So the league says small-market teams can't compete in the NBA like they do in the NFL, where Green Bay, Indianapolis, New Orleans and Pittsburgh have won recent Super Bowls.

Q: What do players think about a hard cap?

A: They're completely opposed, to the extent that union executive director Billy Hunter has called it a "blood issue." Players believe a hard cap would eliminate fully guaranteed contracts for all but a handful of top players and set up a system like the NFL, where teams cut even high-performing players for cap reasons and aren't required to pay their full contracts.

Q: Is playing overseas a viable option?

A: Not as good as players hoped, which is why Stern downplayed it as a bargaining threat from the start. Economic difficulties in Europe mean teams there simply can't pay enough to entice NBA stars, and China essentially removed itself as an option when it ruled its teams couldn't offer contracts with opt-out clauses, meaning players who sign there are required to stay all season.

Q: Can they still play a full 82-game season?

A: Stern said everything is negotiable, but it will be difficult. Arenas have few dates available and already have been told they can book events on nights games were scheduled for the first two weeks of the season.

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/finan.../D9QA62A00.htm