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

[enlightenment]

The ability to demand a trade to a big market (and net the current team pennies on the dollar). The players want the big markets to maintain their big advantage. Those teams are more likely to waste money.

but dont they see how that is detrimental to the competitiveness of the league?? I thought the players would like a more even playing field?

[Apollo]

Sure they care about it... Just as long as it doesn't get in the way of them making as much money as possible.

[slaw]

See, we don't all feel that way. I would say in here it's split 50/50... Well maybe 55/45 in favor of the owners. You may be able to talk me up to 50 but after Wednesday all bets are off.

And the players look like fools for giving up $2 billion to get $1 billion back. I'm not on anyone's side. I've written before why I think the people who are so vociferously behind the owners are going be severely disappointed by what happens when this thing ends based on the history of pro sports in North America. I've also noted that there will be unintended consequences people won't like. Plus, this thread needs a devil's advocate....

[mcHAPPY]

League sends formal proposal to players union

The union has until 5 p.m. Wednesday to accept the N.B.A.’s last proposal or have it replaced by the reset proposal, Stern wrote.

“Rather than simply proceeding, as we could have, to offer a less favorable proposal at this time, the N.B.A. is providing an additional period of time for the players association to consider our 50/50 proposal,” Stern wrote. “We are hopeful that the prospect of a less favorable outcome for the players will prompt the players association to realize that the best deal that can be reached is the one the N.B.A. is prepared to make right now.”

The N.B.A.’s current proposal to the players includes a soft salary cap, a 50 percent share of revenues for players and these features:

¶ Salary-cap and luxury-tax levels in Years 1 and 2 of the new agreement will be no less than they were in 2010-11. By Year 3, they will be adjusted downward to conform to the new system.

¶ Sign-and-trade deals and the biannual exception will be available only to nontaxpaying teams.

¶ Extend-and-trade deals, such as the one signed by Carmelo Anthony last season, will be prohibited.

¶ The midlevel exception will be set at $5 million for nontaxpaying teams, with a maximum length between three and four years (alternating annually). The value of the exception will grow by 3 percent annually, starting in Year 3.

¶ The midlevel exception will be set at $2.5 million for taxpaying teams, with a maximum length of two years, and cannot be used in consecutive years. Its value will also grow at 3 percent annually.

¶ A 10 percent escrow tax will be withheld from player salaries, to ensure that player earnings do not exceed 50 percent of league revenues. An additional withholding will be applied in Year 1 “to account for business uncertainty” stemming from the lockout.

¶ Maximum contract lengths will be five years for “Bird” free agents and four years for others.

¶ Annual contract increases will be 5.5 percent for “Bird” players and 3.5 percent for others.

¶ Players will be paid a prorated share of their 2011-12 salaries, based on the number of games played once the season starts.

¶ Team and player contract options will be prohibited in new contracts, other than rookie deals. But a player can opt out of the final year of a contract if he agrees to zero salary protection (i.e., if it is nonguaranteed).

The “reset” proposal features a flex-cap system that contains an absolute salary ceiling — to be set $5 million above the average team salary. In addition, the N.B.A. would roll back existing contracts “in proportion to system changes in order to ensure sufficient market for free agents.”

The other major differences in the “reset” proposal are:

¶ The midlevel exception would be set at $3 million in Year 1, with a maximum length of three years, and would grow at 3 percent annually.

¶ Maximum salaries would be reduced.

¶ Sign-and-trade rules would remain consistent with the 2005 labor deal.

¶ Contracts would be limited to four years for “Bird” free agents and three years for others, but each team could give a five-year deal to one designated player.

¶ Raises would be limited to 4.5 percent for “Bird” players and 3.5 percent for others.

¶ Changes requested by the union on restricted free agency rules and salary-cap holds would not be included.

Both proposals include an “amnesty” provision that will allow every team to waive one player and have 100 percent of his salary removed from the cap.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/08/sp...atum.html?_r=1

[mcHAPPY]

Something I had not considered before:

Brian
My question is that if the players were getting 57%, but having 8% withheld in escrow and never received that 8% back in any year of the prior CBA but this year, they were in effect making only 49% with this past year being the exception, how is 50-50 unfair if they are guaranteed that 50%?

Bill Ingram
Exactly, and what if the Union doesn’t hold out the 8%? The players should take the deal . . .it’s not going to get any better, and it’s not as bad as the rhetoric would suggest. This is ego versus ego . . .if hunter and the Players could set ego aside (and listen to their agents) they would know this is not so bad.

http://www.hoopsworld.com/nba-chat-w...ram-1172011-2/

Am I missing something here?


If not, the players really are sofa-king-we-tar-did.

[mcHAPPY]

With regards to the offer given to players today, the league needs to have one more meeting on Tuesday or early Wednesday. Give the players some minor concession(s) so they can at least say honestly they got the best deal possible. Probably won't happen but that is just my opinion.

[heinz57]

it's truly the most grandiose game of "let's slap our schlongs on the table and see who's the biggest" ever.

[slaw]

Something I had not considered before:




Am I missing something here?


If not, the players really are sofa-king-we-tar-did.

Yes, so is the writer. The escrow ensures that salaries do not exceed the allotted BRI percentage. For example, let's say the BRI guaranteed to the players is $200 and actual salaries are $220. Let's say 10% of that $220 ($22) is held in escrow. The owners would be entitled to $20 out of the $22 to fix the overage and leave the players with their allotted $200. Conversely, if salaries were $190, the players would get the $19 paid into escrow back as the $190 would be below the BRI allotment.

It's stuff like this that makes me seriously question the reporting on this story. If a NBA reporter doesn't know this very, very simple math, it makes me wonder how he has any idea what is going on.

[slaw]

As I was saying, unintended consequences....

http://www.nba.com/2011/news/feature...s=iref:nbahpt1

Over and over in the last two weeks, I have heard the same refrain from players and agents, from big markets and small ones, max guys and minimum salaried guys. You can forget asking about community service work. You can forget asking for cooperation for NBA Cares. Basketball Without Borders? Don't even ask. All of the public service requests that the league has made of its players -- in part, it must be said, to quell fan anger after the Brawl at Auburn Hills in 2004 -- are in jeopardy.

And one agent intimated that players who would normally try to gut their way through injuries and assorted other hurts now will wait until they're 100 percent before returning to the court. Why should they jeopardize their careers, the agent asked, when the owners obviously care nothing about them?

"They're being treated like employees," the slow-to-anger agent said. "And people who are treated like employees are 9-to-5ers. They punch the clock and they're out the door."

Aldridge hints at something even more significant in the article when he quotes an agent as saying he will never send another player to Charlotte. It will be interesting to see if the players retaliate against certain teams and owners.

[mcHAPPY]

Yes, so is the writer. The escrow ensures that salaries do not exceed the allotted BRI percentage. For example, let's say the BRI guaranteed to the players is $200 and actual salaries are $220. Let's say 10% of that $220 ($22) is held in escrow. The owners would be entitled to $20 out of the $22 to fix the overage and leave the players with their allotted $200. Conversely, if salaries were $190, the players would get the $19 paid into escrow back as the $190 would be below the BRI allotment.

It's stuff like this that makes me seriously question the reporting on this story. If a NBA reporter doesn't know this very, very simple math, it makes me wonder how he has any idea what is going on.

Thanks, slaw. I knew there was something wrong there.

Another way to look at it is for every $100 of revenue:

players get $57

of that $57, $4.56 is held in escrow (8%)

if the players receive more than $57 of each $100, the owners get the difference (or all) of escrow

if the players receive less than $57 of each $100, the players receive the difference (or all) of escrow.

[Apollo]

Pierce let Hunter & Fisher know that he would be peeing in their Corn Flakes

Before Paul Pierce conducted call on decert w/ players and anti-trust lawyer Thursday, he informed Hunter and Fisher of plans, sources say.

Source: Twitter @WojYahooNBA

[Apollo]

Owners might be willing to meet once more?

Some ownership willingness to meet w/ players before Wednesday deadline, but no labor relations call set to decide, management source says.

Source: Twitter @WojYahooNBA

[mcHAPPY]

They're being treated like employees," the slow-to-anger agent said. "And people who are treated like employees are 9-to-5ers. They punch the clock and they're out the door."

That is a union mentality and the exact problem with the current guaranteed contracts in the NBA and in private and government professions in the western world. It is the attitude of entitlement. A part of being a professional is putting the time and effort in to growth and development as a professional. If they want to punch the clock, go work manual labour construction, an assembly line, or a check out (nothing against those jobs and hopefully the difference is seen between a job most people can do and the training and skills required to be a professional).

And one agent intimated that players who would normally try to gut their way through injuries and assorted other hurts now will wait until they're 100 percent before returning to the court.

I feel confident in saying that for every player who returns earlier you can find a case of a player or more not returning even when ready or taking the night off or partying until the wee hours of the morning before a game day.



Again the problem with this pissing match is in the end the players will eventually lose. By not giving 100% they alienate the fans long term. Just as easy as the players remove perks or services, the owners can cut back on pre-game and post game meals, travel, hotel, etc. Also with the community tasks, what about giving back and helping in general? Not doing this only further tarnishes the brand, alienates fans, and lowers their public perception.

The players unfortunately are employees and emotional employees at that who are not thinking rationally or logically throughout this process. It is clear the last CBA gave the players to much power and that power has bred in to entitlement.

It really has become a situation of cutting of one's nose to spite their face.

As always, just my opinion so take it for what it is worth.

[Apollo]

Jordan and Bobcats Black Listed?

One prominent agent who is normally slow to anger called last Friday at 11 p.m. He would never, he said, ever send another one of his players to Charlotte. Jordan, he said, was a rank hypocrite, who tried to get every last dollar out of Jerry Reinsdorf's pocket as a player, yet slammed the door shut on other players who only wanted the same opportunity.

Certainly, people are allowed to change their views over time, and Jordan has to think about a much bigger picture now that he's signing the checks rather than cashing them. Yet Jordan is involved in business arrangements with many of the players whose salaries he's seeking to reduce. His Jordan Brand has among its endorsing clients Dwyane Wade, Chris Paul, Carmelo Anthony, Rip Hamilton Gerald Wallace and Ray Allen.

But it isn't just Jordan. There is incredible anger among players just under the surface. Anger at having to give up hundreds of millions of dollars, of course, but also anger stemming from their feeling that they aren't being treated as partners by the owners, but as employees.

Source: NBA.com

Let's see how that one flies if it's costing his player a million or two per year.

[Employee]

As I was saying, unintended consequences....

http://www.nba.com/2011/news/feature...s=iref:nbahpt1


Aldridge hints at something even more significant in the article when he quotes an agent as saying he will never send another player to Charlotte. It will be interesting to see if the players retaliate against certain teams and owners.

Wait a second! So NBA players aren't doing the community work voluntarily?? You mean NBA cares is lying to me??
AAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH my universe is maligned!