Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

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

  • Was it all for not?

    Here are some of the key details of those moves, according to a league source who was privy to the details of the tentative agreement and shared those details with SheridanHoops.com.

    _ On the financial split, the players will receive between 49 and 51 percent of revenues, depending on annual growth. The players had complained prior to Saturday that the owners’ previous offer effectively limited them to 50.2 percent of revenues, but the source said 51 percent was now reasonably achievable with robust growth.

    _Owners dropped their insistence on what would have been known as the Carmelo Anthony rule, preventing teams from executing extend-and-trade deals similar to the one that sent Anthony from the Denver Nuggets to the New York Knicks last season. This means that if Dwight Howard, Deron Williams and Chris Paul want to leverage their way out of Orlando, New Jersey and New Orleans, they will still be eligible to sign four-year extensions with their current teams before being immediately traded elsewhere.

    _ Teams above the salary cap will be able to offer four-year mid-level exception contracts to free agents each season. Previously, owners were asking that teams be limited to offering a four-year deal one year, a three-year deal the next, then four, then three, etc.

    _ The rookie salary scale and veteran minimum salaries will stay the same as they were last season. Owners had been seeking 12 percent cuts.

    _ Qualifying offers to restricted free agents will become “significantly” improved. The sides had already agreed to reduce the time for a team to match an offer to a restricted free agent from 7 days to 3.

    _ A new $2.5 million exception will be available to teams that go blow the salary cap, then use all of their cap room to sign free agents. Once they are back above the cap, they will be able to use the new exception instead of being limited to filling out their rosters with players on minimum contracts.

    _ The prohibition on luxury tax-paying teams from executing sign-and-trade deals was loosened, although the freedom to execute those types of deals will still be limited.

    Source: SheridanHoops.com


    The “A-list” issues, though, were the ones that had hung up the season, forcing what will be an opening night delayed by 55 days. They’re the ones that caused bargaining to break down Nov. 14 and they’re the ones that needed to be addressed to both sides’ satisfaction –- or tolerable dissatisfaction -– for the tentative agreement to get struck.

    Finding middle ground on those was key. Among them:

    – The mid-level exception for non-taxpaying teams will have a maximum length of four years every season (instead of alternating at four years, then three years). Starting salary can be as much as $5 million.

    – There apparently will be a “mini” MLE for taxpaying teams, restricting the amount they can offer to free agents.

    – A 10 percent maximum escrow tax will be withheld without the unlimited “true up” amount requested by the owners in their previous offer.

    – Extend-and-trade deals –- as used by Carmelo Anthony and the New York Knicks last season –- will be modified but not eliminated in a new CBA. That could impact players such as Orlando’s Dwight Howard and New Jersey’s Deron Williams.

    – A new benefits pool for players equivalent to 1 percent of BRI will include annuities for retired players ages 35-50, as well as funds for continuing education.

    – The “match” period for restricted free agents will be reduced from seven days to three days. Qualifying offers are expected to be increased.

    – Other compromises were believed to have been reached on the “repeater” luxury tax penalties to be paid by teams exceeding the tax threshold in four of any five seasons. Among the “B-list” issues are the age limit for entry to the draft (possibly upping to 20 years and two years out of high school), drug testing modifications, discipline and D League assignments.
    Source: NBA.com
    Last edited by mcHAPPY; Sat Nov 26, 2011, 09:16 AM.

    Comment


    • Matt52 wrote: View Post
      _Owners dropped their insistence on what would have been known as the Carmelo Anthony rule, preventing teams from executing extend-and-trade deals similar to the one that sent Anthony from the Denver Nuggets to the New York Knicks last season. This means that if Dwight Howard, Deron Williams and Chris Paul want to leverage their way out of Orlando, New Jersey and New Orleans, they will still be eligible to sign four-year extensions with their current teams before being immediately traded elsewhere.
      makes me wonder a couple things:

      did the players have more 'leverage' (using that term loosely) than fans initially thought and losing a season was scarrier to the owners than they let on?

      or did the owners never really give a sh*t about 'competitive balance' and this was all about money and ego?

      Comment


      • GarbageTime wrote: View Post
        makes me wonder a couple things:

        did the players have more 'leverage' (using that term loosely) than fans initially thought and losing a season was scarrier to the owners than they let on?

        or did the owners never really give a sh*t about 'competitive balance' and this was all about money and ego?
        After December 25th there were ramifications on the national TV deal and other league sponsorships from what I understand. Plus it was in no one's best interest to lose a season. The best deals are when neither party are totally happy.

        The owners did get:
        6-7% more BRI ($240-300M annually)
        much harsher tax
        shorter contracts
        smaller MLE
        restrictions on sign and trade for tax teams (not yet exactly known)
        monetary advantage for smaller markets in free agency (mini MLE vs full MLE)
        25% increase (8% to 10%) in escrow fund
        decrease in annual raises

        The players kept:
        guaranteed deals
        no hard cap
        no rollbacks for current contracts
        no rollbacks for future minimum and rookie contracts



        The owners were given a choice to sub the starters and settle for a 20 point win or continue with the starting 5 and win by 40.

        In the end a win is a win.



        What I am curious to know is:

        In previous proposal Bird Rights were not transferable in a sign and trade (i.e. only 4 years and 3.5% raises versus 5 years and 6.5% raises). If this continues to be the case, I can live with no extend and trade (i.e. no Melo Rule).

        Comment


        • Matt52 wrote: View Post
          After December 25th there were ramifications on the national TV deal and other league sponsorships from what I understand. Plus it was in no one's best interest to lose a season. The best deals are when neither party are totally happy.The owners did get:
          6-7% more BRI ($240-300M annually)
          much harsher tax
          shorter contracts
          smaller MLE
          restrictions on sign and trade for tax teams (not yet exactly known)
          monetary advantage for smaller markets in free agency (mini MLE vs full MLE)
          25% increase (8% to 10%) in escrow fund
          decrease in annual raises

          The players kept:
          guaranteed deals
          no hard cap
          no rollbacks for current contracts
          no rollbacks for future minimum and rookie contracts



          The owners were given a choice to sub the starters and settle for a 20 point win or continue with the starting 5 and win by 40.

          In the end a win is a win.



          What I am curious to know is:

          In previous proposal Bird Rights were not transferable in a sign and trade (i.e. only 4 years and 3.5% raises versus 5 years and 6.5% raises). If this continues to be the case, I can live with no extend and trade (i.e. no Melo Rule).

          totally agree. Said that a couple months ago.

          But this was more about some believing the players should just give up to any of the owners desires because they'll never get what they want ("owners have all the leverage and the players have none" idea), and giving the impression the owners were in it for some sort of altruistic design ("competitive balance").

          The reality always was it all came down to $... and then morphed into an ego trip. Once it was realized that the ego trip was going to cost significantly more than expected, some peoples pride got checked at the door (thank god).

          anyways don't want to jinx this so I'll shut my mouth.

          Too bad the Melo rule looks like its out the door though... I think it would have been one of the best changes to come out of the lockout.

          Comment


          • Wow ... What a fantastic way to start my Saturday!

            Comment


            • GarbageTime wrote: View Post
              totally agree. Said that a couple months ago.

              But this was more about some believing the players should just give up to any of the owners desires because they'll never get what they want ("owners have all the leverage and the players have none" idea), and giving the impression the owners were in it for some sort of altruistic design ("competitive balance").

              The reality always was it all came down to $... and then morphed into an ego trip. Once it was realized that the ego trip was going to cost significantly more than expected, some peoples pride got checked at the door (thank god).

              anyways don't want to jinx this so I'll shut my mouth.

              Too bad the Melo rule looks like its out the door though... I think it would have been one of the best changes to come out of the lockout.
              I'm not sure that is the case. I do think the owners were trying to achieve maximum competitive balance however money and split of BRI was by far the #1 concern (a league operating at a loss is not sustainable). To get a deal done they had to relent on some of those competitive balance issues but they did get a couple of important changes in there which will hopefully make an impact. Don't forget the much harsher luxury tax is in there and there will still be penalties for repeat tax offenders (although I believe the penalty has been decreased).


              *EDIT* Appears not all owners will be too thrilled but the majority will at the least approve.

              WindhorstESPN Brian Windhorst
              Owners probably will not be happy with last-minute system concessions. But Stern made deal knowing he's got the needed votes.
              Last edited by mcHAPPY; Sat Nov 26, 2011, 11:48 AM.

              Comment


              • Via Larry Coon:

                Friday's compromise included the elimination of the smaller mid-level exception for taxpayers, the restoration of sign-and-trade and extend-and-trade transactions, and the removal of the harsher tax penalties for teams that are taxpayers four times in a five-year span.

                "It's not the system we sought out to get in terms of a harder cap," Silver said, "but the luxury tax is harsher than it was in the past deal, and we hope it's effective."
                Source: Larry Coon, ESPN.com

                Ugh. This does not make me feel good at all. It appears the only thing that has happened is a harsher luxury tax and that might not even be the same as previously proposed.

                Comment


                • I really love seeing how teams only have 3 days to Match an offer on a Restricted Free Agent.

                  I HATED that 7 days.

                  Comment


                  • Matt52 wrote: View Post
                    Via Larry Coon:



                    Source: Larry Coon, ESPN.com

                    Ugh. This does not make me feel good at all. It appears the only thing that has happened is a harsher luxury tax and that might not even be the same as previously proposed.
                    Geez. Looks like they're just trying to get something/anything done at this point.

                    Good to see. I think the harsher Tax will certainly have an effect. Not as much as everything else would have, but still.

                    Comment


                    • The owners were the clear winners but with the few concessions the players achieved on Friday, the NBAPA got the best deal they could salvage for their membership and thus the nuclear winter (great phrase) was avoided.

                      I wonder whose in shape and whose not????

                      Comment


                      • stretch wrote: View Post
                        The owners were the clear winners but with the few concessions the players achieved on Friday, the NBAPA got the best deal they could salvage for their membership and thus the nuclear winter (great phrase) was avoided.

                        I wonder whose in shape and whose not????
                        I wouldn't say "Clear" winners at all.
                        They got their money. And a few notches tighter on the belt.

                        I'd say this boxing match came down to the judges, and it was ruled a Draw.

                        (Which means some pretty good negotiating was done on both sides... I think.)

                        Comment


                        • The extend and trade was the dumbest rule that really only helped a couple of mega star players. I'm not sure why the league would give that one to the players. I'm guessing the league really wants the best players in the best markets.

                          Comment


                          • Most likely the concessions only ensures another lockout in 2018.

                            Comment


                            • planetmars wrote: View Post
                              The extend and trade was the dumbest rule that really only helped a couple of mega star players. I'm not sure why the league would give that one to the players. I'm guessing the league really wants the best players in the best markets.
                              Why wouldn't the league want that?

                              You think the NBA was happy with the New York Knicks as a JOKE?

                              They need big markets to be BIG teams.
                              Thats where the real money comes from.

                              Even if Milwaukee is super popular and has a great team, that exact same team would bring in 10x more money in New York.

                              Comment


                              • joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
                                I wouldn't say "Clear" winners at all.
                                They got their money. And a few notches tighter on the belt.

                                I'd say this boxing match came down to the judges, and it was ruled a Draw.

                                (Which means some pretty good negotiating was done on both sides... I think.)
                                This was from Matt in post #1863:
                                "The players kept:
                                guaranteed deals
                                no hard cap
                                no rollbacks for current contracts
                                no rollbacks for future minimum and rookie contracts"

                                So in essence the players did not get squat in this contract. Nothing but take aways.

                                But yes, they are millionaires, and they will continue to make millions playing a game that most people play for fun.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X