2011 lockout

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

So, it really looks like there will be a lockout in 2011. My question to y'all hoop junkies is, how will that affect your attitude towards the NBA? Will you carry on as normal? Will you give up on the NBA and start following college hoops instead? Slam Ball? Lacrosse? Or will you make voodoo dolls of the owners and players and Billy Hunter and stick sharp objects in their genitalia? What?

[Chieflion]

If this happens, I expect Gilbert Arenas to take out a water gun and fill it up with his juices and spray it at David Stern.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

If this happens, I expect Gilbert Arenas to take out a water gun and fill it up with his juices and spray it at David Stern.

:lmao

Don't blame David though, CBA negotiations are all about Billy Hunter and the owners.

Personally, I can see an easy compromise:

* the players give up the guaranteed 5-6 year contracts they can currently sign and agree to max 2 or 3 year guaranteed deals, with 4/5/6th year guaranteed if agreed performance indicators are met during preceding years;

* the owners agree to keep the player's share of total revenue somewhere between 55-58%;

* maximum salaries decline.

But it is going to be a lot bloodier than that, methinks. The owners want to make money to redeem their GFC losses (often accrued in other parts of their business empires), but the players don't want to give anything up since they've got it pretty cushy right now.

I wonder what Timmy will do if there's a lockout that extends into the season?

[IronMexican]

I can live without the NBA. If there is a 2011 NFL lockout, all hell will break loose though. I know it has nothing to do with this thread, but I was thinking about Schefter saying that 98 in a 100 people think there will be no football in 2011. If that does happen, hopefully some good can come of it. Like a rookie pay scale.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

I can live without the NBA. If there is a 2011 NFL lockout, all hell will break loose though. I know it has nothing to do with this thread, but I was thinking about Schefter saying that 98 in a 100 people think there will be no football in 2011. If that does happen, hopefully some good can come of it. Like a rookie pay scale.

From what I've read, the players really get screwed in the NFL - contracts are completely non-guaranteed!? WTF?

NBA players don't want to go down that road. NBA owners do. There will be blood.

[IronMexican]

From what I've read, the players really get screwed in the NFL - contracts are completely non-guaranteed!? WTF?

NBA players don't want to go down that road. NBA owners do. There will be blood.


Guaranteed money is what the players and manager's worry about the most. Sure, Haynesworth signed a 100 million dollar contract, and he probably wont get all of it, but he still got something like 48 million guaranteed in that deal.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

From what I've read, the players really get screwed in the NFL - contracts are completely non-guaranteed!? WTF?

NBA players don't want to go down that road. NBA owners do. There will be blood.


Contracts are partially non-guaranteed. Some really small contracts are all non-guaranteed but the majority have guarantees. The way NFL players get screwed is their pensions and the NFL taking care of them when the toll football takes on their body causes medical problems later in life. With some of the stories about retired players who's lives are absolutely miserable and the NFL isn't lifting a finger to help them, I can't blame the current players for holding out.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Contracts are partially non-guaranteed. Some really small contracts are all non-guaranteed but the majority have guarantees. The way NFL players get screwed is their pensions and the NFL taking care of them when the toll football takes on their body causes medical problems later in life. With some of the stories about retired players who's lives are absolutely miserable and the NFL isn't lifting a finger to help them, I can't blame the current players for holding out.

Yeah, I read about that too and it amazed me! How freakin hard can it be to get the insurance and pension scheme right?

[Allanon]

The NBA (and any other league) can't afford a lockout in this recession. It's a lose lose for all involved.

I think they'll make sure it doesn't happen.

[NuGGeTs-FaN]

ill get a lot more work done, i know that much

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

The NBA (and any other league) can't afford a lockout in this recession. It's a lose lose for all involved.

I think they'll make sure it doesn't happen.

If the world were run by rational, reasonable people who could share, its problems would be far less. Unfortunately, the world is run by petty, greedy people who don't like to share, and the NBA is no different. Even though a compromise on both sides could easily get a deal done, I doubt it. Damage will be done instead because everyone "gotta get theirs". :rolleyes

I sincerely hope your faith in humanity proves correct and both sides agree to give in to some of each other's demands in order to avoid screwing their fanbase at a time when some people might just give up on the league altogether.


ill get a lot more work done, i know that much

:lol Me too! :oops

[Chieflion]

:lmao

Don't blame David though, CBA negotiations are all about Billy Hunter and the owners.


I did say Gilbert Arenas. :toast

[baseline bum]

Being completely biased, as a Spurs fan, lockouts are great because Stern keeps winning every negotiation, thus making the NBA a much more level playing field for small markets like San Antonio. Without the 99 lockout, no way the Spurs could have been able to pay Tim Duncan and David Robinson together, and then pay Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker later on. If it wasn't for the lockout, Duncan would have been pulling $25+ million a season from 2000 on and the Spurs would have been SOL.

Despite all the bitching from ignorant fans who think Stern is in on some great conspiracy to screw the Spurs and put the Lakers in the Finals every year, Stern has been very good to the Spurs via the salary cap, luxury tax, and bounds on player salaries. I personally think it screws the players over royally, but I'm a fan and there's nothing logical about fanaticism.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Being completely biased, as a Spurs fan, lockouts are great because Stern keeps winning every negotiation, thus making the NBA a much more level playing field for small markets like San Antonio. Without the 99 lockout, no way the Spurs could have been able to pay Tim Duncan and David Robinson together, and then pay Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker later on. If it wasn't for the lockout, Duncan would have been pulling $25+ million a season from 2000 on and the Spurs would have been SOL.

Despite all the bitching from ignorant fans who think Stern is in on some great conspiracy to screw the Spurs and put the Lakers in the Finals every year, Stern has been very good to the Spurs via the salary cap, luxury tax, and bounds on player salaries. I personally think it screws the players over royally, but I'm a fan and there's nothing logical about fanaticism.

Good points. :tu

I'm all for contraction of salaries and shorter guaranteed contracts as long as the players still get a decent cut of total revenue, and hopefully that's the position Hunter and the owners will settle on.

[MiamiHeat]

I would love for the NBA to adopt an NFL-style contract system.

That way, all of these shitty lazy NBA player attitudes would be gone. They would have to work their ass off or risk getting cut.

In the NFL, if you sign a big deal, you better believe the player is working his ass off to keep it.

In the NBA, if you sign a big deal, you just got your guaranteed meal ticket, so you can suck, sit on the bench, do whatever, and still get paid. It's bogus.


So, yeah, bring on the NFL-like contracts to the NBA. It will improve the game, it will cut down all the Larry Hughes type players, etc...

[pauls931]

I say go for it, maybe in a year or two the suns could be rebuilt... Actually, I'd think it would be suicidal in this economy. Edge fans will switch to football or something else and when it returns, will they be able to sell enough tickets to recoup losses?

That said, they definitely need to do something about salaries. Shaq making 20 mil for taking up a few square feet in the key? Long contracts repeating in the situation of teams paying for an injured player over and over? High salaries making numerous franchises unprofitable. ouch...

[I. Hustle]

I say cool. We ALWAYS with the championship during lockout years.

[NRHector]

I would watch beach volleyball and college volleyball and then go back to BB when the lockout is over

[Pistons < Spurs]

CBA Negotiations Could Get Ugly



In conversations with front-office executives Tuesday night, I was told some strong stuff regarding the upcoming Collective Bargaining Agreement. As you probably know, the current CBA will end after the 2010-2011 season.

The gist of what I was told is that the owners will go for the jugular and drop the players’ salaries immensely.

I spoke with one executive about Amare Stoudemire and was told that, the way owners are talking now, Stoudemire wouldn’t even get a five-year contract worth $60 million under the next CBA. That sounded crazy to me, but when I spoke with a team owner an hour later, he made the executive sound tame.

“The owners are really going to chop the money down,’’ the owner said. “I think Stoudemire would get $5 or $6 million [annually] in the next deal. The bottom line is that things are going to change dramatically.’’

Five to six million dollars for a five-time All-Star in his prime? That sounds cruel compared with the players’ current salaries, so cruel that I just don’t believe it. A general manager I spoke with later agreed that that was an extreme.

“That [$5 million for Stoudemire] sounds a little bizarre, but player salaries are definitely going to take a hit,’’ the GM said. “Players that come up for contracts under the new CBA are going to find themselves getting a lot less money.’’

It’s well-known that owners will try to shorten contracts. Currently, players can sign contracts as long as six years. One GM told me the owners are looking to shorten the maximum length of a contract to four or five years. He added that they have actually discussed trying to guarantee only the first two years of a four-year deal, and that the third and fourth years would be guaranteed only if a player reached certain performance-based incentives the previous season.

In other words, it would be closer to the NFL than to today’s NBA.

“Those concepts are being discussed,’’ another GM told me. “Is there a sentiment among some [owners] that they’d like to have it like football? Yeah. But I think that’s out of bounds.’’

Severe drops in salary. Non-guaranteed contracts. Billy Hunter, the Executive Director of the Players Association, will not settle for that without a fight, and the owners know it.

“There’s going to be a lockout,’’ the owner said. “There’s not even a doubt in my mind about that. Billy’s not going to make a deal like that. Teams are already saving up money for a strike.’’

Maybe the players should start saving too.


http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/12604/cba-negotiations-could-get-ugly

[baseline bum]

I would love for the NBA to adopt an NFL-style contract system.

That way, all of these shitty lazy NBA player attitudes would be gone. They would have to work their ass off or risk getting cut.

In the NFL, if you sign a big deal, you better believe the player is working his ass off to keep it.

In the NBA, if you sign a big deal, you just got your guaranteed meal ticket, so you can suck, sit on the bench, do whatever, and still get paid. It's bogus.


So, yeah, bring on the NFL-like contracts to the NBA. It will improve the game, it will cut down all the Larry Hughes type players, etc...

The NFL system is bullshit. What the fuck is the point of signing a contract if the obligation only goes one way?

[duhoh]

The NFL system is bullshit. What the fuck is the point of signing a contract if the obligation only goes one way?

sure but how many players in the NFL can you accuse of being lazy?

[Basketballgirl25]

If a lockout happens in 2011. I won't really care. it's just the NBA and it isn't all the important I can live without it

[21_Blessings]

Lockout would last 2 days after 90% of the players spend all of their money on a bunch of fiscally irresponsible shit. Bonus: we can watch Antonie Walker become a scab.

Look for a plethora of loopholes teams can use to get out of guaranteed contracts in the next CBA. Arenas fucked any chance the players had, which was slim to begin with.

[baseline bum]

sure but how many players in the NFL can you accuse of being lazy?

If the contracts aren't guaranteed, the players' association should just ban multiyear deals period.

[duncan228]

Expect an NBA Lockout in 2011 (http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=tsn-expectannbalockoutin&prov=tsn&type=lgns)
SportingNews

With many NBA franchises in dire financial straits, it’s been expected that the owners will force many concessions from the NBA Players Association for the long-term health of the league when they renegotiate the collective bargaining agreement after the 2010-11 season.

We haven’t heard many specifics about what exactly they will ask for, but speculation has run rampant. Now, Chris Broussard has several quotes from an owner (http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/12604/cba-negotiations-could-get-ugly) that give some indication, and it isn’t pretty. From TrueHoop:

I spoke with one executive about Amare Stoudemire and was told that, the way owners are talking now, Stoudemire wouldn’t even get a five-year contract worth $60 million under the next CBA. That sounded crazy to me, but when I spoke with a team owner an hour later, he made the executive sound tame.

“The owners are really going to chop the money down,’’ the owner said. “I think Stoudemire would get $5 or $6 million [annually] in the next deal. The bottom line is that things are going to change dramatically.’’

That’s obviously a considerable cut in salary, which makes you wonder what non-star rotation players would make. Given owners’ usual inability to contain themselves with free-agent offers, there would have to be some serious cap restrictions to drive salary down that much. But wait, that’s not all:

Currently, players can sign contracts as long as six years. One GM told me the owners are looking to shorten the maximum length of a contract to four or five years. He added that they have actually discussed trying to guarantee only the first two years of a four-year deal, and that the third and fourth years would be guaranteed only if a player reached certain performance-based incentives the previous season.

In other words, it would be closer to the NFL than to today’s NBA.

Something tells me the union is not going to lie down in the face of these demands. The NBA union isn’t as strong as its counterpart in some other major leagues—baseball, namely—but it’s still strong relative to unions in other industries. The players aren’t going to submit to anything the owners ask of them, especially if the cuts are this drastic.

That doesn’t mean they won’t be willing to compromise as long as the owners are willing to make their own concessions. Maybe the owners will raise the max salary, or the max will be ditched altogether. Concessions will be dependent on the financial circumstances at the time of negotiations and how the terms of the agreement interlock. Everyone will need to get creative.

Whatever happens, things are likely to get ugly. Broussard’s owner source expects there to be a lockout, claiming that teams are already holding onto their money in anticipation of a strike. Cherish this season and the next, because we’ll probably be without the NBA for some time in 2011.

[vander]

The NFL system is bullshit. What the fuck is the point of signing a contract if the obligation only goes one way?

yeah I would love for the NFL to adopt guaranteed contracts like the NBA, then teams would really have to pay for their stupid decisions.

and there would be more trades as teams try to unload contracts

[baseline bum]

“The owners are really going to chop the money down,’’ the owner said. “I think Stoudemire would get $5 or $6 million [annually] in the next deal. The bottom line is that things are going to change dramatically.’’

That's ridiculous. If they're going to push for capping salary this far down, then I hope the players hold out as long as necessary to kill this. You'd basically be winding the clock back to 1994 or so, not including inflation.

[MiamiHeat]

It is performance based, which makes perfect sense!

Exactly.

On top of that, our favorite teams are no longer held hostage to disaster contracts. Teams can move on and rebuild quicker, get rid of trouble players, lazy players, etc...

It's a win-win for our favorite teams and the fans.

[BlackSwordsMan]

sweet another spurs championship!
NFL lockout and NBA lockout in the same year? Murder rates will climb

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

That's ridiculous. If they're going to push for capping salary this far down, then I hope the players hold out as long as necessary to kill this. You'd basically be winding the clock back to 1994 or so, not including inflation.

Yeah, no way that happens, but it is an example of the extreme end of the owner's negotiating position, and a good reason to believe there will be a lockout because, clearly, some owners are going to try to rape the players in the next CBA.

The example cited would mean the player's cut going from 58% or so which it is at the moment, down to about 30%. Absurd. Also, unfair. There is no NBA without the players. They deserve their cut of the revenue.

[baseline bum]

Yeah, no way that happens, but it is an example of the extreme end of the owner's negotiating position, and a good reason to believe there will be a lockout because, clearly, some owners are going to try to rape the players in the next CBA.

The example cited would mean the player's cut going from 58% or so which it is at the moment, down to about 30%. Absurd. Also, unfair. There is no NBA without the players. They deserve their cut of the revenue.

The worst part is, in the lockout everyone will again blame the players as being spoiled the same way they blame American auto workers and teachers and anyone else in a union that fights for employee rights.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

The worst part is, in the lockout everyone will again blame the players as being spoiled the same way they blame American auto workers and teachers and anyone else in a union that fights for employee rights.

Yup, people are idiots, and they'll make the "basketball players don't deserve millions" argument. You know what, I agree that it is stupid to pay basketball players millions, but who should recieve the money if they don't? Money-grubbing owners? Players deserve their 55-60% cut as they are the ones providing the basis for the entire business - no players, no entertainment.

The irony is that the very same people who run that argument stimulate demand for the NBA (and other sports) in the first place, and that if those people didn't give their money to sports, sportsmen wouldn't be so massively overpaid! :lol

[jacobdrj]

The 98 lockout was devastating to me. I was just starting to get into basketball hard core and they took that year of connection away from me.
I couldn't care less about the NFL...

[TJastal]

The NFL system is bullshit. What the fuck is the point of signing a contract if the obligation only goes one way?

Because the player has to live up to his end of the contract too, he is obligated to perform at an acceptable level. Is this too hard for you to understand?

[21_Blessings]

The worst part is, in the lockout everyone will again blame the players as being spoiled the same way they blame American auto workers and teachers and anyone else in a union that fights for employee rights.

The terrible comparison aside. Whatever. 50-100 million dollar guaranteed, long-term contracts are retarded to begin with. They cripple franchises. Which hurts the quality of basketball around the league.

For every Lebron James there's 5 Eddie Currys.

[jacobdrj]

Because the player has to live up to his end of the contract too, he is obligated to perform at an acceptable level. Is this too hard for you to understand?

A contract is something that both parties have to live up to. These contracts are too one-sided, and is collectively bargained to be that way, much like the NBA contracts are too heavily weighted towards the players. (However, in the NBA, NFL type contracts could breed a very selfish style of basketball to bad ones own stats to keep them signed, where in the NFL a player is just a part of a system).

If the team has the power to renegotiate a contract based on poor performance, then the player should have the power to renegotiate if he exceeded expectations.

Either way, the NFL has 2 more urgent issues.

1) Treatment of retired players is deplorable. No matter if you are a practice squad player or a multisuperbowl MVP, the NFL should take care of the health of its players. Period. They make too much money not to.

2) Rookie contracts should never be counted against the cap if you have a hard cap like in the NFL. These players earned their payday in college for the right to be drafted higher, but the already obviously bad NFL team forced to pick 1st shouldn't be hampered with a big bloated contract when the rookie hasn't proven he can play professionally yet. Either you have negotiated rookie deals or you have rookie contracts not count against the cap.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Personally, I can see an easy compromise:

* the players give up the guaranteed 5-6 year contracts they can currently sign and agree to max 2 or 3 year guaranteed deals, with 4/5/6th year guaranteed if agreed performance indicators are met during preceding years;

* the owners agree to keep the player's share of total revenue somewhere between 55-58%;

* maximum salaries decline.

But it is going to be a lot bloodier than that, methinks. The owners want to make money to redeem their GFC losses (often accrued in other parts of their business empires), but the players don't want to give anything up since they've got it pretty cushy right now.

I wonder what Timmy will do if there's a lockout that extends into the season?


Because the player has to live up to his end of the contract too, he is obligated to perform at an acceptable level. Is this too hard for you to understand?

No, it was already covered in the thread, which means either you were lazy and didn't read it, or it was "too hard for you to understand".

Oh, and I'd back bb's brain over most of the people on this site in just about any context.


The terrible comparison aside. Whatever. 50-100 million dollar guaranteed, long-term contracts are retarded to begin with. They cripple franchises. Which hurts the quality of basketball around the league.

For every Lebron James there's 5 Eddie Currys.

Please try reading the thread.

The length of guarunteed contracts WILL CHANGE. It is one of the things the owners hate. But you don't have to go all the way to an NFL-style model to make it fairer for the owners whilst motivating the players more (see emboldened above).

[21_Blessings]

I never said go full NFL-style model. But I can guarantee there will be many more ways to void a contract next CBA. None of this collect a 50 million dollar paycheck for doing nothing while sitting on your ass at home like today's NBA.

[ynh]

I pray to God that the NFL doesn't cancle the 2011 season. I live in Indianapolis, IN, and we are getting the superbowl that year. I'll be damned if the NFL cancles the biggest party this town has had in a long time.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

A new twist: the owners probably want to dramatically shrink the % of BRI going to the players. The players will give them the big :flipoff for that, as they should. It occurs to me that a lot of owners are going to try and screw the players to recover money they lost in the crash through other businesses, and that shit shouldn't fly. Take the loss and keep a fair agreement with the players - no players, no NBA. They deserve over 50% of BRI.

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/12764/more-on-nba-labor-talks-the-pizza-metaphor


More on NBA labor talks: The pizza metaphor
February, 1, 2010
By Chris Sheridan

Those of you who follow the business side of the NBA closely know about BRI, the acronym for Basketball Related Income -- the pot of money that the owners and the players split up.

To those unfamiliar with the concept of BRI, this is somewhat of a sloppy metaphor, but I'll use it anyway:

Picture BRI as a pizza, cut up into eight slices. For at least the past 15 years, the players have been getting four slices, the owners three, and they've split the eighth slice in 14 of those years.

Now, if what SI.com is reporting is accurate, the owners want to not only take half the pizza, but a big chunk of that fifth slice, too.

A formal proposal from the owners on a new collective bargaining agreement is expected to arrive at the players' union offices any day, and tone will be set for the road forward -- and whether it will be a long, difficult road -- toward replacing the labor agreement due to expire June 30, 2011.

The NBA has declined to comment on the accuracy of the 45-55 report, which was the third item in today's Sports Business Journal. Players union president Derek Fisher commented on the issue diplomatically in a story I wrote today regarding the labor situation.

But back to the pizza.

If the owners really do ask for 55 percent, predictions of an epic, bloody battle could prove prescient.

Here is a list, provided by a representative for several high-profile NBA players, of the percentage of BRI that NBA players have received since 1995-96 -- the year the Chicago Bulls won an NBA record 72 games:

2008-09: 57.4 percent.

2007-08: 57 percent.

2006-07: 57 percent.

2005-06: 57 percent.

2004-05: 57 percent

2003-04: 57 percent.

2002-03: 60 percent

2001-02: 57 percent

2200-01: 65 percent.

1999-00 62 percent.

1998-99: 59 percent

1997-98: 57 percent.

1996-97: 55 percent.

1995-96: 53 percent.

Just a little something to chew on until we find out at All-Star weekend (NBA commissioner David Stern will undoubtedly address the matter at his annual All-Star news conference) a little more about what was in the owners' initial proposal, and how it was received.

[baseline bum]

This is just fucking amazing. The players accepted caps on contract length twice, caps of contract value, a luxury tax, decreasing shares of the revenue, 4 year servitude to the team that drafts a player, and the owners want more? You can't have a fucking hard cap, no MLE, reduced player deals, non-guaranteed deals, AND lower the share of BRI the players get all at once.

What a fucking crock. I haven't seen a goddamn ticket price reduction since the lockout even though the players accepted terms twice that significantly limited their pay. Under the old system Kobe Bryant and LeBron James would be making $35 million a year.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

This is just fucking amazing. The players accepted caps on contract length twice, caps of contract value, a luxury tax, decreasing shares of the revenue, 4 year servitude to the team that drafts a player, and the owners want more? You can't have a fucking hard cap, no MLE, reduced player deals, non-guaranteed deals, AND lower the share of BRI the players get all at once.

What a fucking crock. I haven't seen a goddamn ticket price reduction since the lockout even though the players accepted terms twice that significantly limited their pay. Under the old system Kobe Bryant and LeBron James would be making $35 million a year.

Exactly. The owners are a bunch of completely unreasonable arseholes who seem to have forgotten that without players they don't get their 45% of the big pie. Without the players there is no NBA. A lot of NBA team owners are just douchebag venture capitalists using basketball to line their pockets. If they can't control their greed for a moment and give the players a fair cut, fuck 'em.

[vy65]

Exactly. The owners are a bunch of completely unreasonable arseholes who seem to have forgotten that without players they don't get their 45% of the big pie. Without the players there is no NBA. A lot of NBA team owners are just douchebag venture capitalists using basketball to line their pockets. If they can't control their greed for a moment and give the players a fair cut, fuck 'em.

I think a lot of what you're saying begs the question. NBA teams are businesses first and foremost, so greed, the bottom line, and douche-baggery are pretty much a given. But, as a business, aren't the owners entitled to run their enterprises as they see fit? In a world without a CBA, employers would (and should) be able to negotiate the terms of employment with their employees. If an owner's terms are unreasonable, then the employee can go elsewhere--no one is twisting his arm. Given that, what's wrong with NBA owners trying to get the most from the players without giving much back to the players -- that's basic business, no?

I think there is an unanswered question here: what is the purpose of the CBA? Is it to normalize the field horizontally across all 30 franchises to make sure they can compete equally for the same talent? Or is it to guarantee the rights of the players?

While the answer is that the truth is somewhere in between, I think that the idea of players being entitled to a larger cut of profits is what is sinking some teams. For example, Philly has the albatross of Elton Brand's contract around its neck, so when attendance goes down, the business as a whole gets really hurt. But with guaranteed contracts, longer term deals, etc... ownership is stuck hurting financially. The idea that the players are entitled to certain contractual givens (contractual guarantees, etc...) is largely responsible for hurting NBA teams.

I'm shooting from the hip here, but I think there's a good analogy to executive compensation because both have high public visibility and statute as well as get paid a shit load. CEOs negotiate the terms of their employment with the company with the idea being that the executive is not entitled to anything; he is there to serve the company, and if his performance isn't up to par, then he gets the axe. The idea here is that if the executive isn't living up to expectations, and the corporation is hurting as a result, he gets the axe and a new manager is given the opportunity to turn things around.

Likewise, shorter contracts or contracts annually reviewed for attainment of performance goals, the ability to terminate contracts due to injury, and smaller contracts could go a long way to making NBA franchises, and the NBA itself, much more competitive and successful.

[Mark in Austin]

my compromise:

Players guaranteed 57% of BRI
Salaries stay the same but contracts have a max length of 3 years.
MLE and LLE stay.

If owners really want protection from themselves this solves that problem to a large extent - now the biggest mistake they can make is 3 years. This benefits the vast majority of players too because it frees up money for them that was locked up in bad deals with players who don't deserve it.

Oh, and there should be an Isiah Thomas clause - any team who hires him for anything beyond scouting pays the league a 10 Million/yr penalty.

[Ed Lover]

RuffnReadyOzStyle

C'mon Son! What kinda fuckin name is that son? Do you take it in the ass son? Nobody gives a fuck what you have to say nigga. Isn't there an Australian, Koala fucking message board somewhere you should be frequenting son?

Getdafuckouttaherewitdatboolshit

[ElNono]

Players need to send their own completely unacceptable and lopsided proposal to the owners... then negotiations begin. We'll see what middle-ground looks like.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Foyle says owner proposal goes too far
Comment Email Print Share
By Chris Sheridan
ESPN.com
Archive

BOSTON -- In the strongest comments yet by a players' union official since NBA owners made a new collective bargaining proposal, vice president Adonal Foyle of the Orlando Magic said the offer put forth last week by commissioner David Stern's office is "ludicrous."

That was the first word out of Foyle's mouth when he was asked Sunday to characterize the owners' new labor proposal, which was given to the union late last week as the sides took one of the first major steps toward replacing the collective bargaining agreement that expires at the end of the 2010-11 season.

“

Foyle A system like that would be too restrictive, and it doesn't jibe with what we think the league is.
” -- Union vice president
and Magic center Adonal Foyle

"I think it's a proposal that's far-reaching," said Foyle, the union's second-in-command behind president Derek Fisher. "This [new proposal] has gone too far. It wants a hard cap, it basically will create no middle class and which, in effect, means none of the Bird rules would apply," Foyle added, referencing the so-called Larry Bird exception that allows teams to exceed the salary cap to retain their own free agents.

Foyle, who was a member of the union's negotiating committee during the 2005 collective bargaining talks and was a player rep for the Golden State Warriors during the 1998-99 lockout, went on to call the owners' proposal "rash" and "unfair."

In addition to a hard salary cap to replace the current system of a "soft" cap, with its accompanying luxury-tax penalties for teams that exceed a certain payroll threshold ($69.9 million this season), owners have asked that contracts be shortened to a maximum of four years, Foyle said.

"I think when you look at the current CBA as it stands, it benefits both the players and owners. This is an agreement where we can [quibble] with different things within it, but it's an agreement that gives some things to both parties involved," Foyle told ESPN.com.

"A system like [the new proposal] would be too restrictive, and it doesn't jibe with what we think the league is. We have been willing to negotiate a guarantee that we don't get over a certain threshold, and no other businesses do that. We hold back 9 percent of our income so that the owners can make sure they are covered on the back end. We have given up a lot of stuff, and they have given up a lot of stuff, so I think to start off a negotiation in this rash a term, I think it's unfair," Foyle said.

Foyle said the union was particularly taken aback by the gravity of the owners' demands after the sides had held several cordial meetings in advance of the league's submitting the initial proposal.

"That's what I think was what most surprising to all of us. The meetings, in our estimation, had been quite constructive. We were seeming to get a sense of where everybody was, and we went through why we think [the current agreement] should be extended," Foyle said. "But I think a proposal like this is the first time they're saying: 'This is the way we want to go with the league.'"

The union's executive board will meet with team player representatives at All-Star Weekend to discuss the owners' proposal.

The union's executive director, Billy Hunter, has declined to comment publicly on the owners' proposal since it arrived on his desk last week. Fisher, too, has declined substantive comment.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=4895310

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

my compromise:

Players guaranteed 57% of BRI
Salaries stay the same but contracts have a max length of 3 years.
MLE and LLE stay.

If owners really want protection from themselves this solves that problem to a large extent - now the biggest mistake they can make is 3 years. This benefits the vast majority of players too because it frees up money for them that was locked up in bad deals with players who don't deserve it.

Oh, and there should be an Isiah Thomas clause - any team who hires him for anything beyond scouting pays the league a 10 Million/yr penalty.

That's pretty much what I said early in the thread. That would be a fair compromise. :tu

Oh, and I have a troll! :lmao

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

C'mon Son! What kinda fuckin name is that son? Do you take it in the ass son? Nobody gives a fuck what you have to say nigga. Isn't there an Australian, Koala fucking message board somewhere you should be frequenting son?

Getdafuckouttaherewitdatboolshit

Yeah, I kinda agree.

timvp, if you read this, is there any chance you can change my handle to "Ruffy"? I think my troll here makes a fair call on that. Thanks in advance. ;) :lol

[Lars]

The NBA cant afford another lockout.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

The NBA cant afford another lockout.

Yup, I agree, that's why I'm hoping that the owners come down out of their castles and realise that they need to be reasonable.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Interesting perspective on the future of the NBA in the context of Jordan's ownership bid by Kent Berger:

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/12984798/wearing-owners-hat-jordan-staring-at-more-crucial-test

[pauls931]

That's ridiculous. If they're going to push for capping salary this far down, then I hope the players hold out as long as necessary to kill this. You'd basically be winding the clock back to 1994 or so, not including inflation.

Do you work in DC?

[DPG21920]

Keep in mind, with no rich owners, there is no NBA either. Yes, I agree the players are what you would call the SME's, but the owners are the one's taking the financial risk. They are also the one's getting screwed. Guys like Arenas are not getting screwed. Guys like Kieth Bogans, who is terrible is still making a million a year. Look at all these terrible contracts being paid out to guys who do nothing. In the real world, you have performance based pay and you can get fired if you do a poor job after you have agreed upon a job.

I mean, look at any "normal" job. You can't have a 5 star restaurant without the chef's & waitstaff, but there is no way they get more money than the owners.

The chef is why the come to eat, not the owners.

Exstatic is right in that the owners are much more well prepared to handle a lockout than the players. This is just a fact.

[pauls931]

Keep in mind, with no rich owners, there is no NBA either. Yes, I agree the players are what you would call the SME's, but the owners are the one's taking the financial risk. They are also the one's getting screwed. Guys like Arenas are not getting screwed. Guys like Kieth Bogans, who is terrible is still making a million a year. Look at all these terrible contracts being paid out to guys who do nothing. In the real world, you have performance based pay and you can get fired if you do a poor job after you have agreed upon a job.

I mean, look at any "normal" job. You can't have a 5 star restaurant without the chef's & waitstaff, but there is no way they get more money than the owners.

The chef is why the come to eat, not the owners.

Exstatic is right in that the owners are much more well prepared to handle a lockout than the players. This is just a fact.

Great post... I completely agree. Players are currently not taking risk, but also are not pulling in enough money to pay their salaries. Somethin's got to give. I doubt many owners want to pay millions out of pocket just to watch their team play, they want to make money.

[Darthkiller]

the owners wouldnt mind locking out, they lose less money holding out then to have a season.

players on the other hand, wont get paid and most of them wouldnt be able to survive.

[Donkeybong]

It would be interesting to see a slew of legit NBA players head to europe and play there if a lockout occurs.

[TIMMYD!]

Is this a good thing or a bad thing for the veteran teams that need more rest like the Spurs or Celtics?

[Donkeybong]

Is this a good thing or a bad thing for the veteran teams that need more rest like the Spurs or Celtics?


If it's a shortened season, probably a good thing. If it's season long, very bad. Window is closing as is. One year older and they are fucked.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Keep in mind, with no rich owners, there is no NBA either. Yes, I agree the players are what you would call the SME's, but the owners are the one's taking the financial risk. They are also the one's getting screwed. Guys like Arenas are not getting screwed. Guys like Kieth Bogans, who is terrible is still making a million a year. Look at all these terrible contracts being paid out to guys who do nothing. In the real world, you have performance based pay and you can get fired if you do a poor job after you have agreed upon a job.

I mean, look at any "normal" job. You can't have a 5 star restaurant without the chef's & waitstaff, but there is no way they get more money than the owners.

The chef is why the come to eat, not the owners.

Exstatic is right in that the owners are much more well prepared to handle a lockout than the players. This is just a fact.

Who gave out those contracts? The owners. They have to take the blame for the contracts they negotiated. All those bad mid-level signings (and a few at the top end) have collectively destroyed the salary cap system. That is almost entirely on the owners, and a little on the agents.

I am not arguing that there shouldn't be change in the CBA - read what I have already said in this thread. Shorter contracts (3/4 yrs guaranteed max) with more money linked to performance makes sense. However, the players should still get at least half of BRI, whilst the owners want them to take a lot less, which to me seems unreasonable.

As you say, NBA players are like star chefs - take away the chef and a restaurant quickly loses its custom. The owners and players are admittedly symbiotic in that neither can really exist successfully without the other, but the players make the league what it is. The owners are just the finance, and I'm sure that if they walked away other financiers would step into the breach because there's a ton of money being made in the NBA.

I honestly believe a lot of these owners are just trying to claw back GFC losses (both from NBA and other assets), and I feel no sympathy for them. These are mostly super-rich people with toy basketball teams for fucksake, and half of them do a shocking job running them! They signed a bunch of bad contracts, made some poor business decisions, got thumped in the GFC, and they are still worth hundreds of millions and more... boo-hoo, I feel really bad for them! :lmao

[L.I.T]

I did not read the whole thread. But, looking at this from a global perspective, slashing salaries too much makes foreign leagues that much more attractive for players who are looking to get paid.

We saw this situation with Josh Childress; what will happen if, for example, someone like Amar'e can 'only' get 12-15 million per year on his next deal for 3 years. Some foreign team swoops in and offers him 20 million per year with some extra years tacked on. I am sure that would make Amar'e think twice about signing in the NBA.

The NBA owners are definitely in a difficult situation. They don't want to continue to pay what they consider exorbitant salaries. If the players play their cards right and leverage off of a perceived Euro threat to the owners they can force the owners off of whatever hard line they've taken.

I am not taking sides in terms of Owners vs. Players; just offering another potential angle to the discussion.

[pauls931]

Who gave out those contracts? The owners. They have to take the blame for the contracts they negotiated. All those bad mid-level signings (and a few at the top end) have collectively destroyed the salary cap system. That is almost entirely on the owners, and a little on the agents.

I am not arguing that there shouldn't be change in the CBA - read what I have already said in this thread. Shorter contracts (3/4 yrs guaranteed max) with more money linked to performance makes sense. However, the players should still get at least half of BRI, whilst the owners want them to take a lot less, which to me seems unreasonable.

As you say, NBA players are like star chefs - take away the chef and a restaurant quickly loses its custom. The owners and players are admittedly symbiotic in that neither can really exist successfully without the other, but the players make the league what it is. The owners are just the finance, and I'm sure that if they walked away other financiers would step into the breach because there's a ton of money being made in the NBA.

I honestly believe a lot of these owners are just trying to claw back GFC losses (both from NBA and other assets), and I feel no sympathy for them. These are mostly super-rich people with toy basketball teams for fucksake, and half of them do a shocking job running them! They signed a bunch of bad contracts, made some poor business decisions, got thumped in the GFC, and they are still worth hundreds of millions and more... boo-hoo, I feel really bad for them! :lmao

Then the fair solution is for owners to tell players' agents to go fuck themselves when asking for huge contracts going forward.

[Chieflion]

Then the fair solution is for owners to tell players' agents to go fuck themselves when asking for huge contracts going forward.

The agents need to feed their families too. Either way, the NBA cannot afford to pull this shit and drastically reduce player salaries. This ain't 1999 where the European leagues are not fully developed yet. Those European teams will throw large amount of money baiting players to join their team, aka those mid level talent from the NBA, those Josh Childress types. The overall talent of the league would drastically reduce and scrubs like Keith Bogans may get overpaid. We don't need that.

[Darthkiller]

The agents need to feed their families too. Either way, the NBA cannot afford to pull this shit and drastically reduce player salaries. This ain't 1999 where the European leagues are not fully developed yet. Those European teams will throw large amount of money baiting players to join their team, aka those mid level talent from the NBA, those Josh Childress types. The overall talent of the league would drastically reduce and scrubs like Keith Bogans may get overpaid. We don't need that.

you do realize nba is losing hundreds of millions a year ever since 1999(the current cba). the players are getting paid too much while owners are not getting back enough.

[EmptyMan]

Lockout you say?

Nice. Just what the doctor ordered to jumpstart the dynasty once again.

[lefty]

Spurs 2011 NBA Champs :elephant

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Simmons nails it again:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/100224

He says some stupid things occasionally, but most of his analysis of the NBA big picture is pretty good.

[jacobdrj]

I was hoping only the NFL would go down and might spark more interest in the NBA. But since both leagues are going down, well, to hell with them...

[DesignatedT]

replacement players!!!!!

[DPG21920]

Yeah, the owners gave out the contracts, so now they can be extremely tight with their money going forward? That will turn out well. You will see a ton of players crying and bitching. :lol They are only making 5M per year instead of 10 and they have absolutely 0 financial risk. I feel so bad for them.

Also, even though the GM's/Owners sign of on the contract and you put the blame on them, in the real world you can get fired even after you are hired. Would you allow the GM's to do that?

Point is both sides have a perspective.

Also, you are sorely over-estimating the amount of rich "financers" who would just step up if the owners left. There is not exactly a line of rich people lining up to buy NBA teams.

[L.I.T]

At the end of the day, owners are businessmen. And most of them have either made, maintained or expanded their asset base through being savvy investors and cost-conscious.

No one will invest in a proposition that is a guaranteed money loser.

[angrydude]

Only a fool buys an NBA team to make money.

Owning a team is an ego trip.

[baseline bum]

I like Simmons' suggestion to make the lottery even odds for all teams that miss the playoffs, like it was just after Houston tanked two seasons back to back.

[bostonguy]

Something will get worked out I hope

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

I like Simmons' suggestion to make the lottery even odds for all teams that miss the playoffs, like it was just after Houston tanked two seasons back to back.

That, plus shorten the season to 75 games and have an elimination tournament to decide the 7/8 seeds in each conference. I think that would be awesome! :)

[baseline bum]

I'm sick of hearing about the poor owners. Fuck that shit. Let a couple of them go under for their bad decisions. The owners already have such sweetheart deals with the way they constantly build new stadiums on the taxpayer dime and then price those same people out of attending the games.

[HornetLoveJones]

I wouldn't mind an NBA lockout. 82 games is more than enough for me the last decade. One off year wouldn't be so bad, just have that damn all star game in Dallas again and charge extra. EVERY NBA player can afford a year without a salary. College players will actually stay more than one year across the nation and for seniors well... they can apply at Taco Bell until the lockout resolves itself.

LOCKOUT
LOCKOUT
LOCKOUT
LOCKOUT
LOCKOUT
LOCKOUT
LOCKOUT MOTHAFUCKAS!!!!!
:downspin::downspin::downspin:

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Terribly ignorant post, but I love what you did with the perspective. :lmao

The more I think about a lockout, the more I think it might be good for me. I'd get a lot more work done for 6 months of the year. ;)

[Ode to Triple Ocho]

Lockout = great for the Lakers trying to three-peat. Kobe/Gasol a half-season rest? Good game. Might as well cut the trophy right now.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Lockout = great for the Lakers trying to three-peat. Kobe/Gasol a half-season rest? Good game. Might as well cut the trophy right now.

Parker could do with some rest too, but it really needs to be this summer. :bang

[Darrin]

So, it really looks like there will be a lockout in 2011. My question to y'all hoop junkies is, how will that affect your attitude towards the NBA? Will you carry on as normal? Will you give up on the NBA and start following college hoops instead? Slam Ball? Lacrosse? Or will you make voodoo dolls of the owners and players and Billy Hunter and stick sharp objects in their genitalia? What?

It depends on what happens. I've got one eye on that deficit sitting over there and seeing if individual businesses will see the big picture or continue to stall the consumer from recovering from this crisis. So part of me is leery that if there is a work-stoppage, we may not have an NBA. I'm not paranoid, just cautious.

However, assuming our economic system stands, it will depend on what their labor-agreement is. If the NBA adopts a hard-cap system, my loyalties towards organizations will die. All of them. The Pistons, the Spurs, the Lakers, the Celtics, the Mavericks. There will be no players that define the organizations--only Peyton Manning and Tom Brady and Ray Lewis are safe. And it wasn't too long ago that Brett Favre was on that list. There will be no internal growth. There will be no chemistry. It will be a hyper-competitive market where mediocre or overlooked players say things to grab time on ESPN and a team has exactly 12 months to define itself, learn each other, learn how to win, and overcome obstacles. Every team will be built like the 2007-08 Celtics--win now. Rajon Rondo and Big Baby Davis would've left last season for greener pastures. This is part of the reason I don't like football.

[Edward]

Lockout = great for the Lakers trying to three-peat. Kobe/Gasol a half-season rest? Good game. Might as well cut the trophy right now.


Go eat a dick you stupid hood rat.

[TheManFromAcme]

Being completely biased, as a Spurs fan, lockouts are great because Stern keeps winning every negotiation, thus making the NBA a much more level playing field for small markets like San Antonio. Without the 99 lockout, no way the Spurs could have been able to pay Tim Duncan and David Robinson together, and then pay Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker later on. If it wasn't for the lockout, Duncan would have been pulling $25+ million a season from 2000 on and the Spurs would have been SOL.

Despite all the bitching from ignorant fans who think Stern is in on some great conspiracy to screw the Spurs and put the Lakers in the Finals every year, Stern has been very good to the Spurs via the salary cap, luxury tax, and bounds on player salaries. I personally think it screws the players over royally, but I'm a fan and there's nothing logical about fanaticism.

That's some good stuff Base. :tu

[MB20]

Euroleague, here we come!!!

Signed,
Former NBA players who were royally screwed by the new CBA.

[DPG21920]

I hope there is not a lockout. Basketball is essentially all I watch.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

It depends on what happens. I've got one eye on that deficit sitting over there and seeing if individual businesses will see the big picture or continue to stall the consumer from recovering from this crisis. So part of me is leery that if there is a work-stoppage, we may not have an NBA. I'm not paranoid, just cautious.

Huh? Businesses are stopping consumers from stimulating the economy? How exactly? Maybe there's just no more money out there because people are so debt-laden. Maybe the existing model of credit-supported material throughput and infinite growth (absurd on a finite planet) is over and we need to start transitioning to a new economic model... not that that is happening either, but I can tell you that business is not the reason your economy isn't recovering quickly. Business responds to demand.


However, assuming our economic system stands, it will depend on what their labor-agreement is. If the NBA adopts a hard-cap system, my loyalties towards organizations will die. All of them. The Pistons, the Spurs, the Lakers, the Celtics, the Mavericks. There will be no players that define the organizations--only Peyton Manning and Tom Brady and Ray Lewis are safe. And it wasn't too long ago that Brett Favre was on that list. There will be no internal growth. There will be no chemistry. It will be a hyper-competitive market where mediocre or overlooked players say things to grab time on ESPN and a team has exactly 12 months to define itself, learn each other, learn how to win, and overcome obstacles. Every team will be built like the 2007-08 Celtics--win now. Rajon Rondo and Big Baby Davis would've left last season for greener pastures. This is part of the reason I don't like football.

Interesting take, and yeah, I think you might be right. A level playing field sounds great in theory, but it often leads to hyper-player movement and that's the last thing the NBA needs. I don't want to support any team that is 75% new players every year. Part of what makes any team a personal favourite is watching the players develop.