Lock out looming with next CBA?

[lmbebo]

Media and players talk up player empowerment and how great it is, but unless you live in Miami, LA or NY, its not been a positive thing for the majority of the league, in my opinion. Never mind players sitting out for rest or whatever.

I think the ratings also back this up.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Basketball_Association_on_television

Looks like there has been a gradual decline over the past few years, pre-covid.

Not sure what tv contracts will look like going forward with shift towards streaming and recent downturn in the economy.

Do we anticipate a lock out when the next cba is up? I think both parties can blow it up after this season or the next?

[Dex]

I think it's almost guaranteed at this point.

Owners were already out for blood with this whole "player empowerment" movement, and that was before Harden forced his way to Philly and now Kyrie and Durant are about to demolish whats left of Brooklyn which was supposed to be the new superpower.

Also, small-market owners probably aren't thrilled with the fact that all the big names basically just want to gather in California, New York, and Miami. San Antonio couldn't even attract star FA's when we were winning championships, what chance do we have now?

We'll be lucky to see 50 games the following season.

[Chinook]

The NBA is making more money than ever. No one has a reason for a lockout. I'd also say Silver has the best relationship with his league's players union of any of the major American sports. I'm sure they'll be some discussion on limits, especially as it relates to a Simmons situation, but I don't see why that requires a lockout. Not every negotiation needs to be brinksmanship

[Dex]

The NBA is making more money than ever. No one has a reason for a lockout. I'd also say Silver has the best relationship with his league's players union of any of the major American sports. I'm sure they'll be some discussion on limits, especially as it relates to a Simmons situation, but I don't see why that requires a lockout. Not every negotiation needs to be brinksmanship

Obviously I'm less optimistic. I think both sides are going to ask for concessions, neither side is going to want to budge...and that's where it stalls out until both owners and players start losing a bunch of money.

It's stupid, but we've seen this play out before.

[Chinook]

Obviously I'm less optimistic. I think both sides are going to ask for concessions, neither side is going to want to budge...and that's where it stalls out until both owners and players start losing a bunch of money.

It's stupid, but we've seen this play out before.

We've seen them come to agreement a year in advance too. Under Stern, there'd definitely be one. I don't think the owners have as many grievances as some here might think. Most of this comes down to pride and a tendency of fans to side with businesses over their labor force.

[vy65]

There absolutely needs to be a lockout. Player empowerment went beyond the pale long ago. No business should deal with doling out 9-figure contracts to employees only for them to withhold their services. The grievance/dispute resolution provisions of the CBA obviously aren’t deterring anyone from being a Kawhi.

I’d be curious to see if small market teams are actually making money, or on welfare from the major markets.

[offset formation]

5yr/300M contracts are also not sustainable, especially for smaller market teams. At some point they're gonna price out their fans from being able to attend games so the owners still make their tens and hundreds of millions.

And there also a lot of resentment from people not being able to watch their team on League Pass and getting blackouts. I saw an interview with Silver on that topic and he basically said yeah its a problem but meh...

Fuck that guy.

[RC_Drunkford]

I think there's definitely gonna be a lockout with how star players have been forcing their way out recently. It's becoming a common thing now. Also ain't the cap supposed to take a significant jump?

[Chinook]

5yr/300M contracts are also not sustainable, especially for smaller market teams. At some point they're gonna price out their fans from being able to attend games so the owners still make their tens and hundreds of millions.

And there also a lot of resentment from people not being able to watch their team on League Pass and getting blackouts. I saw an interview with Silver on that topic and he basically said yeah its a problem but meh...

Fuck that guy.

Why would the league lock out the players over fans resenting about League Pass? That's clearly an owner issue.

In my mind, the NBA should move away from a localized, attendance-based model and lean more heavily into affordable streaming and only national contracts. That doesn't mean only let ESPN do the games. Disney has to be by far the biggest broadcaster with their acquisition of Bally Sports. The league has that, Comcast and Turner as partners. That's fewer than the NFL has nowadays. They can definitely work something out. I enjoy attending games too, but I'm always going to watch the vast majority of them remotely. That's where the league's money mainly comes from, and they need to improve that or else they aren't going to be able to draw the numbers needed to persuade the networks to cough up the dough. In that regard, people don't appreciate how much the 24/7 hype cycle around player movement drives revenue for the league's partners (and thus the league). That's why even though I don't like it, the league is going to be way less offended by the recent landscape than fans want them to be.

As I mentioned before, I do think the two sides will agree that the Simmons situation (whether he was lying or not) was bad optics, and that they need a clear rulebook on how to deal with situations like that so you don't have Phillly running around and breaking the CBA. Hopefully, they realize the DPE was a horrible idea unless it comes with restrictions for the player and team to prevent trades. It's hard to come up with a way that could happen. Maybe a general barring from trades outside of a situation where the two sides agree and a league arbiter grants and exception. Maybe only allow trades in the last year of a player's deal if they had Bird rights when they signed the deal. There are ways to do it that prevents the worst of the movement while not really restricting most players. But what we won't see is the league "crack down" on the players. They are not the players' daddies; they are their business partners. I don't know if any fan would like their business partners acting paternalistic to them.

[lmbebo]

I mean, right now players are basically signing with teams then demanding trades, circumventing free agency. Because they want to maximize salary. Then on top of it, they want you to send them where they want to go or else.

[offset formation]

Chinook, my comment about League Pass didn't reference that a lockout was tied to it. My point was that's something that needs to be addressed though Silver gets paid by the very people that have a desire to keep that system in place. That's why I referenced his interview. If they don't address that, it'll be something that drives fans away as it's done with me on practically 1/10th of the Spurs regular season games already. Not a good thing for fan devotion to a team. And he knows, which makes it all the worse it's unlikely to change.

[MannyIsGod]

There absolutely needs to be a lockout. Player empowerment went beyond the pale long ago. No business should deal with doling out 9-figure contracts to employees only for them to withhold their services. The grievance/dispute resolution provisions of the CBA obviously aren’t deterring anyone from being a Kawhi.

I’d be curious to see if small market teams are actually making money, or on welfare from the major markets.

Uh why not? The players don't have to play anywhere, contract or no. You just don't pay them, ala Ben Simmons. Workers discovering they have leverage isn't a bad thing even if it fucks over your team. Welfare? Major markets can't exist without the smaller markets in the league. A big part of the profit for small market teams is definitely profit sharing but there's a reason that the larger markets agree to that. There's also a reason the NBA is going to expand soon.

Its pretty stupid to say that the player empowerment is hurting the NBA while the NBA brings in all time profits and is considering expansion.

[MannyIsGod]

Chinook (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=37557), my comment about League Pass didn't reference that a lockout was tied to it. My point was that's something that needs to be addressed though Silver gets paid by the very people that have a desire to keep that system in place. That's why I referenced his interview. If they don't address that, it'll be something that drives fans away as it's done with me on practically 1/10th of the Spurs regular season games already. Not a good thing for fan devotion to a team. And he knows, which makes it all the worse it's unlikely to change.

The only way they get rid of the blackouts on league pass is if they get more money from a streaming service than they do from those local tv contracts. I don't think we're there yet.

[Allan Rowe vs Wade]

Lol at paying money to watch sports in the year 2022

[cjw]

In my mind, the NBA should move away from a localized, attendance-based model and lean more heavily into affordable streaming and only national contracts. That doesn't mean only let ESPN do the games. Disney has to be by far the biggest broadcaster with their acquisition of Bally Sports. The league has that, Comcast and Turner as partners. That's fewer than the NFL has nowadays. They can definitely work something out. I enjoy attending games too, but I'm always going to watch the vast majority of them remotely. That's where the league's money mainly comes from, and they need to improve that or else they aren't going to be able to draw the numbers needed to persuade the networks to cough up the dough. In that regard, people don't appreciate how much the 24/7 hype cycle around player movement drives revenue for the league's partners (and thus the league). That's why even though I don't like it, the league is going to be way less offended by the recent landscape than fans want them to be.




Disney actually doesn’t own Bally. The DOJ forced them to divest it for antitrust reasons (they got it as part of a larger acquisition from Fox). Now it’s owned by cost cutters which is why the product is terrible.

[spurs50_]

I don’t feel bad tanking, how can smaller markets compete when every big name wants to go to the bigger markets. Need a hard cap.

[TekXX]

Why would the league lock out the players over fans resenting about League Pass? That's clearly an owner issue.

In my mind, the NBA should move away from a localized, attendance-based model and lean more heavily into affordable streaming and only national contracts. That doesn't mean only let ESPN do the games. Disney has to be by far the biggest broadcaster with their acquisition of Bally Sports. The league has that, Comcast and Turner as partners. That's fewer than the NFL has nowadays. They can definitely work something out. I enjoy attending games too, but I'm always going to watch the vast majority of them remotely. That's where the league's money mainly comes from, and they need to improve that or else they aren't going to be able to draw the numbers needed to persuade the networks to cough up the dough. In that regard, people don't appreciate how much the 24/7 hype cycle around player movement drives revenue for the league's partners (and thus the league). That's why even though I don't like it, the league is going to be way less offended by the recent landscape than fans want them to be.

As I mentioned before, I do think the two sides will agree that the Simmons situation (whether he was lying or not) was bad optics, and that they need a clear rulebook on how to deal with situations like that so you don't have Phillly running around and breaking the CBA. Hopefully, they realize the DPE was a horrible idea unless it comes with restrictions for the player and team to prevent trades. It's hard to come up with a way that could happen. Maybe a general barring from trades outside of a situation where the two sides agree and a league arbiter grants and exception. Maybe only allow trades in the last year of a player's deal if they had Bird rights when they signed the deal. There are ways to do it that prevents the worst of the movement while not really restricting most players. But what we won't see is the league "crack down" on the players. They are not the players' daddies; they are their business partners. I don't know if any fan would like their business partners acting paternalistic to them.

Conservative media giant Sinclair media bought Ballys from Disney, the ones that also bought the NBC affiliate WOAI in San Antonio and turned it into Fox News light and made it look really cheap with their cost cuts

[daslicer]

Uh why not? The players don't have to play anywhere, contract or no. You just don't pay them, ala Ben Simmons. Workers discovering they have leverage isn't a bad thing even if it fucks over your team. Welfare? Major markets can't exist without the smaller markets in the league. A big part of the profit for small market teams is definitely profit sharing but there's a reason that the larger markets agree to that. There's also a reason the NBA is going to expand soon.

Its pretty stupid to say that the player empowerment is hurting the NBA while the NBA brings in all time profits and is considering expansion.


Stop acting like the players are a bunch regular union guys working at a factory. Their leverage does suck bigtime. It makes the game less fun with the way they are able to burn down teams like Kawhi did to the Spurs and now what Durant-Kyrie are doing to the Nets. I hate player empowerment because it makes it nearly impossible to build stability in this league and when I describe stability is having a team that can go to the playoffs 4 or 5 years in a row.

Also, the Simmons examples is a bad example since a lot of these players endorsement money can cover them sitting out a year without pay. Klutch was also paying Simmons' bills while he was having that hold out against the Sixers.

[vy65]

Uh why not? The players don't have to play anywhere, contract or no. You just don't pay them, ala Ben Simmons. Workers discovering they have leverage isn't a bad thing even if it fucks over your team. Welfare? Major markets can't exist without the smaller markets in the league. A big part of the profit for small market teams is definitely profit sharing but there's a reason that the larger markets agree to that. There's also a reason the NBA is going to expand soon.

Its pretty stupid to say that the player empowerment is hurting the NBA while the NBA brings in all time profits and is considering expansion.

Uh, because they’re under contract. In your view, that doesn’t seem to count for anything though. The CBA isn’t deterring people like Simmons or Nephew from refusing to honor their multi-million dollar obligations and suffering no financial repercussions. That’s definitionally broken.

These aren’t factory workers in the 19th century suffering shitty working conditions and not making a living wage. These are already the most empowered, financially successful, and informed people on the planet. They’ve used “empowerment” to avoid their core obligation to play basketball for a team. This post is laughably detached from reality and seems to me to be entirely motivated by a political ideology and not facts.

[vy65]

Small market teams such as the Charlotte Hornets, Indiana Pacers and Memphis Grizzlies collect around $20 million per season from more profitable teams due to revenue-sharing.

Even when the NBA's revenues spiked due to the start of far more profitable national television deals for the 16-17 season, 14 of the league's 30 teams lost money before factoring in revenue-sharing. Nine teams finished that season in the red even after accounting for those payments.

Big markets rely on small markets to be a farm system. They get welfare from big markets in return. That’s a fucked up system.

[Mal]

I think there will be lockout, some things went beyond repair.

If Durant and Harden can sign 200mil deals and treat other side like shit.
Or Zion get quater of a billions after sitting whole season because of being fat ass ?
Or this supermax contracts, that are poison pills and most likely are screwing small market teams, rather than help them. Sign supermax, demand trade to big market team.
I am not even starting with Ben Simmons or Kyrie Irving not giving shit, after they got their money.

[baseline bum]

It's kind of funny that players not honoring contracts they signed is a big deal in the sports media now that it's Philly and Brooklyn getting punked. Nobody gave a fuck when it was San Antonio, New Orleans, OKC, and Houston.

[MannyIsGod]

Uh, because they’re under contract. In your view, that doesn’t seem to count for anything though. The CBA isn’t deterring people like Simmons or Nephew from refusing to honor their multi-million dollar obligations and suffering no financial repercussions. That’s definitionally broken.

These aren’t factory workers in the 19th century suffering shitty working conditions and not making a living wage. These are already the most empowered, financially successful, and informed people on the planet. They’ve used “empowerment” to avoid their core obligation to play basketball for a team. This post is laughably detached from reality and seems to me to be entirely motivated by a political ideology and not facts.

Except Simmons DID suffer financial repercussions. They literally didn't pay him and there was a fine for the part he was prepaid. So maybe you don't even know what you're talking about or maybe YOU'RE the one not motivated by facts?

[MannyIsGod]

Y'all know that the owners and teams are the ones caving to these demands when they don't have to, right? Spurs didn't have to trade Kawhi. Sixers literally sat on the Simmons thing until the got a deal they wanted. The Nets don't HAVE to trade KD and surely don't have to trade him to only the teams he wants to go to. The teams just don't want to go against them because of fear. That's just the players using leverage.

Like I said above, its pretty hard to say the NBA is being harmed at a time they are making profits hand over fist so much so that the next TV deal is once again expected to raise the salary cap substantially.

[vy65]

Except Simmons DID suffer financial repercussions. They literally didn't pay him and there was a fine for the part he was prepaid. So maybe you don't even know what you're talking about or maybe YOU'RE the one not motivated by facts?

Now do Kawhi.

[vy65]

Y'all know that the owners and teams are the ones caving to these demands when they don't have to, right? Spurs didn't have to trade Kawhi. Sixers literally sat on the Simmons thing until the got a deal they wanted. The Nets don't HAVE to trade KD and surely don't have to trade him to only the teams he wants to go to. The teams just don't want to go against them because of fear. That's just the players using leverage.

Like I said above, its pretty hard to say the NBA is being harmed at a time they are making profits hand over fist so much so that the next TV deal is once again expected to raise the salary cap substantially.

Wait, I thought player empowerment was the name of the game? Is it that owners should be fining players for not honoring their contracts? In which case, why isn’t that an issue for future CBA talks?

And that’s to say nothing about players who force their way out of teams they don’t wanna play for no more. The problem isn’t just the Simmons and the Kawhi’s. And the whole empowerment movement is coming at a time when nearly half the league’s teams need welfare to be profitable.

[jjspur]

The problem is money. There is so much of it going around. It's given then taken advantage of without any repercussions. The owners caved in the last CBA. They however won't let it happen again. Why ? Because finally some top teams in big markets are losing money because of the spoiled NBA players they themselves are enabling. It's a viscous circular arrangement. Something has to give. Eventually one side gets tired of the arrangement and decides to end the agreement and go on strike. Maybe this time it will be the fans. It should be, we're are the ones getting hurt the most sometimes emotionally when our favorite players act like spoiled children and bolt for greener pastures, but mainly it hurts in our pocketbooks.

[MannyIsGod]

Wait, I thought player empowerment was the name of the game? Is it that owners should be fining players for not honoring their contracts? In which case, why isn’t that an issue for future CBA talks?

And that’s to say nothing about players who force their way out of teams they don’t wanna play for no more. The problem isn’t just the Simmons and the Kawhi’s. And the whole empowerment movement is coming at a time when nearly half the league’s teams need welfare to be profitable.

You keep trying to frame shit as "welfare" which is a hilariously stupid piece of stupid rhetorical nonsense. Profit sharing isn't welfare. The small market teams aren't being gifted shit. They're profitable because they exist in a situation where the big markets NEED them because no one wants to watch an 8 team league. So yes, they are only profitable because the NBA is set up to be an incredibly profitable league.

Furthermore, I never said shit about what should be talked about in the CBA. I took issue with your idiotic statement that players somehow have to do whatever teams want because they are under contract for millions. The solution for players who don't want to play is fucking obvious and the same for anyone who doesn't perform what they are contracted to do: They don't get paid. But that doesn't mean they HAVE to work for someone if they don't want to. If they want to bring that up in CBA negotiations, then by ALL MEANS. But the players have the leverage here and as I've said in every single post are the owners really in a hurry to potentially damage an incredibly profitable situation over shit that isn't affecting their bottom line? You think the small market teams you apparently are SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO concerned about are eager to lose revenue over something that isn't really a problem?

God damn aren't you a lawyer? Are you sure you aren't a diversity hire?

[MannyIsGod]

Honestly, "They're only profitable because they make more money than they spend" is a hell of a take.

[Ice009]

They need to do something about players always demanding trades to stacked teams or wanting to create a stacked team. Lockout the whole season if necessary. Absolute joke. Most players aren't willing to work or build a team, they all want out to a more stacked team. Take away 50% of their pay for the length of their contract if a superstar demands a trade. Let's see if they'll still go through with the trade if they lose pay.

[baseline bum]

But the players have the leverage here and as I've said in every single post are the owners really in a hurry to potentially damage an incredibly profitable situation over shit that isn't affecting their bottom line? You think the small market teams you apparently are SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO concerned about are eager to lose revenue over something that isn't really a problem?

The players never have the leverage in CBA negotiations, which is why their share of revenue has dropped from 57% to like 51% of basketball related income over the last 25 years, why there is a max salary, why contracts max out at 4-5 years depending on Bird status, why there is a luxury tax, etc. They have power right now but I think the owners are going to crush them with non guaranteed deals and such in the next CBA based on all the hold outs and forced trades. Unless the players agree to some pretty harsh penalties for holding out or forcing trades while under contract.

[baseline bum]

5yr/300M contracts are also not sustainable, especially for smaller market teams. At some point they're gonna price out their fans from being able to attend games so the owners still make their tens and hundreds of millions.


Meh I hate this argument. Teams will charge the max amount they think people will pay for tickets regardless of their payroll. The whole team could take paycuts to zero and it wouldn't change our ticket prices.

[99 Problems]

Yep.