Reply With Quote
Then make some concessions of your own face hunter, and sign a deal dumb .
Hunter: Lockout might be 'death knell' for NBA
Web Posted: 06/16/2005 12:00 AM CDT
Mike Monroe
Express-News Staff Writer
http://www.mysanantonio.com/sports/b....1314da33.html
TROY, Mich. — NBA commissioner David Stern and union director Billy Hunter are in total agreement on one thing: An NBA lockout would be a disaster for the pro league.
At a news conference just south of the Palace of Auburn Hills, Hunter on Wednesday said he had no doubt a lockout would be a long one.
"I think it might be the death knell for the NBA," Hunter said.
The collective bargaining agreement between the league and the NBPA, the union that represents its players, expires at midnight June 30, and Stern warned last week that if the players don't agree to a new deal before then, the owners will lock them out and they will have made "a tragic mistake of epic proportions."
Asked Wednesday to respond to that statement, Hunter said, "that door swings both ways."
"I think it would be a tragic mistake for the owners as well," Hunter said. "From the information we have, the league is going to take in (more than) $3 billion a season. You all know the injury the league suffered with the last lockout. It has taken us about seven years to get back.
"I know commissioner Stern is probably concerned with how he would be perceived in the event of another work stoppage. He is a highly respected commissioner, touted to be the best there is in the business, so I don't think the history would look too friendly upon him if in fact there were another lockout."
Hunter offered a glimmer of hope for a peaceful resolution when he promised to "reach out to the commissioner" and ask for another formal negotiating session, even though the league walked out of the last session and has not contacted the union about scheduling another meeting.
Hunter also said the union was prepared to extend the terms of the current agreement for one more season in order to avoid a lockout.
"From my perspective, the deal has worked," he said. "From my perspective, I think it's one of the fairest deals that exists currently in professional sports. The players are getting paid. The owners are making money, the franchise values have increased dramatically. Franchises are selling for upwards of $400 million.
"From my perspective, it doesn't make much sense and I can't understand why it is that commissioner Stern and I can't get together. We've been extremely fair. We've been extremely open. We've been extremely reasonable. I'm left to only one conclusion: It's really a grab on the part of the owners."
Then make some concessions of your own face hunter, and sign a deal dumb .
What else is Hunter going to say?
I couldn't take sides last time because I thought both sides were full of . This time I'm 100% behinfd the players. Stern absolutely bent the players union over the table and somehow deflected all of the heat onto them in the 1999 lockout. He got rid of the Shaq, KG contracts, the Glenn Robinson rookie deals, he gave so much power to his teams to keep their free agents through the fixed rookie deals, qualifying offers, restricted free agency at the end of the rookie deals, the reduced raises for leaving, the 6 year limit on contracts for teams without Bird Rights, etc. The players gave up so much 6 years ago and I don't think they should budge an inch. Stern has balls of steel to push for othe 5 year deals and the age limits.
Players should get their fair market value, and that's whatever somone is willing to pay them. It's not the players responsibility to keep the owners from trying to outdo one another for their services, but that's what Stern's telling them. For such a right wing board I'm surprised how much opposition there is to the players wanting a more free market.
If the players accept Stern's 5 year contract limit they're nuts. Most of the players are black and the vast majority of owners white, so guess who average American fan is unfortunately going to side with again.
they're still making millions! wohooo hehe mannnn i wonder who's really at fault?
society or the ones who are taking advantage?
Billy Hunter, you unoriginal ass kisser, stop stealing Phil Jackson's lines. And David Stern owns you.
Hunter is a wanker, i bet yah he also gets a stake out of the pie from the members in the players union, he wants to much.
If the NBA doesn't lose any regular season games (like the NHL), the NBA will be fine.
Fans here and in Detroit should make signs saying something like..."No Lockout" "Get your sh** together" "Remember the NHL!" etc. Hopefully, they'll get the message.
I do not understand: what is too much?
And with those 5 max contracts is better deal than all those Allan Houstns and Pennys who are earning milions for nothing.
And those players (fortson ex) when on contract year they can play superb. Singing a 6 year deal with milons and are plaing like till the next contract year.
And what the rasizm got to do with all this ??
Damn.
I don't get all the lockout threats. The two sides are not that far off apart.
If the Players allow things to go to a lockout, I guarentee the Player's get reemed again. Do it now while the Owners are looking to bend.
Stern has already conceded on that -- they wanted what is currently 6/7 to be reduced to 4/5. They've now offered 5/6. They also met at 19 for the age limit. Stern's side has made a lot of adjustments. The player's side agreed to everything verbally and then balked when their agents freaked out.If the players accept Stern's 5 year contract limit they're nuts.
Read more here
If the players are offering to extend the current deal for another season the NBA damn well better accept that offer instead of going through a lockout.
I personally think the deal that has been in place over the last few years is the best in sports...I think the NBA has the best CBA and cap structure in sports...and I am having a hard time figuring out who is the most unahppiest with the current deal...
The NBA players give up a lot that their counterparts in the other pro leagues have not given up.
i agree with hunter the owneers are trying to shaft the players again if you cannot agree might as well just extended the current contract in place now
Like I said, Stern got everything he wanted in 1999 and ed the players over. They shouldn't concede a thing. They made a mistake last time and shouldn't complicate it even worse.
the reason for the Kidd for = tony manu and rasho is because if we had signed kidd we were likely to lose most if not all those players
and yes the le kidd for sa coems from spurs report and how everyone was up all into KiDD, but now we been showing we don't need to have kidd to win and be a dynasty and a huge mistake getting kidd would have been i owuld of posted this reply in the kidd thread but some body locked it
most here NEVER WANTED KIDD
If what Stern said in the transcript thread Kori gave us the link to above is true - that the owners are in fact guarenteeing the players the same percent of BRI - at least 57% - as is in the current deal, and are willing to discuss raising the cap and softening the lux tax the players are crazy not to take it. It would be a better, more flexible deal for everybody but players like Tariq Abdul-Wahad, Penny Hardaway and Allan Houston, who have these bloated contracts but stopped being worth a fraction of them years ago.
A tougher drug policy, raising the minimum age to 19, shortening contract lengths by a year, and reducing the max % yearly raise in exchange for at least 57% of BRI, a higher cap, and a softer lux tax seems like a pretty fair deal for both sides to me.
what good is a raise if their is a drug policy that gets you fired?
maybe tha that is the reason
would tim duncan recive his full max after it is found out he uses cocaine>? possibly but that is a risk he might not want
however i don't know how tougher you mean the policy is i haven't seen the contract and don't plan too so tougher might be still not tough
After reading through the commissioners report it looks to me like the issue is the same it is in all sports...
The NBA wants the players to protect the NBA from the stupid owners...and the stupid owners want the NBA players to protect them from their own stupidity.
It always comes down to the stupid owners being the problem.
We all know that the guys ing the loudest about signing crappy players to huge longterm contracts are the ones that sign the crappy players to the huge long term deals...
Mark Cuban, Paul Allen, the Knicks...
Those are the guys that everything up..
Since the NBA already has a unique protective device for them that no other league has..a salary scale for max contracts...
Those guys are protected enough and the small owners are also protected...any bad contracts they have now are due to their own stupidity...and Spurs fans should be able to see this clearly.
I am with the league on the issues of:
Mandatory year round drug testing(test em every week for all I care, if those guys are making 15 million a year their employer has a right to protect their investment). Either allow it...or no guranteed contract for players who suffer drug related injuries, missed time,.. or cause a PR backlash
Keeping a max salary scale(actually I like all the salary scales).
Totally preserving the soft cap structure currently in place, complete with exceptions and the like. I wouldn't mind seeing them add a Scola exception allowing for signing of international draftpicks that have been developing overseas, outside of the MLE or LLE though. A draft pick should have it's own exception. And it's stupid to allow teams to draft a player but not have a guranteed exception to sign them with.
I am with the NBA on the age limit thing...I am sick of unskilled extremely talented players dilluiting the NBA with a ty brand of basketball.
I think the NBA is legitimately trying to protect themselves and both the players and the integrity of the game by disallowing the drafting of highschool players...it also helps the college game.
But as far as the length of contracts etc, which seems to be the seminal issue....
the owners on that...that's the one outlet NBA players have to truly test their market value in their prime...and if the owners are stupid enough to give a longterm contract to an unworthy lazy player then they deserve what happens to them...no one forces them to do it and they are already protected from their own stupidity by the max salary scale, and that protection comes at the direct expense of the players....They are the luckiest owners in all of sports to have that protection.
IOW...keep the current deal...moderninze the drug testing program and ins ute the age limit for +1. Maybe add an exception for second round picks...
Oh and I am for rasing the cap and lessining the lux tax penalty...the Spurs have proven it's possible to compete being well under the cap...raising it will allow the players to make better money and make back some of the money they lose with the max salary scale.
And once those small teams do find success...the harshness of the current lux penalty prevents them from spending money they might otherwise be willing to spend...and if they do spend it..it could wipe them out.
Owners need to give up pushing for the 6 and 5 contract...they ask too much of the players. I wouldn't budge on that either if I were the players. They already do more than any other major sport athletes to protect the owners from their own stupidity.
I haven't heard much about lessening the Luxury Tax penalty, only about the Super Luxury Tax that they want to add.Oh and I am for rasing the cap and lessining the lux tax penalty...
How is 6 and 5 asking too much if what is being offered in return is raising the cap and softening the lux tax? Especially if the % of BRI is fixed at at least the current level? The amount of money going to the players would stay the same, but there would be a modest shift towards players that can actually help a team win and away from useless players.
What do you think about raises? They want to lower the current 12.5/10 percentages to 10/7.5 or even less, I believe.and if the owners are stupid enough to give a longterm contract to an unworthy lazy player then they deserve what happens to them...no one forces them to do it and they are already protected from their own stupidity by the max salary scale, and that protection comes at the direct expense of the players....They are the luckiest owners in all of sports to have that protection.
From what I've read of the average players' comments, they don't seem to be standing to solidly behind Hunter and the player's union, they want a deal done. Guys alraedy into a contract are just sacrificing money the longer a lockout would go. If that's the case and it goes to la ockoout Hunter's going to have a lot of pressure on him and Stern will be firmly in the captain's chair.
Well, if the cap is raised, the starting salary for contracts based on a % of cap goes up. Higher potential max starting salary, but lower potential max. year to year increases.
Again, it seems like a reasonable proposal to discuss if at least 57% of BRI is guarenteed to the players.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions