carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
....I have been away...and will be going away, just like you!
Lockout!!!
- Thread starter colton
- Start date
....I have been away...and will be going away, just like you!
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
...yeah, they should all quit picking on me! I'm just a poor boy who's intentions are good....please don't let me be misunderstood!
Fishsticks
Banned
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
....I'm not that at all! I'm just anti-jailhouse tats!
DutchJazzer
Banned
its almost september no news?
seems like there wont be any nba for 3 years.
well at least some of those guys will be flipping burgers
seems like there wont be any nba for 3 years.
well at least some of those guys will be flipping burgers
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
...is Dutch a racist....or just speaking the truth?
He's a foaming-at-the-mouth bigot in some form or other. Bonding, are we?
DutchJazzer
Banned
internatiopnally the nba will lose fans.
dont know about national. probably the fans will show up at the buildings
dont know about national. probably the fans will show up at the buildings
AlaskanAssassin
Well-Known Member
https://espn.go.com/espnradio/play?id=6856992
If you haven't listened to this already, Bill Simmons interviews David Stern about the lockout. It's a great listen and is very thorough (over an hour long). Here are a couple of highlights:
-Stern starts the interview by mocking the players. When Bill Simmons asks if David Stern is considering going overseas to be a commissioner, he replies "I'll consider my options." Classic!
-Stern wants revenue sharing once the league as a whole is profitable. He claims that the big market teams are in favor of this as well, despite the fact that most of the sharing is going to be coming from their pockets.
-Bill asks if the NBA is considering contraction and Stern admits that it is something that they are not opposed to. He did mention that he was surprised that the players are in favor of this since it would mean a loss of quite a few NBA player jobs.
-Bill asks about "fudged" numbers and questions how much the NBA is losing. Stern claims that the league has handed over every financial document necessary to the Players Union. He did concede that some of the numbers will count towards the players portion of the revenue share, and others will not. Depreciation and amortization, Stern claims, simply must be accounted for when adding up expenses. He uses an example of the purchase of a scoreboard that can't be counted as an expense the year it was purchased, but must rather be depreciated through time. "How can you not count the purchase of a scoreboard as an expense? It's preposterous."
-Stern says that the league is asking the players to take an 8% cut in pay, while the league looks to grow their salaries back to the current level and beyond in future years. He consistently points out that they are currently the highest paid union in the world.
-Stern ends the interview on a somber note, saying that if the players don't offer more concessions in time for the season to start on time, the NBA's offer will decrease, not increase.
If you haven't listened to this already, Bill Simmons interviews David Stern about the lockout. It's a great listen and is very thorough (over an hour long). Here are a couple of highlights:
-Stern starts the interview by mocking the players. When Bill Simmons asks if David Stern is considering going overseas to be a commissioner, he replies "I'll consider my options." Classic!
-Stern wants revenue sharing once the league as a whole is profitable. He claims that the big market teams are in favor of this as well, despite the fact that most of the sharing is going to be coming from their pockets.
-Bill asks if the NBA is considering contraction and Stern admits that it is something that they are not opposed to. He did mention that he was surprised that the players are in favor of this since it would mean a loss of quite a few NBA player jobs.
-Bill asks about "fudged" numbers and questions how much the NBA is losing. Stern claims that the league has handed over every financial document necessary to the Players Union. He did concede that some of the numbers will count towards the players portion of the revenue share, and others will not. Depreciation and amortization, Stern claims, simply must be accounted for when adding up expenses. He uses an example of the purchase of a scoreboard that can't be counted as an expense the year it was purchased, but must rather be depreciated through time. "How can you not count the purchase of a scoreboard as an expense? It's preposterous."
-Stern says that the league is asking the players to take an 8% cut in pay, while the league looks to grow their salaries back to the current level and beyond in future years. He consistently points out that they are currently the highest paid union in the world.
-Stern ends the interview on a somber note, saying that if the players don't offer more concessions in time for the season to start on time, the NBA's offer will decrease, not increase.
//r00t 4 Jazz
Well-Known Member
Don't make me agree or like anything Stern does, darnit to heck!
gregbroncs
Well-Known Member
No kidding. I freakin hate Stern but think he is spot on with all of the points in AA's post.
I feel dirty.
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
...be a "playa hater" not a Commish hater!!!
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
...I wouldn't give these clowns one red cent....if they cut there salaries in half... stopped palming the ball every time down the court...averaged 30 assists per team per game, shot 55 percent from the field and 80 percent from from the foul line .....and gave free beers to all the fans at the end of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and start of the 4th quarter!
Just like a politician, I can't believe everything Stern is saying is 100% true.
InGameStrategy
Well-Known Member
I agree that I wouldn't trust Stern any farther that I can throw his buttery body, but it is likely that at least some of what he is parroting originated with the owners. Despite the notion that Stern might exert a lot of power over the owners, he still works for them. For example, I can envision a scenario in which the owners told Stern that if the players don't agree sooner rather than later, that they will exert more stipulations upon the players; it is also possible that Stern proposed it, and the owners agreed. Or a mix of the two. I question whether the owners are being rational about it; with the existing bloated salaries, it seems that the owners would want a tapering of the player share over time; i.e., 56% next year, 55% the year after that, down to--say--52% in five years and holding. If it's not tapered, then the existing high salaries will hog much of the payroll of most teams, especially if the owners foolishly insist on a hard cap.
The high player share is a much bigger problem than a hard cap as long as a "luxury tax" is in place. The profitable teams should also look at the amount of money that would subsidize the unprofitable ones would make sense.
That would result in the player share of BRI being 48-50%. The 39% I have heard about is what it would take to get every team profitable individually.
That matches what I remember, as well.
Yep. The scoreboard comment in particular is ludicrous. The players weren't complaining about the owners counting amortization of scoreboards, they were complaining about the owners counting amortization of PURCHASING THE TEAMS themselves.