What's new

Lockout!!!

the players act like they are the first employees to ever be asked to take a paycut.no,they are not supposed to like it but you either take it or leave it and work somewhere else.they are the employees not the owners.
 
If the players don't put it to a vote, I'm gonna ****ing shoot someone! Stop pretending like you know what your membership wants and let them decide for themselves if they like the deal. My god...
 
Again, the players (that is, the superstars and their agents) are so hung up on this because it makes contracts--especially big-ticket contracts--easier to sign, facilitating highly-paid and overpaid players (or their agents) to get deals done, especially with those wealthy teams that tend to be in attractive cities. In other words, a loose LT makes some players get a larger percent of the 50 percent (50-50) in places that they want to play.

It is also a sign that this process is being driven by the superstars and their greedy but equally self-destroying agents, not the more numerous journeymen who could have approved this CBA offer by now if the league representatives had been explaining it to them logically. This union has an offer in front of them and can get a deal done, but if they drag their feet, then the owners might push not only break-even profitability (which this CBA approximates) but also a significantly positive return on their business (which an even more aggressive or draconian CBA--or a reconstructed post-decertification league--would more likely produce).

It's pretty well documented that the tax, ie. the thinly veiled hard cap, affects the middle class. The superstars will all get their max contracts so they're not affected. And player movement has been pretty well contained by all the restrictions on MLE's. What the heavy taxes create is a system where every FA gets lowballed because teams won't go into the tax. That reduces the salaries of role players drastically. An MLE-ish guy under the last deal would have made 6 million per. Now he'll be fishing for 3-4.

I absolutely want a more punitive tax system. I don't care if the NBA's middle class gets hurt. But I think it's prudent for the owners to ease back the throttle on that. My guess is the players will issue some kind of ultimatum that they will present the deal for a vote if taxes are reduced. The owners should bend on this.
 
My guess is the players will issue some kind of ultimatum that they will present the deal for a vote if taxes are reduced. The owners should bend on this.

....the players will issue an "ultimatum?" How can they possibly issue an ultimatum when they don't have a leg to stand on and have a losing hand??? Negotiations are closed. It's take it.....or sit out the whole season!
 
....the players will issue an "ultimatum?" How can they possibly issue an ultimatum when they don't have a leg to stand on and have a losing hand??? Negotiations are closed. It's take it.....or sit out the whole season!

Leverage switches to the players if the owners realize they have a homerun deal. They stand to profit considerably by the terms of it. It's incumbent on them to land this plane if the profits are there and they are. So play the game, give the players something, and still make lots of money.
 
It's pretty well documented that the tax, ie. the thinly veiled hard cap, affects the middle class. The superstars will all get their max contracts so they're not affected. And player movement has been pretty well contained by all the restrictions on MLE's. What the heavy taxes create is a system where every FA gets lowballed because teams won't go into the tax. That reduces the salaries of role players drastically. An MLE-ish guy under the last deal would have made 6 million per. Now he'll be fishing for 3-4.

I absolutely want a more punitive tax system. I don't care if the NBA's middle class gets hurt. But I think it's prudent for the owners to ease back the throttle on that. My guess is the players will issue some kind of ultimatum that they will present the deal for a vote if taxes are reduced. The owners should bend on this.

I disagree. That is the one issue the owners should not bend on at all. It's the only issue in the whole thing that really affects competitive balance. If the players want to discuss the D-league clause so be it, seems like a stupid addition anyway. But the penalties for the tax paying teams is not restrictive enough IMO. Without a step toward competitive balance this whole thing was a huge waste of time.
 
Whoever started these rumours needs to get ****ing smacked. I feel like this is all going to depend on the asshattery of the player reps; Im 99% sure that if we took the votes of all the players, the proposition will pass. Sadly, Im thinking the Player Reps won't even let it get to that step, and kill talks altogether.

https://sheridanhoops.com/2011/11/13/lockout-update-misinformation-rules/#more-1981


NEW YORK — Players reps from all 30 NBA teams are arriving in town today, and tomorrow they’ll get debriefed on what is and what isn’t in the owners’ latest proposal.
Up until now, they’ve been getting fed plenty of bad information in the two days since the owners and players went their separate ways at the conclusion of Thursday night’s bargaining session.
Case in point: ESPN.com drew 5,000-plus comments on a story about how players could be sent down to the D-League and have their salary reduced to $75,000 during their first five seasons. A dealkiller, right?
Maybe it would be, except it is NOT in the owners’ proposal.
“It’s of grave concern to the league that there is an enormous amount of misinformation concerning our proposal, both on Twitter and in the more traditional media,” Adam Silver, the deputy commissioner, told the New York Times on Saturday night. “We believe that if the players are fully informed as to what is and is not in our proposal, they will agree that its terms are beneficial to them and represent a fair compromise.”
More from the story in The Times, by Howard Beck: “Hours after the NBA delivered its final collective bargaining proposal to the players union, the rumors and the rhetoric began to flow. The deal would let teams send players to the development league and cut their pay. Teams that used certain salary cap exceptions would lose the right to re-sign their own players. “Bird” rights would be jeopardized. The middle class would be eliminated. These and other concerns filled Twitter timelines on Friday, a day after labor talks concluded. They turned out to be unfounded, speculative or simply false. The D-League is not mentioned anywhere in the seven-page proposal that was delivered to the union on Friday — a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times. Nor are there any measures that could curtail “Bird” rights. While some provisions might crimp the N.B.A.’s middle class, others could boost it. In the absence of official documentation — neither the league nor the union released the proposal publicly — the rumors have prevailed.”
This is one of the problems that happens when you keep the media in the dark when it behooves you to let them see the light. Even if you tell the writers nothing, they still have to write something. And if falsehoods are being reported, it is incumbent upon somebody to set the record straight — and quickly — before the misinformation becomes accepted as fact.
Case in point: Kevin Durant is so upset with the proposal that he hasn’t even seen that he has already decided to vote against it, and he is considering three different overseas options.

From Mark J. Spears of Yahoo Sports: “If the labor impasse isn’t resolved, Durant said he could sign a contract next week to play overseas. He’s weighing offers from Maccabi Tel Aviv in Israel, Valencia in Spain and BBC Bayreuth in Germany. Any deal Durant signs would include an opt-out clause that allows him to return to the NBA as soon as the lockout ends. “I’m right on the fence with playing overseas and I’m about to jump over,” Durant said in a phone interview from Josh Howard’s celebrity game in Dallas. Durant said he will let Players Association executive director Billy Hunter and president Derek Fisher decide whether players should vote on the current offer. But he would vote to reject it. Nevertheless, Durant also isn’t sure whether it’s the right time for players to push to decertify the union.“I talked to my agent [Aaron Goodwin] about it,” Durant said. “I heard it’s not a good idea to do that. But I got to look into it a little bit more.”
Beck wasn’t the only writer to get a phone call from a worried big shot trying to shoot down some of the misinformation. Brian Mahoney of the AP was buzzed by Stern at 9:30 p.m. (possibly waking Mahoney’s newborn, Caitlyn) and was given this quote: “By some combination of mendacity and greed, the agents who are looking out for themselves rather than their clients are trying to scuttle the deal,” Stern said. “They’re engaged in what appears to be an orchestrated Twitter campaign and a series of interviews that are designed to deny the economic realities of the proposal.”
More from Mahoney’s article: “Owners are also calling for a 50-50 split of basketball-related income, which the players would consider if they get the concessions they seek on the system. But the revised proposal still may not be good enough, and players are already discussing decertifying the union so they can file an antitrust lawsuit against the league instead. Stern said that would not give the players they leverage they seek because it’s a lengthy process. It would also likely kill any hopes for a 2011-12 season, he said. “Yes, I am worried,” Stern said, “because they’re talking up this thing called decertification which is not a winning strategy on the one hand. On the second hand, it’ll take three months to teach them it’s not a winning strategy, which would not augur well for the season.”
Aside from Stern’s statement to the AP and Silver’s in The Times, the NBA went into damage control mode via its special NBA labor Twitter feed, making the following points:
The new labor proposal includes:
_ More mid-levels than 2005 CBA: $5M for non-taxpayers, $3M for taxpayers, $2.5M for room teams.
_ More cap exceptions for teams who are not taxpayers…
_ Projected tax level ranges from $70M-$85M over next 6 years; more than enough money to keep teams together.
_ New trade rules to promote more player movement.
_ Projected max salaries range from $13M to $19M and growing.
_ Increased minimum team salary – from 75 percent of cap to 90 percent.
_Player-friendly changes 4 restricted FAs: qualifying offers higher & 100% guaranteed, shorter match period 4 offer sheets.
_ Ability to stretch waived player’s salary frees up more money for teams to spend on FAs.
_ Players retain full Bird rights.
_ Repeat tax rates apply only when team is taxpayer 4 out of 5 yrs (not 3 out of 5).
The big questions now: Is the damage control coming too late? Is the owners’ proposal DOA?
We’ll learn the answers Monday when the players reps have their meeting and then emerge to disclose their recommendations. Union director Billy Hunter told Sam Amick of SI.com that his intention was to have the player representatives vote on a revised version of the NBA’s latest proposal before moving forward.
“We will vote on the NBA’s proposal,” Hunter wrote in a text message to SI.com. “The proposal will be presented with some proposed amendments.”
 
Whoever started these rumours needs to get ****ing smacked. I feel like this is all going to depend on the asshattery of the player reps; Im 99% sure that if we took the votes of all the players, the proposition will pass. Sadly, Im thinking the Player Reps won't even let it get to that step, and kill talks altogether.

https://sheridanhoops.com/2011/11/13/lockout-update-misinformation-rules/#more-1981

Great find. This deal sounds very fair to me and much better than the player reps (Fisher/Hunter) has made it sound.

The fact that players haven;t even read the SEVEN PAGE DOCUMENT and are already shooting it down is mind boggling to me. Look, I know the owners are dicks too, but some of these players are straight up ****ing stupid. This is their future on the line, and according to them the future of players coming into the league, and they aren't even reading the deal?

wat?
 
Durant's threat is empty, because he knows damn well that he ain't gonna make the $13.6 million in Spain that he makes here. If I were the owners, I'd wish him well. He's part of the problem--overstating his value and ignoring that his current salary and the 50-50 deal still overpays people like him. The fact that he hasn't read it is irresponsible and ignorant.
 
Durant's threat is empty, because he knows damn well that he ain't gonna make the $13.6 million in Spain that he makes here. If I were the owners, I'd wish him well. He's part of the problem--overstating his value and ignoring that his current salary and the 50-50 deal still overpays people like him. The fact that he hasn't read it is irresponsible and ignorant.

Off of Durant's twitter:

@KDTrey5: One more person tweet me and say that us players are selfish ima bite my fingernails off! Stop saying that when we givin up TOO much smh
 
Great find. This deal sounds very fair to me and much better than the player reps (Fisher/Hunter) has made it sound.

The fact that players haven;t even read the SEVEN PAGE DOCUMENT and are already shooting it down is mind boggling to me. Look, I know the owners are dicks too, but some of these players are straight up ****ing stupid. This is their future on the line, and according to them the future of players coming into the league, and they aren't even reading the deal?

wat?

This.
 
This deal sounds very fair to me and much better than the player reps (Fisher/Hunter) has made it sound.

The fact that players haven't even read the SEVEN PAGE DOCUMENT and are already shooting it down is mind boggling to me. This is their future on the line, and according to them the future of players coming into the league, and they aren't even reading the deal?

what?

...I understand they had tattoo parlor appointments....and just couldn't find the time!
 
...I understand they had tattoo parlor appointments....and just couldn't find the time!

If we don't have a season, maybe the players can make some cash through pay-per-view ..

We put the players in one of any empty gyms across America and carolinajazz reads his posts in this thread, one-by-one. I'm buying that ****.
 
The fact that players haven;t even read the SEVEN PAGE DOCUMENT and are already shooting it down is mind boggling to me. Look, I know the owners are dicks too, but some of these players are straight up ****ing stupid. This is their future on the line, and according to them the future of players coming into the league, and they aren't even reading the deal?

+6

Sounds to me like some of the agents are flat out trying to sabotage things. Hopefully these players will realize that they're being played for suckers, and it will come back to bite the agents in the ***.
 
If we don't have a season, maybe the players can make some cash through pay-per-view ..

We put the players in one of any empty gyms across America and carolinajazz reads his posts in this thread, one-by-one. I'm buying that ****.

Maybe through CJ's posts.....the hoppers would finally clue in.......that modern basketball............is just garbage!!!
 
Comparing offers: Facts and figures from the labor talks


Posted Nov 13 2011 12:09PM


Despite concerns expressed by NBA players that the owners' latest proposal in their collective bargaining talks is "worse" than a previous one, the league maintains that the revisions arrived at after 23 hours of negotiations last week are enhancements.

Here are highlights of the current offer, compared to similar points in the owners' previous proposal. Also, here are some terms of the "reset" proposal that commissioner David Stern said would be invoked if the union rejects the latest offer after its meeting Monday in New York with the teams' 30 player-reps.

New offer

Presented to union on Nov. 10:

• A 50-50 split of basketball-related income (BRI), either straight or in a 49-to-51 "band" adjusted for growth figures.

• A mid-level exception for non-taxpaying teams with a starting salary of up to $5 million in contracts up to four years in length.

• A MLE for tax-paying teams starting at $3 million with a maximum length of three years, available every year.

• A new "room" exception for all teams below the salary cap starting at $2.5 million for up to two years.

• Sign-and-trade deals available to all teams, including -- in Years 1 and 2 of the CBA -- taxpaying teams.

• Maximum annual raises of 6.5 percent for "Bird" free agents (players re-signed by their current teams) and 3.5 percent for others.

• Minimum payroll requirement -- known as "the floor" -- of 85 percent of the salary cap in Years 1 and 2, increasing to 90 percent thereafter.

• An allowance for teams whose use of the full MLE would put them over the luxury-tax threshold. They would be permitted to conform by reducing payroll by an Oct. 15 deadline, either through trades or the "stretch" provision in which a player would be cut, with his remaining salary spread out over a longer period of time (two times the years remaining on his deal, plus one). This lower salary figure could enable the team to get down below the tax.

• A mutual opt-out clause in the new CBA after 6 years, conforming to NBPA preference.

* Other provisions in the new offer -- relating to escrow money (10 percent, up from 8), stiffened luxury-tax penalties, a 12 percent drop in rookie and minimum-salary scales (to accommodate 12 percent drop in BRI share from 57 percent), the limiting of bi-annual exceptions to non-taxpaying teams, a 6-month buffer on extend-and-trade deals and other items -- remain essentially unchanged from the previous proposal.

Previous offer

Presented to union on Nov. 5:

Same as above, except:

• The MLE exception for taxpaying teams would have started at $2.5 million for a maximum of two years and been available to use only every other year.

• No "room" exception. Teams under the salary cap would only have that cap space available for free-agent signings.

• No sign-and-trade deals for taxpaying teams.

• Maximum annual raises of 5.5 percent for "Bird" players and 3.5 percent for others.

• The minimum payroll requirement in past CBAs was 75 percent of the cap number.

• The mutual opt-out in the 10-year CBA would come after 7 years.

"Reset" offer

To be presented if the union rejects the current offer:

• A 47 percent share of BRI for the players.

• A hard salary cap set $5 million above the average team salary.

• Rollbacks of individual player contracts "in proportion to system changes" to allow for spending on free agents.

• A MLE exception with a starting salary of $3 million and a maximum term of three seasons.

• Maximum contract lengths of four years for "Bird" free agents and three years for other players. Each team could give a five-year deal to one designated player.

• Maximum annual raises of 4.5 percent for "Bird" players and 3.5 percent for others.

https://www.nba.com/2011/news/features/steve_aschburner/11/12/fact-box/index.html
 
Back
Top