JimLes
Well-Known Member
Ya see, that's just stupid. Pride doesn't feed anyone, including Latrell's children.
Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce and Kobe Bryant....shot down 50/50 deal!
- Thread starter carolinajazz
- Start date
Ya see, that's just stupid. Pride doesn't feed anyone, including Latrell's children.
TheItinerantSon
Well-Known Member
Hey, its not like that extra 7% is going to charity. I see no reason that the owners deserve that extra income, remember its a lockout not a strike.
Also, the owners do pay for perks such as hotel rooms etc, but they also are trying to revise the formula for BRI to exclude lots of different types of revenue.
the league had record profitability last year, this is about stealing a larger portion of the pie for owners. **** them.
Also, the owners do pay for perks such as hotel rooms etc, but they also are trying to revise the formula for BRI to exclude lots of different types of revenue.
the league had record profitability last year, this is about stealing a larger portion of the pie for owners. **** them.
"hold out"? it's a lockout, remember. did you mean "resist capitulation" instead?
and how are hotels and flights a "perk"? these guys are on the road 50 nights a year. what are they supposed to do? drive their own cars on the road trips? sleep at the arena?
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
....and that's exactly why most NBA fans do side with the owners (of course, I have my "other" reasons as well!) and the players don't have a leg to stand on....which they will find out shortly....when those paychecks stop coming and the deal on the table get's worse and worse and worse!
trigg3r
Well-Known Member
The owners and the players have every right to try to get the best deal possible for their side. I won't say I believe they are losing a lot of money. Anyway, I have no issue with them wanting a 50/50 split. In the end both will lose out if this goes on because the fans will ultimately walk away. Some probably already have.
yes, they should get a paycut, just because the rest of us (supposedly) have. and can i get a t-bagger over here to object to the socialism implied in this post?
as opposed to the owners, who make their money all fair-and-square. see:
https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php?7331-Get-to-know-an-NBA-owner!&p=199023&viewfull=1#post199023
kwb
Well-Known Member
I can totally see those 3 just wanting to do what's completely best and beneficial for the younger players in the league.
InGameStrategy
Well-Known Member
The owners were the obstacle at the beginning, but now it's the players. And there's little difference between a lockout and a contract dispute in terms of the impact of not having games.
The NBADL players and international players can explain to you the difference between a perk and a cost-effective business expense better than I can.
https://www.yardbarker.com/nba/articles/jennings_nba_a_far_better_option_than_europe/6090403
In either case, if it's really coming out of the owners' share, then it further reduces the players' argument in all this. Before taxes, the players' 50% (or 46% or 53% or whatever) comes out relatively expense-free.
TheItinerantSon
Well-Known Member
so if your employer comes to you and demands that you take a 12.5 % paycut even as the company is making record profits you would accept that? I know a lot of people have had to do that or worse, but if you can avoid it you should.
trigg3r
Well-Known Member
Depends on the viability of the company at the time. There is an ongoing debate whether the NBA is losing money or not. I offer you the flip side. If you are an owner is it not fair for you to try to get the best deal possible?
TheItinerantSon
Well-Known Member
nobody denies that the league is making tons and tons of money. What is up for debate is the extent to which individual franchises may be losing money. That sounds like a revenue sharing issue to me...
I dont understand why nobody talks about how the league as a whole is making enormous amounts of money, why is everyone focused on the individual franchises? Its not 30 different units, isn't that the whole reason they are able to avoid anti-trust litigation?
I dont understand why nobody talks about how the league as a whole is making enormous amounts of money, why is everyone focused on the individual franchises? Its not 30 different units, isn't that the whole reason they are able to avoid anti-trust litigation?
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
....you make an interesting point! If my boss said to me "take this pay cut or find another job"....I would take the pay cut, be looking for another job....but probably not giving him my best effort anymore! But NBA players can't possibly give a worse effort than they've been doing the past 10 years anyway! Poor shooting, poor defense, poor team play.
did you not read this part: "even as the company is making record profits"?
Last edited:
trigg3r
Well-Known Member
As was stated, some franchises might be making record profits. There are many that aren't. Sure it is a revenue sharing issue. But why not get the best deal you can as an owner? Or do you expect them just to give in without a fight? I don't feel bad for either side and I think 50/50 is fair. That being said, the owners have IMO made their final offer or concession on BRI IMO.
I understand what you're saying, but the owners started the fight. To "give in" without a fight clearly implies that the players came barging down their doors demanding raises (which didn't happen, in case that needs explaining to the majority of you that act as though this is what happened).
trigg3r
Well-Known Member
And yet the players were making 57% of the BRI and the owners 43%. Why would they continue with that deal if they knew they could get a much better one. The owners' original stance was 54/46 in favor of them, right? At least that's what I have been reading. Their ultimate ceiling I believe is 50/50. That's the highest they will go IMO. I can't fault them for wanting the best deal they can get and I can't fault the players for wanting the best deal they can get. I will say the owners have IMO done a much better job of arguing their position. I haven't read any real good arguments from the player perspective. Anyway, 50/50 is the best the players are going to get and they are wasting their time and money by not accepting that. The owners as many have pointed out are already very wealthy. They can afford to wait the players out.
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
....gee, I hate being right all the time, but NBC Sports is now reporting that it WAS Garnett that muddy up the whole thing and here are the details! "Privately, management insists that everything changed when the Boston Celtics’ Kevin Garnett(notes) walked into the negotiating room on Oct. 4. The owners knew it wouldn’t go well when Garnett started glowering across the table, sources said, like the league lawyers, owners and officials were opponents at the center jump. He was defiant, determined and downright ornery. He was K.G. Everyone knew Hunter had to cede to the wishes of the stars, and the stars demanded that the players stop making concessions to the owners.
As one league official said, “We were making progress, until Garnett [expletive] everything up.”
By the way, for those who are CJ supporters, I just got busted with a warning for referring to Garnett as an "Angry man of color"! How ironic???
Here's the link: https://probasketballtalk.nbcsports...at-“garnett-expletive-everything-up”/related/
As one league official said, “We were making progress, until Garnett [expletive] everything up.”
By the way, for those who are CJ supporters, I just got busted with a warning for referring to Garnett as an "Angry man of color"! How ironic???
Here's the link: https://probasketballtalk.nbcsports...at-“garnett-expletive-everything-up”/related/
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
.....I'm not gonna get another warning, am I???
I still doubt that one person can mess up negotiations that bad. Think it's a ploy by the Owners/League to make players look bad.
carolinajazz
Well-Known Member
....you know how hoppers don't like to be dissed? Well, some of these old school owners don't appreciate it when some punk kid from the streets trys to intimidate them with staredowns and gangsta rap looks!