What's new
By:

Lockout!!!

GlassEater said:
Good points, IGS. Any conversion probably favors Miami and teams who are tight against the cap. Right now, Miami can only offer league minimum contracts to players or use their exceptions since the "Big 3" take up all their cap space. I'd hate to see a new CBA result in them being able to go out and get another all-star caliber player. Utah has some major salary coming off soon (AK now, then Memo, with Harris in 2 years). I just hope the new CBA makes it easier to retain your own FA's. And I think that will be teh case. Most owners don't want a repeat of what happened with Lebron & Anthony, nor the scenarioo that was playing out with Deron and CP3.
Click to expand...
I was thinking that a "conversion" (which I interpret to mean that the existing salaries (at least the big-ticket ones) don't (fully) count against the new cap) was only benefitting the overpaying teams in order to allow them to continue with existing contracts. If the player revenue percentage were to be hacked immediately, I'd imagine that some teams wouldn't be able to even fill their rosters under a hard cap because of the high-priced contracts that they have.

When the players were offering to take 54% revenue percentage, I was thinking that the owners should consider phasing in the percentage (e.g., starting with 56%, then 55%, then 54%, then 53%, then staying at 52%) for the very reason that the existing contracts would take time to expire. But if the players recently capitulated to accept 52% or 53% anyway, then the owners are definitely the ones who are holding this up, at their peril and at the peril of the NBA overall. Relatively speaking, a 52% share is plenty fair--and at a 5% drop from the previous players' share, should be plenty profitable for the owners.

David Stern (or a capable third party such as me ;)) should be able to get this deal done in the next few weeks. Even if there are a few rogue owners, the rest of the owners should negotiate or pressure the holdouts into consensus and move onto getting the season rolling.

With the recent shift of events, I predict that they will start playing by New Year's Day.
 
Last edited:
InGameStrategy said:
There is talk about the existing contracts being grandfathered in or somehow not fully counting against the hard cap; if they were, then the hard cap (i.e. Miami) would make it impossible for some teams to even fill out their roster. But all new contracts would be.

One way to do it is to count all existing contracts as a maximum of 25% of the hard cap; contracts worth less than 25% of the hard cap would be counted at face value. But neither Derek Fisher nor the owners have hired me for my opinion; if they had, then the lockout would be over already, and the season would be in process toward starting ;).
Click to expand...

full of yourself?
 
I don't know how legitimate this article is, but apparently Kobe is willing to hand out loans to low-salary players to help them make it through the lockout.

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/215638/Kobe_Could_Offer_Loans_To_Fellow_Players

Is he for real? How long does Kobe think he can support 1/3 of the league with NBA player's lifestyles? Obviously, he's looking out for future big-earners in the NBA, and he doesn't want the little guy to be "forced" to cave into the NBA's CBA demands because they're broke. But this seems like such a short-sighted fix that I can't imagine it would do much at all.
 
Good for Kobe. Important parts in are red: "...he and others are prepared to loan money if necessary." So it's not like he is trying to prop up 1/3 of the league all by himself. He's not by himself, and presumably the "if necessary" part will be a much smaller fraction of the league.
 
AlaskanAssassin said:
I don't know how legitimate this article is, but apparently Kobe is willing to hand out loans to low-salary players to help them make it through the lockout.

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/215638/Kobe_Could_Offer_Loans_To_Fellow_Players

Is he for real? How long does Kobe think he can support 1/3 of the league with NBA player's lifestyles? Obviously, he's looking out for future big-earners in the NBA, and he doesn't want the little guy to be "forced" to cave into the NBA's CBA demands because they're broke. But this seems like such a short-sighted fix that I can't imagine it would do much at all.
Click to expand...

...hey, these clowns cap each other when they get stiffed in a card game! What do you think would happen if some players were delinquent on Kobe loans!!!!
 
Last edited:
Hilarious transparency on part of the players. They're called 'pros' because of their bb skills, obviously.
 
colton said:
Good for Kobe. Important parts in are red: "...he and others are prepared to loan money if necessary." So it's not like he is trying to prop up 1/3 of the league all by himself. He's not by himself, and presumably the "if necessary" part will be a much smaller fraction of the league.
Click to expand...

Loan does not help. the money has to be paid back. so in eccense they lose income this year. and have to pay the loan back. stupid ****
 
DutchJazzer said:
Loan does not help. the money has to be paid back. so in eccense they lose income this year. and have to pay the loan back. stupid ****
Click to expand...

Not really. If they a house,car,child support,etc. payment to pay that they can't pay because they don't have a check coming in, they can borrow money from Kobe (probably at a better rate than from a bank too).
 
colton said:
Good for Kobe. Important parts in are red: "...he and others are prepared to loan money if necessary." So it's not like he is trying to prop up 1/3 of the league all by himself. He's not by himself, and presumably the "if necessary" part will be a much smaller fraction of the league.
Click to expand...

It will be interesting to see what these willing lenders are really going to do. Say, if I were Kenyon Martin and I were not going overseas, would Kobe be willing to lend me $9M since I made that much last year? Or he would only lend me veteran minimum since he thinks I am only going to make this much?
 
Email from the jazz I got.


We appreciate your continued patience as the NBA and the NBA Players Association negotiate a new collective bargaining agreement. Since no such agreement has been reached at this time, the league has postponed player training camps and cancelled preseason games scheduled through October 15, 2011.

Please know that you are a vital part of the Utah Jazz, and we value your support.*

We want to assure you that the league’s efforts are focused on reaching an agreement that benefits all parties involved.* The NBA’s goal is to secure a sustainable business model that enables all 30 teams to compete for a championship, fairly compensates players, and ensures a world-class experience for our fans.*

We recognize that without our fans, there would be no NBA. Your passion for the game is what motivates us, and we do not take your support for granted. The league will continue to work toward a new collective bargaining agreement so that we can get back to enjoying the excitement of NBA basketball.

For more information, visit*NBA.com's Labor Central page.*

Thank you again for your support and your continued loyalty to the Utah Jazz.

Sincerely,
 
hoopshype.com :

"Steve Kyler: So where do we stand... 3% or about $123 million and a hard cap apart... Players have a choice. 53% and a hard cap or 50% and no hard cap."
 
50% and no hard cap is a pretty good deal for the players considering what the owners wanted originally and what they could basically continue to hold out for (45% and a hard cap).

For my part, I think the players should get 51% under a flex cap system with most of the existing rules remaining. Max length for MLE deals should be shortened one or even two seasons with a provision where the free agent's last team can offer that additional year or two even without Bird Rights.
 
NUMBERICA said:
50% and no hard cap is a pretty good deal for the players considering what the owners wanted originally and what they could basically continue to hold out for (45% and a hard cap).
Click to expand...
I don't see, though, where 45% is anything more than a number that the owners pulled out of their billionaire asses. Was there any financial analysis behind it?

I'm skeptical, because if the players' share was 57% and the owners are threatening a random 45% number, and if $123 million represents 3%, then each percentage point represents about $40 million, suggesting that the draconian drop from 57% to 45% PRI is about ($40 * 12) = nearly $500 million savings by the owners. I think that this is annually. That's a huge profitability cushion relative to a more equitable value (literally) of 50% or so. Under broad accounting standards (i.e., including non-cash amortization), the NBA was losing "only" $300 million per year--and that's before any teams are folded or moved to more financially stable areas.

If the MLB and NFL can "get by" paying the players about 50% of revenue, I don't see why the NBA--which has fewer players per team, thus saving on associated costs such as insurance, lodging, travel, etc.--can't.


NUMBERICA said:
For my part, I think the players should get 51% under a flex cap system with most of the existing rules remaining. Max length for MLE deals should be shortened one or even two seasons with a provision where the free agent's last team can offer that additional year or two even without Bird Rights.
Click to expand...
I agree that a number in the low 50's is about right, and I think that they will come to agreement in that range. Anything below that is a bit greedy and bullying on the part of the owners (as if it were possible to bully employees averaging $5 million in income). Also, maybe a lot of owners can afford holding out longer, but it's still in their best interest financially to start things going again as long as they can get a deal that makes sense, especially if the fan base gives up on the NBA for good if it were to be dragged out for too long. (We're probably not to that point yet.)

With the players already having capitulated to 53%ish, I reaffirm my prediction that they'll be playing by New Year's--maybe as early as Thanksgiving. I'm sure David Stern and the owners would like to see NBA fans cheering for Kobe between helpings of turkey.
 
InGameStrategy said:
I don't see, though, where 45% is anything more than a number that the owners pulled out of their billionaire asses. Was there any financial analysis behind it?

I'm skeptical, because if the players' share was 57% and the owners are threatening a random 45% number, and if $123 million represents 3%, then each percentage point represents about $40 million, suggesting that the draconian drop from 57% to 45% PRI is about ($40 * 12) = nearly $500 million savings by the owners. I think that this is annually. That's a huge profitability cushion relative to a more equitable value (literally) of 50% or so. Under broad accounting standards (i.e., including non-cash amortization), the NBA was losing "only" $300 million per year--and that's before any teams are folded or moved to more financially stable areas.

If the MLB and NFL can "get by" paying the players about 50% of revenue, I don't see why the NBA--which has fewer players per team, thus saving on associated costs such as insurance, lodging, travel, etc.--can't.


I agree that a number in the low 50's is about right, and I think that they will come to agreement in that range. Anything below that is a bit greedy and bullying on the part of the owners (as if it were possible to bully employees averaging $5 million in income). Also, maybe a lot of owners can afford holding out longer, but it's still in their best interest financially to start things going again as long as they can get a deal that makes sense, especially if the fan base gives up on the NBA for good if it were to be dragged out for too long. (We're probably not to that point yet.)

With the players already having capitulated to 53%ish, I reaffirm my prediction that they'll be playing by New Year's--maybe as early as Thanksgiving. I'm sure David Stern and the owners would like to see NBA fans cheering for Kobe between helpings of turkey.
Click to expand...

My preditction is that we will start the season on time, and all 82 games will be played. Of course, this is simply a hunch on my part, however things are really progressing to the point where "one bad meeting" wont destroy progress as much as it would have, say, two weeks ago. Things are looking up.
 
https://sheridanhoops.com/2011/09/22/nba-lockout-update-generous-amnesty-provision/

By Chris Sheridan

NEW YORK — Negotiations to end the NBA lockout are resuming today in Manhattan with all the heavy hitters in attendance, so there will be some news before the end of the day. Stay tuned on that front.

In the meantime, chew on these two articles:

In the Oregonian, columnist John Canzano reports an amnesty provision could be part of the new labor agreement, and it would provide some serious cap flexibility leaguewide:

“Two NBA sources told me Tuesday that they believe there’s consensus among owners on a few important lockout issues. One of those issues being an amnesty clause that would give NBA teams the ability to release one player, pay his salary, take no luxury tax liability, and also, not have that player count against the season salary cap. This is different than the last round of amnesty, which didn’t give the cap relief. And if true, it would likely allow Portland to strongly consider releasing three-time All-Star Brandon Roy, creating an additional $15 million in cap relief next season. Which is only to say, the Blazers need a general manager in the chair now, as this develops, if they’re going to fully maximize the advantages of making such a powerful play.”

Adrian Wojnarowski of Yahoo Sports raises the issue of whether Billy Hunter might make so many concessions, the league’s most powerful agents would encourage their clients to vote against ratification.

“Everyone knows this is Hunter’s final stand as executive director of the Players Association, and he ultimately won’t have to live with the consequences of the agreement. He’ll take his millions of dollars, and go, and that leaves some agents and players suspicious of his willingness to fight NBA commissioner David Stern and the hard-line owners to a determined, defiant end. “There’s a lot of money and control at stake here,” one NBA front-office executive said. “I’ve never seen people who are in negotiations with each other give up those two things easily. There will be a nasty fight at some point among the owners, the players and the agents. At some point, two of those three entities will square off and go to war. It’s just a matter of which two entities it will be.”
Click to expand...

Two words come to mind when I read this article;

Raja Bell.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top