https://www.thepostgame.com/blog/dish/201111/south-floridas-eye-popping-economic-hoops-losses
Wonder how SLC is faring?
Wonder how SLC is faring?
Is there a more clear-cut pile of **** (in a garbage can, pulsating with maggots) in this saga than Billy Hunter?
If you are not OK with the changes, you are free to look for work somewhere else.
You leave Lockheed-Martin, you can work for Northrup-Grumann, with vbery little difference. You leave Wellpoint, you can work for United Healthcare. There is no other organization similar to the NBA. Because they have an effective monopoly, they don't get to treat employees like other companies. In particular, if your employees find your working conditions unacceptable, your options are limited.
My understanding is that the NBA could avoid both a union and anti-trust legislation simpy by abandoning the salary cap, luxury tax, and similar provisions of the CBA, and every team was free to decide it's salary structure on its own, setting up genuine competition for players. The owners want limited competition for players, so the player have a say in that.
I would be all for eliminating the CBA and having each team be free to decide thier own salary structure. We all know this would result in 5 to 8 teams in the league competing for the top spot while the other teams fight for scraps. I would be okay with this situation because atleast it gets rid of the illusion that all NBA teams are equal. And the millers can field a team of nice guys, who are scrappy players with interesting storylines, and still charge a bit for seasons tickets because the stars will come via the other teams. Jazz never win a championship, but they weren't going to anyway.
The problem I have is that the players won't stop there. They would claim collusion amongst the owners of the 20 or so teams that kept a budget and every free agency off-season would be a court battle. No thanks.
You leave Lockheed-Martin, you can work for Northrup-Grumann, with vbery little difference. You leave Wellpoint, you can work for United Healthcare. There is no other organization similar to the NBA. Because they have an effective monopoly, they don't get to treat employees like other companies. In particular, if your employees find your working conditions unacceptable, your options are limited.
There are other basketball leagues, just not others that pay what the NBA pays. Nothing in Antitrust laws regarding a person's salary. Besides, I think Antitrust laws are based on "essential services" being provided. IMO, the NBA union or "association" is trying to gain leverage and settle before this ever goes to court. IMO, a waste of time...
Well obviously they could avoid any litigation by blowing things up and going the MLB route. That's like saying the players could have avoided this whole lockout mess if they simply agreed to a hard cap, rollbacks and 47% of BRI.
And there are dozens of professional basketball leagues throughout the world that these players could have, and still can, play for.
I would be all for eliminating the CBA and having each team be free to decide thier own salary structure. We all know this would result in 5 to 8 teams in the league competing for the top spot while the other teams fight for scraps. I would be okay with this situation because atleast it gets rid of the illusion that all NBA teams are equal. And the millers can field a team of nice guys, who are scrappy players with interesting storylines, and still charge a bit for seasons tickets because the stars will come via the other teams. Jazz never win a championship, but they weren't going to anyway.
Is there a more clear-cut pile of **** (in a garbage can, pulsating with maggots) in this saga than Billy Hunter?
The difference3 is that the latter requires player agreement, while the former does not. The owners want a CBA becasue they do not want a free market on player salaries.
None are competitors to the NBA. That's like saying you can gor from Lockheed-Martin to a German defense company.
There are other basketball leagues, just not others that pay what the NBA pays.
Nothing in Antitrust laws regarding a person's salary.
Just because I'm employed at Lockheed-Martin doesn't mean that I'm entitled to the my current salary and benefits for my entire career.
It's Lockheed-Martin's perogative to employ me and unless they are asking me to do anything illegal or immoral, if I want to stay there, I'll abide by their rules. If I disagree with what they're asking me to do, then I have the option of seeking employment elsewhere at the expense of losing whatever salary/benefits that I had at Lockheed-Martin.
No NBA player gets that.
Since all the NBA teams are working together, the equivalent here would be you choosing to work at Lockheed-Martin, or taking your services to the fast-food industry (that the usual alternative suggested for the players, it seems), because every other complany operates in the same way Lockheed-Martin does, at the same salary structure, and they all know about your putative refusal.
Yeah, right. I don't know a single Jazz fan who would want to watch a D-league Jazz team get creamed every night by an all-star team from LA, New York, or Chicago. Even the fans of those teams would get bored with that situation in a hurry. Teams like Utah would fizzle out, and it would probably cut the league in half. This is a terrible idea, and quite honestly, I don't believe you are a Jazz fan if you would be OK with that.