Poll: Which side do you support?

[killbuckner]

There is still 451 to 900 of the best 1000 players in the world to display.

Who is going to pay for courtside seats to watch a team if Brian Zoubek was the best player?

THere are a whole lot more billionaires than there are NBA starting quality players.

[bstein14]

Is the NBA still allowed to make and sell jerseys with players names on the back?

[DanTown8587]

I honestly don't see how it's unfair that the players (labor) get a 55-57% split of the revenue. Isn't that how it is in most businesses? Proposing a 40% split is like spitting in the players' faces.

Actually, the players are the commodity. They're as irreplaceable as they come. Even more valuable than the owners. Its like having a car dealership with no cars.

How do you buy the car if there are no dealerships or suppliers? You need both or neither can exist.

There are a lot of basketball players in the world. The NBA displays 450 of them. There is still 451 to 900 of the best 1000 players in the world to display. Lots of replaceable "commodity".

First, the top 450 players in the world are not exclusive to the NBA

Second, you wouldn't get the next best 450 to fill their spots

Third, the league would go from marketing LeBron James and Dwyane Wade to Kyrie Irving and Derrick Williams. Good luck league!

[JACKBARNEY]

Unions generally think short term. In the case of the NBA players they want to get as much as they can and aren't really thinking about the long term survivability of the league.

The owners have a long term investment and are concerned about the NBA years down the road.

I'm in total agreement with the people who have said being pro management/owners is being pro fan.

[Pimpwerx]

Unions generally think short term. In the case of the NBA players they want to get as much as they can and aren't really thinking about the long term survivability of the league.

The owners have a long term investment and are concerned about the NBA years down the road.

I'm in total agreement with the people who have said being pro management/owners is being pro fan.

Greg OIden has played 82 games total since being drafted. He is being offered a $9M contract by these owners who are so interested in their long-term investment. How is that pro-fan?

How is that a smart move for the long-term survivability of the Trail Blazers, much less the league? Cognitive dissonance FTL. PEACE.

[lilneige]

after reading this

http://tinyurl.com/43g98qv

Nevertheless, the IRS not only agreed with Veeck but allowed any owner claiming the write-off to deduct roster expenses twice — first under "player salaries," in the case of the Nets' documents, and then under "loss on players' contracts

and

http://tinyurl.com/64l22jb

Source: Owners Will Push For $45 Million Hard Cap Once Lockout Begins

I am pro players all the way.......

[Sunk Cost]

Unions generally think short term. In the case of the NBA players they want to get as much as they can and aren't really thinking about the long term survivability of the league.

The owners have a long term investment and are concerned about the NBA years down the road.

I'm in total agreement with the people who have said being pro management/owners is being pro fan.

Greg OIden has played 82 games total since being drafted. He is being offered a $9M contract by these owners who are so interested in their long-term investment. How is that pro-fan?

How is that a smart move for the long-term survivability of the Trail Blazers, much less the league? Cognitive dissonance FTL. PEACE.

Huhh? That's exactly what the owners should be doing. If Oden shows he can stay healthy then that contract is a no-brainer. If not, it's only one year and not five. It only hurts them in the short run if it fails, and it could be huge in the long run.

[bjax24]

Yes there are overpaid Players but who gives them the concert? Why would I feel bad for the Hawks ownership when they were dumb enough to give JJ that kind of money? Same with WAS/ORL with Arenas.

[desertlakerfan]

Unions generally think short term. In the case of the NBA players they want to get as much as they can and aren't really thinking about the long term survivability of the league.

The owners have a long term investment and are concerned about the NBA years down the road.

I'm in total agreement with the people who have said being pro management/owners is being pro fan.

Actually this highlights how brainwashed small market fans are by the owners. They actually believe all the hogwash that a hard cap will allow their aweful team to magically get better(while still being led by idiotic decision makers), so instead of looking at the facts they vote with their fan ties.

The voting break down also highlights this, "pro owners, small market" has almost surpassed the total of all 3 other options.

[Sunk Cost]

Unions generally think short term. In the case of the NBA players they want to get as much as they can and aren't really thinking about the long term survivability of the league.

The owners have a long term investment and are concerned about the NBA years down the road.

I'm in total agreement with the people who have said being pro management/owners is being pro fan.

I think if the owners were only concerned with the viability of the league they would have a strong incentive to open up their books and show that the franchises weren't viable. Even with the terrible decisions many of them have made I would support them in that case. Since they haven't done that, I have a hard time believing their motives are any different from the union.

[miltk]

interesting poll. 65% owners!
that works against the players, unlike the NFL.

[WillBill420]

i just want em all to shut up and play ball

[Blame Rasho]

I don't understand how you can have sympathy or empathy for either side... Fact is that this sport is a form of entertainment, a form of entertainment for which both parties get paid an ungodly amount of money.

[Pimpwerx]

Unions generally think short term. In the case of the NBA players they want to get as much as they can and aren't really thinking about the long term survivability of the league.

The owners have a long term investment and are concerned about the NBA years down the road.

I'm in total agreement with the people who have said being pro management/owners is being pro fan.

Greg OIden has played 82 games total since being drafted. He is being offered a $9M contract by these owners who are so interested in their long-term investment. How is that pro-fan?

How is that a smart move for the long-term survivability of the Trail Blazers, much less the league? Cognitive dissonance FTL. PEACE.

Huhh? That's exactly what the owners should be doing. If Oden shows he can stay healthy then that contract is a no-brainer. If not, it's only one year and not five. It only hurts them in the short run if it fails, and it could be huge in the long run.

It is a lot of money for someone who has played just 1 season's worth of games his whole career. If ifs and buts were candy and nuts. U can't rightfully claim money is an issue and then openly gamble on a guy who hasn't been healthy his whole career. Can't have your cake and eat it too. Either the status quo is ok, or its not. A decision like this is continuing the status quo. PEACE.

[omerome]

I don't understand how you can have sympathy or empathy for either side... Fact is that this sport is a form of entertainment, a form of entertainment for which both parties get paid an ungodly amount of money.

Precisely.

The owners are already ridiculously rich from outside endeavours and continue to get rich from selling expensive tickets, merchandise and other things and the players are getting paid crazy amounts of money to play a sport. Both sides are greedy bottomline.

[Sunk Cost]

Huhh? That's exactly what the owners should be doing. If Oden shows he can stay healthy then that contract is a no-brainer. If not, it's only one year and not five. It only hurts them in the short run if it fails, and it could be huge in the long run.

It is a lot of money for someone who has played just 1 season's worth of games his whole career. If ifs and buts were candy and nuts. U can't rightfully claim money is an issue and then openly gamble on a guy who hasn't been healthy his whole career. Can't have your cake and eat it too. Either the status quo is ok, or its not. A decision like this is continuing the status quo. PEACE.

I doubt it's the Blazers owner who is saying money is an issue. It isn't for him. And yes, you can gamble on a potential franchise center for one more year, especially if you aren't going anywhere without him. They really have nothing to lose.

[shmortisborg]

This may or may not be a novice question, i dont really understand a lot of the $ behind sports, but how much of this is the players wanting more and how much is it their agents wanting more? I might be a bit naive but it seems to me that the players would want to just go out there and play, whereas its moreso in the agent's interest to want a bigger salary for them. Sorry if this bhas already been addressed, but i havent seen it mentioned here.

Also, when the spurs won their first title some said there should be an asterisk because of the shortened season, wouldnt any player hoping to win want to avoid a lockout (aside. From vets needing rest like kidd) to avoid an asterisk? Or was that just because the spurs werent from la or ny?