Official CBA/Labour Talks Discussion Thread II

[Reignman]

So the league accepts 5/6 changes proposed by the federal mediator yet the Union doesn't want to propose it to the rank and file?

Yup, Fisher/Hunter sure are representing the masses.

This is becoming a joke. If they don't put this offer to vote by Wednesday then it's not the Owners who will break the Union, it will be their own representatives that break them.

[dacrusha]

So the league accepts 5/6 changes proposed by the federal mediator yet the Union doesn't want to propose it to the rank and file?

Yup, Fisher/Hunter sure are representing the masses.

This is becoming a joke. If they don't put this offer to vote by Wednesday then it's not the Owners who will break the Union, it will be their own representatives that break them.

Why should they agree to changes that are not acceptable to them? What's the point of a union if they're not trying to broker the best deal possible?

Right now, there's no evidence that any of the players want to bother with a vote anyway.

[ranger001]

...

350/2 billion = 18 % per month. Your make believe numbers dont disprove facts. The ammount of money players lose per month will completely negate how much extra they would have made at 52 % by the end of December.

As Larry Coon wrote if the players hold out past Dec 16th and get 53% they would have made more money by taking the 50% at the beginning of the season. And that's if a player plays 6 more years in the league. The average career is less than 5 years.

[C Court]

I don't think it will ever get to the full decertifcation stage, but it's the only leverage the players hold and it's the big reason why NBA owners can't afford to blow away the entire season.

Unlike the NHLPA, it appears the NBAPA is completely willing to go down the decertification path. If the owners call their bluff and cancel the season, then the decertification process begins.

That means an anti-trust suit gets filed against the owners and the courts are likely to favor the players and make all players free agents, invalidate the draft (college kids can sign with the team they choose) and deem the NBA business model as an illegal cartel.

US Anti-Trust Law promotes and maintains market competition by regulating anti-competitive conduct by companies. Pro Sports has avoided anti-trust sanctions because the employer and the union agree to a business system with restrictions on player movement and puts spending limits on franchise owners.

It won't get that far, but it's the BIG hammer the players hold in their favor. Granted it will lead to a complete shutdown of the NBA for a year or two, but once it gets through the court system the owners will not be able to control player movement and wages. While the NBA won't likely see a completely open market, their best case scenario becomes the MLB system - which is way worse than what they have now.

While the players might not see a better offer than 50/50, the owners may open a Pandora's Box of headaches that two years from now makes 52/48 look great if Anti-Trust challenges make it to court.

[carlosey]

Wont decertification guarantee that the big dogs get a huge pay raise and that the average and specially the little guy be out of a job?

[ranger001]

Wont decertification guarantee that the big dogs get a huge pay raise and that the average and specially the little guy be out of a job?

Yes, that's what will happen. Since the median NBA salary is 2.33 million I'm hoping the majority of NBA players will figure out that decertification means a salary decrease for them.

[bboyskinnylegs]

Wont decertification guarantee that the big dogs get a huge pay raise and that the average and specially the little guy be out of a job?

the little guy will still have a job, they likely won't get paid anywhere near as much as they do now to do it.

If decertification were to happen, would existing contracts still exist? Would a draft even be possible?

[dacrusha]

I doubt we ever get down that road to decertification; the owners need a system in place to curb their wild spending ways and a legal agreement with players to ensure the membership of owners can work together as a legal cartel.

Without an agreement with a cohesive players representative, the league ceases to exist and franchise values (at least those poorer franchises that benefit from the protections of the cartel) turn to dust.

[C Court]

With decertification and all the anti-trust court challenges that follow, you'd eventually see a new system which would probably be like MLB. No limits on spending and open bidding for free agents.

The big markets would overspend on players (like the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, Dodgers, Mets and Angels do), which then drives up the overall salaries of all players including those in the lower and middle tiers.

If the owners play hardball and write off the season, they need to understand that will lead to decertification which potentially has very negative consequences over the longer term.

[lobosloboslobos]

I don't see how decertification is going to be worse for owners than players. People talk casually about 'shutting down the league for a year or two" but if that happens, and the draft is invalidated and contracts are invalidated then if I am an owner and it's time to start up the NBA again, then it is 100% a buyer's market isn't it? Hell, you could stock your whole team with whomever you wanted and pay them whatever you wanted. Sure the big stars will get paid huge bucks but the likelihood of the guys on our team for example, ever getting paid as much in the future as they are now seems pretty small to me. If - that is - they even get into the league when it starts up again.

From an owner's perspective, yes the value of their team would drop significantly and so would revenues, and that would be huge for them. BUT as individuals they will all still be zillionaires whereas as individuals a lot of NBA players will be up **** creek.

Am I wrong about this?

[theonlyeastcoastrapsfan]

there won't be a cap, but there won't be a floor either. I still don't know if decert will void all current contracts.

[Reignman]

So the league accepts 5/6 changes proposed by the federal mediator yet the Union doesn't want to propose it to the rank and file?

Yup, Fisher/Hunter sure are representing the masses.

This is becoming a joke. If they don't put this offer to vote by Wednesday then it's not the Owners who will break the Union, it will be their own representatives that break them.

Why should they agree to changes that are not acceptable to them? What's the point of a union if they're not trying to broker the best deal possible?

Right now, there's no evidence that any of the players want to bother with a vote anyway.

I never said the players should accept the deal, I said it should be up for vote.

IMO, we've only heard from the stars and their agents. We haven't heard from the rank and file, the majority.

On the owners side we're hearing from the majority which is the small market hardliners.

[lucky777s]

I doubt we ever get down that road to decertification; the owners need a system in place to curb their wild spending ways and a legal agreement with players to ensure the membership of owners can work together as a legal cartel.

Without an agreement with a cohesive players representative, the league ceases to exist and franchise values (at least those poorer franchises that benefit from the protections of the cartel) turn to dust.

I completely agree. And I am surprised the owners did not take the unions 51% offer. Maybe they feel that they have 51% locked in as a fallback and decided to make one more hard push for 50 before potentially having to settle for 51 and give the players a small victory of some sort. That makes some sense.

It will be interesting to see if the players can force their union to call a vote on the offer. The sides are ridiculously close now with only the MLE and S&T really remaining as issues.

[carlosey]

So the league accepts 5/6 changes proposed by the federal mediator yet the Union doesn't want to propose it to the rank and file?

Yup, Fisher/Hunter sure are representing the masses.

This is becoming a joke. If they don't put this offer to vote by Wednesday then it's not the Owners who will break the Union, it will be their own representatives that break them.

Why should they agree to changes that are not acceptable to them? What's the point of a union if they're not trying to broker the best deal possible?

Right now, there's no evidence that any of the players want to bother with a vote anyway.

I never said the players should accept the deal, I said it should be up for vote.

IMO, we've only heard from the stars and their agents. We haven't heard from the rank and file, the majority.

On the owners side we're hearing from the majority which is the small market hardliners.

This is true. They should put it up for a vote. Otherwise Im suspecting a player revolt at some point. They may be going along wiht it, but I hope mid and low tier players (the majority) understand that decert is only good for the superstars. A lost season plus another years time in court battles will leave many ballers on bankruptcy and considering their money post decertification is going to be used to raise the superstars salary in a free for all market, they have no way of getting out of that situation.

Players are playing a dangerous game of chicken against someone that can far outlast them for what it seems to me like the benefit of the top 10-20 paid players. If Im a middle type guy Im starting to ask why the majority arent being asked about whats on the table today.

[anj]

I never said the players should accept the deal, I said it should be up for vote.

IMO, we've only heard from the stars and their agents. We haven't heard from the rank and file, the majority.

On the owners side we're hearing from the majority which is the small market hardliners.

Actually, we're only hearing from agents, Fisher/Hunter on the players side; and Stern/Silver on the owners side. The rest is just second-hand reporting and "leaks & tweets".

[dacrusha]

Why should they agree to changes that are not acceptable to them? What's the point of a union if they're not trying to broker the best deal possible?

Right now, there's no evidence that any of the players want to bother with a vote anyway.

I never said the players should accept the deal, I said it should be up for vote.

IMO, we've only heard from the stars and their agents. We haven't heard from the rank and file, the majority.

On the owners side we're hearing from the majority which is the small market hardliners.

This is true. They should put it up for a vote. Otherwise Im suspecting a player revolt at some point. They may be going along wiht it, but I hope mid and low tier players (the majority) understand that decert is only good for the superstars. A lost season plus another years time in court battles will leave many ballers on bankruptcy and considering their money post decertification is going to be used to raise the superstars salary in a free for all market, they have no way of getting out of that situation.

Players are playing a dangerous game of chicken against someone that can far outlast them for what it seems to me like the benefit of the top 10-20 paid players. If Im a middle type guy Im starting to ask why the majority arent being asked about whats on the table today.

The worst part of this situation is that it's the mid-level/bottom level players (represented by the union) and the poorest teams (the Heisley/Taylor faction) that are currently making a power grab in these negotiations.

The real negotiating entities SHOULD be the richest players and franchises that basically account for 90% of the worth of the entire league.

If it were up to them, the best way to save the league is to get rid of max salaries (that artificially facilitate huge mid-level salalries) and cut off the bottom 6 teams (that are dragging league profits down).

Win, win situation for everyone.

[Rapsfan07]

But we have a good sense of the division in the Owners camp. The rich guys want to play, the poorer teams want higher revenue sharing and/or BRI% and there are a few who are in the middle. On the players side, you have no more than about 10-20% of players who want decertifcation and the majority absolutely silent. So Fisher and Hunter can do one of two things or both: Put the current proposal to a Union-wide vote in which case he'd have to go with the majority if he really cares about the union as much as he says he does or get a petition to take a vote or decertifcation. They'll need 50% +1 to decertify

I doubt the majority likes the aftershock of decertification.

[TiKusDom]

Omg, they are not losing money, but they are not making money, and perhaps collecting EI.
You are job less, doesn't mean you are losing money, while you don't have a job
Can they claim financial lost as a player? I don't think so.

The owners are losing money, they have to pay their expenses.
Can they claim financial lost? Yes they can.

If someone wants to go on an unpaid vacation, you have a problem?
Why not ask the owners agree to the players, its not like players never gave them a proposal.

Opportunity cost is the cost of any activity measured in terms of the value of the best alternative that is not chosen (that is foregone). It is the sacrifice related to the second best choice available to someone, or group, who has picked among several mutually exclusive choices

business 101 sacrificed month = 350 million lost
the time you spend not earning money is time you are losing earning money that could have gone to your pocket.

As Larry Coon wrote if the players hold out past Dec 16th and get 53% they would have made more money by taking the 50% at the beginning of the season. And that's if a player plays 6 more years in the league. The average career is less than 5 years.

They wont get 53 %, or anywhere close to it.

[Rapsfan07]

As Larry Coon wrote if the players hold out past Dec 16th and get 53% they would have made more money by taking the 50% at the beginning of the season. And that's if a player plays 6 more years in the league. The average career is less than 5 years.

They wont get 53 %, he might as well be hoping for 57 %.

But I think 51% is realistic though.

[ATLTimekeeper]

But we have a good sense of the division in the Owners camp. The rich guys want to play, the poorer teams want higher revenue sharing and/or BRI% and there are a few who are in the middle. On the players side, you have no more than about 10-20% of players who want decertifcation and the majority absolutely silent. So Fisher and Hunter can do one of two things or both: Put the current proposal to a Union-wide vote in which case he'd have to go with the majority if he really cares about the union as much as he says he does or get a petition to take a vote or decertifcation. They'll need 50% +1 to decertify

I doubt the majority likes the aftershock of decertification.

Fisher and Hunter can't petition for decertification, that's for sure. They have to pretend they're not involved in the whole thing.