Official CBA/Labour Talks Discussion Thread II

[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.

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

I kinda meant their camp but thanks for clarification

[Indeed]

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.

You never know would they get more. And are we expecting the revenue stays?
And my question you have not answered, why the owners not agree to a 53% then? Aren't they losing more money? Why you are only saying the players are loser, while never mention anything about the owners? Aren't they loser as well?

[ATLTimekeeper]

Over and over in the last two weeks, I have heard the same refrain from players and agents, from big markets and small ones, max guys and minimum salaried guys. You can forget asking about community service work. You can forget asking for cooperation for NBA Cares. Basketball Without Borders? Don't even ask. All of the public service requests that the league has made of its players -- in part, it must be said, to quell fan anger after the Brawl at Auburn Hills in 2004 -- are in jeopardy.

Man, the PR for the players is just the worst.

[Ponchos]

Over and over in the last two weeks, I have heard the same refrain from players and agents, from big markets and small ones, max guys and minimum salaried guys. You can forget asking about community service work. You can forget asking for cooperation for NBA Cares. Basketball Without Borders? Don't even ask. All of the public service requests that the league has made of its players -- in part, it must be said, to quell fan anger after the Brawl at Auburn Hills in 2004 -- are in jeopardy.

Man, the PR for the players is just the worst.

The players have raised millions for charity with all their charity games since the lockout began.

How much have you given to charity during that time?

[Reignman]

You completely missed ATL's point.

[Ponchos]

No, not really. He is referring to player PR, but no amount of PR will overcome personal biases.

When ATL read that he thought: "Wow what a bunch of greedy scumbags".

When I read it I thought: "The players have done a ton of charity games, I hear of them being played all the time.. Whether they do charity work under the NBA Cares label or on their own, it's all charity".

[ATLTimekeeper]

You completely missed ATL's point.

[I_Like_Dirt]

All that work the NBA has done to negotiate the players into agreeing to do charity work as a part of the work for which they get paid. The hilarious part is that the players give to charity all the time. What percentage of MLSE's profits do you think they give to charity? I bet it's lower than what the players give. Think any of the couple hundred million in profits from the sale of the Raptors goes to charity? Damn those greedy players. If only they'd do more what they owners say rather than what the owners do.

[NH]

http://www.hoopsworld.com/letter-to-uni ... bas-offer/

Current proposal set by the NBA. Wonder if the owners let go of the sign-and-trade restriction, will the NBA players agree on the deal?

[Ponchos]

http://www.hoopsworld.com/letter-to-union-stern-details-nbas-offer/

Current proposal set by the NBA. Wonder if the owners let go of the sign-and-trade restriction, will the NBA players agree on the deal?

I bet they would agree. At this point they're defeated, but they will not take a deal they can't sell. They need to be able to save face.

If there's a meeting Tuesday, then I think we'll have a deal. If the owners refuse to meet and continue with the ultimatum then there will be no deal.

[40 Guzzle]

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.

for everyone?

based on what you posted I can think of at least 6 parties who will they think they got the shi**y end of the stick

[floppymoose]

The owners are in a mad rush to get a deal done. That's why they are pulling out all the stops for a wednesday deal: the deadline, the heavy handed threat of making the deal worse.

They know the clock is ticking on the season, and once the season has to be cancelled, a decertification vote will pass easily. Players have a lot less to lose once the season is gone anyway.

The harder the owners push, the closer the players are to actually getting a better offer. They just have the stamina and willpower to wait out the owners and let the season be cancelled if that's what it takes.

[carlosey]

You could also see it as the owners have the players backed against a corner and its time to press for something to get done. They are rightfully calling their decertification bluff. They know it wont pass because honestly unless your Javale Mcgee there is no way youre going to let Wade get a major salary raise at your expense and livelihood. The owners have always had the upper hand, and the players need to put whats on the table up for vote instead of messing around trying to score the top 20 a better deal instead of looking out for the remaining 400 that are going to get screwed no matter what.

[floppymoose]

You have misunderstood the implications of decertification. It's Wade who loses big then. A lost season hits the big contract guys harder than the young guys.

It sounds like you expect decertification actually results in a situation where the league is going again, but with no union or CBA. That's not going to happen. Decertification is just a step that ends with the parties hammering out a deal that has a union and a CBA.

[C Court]

ESPN's Mark Stein posted this about why the players feel decertification strengthens their bargaining position:

Sources close to the process say leaders of the decertification movement -- with Boston Celtics star Paul Pierce most noticeably at the forefront -- can and will find the required 130-ish players needed to sign a petition to vote on decertification by Monday or Tuesday. And that's when the clock would really start in terms of saving the season … unless you believe that the league is truly prepared to take the villainous step of canceling the season if there’s no deal by Wednesday. (For the record: I don’t believe that.)

After the petition to vote on decertification is filed, there would be an estimated 45 days from that point -- while the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) rules on whether a decertification vote should actually take place -- for the union and league to keep negotiating. The union is not immediately dissolved and it is during those 45 days, sources say, that decertification backers believe that the owners can be nudged away from the hard-line stance they’ve maintained for four months.

And here’s why: Decertification by no means guarantees success for the players, but the prospect of taking this dispute to the courts injects a level of uncertainty into proceedings that they believe makes the league side nervous after it held virtually 100 percent of the leverage to this point. Fear of the unknown and all that. “Decertification is risky and messy [for the players],” says one backer, “but it’s the only thing that scares the owners. Because then they lose total control.”

The player's trump card is decertification. They can play the card and not have an actual vote to decertify for 45 days. That provides a window to negotiate a more favorable deal with the owners.

[Reignman]

Decertification is as much a bluff as it is a trump card. It's the unknown that puts pressure on everyone.

Trust me, the players are just as scared as the owners when it comes to decertification and that's why I don't think it's a viable option at this point.

If Stern cancels the season this early in the negotiations that might prematurely cause the players to feel they have no choice. The owners need to drag this out a little further if they want the players to fold, a few more cheques need to be missed.

[C Court]

On the other hand, if decertification passes and anti-trust litigation is fast-tracked - the owners may discover a year from now that their league has been deemed an illegal cartel by the courts and they have no cap or salary limits - plus, they are required to pay damages to the players.

Is it worth one or two points of BRI to risk it?

[Twinkie defense]

Stern hasn't talked about cancelling the season, the Wednesday deadline is for the specific deals on the table right now. The passage of time is what's "cancelling the season" - a weeks worth of games at a time. But if the union decertifies, that could bring about the cancellation of the season more quickly than anything.

[ranger001]

The player's trump card is decertification. They can play the card and not have an actual vote to decertify for 45 days. That provides a window to negotiate a more favorable deal with the owners.

I doubt they have enough votes to decertify. However it doesn't hurt the star players at all since the voiding of contracts is said to be a long shot. So I can see also why they play the card, it likely won't hurt them and has a chance of helping them.

[floppymoose]

This may seem counter-intuitive, but I think if the players stop negotiating with the owners, that will speed things up. The sooner the owners are convinced that the players have the votes to decertify, the sooner the owners will improve their offer. I think there are only two ways to save the season at this point:

1) the players cave soon
2) the players show they have the votes to decertify, and show that soon.