Official CBA/Labour Talks Discussion Thread

[Mos Def]

KBergCBS Ken Berger
Sources: After seeing owners' stance themselves, players threatened to walk out of #NBA #lockout talks Friday. bit.ly/nTfbhi

Not looking good...

MrMichael_Smith Michael Smith
by SebastianPruiti
According to @Chris_Broussard @dwadeofficial basically told Stern, "Don't point at me bro. I'm serious." NBA CBA meetings getting real!

Did Dwade really call Stern bro?

Apparently he said "Don't point at me, I'm not your child."

I could see it going down like this...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mryFz8C9AHk[/youtube]

[Firesphere]

Why don't players have a cap on their salary.. but as an incentive, the owners can introduce shares in the franchise. These can be completely unrestricted and will show how much an owner actually wants a player to be a part of an organization... also, over time, it will give more power to the old school players who were worth a damn, and they can help shape the future of salaries... they will see the flip side of ownership and it will be easier to negotiate because both sides of the table will be working for the same goal in the long run.

And it would also instill loyalty because a player who earned shares in a franchise would inherently want it to succeed and they would want to stay with them.

[LittleOzzy]

Why don't players have a cap on their salary.. but as an incentive, the owners can introduce shares in the franchise. These can be completely unrestricted and will show how much an owner actually wants a player to be a part of an organization... also, over time, it will give more power to the old school players who were worth a damn, and they can help shape the future of salaries... they will see the flip side of ownership and it will be easier to negotiate because both sides of the table will be working for the same goal in the long run.

And it would also instill loyalty because a player who earned shares in a franchise would inherently want it to succeed and they would want to stay with them.

So not only should the players get paid but the owners should start giving away the team they own? Get real, that's not a realistic option at all.

Plus players get traded all the time, even veterans, how would the shares be moved then?

[Firesphere]

That's the point... at the moment owners can throw money around and it means nothing to the big teams like the lakers... they have money for years.. but the second they have to give kobe a share of the franchise, it means something. Players wouldn't end up getting traded all the time, at least the major ones who get shares anyway.. because both parties would prefer that player to remain with the team. It would stabilize all the team hopping that goes on, and might actually balance the league for once. Drafted big names who get resigned to stay such as Lebron might actually stick with their club and keep the league interesting, instead of juggernaut teams. It would finally bring back true team spirit and enter a new era of rivalry. Also down the line, people like kobe would be a minor part of decisions in retirement, so they would have a hand in governing the legacy they hope to leave.

At the moment the owners are complaining that they are not making money and are losing money... so why not pay less for players and give them shares of the losing company to keep them happy? You aren't losing anything if the company is going down, you are just hopefully stabilizing it and getting the players and owners to see eye-to-eye on decisions.

[carlosey]

Shares on a privately owned entity? Not going to happen. How many shares can you actually give up before the team is no longer yours? And what makes anyone think that once a player owns a slice of the team he will ever give it up? I just dont see it happening.

Now I agree that the team spirit and competition part of the game has been watered down to make way for the individual stars (something Rick Carlisle refered to to great extent after the NBA finals) and this is why we have Wade yelling at Stern for being pointed at during a multimillion dollar negotiation, or saying how he could make a ridiculous sum of money on a free market when the world economy is in the crapper and when no one outside the NBA could even afford. Just absolutely delusional. NBA has to go back to basics and make the league about competition and team support. This manufactured superstar garbage has gone too far. Being strict w players in terms of salary rules, marketing and whistles is the only way to go.

[arbsn]

can we call in some arbitrators / mediators already

this is going absolutely nowhere

as much as I love the sport of basketball i am seriously starting to resent the NBA entity

what is the high road in this situation?

There is really no win - win at this point... all four powers that be (players, agents, owners, league executives) have been making no ground because they are all so stubborn. So much for the NBA being a community helper and an organization full of role models...

maybe the players should all just go play internationally
maybe the union should just decertify
maybe the NBA should get replacement players
none of this would be good although it's already started.

America is falling apart anyway.

this lockout is a great representation of the greed that is destroying the Western World

[LittleOzzy]

My guess. They announce a finalized deal on Monday afternoon.

[whoknows]

So when the Billionaires (business people) fight for money with Millionaires (not business people) who do you think will win?

[OvertimeNO]

So when the Billionaires (business people) fight for money with Millionaires (not business people) who do you think will win?

As always, someone rich.

[KG1585]

The way I understand it is that the owners are proposing different levels of luxury tax. Instead of $1 for $1 at certain point it will be $2 for a $1, which the players are not happy about saying that it is a hard cap since owners would not want to go into the different levels of luxury tax. So my question is that, wouldn't current luxury tax level be considered a cap to the players? Since a lot of the owners do not want to spend above the luxury tax level. So I don't really see much of a difference what the owners are proposing as many of them do not go into luxury tax levels currently.

[anj]

The way I understand it is that the owners are proposing different levels of luxury tax. Instead of $1 for $1 at certain point it will be $2 for a $1, which the players are not happy about saying that it is a hard cap since owners would not want to go into the different levels of luxury tax. So my question is that, wouldn't current luxury tax level be considered a cap to the players? Since a lot of the owners do not want to spend above the luxury tax level. So I don't really see much of a difference what the owners are proposing as many of them do not go into luxury tax levels currently.

Actually, the figure was a lot higher than "$2 for $1". Early in the week it was reportedly as high as $20 for $1, which is, in essence, a hard cap.

[douggood]

Among the NBA owners' proposals for a new CBA is a so-called "Carmelo rule," which would prevent teams from signing or extending a player acquired by trade, unless that player is acquired before July 1 of the final season of their contract.
Kurt Helin of ProBasketballTalk translates the practical implications: "The 'Carmelo rule' would force teams to do what Utah did with Deron Williams — trading him a year out — or risk losing him for nothing." Follow the link for even more details of the ongoing negotiations.

http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/ ... um=twitter

[baulderdash77]

The money is the big part.

What we know right now is that the owners are offering 49% of BRI with a stiffer luxury tax penalty (1-1 at 70 million, 2-1 at 75 million, 3-1 at 80 million) and the players are conceding 54% with the same tax structure.

So the hard cap concept is gone but there is going to be a stiffening of the tax structure seems to be in place. I think there's a deal to be had there.

After that it's all minor things. The owners want to really pronounce the advantage to being under the cap and working within the framework- dropping the MLE to $3 million, getting rid of the LLE, reducing bird rights.

It's really interesting that all these moves are going to promote much more free agency in the middle class. Player movement will start to become extreme in some years. This system really favours the Raptors because it reduces the ability of over-capped teams to concentrate the talent.

[Salted Meat]

Honestly, if I were a player, I'd be more interested in ensuring that no matter where I play, there's a chance the team I'm on has a chance to be competitive. This is why I don't understand the players' ire about an increasing luxury tax, even if it is tantamount to a hard cap at a certain level. Not everyone can play for the Lakers, of the Mavs, or the Knicks. The majority of players will likely end up on a team that, no matter what, will want to maintain some sense of fiscal responsibility, so it would behoove them to accept a structure that, at the very least, offers some attempt at parity.

[lobosloboslobos]

Honestly, if I were a player, I'd be more interested in ensuring that no matter where I play, there's a chance the team I'm on has a chance to be competitive. This is why I don't understand the players' ire about an increasing luxury tax, even if it is tantamount to a hard cap at a certain level. Not everyone can play for the Lakers, of the Mavs, or the Knicks. The majority of players will likely end up on a team that, no matter what, will want to maintain some sense of fiscal responsibility, so it would behoove them to accept a structure that, at the very least, offers some attempt at parity.

This is a very good point. In every other business negotiation with employees and management consideration is given to many other factors besides money that will make the employee feel satisfied with their workplace experience. Presumably, beyond hard cash, the competitiveness of your team would be #2 for the players, but you never hear them say anything about this at all. Real world workers bargain for time off, health care, pensions, safety, training, better facilities and more, but these guys are so spoiled that they have all of that and lots more. So you'd think they might turn a small amount of their bargaining attention to the health of the game, not just for us fans but for themselves, but that is not happening and never will because they are so amazingly selfish. I have no great respect for the owners but can you imagine being in that negotiating room yesterday with DWade and the rest of the hundred-millionaire ballplayers with egos the size of Texas and you make a point by actually pointing at the other side (not exactly unheard of in a bargaining session) and DWade has a sh*tfit and goes off on you for having the audacity to point at His Majesty? Gimme a break.

[DG88]

Honestly, if I were a player, I'd be more interested in ensuring that no matter where I play, there's a chance the team I'm on has a chance to be competitive. This is why I don't understand the players' ire about an increasing luxury tax, even if it is tantamount to a hard cap at a certain level. Not everyone can play for the Lakers, of the Mavs, or the Knicks. The majority of players will likely end up on a team that, no matter what, will want to maintain some sense of fiscal responsibility, so it would behoove them to accept a structure that, at the very least, offers some attempt at parity.

Exactly the point I made in the last page. The majority of team now don't even go over the luxury tax in the old system. So making a harsher one won't change that. It really puts into question how much the players care about being competitive. The two blood issues were the hard cap and non guaranteed contracts. The owners came up with a harsher luxury tax and guaranteed contracts yet it still a hard cap. Stop belly aching because I believe this is the best the players will get.

[Snakeyes]

Wade is the clown who said superstars are underpaid. Nuff said.

[darth_federer]

Wade is the clown who said superstars are underpaid. Nuff said.

Hes right though. The superstars are underpaid while the middle tier guys are overpaid.

[Laowai]

As I said earlier having players like Wade involved was a bad idea the guy firmly believes he is worth 50 million a year!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Frankly I haven't a problem losing a large portion of the year or the full year to bring balance to the league.

[YogiStewart]

Honestly, if I were a player, I'd be more interested in ensuring that no matter where I play, there's a chance the team I'm on has a chance to be competitive. This is why I don't understand the players' ire about an increasing luxury tax, even if it is tantamount to a hard cap at a certain level. Not everyone can play for the Lakers, of the Mavs, or the Knicks. The majority of players will likely end up on a team that, no matter what, will want to maintain some sense of fiscal responsibility, so it would behoove them to accept a structure that, at the very least, offers some attempt at parity.

Exactly the point I made in the last page. The majority of team now don't even go over the luxury tax in the old system. So making a harsher one won't change that. It really puts into question how much the players care about being competitive. The two blood issues were the hard cap and non guaranteed contracts. The owners came up with a harsher luxury tax and guaranteed contracts yet it still a hard cap. Stop belly aching because I believe this is the best the players will get.

all of these guys have egos.
its another sport, but look at hockey. Look what Doughtey did on LA. he wouldn't sign unless he was the highest paid player on the team.
couldn't care less about chemistry or about keeping their young talent.
they all want what's best for them. winning is secondary.