RealGM

http://portlandtribune.com/sports/story ... 4827019000

But we believe through shorter contracts, less guaranteed money and a harder salary cap, we can create more parity among the teams in this league. We believe for the long-term success for the business, that’s important.

Why not eliminate free agency completely while you're at it ??
The owners refuse to accept that the reason for losses is more often than not BAD MANAGEMENT - Rashard Lewis and JJ didn't need to take any hostages to get those 20 mil/season contracts - and blame it on small markets and such. Well, the Spurs won despite playing in a small market. And the Knicks sucked for a looooong time (and are still far from being contenders) despite playing in the biggest market.

I wonder how many NBA owners are republican/right wing supporters and/or proponents of the free market and completely oppose regulations and any intervention from the state, yet when they find themselves at a disadvantage (small market, impossibility to retain free agents) they suddenly cry for socialism - only they call it "parity".

I am not trying to start a political debate, just trying to point out the hypocrisy of the/some owners.

The NBA makes a ton of money, yet some teams manage to waste it all away, sometimes without even a few wins to show for it. Now they are trying to basically ensure their profits are guaranteed - guaranteed profits ? where do I sign up for some ? - by avoiding to pay the players their fair share. We're talking about a business that depends in its entirety on the athletes. Its elite athletes are not replaceable like, say, some low level employee at WalMart.

PLEASE READ MY 2ND POST IN THE THREAD AS WELL
I am not opposed to a form of redistribution of the earnings as long as it rewards teams that win and teams that are well managed. I do NOT agree with owners being guaranteed profits.

Why not contract about 20 teams then. These moron players only want to play in big market. Small market teams will be a farm teams for big markets. Small market team fans will eventually get sick of this crap

OP is a Heat fan...

Since I started this, here's what I'd do:

I agree with less years and only partially guaranteed contracts. I would tie the unguaranteed money to team performance. I do not agree, however, with less money. The stars like Lebron, Kobe, Wade, Dwight, Rose etc are the ones the people pay to see. If anything, they should be making MORE money. Rose is worth a ton more than what he makes on the rookie scale, and it's a travesty that Lebron makes less than Rashard Lewis.

In order to encourage teams to strive to win titles (instead of just milking the team for profit *cough*Sterling*cough*), I'd have all teams contributing yearly a substantial amount to go to a fund that would be distributed between playoff teams. The champion should get at least 15-20 mil dollars, the other conference finalists 10-15, 2nd round exists 7-8 mil and 1st round exists around 5 mil. That would amount to about 140 mil per season, or about 4-5 mil/team.

The contribution should be either a fixed amount or a percentage of the team salary (5-10 %). I'd prefer the 2nd option. This way teams with deep pockets that spend like crazy but without results will be harshly penalized, while teams that stay competitive with decent payrolls would get rewarded.

Scouta wrote:OP is a Heat fan...

And that is relevant .... how ?

Anyway, thank you for your contribution to this thread.

truthiness wrote:

Scouta wrote:OP is a Heat fan...

And that is relevant .... how ?

Anyway, thank you for your contribution to this thread.

If you call parity in the league socialism. Then damnit I want socialism in NBA. If NBA only cares about money might well start contracting small market teams

Hmm...I heard some dude on the radio yesterday using the term "Socialism" when talking about the NBA CBA and how only big markets deserve to win....you wouldn't happen to have heard the same thing did you?....

op butthurt lol

Scorpion King wrote:Why not contract about 20 teams then. These moron players only want to play in big market. Small market teams will be a farm teams for big markets. Small market team fans will eventually get sick of this crap

Read my 2nd post in the thread.

I am not opposed to some form of redistributing the earnings. I am just calling out stupid owners that are incompetent at managing their teams and that expect guaranteed profits. Where in the business world are there guaranteed profits ?

The luxury tax does its part in penalizing overspending, but is not enough. You need to encourage better management. In the real world a company that is mismanaged ends up in bankruptcy. The league needs to find a way to reward winning first and foremost and good management a close 2nd.

Heat3 wrote:Hmm...I heard some dude on the radio yesterday using the term "Socialism" when talking about the NBA CBA and how only big markets deserve to win....you wouldn't happen to have heard the same thing did you?....

read my 2nd post.

Professional sports franchises: The only business you can own where someone will call you a socialist for putting a priority of profit above workers' salaries.

Every person who I have seen support the players having more power to move around tend to be fans of currently constructed "super-teams".

Sure, the current NBA is absolutely awesome if you have an unselfish superstar willing to stay in a small-market, such as Duncan/Parker/Manu in San Antonio and Durant in OKC (Westbrook is still a question mark at this point). However, the majority of stars don't want to play in smaller non-glitzy cities, and these teams have absolutely no shot at resigning their star players. Everyone keeps saying, "Oh, but they have x-amount of years to build a contender!", yet fail to grasp that other star players won't want to sign there if they know damn well the other star player has no intention of staying there either.

The owners are right 100% here. Unless the NBA is willing to contract about 15 teams to make sure every team has multiple stars on it, there is no other solution than to limit the ability of players.

And I love how the OP throws around the word SOCIALISM and blames republicans, way to inject politics where it is not needed. You want to throw in religion, abortion, and war in the Middle East as well to make your point?

The NBA does need more parity.

Op "wonders" how many owners are republican/right wing supporters but wants to point out their "hypocricy". How about the hypocricy of wondering about their political preference and then calling them out for it when you have no facts to support you claim of hypocricy?
Now I would think that many are, but you are comparing apples to oranges here. The NBA is a private group of owners. They have the right to set the rules of their league, no matter what you or I may think.
If the players and the players union dont like the rules they are free to start their own league, thus a free market. If the players dont want to accept the rules they can play overseas as well. The owners are reacting to a group of spoiled overpaid stars trying to take over their league imo, so if they lock the players out lets see the players form their own league, get their own arenas built, hire their own staff, negotiate their own TV advertisisng rates and local contracts for radio and TV rights. Then, they can pay for utilities, insurance, marketing, labor, trash removal, and the thousands of other expenses they currently dont ever have to worry about.
The can also handle making their own arrangements, their daily stipends for food, and negotiate with themselves for salaries and benefits (if there is anything left). So you see the point op? These players are made wealthy not only due to their own hard work and god given talents, they are paid by men who have made their "billions" as the union reps like to remind us (nothing like a little class warfare to cloud the argument, right from the socialist playbook btw) while taking no other risk than what is required to perform their jobs.
I Hope there is no lockout or work stoppage, but to support the players who are making millions upon millions of dollars without having to actually run a business or having any responsibility other than to show up at practice on time while trying to paint these business owners as hypocrites is completely mis-informed imo.

DrunkOnMystery wrote:Professional sports franchises: The only business you can own where someone will call you a socialist for putting a priority of profit above workers' salaries.

You can add health insurance comapnies to the list among many others under attack from this administration.
Edit:typo

Anyone gonna disagree that shorter contract and less-guaranteed money would be good for the league?? Really, has there been any franchise who has never had to spent years trying to get out from under a bad signing? Why does all the money need to be guaranteed?? Why shouldn't Orlando be allowed to cut Rashard Lewis when he starts playing terribly - and gets busted for a DUI and gets busted using PEDs? ... do we all just subscribe to an absolute and excruciating punishment system for bad signings? Do we view a horrendous contract as such a incredible sin that we believe the franchise must be forced to be crippled because of it for years and years?

Honestly, if they can at least accomplish that in the next CBA I believe the NBA would already be soo much better off.

gflem wrote:

DrunkOnMystery wrote:Professional sports franchises: The only business you can own where someone will call you a socialist for putting a priority of profit above workers' salaries.

You can add health insurance comapnies to the list among many others under attack from this administration.
Edit:typo

People have been calling the heads of health insurance companies socialists? Where?

truthiness wrote:Why not eliminate free agency completely while you're at it ??

Shorter contracts, less guaranteed money, and a harder salary cap will result in more free agent movement around the league, not less.

truthiness wrote:The owners refuse to accept that the reason for losses is more often than not BAD MANAGEMENT - Rashard Lewis and JJ didn't need to take any hostages to get those 20 mil/season contracts - and blame it on small markets and such. Well, the Spurs won despite playing in a small market. And the Knicks sucked for a looooong time (and are still far from being contenders) despite playing in the biggest market.

This argument doesn't really address the issue at hand. Look at Utah. Nobody will ever claim they're a poorly run team, and their results are pretty good, yet they keep losing players because they aren't on equal footing with the big market teams. If they were the New York Jazz, they'd have multiple titles by now.

Not socialists, you are right. called evil for wanting to make a profit and stay in business by socialists. Thanks for correcting me.
The guaranteed contract is the real problem and Spotie pointed out. Its crazy that the NFL where players intentionally crash into each other at full speed and try to knock each other out of the game dont have guaranteed contracts but the NBA and MLB do.