RealGM

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/1416 ... e-pay-cuts

I hate this man for listing us as one of the teams that could be affected if this happens, but I fear he may be right. I dont think this happens, but the fact they have even discussed it is bad news.

its BS they are just throwing it out there to try to scare the players....aint nobody buy that...if the nba is mad cause they are losing money they have no one to blame but themselves

Doubt it's even been discussed. Stern is just making his case for salary reductions. The players should take a pay cut. Most Americans have either lost their jobs or taken a pay cut.

The league is talking to the union about ideas to change the salary structure, and make thimgs healthier for franchises and the league, without hurting players too much.

There's discussion about contraction of existing salaries, changes to the length and terms of player contracts, etc. They are also suggesting the possibility of cutting some teams/markets that are not profitable. I think the threat of eliminating teams is largely to help the players union understand the severity of the situation. Cutting teams means cutting slots...less players overall. No union seeks to have that happen.

Here's my ideas:

> Give every team an option to make changes with up to 4 players on that team. They can elect one of two options for each of those 4 players:

A - Waive the player outright and pay that player a lump sum buyout equal to 15% of their old contract's remaining total $. Player is instantly a free agent.

B - For multi-year contracts, reduce the player's upcoming year's salary by 30% (new cap number), all other years are eliminated and the player receives a lump-sum buyout at the end of the season equal to 25% of the old contract's remaining $.

As for future contracts, who knows how that might take shape. I do feel we need some performance based adjustments (up and down) to account for guys who earn their keep.

I'm going to merge this into ohara's and make it one thread for all this talk.

ohara wrote:http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/14168647/nba-owners-float-contraction-along-with-huge-pay-cuts

I hate this man for listing us as one of the teams that could be affected if this happens, but I fear he may be right. I dont think this happens, but the fact they have even discussed it is bad news.

I'd have to think that the Bobcats would have some sort of protection. Can't see the NBA working for a 30th franchise, awarding it then 6 years later pulling the plug on it. With the start up costs etc I would think that the owner would have been given some promises of longevity in order to make his money back and then some.

Bassman wrote:As for future contracts, who knows how that might take shape. I do feel we need some performance based adjustments (up and down) to account for guys who earn their keep.

I'd like to see all contracts as a flat rate over the course of their duration.

Unguaranteed contracts.

Any contraction would presumably have to happen voluntarily. I cant imagine MJ willingly putting a bullet in his baby like that...

I can´t imagine the union would ever go for fully unguaranteed contacts. Probably they´ll just find a way to get out of huge dead-weight contracts like Eddy Curry or Elton Brand, which should be good for the league actually. It sucks to make one bad signing (or one good signing that gets hurt) and be doomed to five years of terrible. And frankly anything that take money out of people like Eddy Curry´s pocket is good and just.

Well, I guess partially guaranteed is a better term for it.

Sign a 5 year/50mil contract and agree to have 30 guaranteed, that way, you can cut him after 3 years if it doesn't work and won't be on the hook for the remainder, or you can cut him after 2 and only be on the hook for another 10.

stern wont allow contraction on his watch. this is just posturing.

as for the owners... its hard to really buy into their side when so many of them went **** bananas this offseason. this was supposed to be the offseason where free agents were forced to take less money and the exact opposite happened.

NBA commissioner David Stern has mentioned contraction as a possibility as the league enters economic uncertainty.

Stern didn't single out any franchises, but a Celtics team source told the Boston Globe that small-market cities like Charlotte, Memphis and New Orleans may be in danger of losing their teams.

Not sure what the criteria is but I suspect its - who has the lowest ticket prices.

http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archi ... tractions/

yea i am not really feeling the celtics team source talking about what team we should get rid of....the bobcats aint going anywhere

countryboi wrote:yea i am not really feeling the celtics team source talking about what team we should get rid of....the bobcats aint going anywhere

You got it. Sensationalist headlines pointing to non-stories by RealGM to get clicks. This is the biggest 'duh' statement ever. If you asked anyone on the street what contraction would look like in the NBA, they would begin to rattle off all of the small market teams, CLT included. Yawn.

merged

its all a bargaining ploy by stern to scare the players union. its not gonna happen. stern is the one who insisted on diluting the league during the 80s and 90s, even when the downside was blatantly obvious.

I thought this was a pretty interesting read:

NBA lockout's potential impact on NBA draft

http://www.nbadraft.net/nba-lockouts-po ... -nba-draft

Wow, can you imagine the luck? We would suck enough to get a very high pick, and the best players would decide to stay in school. I hope fate doesn't hate us that bad.

There's no way the NBA is contracting.

Unguaranteed contracts are a bad idea, the results in football are holdouts and constant roster turnover. No thanks.

The salary cap is set at a percentage of league revenue, which is why it can go up and down... the problem is that salaries don't go up and down accordingly over long-term deals, and many owners view their teams as hobbies, not money-making ventures (Allen, Cuban). So there are a couple of options:
1) Install a hard cap, based upon league revenues. This prevents owners from outspending each other.
2) Shorten the length of multi-year deals considerably, to avoid trapping teams and preventing players from being paid according to their worth.
3) Don't agree to deals with a particular cash value. Set it to a percentage of the cap, and allow that number to fluctuate with league revenues.
4) Increase revenue sharing. The NBA did not lose money. Some owners did. So pay them off, and let the league be.

ohara wrote:Wow, can you imagine the luck? We would suck enough to get a very high pick, and the best players would decide to stay in school. I hope fate doesn't hate us that bad.

I know what you mean. With no 1st last year and likely no 1st in 2012 it would suck to finally have a 1st in 2011 with a seriously watered down draft class!