Next CBA

[Three34]

Guess whose opinion matters? Both of them.

[ranger001]

Well, we'll see how much resolve the owners have and how much the opinion of the nbpa matters. I think they are actually losing real dollars, the players don't have nearly as much pride as you think to walk away from their reduced multi-million dollar contracts and that we see major changes to the CBA.

[Three34]

You also seem to have emphatically stated your position in this thread, that the owners hold all the cards. And that's not so. Without players, there's nothing to own.

[ranger001]

Players are replaceable, every year 50 or so come in through the draft. Billionaires not so much.

[giberish]

Unless franchise values drop significantly, IMO it's not credible that NBA teams really lose money.

NBA owners talk poor in order to get more money (from cities or players). They do this because they want more money. It's just not that complicated.

[Three34]

Players are replaceable, every year 50 or so come in through the draft. Billionaires not so much.

All right. Replace all the players in the NBA and see what that does to the franchise values.

[killbuckner]

I think that owners own basketball teams for the same reason they own a private jet- because its really fun to have one. The owners don't expect to make money on the basketball team any more than they expect to make money off of their jet.

The system isn't broken- the owners just have no self restraint. So they are trying to create a system where they are forced to have more restraint but I jsut don't see what thats the player's problem to deal with.

[ranger001]

Sham, let me ask you this. Suppose there is a lockout and they can't agree. The owners decide to hire replacement players. NFL players crossed the line some years back, do you think NBA players will cross the line?

[killbuckner]

People are more tied to NFL football than they are to the NBA. The NFL still got good attendance with replacement players. The games were still televised normally. Who on earth would pay to watch replacement NBA players? The NBA is a league where people are drawn to the stars more than any other. Who is going to pay money to watch Courtney Sims?

[ranger001]

Well they've got the tv contract so the games will be televised. People pay big money to watch college basketball. They'd be able to drop ticket prices a lot. Basketball fans will pay money to watch ex-college players at vastly reduced prices. And the talent level and franchise values would increase as the draft builds teams up again. So fan interest and ticket prices would gradually go back up.

I'd expect also some nba guys to cross the line. Not everyone is going to agree with the union and not everyone can afford to sit out an extended period. So there will be nba players to watch.

[killbuckner]

Yes... people will be lining up to watch ex-college stars Chris Kramer and Sherron Collins in a meaningless regular season game. With top college players staying so briefly in college the NCAA tournament is the only thing that draws significant attention. College basketball is about the Schools- not about the individual players anymore. l really don't understand what ex-college players would be a big enough draw to get people to pay to watch them.

[ranger001]

Lets say you could get a courtside seat to watch a game at a tenth of the normal price, you wouldn't do it? I would.

[killbuckner]

I literally wouldn't go for free. And with so many other choices on TV why on earth would anyone watch it if they were at home?

[Dunkenstein]

I'd expect also some nba guys to cross the line. Not everyone is going to agree with the union and not everyone can afford to sit out an extended period. So there will be nba players to watch.

You're out of your mind. This won't be a player's strike. This will be a league lockout. There will be no picket line to cross. The NBA won't be putting on games.

And if a situation arose where NBA players did "cross the line", they would be thrown out of the Union, and once an agreement was reached, they'd never play in the league again.

During the last lockout, which lasted into December, not a single player "crossed the line".

[ranger001]

I understand you disagree with me but no need to get personal by telling me I'm out of my mind.

I realize its a league lockout but if its a long one then the owners will make some kind of offer and start hiring replacement players, some guys will cross the line then.

[SJSF]

Ladies, There is going to be an ugly lockout. The writing is on the wall. This is the big chance for the owners to get power back. The players have no power right now. And the owners know it. The owners have money without the NBA. They don't depend on it to make a living. THe players on the other hand need this for their lifestyles. And its very well known that a lot of these players live month to month. SPend spend spend. I think there is going to be a hard cap. And why not, hockey and football has one. Hockey was in the same position years ago before the lockout. ANd the players were against a cap and guess what. There is a hard cap now. The players have no power!!!!!!!!!!!! THere is also more college basketball fans then pro fans. The players can be replaced easily.

[Curmudgeon]

1. I don't think there will be a lockout, unless it's very short. No one wants to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.

2. There will not be a hard cap.

3. Don't believe managment's profitability numbers. Many of these franchises are designed to generate losses to shelter income from other ventures. You also have to ask whether the numbers include the parking, the concessions, the bar, the sale of trademarked items and all of the other sources of ancillary revenue for NBA franchises. On the expense side, you have to look at which non-basketball related expenses are being carried on the books, such as perks for the owners' families and business associates.

4. Like others here, I expect to see a regime in which only a portion of each contract is guaranteed. I do not expect to see shorter contracts because that helps the players, not the owners. For starters, it allows good players to hit free agency sooner and increases teams' exposure to the "Cavs disaster scenario" in which a team receives zero compensation for its most prized asset. Maybe Stern ought to consider a system of compensatory draft picks in those situations.

[DBoys]

How I'd solve the issue of contracts being too long, but teams needing continuity ...
1. By CBA mandate, the last year of every NBA contract will now be a team option year. That gives a motivator for players, who can potentially be in a contract year two years in a row.
...It allows teams to get away from those overpaid contracts a year earlier, when needed.
2. A team can decline the option but gain restricted rights by making a qualifying offer of the option amount - which means player is guaranteed to lose nothing, but allows the player and team to then work out a LARGER and LONGER contract when the player has outperformed their contract. Bird rights and sign-and-trades would be allowed when the parties find that advantageous.
3. If a team declines the option and also declines to make a QO, it works like a waiver in that the player becomes an unrestricted free agent and the team loses all advantages (such as sign-and-trade opportunities, or Bird rights advantages in resigning) that they otherwise would have had. There is no cap hold, no rights of any kind, which penalizes the player who has gotten a big contract and then sucked as well as penalizing the team who had such a bad contract that they wanted it to end early.

The end result of this would take bad contracts and poorly motivated players out of the system more promptly, which leaves more money available for the ones who perform.

To ensure that owners don't use this as a mechanism to take money out of the system where they (alone) benefit, another mechanism beyond team minimums would have to be added. I'd suggest league wide revenue guarantees (% of BRI) to the players - in other words, salary surcharges (the reverse of the escrow system) to every team if the payout to players as a whole isn't enough. The players get a bonus based on some sort of performance scale or prorata based on actual salary or a combo, with everyone who played that year getting a slice.

[giberish]

What I expect to happen:

Owners will bluster about wanting a hard cap, but in the end the new CBA will look similar to the current deal, except that the way the income figures for the cap and tax levels will be modified, effectivly lowering them by $5-10M/yr. This might be phased in over a few years so it isn't a sudden hit. The players association will sell this as a win for avoiding the hard cap, while the owners effectively lower payrolls by $5-10M/yr like they want (ok, they really want to lower payrolls by $20-30M/yr but they aren't going to get that big of a win). There could be a few changes around the edges, but not that significant.

What should happen:

Two standing comittees are formed to review NBA transactions.

The Popovitch comittee reviews trades and voids deals where one team acts like the Washington Generals. The Ted Stepian rule could even be eliminated with this committee in place.

The second one (I don't have a good name for it) would review free agent contracts and extensions - at least those above $3M/yr or so. If found to be rediculous and irresponsible, they would veto the deal. The owner and GM could appeal (trying to make the case that $120M for Joe Johnson is a good idea ) and even if denied they could still apporve the contract - but the franchise would be forbidden from publically complianing about finances for the length of the contract.

[Curmudgeon]

If Billy Hunter expected a long lockout he would likely be asking the players to decertify the union in prparation for an anti-trust lawsuit against the NBA, which is what the football players are doing.

I suppose the owners would like to pay a smaller slice of BRI and lower both the cap and the luxury tax threshhold. But it seems to me that what they should really be asking for is to have the last two years of each maximum length contract be partially guaranteed.

It's the long contracts with players who aren't producing that cause the most trouble. Not only do you have to keep paying the player, but it is harder for the team to move on and become competitive with an albatross around its neck. It's a double whammy.