Official CBA/Labour Talks Discussion Thread

[wfnshow316]

Ponchos your wrong about the fixed cap and your wrong about the hard cap effecting parity - the cap is still tied to BRI - it is just that BRI is being lowered to favor the owners - and if teams go into the upper part of the flex cap that portion comes out of the BRI (which I am sure the owners left in to take out during the negotiating part of the CBA) As for the flex cap or hard cap and parity - just look at the NHL - no dynasties and teams are all slowly getting more competitive - Nashville made the playoffs and Boston won the cup - last year Chicago vs Philly - each year of the hard cap - each year it goes up and each year the league gets more competitive and popular - the basic model works -

[Ponchos]

Ponchos your wrong about the fixed cap and your wrong about the hard cap effecting parity - the cap is still tied to BRI - it is just that BRI is being lowered to favor the owners - and if teams go into the upper part of the flex cap that portion comes out of the BRI (which I am sure the owners left in to take out during the negotiating part of the CBA) As for the flex cap or hard cap and parity - just look at the NHL - no dynasties and teams are all slowly getting more competitive - Nashville made the playoffs and Boston won the cup - last year Chicago vs Philly - each year of the hard cap - each year it goes up and each year the league gets more competitive and popular - the basic model works -

Sorry but you're wrong. I will take Larry Coon's word over yours. The 2 Billion to the players is static, and the owners make their gains out of the rising revenues over 10 years. No link to BRI.

As per hard cap: If you don't see the differences between Basketball and Hockey and why one sport is far less likely to have parity than the other regardless of any system (hard/soft cap etc). I don't know what to say.

The nature of Basketball and the structure of how it is played basically guarantees that dynasties will emerge on the backs of talented players.

[Ponchos]

As a fan of the Raptors you should be more open to the idea of parity.

Actually as a fan of the Raptors I would rather we land a Duncanesque player and stay in title contention for over a decade, as opposed to winning the championship in a talent diluted league and then ending up in the lottery the very next year.

[Too Late Crew]

Where does this idea that "parity" is the goal of the best system?

[bigdirty]

Where does this idea that "parity" is the goal of the best system?

Because if parity wasn't the goal then you might as well just have NY, Chicago, LA and maybe a handful of other cities with teams because everyone else couldn't compete.

[StartingBench]

Where does this idea that "parity" is the goal of the best system?

Yup, this is sports, not poker. The best teams win, the bad teams lose.... period. Parity makes the championship mean less.

[Courtside]

Where does this idea that "parity" is the goal of the best system?

I think that most people use "parity" in too simplistic a way and it's interpreted as a sort of pro sports socialism. 100% parity is not a realistic goal, just as 100% revenue sharing with each team getting 1/30 is not a realistic goal.

But since most agree that some measure of revenue sharing is healthy for a league with such varying markets, some measure of salary and on-court parity can also be beneficial in the bigger picture. I think most people have an issue with "large disparity" and they just want some sort of system to give more teams a shot, though not a truly 1/30 equal shot as the word "parity" would imply.

I think the system in place already gives a measure of opportunity to all teams, it's just that it slightly favors the players right now in terms of % of revenue and contract guarantees. Owners have no guarantees and if there is a true partnership in place between the 2 sides, the players have to adjust their stance to take some of the revenue risk. They can either agree to a fixed % that goes up or down with revenues, or they can agree to a guaranteed amount that does not change, but is slightly lower in order to give the owners a bit more of a buffer against rocky revenues.

[dagger]

My position on the talks, which is pro-owner, stems from our experiences here in Toronto.

When I think of all the stranded money we've had to put up with - Hakeem, Zo, Murray, Rose, Alvin, Yogi - it cripples a franchise and the paying customers and other fans suffer more than the owners. During the Babcock years, shortly after the Carter trade, we had literally 50% of our salary cap allocated to permanently disabled (or so they claimed) players like Zo, or to egregiously overpaid players like Rose. There has to be a way to get rid of this, which has had me thinking about regular amnesties where a player might get, say, 75 cents on the remaining dollars and be free to sign as a free agent to make some of that up. For regular amnesties to occur, players would have to make overall concessions so teams can fund the writeoffs.

[Parataxis]

Where does this idea that "parity" is the goal of the best system?

Yup, this is sports, not poker. The best teams win, the bad teams lose.... period. Parity makes the championship mean less.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Parity would still mean that the best teams win, and the bad teams lose. What parity does it it means that teams actually have a fair chance of becoming good teams, if their management is smart enough to make it happen.

Also, in poker, the good players win, and the bad players lose.

[Raptors Aiya]

Why dont they implement a clause in the contract that the NFL had used in where u sign for les money but you are able to earn bonuses when u reach certain milestones set out in the contract.

[inonba]

My position on the talks, which is pro-owner, stems from our experiences here in Toronto.

When I think of all the stranded money we've had to put up with - Hakeem, Zo, Murray, Rose, Alvin, Yogi - it cripples a franchise and the paying customers and other fans suffer more than the owners. During the Babcock years, shortly after the Carter trade, we had literally 50% of our salary cap allocated to permanently disabled (or so they claimed) players like Zo, or to egregiously overpaid players like Rose. There has to be a way to get rid of this, which has had me thinking about regular amnesties where a player might get, say, 75 cents on the remaining dollars and be free to sign as a free agent to make some of that up. For regular amnesties to occur, players would have to make overall concessions so teams can fund the writeoffs.

I think the reason why amnesties aren't in the previous CBA is to prevent wealthy teams like NY from buying their way out of trouble. The logic behind it I think is to detour teams from giving out big, long term contracts. Of course, in reality, agents pushes for the maximum allowed under the rules so it really doesn't work.

I'm for shorter, non-guarantee contracts if the players want to keep the current salary structure. Too often I see player coast their way and not live up to their contracts, only to make a miraculous recovery during contract year, then coast again. Or what about players drawing huge salaries when they should have retired?

[RocLaFamilia]

@CSheridanESPN Fashion statement from players at NBA labor talks: About 50 of them arrived in matching "STAND" t-shirts.

[dagger]

The Players Association didn't counter-offer today and so the lockout is a lead-pipe cinch now.

[Mr.Raptorsingh]

Damn, this going to be a LONG lockout...

[dagger]

Chris Mannix of Sports Illustrated:

Why I think Barkley's prediction for no '11-'12 season is possible: The NFL lockout is at Day 104. If an NBA lockout goes that long it will be mid-October, middle of exhibition season. It's a widely accepted truth that NFL and union are/have been closer to same page than the NBA and it's union are. In other words, barring a miracle over the next few days, this could get really, really ugly
As David Stern already pointed out, the proposals don't get better after a lockout. They get worse. Sources with knowledge of negotiations believe there are owners determined to lock players out just to get a 8-10 year, union crippling deal

[Mr.Raptorsingh]

Well, hopefully there are streams available to watch Valanciunas play. That's the only basketball us Raptor fans will be able to watch for the foreseeable future.

I'm still hoping for a miracle though...

[Too Late Crew]

Where does this idea that "parity" is the goal of the best system?

I think that most people use "parity" in too simplistic a way and it's interpreted as a sort of pro sports socialism. 100% parity is not a realistic goal, just as 100% revenue sharing with each team getting 1/30 is not a realistic goal.

But since most agree that some measure of revenue sharing is healthy for a league with such varying markets, some measure of salary and on-court parity can also be beneficial in the bigger picture. I think most people have an issue with "large disparity" and they just want some sort of system to give more teams a shot, though not a truly 1/30 equal shot as the word "parity" would imply.

I think the system in place already gives a measure of opportunity to all teams, it's just that it slightly favors the players right now in terms of % of revenue and contract guarantees. Owners have no guarantees and if there is a true partnership in place between the 2 sides, the players have to adjust their stance to take some of the revenue risk. They can either agree to a fixed % that goes up or down with revenues, or they can agree to a guaranteed amount that does not change, but is slightly lower in order to give the owners a bit more of a buffer against rocky revenues.

My take on when people cry PARITY is that its usually fans of teams who are "have not" teams who likley won't get a shot at a ring anytime soon looking for someone to give them a helping hand.

This isn't really what the CBA is about. Revenue sharing and parity on the court are not intertwined.

The NBA owners don't care about "arity" in terms of wins and losses so much as they care about $. Donald Sterling and Robert Sarver are prime examples. The Clippers are in a big market. They play in the exact same building as the Lakers. they can afford to spend the same money as the Lakers. They are not being held back from winning a championship by the CBA or wather or a city. they have a cheap owner and bad managment. The Twolves for all the complaints about location and small market have had terrible managment and crippled themselves by getting caught breaking the CBA rules.

The Spurs won multiple chamioships nopt becuase of CBA rules but due to luck (Duncan) and good managment. Thunder same thing.

If every team in the NBA finished 41 and 41 it wouldn't fix the $ issues one bit. Some teams would still lose $. Some teams would still make money. The $ issues in the NBA are not about the Lakers Celtics Heat etc being in the finals multiple times. Its about teams being able to generate revenue at a reasonable expense. Some teams are always going to bring in more $ no matter haow bad they are (See NY KNICKS) Players get too big a share of the pie and teams need to find a way to share the pie among themselves to enable all the teams to make SOME money.

The players are going to need to take less, the weathiest teams are going to have to make a little less $ to share out to some other teams. Its really as simple as though 2 things

[dagger]

The players are going to need to take less, the weathiest teams are going to have to make a little less $ to share out to some other teams. Its really as simple as though 2 things

You're dead on. But getting from here to there won't be easy. Nobody will make big moves until it begins to hurt. That won't happen until owners have arena and staff bills to pay with no revenue coming in and players miss a pay cheque. That means October

[TheRaptorTruth]

Right about now, i hope we get a lockout so we give Jonas time to develop in Europe before he comes over.

[highness]

Right about now, i hope we get a lockout so we give Jonas time to develop in Europe before he comes over.

Why? He'll be in Europe regardless. I don't know what I'll do for a year without my NBA ball.