Lockout

Twinkie defense · Post #401 » by **Twinkie defense** » Sat Aug 20, 2011 5:50 am

Right, it was successfully collectively bargained.

And Tommy Kelly is worth every penny!

I'm not sure though that "anti-trust enforcement would be so painful for the owners" - In fact it could be at least, if not more, painful for players.

turk3d · Post #402 » by **turk3d** » Sat Aug 20, 2011 9:23 am

Believe you me, antitrust would be painful. I can't think of anything more painful than getting the US Government involved. As stated earlier in this thread, professional sports enjoys major advantages (mostly tax) that most corporations do not have.

Twinkie defense · Post #403 » by **Twinkie defense** » Sat Aug 20, 2011 6:30 pm

There would definitely be big uncertainty, but that could very well cut both ways - players have protections too... minimum salaries, guaranteed roster spots, guaranteed contracts, benefits like health care and pensions, some limits to their ability to be traded, protection against wages lost due to injury, etc.

One possible outcome is the courts could eventually rule that the NBA isn't subject to antitrust, that they're not a monopoly, and the players themselves have demonstrated that they're not at the mercy of the League for employment, that it's an international game and they can play in Spain or China if they don't like what the NBA is offering. In fact it's not at all certain that absent a players' union, the League wouldn't still be able to unilaterally dictate many terms of operation in order to maintain a viable enterprise.

turk3d · Post #404 » by **turk3d** » Sat Aug 20, 2011 8:03 pm

Actually, that would have to take place and would take a while before it would become accepted as fact. Also take into consideration the problem the players have if they are under contract and get injured. This is a might big risk and are the owners going to continue paying them if they get hurt playing overseas? Absolutely not and now include China bowing out as far as signing any players who are still under contract.

Problem is even if it turns out that all the players could get deals overseas (which they won't) all these years of not having this option (in reality) will not make it a viable argument imo. I think where the league loses bigtime is with some of the tax breaks they receive (as a result of their current status) and the likelihood of government intervention (seems to be one of the government's favorite pastimes in recent years).

As for the players, how can they be hurt any more than the are being hurt by the owners locking them out? I don't think that was anything that the league could have done to them which was more severe. If the league were to lose their anti-trust status, then this will lower the value of the average NBA franchise (and the owners will then really have something to complain about).

Post #405 » by **floppymoose** » Wed Aug 24, 2011 2:43 am

Thoughts on the hard cap:

http://www.sbnation.com/nba/2011/8/22/2 ... p-the-hook

A big factor in the NBA lockout is that small-market teams are fighting for a hard salary cap. But in getting one, they could end up losing the ability to surround their young stars with talent.

Twinkie defense · Post #406 » by **Twinkie defense** » Mon Aug 29, 2011 9:57 pm

Wilson Chandler has signed with China's Zhejiang Guangsha, for "less than the $3.1 million qualifying offer the Nuggets made in order to retain their rights to Chandler, and more than the $1.7 million offer that has been reported elsewhere."

That sucks for the Nuggets, since it means he won't be back in Denver this season - if there is a season - no matter what, since China is not allowing for opt-outs.

I think it's great that players are being proactive and finding themselves something to do while the NBA is in hiatus. But while the union was encouraging players to sign overseas as a means to employ leverage on the League in their collective bargaining, I think it has the opposite effect.

Of course, for a player like Wilson Chandler who is due a big long-term contract, there is a big risk having a serious injury derail that payday. Hope he got a lot of insurance. But further, it would seem hard for the players to argue that they won't take much of a pay cut when players are signing deals overseas for far less than what they would be making in the NBA (for example, in Chandler's case), and it also demonstrates that the League doesn't have a monopoly on employment opportunities for pro basketball players - that they are but one player in a vast market, which would hurt any antitrust claim the union would bring should they seek to decertify as a way to leverage their negotiations with the League.

Post #407 » by **floppymoose** » Mon Aug 29, 2011 10:32 pm

None of that matters. It's strictly a test of wills at this point. Players and owners were both making money before, and are both going to make money in the next deal. Every time a player finds employment they like elsewhere, it helps the players wait out the owners, which is the only thing this is about now.

Souvlaki · Post #408 » by **Souvlaki** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 1:48 am

floppymoose wrote:None of that matters. It's strictly a test of wills at this point. Players and owners were both making money before, and are both going to make money in the next deal. Every time a player finds employment they like elsewhere, it helps the players wait out the owners, which is the only thing this is about now.

Biased much?

I think it's about the owners waiting out the players. Let them play overseas on obscure teams for peanuts compared to what they would be making in the NBA. Let them miss the hype machine that strokes their egos that is the NBA, the crowds, the ads, the attention. Then maybe they'll appreciate being a part of the league and stop being a bunch of spoiled multi-millionaires.

Personally, I could care less if there's a season or not. There are more competitive games to be enjoyed in college hoops anyway.

Coxy · Post #409 » by **Coxy** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 8:16 am

I'll just be enjoying the hockey whilst this crap goes on.

KevinMcreynolds · Post #410 » by **KevinMcreynolds** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 8:35 am

I miss this board. This lockout is disgusting.

Post #411 » by **floppymoose** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 8:58 am

Souvlaki wrote:Biased much?

Are you? And if so, who cares? The facts are the facts. Accusations of bias are just talking points that distract from the real issue.

Little Digger · Post #412 » by **Little Digger** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 4:34 pm

Best case scenario = the end of long guaranteed contracts. The Association would be incredible if all the players were motivated.

I'd love to see the season lost..It would mean the owners are serious.

turk3d · Post #413 » by **turk3d** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 5:20 pm

I think someone needs to start a "FIRE STERN" campaign. Then they might be able to straighten out all of the NBAs problems. He may have really screwed up this time. Just another example to show that absolute power corrupts.

Post #414 » by **floppymoose** » Tue Aug 30, 2011 11:46 pm

Joe Hollywood wrote:Best case scenario = the end of long guaranteed contracts. The Association would be incredible if all the players were motivated.

careful what you wish for. motivated for next contract is not always the same as motivated to win.

Souvlaki · Post #415 » by **Souvlaki** » Wed Aug 31, 2011 1:00 am

floppymoose wrote:
Souvlaki wrote:Biased much?

Are you? And if so, who cares? The facts are the facts. Accusations of bias are just talking points that distract from the real issue.

Your last statement (about the players waiting out the owners) was not a fact, but a clearly biased opinion. That's not what "it's all about". It's about both sides realizing that they have it pretty good and coming together to compromise.

Post #416 » by **floppymoose** » Wed Aug 31, 2011 3:00 am

Dude, I have opinions on this issue. It's true. Our opinions are what this message board is all about.

When I have opinions, it's bias, right? And your take, that the players need to "appreciate being a part of the league and stop being a bunch of spoiled multi-millionaires" is some other kind of opinion. One that isn't a bias at all, right?

Twinkie defense · Post #417 » by **Twinkie defense** » Wed Aug 31, 2011 5:05 am

floppymoose wrote:
Joe Hollywood wrote:Best case scenario = the end of long guaranteed contracts. The Association would be incredible if all the players were motivated.

careful what you wish for. motivated for next contract is not always the same as motivated to win.

I'm all for a component of compensation that is keyed to wins.

Post #418 » by **floppymoose** » Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:23 am

Twinkie defense wrote:I'm all for a component of compensation that is keyed to wins.

That would be awesome.

Souvlaki · Post #419 » by **Souvlaki** » Wed Aug 31, 2011 10:48 am

floppymoose wrote:Dude, I have opinions on this issue. It's true. Our opinions are what this message board is all about.

When I have opinions, it's bias, right? And your take, that the players need to "appreciate being a part of the league and stop being a bunch of spoiled multi-millionaires" is some other kind of opinion. One that isn't a bias at all, right?

Of course I'm biased. When did I say I was not?

I was simply pointing out that this statement, "...the players wait out the owners, which is the only thing this is about now", was over the top bias and disconnected from the reality of the situation to the point of being kind of absurd.

turk3d · Post #420 » by **turk3d** » Wed Aug 31, 2011 4:41 pm

turk3d wrote:I think someone needs to start a "FIRE STERN" campaign. Then they might be able to straighten out all of the NBAs problems. He may have really screwed up this time. Just another example to show that absolute power corrupts.

How about "BURN STERN"? I know they used to burn witches at the stake. What about Warlocks?