Official CBA/Labour Talks Discussion Thread

[ATLTimekeeper]

I'd be interested to hear if KG and Kobe show up for that meeting with the mediator.

[J-Roc]

So what's the latest threat of the day? Did Stern say a deal had to be made today?

No each side meets with the mediator today, then the mediator meets with both sides together tomorrow. Then the owners have board of governors meetings Wed andThurs. I suspect if things are pleasing Stern, they could push back the BoG meetings, but for some reason Stern hasn't moved them back since the meditation date was set.

Stern never said that they had to have a deal Tuesday. He said that if they couldn't come to an agreement on a deal, his gut tells him they may not be able to play by Christmas or longer. It's rhetoric with a purpose to ratchet up the pressure on the union, and it hold no actual weight. He didn't say he would cancel the games, and he didn't games would have to be cancelled, he explained further to Aldridge that he would be pessimistic on the potential to get a deal if given where they are.

Thanks for the weekly breakdown. Yeah, I don't even believe an 82 game schedule is out of the question...a lot of rhetoric for sure. But at least when we know there are plans to meet, we can at least think something might happen. This weekend for instance we knew nothing would happen.

[theonlyeastcoastrapsfan]

Yeah, but the Mcgee thing was at least entertaining.

[S.W.A.N]

Yeah, but the Mcgee thing was at least entertaining.

poor guy isn't smart enough to understand media looking for sound bites going to take his sentence chop it in half and make an issue... guess he was sleeping through media training as a rookie

[J-Roc]

Can't knock Javale for speaking the truth. He was being a voice. And it's good for us to know there might be smoke coming from a fire.

[theonlyeastcoastrapsfan]

Can't knock Javale for speaking the truth. He was being a voice. And it's good for us to know there might be smoke coming from a fire.

Which is why from the player's union perspective, he should have known to keep his mouth shut. The Truth? This is a labour negotiation. Where does the truth come in in regards to your position in a negotiation? "Hey look, I really like this car and I'm willing to pay too much for it" "I really need to sell this house, and will take way way less than what I'm asking"

I just wish he'd been wearing his STAND t-shirt at the time of the interview.

[theonlyeastcoastrapsfan]

Yeah, but the Mcgee thing was at least entertaining.

poor guy isn't smart enough to understand media looking for sound bites going to take his sentence chop it in half and make an issue... guess he was sleeping through media training as a rookie

Media didn't have cut what he said up and they didn't. Players efforts to date publicly was to show how "unified" they are. Because they are in a very week position if they don't. Sure mcgee said "most want to stick it out" and it was widely reported that he said that. But what was newsworthy and of interest in this process, is that in a meeting of less than 30 members, some of them expressed a desire to fold. It's not a case of media making it and issue or chopping it, it's the fact that he let that info out in the first place. Media focuses on it, because it was an unexpected admission, thus significant.

the fact that due to that Fisher had to concede and speak of the fact that there are many opinions among players, which flies in the face of the united we stand message, and speak specifically about the Free Agent to be's, the Rookies who've yet to play, and the vets in their last year, weakens their position and makes me, and I'm sure the owners wonder whether union message is attitude of all players, or just the KG's. Plus, they had to throw one of their own under the bus distancing themselves, which is not what they want to do.

It's one thing to say we want to play, it's far different to say some want to fold.

[J-Roc]

Can't knock Javale for speaking the truth. He was being a voice. And it's good for us to know there might be smoke coming from a fire.

Which is why from the player's union perspective, he should have known to keep his mouth shut. The Truth? This is a labour negotiation. Where does the truth come in in regards to your position in a negotiation? "Hey look, I really like this car and I'm willing to pay too much for it" "I really need to sell this house, and will take way way less than what I'm asking"

I just wish he'd been wearing his STAND t-shirt at the time of the interview.

That's different. With the house, it's only you negotiating. If you want to hold out for a better price, it's up to you.

With group of players, we could very well have 80% of players wanting to accept the latest owners' offer.

[BorisDK1]

No one suggested it's just the costs of debt servicing causing the losses we're seeing. It's amortization and depreciation. It's some debt servicing. It's paying your children millions of dollars to be executives in your organization. There are all sorts of little (and big in the case of amortization and depreciation, at least for the Nets in 05 and 06) ways to nickle and dime your way to big losses. All management expenses the players have no say in, yet are being asked to pay for.

Amortization and depreciation were not part of the cash losses that I discussed with them. They have absolutely nothing to do with the operational losses. As I said before:

Okay - they don't want to include a paper loss like amortization and depreciation? Okay, fine. But you still need to account for interest, because that is a cash loss, not a paper one. And that makes operational losses for the Nets $13 million in 2005 and $27 million in 2006, not $7.5 and $17.2. And no business valued at $307 million can survive hemorraging $40 million in two years. Whether or not you think that financing should be used in the purchase of the franchise, the inescapable fact is that it has been, and if you want the business to be a profitable going concern (and it's in the players' interests that they are), interest has to be accounted for in the business' costs. Every other employee group in the world would agree: why do NBA players get a free pass on this?

Now, frankly, when the team owns the building, I think depreciation is a 100% valid expense when we're talking about the losses of a team, because at some point that building is going to need to be replaced. But whatever - I played by your rules and did not consider it. So are you suggesting that nepotistic salaries comprised $40 million for the Nets in 2005 and 2006? I don't think so!

Are players the largest single expense? Yes. Does that mean they should give up more than 160 million/year (to start with) in order to pay for everything else? No. They are the main reason there are record revenues. They offered to drop 4% of BRI back to the owners. The owners wanted them to come down to a 50/50 split, which isn't really a 50/50 spilt since they also wanted $350 million/year off the top of BRI for non player expenses and expanding the game in China or something.

That's not even getting into stuff like why the players should care about Mark Cuban losing money last season, since Cuban doesn't care. Or Ratner and now Prokharov with his 20 or 30% share making hundreds of millions of dollars on the Atlantic Yards project that will never show up on any BRI calculation, but required the Nets to facilitate.

Yes, the players - like it or not - are going to have to take a hit in the payroll. The costs for them have risen astronomically - because, as we all know, they can't possibly be expected to fly coach on a commercial flight, or stay in less than a 5-star hotel, or have less than a $100/day per diem - and it's in their long-term best interests to have a profitable league. The league as of right now is not sustainable in its present condition financially. It needs to be a profitable concern. When it is, the players' pensions are protected, the quality of the facilities are protected, etc. Businesses exist to make money, not just break even: businesses can't survive just breaking even.

[Fairview4Life]

The players offered to give up over $160 million in payroll in year one alone.

As we all know, 6.5-7 foot humans that require their knees to work in order to do their jobs, and fly several times a week, should probably not be flying coach. The total per diem for every player in the league last year, going with 450 players and 250 days, was somewhere around Phil Jackson's salary.

I never said the Nets losses weren't real or more than likely extensive. Just that the numbers were overblown. I also did not say that Nets losses were solely the responsibility of poor management salary structure, depreciation, amortization, and everything else I listed previously. I said the 22-24 teams losing over 350 million number the league uses is overblown due to those factors. Not the Nets specifically.

Bruce Ratner bought the Nets and ran them into the ground. He purchased them with the express intent of moving them to Brooklyn, and only worked towards that move. He needed the team to get his billion dollar real estate deal off the ground. Once his eminent domain case was won, he quickly sold to Prokharov to improve the financing of his real estate development. The Nets losing a bunch of money during his run as owner does not indicate a systemic problem with the NBA's CBA. It indicates a systemic problem with letting someone like him own an NBA team. Unless you don't care about keeping franchises in their current markets. Personally, I think the move is a good thing. I think the Hornets should also move, and the Thunder are probably going to have to move somewhere with more people and money as well, along with a few other teams. But I don't think the players should have to pay for the Nets losing money while tanking their franchise in a poor market as they waited out a court case. Their losses are also indicative of the fact that yearly operational losses were not a big deal for Bruce Ratner. He will now be bringing in about $30 million a year, and Prokharov will be doing extremely well thanks to his 20% option in the real estate side of things, and 45% stake in the new arena. This is the team with the largest losses in NBA history, and both the old and new owner have been crowing about how much money they will be making. There is an obvious disconnect here between how hard the NBA says it is to be an NBA owner, and the reality of how much money these men are going to be making.

[Ponchos]

The league as of right now is not sustainable in its present condition financially.

Why not?

How has this unsustainable business model been sustained for over a decade? In 2005 this "horrible unsustainable system" was basically extended for another 6 years because everyone was happy with it. The owners had the chance to change the system then, but they did not.

Since 2005, revenues have continued to go up every year, even in the worst recession in decades.

[dacrusha]

The league as of right now is not sustainable in its present condition financially.

Why not?

How has this unsustainable business model been sustained for over a decade? In 2005 this "horrible unsustainable system" was basically extended for another 6 years because everyone was happy with it. The owners had the chance to change the system then, but they did not.

Since 2005, revenues have continued to go up every year, even in the worst recession in decades.

... and player salaries have remained the same relative to revenues.

The problem is, some of the owners want the players to now give back a share of the revenue pie to underwrite their horrible business decisions...while the large market owners sit back, salivating at the huge profit bump they're about to enjoy.

[douggood]

The revenue growth by the league has been mainly driven by the big market teams, places like mil, min, den etc etc have seen smaller growth in the past decade.

Lakers just singed a 20 year 3 billion dollar local tv deal, the Lakers new deal on its own adds 3 million to the salary cap per year. Celtics just got a massive new deal as well.

The bottom 20-25 owners in the league are looking for a way to make it competitive on the court for the middle of the pack teams, and limit the cap because they cannot compete with the big boys anymore.

nba if agrees to the nbpa offers is headed for a league similar to baseball, where 5-8 teams outspend in total the rest of the league combined.

[CeltsfanSinceBirth]

The revenue growth by the league has been mainly driven by the big market teams, places like mil, min, den etc etc have seen smaller growth in the past decade.

Lakers just singed a 20 year 3 billion dollar local tv deal, the Lakers new deal on its own adds 3 million to the salary cap per year. Celtics just got a massive new deal as well.

Only the broadcasting rights get included into that deal. The ownership part of the TV station is not included in the BRI.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2011/07/19/the-real-value-in-bostons-new-cable-deal/

The Boston Celtics have reportedly inked a new cable television deal that will give the NBA team an equity stake in Comcast SportsNet New England.

Besides a big increase in its annual rights fee the Celtics would get up to a 20% equity stake in the regional sports network. The increase in the rights fee, which is expected to be about $20 million a season, will be included in the league’s Basketball Related Income and therefore part of the salary cap. But none of the income the Celtics owners will get from their equity stake in the profitable RSN will be included in BRI and, by extension, player salaries.

The new deal will enrich its owners more than a comparable deal comprised entirely of a rights fee. The Celtics were bought by a group led by Wyc Grousbeck in 2002 for $360 million. In January we valued the team at $452 million.

nba if agrees to the nbpa offers is headed for a league similar to baseball, where 5-8 teams outspend in total the rest of the league combined.

As odd as it sounds, MLB has actually had a decent amount of parity, as pointed out by jfs1000d from the Celts board.

Hate to say this, baseball has the best competitive balance --- look how many teams have made the playoffs in the last decade at least once.

Only five teams have not made the playoffs in the last decade in baseball: Baltimore (mismanagement), Kansas City (poor drafting, but getting better), Pittsburgh (cheap), Toronto (unlucky, tough division), and Washington (mismanagement).

And, baseball is by far the hardest sport to make the playoffs in.

That is something I never thought would be possible.

[Fairview4Life]

That is something I never thought would be possible.

It's the nature of the sport. That's also why hard caps, revenue sharing, etc. have been shown to only have minor affects on competitive balance and parity. There are much larger factors involved, like 9 vs. 9 as opposed to 5 on 5.

[knickerbocker2k2]

That is something I never thought would be possible.

It's the nature of the sport. That's also why hard caps, revenue sharing, etc. have been shown to only have minor affects on competitive balance and parity. There are much larger factors involved, like 9 vs. 9 as opposed to 5 on 5.

Hard cap would have inverse effect on parity. Which ever team lucks out in drafting the likes of Lebron, Wade, Kobe, etc would have substantial advantage over the teams with players like Bosh. If both Bosh & Lebron are paid the same amount of money in capped system, who is getting the most out of that $1 in salary?

If the goal is parity, than the NBA should change the rules to lessen the impact of one player. For instance get rid of superstar calls, touchy fouls. Allow for more zone defense (get rid of defensive 3 second). The NBA will never do this though because its main selling point is its super athletes. They have found that they make more money by allowing these superstar players to excel.

[S.W.A.N]

good read on a possible solution to tax issue...

probably makes too much sense to happen.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/1575 ... esentation

[carlosey]

This fight has grown nastier, more personal, in the past weeks. Privately, management insists that everything changed when the Boston Celtics’ Kevin Garnett(notes) walked into the negotiating room on Oct. 4. The owners knew it wouldn’t go well when Garnett started glowering across the table, sources said, like the league lawyers, owners and officials were opponents at the center jump. He was defiant, determined and downright ornery. He was K.G. Everyone knew Hunter had to cede to the wishes of the stars, and the stars demanded that the players stop making concessions to the owners.

As one league official said, “We were making progress, until Garnett [expletive] everything up.”

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=aw-wojnarowski_nba_labor_stars_union_101711

Seriously who is this fool? I could totally see how he would behave in this said meeting. Staring people down and trying the same lame on-court antics.

I dont respect how this guy has made it his personal crusade to tell hunter and everyone to stay put when he already has much more than the little guys every will. He was obviously there trying to intimidate people into getting a more luxurious retirement fund.

[Ponchos]

This fight has grown nastier, more personal, in the past weeks. Privately, management insists that everything changed when the Boston Celtics’ Kevin Garnett(notes) walked into the negotiating room on Oct. 4. The owners knew it wouldn’t go well when Garnett started glowering across the table, sources said, like the league lawyers, owners and officials were opponents at the center jump. He was defiant, determined and downright ornery. He was K.G. Everyone knew Hunter had to cede to the wishes of the stars, and the stars demanded that the players stop making concessions to the owners.

As one league official said, “We were making progress, until Garnett [expletive] everything up.”

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=aw-wojnarowski_nba_labor_stars_union_101711

Seriously who is this fool? I could totally see how he would behave in this said meeting. Staring people down and trying the same lame on-court antics.

I dont respect how this guy has made it his personal crusade to tell hunter and everyone to stay put when he already has much more than the little guys every will. He was obviously there trying to intimidate people into getting a more luxurious retirement fund.

Looks like the owners have made you feel exactly how they want you to feel about this "private" piece of information.

[carlosey]

This fight has grown nastier, more personal, in the past weeks. Privately, management insists that everything changed when the Boston Celtics’ Kevin Garnett(notes) walked into the negotiating room on Oct. 4. The owners knew it wouldn’t go well when Garnett started glowering across the table, sources said, like the league lawyers, owners and officials were opponents at the center jump. He was defiant, determined and downright ornery. He was K.G. Everyone knew Hunter had to cede to the wishes of the stars, and the stars demanded that the players stop making concessions to the owners.

As one league official said, “We were making progress, until Garnett [expletive] everything up.”

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=aw-wojnarowski_nba_labor_stars_union_101711

Seriously who is this fool? I could totally see how he would behave in this said meeting. Staring people down and trying the same lame on-court antics.

I dont respect how this guy has made it his personal crusade to tell hunter and everyone to stay put when he already has much more than the little guys every will. He was obviously there trying to intimidate people into getting a more luxurious retirement fund.

Looks like the owners have made you feel exactly how they want you to feel about this "private" piece of information.

You have the players union sending the most idiotic and volatile star that has zero experience in negotiation to make a fool out of himself and were not supposed to make anything of it? Sounds like you dont like the negative press this brings instead.