No CBA Deal: Players Union rejects deal (wants to talk more)

[paulpressey25]

Ok, just finished reading everything I could find. Here is your summary of where they stand.

Owners want and have on the table until this Wednesday night:
-No S&T for lux taxpayers

-MLE for taxpayers is only 2/$5 million ($2.5 millon per year) used every other year

-Regular MLE can be used by non taxpayers, but four-year MLE deals only given out every other year. 3-years otherwise. Example. Bucks could have offered Drew Gooden a 4-year deal last season. But then this year they could only offer a 3-year MLE deal to a different free agent. The 4-year would then alternate back in 2012.

-Owners guaranteeing players 49% of BRI no matter what. If league BRI meets 4.5% growth projections they expect, players get 50%. If growth more than expected, players get 57% of that incremental growth to a maximum percentage of 51%.

Players have on table:
-Deal where players get 51% BRI (they claim they will give up to one-point of that 51% to go into retirement benefits.

-No limits on MLE or S&T's for lux tax payers

-More normal and expanded MLE for all teams

Commentary on mood of room:
-Most of the 8 hours was spent with both sides in separate rooms and the mediator Cohen shuttling between them with ideas. Cohen apparently proposed all these ideas, including keeping the limit on luxury tax teams not being able to use S&T's. I'm not sure what the one Cohen proposal is the league rejected.

-Billy Hunter claimed to be sick so union pitbull Jeffrey Kessler did all the talking. Outright said players won't accept this nor put it to a vote.

-One owner or league official apparently talked with Aldridge, Woj, etc. and said that the hardline owners are in control. Stern claimed that the "owners-only" pre-meeting ended with the hardline faction still in control of things. That could be negotiating posture though since Stern publicly did say that he had the votes to get the proposed deal on the table last night done.

-Players union side believes that the MLE and luxury tax system issues are going to kill their ability to choose their teams. Said league wants a system where big spenders and taxpayers won't be in the free agent marketplace.

-Players may take vote to decertify the union. But that will take 45-days at least. Seen as tactic to put more pressure on owners to give in the month ahead.

[paulpressey25]

Apparently if the players do not take the deal this Wednesday, the claim is that the next offer from the owners would be at 47% BRI plus a "Flex-tax". However I can't find anything to describe what the owners mean by "Flex-tax". All I can see is that three week old Ken Berger article where he made up his own version of it, favorable to the players. Presumably the owners idea would be much more stringent.

Zach Lowe has a good paragraph on why the players and owners are fighting on the hill of system issues. It has huge practical implications for both sides.

He brings up an interesting point that the teams close to the tax line might not guarantee the contracts of certain players to give them flexibility. And as we've talked, it would be a huge block on the ability of teams like Miami and Dallas to run their payrolls up to $80, $90, $100 million by adding players through S&T's and MLE's.

http://nba-point-forward.si.com/2011/11 ... more-12816

".....It (Union) sees a system designed to give role players and mid-level veterans — players like NBPA president Derek Fisher, actually — fewer places where they could make $5 million instead of $2.5 million, fewer options through which they could gain leverage in negotiations with other teams. More broadly, they see a luxury-tax system so harsh that it is designed to act like a hard salary cap, which in turn would likely redistribute money away from mid-level veterans (a fair goal, one could argue). Those players might face more nonguaranteed contracts because teams will want maximum flexibility to duck the tax when they must...."

[raferfenix]

Had we heard about the MLE being rolled back this much before?

Seems to be a big development, and considering how the Bucks have been getting crushed based on the MLE leverage from other teams driving up the value of our own and other free agents, this would be particularly impactful for us.

Do we have any indication of how involved Kohl is in these talks? Word is that MJ was silent, so maybe that's just the marketing face of it.

With the talk of the season being tanked due to hardliner owners demanding what would be major fixes for the league, I think Bucks fans would (and should) be proud if Kohl is really holding the line---and likewise hold him accountable if they risk the season without fixing the issues that have put our franchise in such a precarious predicament in the first place.

[Sigra]

MLE battle was always the most important one. If owners make proposal that keep all other things same but eliminate MLE I think players still reject that. MLE is deal braker. Always was.

[REDDzone]

I just can't side with the players no matter how hard I try, I don't think players SHOULD be able to so easily dictate where they play.

[emunney]

I think they should always have the option to sign anywhere they want for the vet minimum. They should be heavily discouraged from joining teams over the lux tax, but not prohibited from doing so.

[unklchuk]

I think they should always have the option to sign anywhere they want for the vet minimum. They should be heavily discouraged from joining teams over the lux tax, but not prohibited from doing so.

My feelings on this are similar, but really don't make a lot of sense when scrutinized.

I think they should be free to choose where they play. But I want them to make those choices for high-minded reasons. Like joining a team that plays hoops the right way, without selfishness & with a high degree of unified teamwork.

When I realize that many players would make their choices for tax advantages, beaches, bimbos, gambling, and to have an easy time on super-talent rosters, then I lose enthusiasm for personal choice.

[REDDzone]

I'm with you.

[WEFFPIM]

Co-sign

[paulpressey25]

I think they should always have the option to sign anywhere they want for the vet minimum. They should be heavily discouraged from joining teams over the lux tax, but not prohibited from doing so.

Then the owners current offer should fit.

For us, I'd rather see Kohl give up a point of BRI and go to a firm 51% and hold on system issues. As you look at that $4 billion of BRI, we only receive about $95 million of it in the form of revenues and probably contribute even less. I just can't see how a point of BRI hurts the Bucks more than $1 million per year in lost owner revenue but would be curious to see how it actually breaks out.

In the meantime those system restrictions would help act as a semi-hard cap and make it easier for us to resign our players. We'd save millions and get better players in a more competitive league.

[jerrod]

My feelings on this are similar, but really don't make a lot of sense when scrutinized.

I think they should be free to choose where they play. But I want them to make those choices for high-minded reasons. Like joining a team that plays hoops the right way, without selfishness & with a high degree of unified teamwork.

When I realize that many players would make their choices for tax advantages, beaches, bimbos, gambling, and to have an easy time on super-talent rosters, then I lose enthusiasm for personal choice.

so you're all for personal choice as long as people think just like you? that's really weird.

[raferfenix]

How many fans are going to take the players' side in giving them financial parity in their decisions to choose where to play?

Every small market fan will hate this as we lose the ability to retain our guys, whereas almost everyone hates the super-teams that these guys have chosen to pursue in lieu of building their own teams even in a big market.

Exhibit A for why they shouldn't be allowed to do this is the Miami Heat. They are the villains for a reason, and all of the Cavs fans burning Lebron jerseys can attest for what giving in to the players on this has wrought.

[REDDzone]

so you're all for personal choice as long as people think just like you? that's really weird.

Yea, to confirm: my agreement was with emunney, hence the don't want players to "so easily" dictate where they want to play part. I could care less why they make their choices.

[REDDzone]

A random thought I just had, the players wanted 51% with a certain percentage going back to the retirees. Would it be realistic/helpful for negotiations at all for a certain percentage of the owners bri to be mandated to be re-invested back into the league? Not sure what this percentage would need to be, just thinking out loud.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

My feelings on this are similar, but really don't make a lot of sense when scrutinized.

I think they should be free to choose where they play. But I want them to make those choices for high-minded reasons. Like joining a team that plays hoops the right way, without selfishness & with a high degree of unified teamwork.

When I realize that many players would make their choices for tax advantages, beaches, bimbos, gambling, and to have an easy time on super-talent rosters, then I lose enthusiasm for personal choice.

so you're all for personal choice as long as people think just like you? that's really weird.

did you read his first sentence or were you too busy framing your insult?

[Badgerlander]

You're right GOS, jerrod should offer a complete and utter retraction. The imputation was totally without basis in fact, and was in no way 'fair comment' and was motivated purely by malice and surely did not take into account the distress that his comments may have caused unk or the chuck family and he should undertake not to repeat any such slander at any time in the future. The vulgarian should be hung upside down out a second story window until he appologizes. The mods of this forum simply cannot allow such behavior to continue, and I for one think all future insults should be choosen only from those already published by such literary geniuses like the Bard himself. I submit a sample of such insults for your approval-

and, as you can see these insults are suitable for framing.

[tyland]

Best article so far since the fall-out yesterday by K.Berg. http://t.co/rYim1NJu

Still hopeful this is just some overreaction and posturing by both sides. Sources on all sides seem to think decertification is the worst possible outcome and is not desirable.

[Badgerlander]

KBergCBSKen Berger
Your answer, from union source: FIVE sign-and-trade deals were done by tax-paying teams during previous six-year CBA.

KBergCBSKen Berger
For those baffled why there's no deal: Guess how many sign-and-trades were executed by tax payers during previous CBA? No, really, guess.

[tyland]

KBergCBSKen Berger
Your answer, from union source: FIVE sign-and-trade deals were done by tax-paying teams during previous six-year CBA.

KBergCBSKen Berger
For those baffled why there's no deal: Guess how many sign-and-trades were executed by tax payers during previous CBA? No, really, guess.

Maybe I'm being daft here, but what is this inferring? Is it that the S&T provision should be removed because it has such a small effect. Or, is it that it will have little impact so the union should accept it?

[Badgerlander]

I think he is infering that the season should be canceled since agreeing to the deal on the table would prevent nearly one player per year from earning enough to feed his family. You can use the argument either way, but his point seems to be why is something so minute holding up negotiations to begin with.

KBergCBSKen Berger
Also, who couldn't love the irony that of the five sign-and-trades by tax-payers during previous CBA, two were done by Sarver and Heisley?

So one could argue, the season could be canceled over an issue that doesn't matter that much to either side.

Two in '09-'10: Suns-Hedo Turkoglu (basketball-driven deal); Mavs-Shawn Marion.

Three in '05-'06: Knicks-Eddy Curry; Memphis-Marko Jaric; Lakers-Kwame Brown and Laron Profit. Destroyers of competitive balance, all.

This is something season could be canceled over, folks. FIVE sign-and-trades in six years. And wait until you hear what they were...