Official CBA/Labour Talks Discussion Thread II

[knickerbocker2k2]

As for the negotiations, I think Fisher and Hunter are being unfair and catering too much to the Stars. I think the League is also in some ways responsible for stalling the negotiations but Fisher and Hunter aren't being fair. They're supposed to represent the Player's.

What are you basis this on? How is the union catering to the stars? All the proposed changes would have the most impact on MLE type of players. Take away MLE from tax teams will affect Lebron? Reducing MLE players salary by 10% will have more impact on him than if you reduce Lebron salary by 10%. Or having luxury tax act like hard cap will impact on MLE players because teams will not want cross that cap, and thus reduce their demand in new system.

Union is fighting for the middle class player. The fact the top dogs like KG/Pierce/etc are fighting for better deal should be testament their unselfishness. Do you these high paid players will ever recover the amount they lose this season? KG will lose $21M if no season and he has at best 2 years. Do you even think he will make that amount in his next contract? Take young guy like Deron Williams. He will lose $15M if no season. He probably has 10 years in this league. Do you think he will recover that amount? He would be better off supporting the original offer at 37% BRI than fighting better deal.

Fact is the big dogs should be forcing the union to cave. Most of the union are either FA, young players, or on small contract. It is to their benefit if the union fights for better deal because they can make that money back if they get better deal. If I'm on minimum now, and even if we lose the whole year, I might lose $1M. But if we get favourable deal, than I may be able to make 4/$20M deal instead of settling for 3/$10M that would result if owners get their deal.

[40 Guzzle]

They should make a basketball a spring/summer sport.

Training camp/preseason: mid-february to mid-march
Season: mid-march to August
Playoff: late August to mid-October

Draft: early November, before the NCAA season starts
- it gives the students a chance to relax during the summer then decide whether they would want to enter the draft or not.
- it gives them a chance to go to school and September, and maybe change their mind about declaring for the draft.

It gives all players a chance to be with family on major holidays.

the whole purpose of basketball was to create an indoor sport for the winter and you must be sippin drank from the extra big syrup cup if you think the NBA is giving up games on December 25th, as a fan I would personally be pissed

I'd wager that the very first thing Stern did after Bron's decision was schedule the Heat-Lakers Christmas matchup

If your dad isn't home on December 25th because he has to play an NBA game, guess what? Everyday of your life is Christmas... live with it

[Salted Meat]

As for the negotiations, I think Fisher and Hunter are being unfair and catering too much to the Stars. I think the League is also in some ways responsible for stalling the negotiations but Fisher and Hunter aren't being fair. They're supposed to represent the Player's.

What are you basis this on? How is the union catering to the stars? All the proposed changes would have the most impact on MLE type of players. Take away MLE from tax teams will affect Lebron? Reducing MLE players salary by 10% will have more impact on him than if you reduce Lebron salary by 10%. Or having luxury tax act like hard cap will impact on MLE players because teams will not want cross that cap, and thus reduce their demand in new system.

Union is fighting for the middle class player. The fact the top dogs like KG/Pierce/etc are fighting for better deal should be testament their unselfishness. Do you these high paid players will ever recover the amount they lose this season? KG will lose $21M if no season and he has at best 2 years. Do you even think he will make that amount in his next contract? Take young guy like Deron Williams. He will lose $15M if no season. He probably has 10 years in this league. Do you think he will recover that amount? He would be better off supporting the original offer at 37% BRI than fighting better deal.

Fact is the big dogs should be forcing the union to cave. Most of the union are either FA, young players, or on small contract. It is to their benefit if the union fights for better deal because they can make that money back if they get better deal. If I'm on minimum now, and even if we lose the whole year, I might lose $1M. But if we get favourable deal, than I may be able to make 4/$20M deal instead of settling for 3/$10M that would result if owners get their deal.

If the union reps were really fighting for the middle class players, they'd never push for decertification. Middle and lower-tiered players stand to lose the most in a free-market system. if they actually did care about the middle class players, they'd take the deal on the table.

Your example is off base. it's not a matter of choosing between possibly getting a 4/$20M deal or settling for a 3/$10M deal, it's between you choosing a 3/$10M deal, and choosing to make a hell of a lot less than the $1M you're making right now when the union decertifies, which eliminates things like minimum salary requirements. That's the choice, because it's not getting any better than the 49-51 flex BRI deal on the table right now.

[lobosloboslobos]

The fact the top dogs like KG/Pierce/etc are fighting for better deal should be testament their unselfishness. Do you these high paid players will ever recover the amount they lose this season? KG will lose $21M if no season and he has at best 2 years. Do you even think he will make that amount in his next contract? Take young guy like Deron Williams. He will lose $15M if no season. He probably has 10 years in this league. Do you think he will recover that amount? He would be better off supporting the original offer at 37% BRI than fighting better deal.

Fact is the big dogs should be forcing the union to cave. Most of the union are either FA, young players, or on small contract. It is to their benefit if the union fights for better deal because they can make that money back if they get better deal. If I'm on minimum now, and even if we lose the whole year, I might lose $1M. But if we get favourable deal, than I may be able to make 4/$20M deal instead of settling for 3/$10M that would result if owners get their deal.

I don't agree with this at all. I think the #1 reason the big stars are pushing for a better deal is so they can prove that this is THEIR league. I think this is 100% about ego for them. You cannot possibly get me to care or believe that it matters to KG that after having made $200m+ in his career he will lose money this year. I think he would gladly give up this year's salary if he could publicly whip Stern and the owners' asses once and for all.

As I've said before, if it was really about the big guys helping out other players, then there should be a significant discussion about recompensing past players who never had the chance to make millions (avg. salary increased by approx. 2000% in past 25 years) and who live on an annual pension of around $35k after having won championships etc. THAT would be something worth fighting for. Strangely though, I haven't heard Garnett or Pierce or anyone else talking about those NBA players.

The owners are greedy egotistical sods. But so are the players. Don't kid yourself.

[knickerbocker2k2]

If the union reps were really fighting for the middle class players, they'd never push for decertification. Middle and lower-tiered players stand to lose the most in a free-market system. if they actually did care about the middle class players, they'd take the deal on the table.

First union has not pushed for decertification. It is mainly select players and their agents. And secondly the main purpose behind this is to get leverage vis vie the owners. Right now owner the impression is the owners are willing to lose a season because this will break the backs of the players and they will accept whatever offer owners give at this point. Well if decertification is in play, than owners would be thinking twice about this approach. And thirdly in a non-union-zed league no-one can guess as to the salary of players and I doubt MLE players will be making $1M.

Your example is off base. it's not a matter of choosing between possibly getting a 4/$20M deal or settling for a 3/$10M deal, it's between you choosing a 3/$10M deal, and choosing to make a hell of a lot less than the $1M you're making right now when the union decertifies, which eliminates things like minimum salary requirements. That's the choice, because it's not getting any better than the 49-51 flex BRI deal on the table right now.

You realize that most players don't make the minimum now? You are assuming players are making minimum because of some law that forces the NBA to pay them $1M. If you take out rookies which get automated contracted based their draft position, most players are making more than the minimum because of supply/demand. That is why the league is trying to get all these restrictions in place. They want to artificial create barrier as to depress the wages of the players. If you want example look at European soccer. There is no huge discrepancy between superstar players and other players that are on the team. It aint like Messi is making $100M, while another player on the roster is making $100K.

I don't agree with this at all. I think the #1 reason the big stars are pushing for a better deal is so they can prove that this is THEIR league. I think this is 100% about ego for them. You cannot possibly get me to care or believe that it matters to KG that after having made $200m+ in his career he will lose money this year. I think he would gladly give up this year's salary if he could publicly whip Stern and the owners' asses once and for all.

You can speculate all you want. Neither you and I don't know their true intent. What we can conclude is that finances is not the #1 reason. You choose to believe its all about getting one over Stern. I tend to believe that its all about principle and they are fighting for future generation, just as the past generation fought for them and they have enjoyed the fruits of their labor.

[ATLTimekeeper]

"The future generations" is to the players what "parity" is to the owners.

[Ponchos]

"The future generations" is to the players what "parity" is to the owners.

Except that there are players who are obviously acting against their own interests, whereas thus far owners overtures towards parity have proven to be lip-service only.

[ATLTimekeeper]

"The future generations" is to the players what "parity" is to the owners.

Except that there are players who are obviously acting against their own interests, whereas thus far owners overtures towards parity have proven to be lip-service only.

Yeah, because of stubborn pride. Their personal feelings are hurt that they're losing the negotiations. 51 would buy them off because it would look like a win.

[floppymoose]

So I guess the players can't win with you, then.

If they take the deal, they don't care about "future generations".

If they don't take the deal, it's because of their "stubborn pride".

Thanks for making it so clear exactly where you stand.

[Cyrus]

Interesting, this is one of the unions Non disucssion points, the whole sign and trade option for tax teams:

KBergCBS Ken 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.

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

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

[40 Guzzle]

Interesting, this is one of the unions Non disucssion points, the whole sign and trade option for tax teams:

KBergCBS Ken 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.

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

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

Hahaha

Love it

[Cyrus]

Here are the answers by the way, Raps apart of two! We'd have not been able to get out of Hedo's contract, nor help mavs get their championship...

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


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

[Laowai]

To use the nuclear option of decertifying the union is lubricious. Since the contracts for the players are through the Union they become null and void and who becomes a negotiator? The suit on a Monopoly will take minimum of a year and whom ever win in court it will be dragged into appeal all the way to the Supreme Court. That's at least 3 years I think the players have less than a 50% chance of winning. Where do the legal fees come from to fight this battle?

A number of players are finding playing off shore less than satisfying.

Why doesn't the union put the current proposal to a vote to the union members I think it would be approved.Do you seriously think players on the last year of a contract, the grossly over paid and the average player would turn down the proposal. You can debate all you want but the guys with the bigger Johnso'ns will win.

[floppymoose]

The Hedo s&t was between the Magic and Raptors.

[floppymoose]

That's at least 3 years [...]

You don't think the owners are seriously going to let the NBA go three years without playing, do you? If decertification happens they will improve their offer.

[Laowai]

That's at least 3 years [...]

You don't think the owners are seriously going to let the NBA go three years without playing, do you? If decertification happens they will improve their offer.

Obviously not but the union/players has no cards.
In 6 to 9 months the players will crawl back and the agents will be the new demons.
The reality is that the modifications came from a independent arbitrator not the owners and the owners agreed to 5 of 6 the union 0.

[knickerbocker2k2]

Interesting, this is one of the unions Non disucssion points, the whole sign and trade option for tax teams:

KBergCBS Ken 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.

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

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

Hahaha

Love it

Ok. So if it is not big deal, than why owners insisting on it? If this is is what is blocking from deal, than owners could be the rational party and let this one go. No?

[Laowai]

Interesting, this is one of the unions Non disucssion points, the whole sign and trade option for tax teams:

KBergCBS Ken 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.

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

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

This was from the independent arbitrator not the owners. The union rejected everything.

Hahaha

Love it

Ok. So if it is not big deal, than why owners insisting on it? If this is is what is blocking from deal, than owners could be the rational party and let this one go. No?

[dhackett1565]

Interesting, this is one of the unions Non disucssion points, the whole sign and trade option for tax teams:

KBergCBS Ken 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.

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

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

Hahaha

Love it

Ok. So if it is not big deal, than why owners insisting on it? If this is is what is blocking from deal, than owners could be the rational party and let this one go. No?

The big spenders used to have the mid level to improve their teams. With that greatly reduced, what mechanism do you think takes it's place? S+T's would be much more heavily used going forward.

[Rapsfan07]

As for the negotiations, I think Fisher and Hunter are being unfair and catering too much to the Stars. I think the League is also in some ways responsible for stalling the negotiations but Fisher and Hunter aren't being fair. They're supposed to represent the Player's.

What are you basis this on? How is the union catering to the stars? All the proposed changes would have the most impact on MLE type of players. Take away MLE from tax teams will affect Lebron? Reducing MLE players salary by 10% will have more impact on him than if you reduce Lebron salary by 10%. Or having luxury tax act like hard cap will impact on MLE players because teams will not want cross that cap, and thus reduce their demand in new system.

Union is fighting for the middle class player. The fact the top dogs like KG/Pierce/etc are fighting for better deal should be testament their unselfishness. Do you these high paid players will ever recover the amount they lose this season? KG will lose $21M if no season and he has at best 2 years. Do you even think he will make that amount in his next contract? Take young guy like Deron Williams. He will lose $15M if no season. He probably has 10 years in this league. Do you think he will recover that amount? He would be better off supporting the original offer at 37% BRI than fighting better deal.

Fact is the big dogs should be forcing the union to cave. Most of the union are either FA, young players, or on small contract. It is to their benefit if the union fights for better deal because they can make that money back if they get better deal. If I'm on minimum now, and even if we lose the whole year, I might lose $1M. But if we get favourable deal, than I may be able to make 4/$20M deal instead of settling for 3/$10M that would result if owners get their deal.

If the union reps were really fighting for the middle class players, they'd never push for decertification. Middle and lower-tiered players stand to lose the most in a free-market system. if they actually did care about the middle class players, they'd take the deal on the table.

Your example is off base. it's not a matter of choosing between possibly getting a 4/$20M deal or settling for a 3/$10M deal, it's between you choosing a 3/$10M deal, and choosing to make a hell of a lot less than the $1M you're making right now when the union decertifies, which eliminates things like minimum salary requirements. That's the choice, because it's not getting any better than the 49-51 flex BRI deal on the table right now.

This is the point I was trying to make in my post.

Correct me if I'm wrong but we've seen KG, D-Wade, Pierce talk about how bad the deal is for "future generations" thus rejecting or not liking proposal after proposal. Now, we have a tweet from Deron Williams that says he was willing sign a decertification petition from July. Have you see/heard any "mid-level" or minimum guys saying anything like that? Because from what I can remember, Big Baby Davis was for a 51% split and McGee was tweeting about how many guys are willing to take a 50-50 split just to get back to work.

So to me, what's happening is the guys who are "hardliners" and refusing proposals and refusing to budge are the guys who have the money and financial wiggle room should the lockout stretch out or decertification be the course of action. I personally have yet to hear a "mid-level" guy be pro-decertification or for the stalling of this deal. Fisher and the Union say they speak on behalf of the players but I'm not convinced that they truly are UNLESS they put the current offer to a vote.

I'm not pro anybody really. I just want a league where every team has a realistic chance to compete and be profitable.