Official CBA/Labour Talks Discussion Thread III

[Reignman]

Job security. You have already been told that.

And like I already said, if they are the best of the best of the best why do they need job security? Who is going to steal their job?

Another player? One of the 60 new draftees every year, or one of the hundreds of guys playing in Europe? You seem to think you're making some kind of profound point here. The owners set max contract lengths, something that I believe is probably illegal without negotiating with a union. The players are willing to agree with that system if they get some other concessions, like a large portion of BRI. This is how negotiations work. The owners and players work towards a mutually acceptable compromise on contract length, BRI share, etc.. The players currently feel that between the owners current offer and a free market, they can do better in a free market, so they have decertified (basically). Now individual teams are free to offer whatever contracts they want. They can offer one year deals if they want. Or completely unguaranteed contracts. They could offer Lebron minimum wage. They just can't setup a league wide max contract or free agency rules, since there is no collective bargaining and that would be illegal. They can find some sort of balance that is acceptable to the union, or they can start to actually compete with each other.

Did you know that teams can currently offer 1 year unguaranteed contracts? Exactly like you want? It's true. They just can't convince an in demand player to sign them since another team will usually offer them a better deal.

I have a couple of points:

1) So job security to you means having your job even if you don't perform to the standards that got you paid? Really? Who cares if there's a draft every year? You get paid to perform at a certain level. It's weird how basketball players want to be excempt from EVERY risk.

2) This CBA negotiation wasn't about one or the other, BRI vs. System. The last system favoured the players in both aspects and was lopsided to be honest. The pendulum has swung because that last deal was so bad in both aspects. The owners haven't asked for roll backs (yet), they just want things to be more balanced moving forward. I don't think that's unreasonable at all when you take the last lopsided CBA out of the equation.

3) The discussion about non-guaranteed contracts being allowed in the last CBA is a non-starter for me. The way the system is designed you could only offer that kind of deal to the worst players in the league. Otherwise, you'll just lose that player to the next team just like you said. There might as well be no non-guaranteed deals under that kind of system.

[Ponchos]

The last deal on the table hit the rank and file the hardest.

The MLE is the most a decent player can ever aspire to receive. The MLE in the last proposal has been gutted, and the restrictions on luxury tax teams ability to hand them out hurts the "rank and file".

It's my personal view that the players should've accepted it (or done another counter-proposal) because I don't think a better deal will be forthcoming. However, make no mistake that the middle-class and lower-class players were being asked to take the biggest hits in the deal.

The median salary is 2.33 million. The "rank and file" do not make anywhere close to the MLE. The 50% of the players that make the median and below would not have been affected a whole lot by this deal.

I said aspire to. Look up the meaning.

Stars dream about the max, rank and file dream about the MLE.

Kapono, Evans, Jerome James. All mediocre, all rank and file. They each benefited from timing, circumstances and healthy market demand and they landed huge MLE deals.

I'll say it one more time. The MLE is the most the rank and file can ever ASPIRE to make, and it was gutted. Completely gutted.

[Fairview4Life]

1) So job security to you means having your job even if you don't perform to the standards that got you paid? Really? Who cares if there's a draft every year? You get paid to perform at a certain level. It's weird how basketball players want to be excempt from EVERY risk.

No, I mean you and a team agree that you will work for them for a set amount of $ for a set period of time and you don't have to worry that they'll rip up the deal, and they don't have to worry you'll rip up the deal. You know, a contract, like in the rest of the world.

2) This CBA negotiation wasn't about one or the other, BRI vs. System. The last system favoured the players in both aspects and was lopsided to be honest. The pendulum has swung because that last deal was so bad in both aspects. The owners haven't asked for roll backs (yet), they just want things to be more balanced moving forward. I don't think that's unreasonable at all when you take the last lopsided CBA out of the equation.

I didn't say this negotiation was about one or the other. I said that the union and the owners need to come to a mutually acceptable agreement, and the owners weren't able to put a deal on the table that the players felt would be better than a free market. No one cares what you or I think is reasonable. You seemed to have thought that basically every single deal the owners proposed was reasonable. The players are all that mater, and they did not find the deal more reasonable than a free market, so the owners can now abide by anti trust legislation, like every other business in the world.

3) The discussion about non-guaranteed contracts being allowed in the last CBA is a non-starter for me. The way the system is designed you could only offer that kind of deal to the worst players in the league. Otherwise, you'll just lose that player to the next team just like you said. There might as well be no non-guaranteed deals under that kind of system.

That is the entire point. Teams are willing to offer longer deals and more money in order to secure the services of a player. What you're saying is that an artificial limit needs to be put in place in order to prevent teams from competing with each other on contract terms. The owners need to offer enough incentives to the players to get them to agree to that kind of system with it's artificial limits. Like a high % of BRI. Otherwise that system is a "non starter" for the players. There is no point for them to continue to function as a collective bargaining unit if they can't get the owners to offer enough concessions to make that type of system palatable. NFL players, for example, were willing to trade guaranteed deals for massive signing bonuses so they can still get a large portion of their money up front.

[Reignman]

The last deal on the table hit the rank and file the hardest.

The MLE is the most a decent player can ever aspire to receive. The MLE in the last proposal has been gutted, and the restrictions on luxury tax teams ability to hand them out hurts the "rank and file".

It's my personal view that the players should've accepted it (or done another counter-proposal) because I don't think a better deal will be forthcoming. However, make no mistake that the middle-class and lower-class players were being asked to take the biggest hits in the deal.

The median salary is 2.33 million. The "rank and file" do not make anywhere close to the MLE. The 50% of the players that make the median and below would not have been affected a whole lot by this deal.

I said aspire to. Look up the meaning.

Stars dream about the max, rank and file dream about the MLE.

Kapono, Evans, Jerome James. All mediocre, all rank and file. They each benefited from timing, circumstances and healthy market demand and they landed huge MLE deals.

I'll say it one more time. The MLE is the most the rank and file can ever ASPIRE to make, and it was gutted. Completely gutted.

LOL.

I "aspire" to make a 150 K, I should bring that up to my boss during my annual review to see if that will have any bearing on my raise.

[MEDIC]

The defeatist attitude is weird to me.

Yeah, I've noticed a bit of a defeatist tone amongst many posters as well.

If you're an organization & you're "settling" rather than striving for continuous improvement (matching or surpassing the competition), then you've got a serious problem with your leadership, vision & overall managerial philosiphies.

A company should always be motivated to meet or exceed the gold star benchmark. In NA professional sports, that benchmark happens to be the NFL.

[ranger001]

The last deal on the table hit the rank and file the hardest.

The MLE is the most a decent player can ever aspire to receive. The MLE in the last proposal has been gutted, and the restrictions on luxury tax teams ability to hand them out hurts the "rank and file".

It's my personal view that the players should've accepted it (or done another counter-proposal) because I don't think a better deal will be forthcoming. However, make no mistake that the middle-class and lower-class players were being asked to take the biggest hits in the deal.

The median salary is 2.33 million. The "rank and file" do not make anywhere close to the MLE. The 50% of the players that make the median and below would not have been affected a whole lot by this deal.

I said aspire to. Look up the meaning.

Stars dream about the max, rank and file dream about the MLE.

Kapono, Evans, Jerome James. All mediocre, all rank and file. They each benefited from timing, circumstances and healthy market demand and they landed huge MLE deals.

I'll say it one more time. The MLE is the most the rank and file can ever ASPIRE to make, and it was gutted. Completely gutted.

So when you said that the "last deal on the table hit the rank and file the hardest". You meant it hit their dreams the hardest? They don't care about their actual salary and what the deal meant to that, they care more about their dreams and aspirations?

[Reignman]

1) So job security to you means having your job even if you don't perform to the standards that got you paid? Really? Who cares if there's a draft every year? You get paid to perform at a certain level. It's weird how basketball players want to be excempt from EVERY risk.

No, I mean you and a team agree that you will work for them for a set amount of $ for a set period of time and you don't have to worry that they'll rip up the deal, and they don't have to worry you'll rip up the deal. You know, a contract, like in the rest of the world.

2) This CBA negotiation wasn't about one or the other, BRI vs. System. The last system favoured the players in both aspects and was lopsided to be honest. The pendulum has swung because that last deal was so bad in both aspects. The owners haven't asked for roll backs (yet), they just want things to be more balanced moving forward. I don't think that's unreasonable at all when you take the last lopsided CBA out of the equation.

I didn't say this negotiation was about one or the other. I said that the union and the owners need to come to a mutually acceptable agreement, and the owners weren't able to put a deal on the table that the players felt would be better than a free market. No one cares what you or I think is reasonable. You seemed to have thought that basically every single deal the owners proposed was reasonable. The players are all that mater, and they did not find the deal more reasonable than a free market, so the owners can now abide by anti trust legislation, like every other business in the world.

3) The discussion about non-guaranteed contracts being allowed in the last CBA is a non-starter for me. The way the system is designed you could only offer that kind of deal to the worst players in the league. Otherwise, you'll just lose that player to the next team just like you said. There might as well be no non-guaranteed deals under that kind of system.

That is the entire point. Teams are willing to offer longer deals and more money in order to secure the services of a player. What you're saying is that an artificial limit needs to be put in place in order to prevent teams from competing with each other on contract terms. The owners need to offer enough incentives to the players to get them to agree to that kind of system with it's artificial limits. Like a high % of BRI. Otherwise that system is a "non starter" for the players. There is no point for them to continue to function as a collective bargaining unit if they can't get the owners to offer enough concessions to make that type of system palatable. NFL players, for example, were willing to trade guaranteed deals for massive signing bonuses so they can still get a large portion of their money up front.

1) In most contracts there are performance baselines and if you do not meet them the contract can be ripped up. In the current NBA those performance baselines are non-starters. Hell, Arenas brought a gun to the arena and still hasn't had his contract torn up. You don't see a problem with that? I haven' even gone into pay for performance issues.

2) Based on the losses of $300 mil and the way players are congregating on a handful of teams I don't see anything wrong with the latest offer. in fact, I would prefer the 47% / hard cap offer. If litigation proves the numbers are off I'm more than ok with the BRI split changing to whatever is fair but the systems issues are as clear as day and need to be overhauled. The players keep talking about freedom of movement and the ONLY way they should get that is shorter deals.

3) Artificial limits do need to be placed on teams. I mean, that's equal for all sports. If you're ok with having league of haves / have-nots then don't put those limits. I don't like that kind of league so I want those limits put in place.

[Ponchos]

So when you said that the "last deal on the table hit the rank and file the hardest". You meant it hit their dreams the hardest? They don't care about their actual salary and what the deal meant to that, they care more about their dreams and aspirations?

In the new CBA guys like Kapono, Evans, Jerome James will never ever ever see as much ACTUAL money.

Not every rank and file gets a full MLE, but some do, and many of them believe (rightly so) that they're capable of landing an MLE deal.

So in conclusion:

-The most a rank and file guy can earn will be the MLE
-Some rank and file guys get the MLE
-In the new deal the MLE is decimated.

[Ponchos]

LOL.

I "aspire" to make a 150 K, I should bring that up to my boss during my annual review to see if that will have any bearing on my raise.

I'm sure you probably aspire to make at least 80K someday at your computer tech job. If there was some company-wide artificial cap on computer tech salaries that set it to 40k, then I'm sure you wouldn't be too happy.

[ranger001]

So when you said that the "last deal on the table hit the rank and file the hardest". You meant it hit their dreams the hardest? They don't care about their actual salary and what the deal meant to that, they care more about their dreams and aspirations?

In the new CBA guys like Kapono, Evans, Jerome James will never ever ever see as much ACTUAL money.

Not every rank and file gets a full MLE, but some do, and many of them believe (rightly so) that they're capable of landing an MLE deal.

So in conclusion:

-The most a rank and file guy can earn will be the MLE
-Some rank and file guys get the MLE
-In the new deal the MLE is decimated.

What do you mean by rank and file? It can't be the the lowest paid workers because the 50% who make 2.33 million or less should know that this deal doesn't affect them a whole lot. It didnt hit these guys "the hardest" at all. Unless you were saying it hit their dreams the hardest.

So it looks like you have a new definition, rank and file are the ones who think they should get the MLE or the ones that did get an MLE deal.

[Reignman]

LOL.

I "aspire" to make a 150 K, I should bring that up to my boss during my annual review to see if that will have any bearing on my raise.

I'm sure you probably aspire to make at least 80K someday at your computer tech job. If there was some company-wide artificial cap on computer tech salaries that set it to 40k, then I'm sure you wouldn't be too happy.

There is a cap on my salary and it's not artificial in the least. It's called company profitability and getting paid based on my results/performance.

Here's a real story. I'm currently the HR outsourcing Client Manager for the 2nd biggest company in the world (I'll let you figure it out). I make a decent living and believe my pay reflects the job I do. FYI, I'm very good at my job and was recently recruited for this role. I aspire to make more just like everyone else but in my reviews I can only speak on what I have done and what I reasonably hope to do in the future. The company I manage makes hand over fist but I'm smart enough to realize I get paid for the work I do. If my salary was capped at 80K I'd find it funny because I could go to a competitor and get that fairly easily; however, if nobody else was offering me 80K then I'd be more than happy with that.

Moral of the story, Kobe Bryant couldn't even get $15 mil on the open market.

[Reignman]

So when you said that the "last deal on the table hit the rank and file the hardest". You meant it hit their dreams the hardest? They don't care about their actual salary and what the deal meant to that, they care more about their dreams and aspirations?

In the new CBA guys like Kapono, Evans, Jerome James will never ever ever see as much ACTUAL money.

Not every rank and file gets a full MLE, but some do, and many of them believe (rightly so) that they're capable of landing an MLE deal.

So in conclusion:

-The most a rank and file guy can earn will be the MLE
-Some rank and file guys get the MLE
-In the new deal the MLE is decimated.

What are you babbling about? The rank and file make 2.33 mil. Nowhere near the previous MLE.

And furthermore, the MLE isn't being eliminated, it's going from 5.8 to 5 and the years are getting reduced with restrictions on tax teams from using it.

This provision would be lucky to affect even 1% of the rank and file.

[Ponchos]

What do you mean by rank and file? It can't be the the lowest paid workers because the 50% who make 2.33 million or less should know that this deal doesn't affect them a whole lot. It didnt hit these guys "the hardest" at all. Unless you were saying it hit their dreams the hardest.

So it looks like you have a new definition, rank and file are the ones who think they should get the MLE or the ones that did get an MLE deal.

Guys like Shannon Brown and JJ Barea.

How do you think they're feeling about the hits to the MLE? I guarantee both of those guys would've landed full MLE's with the last CBA. Right now they're free agents and their earning potential is taking a massive hit.

Every year has guys like Brown and Barea. Role-players earning under the median salary that have a good year and can score a big payday.

[Ponchos]

So when you said that the "last deal on the table hit the rank and file the hardest". You meant it hit their dreams the hardest? They don't care about their actual salary and what the deal meant to that, they care more about their dreams and aspirations?

In the new CBA guys like Kapono, Evans, Jerome James will never ever ever see as much ACTUAL money.

Not every rank and file gets a full MLE, but some do, and many of them believe (rightly so) that they're capable of landing an MLE deal.

So in conclusion:

-The most a rank and file guy can earn will be the MLE
-Some rank and file guys get the MLE
-In the new deal the MLE is decimated.

What are you babbling about? The rank and file make 2.33 mil. Nowhere near the previous MLE.

And furthermore, the MLE isn't being eliminated, it's going from 5.8 to 5 and the years are getting reduced with restrictions on tax teams from using it.

This provision would be lucky to affect even 1% of the rank and file.

God you're simple.

[ranger001]

What do you mean by rank and file? It can't be the the lowest paid workers because the 50% who make 2.33 million or less should know that this deal doesn't affect them a whole lot. It didnt hit these guys "the hardest" at all. Unless you were saying it hit their dreams the hardest.

So it looks like you have a new definition, rank and file are the ones who think they should get the MLE or the ones that did get an MLE deal.

Guys like Shannon Brown and JJ Barea.

How do you think they're feeling about the hits to the MLE? I guarantee both of those guys would've landed full MLE's with the last CBA. Right now they're free agents and their earning potential is taking a massive hit.

Every year has guys like Brown and Barea. Role-players earning under the median salary that have a good year and can score a big payday.

Redefining the words rank and file into "guys like jjbarea" is silly. Just admit you didn't know that the median salary was 2.33 million.

[Reignman]

In the new CBA guys like Kapono, Evans, Jerome James will never ever ever see as much ACTUAL money.

Not every rank and file gets a full MLE, but some do, and many of them believe (rightly so) that they're capable of landing an MLE deal.

So in conclusion:

-The most a rank and file guy can earn will be the MLE
-Some rank and file guys get the MLE
-In the new deal the MLE is decimated.

What are you babbling about? The rank and file make 2.33 mil. Nowhere near the previous MLE.

And furthermore, the MLE isn't being eliminated, it's going from 5.8 to 5 and the years are getting reduced with restrictions on tax teams from using it.

This provision would be lucky to affect even 1% of the rank and file.

God you're simple.

Simple is talking about aspirations, dreams and fairy tales in a multi-billion dollar CBA negotiation. Now go back to sleep, your children's book awaits.

[Ponchos]

What do you mean by rank and file? It can't be the the lowest paid workers because the 50% who make 2.33 million or less should know that this deal doesn't affect them a whole lot. It didnt hit these guys "the hardest" at all. Unless you were saying it hit their dreams the hardest.

So it looks like you have a new definition, rank and file are the ones who think they should get the MLE or the ones that did get an MLE deal.

Guys like Shannon Brown and JJ Barea.

How do you think they're feeling about the hits to the MLE? I guarantee both of those guys would've landed full MLE's with the last CBA. Right now they're free agents and their earning potential is taking a massive hit.

Every year has guys like Brown and Barea. Role-players earning under the median salary that have a good year and can score a big payday.

Redefining the words rank and file into "guys like jjbarea" is silly. Just admit you didn't know that the median salary was 2.33 million.

I did know the median was around 2 mil. It's been mentioned on these boards many times.

I'm not redefining anything. Mediocre players (there are lots of them, Brown, Kapono, Barea, James, Evans etc.) can aspire to make the MLE.

The rank and file is full of mediocre players.

[Indeed]

LOL.

I "aspire" to make a 150 K, I should bring that up to my boss during my annual review to see if that will have any bearing on my raise.

I'm sure you probably aspire to make at least 80K someday at your computer tech job. If there was some company-wide artificial cap on computer tech salaries that set it to 40k, then I'm sure you wouldn't be too happy.

There is a cap on my salary and it's not artificial in the least. It's called company profitability and getting paid based on my results/performance.

Here's a real story. I'm currently the HR outsourcing Client Manager for the 2nd biggest company in the world (I'll let you figure it out). I make a decent living and believe my pay reflects the job I do. FYI, I'm very good at my job and was recently recruited for this role. I aspire to make more just like everyone else but in my reviews I can only speak on what I have done and what I reasonably hope to do in the future. The company I manage makes hand over fist but I'm smart enough to realize I get paid for the work I do. If my salary was capped at 80K I'd find it funny because I could go to a competitor and get that fairly easily; however, if nobody else was offering me 80K then I'd be more than happy with that.

Moral of the story, Kobe Bryant couldn't even get $15 mil on the open market.

Kobe Bryant is making more than $20m on the open market, just not as a basketball player.

Anyway, I hope you are not outsourcing North American jobs to offshore locations.

[Ponchos]

Simple is talking about aspirations, dreams and fairy tales in a multi-billion dollar CBA negotiation. Now go back to sleep, your children's book awaits.

Actually, simple is more of an inability to understand nuance or have a certain level of reading comprehension.

Case in point:

Bottom line, the union works for the majority. If the majority want the deal at 50% or 30% or 80% then you go with their wishes, that's the job of the negotiators.

The owners present an offer on Monday that 51% of the union would vote yes on. The lead negotiators refuse to take the deal to a vote.

Then the owners up their offer on Tuesday that 65% of the union would vote yes on. The lead negotiators take the vote to their constituents and it passes. CBA done.

Were the negotiators negligent in their duties for not having a vote on the Monday proposal?

But there is no 65% offer coming their way. It's 51% or they go to 47%. And that's the way this entire negotiation has been for the players and they should've known what was coming when Stern gave them the head's up 2 years ago.

All that has happened throughout this negotiation is the deal has gotten worse and worse for the players. I mean, honestly speaking, forget 65%, do you even see the owners going up to 53% for the players? I don't.

[Reignman]

Well, it's good Kobe has some business savvy because he ain't getting his $30 mil for playing basketball. In fact, he couldn't even get $15 mil.

BTW, I was on the brink of losing my last job due to outsourcing to India (I'm of Indian descent) so I'm not particularily fond of off-shoring work. Luckily my new company is a Canadian company that believes in keeping its business within our borders.