Official CBA/Labour Talks Discussion Thread III

[Ponchos]

Tecumseh, this has devolved into some sort of meta argument about the legal system and lawyers in general. Perhaps your time as a Toronto lawyer has left you with a different impression about the profession than my time as a Vancouver lawyer has had on me.

Anyhow, my basic premise remains unchanged. If David Boies did not take this case, his bottom line would not be different. A lawyer of his prominence will always find another case if he so chooses.

If you disagree with that, fine. If you think that downtown Toronto lawyers would never ever under any circumstances (aside from ethical considerations) refuse a case then fine. However, this is David Boies. He was practically a household name during Gore v Bush. If these particular legal proceedings were not happening his billable hours would be clocking in at EXACTLY the same rate.

[Ponchos]

So really its because it was an area of law they were not specialized in.

No.

He specialized in the area of law, his partners did not. Therefore his course of action was to refer this potential client to a friend of his at a competing firm that did have the necessary expertise.

Comprende?

Yeah I got it, they didn't have the necessary expertise.

Have you ever admitted you were wrong about anything? Are you just going to make things up?

[tecumseh18]

Tecumseh, this has devolved into some sort of meta argument about the legal system and lawyers in general. Perhaps your time as a Toronto lawyer has left you with a different impression about the profession than my time as a Vancouver lawyer has had on me.

Anyhow, my basic premise remains unchanged. If David Boies did not take this case, his bottom line would not be different. A lawyer of his prominence will always find another case if he so chooses.

If you disagree with that, fine. If you think that downtown Toronto lawyers would never ever under any circumstances (aside from ethical considerations) refuse a case then fine. However, this is David Boies. He was practically a household name during Gore v Bush. If these particular legal proceedings were not happening his billable hours would be clocking in at EXACTLY the same rate.

Coincidentally enough, I originally articled in Vancouver. But now I'm in Toronto.

Boies has a commercial (probably not fiduciary) duty to his partners to help maximize partnership income. Turning down work may not affect his bottom line - although it will because he undoubtedly is paid a share of the firm profits - but it will negatively impact the profits of the partnership as a whole. In my experience with larger firms, that simply is not allowed to happen.

[/end thread hijacking]

[ranger001]

Yeah I got it, they didn't have the necessary expertise.

Have you ever admitted you were wrong about anything? Are you just going to make things up?

I was not wrong, you made a generalisation.

[Ponchos]

I do understand what you're saying. I think I'm just coming at this from more of a macro-economics approach.

I am so sorry you had to leave the promised land that is Vancouver

[/endhijack]

[Ponchos]

Yeah I got it, they didn't have the necessary expertise.

Have you ever admitted you were wrong about anything? Are you just going to make things up?

I was not wrong, you made a generalisation.

Which generalization was that?

[Kevin Willis]

NBA players

Yes - they start young AND can play to they're in their late 30s
Yes - they make large sums of money
Yes - they have a growing revenue stream with increased popularity

However they push for a lockout. Why? They have it all really - why end a season in this way. I don't get it. The other leagues had issues that needed remedy but the players in the NBA arguably have more to conceed than players in other leagues. And they refuse to take a stand against the man. I don't get it...

The owners are pushing for a lockout. The players do not want the lockout.

This is not a strike.

Yes, that's true but I was talking about decertifying instead of accepting the last offer with some modifications. I think that was going overboard.

[Ponchos]

NBA players

Yes - they start young AND can play to they're in their late 30s
Yes - they make large sums of money
Yes - they have a growing revenue stream with increased popularity

However they push for a lockout. Why? They have it all really - why end a season in this way. I don't get it. The other leagues had issues that needed remedy but the players in the NBA arguably have more to conceed than players in other leagues. And they refuse to take a stand against the man. I don't get it...

The owners are pushing for a lockout. The players do not want the lockout.

This is not a strike.

Yes, that's true but I was talking about decertifying instead of accepting the last offer with some modifications. I think that was going overboard.

Actually I agree. I do not believe that the players will get much more than the present offer by pursuing litigation. But it's their money not mine. If the players feel it's in their best interests to make this move then more power to them.

[Twinkie defense]

dgoldstein79 Dave Goldstein
@mccannsportslaw Is Boies' "months, even weeks" timeline realistic? Thought jurisdiction battle alone could take longer, let alone merits.
59 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply

mccannsportslaw Michael McCann
@dgoldstein79 I don't think it's realistic. Boies thinks he's going to win on the merits, but I can't see how that happens in weeks/months.

If Players thought they were going to get a quick victory they better think again.

"Quick victory" = owners coming back to the players shortly with a better offer.

Still though they might have to think again.

[roundhead0]

Actually I agree. I do not believe that the players will get much more than the present offer by pursuing litigation. But it's their money not mine. If the players feel it's in their best interests to make this move then more power to them.

At this point the players' stand is more personal/emotional than logical. Whether or not they can get more money or get more issues their way, they want to feel like they were respected and managed to "win" in at least part of this process, allowing them to save face.

That was Stern's biggest mistake, IMO. By phrasing/framing things the way he did he didn't allow the Union to accept a deal and claim at least partial victory, and thus save face.

[C_Money]

I don't see why guys like Paul Pierce and Derek Fisher even give a s***. They're on their last contract and all their doing is losing money for themselves.

[MEDIC]

I don't see why guys like Paul Pierce and Derek Fisher even give a s***. They're on their last contract and all their doing is losing money for themselves.

Because at the end of the day......they're not all that bright.

They are letting emotions influence business decisions. That's always a recipe for failure.

The people who are supposedly on their side (lawyers, agents, non-NBA union people) know this too. They are vulnerable & easily manipulated.

[Thelonious]

I don't know about not bright. Maybe they already have enough money and are sticking up for the rookies by ideology.
Or maybe they're pushing for more money, which, in their position (close to retirement), would have to be a massive concession by the owners to counterbalance the lockout losses. In which case they would have accepted the new offer if then they knew it would be a nuclear winter.
I'm leaning toward the second possibility, and that they're regretting this all thing.

BTW, if you're an NCAA prospect, you're so glad Fisher and Pierce are doing what they're doing.

[theonlyeastcoastrapsfan]

I don't know about not bright. Maybe they already have enough money and are sticking up for the rookies by ideology.
Or maybe they're pushing for more money, which, in their position (close to retirement), would have to be a massive concession by the owners to counterbalance the lockout losses. In which case they would have accepted the new offer if then they knew it would be a nuclear winter.
I'm leaning toward the second possibility, and that they're regretting this all thing.

BTW, if you're an NCAA prospect, you're so glad Fisher and Pierce are doing what they're doing.

I don't know about that, If you've just come from NCAA you're frustrated and want to play. This isn't about rookies, it's about movement. Prospects want a place to go, they don't want missed years where they can't play, or where players avoid coming out in the middle of the lockout and inflate the depth of future classes. These young players won't be in the free agent market for a while. This is about their ability to chose their teams, and ensuring teams like NY LA, are possible locations in free agency, and that those teams won't be excluded and thus, limiting the bidders in the market place for free agents.

Plus, out of principal, they don't want to give in on both money and system. To the players, they gave in on money, so owners should give in on the system, but the owners want both and they don't want to lose. Other than that, I'm not sure many on the players side could specifically tell you what system issue they dislike most or propose another solution. I get the feeling guys like fisher and Hunter just got pissed and tired. They knew they were going to bring a bad deal back, and they knew the union and agents wouldn't be happy, this way, they can wash their hands of it and don't have to wear the fact that they couldn't get the players a good deal. Now they can say they did what the players wanted with whatever happens. I think Chris Paul and his pals, have a lot of pull in the league, and I think he's gone through this whole process with an eye on him going to New York, more than anything else. Which is why you see two year concessions in extend and trades, in owners revised proposal.

People, even well know bloggers, talk all the time about the players last offer. What offer? When did that cluster-frig-of-an-outfit ever get down and put a formal proposal together to the owners? Outside of alluding to going to 50 in a press conference, the union never actually proposed or agreed to anything. And it's because it's such a cluster frig, that no-one dare make a proposal becasue then they would have to articulate their position, and the union leaders feared the agents turning on them the second they did. So here we are, and I think it has a lot to do with union leaders not wanting to take that knocks that come with being responsible union leaders.

Think about this. Players hire Boeis, he's leading the trade assoc through this process. He's what is supposed to get owners and media's attention. And it works for the media, Stern and owners see through it and see it as a way to blame the players for causing the missed season, that the owners know will get them what they want in the next CBA. Independent of Boies, others file suit in Minny. With time being of the essence, Boies now pulls his Cali filing and files revised claim in Minny. If Boies had a plan to lead the players, why is he doing a do over of his one move? If it wasn't for the independent agents, they would have lost the whole week, or stayed in the Cali court where they weren't going to have proceedings until March. Does this look like sound union leadership?

Read Sherridan's site and his writeup about his argument with Boies about whether he should call the league. The guy goes on and on about how he can't call them first, then after a few minutes of questioning, puts his hands on his head, and concedes, that maybe he should call. And this last presser, i believe was supposed to be a show of strength with the story being the new names on the court filing, but instead league immediately sends a "get bent" press release. Now I commend Boies for trying to do what he can to get talks going, but it screams to me the guy didn't know what he was getting into joining this labour dispute so late in the game. Sounds like he can see the clock and the calendar, and knows he's not spooking the owners and he knows he's put the 450 members of the players association out on an island, with the best they can hope for if the league doesn't settle is a short term legal monetary winfall that will ruin their industry and livelihood -forever. Fun times.

[Thelonious]

All the immediate repercussions aside, the stance in which the players are now mostly favours those with their career ahead of them. As far as as business decisions go, from the players perspective, time will tell if that stance was too hard or not hard enought, or the right one. But the players are fighting for their future share. More fighting should equate to more share.

Take Valanciunas for example. They're essentially fighting for him right now. He's already playing pro ball as we speak, is assured of a future in the NBA. He could get a loan at the bank based on his future earnings to buy a share of the Lithuanian club he's playing for. If the NBA PA gets a favourable deal, that loan could be, say 20% more.
It wasn't the best analogy, but all I'm saying is that for most young bright prospects this lockout is a good thing. For most veterans, the deal would have to be very favourable for the lockout to be worth the lost time, unless they're doing it for their fellow players by ideology.

[theonlyeastcoastrapsfan]

I think a lot of vets look to be able to play out their last few years on vet min deal in the location of their choice. Look how many vets the champion caliber teams get in min deals. Once they have their money and they have a few years left in their twilight they bolster the benches of the Lakers, Celtics, Heat, Mavericks, and now Knicks, and Bulls, once they've got Rose resigned. Now if those teams were over tax under new CBA, not only would they have limited exemptions to take on those players, but they'd have a high tax to pay, that may dissuade teams from offering them a contract.

[Thelonious]

So you're saying vets are fighting as much for themselves as anything else? I would have to agree with that. At the end of the day they're the driving force behind the NBAPA's decisions.

[C Court]

People, even well know bloggers, talk all the time about the players last offer. What offer? When did that cluster-frig-of-an-outfit ever get down and put a formal proposal together to the owners? Outside of alluding to going to 50 in a press conference, the union never actually proposed or agreed to anything.

Do you really think the players (and their lawyers) sat in two years of negotiations and never actually proposed or agreed to anything? Really???

If you've spent anytime in a business negotiation, you know you have a pretty good idea where the other side is on the major issues throughout the discussion process - with or without a formal proposal document.

While we weren't there, the player's reps would have clearly indicated their position on a number of system issues. The owner's response to the player's demand was 'no way', which led to Stern's final ultimatum.

[ranger001]

The NBA filing in the 2nd circuit is interesting. I found this little gem:-

the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Clarett v. Nat'l Football League rejected the 8th & 9th Circuit definition of the non-statutory labor exemption in favor of a far broader non-statutory labor exemption. Thus, in the Second Circuit, the mere act of disclaiming union interest might not impose immediate liability on a sports league for maintaining terms originally implemented before such a disclaimer.

http://sports-law.blogspot.com/2011/11/coming-soon-nba-forum-wars-and-why.html

[CeltsfanSinceBirth]

I don't see why guys like Paul Pierce and Derek Fisher even give a s***. They're on their last contract and all their doing is losing money for themselves.

Paul Pierce and Wyc Grousbeck are stalling negotiations on both sides, in order to shorten the Celtics season, thus giving them a greater chance at a title. Pierce is on his last contract, while Wyc makes enough money off the TV deal to even care about losing some games. Shorter season means fresher legs for the Cs. Derek Fisher and Kobe were in on it too, until Kobe changed his mind and decided he needed more games to chase after Kareem's scoring record. Brilliant strategy by the boys to try and set up another Lakers-Celtics finals though.

Some of you morons will actually believe I was being serious about this too. smh