Official CBA/Labour Talks Discussion Thread III

[theonlyeastcoastrapsfan]

I'm talking about them actually putting an offer to the owners. Seemed to me, there was always meetings, players leave with offer, players decide they don't accept offer, players meet with league, league revises offer, players decide they don't like offer....and round and round until disclaimer. I'm wondering if Players, since the beginning of this thing, ever said, we hear you, here's an offer they they are happy with for you guys to consider.

I don't think they have the cohesion, stones or traction to be proactive negotiators for their membership and I think that hampers negotiation. I've heard players say they may agree to this, won't agree to that, not willing to go under 53, now willing to go to 50 on some system issues, all this widely covered but's it's never been said, that I have heard, what system concession they want. I feel like I've seen alot of the owners proposal. I don't get the impression the NBPA is a group that Hunter and the exec committee have enough sway over that they can propose anything without being besieged by agents and other players, so it hampers things. Instead of telling their position of what they would accept, they don't know what they would accept, so their left just responding to the other sides proposals and blaming them for not providing them with the offer they can accept. Why don't they make a formal offer they can accept? It could have helped provide some traction while trying to bridge the gap. You get the feeling, league could be at position A, while union may be at position B, but they can't be sure because of the amount of disagreement and infighting between, them, their members and the agents.

Maybe this whole thing would have been done if NBPA exec wasn't stuck trying to please both the league, and the agents which would be impossible. If union leaders want to be responsible they would have put the best deal they could get in front of their members and let them decide to get back to work or not, instead of waiting four months to play a time consuming legal card and admitting that they weren't able to adequately do their jobs and represent the players.

[RapTelligence]

So now they have dropped the California suit and are consolidating everything in Minnisota. Boises is indicating that they might call the league by Wednesday to initiate some negotiations.

[C Court]

Do you really believe the players and their attorneys sat for months in 16 hour meetings and not once did they ever think to provide even an informal written offer for the other side to consider? I know this is an online forum, but let's use a little common sense here.

And while you are quick to blame the Hunter for failing to placate both players and agents, you ignore the fact that a compromise was made impossible because of the feuding within the factions on the owner's side. Stern can't placate the 10 hardline owners, even though big market owners should be delighted with 50/50 and concessions on the systems side.

And while you hear varying opinions from the players, lets be clear that the owners have NO freedom to speak their mind regarding these negoations, unless they want to pay a $500k fine.

[RapTelligence]

Do you really believe the players and their attorneys sat for months in 16 hour meetings and not once did they ever think to provide even an informal written offer for the other side to consider? I know this is an online forum, but let's use a little common sense here.

And while you are quick to blame the Hunter for failing to placate both players and agents, you ignore the fact that a compromise was made impossible because of the feuding within the factions on the owner's side. Stern can't placate the 10 hardline owners, even though big market owners should be delighted with 50/50 and concessions on the systems side.

And while you hear varying opinions from the players, lets be clear that the owners have NO freedom to speak their mind regarding these negoations, unless they want to pay a $500k fine.

I might be wrong here but did'nt stern put the last offer on the table despite the fact the 10 hardliners hated it? I believe Stern would have got at least 20 guys on board with the last offer. I suspect many in the 20 crowd would want the strict system related clauses included in the last offer. if the system related clauses are taken out Stern is not going to get the support of many more. And by the way as you say we have no way of knowing if the players did not make a offer. I believe they made some during the two years and were proactive at some time.

[theonlyeastcoastrapsfan]

Do you really believe the players and their attorneys sat for months in 16 hour meetings and not once did they ever think to provide even an informal written offer for the other side to consider? I know this is an online forum, but let's use a little common sense here.

And while you are quick to blame the Hunter for failing to placate both players and agents, you ignore the fact that a compromise was made impossible because of the feuding within the factions on the owner's side. Stern can't placate the 10 hardline owners, even though big market owners should be delighted with 50/50 and concessions on the systems side.

And while you hear varying opinions from the players, lets be clear that the owners have NO freedom to speak their mind regarding these negoations, unless they want to pay a $500k fine.

It's just that I've seen or heard of seemingly everything else, but I have not read about any formal offer made by players since this thing began. I'm almost convinced things are too fractured in the players association for the union to do anything but respond to the other side's offers. Have you?

I don't think the Union has sufficient backing of the players or communication with the players to be able to respond with a responsible offer that the players would support and that reflects the reality of the NBA situation, and the needs/desires of the League - without facing backlash. And Hunter and Fisher's aversion to that backlash, makes for a void of leadership on the players side, which harms negotiations. You hear reports of the many opinions from the Owners side, but I never once got the feeling Stern wasn't confident he could get whatever he agreed to through. I don't think it was that way on the other sided due to the influence of the agents. Especially the "group of 7 super agents" we heard about. How often did you hear "players" say they support hunter and fisher, only for their agents to call woj and plant stories of distention and undercut them at every pass? NBPA is a freakin' mess.

Look at it this way, I'm charged with getting dinner for everyone, I knew it was going to be tough, I knew you can't please everyone, and I know I'll take some lumps if not everyone is happy with my decision. Well, i get to the restaurant and realize I don't have as much money as I thought I would. Things cost more than I thought, and while I thought and let people think I could get a deal, it turns out I can't. So, I can suck it up, make due with what I can and comeback with something that people might not like but at least everyone can eat, or I can have the restaurant keep giving me an option, that I can take back to the group one at a time, and say, no we don't want it, no we don't want it, no we don't want it, and blame the restaurant for not wanting to do business. There were lumps here to be taken by Fisher, the exec commitee and Hunter. To come back and say, this is the best we could do, or to actually find the courage to make an order on behalf of the players and be willing to accept the players reaction to what they ordered on their behalf, but rather they chose to retire themselves from the task, about a half hour after dinner was supposed to be served. It's not easy, it was never going to be easy, but this smacks of giving and quitting the team because it looks like you're going to lose.

I agree that i would think any responsible leadership would know the position of their members and be able to express it in a workable way to reach a conclusion in a long negotiation. I don't for a minute now beleive the the NBPA has responsible leadership, and I think it's a cluster-f every time a deal get's close because if the league would take it, the agents wouldn't and the members are left hungry in the middle.

[OAKLEY_2]

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

Bingo. Pierce is smart enough to know he can retire tomorrow and he isn't going to go out being a pssy to Stern. There might be some guys like Fisher who actually say other players since departed put it on the line for me and I'm willing to think big picture and I'm not giving up my bottom line just to get a deal done because Stern while pretending to play moderate middleman is in fact playing hard ball for the owners.

[ATLTimekeeper]

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

Bingo. Pierce is smart enough to know he can retire tomorrow and he isn't going to go out being a pssy to Stern. There might be some guys like Fisher who actually say other players since departed put it on the line for me and I'm willing to think big picture and I'm not giving up my bottom line just to get a deal done because Stern while pretending to play moderate middleman is in fact playing hard ball for the owners.

Pierce himself confessed he doesn't even know what the best course of action is. He already copped to having less of a leadership role then it was let on. If even the hardliner admits he doesn't know what he's doing and wasn't even that much of a hardliner, why are we at this position? Who are the players really following?

[ranger001]

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

And if you're in the 50% of the NBA players making less than 2 million you should be very annoyed. Especially if you're the guy that plays for 1 or 2 years then never catches on.

[J-Roc]

I don't think the union has the intelligence on their side to put forth an offer the owners might accept. The trick in these negotiations is to introduce an idea that would appear to be advantageous to the other side, but your own modelling shows it will be advantageous to you in the end.

The players would rather stick to what they know....the last deal....and just make minor BRI changes. When you start introducing extra exceptions, and tougher lux taxes, they're afraid of what might happen. They should probably go for whatever deal anyway, because as the past has shown, GM's will run wild and give out money no matter what.

But I agree with eastcoast. The players aren't actively trying to think of a better deal. They're just fighting for the old deal, or waiting for the owners to make another proposal.

[Fairview4Life]

http://www.nba.com/2011/news/features/s ... index.html

Yup, limited intelligence on the players side. Good call.

[J-Roc]

http://www.nba.com/2011/news/features/steve_aschburner/10/27/lockout-q-and-a-kevin-murphy/index.html

Yup, limited intelligence on the players side. Good call.

They're obviously not paying him to come up with any ideas.

[Fairview4Life]

http://www.nba.com/2011/news/features/steve_aschburner/10/27/lockout-q-and-a-kevin-murphy/index.html

Yup, limited intelligence on the players side. Good call.

They're obviously not paying him to come up with any ideas.

Obviously.

[Reignman]

Seems like a decent guy but the fact that he brought up "psychic benefits" to owning a basketball team just put me off.

Psychic benefits is the most ridiculous thing I've heard anyone say in a multi-billion dollar CBA negotiation. Sure, you have the odd ball billionaire who is willing to burn money but those guys are few and far between.

[Fairview4Life]

Seems like a decent guy but the fact that he brought up "psychic benefits" to owning a basketball team just put me off.

Psychic benefits is the most ridiculous thing I've heard anyone say in a multi-billion dollar CBA negotiation. Sure, you have the odd ball billionaire who is willing to burn money but those guys are few and far between.

You don't think there are non monetary rewards to owning an NBA team? Buying an NBA team is more like buying a boat than it is like buying a widget factory.

[Reignman]

Seems like a decent guy but the fact that he brought up "psychic benefits" to owning a basketball team just put me off.

Psychic benefits is the most ridiculous thing I've heard anyone say in a multi-billion dollar CBA negotiation. Sure, you have the odd ball billionaire who is willing to burn money but those guys are few and far between.

You don't think there are non monetary rewards to owning an NBA team? Buying an NBA team is more like buying a boat than it is like buying a widget factory.

I think it's so insignificant and rare that it's not even worth discussing.

Edit: Similar to players and their "love of the game".

[ranger001]

You don't think there are non monetary rewards to owning an NBA team? Buying an NBA team is more like buying a boat than it is like buying a widget factory.

A boat is a depreciating asset. Oh the irony.

[Fairview4Life]

Seems like a decent guy but the fact that he brought up "psychic benefits" to owning a basketball team just put me off.

Psychic benefits is the most ridiculous thing I've heard anyone say in a multi-billion dollar CBA negotiation. Sure, you have the odd ball billionaire who is willing to burn money but those guys are few and far between.

You don't think there are non monetary rewards to owning an NBA team? Buying an NBA team is more like buying a boat than it is like buying a widget factory.

I think it's so insignificant and rare that it's not even worth discussing.

So then the Maloofs, who are losing money, would jump at the chance to sell to Larry Ellison, right? They wouldn't try to desperately hang on to their NBA team, no matter what the cost?

[Reignman]

You don't think there are non monetary rewards to owning an NBA team? Buying an NBA team is more like buying a boat than it is like buying a widget factory.

A boat is a depreciating asset. Oh the irony.

[Fairview4Life]

You don't think there are non monetary rewards to owning an NBA team? Buying an NBA team is more like buying a boat than it is like buying a widget factory.

A boat is a depreciating asset. Oh the irony.

So what? You aren't using your boat to generate profit. The goodwill portion of an NBA teams purchase price is also an intangible asset that can be depreciated, I believe. And of course the fantastic the roster depreciation allowance. All depreciating assets. Who cares? That doesn't really have anything to do with the psychic benefit discussion. Saying there are actually monetary rewards for owning a boat and/or an NBA team has nothing to do with the point.

[Reignman]

You don't think there are non monetary rewards to owning an NBA team? Buying an NBA team is more like buying a boat than it is like buying a widget factory.

I think it's so insignificant and rare that it's not even worth discussing.

So then the Maloofs, who are losing money, would jump at the chance to sell to Larry Ellison, right? They wouldn't try to desperately hang on to their NBA team, no matter what the cost?

Aren't there some issues with the NBA not wanting Ellison to buy a team?

Anyway, I'm guessing the Maloofs are waiting to see how the new CBA looks. If it looks anything like the last one I'd venture to guess that they sell sooner or later.