I don´t blame the owners

by amlmart1 on Oct 12, 2011 12:48 AM PDT

The NBA model the owners are proposing is the way to allow teams to compete and avoid financial troubles coming soon. We can´t say there´s no need for that system, "they just have to be financially sound", because that does not exist. Nowhere I know. Once there are no rules about spending there will be an arms race, and then you die quickly if you don´t spend or you die slowly if you spend. How things are rolling in Euro soccer is a good example. Give this a read: european soccer eating itself

You have to take into account that in Euro soccer there is a hierarchy in competitions, and teams can lose their spot in the best ones if they are among the 3 worst teams in any given season. Losing that spot has serious consequences in their economies, so there´s big pressure to spend even for small market teams.

Tweet Comment 21 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

The owners can't win the image battle.

When they make a bad deal and overspend everyone laughs and calls them idiots.
When they try to stop overspending everyone screams and calls them greedy.

Who's that tromping across my bedge?

by Troll Blazer on Oct 12, 2011 10:00 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs

but the good thing for them

they don’t care about the image battle.

"Well, you can always sell your team."

by douglast on Oct 12, 2011 11:04 AM PDT up reply actions

better to be smart and greedy than dumb and broke

by hoodieNation on Oct 12, 2011 6:53 PM PDT up reply actions

Sadly, I'm the latter.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Oct 13, 2011 12:24 AM PDT up reply actions

I don't "blame" the owners, but I hold them responsible.

What I mean is that I don’t think the owners are evil, or irrational, or even abusive in how they have led up to this lockout.

However, there is a lot of evidence to suggest that this lockout is proceeding exactly according to the script that was laid out by the owners more than a year ago. The only way this season could have proceeded without impacting the regular season schedule would have been a total capitulation by the players. Keep in mind that the owner’s demands include:

a 20% pay cut, applied retroactively to contracts agreed on years ago.
cutting contract length guarantees in half.
further wage cuts driven by systemic changes (like the cap structure) that would prevent salaries from reaching the BRI limit.
a contract length that would keep players out of the loop of the next long-term TV deal the league signs.

Taken over the lifespan of the next CBA, you’re talking about a decline in total compensation approaching 33-40%. This rollback is about far more than bringing the league into profitability, which is important and I agree with.This is about the owners insulating themselves from the risk of their team investment. If the owners get everything they want, then the NBA is more than just profitable. Owning a team becomes a “safe” investment.

Think about that. Owning a sports team having less financial risk than your average retirement portfolio? From the owner’s perspective, if they can get that at the expense of one season and infuriating some aging superstars and agents in the process… well you do that.

So I don’t blame the owners in the same way I don’t blame a pack of hyenas for being attracted to rotting corpses. It’s in their nature. But let’s be clear: the owners are willing to flush the entire season to get the givebacks of their wildest dreams.

"You can pretty much flip a coin to see which Portland team will show up: the dark-horse world-beaters or the mixed-up eggbeaters" - Dave

by conspirator5 on Oct 12, 2011 10:03 AM PDT reply actions 2 recs

the owners have backed off at least 3 of those 4 things

"Well, you can always sell your team."

by douglast on Oct 12, 2011 11:06 AM PDT up reply actions

It time for the players to take some economics classes

Even billionaires won’t operate at huge losses for long. It is not like the players would suddenly be poor if they agreed to a 50% split…

by Odenrising on Oct 12, 2011 11:25 AM PDT reply actions

Please link me to unbiased data showing the owners are taking losses.

Then prove it’s BECAUSE OF SALARIES and not due to business decisions that they made, that have nothing at all to do with the players.

by Corvallis, OR on Oct 14, 2011 9:25 AM PDT up reply actions

What difference does it make?

Can you name another career in which 50% of revenues are spent on employee salaries? If so… sign me up.

Every place I’ve ever worked has kept salaries at < 30% of revenue… and I work for a living. These guys play a silly game for half the year and are paid a far larger share than anyone in the real world.

If the owners are losing money, I could care less if they cut player’s salaries to 40%. It’s just common sense.

by manfredi on Oct 14, 2011 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions

My guess is that law firms spend more than 50% of revenues on employee salaries+benefits

in this case the major expenses of runing the law firm are paying for the expertise of the lawyers, unlike in manufacturing where it is purchasing the raw materials.

by tingeyga on Oct 14, 2011 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions

Uh... yeah... lawyers and actors are not 'everymen'.

Regardless, if the company is losing money and the biggest expense is bloated salaries, it’s not difficult to ‘do the math’.

by manfredi on Oct 14, 2011 6:32 PM PDT up reply actions

but neither are NBA players

which is why the comparison is silly in the first place.

i keep dancing on my own.

by atomiccafe on Oct 17, 2011 9:34 AM PDT up reply actions

That's the whole point!

People who play a game for millions of dollars are whining because they want a few more percentage points.

by manfredi on Oct 17, 2011 8:49 PM PDT up reply actions

Law firms fall apart all the time because the partners can’t figure out how to divide millions of dollars of per-partner profits. Harvard educated suits whining because they want a few more percentage points to play golf and wine and dine clients!

i keep dancing on my own.

by atomiccafe on Oct 18, 2011 2:23 PM PDT up reply actions

No one pays to watch you work

Every place I’ve ever worked has kept salaries at < 30% of revenue… and I work for a living.

And the entire product being offered by your company is not “the ability to watch manfredi work”.

dinasour type of guys choir boys

by mittsabishy on Oct 17, 2011 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions

Your mom likes to watch me work.

She does.

by manfredi on Oct 17, 2011 8:50 PM PDT up reply actions

my mom passed away two months ago

that’s kind of rude of you.

dinasour type of guys choir boys

by mittsabishy on Oct 17, 2011 10:15 PM PDT up reply actions

The players are the greedy ones in this lockout, no doubt about it.

They sound worse after every time one of them comes out and blames the owners for the lockout and not being fair. As far as I am concerned they are already being paid far more than they deserve, certainly more than during the NBA’s best years in the 90s which doesn’t make sense. They should be taking less and not asking for more! Don’t they realize that if they demand more money that is less that the owners are getting which makes owning a team less desirable which means less stability and constant changing of ownership and teams end up relocating.

The players keep talking about the fans but really they don’t care about anyone but themselves cause the fans want their teams to stay in their cities and not have to lose them because the owner can’t afford to keep it there.

I couldn’t care less if there is no season as long as the greedy morons don’t get what they want. They shouldn’t get 50% that’s for sure. If they can’t accept that then let them go to Europe where they won’t be earning anywhere near what they are currently getting, the owners need to stand their ground and not give in whatsoever.

P.S – If Rodman thinks the players are asking too much then they definitely are!

by VinnyB on Oct 17, 2011 9:09 AM PDT reply actions

PS

Rodman is a suicidal alcoholic.

dinasour type of guys choir boys

by mittsabishy on Oct 17, 2011 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions

They are both full of it

I don’t believe that the owners are suffering, they have so much money they can afford to own a SPORTS TEAM! Secondly the players make more money on a rookie contract then a middle class american makes in 10-20 years! Both sides are so blind to the realities of the new paradox we live in I can’t decide who is less absurd. All I have to say is that if you don’t want to own a nba team then don’t, and if you feel you need more money as a player, then don’t spend so much on crap you don’t need. Americans don’t care about the plights of the rich we just want to watch the game.

by PortlandPhil on Oct 18, 2011 8:36 PM PDT reply actions