Billy Hunter, the executive director of the National Basketball Players Association, said Thursday that Portland Trail Blazers owner Paul Allen was responsible for delivering a message from the owners to the players that led to a breakdown in the negotiations.
Allen does not usually attend NBA meetings, opting to send team president Larry Miller instead.
-- Ben Golliver | benjamin.golliver@gmail.com | Twitter
7 months ago
Ben Golliver
120 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
I watched the statement earlier
I was mesmerized by the players behind him swaying back and forth. I guess their legs were falling asleep or they were antsy to get out of there or bored. But at a few points they were all in unison. Constant movement like a metronome
The Department of Redundancy Department is hiring, maybe I should apply myself.
Athletes do it unconsciously
It keeps their circulation flowing and their legs somewhat limber. When you’re used to going all out many hours a day your body gets in a habit of readiness and that’s part of it.
They're called "Hummingbirds".
///
((())) llbdll
///
ed: bumped to front page
by Oh. Em. Gee. on Oct 21, 2011 2:42 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
lol @ always sunny reference
Rip City Baby...People have no idea what is coming.
Follow my twitter www.twitter.com/PDXBlazersFTW, @PDXBlazersFTW. Lots of random Blazer Posts from links I find around the blogosphere.
Probably trying to give Brandon and Greg some more time to heal...
I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way.
Mark Twain
Read more: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/m/mark_twain_4.html#ixzz1IE4sPu16
by Tyler Durrden on Oct 20, 2011 7:43 PM PDT via mobile reply actions 1 recs
That's the way I look at it
Unless PA uses the amnesty clause on BRoy, then we’re just letting Brandon “age” his contract :-)
I am not giving up on Greg or Brandon.
#52
#7
I don't care one iota about BRI
what matters to me, as a fan, is to use this CBA as a mechanism to get real system changes in place: harshening the tax. losing exceptions for tax-paying teams. Ending sign and trades. Ending tradeability of Bird right’s in a contract year. All things that would level the playing field between small and big markets. If we get a “deal done” but it’s the same system with slightly modified revenue split, then we haven’t gotten anywhere.
to answer your question though – I think it’s fair.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform."
Exactly.
There are some real issues with the current system. Take as much time as is needed to work them out and have the sport much healthier for it.
Yeah this
I’d give the year and even two if some things could be fixed. Make it better and I’ll be back as soon as games start again.
I still think you're underestimating the damage that could occur by ending tradability of Bird rights ...
in a contract year. A guy like Armon Johnson, who’s set to have Early Bird rights after this season, could invoke a no-trade clause and hold up a blockbuster deal.
This upcoming season, other Trail Blazers who’d have automatic no-trade clauses under your proposal are Marcus Camby (Full Bird), Nicolas Batum (Full Bird), and Raymond Felton (Early Bird).
Even Chris Johnson (Early Bird) and Earl Barron (Early Bird) would count, although they could have their non-guaranteed contracts waived by the season’s start.
Last season, the only Trail Blazer who had a no-trade clause was Patty Mills. That was due to this rule:
“Without the player’s consent when the player is playing under a one-year contract (excluding any option year) and will have Larry Bird or Early Bird rights at the end of the season. This includes first round draft picks following their fourth (option) season, who accept their team’s qualifying offer for their fifth season. When the player consents to such a trade, the team loses its Larry Bird/Early Bird rights, and the player is considered a Non-Bird free agent. Note: when there is an option year involved, they can get around this regulation by invoking the option prior to the trade.”
http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q88
The more I think about it, the more resolute I am in my belief that screwing around with Bird rights is an ill-conceived idea. It’d have a bundle of negative ramifications.
Your proposal would possibly hamstring the Trail Blazers trade options, as well as those of many other teams throughout the NBA.
"I Am Mine"
i haven't made any specific proposal
my goal is to curtail the ability of players to force their current team to trade them to a hand-picked team for less than market value by making public announcements about their intention of only resigning in those cities, thus scuttling their trade value.
I don’t care how exactly we get there. i am ok with it only applying to full bird and not early bird, so that helps. Im also ok with their being some sort of minimum current salary threshold before the rule applies (since this is really only going to apply to true superstars who are making near-max money).
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform."
What about star players on their rookie deals who don't make "near-max money" or more?
This upcoming season, Kevin Love fits that description. Not that Love would demand a trade out of Minnesota this year, but theoretically he, unlike Dwight Howard, could skirt by that loophole.
What about aging, overpaid players with an expiring contract who now might prevent a team from moving them for an upgrade. This upcoming season, Chauncey Billups, Antawn Jamison, Chris Kaman, and Portland’s own Marcus Camby all fit that bill with eight-figure salaries.
"I Am Mine"
like I said, I have a goal in mind
I’m not married to a specific way to get there.
in your first case, Love will be restricted and can be retained under mechanisms used for RFAs.
in your second case, those players are not going to need the bird exception to get resigned to a smaller salary the next year. we have the “up to 125%” of your previous salary" rule for them.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform."
I think players need to have some chance to get away from their team too, even big stars
Otherwise you are stuck for your career with whatever team the magic Sorting Hat aka the lottery balls assign to you. One moment you imagine yourself throwing alley-oops to another star on a young contending team, the next you are on your way to the Wizards or Wolves just because some ball bounced the wrong way (just as an example for Wall or Rubio who looked less than thrilled recently. Maybe in the end they are as happy as Durant is in OKC. Maybe not).
I agree that it’s tedious if that is easiest to accomplish by complaining about your situation a year in advance of your upcoming free agency though. Some mechanism needs to be in place to give teams and players a fair chance to seek what’s best for them.
i agree
and they would still have plenty of ways – play out your contract and go sign with whatever team you want that also wants you.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform."
or if you desperately want to get traded
don’t sabotage your current team by pulling a ’Melo. let them get fair value for you, then go where you want when your contract runs outs.
This also has the benefit of making trades actually about talent and risk, and good team/cap managements.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform."
It's a crock of crap
The owners are BSing their way through this process, poor mouthing but offering not the slightest evidence. There isn’t a team in the league worth less than what the current owner paid. It’s a joke.
What makes 50-50 an outrage is that it was 57 in the last contract. The players are GIVING them four points that they shouldn’t even have to, and still that doesn’t satisfy the fatcats.
I’m embarrassed to be a Blazer fan. Allen is being a penus.
I only take my petz to Bunfeeld Pet Oz-pitzal!
the last contract is irrelevant
it ended. it’s not the baseline. much has changed.
team worth does’t mean much if you spent triple your teams value just trying to run it for the past 20 years.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform."
The 76ers were just sold the other day...
If things are as bad as owners are trying to say, why would anyone buy a team? I just don’t believe the owners are being genuine about losses. They didn’t get their fortunes by being idiots. The kind of cuts they are expecting players to make seem unreasonable to me. And yes, I think you have to use the last contract as at least some kind of reference for what is equitable. What other measuring stick do they have?
PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04
by tssbro on Oct 20, 2011 9:13 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Rec
Great question. I’m not taking the players side. But assuming the owners’ accounting is accurate, does anyone have an answer for why someone would spend hundreds of millions of dollars to buy a team that will most likely bleed money?
The Pistons were bought by a guy specializing in leveraged buyouts of undervalued non-core assets from other companies
I wonder if he still sees additional cost-cutting or revenue-increasing options, or if it’s really purely a hobby for him. Somewhat doubt that.
Very possible it was only sold due to his knowledge of the owners' minimum requirements in a new deal.
Which would add an interesting wrinkle to negotiations.
it's the ONLY thing
it’s not irrelevant, it’s the only piece of real empiric data out there. The owners refuse to give their poormouthing credibility by opening their books, and there’s a reason for it. Absent that, what possible reason is there for owners to pick up 10 points of revenue?
“We want you to take 10 points less this time.”
“Why? We just had a great year.”
“We’re losing money.”
“Really? Show us.”
“Uh…we can’t. But it’s true, really.”
Let’s not be naive here…
I only take my petz to Bunfeeld Pet Oz-pitzal!
The players have agreed that more than half of the teams are losing money
The players’ salaries were arguably a bubble. It’s getting popped, and the old bubble values can’t be used as a baseline. They’re trying to create a new baseline, and that’s where the problem is.
books were opened long ago
why are people still saying that? it’s just not true.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform." -Dave
by douglast on Oct 21, 2011 7:19 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
So since my house use to be worth 450,000
but current market says its worth about 320,000, can I still sell that at 450,000 cause thats what the contract said and peek market value? Everyone in America is taking pay cuts. I work for a major bank and company wide we took a 10% pay cut when the market crashed. Are these guys supposed to be immune to the market place?
by AR-15 on Oct 20, 2011 8:20 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Interesting article
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/132133518.html
The most interesting to me is the number of investors waiting to buy teams. Something doesn’t add up with the pill the owners are trying to get the players to swallow.
PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04
but sale price is not what they're talking about
A sales price is funny money until an entity is sold. P&L Reports and Cash Flow statements are what owners are after.
I think this is why CBAs have term limits.
I am not giving up on Greg or Brandon.
#52
#7
The hornets are for sale and no one is buying
That tells me that people are not lining up to buy teams
they are lining up to buy teams in teh right markets
Brooklyn and the Bay area to name two. Both have large geographical, demographical, and profile advantages over the majority of NBA markets.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform." -Dave
Bob Johnson bought the Bobcats for $300 million in 2003
and sold them for somewhere between $175 and $275 million in 2010.
In general, I’d say that team values are up, but not at the rate that they were increasing in the 80s and 90s. For example, the Sixers were purchased in 1981 for $12 million, for $125 million in 1996 and for $280 million last week.
I wonder how valuations of the teams line up with inflation?
I am not giving up on Greg or Brandon.
#52
#7
Tyler gave me this link in the Publicly Owned Teams discussion
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2010/32/basketball-valuations-11_Portland-Trail-Blazers_324837.html
It doesn’t have the most recent team valuations, nor does it have inflation rates for comparison. But if you figure that inflation is typically 2-4% annualized, then you can get an idea. I’d say there’s quite a bit of variation among team value growth rates, but I haven’t actually done a statistical comparison.
Phase 1: Collect underpants
Phase 2: ???
Phase 3: Profit!
Sale price isn't that important
The NBA is a business. As a business owner you need to make a profit to keep the doors open. Your boss doesn’t break even ever year so he can sell his business in 60 years when he can finally retire.
why?
Allen is the owner, and he could lose money year after year and it wouldn’t even register. Same with almost every owner. Yearly operating profits don’t affect the investment, and in fact subsidize profits in other ventures.
Also, I’m telling you there are accounting scams going on, just like in baseball when they tried to poormouth. Yankees doing things like counting transfers between team and wholly-owned broadcast company as actual money gained or lost on one side. Paul looks poorer, Peter looks richer. It’s a shell game to hide revenues and maximize expenses on paper. It IS a business. Look around at how other businesses work the system.
I only take my petz to Bunfeeld Pet Oz-pitzal!
Allen is the owner, and he could lose money year after year and it wouldn’t even register. Same with almost every owner.
Any reason the players can’t take less money so that everyone is profitable.
Also, I’m telling you there are accounting scams going on, just like in baseball when they tried to poormouth.
This isn’t a provable concept, and nobody has seen any sign this is the case so far. Most of the smaller market teams are struggling to be profitable, and seem to be failing.
I’m not sure why the onus is only on the owners. “They can afford to lose money” is never an answer, when there is a labor negotiation going on. Those kind of issues have a habit of getting corrected.
Sale price and the fact that others are lining up to buy in...
Are an indication to me that something is not adding up in what the owners are claiming. It sounds like players are making concessions and owners want more. If you owned a business that lost money for 30 years and sold it for 100 times what you paid for it, would you be surprised if your employees (the people who you are asking to take pay cuts to keep the business going) doubted that you lost money during that 30 years?
PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04
See the Bobcats and hornets
Bobcats just sold for less than the owner bought them for. Hornets couldn’t find a buyer and so the NBA now owns them.
There is no one lining up to buy teams….
you are both right
people will line up to buy teams in certain markets – brooklyn and the Bay area to name two recent examples.
people clearly aren’t lining up to buy teams in ~20+ NBA markets
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform." -Dave
Everyone in America is taking pay cuts
EXCEPT the rich, who have never been richer. Screw the owners, say I, just on principle. I hope they rot.
/s
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Oct 20, 2011 10:30 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
If it wasn't for Allen you wouldn't be able to be a Blazer fan. The team would have been long gone!
"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Oct 20, 2011 9:03 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
If finance % is figured into BRI, it's a bigger dip in players' share.
50/50 is one thing. Configuring BRI with finance % another. The two together are likely not acceptable at this point. Obviously, the two sides are at an impasse.
/s
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Oct 20, 2011 8:35 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't blame Paul
And clearly he was there on behalf of a significant portion of owners. The ones who have to bleed money to try and compete, and who need both BRI reductions AND serious systematic changes.
I hope they don’t cave to the big market guys. Then we as fans have gained nothing.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform."
I think he was the guy to deliver the message though
As the richest owner in the NBA, but also an owner of a small market team, I’m glad he delivered the message. He obviously doesn’t care a ton about losing money, he is pretty willing to do it in order to have a chance at a championship, but I think it sends a message that the one small market owner you would expect to not really care about BRI splits, is the one delivering the blow.
indeed it does
and it doesn’t hurt that he honestly doesn’t seem to care what people think about him.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform."
Also he is known for avoiding confrontation
I think it says a lot about him as a person to be that guy.
and one more thing we should all think about
Paul Allen isn’t going to be our owner forever. Without Allen in the current NBA system we become Milwaukee or Charlotte or New Orleans or some other team that can’t and won’t bleed money. We become the team trading away talented players for ending contracts and risky draft picks.
If Paul Allen becomes a catalyst that helps create a more level playing field in the NBA, then long-term, that is a VERY good thing for Portland Trail Blazer fans.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform."
by douglast on Oct 20, 2011 8:05 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
They're "bleeding money"
like a lizard loses his tail—looks bad now, but they’ll get it back. It’s just like baseball—sham accounting. Nobody pays to see owners own.
I only take my petz to Bunfeeld Pet Oz-pitzal!
by former insider accounts
who have ZERO reason to lie – Paul Allen has LOST over a billion dollars on the PTB.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform."
He's not a very smart businessman.
He’s not been very good at anything he does ever since that first Microsoft stock sale.
Give him a chance, and he’ll caulk up whatever he touches.
dinasour type of guys choir boys
of course
but that doesn’t diminish the point
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform."
Yes it does.
The owners want guaranteed profits for themselves no matter how bad they are their management. Name another entertainment enterprise where there is zero risk involved in investment, when it will come at the expense of the workers and the product.
dinasour type of guys choir boys
it seems entirely incongruous to me that people continually trot out the “owners want guaranteed profits” line to argue for players who already receive enormous guaranteed profits with ZERO financial investment.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform."
by douglast on Oct 20, 2011 9:25 PM PDT up reply actions 10 recs
Thought provoking entry,
…but upon thinking about it, I must disagree.
Perhaps the financial investment is minimal, but if one trains their whole life, gives up many of the fun things of childhood, and from a young age, deals with pressure or expecations the likes of which few of us can conceive, all the small chance of a career that can span about 10 years or so of income earning potential, I would have to say that these guys put a whole hellava lot of skin in the game!!!!
And they don’t just represent themselves. They represent all the people who supported their upbringing and all the guys who never made it or almost made it….
Except the players see the hypocrisy in the owners' claims.
Example: Golden State Warriors. 450 million dollars…
/s
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Oct 21, 2011 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions
do we really want to rehash the sale of team vs. yearly operating losses argument again?
hasn’t that been done to death already?
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform." -Dave
they don't really want "guaranteed profits"
They just want to make more then they spend, just like any other business. If they are making 43% BRI right now and losing money, they want to increase that number to a point where they are making money…..is that not understandable? Its not like they are saying we want a 50/50 split but if that doesn’t cover our losses we will actually only give you 40%.
team operations only?
Or are we including the arena in that? We don’t know, do we? So I don’t take that too seriously. 50 million dollars a year in operating losses? What were they in non-JailBlazers years?
I only take my petz to Bunfeeld Pet Oz-pitzal!
No body pays for
the NBA to have teams either. We pay a VERY small fraction as fans of what makes the NBA run. WIthout the owners, no one pays to watch pro basketball, because there would be no pro basketball.
this is an excellent point
"If I had a dime for every basket I made today, you'd still suck!" - from the book 'John Dies @ the End'
by sammymohawk on Oct 20, 2011 9:59 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Enough is a enough
All right then, Well I have reached my limit, I was a diehard nba fan, well no longer. I will never spend another dollar on the NBA , EVER. They are here as entertainment, something I think is lost on both parties. If I wanted to hear about the My way or the highway I,d switch to CSpan. If you want to destroy a decade of your efforts, congratulations it took y’all 4 months. The rich fighting with the richer, this is what is entertainment has devolved into well I’m going to find something better to do with my time and I suggest you do as well.
by shortandquick on Oct 20, 2011 8:42 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Id have to say given this comment
you were never a “diehard” NBA fan.
by AR-15 on Oct 20, 2011 8:47 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
That's not fair to say, as I wouldn't question the sincerity of shortandquick's fandom.
Still, I do agree that many people overreact when saying they’ll walk away from the NBA forever.
It’s more venting out of frustration than anything, although a rare few may follow through on their threats.
"I Am Mine"
Ben's lambasting of Paul Allen
http://eye-on-basketball.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22748484/32841752
While this is quite the rambling, eye-catching tirade against Paul, to me it just comes across mostly as a petty attack piece which does very little to tie any of the anti-allen rants into anything relevant about his role in the talks.
Saying he is completely uninformed because he has been sending Miller to the meeting up until today is just a ridiculous assertion – don’t you think he’s been getting constant reports from Miller? Of course he has. He’s not a dumb man – he knows all the stuff that’s been discussed up until this point.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform."
He is a dumb man.
You think he even listens to Larry when Larry says anything other than “yes sir, great idea sir.”?
dinasour type of guys choir boys
come on, now you are hurting your own argument.
saying Allen is a dumb man is just laughable. He may be many other things, but “dumb” (in the classic sense of the word) is not one of them.
You seem to be making entirely emotional arguments here.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform."
You appear to be awfully quick to defend Allen
How much more bumbling, incompetence do you need to see?
he has proven to be a very poor businessman
but he has also proven to be highly intelligent human being.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform."
Being highly intelligent (in a geeky way) is different than being a leader
He got kind of lucky knowing Bill Gates and he could probably write some mean code back in the day, but running a corporation or a complex sports organization that requires things like people skills, leadership, the ability to read people, etc. he’s an epic failure
we don't disagree.
all I said was that calling Allen “dumb” is just a ridiculous assertion. I made no counter-assertions that he is a leader, great businessman, or anything else.
I think you downplay Paul’s role in Microsoft’s founding significantly.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform."
Allen is more of the doctor/scientist type
And while people of that type may be highly intelligent, they are often just as conversely terrible at business practices.
Y'know, It'd be interesting to discover what is Paul Allen's personality type.
My guess is INTJ, which fits with you calling Allen a “scientist type” personality.
I, for what it’s worth, fall under the INTP label of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator.
"I Am Mine"
Fine
Paul Allen is above average at high concept math and 40 years ago was average at programming in C.
Unless he had a ghost writer, he is above average at spelling.
At basically all other skills involving human interaction he rates far below average for a man of his socio-economic background and upbringing.
dinasour type of guys choir boys
Yeah, in all fairness to Paul Allen, he likely has more interesting things to do than attend every meeting.
Unlike several NBA team owners, this isn’t the be-all/end-all of Allen’s existence. Within Allen’s Vulcan, Inc. enterprise, he’s got many toys to fund and enjoy.
Also, I take exception to Ben’s comment about Pete Carroll:
“[Allen] passes his time, including on Thursday morning, exchanging tweets about what rock song the Seattle Seahawks, his NFL franchise, should play at practice. Carroll plays along, of course, because he, like every Allen employee, knows his job depends on it”
Knowing the zany, upbeat nature of Carroll, he probably enjoys exchanging tweets with Allen. Although a lot of people may find it to be irritating — including myself — the chill, affable Carroll is sure to get a kick out of that kind of stuff. Hell, look no further than Carroll’s playful banter over Twitter with LeBron James for proof that he’s a fun-loving sort.
"I Am Mine"
So much agenda....
…that I find it hard to believe much of what I hear from either side. Last week, when the story was going around that Kevin Garnett had scuttled negotiations with his appearance at a meeting…I didn’t buy it. Now we have the story that Paul Allens appearance brought negotiations to a halt.
IMO this has GOT to be bigger than any one person or even a a handful of people. It simply cannot be about how David Stern didn’t like what he heard from Kevin Garnett or that Billy Hunter didn’t like what he heard (or didn’t hear) from Paul Allen.
I’m torn. As a fan, I like the information. But objectively I think it aided the process when the moratorium on post meeting press conferences was in place. Then right or wrong, you don’t get the finger pointing and blame game.
Basically…just keep working guys…keep working. The N.B.A. is bigger or should be bigger than David Stern, Billy Hunter, Kevin Garnett or even Paul Allen. I’m tired of hearing about how Person “A” scuttled talks….or progress isnt being made because of (choose a side).
I think on one level, what we have here is one of the strongest and most respected sports leagues in the world, populated with some of the best players in the world, full of teams owned by some of the richest men in the world. This is a big pie. Figure out how to slice it.
"Mother Nature started this fight, I think it's about time we ended it!"
"IMO this has GOT to be bigger than any one person or even a a handful of people."
That is very true. Without a doubt, this is a collective mishandling of a rocky situation. Let’s hope these guys can work together to right the ship before the season crashes into an iceberg and sinks, although I wouldn’t hold my breath.
"I Am Mine"
Absolutely
Garnett is one of 450 or so players, and Allen is one of 30 owners. And Hunter, Fischer and Stern represent both groups. The owners and their board of governors have had several years to decide where they wanted to go, and the players and their officers have had several years to look at it. This last round became acrimonious precisely because the players were essentially presented with the fact that they could not off-set the revenue split with an expectation of a much softer cap than the owners wanted, which appears to have been their approach. In sum, a trade off. Clearly, the owners have decided that both are essential to have better cost controls over salaries, which they believe is essential to enabling reasonably well run small market franchises to be profitable, or at least break even.
Obviously anyone and everyone, for that matter, can disagree with it.
This step, however one feels, is an essential one. The union and the players had to finally get this point, which is that the owners intend to have both, not one and a little of the other. This may not make for any rapid break-through, but at least the reality may start to settle in.
If and when they meet again, then we may see some form of something we may call progress precisely because of this. But I’ll bet it takes some time. This is a bitter pill for the players to finally accept and swallow, and it isn’t going to go down easy. For the last 20 months or so, they’ve likely felt that they could negotiate on both primary points, and the owners would be willing to trade. Now, they have only the fact that if they want to play, they will have to accept both points, and negotiate only the nuts and bolts, which are the side issues – even though they are importants.
Hunter’s anger, and Fischer’s as well, undoubtedly rests on the fact that they have not been able to accomplish anything of note to date to take to their members. And a lose-lose as opposed to a win-lose is a tough presentation to make for them.
I'm totally with Douglast...
unless some big time changes are made during this process, then the whole thing has been a huge waste of time. Better to lose the whole season then settle for more of the same!
"Just keep swimming, swimming, swimming. Just keep swimming, swimming, swimming."
Who's that tromping across my bedge?
brooklyn is hardly a small market though
PA is standing up for the small markets.
As I said before this week started - The Owners have made their best offer. 50-50 that's it.
Nothing changed this week. The League went through the mediation process so they can legally say they are bargaining in good faith (that matters in the legal steps to come). The players may have had their last chance to take that deal because obviously some of the NBA owners don’t even like 50-50.
Now, the Federal mediation process is over and the owners go back to just waiting for the players to break. I expect Stern to cancel 2 weeks or perhaps 4 weeks of games tomorrow or by Monday at the latest. The players are losing $82.4M per week, so that’s $165M so far. When Stern announces the next 2 weeks of cancellations it will be $330M lost. If instead he announces 4 more weeks of cancellations it will be a total so far of $494M lost for the players.
A couple of weeks ago the players could have settled for 50-50 but they wanted 53%. That difference was worth $800M TOTAL OVER 6 YEARS to them. Now if they get 53%, which they will never get, the difference is only worth $470M (if Stern cancels 2 more weeks) or only $306M TOTAL OVER 6 YEARS (if Stern cancels 4 more weeks). In another month, the players will have lost more THIS YEAR than they would have gained OVER 6 YEARS had they got the 53% originally. i.e. if the NBA gives them 53% in a few more weeks (which they will never do) they would only get as much as they would have agreeing to 50% originally.
What the players are doing is economic insanity. They will not get more than 50-50. The owners are prepared to dump the season (which costs the players more than $2B in salaries) and they still won’t give them more than 50-50.
So why is this happening? Because the rank and file players are stupid enough to follow the stars and the stars agents (who are the only ones that can ultimately gain from canceling games and canceling the season). If the stars and agents can get the players to decertify, then a couple dozen stars (and their agents) can negotiate unlimited contract deals with individual NBA clubs (no salary caps, no salary fixing, no drafts, etc.). That can make up for a years lost salary. But the rank and file players will then get paid a fraction of what they make now, not have guaranteed contracts, and have short careers as they are replaced/cut regularly for cheaper younger interchangeable average players.
"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Oct 20, 2011 10:08 PM PDT reply actions
i figured that onr of the main reasons
why the owners were so unhappy with the previous system was because it drove up the price for low-mid level players like outlaw.
as an aside, i would wholeheartedly support a system where a star makes > 30 mil, but the 6-12 guys on the roster who would generate very little income should make < 5mil.
PHILLY!
this is what it should be
lift the player max salary, and those stars would be a lot more spread out. but this is the problem the player have – certain groups of players have MUCH different interests. the stars would love that system, even though it means they won’t be grouping up together. but the mid-tier players would take a huge cut, and there are more of them in the league.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform."
yes, a rational analysys of the financial factors certainly support embracing
that 50/50 plan as soon as it was suggested. But, unfortunately, it seems a ‘pride/ego’ factor took precedence over rationality. It is an ugly glimpse into the minds of some of the participants who are focused on the worst of their adversaries, and determined to confront those demons, real or imagined. Often it is best to give someone the benefit of the doubt, and treat them with respect, rather than contempt. You may find that people respond to you as you expect them to. Unfortunately, this conflict seems to be on a deteriorating track.
Wake me when the game is on.
Yes, very funny indeed. But I think Paul was speaking on behalf of the majority of the owners while
Garnett was foolishly turning down the best deal they would ever get based solely on his own ego.
I wonder why/how Paul was chosen to deliver the owner’s message? The process that selected him to do it must have been fascinating.
"You're not too smart, are you? I like that in a man." - Matty Walker in Body Heat (1981)
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Oct 21, 2011 12:18 AM PDT up reply actions
yeah, would have loved to have been a fly on the wall in that room.
we have all these amazing espionage tools. someone needs to get a microphone into a BOG meeting. it can’t be that hard, can it? Are they sending in an electronics cleaning crew ahead of time?
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform."
I told you.
They should have booked counselor Troy as mediator. Paul would have TILTED and fallen over in a khaki, sweater-vested heap and the union would have gotten in their 53.234% deal, or whatever, and the galaxy would have been saved.
But nooooooo.
/s
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Oct 20, 2011 10:41 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
Tony Robbins for mediator
Everyone has a good cry, walks over hot coals, and we’re watching basketball on Christmas instead of gasp talking to our family.
If B Roy dunks next season
I’m gonna man-hug my dad.
/s
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Oct 20, 2011 10:52 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
it's Troi
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform."
yep
I’m well into season 6 of my TNG re-viewing since it’s debut on Netflix a month or so ago.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform." -Dave
I've been back through everything except classic star trek
I just finished most of DS9. I could really use some televised NBA basketball about now lol
Good for Allen!
Keep it locked out until the entire system is fixed!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Behind the Box Score, where the Boston Celtics are moving on to the conference finals
- NBA Playoffs Fan Fiction: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- The Indiana Pacers? Gone till November
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
