Berger: Union Attorney Says Negotiations Were Hijacked
On Thursday, we posted video of NBPA executive director Billy Hunter pointing the finger at Portland Trail Blazers owner Paul Allen for delivering a message that he felt ultimately led to the breakdown of NBA labor talks.
Ken Berger of CBSSports.com reports that head union lawyer Jeffrey Kessler also singled out Allen's role in the negotiations.
-------------------------------
Union attorney Jeffrey Kessler speculated that owners in the Board of Governors meetings Wednesday night and earlier Thursday had forced this take-it-or-leave it negotiating strategy on Silver, Holt and the rest of the labor relations committee. I don't have time for conspiracy theories at a time like this, although Kessler made a compelling -- if incendiary -- case, even implying that the strategy was somehow related to Stern's absence.
"This meeting was hijacked," Kessler said. "Something happened in that Board of Governors meeting. We were making progress. They came back, they came without the commissioner. They came with Paul Allen. We were told Paul Allen was here to express the views of the other members of the Board of Governors. And that view was, 'Our way or the highway.' That's what we were told. We were shocked. We went in there trying to negotiate, and they came in and they said, 'You either accept 50-50, or we're done, and we won't discuss anything else.' "
-------------------------------
NBA deputy commissioner Adam Silver said commissioner David Stern did not attend meetings on Thursday because he had the flu.
Dave offered his take on Allen's role in all of this.
-- Ben Golliver | benjamin.golliver@gmail.com | Twitter
7 months ago
Ben Golliver
62 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Nothing slaps a fanbase in the face
like walking away from progress with no further meetings scheduled at this stage of the game. Freaking children…so college basketball it is then.
"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 21, 2011 9:48 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
Too many owners are spoiled and mean-spirited.
They obviously aren’t the 99%. This whole thing reminds me of the Star Trek episode where the crew was kidnapped by a supernatural spoiled child and was close to killing them off until his mother arrived and saved the day.
In this case, I doubt whether any of the owners have the maturity to make a fair deal. Paul Allen has done nothing to make me think he is nothing more than a spoiled child that never had to grow up. Almost all of the idiotic choices he has done can be analyzed as a very immature person using his power unfairly.
It is no wonder that they can’t find anyone to come here and be the GM. Why would you want to work for a spoiled child that continues to live in never-never land?
Speaking of spoiled children,
Any reason the players can’t make a little less, so both sides have a chance to be profitable yearly? Or is it only the players who should be making money while owners take losses to make it happen?
[Accusations of spoiled children and maturity issues can cut both ways in a negotiation like this. This lockout is a two-sided problem, not just an owner issue]
by Timmay! on Oct 21, 2011 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
The players are supporting more than just themselves
Yes they make big money. But they often support their extended family and give back to their community. Sure many of the players are immature – they’re mostly kids. But this issue is not about the players being greedy, it’s about the owners trying to screw them because they can’t control their impulses to make bad deals.
Owners pay out regardless of the deal
They were destined to pay out 57% last season whether Kevin Love made 7 million or 20 million. PA could’ve paid Rudy Fernandez a max contract or LMA $5 bux a year and owners would still have to pay out 57%.
When the gap between the BRI number and reality gets too high players will have an easier time getting artificially high contracts.
Thats not their responsibility
And yes, its about greed, not…“Jeez fans, we would love to go 50/50 with the owners; HECK! We’d go 40/60!, buuuuuuuuuut, unfortunately we have to support all the bastard children and crummy neighborhoods we grew up in. Sorry.”
Making bad deals. That argument holds up if its just one owner allowing bad contracts. But its known, if you want a player, you probably have to overpay to get them, because making a legitimate, talent-based, true market value offer will only mean you get outbid by another management team desperate enough to offer more.
if sorry, but this is such a laughable arugument
they deserve more because they support family/friend freeloaders and give to charity?
And don’t you think owners likely do both those things as well?
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform." -Dave
obviously you know nothing about Mr Allen.
He gives over $30 million a year in grants. He has donated over $25 million to WSU and $18 million to UW. He has started numerous medical projects and gives others huge donations; such as studies for spinal cord injuries, eye care, etc… 68% of his donations stay in the NW as well helping local businesses. I guess giving away nearly a billion dollars doesn’t help the community.
/////
((o))
///// #20 Always remembered.
by Dep H on Oct 21, 2011 12:42 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Yes
follow the money and you will get the clearest picture of what’s going on here ……
the NBA and owners create the platform and the players are perfectly willing to take advantage of their talents to exploit themselves beyond reason. The atmosphere is perfect for eventually creating a point of no return..
The viability of the NBA is at stake here and a player concession is likely the only way out for the smaller market teams. Sadly the only viable solution (otherwise) is to disband the league and possibly create a tiered one, based on market size/player salary.
It’s really simple economics.(as we have found out with the fragile economic situation the country is now in) The small market cities are approaching the point of no return (many are in it already)
The marque players are not about to let the lesser talented players in their world and have been exploiting both owners and fans much more aggressively in the last several years. It’s sad to see such selfishness, greed, and power ruin such a great sport.
Up and running.........and almost defending.
Dear NBA fans,
Love,
“NBA Cares”
/s
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Oct 21, 2011 10:16 AM PDT reply actions 4 recs
Damn they send in the rich guy with that message.
If he (Allen) becomes the face of the lockout, we may be screwed when this is finally over. Our own players possibly may resent Allen and want off of his tea., Free agents and their agents Certainly may want to avoid Portland in the future. If only he would have stayed hidden behind the scenes.
screw them all
anyone putting blame on one side over the other is crazy…
when players 9-15 on an nba bench average between 2-4 million dollars a year. No way do I feel sorry for these players. It’s about time owners put their foot down. These owners are in the position they are in because they worked to get where they are. Most of them run these teams as hobbies, most aren’t even making any money from all accounts I’ve seen. Like any hobby you need to still remember its just a hobby. You don’t go out and blow your morgage on a box of common baseball cards do you? Well just continuing to give these players more and more money each year, while then needing to raise the cost of admission/concessions etc. Isn’t the answer.
The league needs a cap, let each team do it’s best to create a winning franchise with an equal share of the pie. This keeps going and we’ll have 5-6 ‘BIG THREE’S" and the games will become as predictable as playing NBA JAM with Jordan and Pippen.
If the owners are proposing 50/50.
take it and quit bitching. I already gave up my season tickets after 4 years. Listening to all these rich players talking about how they will form another league… Or the stars going off to play for big money in Europe or Asia, while all the time telling those guys not good enough or big named enough to make that move to hold strong… solidarity. It makes me laugh. They are telling the guys not making the 10’s of Millions to hold strong, while cashing paychecks of their own on money in the same sport.
Makes you wonder if those involved in the Centralia Massacre November 11, 1919. would be rolling over in their graves.
Unions were created to protect hard working men and women, fighting for the 40 hour work week…. not protecting Millionaires squabbling over percentage points!
I struggle sitting on my hands... don't you?
by RoysBlazers on Oct 21, 2011 10:22 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Didn't the players work hard to get where THEY are?
These owners are in the position they are in because they worked to get where they are.
Billionaires STAY in the position they’re in by bribing public officials, not just by hard work. The inequity of the bailouts, in my opinion, is far worse than any underachieving NBA player’s guaranteed contract.
/s
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Oct 21, 2011 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions
To quote Ken Berger, " I'm out of optimism ".....
…. I’m not saying this is a good route in this case, but sometimes, after negotiations drag on, someone needs to say, " look, I am done with negotiating. Either accept this, or don’t."
Which is what I think it turned out to be.
How close, or how far to a deal actually being done depends on who you talk to on which day it happens to be..
I always preferred NBA over NCAA. I haven’t watched college really since the early 80’ s, With Kelly Tripuka of Notre Dame for example. I’ve just preferred the rules, such as 4 quarters, shot clock, and home team The Portland Trail Blazers..
But now, I think for me, I will decline this deal and watch the NCAA..
Thanks a lot for quarreling over a few percentage points. I know it amounts to a lot of money, but for it to amount to a lot of money there is a hell of a lot more above and beyond this.. They, both sides, forget the big picture. " Us " the fans…
See ya. Let me know when you are done fighting. I will not concern myself anymore with this topic..
Question Norsktroll....
Does this mean the players are going to pee on the carpet?
Well, who pooped in the hallway?
The quotes in this article from Kessler are his interpretation of what Allen might have said. They are an attempt to manipulate public opinion. Aren’t we all a little tired of that, being manipulated? Are we going to continue to allow it to work? Others can get all hot a bothered and say ’ see the owners are jerks’, but I’m going to deride these kind of tactics that just make the whole thing ugly. I would encourage all of us to not be manipulated by someone trying to mis-characterize the other side as if they know what they’re thinking. All these comments mean is that the players are going take the position of the good guys and these problems aren’t their fault. Sickening.
by signal_lost on Oct 21, 2011 10:38 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
There are no 'good' guys.
I don’t think anyone on BEdge really believes this is an issue of ‘good’ and ‘bad’. I, for one, would like the NBA to back up it’s “NBA Cares” slogan by negotiating these issues in good faith, not threats to kill the talks (Paul Allen) and personal threats against players’ livelihoods (“you havn’t suffered enough yet”). The fact is, the owners are making themselves look like jack-asses with those tactics. Keep it professional and keep working.
/s
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Oct 21, 2011 10:56 AM PDT up reply actions
if you know you can buy a car for $50,000
would you be willing to pay $53,000?
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform." -Dave
50k cars always cost 53k
after they trick it out with stupid modifications etc.
The difference here is the owners want the players to agree to a % BEFORE negotiating the rest of the contract. This doesn’t sound like a productive method of bargaining to me. It seems like the whole thing is dysfunctional—especially from the owners, who should be able to offer up a complete package to work on, not just a % split.
/s
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Oct 21, 2011 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions
i agree with you about the pre-condition issue
but I think where you, and many others, are getting confused here is in thinking that this is a negotiation. It clearly isn’t. the owners have a line in the sand on BOTH BRI and system issues – and they are going to get it eventually. From their perspective, they see little value in just giving some of that away if they don’t have to.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform." -Dave
Sure, fair enough.
In a way, we fans, and our undying loyalty, are the real mediator here. So long as we can be held hostage there really isn’t any reason for either side to budge. They’ll just play it out for another month, shake hands on 50/50, and put together a salvaged, crappy version of the NBA product. In that way I wish the players would just take the deal. I don’t think finance % should be configured into the BRI but I’m not privy to the current deal on the table…
/s
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Oct 21, 2011 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions
professional? jackasses?
i don’t think the owner’s have the market cornered on either. KG glaring down media and belittling them. Hunter and Fisher with the schoolyard “liar, liar, pants on fire” press conference.
This isn’t good vs. bad, player vs. owner or right vs. wrong. Its about leverage.
Fans of specific teams (and not just some general NBA fan – what is that BTW?) should be rooting for what’s in the fans best long-term interest. That isn’t a “quick deal with the owners’ caving” just to get basketball on the court by Christmas. If you are a Laker, Clipper, Heat, Bulls, or Celtics fans, by all means, push for the status quo with a slight tweak to BRI split.
But if you are a fan of teams not located in LA, Boston, Chicago, Miami, or New York, you SHOULD be hoping for an agreement on systems changes that improves the long-term ability for the other 24 teams to be able to compete without piling up 7+ figure yearly losses. The owners positions are MUCH more likely to push things in that direction than the players’
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform." -Dave
Competitive balance has NEVER been the issue driving these negotiations.
Neither has profit sharing. It’s the owners digging in on a % and seeing little reason to budge before the season is all but canceled is the primary force at work here. They don’t care about what fans think, obviously. That sounds pretty typical of a billionaire’s logic to me. They will lose though. You can only kick fans in the nards so many times before they discover competitive balance in your game is a farce and your players are brats and so are you.
Were this negotiation about competitive balance and helping out smaller market teams, they would be working over the entire contract, from top-to-bottom, with profit sharing models and cap models built in. Instead, the owners are simply holding fast to a % they feel is fair. The players are expected to agree to the % without knowing the rest of the terms? Does that sound like an organized ownership determined to find competitive balance? Of course not. They have leverage, and they’re bullying their way through this as they bully their ways through the rest of their business dealings.
/s
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Oct 21, 2011 11:47 AM PDT up reply actions
i think it's a component
not the main one, but it is a factor.
and the point remains – if the NBA just continue to shift more and more towards a model where the stars can all congregate and force their way onto the most desirable teams at the expense of the other 24, then it loses a ton of it’s appeal to fans of those other 24 teams.
There is no magic bullet to this, and I certainly don’t think I’m going to get everything I hope for on those fronts. But the owners clearly want system changes that will at least nudge things in that directions – and something is better than nothing.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform." -Dave
Well more free agency is also a natural product of less guaranteed deals.
KG’s deal with Minnesota looks pretty good right now to me. Durant getting locked up in OKC is great for the NBA, assuming competitive balance is an end goal. I question that, however. Does TNT want competitive balance? I’m guessing they want the big markets and stars to play each other.
In fact, I could make a case for Lebron and Wade being on the same team as good for the league. Bosh shouldn’t count. He’s not a superstar and never would have panned out as such anymore than Boozer is a superstar in Chicago.
/s
by Hipster Olympic Team! on Oct 21, 2011 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions
you are missing my point
as a FAN of a small market team – I don’t care what TNT wants, or ABC/ESPN, or anyone else. I don’t care what’s good for the league overall. I care about having a system that gives small markets teams the best chance possible, despite their obvious disadvantages.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform." -Dave
I completely agree
One of the biggest reasons the NFL is so successful is that Buffalo and KC and San Diego have the same ability to spend that Dallas and NE and like do. Obviously some teams are better than others, and some cities are more desirable than others, but the overall system isn’t automatically skewed in favor of Dallas.
We’ve been very lucky to have PA as the owner. His money and willingness to spend made Portland a de facto “big market team”, although still not a particularly attractive free agent hot spot. Whether he’s lost interest now and wants to sell soon or he wants to own the Blazers for the forseeable future, that will end at some point. In order for this team to exist in Portland in any meaningful way, we need a plan for the future that doesn’t rely on us having an owner with $18B or whatever AND one that doesn’t care what he spends.
If the owners and players don’t find a compromise that allows the small market teams to compete without having a sure-fire HOFer or three on their roster, then they should just fold all but about 6 or 8 teams and then all go to hell.
"I don't mean to sound bitter, cold, or cruel, but I am, so that's how it comes out."-Bill Hicks
by Linoleum Knife on Oct 21, 2011 2:34 PM PDT up reply actions
yeah this
The worst part about the NBA to me is that owners of small market teams have to practically shovel money into oblivion to compete. The only other way is to play lottery and hope to get lucky every 5 years or so.
Even tweaking the BRI split will help with profit/loss in these situations. In my mind, it’s already effecting competitive balance. Better profit sharing alone wouldn’t have really made much difference on this situation and I think it would set owners up with the wrong mentality as far as pushing to compete.
I don’t want 20 teams sitting on their hands pulling in young talent through the lottery and checks from profit sharing. I want as close to 30 teams as possible doing their best to compete because filling their arena = money in the owner’s pocket and money for the franchise/players.
"In fact, I could make a case for Lebron and Wade being on the same team as good for the league. "
Yeah, it’s good for the league from a money-making perspective. There’s no denying that.
"I Am Mine"
This is where I'm at
Earlier, I was more on the side of the players, but the longer it goes on and the more informed I get on the issue, the more I find myself on the owner’s side.
im on the side of the small-market fan
right now, that means I kind of have to side with the owner’s as well and hope they get major systems changes. I know 100% certain the players have NO interest in helping smaller market teams.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform." -Dave
As it turns out, the majority of the owners ARE small market teams.
I would think even the big-market teams would see the need to not contract the league much. The NBA would get boring fast if there were only 8 teams.
Isn't that what I'm talking about?
I"m with you all the way to “not threats to kill…” because you’re characterizing someones actions even though we don’t know those to be his actions to make a point. Help me out, isn’t this a straw man argument? Paul Allen made personal threats? Said “You haven’t suffered enough yet”? I think that’s the kind of person everyone could look down on. But, I don’t think he actually said that and I don’t think he thinks that way.
I think we will all end up just having to be satisfied with what eventually happens because we’ll never know what’s going on inside the negotiating room. It’s like KP’s firing, we’ll never know why, or what was said. I think it’s damaging to all parties to try to manipulate the public in the way Kessler does in his quotes.
I apologize for my anger and frustration...
… So let me start over…
I saw a quote from someone that posted at CBS sports..
It went something like this:
" Maybe the owners should get scabs like the NFL did."
I like this, although I think it is a bit thuggish..
I remember it turned the whole league upside down. The great teams were horrible and vice versa. You didn’t know what to expect but those were some great games.Then after the season started, fans caught on, ticket prices were cheap and there was excitement.
The players then were quicker to come back, because I believe they realized that the owners owned and the players played and came to the realization that others were willing to take their jobs at, what, less than 25% of their salary?
The players came back and suddenly were appreciative of what they got.
The best thing, besides the games, was that many scabs proved they could hang with the big boys and actually stuck with many teams.
I believe that even before the strike ended, some players even crossed the picket lines and played anyway.
What do you guys think?
Here is a link to a recap of the nfl scab season....
http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/82262
Ask yourself, " what if this happened in the nba"?
The players ultimately won in court though, and got a pretty favorable CBA compared to the then status-quo. So the scabs provided immediate leverage, but it wasn’t a panacea and it didn’t totally give the owners the upper hand.
i keep dancing on my own.
mmm
It seems like the people that are on the labor relations leadership on both sides are quite a bit more willing to negotiate than the rank and file. Once the rank and file comes into it (KG, PA), that’s when it appears to get messy.
i keep dancing on my own.
lol, I like that PA can be called a villain or even the owners for trying to get a 50/50 split.
I still think the players should only be getting like 40%.
pretty much
The players are asking for more than 50%, but the owners still have to pay all operating expenses out of their share…
Even though I have argued that the owners are confounding the issues by not being completely straight up with BRI and revenues (they actually don’t lose money out of pocket, as a league), I really don’t believe the players deserve than 50% – and should consider themselves fortunate for receiving that amount…
Law of Logical Argument
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
by blacknoiseNW on Oct 21, 2011 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't care how much any of them make.
I do know that most of us fans are wallowing in ignorance when it comes to the issues being negotiated. Most teams are losing money, but we also know that the definition of “losing money” can be jerked around a lot with creative accounting and the owners are savvy enough to have the best accountants around. We also know that teams have recently sold for crazy sums of money when you consider the buyer is buying a business that is losing money and has a “broken economic model”. I don’t think any of us fans are in a position to say 57% or 53% or 50% or 40% is the right number. We just don’t know.
I do know this much: The big market teams like the Lakers, Knicks and Bulls need the small market teams in order to make their money. The small market teams do not have the option of moving to L.A. or N.Y. and competing fairly in that market like other businesses (can you imagine 10 teams in L.A.?). Heavy revenue sharing is a must.
I also know guaranteed contracts cripple a team. Sure there are great players who will work hard regardless of the guarantee, and there are players who only play to their potential in contract years.
And as far as I can tell neither of these two issues are seriously being discussed, though they are joking around some on the topic of revenue sharing.
What percentage the players get is just window dressing compared these things.
by LaughingJon on Oct 21, 2011 12:00 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
interesting point
it would be difficult for the players to argue that they have “earned” all the money they have been paid…
Yeah, the owners signed some dumb contracts – but I can guarantee that the owners anticipated a return on investment. Players have no risk – but want more than 50% of the reward (for which they have very very few expenses, relative to owner operating expenses)…
Law of Logical Argument
Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
by blacknoiseNW on Oct 21, 2011 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions
Stop wasting your energy on useless PR. Nobody cares.
"Ted Thompson's running Brett Favre out of Green Bay was the biggest mistake by a GM in the history of the league."
-Skip Bayless, November 2008
by The Cactus Leaguer on Oct 21, 2011 12:10 PM PDT reply actions
So....
It this like the coin being flipped, as to what KG remarked ??
One thing is clear to me
The two sides see the previous CBA completely differently.
Tim Donahue made a good analogy last week. To take his point and put it into a fictional negotiation, tell me if this sounds familiar:
OTIS SMITH: Jason, you were a big part of the Magic last year and we’d love to re-sign you
JASON RICHARDSON: I’d love to sign with you guys. What can you offer?
SMITH: How does 3 years and $18 million sound?
RICHARDSON: Wow. 3 years at $18 million a year? That’s great,
SMITH: No, Jason. I mean 3 years at $6 million a year. $18 million total.
RICHARDSON: That’s outrageous. I made over $14 million last year. Now, I’m willing to take a bit of a pay cut. I’d take 3 years at $12 million each.
SMITH: There’s no way we can do that. I know what you made last year, but honestly, Jason, we believe that you were overpaid last year.
RICHARDSON: We won 52 games last year. Attendance for Magic games was up 9%. We won games and you made money – how can you say that’s anything but success? That’s the very definition of win-win. There’s no way my contribution can be considered being overpaid by the amount you’re arguing. I’ve agreed to take a 15% pay cut – what else do you want.
SMITH: We can go as high as 3 years, $7 million a year. But no higher.
RICHARDSON: That’s ridiculous. You’re telling me that Turkoglu is 50% better than me? Because you want to pay him 50% more than me. I didn’t hear you complaining about my salary last year when I was the 3rd highest scorer on the team. It worked last year for both of us – why can’t we agree to something similar?
SMITH: Things are different now.
great scneario
in a nutshell:
The players view the previous CBA as the logical starting point/baseline in negotiating the new CBA.
The owners view the whole thing as a clean slate – let’s start from scratch.
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform." -Dave
why not just agree to 50/50 and move on?
I don’t get it but the NBA will be back sooner or later
Fan of Portland Trail Blazers, Denver Broncos, and Portland Timbers
by PortlandOrange on Oct 21, 2011 12:27 PM PDT reply actions
...or later
Players have put the line in the sand at 53% after their agents did the math. Probably 3% is their BRI share ;-)
i still think
that publicly making such a huge deal about 53% was a bad move for the players. Ultimately, they will get less than that. It’s practically certain. So now they have to come up with a way to spin it, all because they unnecessarily drew a hard line over a specific number
"But if Ding Dongs and prime rib were the path to NBA pivot stardom we'd all be wearing the uniform." -Dave
right, but...
this quote by Kessler seems to indicate they’re going to play the public relations game and see where that get’s them.
good luck with that
16 teams in the NBA D league. Switch the games to the arenas less any NBA contracted players and give the fans something roughly like basketball while the negotiations roll on.
Maybe some NCAA games in the arenas as well.
I'd watch the D League right now.
The players are becoming less important to me. I just wanna watch a local team that I can root for play some ball.
by hoodieNation on Oct 22, 2011 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions
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
