So Who Do You Blame? (w/Poll)

by LaoTzu on Nov 26, 2011 12:44 AM PST

ESPN reports: "Owners dismayed by players asking for 51% BRI 2nite." Dismayed? The players have come down 6% from the last agreement which had them at 57% and they've agreed to real concessions on contract structure. What have the owners done? Moved 3% from their initial offer of 47%, proposing harsher conditions all along the line.

It's easy to blame the greedy millionaire players. But this story is more about greedy billionaires. The owners paid a premium to say they own an NBA team. Many bought into basketball high, floating huge loans with hefty payments on interest and principal that take big chunks out of their bottom lines. Then the owners doubled down with more poor business decisions.

Greedy for wins, they overpaid for players. Then they asked for limits on team salaries. To help control billionaires from over-spending, the players agreed to their proposal for a soft cap. Free market economics, right? If you are Lebron James, the market should set your worth. Turns out not. The owners also got an individual limit on player contracts of $17M per season.

But it seems the owners were still greedier for wins than for dollars, or at least that's what having so many teams paying luxury tax tells me. The teams not in luxury tax are lucky if they can remain competitive, and not being competitive in sports comes with steep losses on the other side of the ledger in franchise revenue. Playing the game the way the owners have, they've found a way to make the NBA a lose-lose proposition.

Now these billionaires -- the same men who dug these money pits -- want the players to basically guarantee them profitability! And the funny thing is that the teams ARE still profitable -- if you include the growth in the value of NBA franchises.* Or they were. Now that the owners locked out the players, the worth of an NBA team is plummeting. They have two ways out: squeeze the players into an ugly deal, and soon; or pull on their big boy pants and accept losses brought on by their own poor management decisions.

* [The growth in franchise value is not reflected in calculating BRI. Nor are the many tax advantages including double deduction amoratizing presumed losses in player worth, uncounted revenues for arenas, regional market synergies, etc., etc. No wonder teams refuse to show their full revenue pictures! They just want the players to believe they're losing money. Don't get me started.]

So here's your chance to clock in. Who do you blame?

Poll

Who Do You Blame?

Billionaire Owners

6 votes

Millionaire Players

8 votes

Stern and Co.

12 votes

Players' Union

6 votes

Players' Agents

11 votes

All the Lawyers

10 votes

53 votes | Poll has closed

Tweet Comment 10 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Hey dude, may want to look at the story on the front page.

by Timmay! on Nov 26, 2011 1:01 AM PST reply actions

I did.

I’ve wanted to take the time to write this article and offer readers a poll for some time. The league’s response to the players latest (and legitimate) offer simply fueled that fire.

Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM

by LaoTzu on Nov 26, 2011 1:04 AM PST up reply actions

If the players felt the NBA's offer was acceptable, we're probably no longer needing to place any blame.

by Timmay! on Nov 26, 2011 1:05 AM PST up reply actions

Even in times of peace and harmony, we can always blame agents and lawyers for something.

"I Am Mine"

by AK1984 on Nov 26, 2011 1:34 AM PST up reply actions

Hmmm. I really can't argue with that.

by Timmay! on Nov 26, 2011 1:35 AM PST up reply actions

W00t!

When I posted, all I saw was that the players offered 51% and the league took it as a joke.

Whatev. Just hoop up. Please!

Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM

by LaoTzu on Nov 26, 2011 2:22 AM PST up reply actions

Not that I am taking credit for kicking the season off...

but, heh, you never know.

Now all we need is the rest of the roster to get into "how can everybody help Nicco and Oden" mode. -- Oden Mad, Oden Smash! Sep 29, 2010 7:47 PM

by LaoTzu on Nov 26, 2011 2:23 AM PST up reply actions

Still counts; had sex.

by Oden Mad, Oden Smash! on Nov 26, 2011 9:12 AM PST via mobile up reply actions

I'd like the option to vote for more than one of the above!!!

by Natsthecat on Nov 27, 2011 1:41 PM PST reply actions

No vote here.

We have some good owners, some not so good, and some poor ones. We have a league with too many franchises for the talent pool, yet shrinking it would cost a lot more jobs than a CBA, so no one wants that. Then we have a lot of teams who don’t pay the luxury tax, and we have claims of profitability based upon what a franchise sells for – but no one knows the annual profit or loss of the franchise, so that the actual return cannot be calculated. It’s all just guesswork. And in any case, no one in business buys a business to break even or lose money on an annual basis due to the fact that they can eventually sell it and make some kind of a return. It may be basketball as practiced today, but it’s not business. We also like to condemn owners for paying some schmuck too much, but ignore the fact that we don’t seem to think the other 95% are paid too much, so we never talk about it. And then, we like to ignore the impact of money on buying talent, which drives up everyone’s cost of business – assuming they want to compete. In the end, the last CBA was absurd – which is why the other leagues moved to a 50/50 or so, which is more realistic. And no, picking up 7% or $4 billion or $280 million divided 30 ways isn’t going to guarantee profitability. After all, that’s one $9 million contract. If there were a hard CAP in combination with a 50/50, then yes, I’d say there would be more of a guarantee. As it is, it’s a very small movement given only LA, Chicago, New York and maybe Miami qualify for the bright lights and larger revenues from cable, whereas the other 26 are stuck with markets of 5 million or so or less – and that will never give you a large cable contract or any larger revenues. The guarantee, in the end, is the hard CAP, not the BRI split. Only if you lock down the spending on salaries and force everyone to comply, would you have cost control.

by ebenc on Nov 27, 2011 2:34 PM PST reply actions