First 2 Weeks of the NBA Season Officially Cancelled - Page 3
Old 10-11-2011, 03:24 PM   #41 (permalink)
enjoying having the keys to destiny

perusing ancient database
 
ClingRap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The far side of the Universe.
Posts: 1,954
Representing:
Default

I'm not at all shocked or surprised at the notion that they're doing this for the future. It's kind of a moot point though. The "I want it now" consumptive attitude, combined with how fickle the players and the owners look after pretty much shitting on one of the better seasons in recent memory will hurt this league for a long time.
This discussion belongs on a business board, not a basketball one. I've said this before, but the business side is what this league is all about. It pushes a pretty shitty product in comparison to year's past (watching all these retro games on RapsTV recently has shown me that). Maybe they can bring in jeremy Piven to kick-start our hearts?!?!?
The Tim Donaghy thing hasn't helped the league's reputation in this regard, and its become more about policing the game and its revenue streams, instead of playing it for the reasons why it was created in the first place.
I've always hated it when Colangelo says what he's all about is putting the best possible product on the floor. But that's the logic of suits, agents, advertisers, networks, and unfortunately, now the players, all subscribe to. The logic of showing the fans a good time is insulting to me.
Money, Power, Respect. Fans take it down the throat.
Sorry for the rambling. I've just got a lot going through my head.
ClingRap is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 03:26 PM   #42 (permalink)
LX
synapse jelly

In the Paint


 
LX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 28,766
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Metallikid View Post
It's definitely the players; the owners already conceded on not having a hard cap, guaranteed contracts, the players' $160 million worth of withheld escrow money AND not rolling back the existing payrolls/contracts.
That's just a big list of stuff they threatened. The players didn't go forward with having Donald Sterling hunted down by mafia hit men, so I guess they're even. Well not really, since Sterling isn't worth much.

The only real movement from the status quo has come from the players, as has generally been the case for some time now.
LX is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 03:29 PM   #43 (permalink)
LX
synapse jelly

In the Paint


 
LX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 28,766
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClingRap View Post
Sorry for the rambling. I've just got a lot going through my head.
Liked the post. It sums up where my jumbled mind is at pretty nicely.
LX is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 03:48 PM   #44 (permalink)
Follow @raptorsforum on twitter

Senior Member

 
box92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,686
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tettays View Post
haha yea.....#stayunited ?! I bet even now some of the bottom players (and probably all rookies) just want to play and are willing to sign off on whatever that last offer was
Theres no way I stay United after seeing what Turkoglu got paid 2 years ago. Fuck that.
Ye give it a couple months, players will sign the current deal owners are offering, and still lose money for not signing it earlier
box92 is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 04:23 PM   #45 (permalink)
sticking to his guns... is stuck to his guns...

Senior Member

 
DanH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 4,773
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LX View Post
That's just a big list of stuff they threatened. The players didn't go forward with having Donald Sterling hunted down by mafia hit men, so I guess they're even. Well not really, since Sterling isn't worth much.

The only real movement from the status quo has come from the players, as has generally been the case for some time now.
Depends on the definition of status quo. Is the latest agreement the status quo, or an aberration there from? In 1995, the CBA did not dictate the BRI rate the players got, but gave the owners the ability to end the CBA if they exceeded 51.8% - meaning that under the existing situation, they did not. Over the next 15 years, the percentage (not the pay, driven by the revenue growth) increased to 58% by 1998 (where the owners terminated the CBA, causing the NBA lockout), 61% in 2001, and ballooning to 63% in 2009. 2009 was the first year that the withheld escrow was not enough to cover the overage given to the players above the 57% defined in the 2005 CBA - they received an additional 15 million above .

If you look at the vast majority of NBA history, 50% is a fairly standard and even generous rate. By that standard, 57% is ludicrous. The only reason it is accepted is because the owners lost the 1999 lockout, and only put in measures against further overspending in the 2005 lockout (which they also lost, mostly because the spending had increased so far above the 51% they desired as shown in the '95 CBA that even limiting spending to 57% was seen as 'greedy'). The owners also made the mistake in '05 of attacking the system rules - shortening contracts, reducing maximum raises, etc, not realizing that supply and demand of players would still drive prices up just as much - they should have conceded all of that if they could have gotten back even 1% of the BRI.
DanH is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 05:49 PM   #46 (permalink)
LX
synapse jelly

In the Paint


 
LX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 28,766
Representing:
Default

Yeah, I was a little loose with my words Dan. What I was thinking was that the players didn't require a lot of concessions from the owners. They have faced more and more restrictions over the years, and often threatened to fire Billy Hunter for giving in so easily on a number of issues. Yes the BRI went up, but the owners contributed to that right? Still, that would explain why Hunter gave up on everything else so easy, without a doubt. Ultimately that's the only status quo that gets counted for anything.
LX is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 11:25 PM   #47 (permalink)
is pounding the rock!

Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 242
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thriller92 View Post
The players are greedy idiots who dont seem to realize the offer is going to get worse not better from here on out. Its going to be hard for the NBA to recover from this. No other league has had 2 lockouts in the span of 12 years have they? Just when they were getting back fans and respectability they throw it all down the drain and people will now go back to trashing the league. On the flip side with the loss of fans the owners are going to hurt as well. Both sides are insane.
It's hard to say who is being greedy without knowing the exact conversations being taken place.

NBA players do make a lot, their superstars make a lot so maybe they are being greedy. But at the same time, if players did accept lower salaries, it's not like we're going to see ticket prices being lowered so it would just be owners making more profit than they already do.

And personally, I would rather see money in the pockets of players than owners.

But yeah this will hurt the league.

Last edited by Kobe>LeBron; 10-11-2011 at 11:27 PM.
Kobe>LeBron is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2011, 11:53 PM   #48 (permalink)
------------------------

Senior Member
 
XiaominWu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,429
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobe>LeBron View Post
It's hard to say who is being greedy without knowing the exact conversations being taken place.
short answer is...... everybody.
XiaominWu is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2011, 12:41 AM   #49 (permalink)
the gat'll killya quicker, when I'm drunk off the liquor

The Mara sisters are hot!
 
Bill Haverchuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 10,289
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thriller92 View Post
No other league has had 2 lockouts in the span of 12 years have they?
The NHL had a lockout in 94-95 and then again in 2004. However, that was not good for hockey.
Bill Haverchuck is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2011, 12:45 AM   #50 (permalink)
Nasty, right? I cocked that joint back and banged on him!

Lackey
 
Ammo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: The Mighty North Tundra
Posts: 3,652
Representing:
Raptors

Quote:
Originally Posted by box1992 View Post
Ye give it a couple months, players will sign the current deal owners are offering, and still lose money for not signing it earlier
Sometimes that works the opposite way where once they see that the work stoppage and stubborness has cost something, they try and save face and claw back by being even more stubborn.

If I already put $10,000 into a risky business venture, I am more likely to put in more money to try and make it work when it is failing. If I only put in $500 to start the business, if it starts failing, I might walk away without putting down a cent more.

In other words, if it goes too long it could turn into the whole season because how are you going to be able to tell the players that they lost pay for all those games and the benefit is nothing? Gotta keep trying to force the owners to give in once your each the point of no return.
Ammo is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2011, 01:50 AM   #51 (permalink)
Follow @raptorsforum on twitter

Senior Member

 
box92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,686
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ammo View Post
Sometimes that works the opposite way where once they see that the work stoppage and stubborness has cost something, they try and save face and claw back by being even more stubborn.

If I already put $10,000 into a risky business venture, I am more likely to put in more money to try and make it work when it is failing. If I only put in $500 to start the business, if it starts failing, I might walk away without putting down a cent more.

In other words, if it goes too long it could turn into the whole season because how are you going to be able to tell the players that they lost pay for all those games and the benefit is nothing? Gotta keep trying to force the owners to give in once your each the point of no return.
Nicely put, I agree with this, but i think if the superstars are running the show, the season is in trouble, but if the middle/lower class players step up, I think a season will happen
box92 is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2011, 08:56 AM   #52 (permalink)
Likes raw prospects with a great work ethic...

Senior Member
 
LKeet6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Liverpool (UK)
Posts: 2,010
Representing:
Default

good chat on here. I'm nowhere near as knowledgeable as you guys, who have been through lockouts before and have access to tv shows and media that i do not. So good to come on and learn some stuff.

my personal take is the same as most, that it's the players who by far need to shift the most and be realistic. The owners' changes are the ones that will benefit the league in the long-term, even if they are being greedy just like the players.

i'm so disappointed, coz last season was my 1st being able to watch all the raps games and i became obsessed with basketball straight away! Was so looking forward to watching the team continue to develop. hope we get half a season.

oh and on cricket, it's a great sport! Similar to baseball. Slow, repetitive, with bursts of excitement. You need to really know the game to enjoy it and know all the nuances.
LKeet6 is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2011, 09:22 AM   #53 (permalink)
sticking to his guns... is stuck to his guns...

Senior Member

 
DanH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 4,773
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ammo View Post
Sometimes that works the opposite way where once they see that the work stoppage and stubborness has cost something, they try and save face and claw back by being even more stubborn.

If I already put $10,000 into a risky business venture, I am more likely to put in more money to try and make it work when it is failing. If I only put in $500 to start the business, if it starts failing, I might walk away without putting down a cent more.

In other words, if it goes too long it could turn into the whole season because how are you going to be able to tell the players that they lost pay for all those games and the benefit is nothing? Gotta keep trying to force the owners to give in once your each the point of no return.
Absolutely - but which side has the ability to play that waiting game the longest? The NBA owners, who have billions in assets and millions in incomes in other ventures, or the NBA players, the vast majority of whom have very little savings (relative to their lifestyle) and are using up part of their career span not getting paid.

The owners have the entire agreement (and future agreements) to recoup any losses here. A huge chunk of players (especially the large middle and lower classes) have only a couple of years to reap the benefits of this agreement - and playing this waiting game just means they get older and less able to reap those benefits.

Remember, both sides see this lockout like you outlined above - they've both invested hundreds of millions already by canceling the first 2 weeks and preseason, and to walk away now for either side would be a loss. But who is more willing to keep increasing that investment as the cancellations pile up?
DanH is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2011, 10:48 AM   #54 (permalink)
sticking to his guns... is stuck to his guns...

Senior Member

 
DanH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 4,773
Representing:
Default

I've been looking at the history of CBA negotiations, and I've decided there are 3 things the owners care about.

1) A hard cap. The history of the BRI split is driven by the soft cap system. Every CBA agreement, spending has gone up as the various exceptions have been used more and more to gain a competitive edge. By establishing a hard and fast limit to spending (associated with BRI, so as revenue grows, so does spending, but proportionally), the owners can guarantee that the BRI split doesn't keep growing out of control. Of course, a stiff luxury tax like they have been discussing would work as well. But it has to be very stiff - no more than a couple of teams can spend over it or you'll see that BRI growth all over again.

2) A higher withheld escrow amount. This defines the overage the owners can spend. If they end up with a softer luxury tax system than they want, the only way to protect themselves from overspending above the BRI split is withholding escrow money. Right now they are limited to 8% of total player salaries. The salaries have exceeded that limit in each of the past 2 CBA agreements - in other words, when the soft cap system has forced (encouraged...) owners to spend to stay competitive, the salaries have ballooned beyond the BRI split by so much that the withheld escrow doesn't cover it, and the owners end up paying more (sometimes much more) than the established 57% (55% in the 99 agreement).

3) A lower BRI split - the split defines the amount the owners are guaranteed to pay to the players - if the owners underspend as they did this past year, they don't want to have to pay up to a huge BRI percentage. Also, the split defines the salary cap - if the split is lower, the hard (effectively) cap will be lower - that means a lower overspending limit as well. The owners always wanted a 50% split - but didn't have the leverage the past two negotiations to get it as their own spending (caused mostly by the system rules the players fought for, I would suggest) had increased the players' salaries.

So, I would be willing to bet that before we see another game played, we'll see an agreement that fits one of the first two points and the third - the third is already taken care of: at 53% the BRI is almost down to the level of '95, which the owners will take and run. The key is the other two - and especially the first one, in the long run, and I expect that is why the owners are standing pat on the 50-50 split - either they get it (yay for them) or they can use it as a bargaining chip to get the hard(ish) cap they really need.
DanH is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2011, 12:14 PM   #55 (permalink)
is.....

Tai-Pan
 
m5racer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,903
Representing:
Default

As much as I hate having no basketball, the lockout isn't bothering me too much. The raps suck ass, and this will allow us to further develop our young players and hopefully move towards building a winning team.
m5racer is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2011, 12:22 PM   #56 (permalink)
I believe in Masai!

giant steps

 
'trane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 16,700
Representing:
Default

how do you develop young players when they are not allowed to interact with the coaches and when they don't get any practice or playing time at the highest level?
'trane is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2011, 12:27 PM   #57 (permalink)
sticking to his guns... is stuck to his guns...

Senior Member

 
DanH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 4,773
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LX View Post
Yeah, I was a little loose with my words Dan. What I was thinking was that the players didn't require a lot of concessions from the owners. They have faced more and more restrictions over the years, and often threatened to fire Billy Hunter for giving in so easily on a number of issues. Yes the BRI went up, but the owners contributed to that right? Still, that would explain why Hunter gave up on everything else so easy, without a doubt. Ultimately that's the only status quo that gets counted for anything.
Whoa, hold on there. I missed this the last time through.

First, BRI went up because the system rules (which have actually been less and less restricting over time) encouraged the owners to spend more and more to be competitive, and drove the spending up above the established caps. Which is very, very good for the players.

The players have been winning more flexibility for decades.

Let's look back:

In 1970, the first CBA was put in place. The effects it had? It increased the minimum salaries the players received, and gave them a per diem.

In 1973, arbitration was introduced. This is generally a pro players action, though it can go both ways.

In 1976, free agency was introduced (a limited version, with team compensation) - this was pro player as well.

In 1980, no-trade clauses were eliminated - this was a pro-owner move.

In 1983, the salary cap was put in place. Pro-owner move. Bird rights were created, to allow players to still sign with their current teams over the cap - a small win back to the players. Still a net restriction on the players.

In 1988, unrestricted free agency was created. Pro players. Draft was reduced (not a big impact, as most late-rounders never played in the league).

In 1995, rookie scale contracts were put into place. Pro-owners.

In 1999, maximum salaries put into place. Pro-owners. Mid-level exception created (, pro-players. Luxury tax and escrow system created - pro-owners, but not player-restrictive.

In 2005, reductions in length of max contracts (7 years to 6 years), maximum raises (from 12.5% to 10.5%).

Every one of the last 3 CBA's has also increased the guaranteed amount due to the players.

So, in terms of restrictions placed on the players, they have been restricted to maximum salaries (a restriction that impacts only the top 5% of the league - and really just redistributes the money to the other players), had a salary cap put in place (I think we can agree this is unavoidable), and had the ridiculous terms on their max contracts and MLE's (which they won the previous CBA) reduced to the terms that exist now. Rookie scale contracts are certainly a restriction, but apply for only 4 years of the player's career, and if they have the potential to earn more than the value of their rookie contract, they'll be in the league much longer than that.

For every restriction placed on the players, there have been concessions from the owners that reduce restriction on players. Free agency, unrestricted free agency, mid-level, bi-annual, veteran, minimum salary exceptions, increased guaranteed money. Over the past couple decades, it has been a pretty even give and take in terms of system rules, and I think I showed above that the players have won the finance side by a landslide - mostly because the owners gave up so much in the system rules.
DanH is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2011, 12:52 PM   #58 (permalink)
is.....

Tai-Pan
 
m5racer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,903
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 'trane View Post
how do you develop young players when they are not allowed to interact with the coaches and when they don't get any practice or playing time at the highest level?
Practice. Playing in Europe. Practice. Although they cannot interact with coaches, these guys have a pretty good idea in regards to what they need to improve on, and can work on these things during the down time. I'm not saying it's ideal, but considering how much we suck, and given the fact that our latest rookie is playing in Europe this year, rather then playin on our team, it's not as bad as say....Boston, who has aging superstars on their team who arnt getting any younger, we are in not so bad a position

Question. Does this still count as a year on contracts, or are they basicly frozen until after the lockout ends (ie will Jose no hammy Calderon be one year closer to being a free age if the lockout were to last the entire season?)
m5racer is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright RaptorsForum.com 2005-2011

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24