Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 26

Thread: Stern on the changes that are coming

  1. #1

    Default Stern on the changes that are coming

    Hartford Courant
    By JOSEPH WHITE | AP Sports Writer
    11:02 AM EDT, March 10, 2009

    http://www.courant.com/sports/nation...,6821922.story


    WASHINGTON— Commissioner David Stern says the NBA and union might have to make "some adjustments" to the labor contract when it expires in two years, but he foresees no "doomsday scenario" for the league because of the current economic crisis.

    Minnesota Timberwolves coach Kevin McHale said recently the NBA had entered its own "Fannie Mae Freddie Mac era" of subprime loans" because of player salaries. He added that players will need to make substantial concessions at the bargaining table.

    -----
    I saw a brief note in the Star, and linked to the more complete article in the Hartford Courant.


    The most surprising thing here is David Falk (an agent) saying the league could "shut down for a year or two."



    .
    Last edited by Putnam; 03-11-2009 at 09:32 AM.
    And I won't be here to see the day
    It all dries up and blows away
    I'd hang around just to see
    But they never had much use for me
    In Levelland. (James McMurtry)

  2. #2
    Denim Chicken duke dynamite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Bloomington
    Posts
    13,373
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    I think the best way for the NBA to operate efficiently is for the players to re-negotiate contracts. I mean less money is better than no money.

  3. #3
    It is ka Thankee sai Major Cold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Garrett, IN
    Posts
    9,077
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    The thing is they won't get no money. They will play overseas.

  4. #4
    billbradley
    Guest

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    i'm going to say there will never be a season long lock out because the vast majority of the nba players, sad to say, live completely check to check and the players simply can't afford not working. only so many can go across the pond.

  5. #5
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    Quote Originally Posted by Major Cold View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The thing is they won't get no money. They will play overseas.
    Not everyone wants to leave their home country to move to the other side of the Atlantic.

    I'd also be surprised if they'd want to stay long term, or if those leagues want to pay all 300 of them similar pay to what they could get here in their home country (excluding those who aren't American, of course).

  6. #6
    Headband and Rec Specs rexnom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    8,751

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    If there is faceoff between the owners and the players about salaries, the players will buckle very quickly. Most owners are losing money this year on NBA teams. They won't mind shutting their teams down for a year to renegotiate salaries. Would the NBA really be hurt by an NFL-like arrangement?

  7. #7
    NaptownSeth is all feel Naptown_Seth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Downtown baby
    Posts
    12,618

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    I'll tell you one thing, seeing which owners aren't afraid to stop running a "major loss" business will help call the bluff on that part. If things are really so bad then getting a break from having to pay players and the cost of running a team could be very beneficial to teams in the red nearly every year.

    I'm with Rexnom...if the owners haven't been BSing us at least.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,436

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    Quote Originally Posted by rexnom View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Would the NBA really be hurt by an NFL-like arrangement?
    The NFL, with stuff like a hardcap and non-guaranteed deals? You would see more NFL like turnover from year to year, as players are just playing for their next contract more and more often. It would affect continuity and, eventually, quality of play.

    You'd see more guys headed to Europe for sure. The NFL doesn't have to worry about this probem. If the players don't like playing for the NFL, well, too bad....because they won't find any other league organizing their particular sport while paying them anything near that type of money anywhere else.

    I could also see more guys (particularly the big ticket guys) having a bigger preference to play in the big market because with smaller salaries from the league, they'd be looking to make some more scratch on endorsements.

    Also in the NFL mode (with hard cap and no Bird rights), the home team like Cleveland can't offer more money in free agency to keep one of their own guys (like Lebron for instance) than any other team in the league that has cap room (like the Knicks for instance).

    An NFL like collective bargaining agreement would be a huge victory for the likes of the Knicks, Lakers and most other big market teams. They would get all the superstars while paying them less money. It would be win-win for them.
    Last edited by d_c; 03-11-2009 at 06:53 PM.

  9. #9
    Rebound King Kstat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    27,929

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    well, on the contrary, almost no superstar would leave if the NBA had a "franchise tag."

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

  10. #10
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    What about a hybrid of the current NBA and NFL CBAs?

  11. #11

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    Quote Originally Posted by d_c View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

    An NFL like collective bargaining agreement would be a huge victory for the likes of the Knicks, Lakers and most other big market teams. They would get all the superstars while paying them less money. It would be win-win for them.
    IMO, the NFL system is far superior to the NBA. You would certainly see more player movement, but that is partly the point. In the NBA a single contract mistake can hamper a team for years. Especially when you get to the point you are significantly above the soft salary cap. In the NFL teams can recover from mistakes much more quickly. When the majority of trades are executed more for salary reasons than for actually improving the teams, you have a horrible system

    And the NFL system would pretty much guarentee Clevland would keep Lebron. The franchise tag wouldn't allow him to leave. IMO, he would be forced to sign a long term deal with Cleveland or be forced to play on a series of 1 year contract thanks to the tag. My guess is he'd look for the longer term deal.

  12. #12
    Member Swingman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Age
    33
    Posts
    726

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    who really cares if a few players go overseas? The overall talent may dip some but there's always players fighting to get into the league.

    I doubt you'll see any mass exodus of players that want to move halfway across the world from their family and everything they've known.

  13. #13
    Yeah, I'm a Pacers fan. MyFavMartin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    In the Washington DC area
    Posts
    4,302
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    Any player salary cuts I'd like to see on a sliding scale so theose making the league minimum may only take a fourth of the cut that the top earners would take (5%/20%, for example).

  14. #14
    Rebound King Kstat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    27,929

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    Quote Originally Posted by rm1369 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    IMO, the NFL system is far superior to the NBA. You would certainly see more player movement, but that is partly the point. In the NBA a single contract mistake can hamper a team for years. Especially when you get to the point you are significantly above the soft salary cap. In the NFL teams can recover from mistakes much more quickly. When the majority of trades are executed more for salary reasons than for actually improving the teams, you have a horrible system
    ....as opposed to the NFL, where the vast majority of player cuts are due to salary reasons...

    It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

    Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
    Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
    NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

  15. #15

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    Quote Originally Posted by Kstat View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    ....as opposed to the NFL, where the vast majority of player cuts are due to salary reasons...
    You mean when their production doesn't match their pay? I'll take it.

    I guess it's better to have teams in cap hell for years. That's got to be good for the league!

  16. #16

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    I would suggest that the economic downturn will also affect overseas markets so there is nowhere to go. The teams with big contracts on the books over the next few years will be hurt the most. There might be a mad dash to avoid players who command big salaries. That would be irony.

  17. #17
    Member Taterhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    1,288

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    Quote Originally Posted by d_c View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The NFL, with stuff like a hardcap and non-guaranteed deals? You would see more NFL like turnover from year to year, as players are just playing for their next contract more and more often. It would affect continuity and, eventually, quality of play.

    You'd see more guys headed to Europe for sure. The NFL doesn't have to worry about this probem. If the players don't like playing for the NFL, well, too bad....because they won't find any other league organizing their particular sport while paying them anything near that type of money anywhere else.

    I could also see more guys (particularly the big ticket guys) having a bigger preference to play in the big market because with smaller salaries from the league, they'd be looking to make some more scratch on endorsements.

    Also in the NFL mode (with hard cap and no Bird rights), the home team like Cleveland can't offer more money in free agency to keep one of their own guys (like Lebron for instance) than any other team in the league that has cap room (like the Knicks for instance).

    An NFL like collective bargaining agreement would be a huge victory for the likes of the Knicks, Lakers and most other big market teams. They would get all the superstars while paying them less money. It would be win-win for them.
    This is definitely the first time I've heard someone claim non guaranteed deals would be bad. I see your point, just strongly disagree.

    I disagree for a few reasons.

    1) It wouldn't benefit the larger markets because of the hard cap. That would cancel out their advantage in appeal to players. You can only sign so many guys under that cap. The larger markets don't have an advantage in the NFL. Actually the NBA's system already favors large markets more than the NFL does.

    2) It wouldn't affect quality of play. Teams would have more flexibility to make moves. Imagine if the Colts had to Harrison his 13 million this year. That means they would have not been able to keep Saturday or Hayden, and the team would've taken a step back. Actually if the Colts couldn't have cut people they would've probably never made it to the SB in the first place. This would improve the play.

    The Pacers could let go of a guy like Murphy and his albatross deal to land a better fit for them to improve their defense. And some team out there would be able to pick up Troy Murphy that is more in need of his abilities. Let's say we could let Troy walk, and then Orlando picked him up. Orlando would be a better team, and we would have the flexibility we need to continue to rebuild ours. It's a win win. Teams also wouldn't go through these long droughts of bad basketball. In the NFL you can go from the basement to the SB in a couple of years. In the NBA the same 4-5 organizations have won all the titles over the last 10-15 years. It would also take some pressure off of coaches. They would be able to assemble a team that fit their style.

    3) You might lose some mid level guys overseas, but the top guys wouldn't go anywhere. There is much more marketing opportunity here. And as far as the mid levels, it will be out of sight out of mind to NBA fans after a while.

    4) You could still give home teams the advantage in keeping their own prized pieces by giving them the upper hand in the amount of guaranteed money they can offer. The signing bonus will just become the new emphasis over the total value.

    I think this is exactly what the NBA and MLB need. It is why the NFL is a huge success and they are struggling. Think of all the money NFL teams save themselves every year when they start releasing guys that the other two leagues are forced to honor. It's draining them dry.
    Last edited by Taterhead; 03-11-2009 at 10:41 PM.

  18. #18
    Member Taterhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    1,288

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    Quote Originally Posted by Kstat View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    ....as opposed to the NFL, where the vast majority of player cuts are due to salary reasons...
    LoL yeah, poor guys!

  19. #19
    Pacer Junky Will Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    10,043

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    Quote Originally Posted by duke dynamite View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I think the best way for the NBA to operate efficiently is for the players to re-negotiate contracts. I mean less money is better than no money.
    You mean like the banks did with loans? Won't happen!

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Age
    33
    Posts
    28,142

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    Quote Originally Posted by Taterhead View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This is definitely the first time I've heard someone claim non guaranteed deals would be bad. I see your point, just strongly disagree.

    I disagree for a few reasons.

    1) It wouldn't benefit the larger markets because of the hard cap. That would cancel out their advantage in appeal to players. You can only sign so many guys under that cap. The larger markets don't have an advantage in the NFL. Actually the NBA's system already favors large markets more than the NFL does.

    2) It wouldn't affect quality of play. Teams would have more flexibility to make moves. Imagine if the Colts had to Harrison his 13 million this year. That means they would have not been able to keep Saturday or Hayden, and the team would've taken a step back. Actually if the Colts couldn't have cut people they would've probably never made it to the SB in the first place. This would improve the play.

    The Pacers could let go of a guy like Murphy and his albatross deal to land a better fit for them to improve their defense. And some team out there would be able to pick up Troy Murphy that is more in need of his abilities. Let's say we could let Troy walk, and then Orlando picked him up. Orlando would be a better team, and we would have the flexibility we need to continue to rebuild ours. It's a win win. Teams also wouldn't go through these long droughts of bad basketball. In the NFL you can go from the basement to the SB in a couple of years. In the NBA the same 4-5 organizations have won all the titles over the last 10-15 years. It would also take some pressure off of coaches. They would be able to assemble a team that fit their style.

    3) You might lose some mid level guys overseas, but the top guys wouldn't go anywhere. There is much more marketing opportunity here. And as far as the mid levels, it will be out of sight out of mind to NBA fans after a while.

    4) You could still give home teams the advantage in keeping their own prized pieces by giving them the upper hand in the amount of guaranteed money they can offer. The signing bonus will just become the new emphasis over the total value.

    I think this is exactly what the NBA and MLB need. It is why the NFL is a huge success and they are struggling. Think of all the money NFL teams save themselves every year when they start releasing guys that the other two leagues are forced to honor. It's draining them dry.
    this is what I was thinking. good post

  21. #21
    Member Pacers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    New Whiteland, IN
    Posts
    573

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    Quote Originally Posted by Taterhead View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This is definitely the first time I've heard someone claim non guaranteed deals would be bad. I see your point, just strongly disagree.

    I disagree for a few reasons.

    1) It wouldn't benefit the larger markets because of the hard cap. That would cancel out their advantage in appeal to players. You can only sign so many guys under that cap. The larger markets don't have an advantage in the NFL. Actually the NBA's system already favors large markets more than the NFL does.

    2) It wouldn't affect quality of play. Teams would have more flexibility to make moves. Imagine if the Colts had to Harrison his 13 million this year. That means they would have not been able to keep Saturday or Hayden, and the team would've taken a step back. Actually if the Colts couldn't have cut people they would've probably never made it to the SB in the first place. This would improve the play.

    The Pacers could let go of a guy like Murphy and his albatross deal to land a better fit for them to improve their defense. And some team out there would be able to pick up Troy Murphy that is more in need of his abilities. Let's say we could let Troy walk, and then Orlando picked him up. Orlando would be a better team, and we would have the flexibility we need to continue to rebuild ours. It's a win win. Teams also wouldn't go through these long droughts of bad basketball. In the NFL you can go from the basement to the SB in a couple of years. In the NBA the same 4-5 organizations have won all the titles over the last 10-15 years. It would also take some pressure off of coaches. They would be able to assemble a team that fit their style.

    3) You might lose some mid level guys overseas, but the top guys wouldn't go anywhere. There is much more marketing opportunity here. And as far as the mid levels, it will be out of sight out of mind to NBA fans after a while.

    4) You could still give home teams the advantage in keeping their own prized pieces by giving them the upper hand in the amount of guaranteed money they can offer. The signing bonus will just become the new emphasis over the total value.

    I think this is exactly what the NBA and MLB need. It is why the NFL is a huge success and they are struggling. Think of all the money NFL teams save themselves every year when they start releasing guys that the other two leagues are forced to honor. It's draining them dry.
    Winner winner chicken dinner

  22. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,436

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    Quote Originally Posted by Taterhead View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This is definitely the first time I've heard someone claim non guaranteed deals would be bad. I see your point, just strongly disagree.

    I disagree for a few reasons.

    1) It wouldn't benefit the larger markets because of the hard cap. That would cancel out their advantage in appeal to players. You can only sign so many guys under that cap. The larger markets don't have an advantage in the NFL. Actually the NBA's system already favors large markets more than the NFL does.

    2) It wouldn't affect quality of play. Teams would have more flexibility to make moves. Imagine if the Colts had to Harrison his 13 million this year. That means they would have not been able to keep Saturday or Hayden, and the team would've taken a step back. Actually if the Colts couldn't have cut people they would've probably never made it to the SB in the first place. This would improve the play.

    The Pacers could let go of a guy like Murphy and his albatross deal to land a better fit for them to improve their defense. And some team out there would be able to pick up Troy Murphy that is more in need of his abilities. Let's say we could let Troy walk, and then Orlando picked him up. Orlando would be a better team, and we would have the flexibility we need to continue to rebuild ours. It's a win win. Teams also wouldn't go through these long droughts of bad basketball. In the NFL you can go from the basement to the SB in a couple of years. In the NBA the same 4-5 organizations have won all the titles over the last 10-15 years. It would also take some pressure off of coaches. They would be able to assemble a team that fit their style.

    3) You might lose some mid level guys overseas, but the top guys wouldn't go anywhere. There is much more marketing opportunity here. And as far as the mid levels, it will be out of sight out of mind to NBA fans after a while.

    4) You could still give home teams the advantage in keeping their own prized pieces by giving them the upper hand in the amount of guaranteed money they can offer. The signing bonus will just become the new emphasis over the total value.

    I think this is exactly what the NBA and MLB need. It is why the NFL is a huge success and they are struggling. Think of all the money NFL teams save themselves every year when they start releasing guys that the other two leagues are forced to honor. It's draining them dry.
    I'm arguing against the hard cap moreso than about guaranteed deals.

    The hard cap would affect continuity, as it has in the NFL. Critics have pretty much said that free agency has diluted quality of play in the NFL, particularly in areas such as offensive line play, where continuity and chemistry is a big deal. Not only are the Troy Murphys of the NFL cut all the time, but quality players still within the primes of their career who have played vital roles with their teams are cut due to the hard cap.

    Also, if you follow the NFL's model completely, you'll have 1st round picks instantly making as much or more than 5 year vets, and in some cases they'll be among the very highest paid at their position. So under an NFL model, Kwame Brown in his rookie year would have entered camp as one of the highest paid PFs in the league.

    The NBA's system does not favor large markets more than the small markets as compared to the NFL. Tim Duncan is still with the Spurs, Dwight Howard is still with Orlando and Chris Webber (even though he didn't even want to be there) spent the prime of his career in Sacramento. On the flip side, the biggest impact free agent signing that a team in New York ever made since David Stern took over has been Allan Houston.

    I too would like to see some of the guaranteed deals nixed, but I'm not holding my breath. I'm sure Stern will have the leverage to put things more in favor of the owners when the next CBA comes up for negotiation, but I fully expect that the current system of guaranteed deals isn't going to change much.

    The reason the NFL has so much success is that American football is the biggest sport in the country at every level (HS, college, pro). It's the game to watch. The reason college football is bigger than college baseball isn't because of a better bargaining agreement. It's off topic, but the number of thugs/bad guys in the NFL far outnumber those in the NBA/MLB, but the public doesn't care as long as those guys strap on a helmet on Sundays. Steroids? Nobody gives a damn that NFL players take steroids. Nobody. It's big because it's the most popular game.

    The NFL's costs are also much lower simply because there are only 16 games a year as opposed to 82 or 162. The logistics (especially travel) and costs of production are lower simply because they produce less events, yet they still secure the biggest TV deals. Basically, they get paid more for doing less. That's ALWAYS going to be a successful model, if you can pull it off.
    Last edited by d_c; 03-12-2009 at 01:09 AM.

  23. #23
    Grumpy Old Man (PD host) able's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    London UK
    Posts
    8,699

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    Hmmmm or is it because the CIB RUNS the lucasoil, has more to pay towards the build and has to pay a healthy percentage of the gross income outside of the NFL games of the Lucas Oil, with or without positive results, and then still have to bail out the Colts?

    Quick estimates:

    Pacers 15 mio , Colts 47 mio (yearly)

    "tax" cost to stadiums (parts financed by)
    Pacers 87 mio Colts 600 mio ?


    And now we have to cut players, change the contract structure and so forth? why no go one further and declare the union unwanted as well
    So Long And Thanks For All The Fish.

    If you've done 6 impossible things today?
    Then why not have Breakfast at Milliways!


  24. #24
    Tree People to the Core! indygeezer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Cumberland
    Posts
    15,240
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    Shut down for a year or two.....ask players like Reggie how they would have liked that to happen during their mid to late thirties. They'd never get back into game shape. Then again, two years off and we'd forget they ever existed. We'd be out of the habit of watching them and really into watching Dance Marathon, or whatever it's called, and American Idol.

    As for caps........bleeech. Every team is allowed to spend X numbers of dollars. How they choose to do so is their business but I don't like Bird rights, caps, tax thresholds, etc etc ad infinitum. Perhaps this could lead to the sliding scale I have proposed in the past. Different starting ranges based upon years in college or D-league...like real buisnesses do, pay for experience.
    If you get to thinkin’ you’re a person of some influence, try orderin’ somebody else’s dog around..

  25. #25
    Boom Baby'er ABADays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The Coliseum
    Posts
    6,248

    Default Re: Stern on the changes that are coming

    Quote Originally Posted by Major Cold View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The thing is they won't get no money. They will play overseas.
    If, indeed, the economic situation is global why do you think that option would be open?

Similar Threads

  1. david stern: salary cap is going to decrease
    By wintermute in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-19-2009, 12:58 PM
  2. Ex-Sonics owner: Stern urged me to drop lawsuit
    By Basketball Fan in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 07-28-2008, 01:52 PM
  3. Stern open to dropping the 2-3-2 Finals format
    By idioteque in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-11-2008, 09:00 PM
  4. Replies: 38
    Last Post: 05-19-2008, 04:32 PM
  5. Carter coming to Indy -- with Nets
    By Will Galen in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-21-2008, 09:15 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •