Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 31

Thread: September 15th: The first deadline

  1. #1
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583
    Mood

    Default September 15th: The first deadline

    http://aol.sportingnews.com/nba/stor...new-labor-deal

    Sept. 15 has been set as the deadline for a new collective-bargaining agreement to be reached before the NBA starts to cancel training camp and preseason games, league sources tell Hoopsworld.

    Should even one preseason game be canceled, advertisers and sponsors would start pulling commitments and season ticketholders would likely start asking for refunds, sources told the website.

    There is reportedly a negotiating session scheduled for Wednesday in New York, which will be attended by top executives on both sides, including NBA commissioner David Stern and deputy commissioner Adam Silver, and NBPA executive director Billy Hunter and president Derek Fisher. Still, there is little optimism that much progress will be made this week.

  2. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    Pacers 4 Life.31 and only Pacers4Life's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Indiana
    Age
    25
    Posts
    611

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    How anyone is supposed to believe this is anywhere even close to being resolved is beyond me. The players and owners have met one time and it's been almost 2 months. I never in my wildest dreams thought the season would really be lost.. But the more I hear and the less I see, it just seems imminent. Sad news for us Pacer fans who desperately want to see our team grow with each other.
    Reggie Miller is a God. Period.

    Passion. Pride. Pacers.

    It's ALWAYS Miller Time.
    #31 & Only


  4. #3
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583
    Mood

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    I have basically no hope of anything getting done in time for this deadline (it would take a MASSIVE acceleration in talks), but I'm hoping that once we get into mid-to-late October things will finally get serious.

  5. #4
    Member Speed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Brownsburg
    Posts
    8,492

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    Even it there was some agreement before then, you still need a Free agency period. First Pacer preseason game is 10/11/11.

  6. #5
    Member Speed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Brownsburg
    Posts
    8,492

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    I'm interested to see how things go Wednesday.

    If they break off talks, right away, and go into PR mode, we have big trouble ahead.

    The best we (fans) can hope for is they start to get quiet and keep meeting, imo, with little to no leaks of information.

    I wish they'd get a mediator, now!! I think the owners don't want a mediator because they don't want a comprimise.

  7. #6
    Member Sparhawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Age
    34
    Posts
    5,234

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    Why aren't they meeting more? Seems like the more often you meet, the quicker you can come to reach a deal. Is it a waiting game to see who cracks first? This is just petty and lame.
    Lance + Starting SG = Awesome

    Now really free Lance!

  8. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Sparhawk For This Useful Post:


  9. #7
    Member CableKC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    San Jose, CA ( 1123, 6536, 5321 )
    Age
    41
    Posts
    24,369

    Sports Logo

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I have basically no hope of anything getting done in time for this deadline (it would take a MASSIVE acceleration in talks), but I'm hoping that once we get into mid-to-late October things will finally get serious.
    I wonder what would be the next "deadline" or "milestone" that would be set after Mid-September?

    At best, we're probably looking at a shortened season starting in January......but I have a question to those that remember the 1999 lockout.....since the season was shortened...did they create a totally new schedule once the season started?

    or

    Did they just pick up the existing season when the schedule starts?
    Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

    This is David West, he is the Honey Badger, West just doesn't give a *****....he's pretty bad *ss cuz he has no regard for any other Player or Team whatsoever.

  10. #8
    Pacer Pride, Colts Strong Kid Minneapolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    4,378

    Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    Quote Originally Posted by Sparhawk View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Why aren't they meeting more? Seems like the more often you meet, the quicker you can come to reach a deal. Is it a waiting game to see who cracks first? This is just petty and lame.
    This is my entire stance, too. And I may have my facts crooked, but I keep hearing how they aren't in talks at all. Why the hell not? Your entire business depends upon the progress of negotiations, and you're not negotiating?

    What the hell else are you doing then?
    There are two types of quarterbacks in the league: Those whom over time, the league figures out ... and those who figure out the league.

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Kid Minneapolis For This Useful Post:


  12. #9
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,711

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    Quote Originally Posted by Pacers4Life View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    How anyone is supposed to believe this is anywhere even close to being resolved is beyond me. The players and owners have met one time and it's been almost 2 months. I never in my wildest dreams thought the season would really be lost.. But the more I hear and the less I see, it just seems imminent. Sad news for us Pacer fans who desperately want to see our team grow with each other.

    No one believes it is anywhere close to being resolved. They basically haven't even started negotiating.

    However I would not jump to your conclusion that canceling the season is immiment. I mean it might be canceled in the end, who knows, but that won't be known for sure until January and we are a long, long way off from that

  13. #10
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,711

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    Quote Originally Posted by Sparhawk View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Why aren't they meeting more? Seems like the more often you meet, the quicker you can come to reach a deal. Is it a waiting game to see who cracks first? This is just petty and lame.

    No reason to meet until one side or the other is willing to change their offer.

    if I am willing to pay you $20 but you want $40. OK, say we meet, I raise my offer to $22, you say nope, I want 40. that ends negotiations and I won't meet with you again until I know you are comijng off your $40. if there is a deadline in 6 weeks, I am not going to neogiate against myself, I will just wait. The ball is in your court

    there is no reason to meet until there is either a deadline or until one side or the other is willing to compromise which typically never happens until a deadline is near.
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 08-29-2011 at 02:07 PM.

  14. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Unclebuck For This Useful Post:


  15. #11
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,711

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    Quote Originally Posted by CableKC View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I wonder what would be the next "deadline" or "milestone" that would be set after Mid-September?

    At best, we're probably looking at a shortened season starting in January......but I have a question to those that remember the 1999 lockout.....since the season was shortened...did they create a totally new schedule once the season started?

    or

    Did they just pick up the existing season when the schedule starts?

    completely new schedule. But they will wait until the last possible moment to start canceling regular season games. In 1999 no regular season games were cancelled until October 13th, and my guess is if it looked like things were moving towards a possible setlement they could push that back a few days

    Here are the key dates from 1999


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998%E2...99_NBA_lockout

    After negotiations between the sides broke off on June 22, the lockout started nine days later. Teams were barred from making player transactions and holding workouts and meetings for the duration of the work stoppage.[3] An early byproduct of the lockout was the exclusion of NBA players from the U.S. national team that played at the 1998 FIBA World Championship. USA Basketball, the governing body for the sport in the U.S., elected to send a team consisting of lower-level professional players and amateurs.[8] Negotiations resumed at an August 6 bargaining session, the first since the start of the lockout. NBA commissioner David Stern and several owners left the talks after the NBPA presented an offer that included increased revenue sharing between teams.[9]

    By September 25, 24 exhibition games were canceled and training camps were postponed indefinitely as a result of stalled talks.[10] Further negotiating sessions took place in October and November, but no agreement was reached.[11] The season's first two weeks were officially canceled on October 13, and 99 games scheduled for November were lost as a result. It was the first time in NBA history that games were canceled due to a labor dispute.[12] On October 20, arbitrator John Feerick ruled that the owners did not have to pay players with guaranteed contracts during the lockout.[13] Feerick's decision gave the owners leverage in bargaining talks. Another factor favoring the owners was that their teams received money from the NBA's television broadcasters, whose contracts with the league called for payments to be made if games were not played.[14]

    Further games were canceled as the lockout continued through November and December,[11] including the 1999 All-Star Game, which had been scheduled to be played on February 14, 1999 at the First Union Center in Philadelphia.[15] Discussions during the lockout were characterized by frequent hostility between the players and owners. One example of the heated nature of the talks came at an early December bargaining session, when Stern and NBPA executive director Billy Hunter became involved in what CBS News called "an extremely heated, expletive-laden screaming match".[16] Both men temporarily walked away from the bargaining table,[16] and indicated after the session that the entire season might be canceled.[17] Although the 1998 portion of the schedule was not played because of the lockout, 16 NBA players participated in a December 19 exhibition game in Atlantic City, New Jersey. The event's organizers intended to give NBPA members a share of the money raised, but the idea proved controversial, and charities ultimately received the proceeds.[18]


    [edit] Settlement

    On December 23, Stern announced that he would recommend canceling the season if there was no deal by January 7, 1999.[11] As Stern's deadline approached, the NBPA showed signs of division from within.[19] Highly paid players were seen as the ones most affected by the disputed issues, rather than the union's membership as a whole.[20] Agent David Falk, who was considered an influential voice for the players,[20] represented NBPA president Patrick Ewing and nine players on the union's 19-person negotiating committee.[21][22] The NBPA scheduled a meeting in New York City on January 6, where players would vote on a proposal by the owners that the committee had recommended opposing. Several players, including Shaquille O'Neal and Hakeem Olajuwon, wanted the vote to be conducted by secret ballot, while others indicated a desire to return to competition regardless of how the vote went. Kevin Johnson stated that most players "were just ready to throw down [fight] Wednesday at our meeting if an agreement hadn't been reached."[23] Faced with a splintering union, Hunter moved to resume talks with Stern.[19] On January 6, the day before Stern's deadline, he and Hunter reached an agreement, which was ratified by the NBPA later that day and by the NBA Board of Governors on January 7.[24]

    Widely viewed as a victory for Stern and the owners,[19][23] the agreement was signed by both parties on January 20, officially ending the lockout after 204 days.[25] It capped players' salaries at between $9 million and $14 million, depending on how long they had played in the NBA. A rookie pay scale was introduced, with salary increases tied to how early a player was selected in the NBA Draft. The Larry Bird exception was retained, though maximum annual pay raises were capped. New "average" and "median" salary cap exemptions, which the NBPA had proposed, allowed teams to sign one player per category even if they were over the spending limit.[24] The league's minimum salary was increased to $287,500, a $15,000 raise from before the lockout.[26]


    [edit] Reaction and aftermath

    The lockout prompted indifference among most American sports fans, who thought that greed was shown by both sides.[27][28] A CBS News–New York Times poll conducted in October 1998 showed that, while most fans' opinion of professional basketball was unaffected by the work stoppage, 29 percent reported that their views had become more negative.[29] The same poll showed that fans backed the NBPA in the dispute by a 36–29 margin, while the general public supported the owners 24 percent to 22 percent. One-quarter of basketball fans who responded to the poll did not know enough about the lockout to give an opinion, along with 45 percent of the general public.[29] Media members were frequently critical of the owners and players. Sportswriter Tony Kornheiser described the labor dispute as one "between tall millionaires and short millionaires."[30] An article in Newsweek termed the lockout "an incomprehensible and unconscionable dispute between rival gangs of millionaires".[23] Time's Bill Saporito believed that each side was damaged by the lockout, in terms of financial losses and negative publicity.[31] Stern said that he had made concessions in the agreement, while Hunter said that the parties "both blinked."[19][31]

    The 1998–99 season, which began on February 5, 1999,[32] was shortened to 50 games per team, as opposed to the normal 82.[33] As a result of the 204-day lockout, 464 regular-season games were lost.[34] In addition to the lockout, the NBA's popularity was affected by the second retirement of Michael Jordan, who had been largely responsible for an increase in fan interest during his career.[35] The average attendance during the shortened season was 16,738 fans per game, down 2.2 percent from the 1997–98 average of 17,117 spectators per contest.[36] Ticket sales fell nearly two percent further in the opening months of 1999–00,[35] and remained under 17,000 per game for the following three seasons.[36] The league also saw television ratings drop for three consecutive seasons after the lockout.[37] In the years following the lockout, a higher percentage of players signed contracts worth the maximum amount possible under the cap. Some young players, such as LeBron James, began signing shorter contracts that allowed for more flexibility in team choice and salary.[34] The agreement expired in 2005, and both sides became concerned about the possibility of another work stoppage. A fourth lockout in 11 years was prevented, however, when a six-year CBA was reached in June.[38]

    [edit] Notes
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 08-29-2011 at 02:13 PM.

  16. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Unclebuck For This Useful Post:


  17. #12
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583
    Mood

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    Quote Originally Posted by CableKC View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I wonder what would be the next "deadline" or "milestone" that would be set after Mid-September?
    I think what it is is that they have to hack off the schedule one month at a time. So if Sep. 15th is the line now, I'm assuming it'll be roughly each month that another 'deadline' comes long.

    Next time the victim will be the month of November's games. Then December, then January, then finally they'll just call off the season if they can't get an agreement sometime at the top of 2012.

    I'm crossing my fingers for only losing November and December, but I'd be lying if I said I was optimistic.

  18. #13
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583
    Mood

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    Quote Originally Posted by Kid Minneapolis View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    This is my entire stance, too. And I may have my facts crooked, but I keep hearing how they aren't in talks at all. Why the hell not? Your entire business depends upon the progress of negotiations, and you're not negotiating?

    What the hell else are you doing then?
    On the surface, I completely agree, but I think it's because both sides realize that neither one is going to budge until money begins to be lost, so it's a matter of waiting for the bleeding to begin. I find that stupid, but understandable.

  19. #14
    Administrator Unclebuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    32,711

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    I still sense a different relationship between the owners and players than in 1999 - it is better now. Or at least it seems better

    http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/bal...urn=nba-wp7917

    August 29, 2011

    The NBA’s players can win the PR war, but they should attempt to end the mess


    The kids are back in school, the NFL is about to spark up, and the NCAA isn't far off from tipping off its own hoops season. September is a few days, and the NBA has made absolutely no inroads or advancement as it "attempts" to bargain with its players. The 2011 lockout is about to finish its second full month, and absolutely nothing has been accomplished.

    Outside of, surprisingly, a warming lack of blowhard dialogue from either side. David Stern and his owners haven't gone too far over the top in presenting their case, and no player has really done much to either embarrass or take away from the message emanating from the other side.

    Training camps are set to start just about a month from now, though. And if you think a July 1st mindset -- a dogged adherence to pre-lockout talking points, and absolutely no consideration for the lives and fortunes lost by potentially losing a single preseason week to this lockout counts as any sort of advancement -- then you're probably part of the legal counsel representing either side of this mess. The owners and the players don't have a car to park, a ticket to take, a section to sweep, a keg to change, an ankle to tape, or a column to type up. No wonder they haven't moved an inch.

    This doesn't mean there hasn't been some advancement. At this time, back in 1998, the North American sporting world had its eyes fixed upon Sammy Sosa and (mainly) Mark McGuire as they chased down Roger Maris' home run record with a litany of locker room supplements and not a dose (no pun intended; and this is from a St. Louis Cardinals fan) of shame. With Michael Jordan all but retired and the eyes of a sports-mad nation fixed elsewhere, the NBA's players could afford to act like absolute morons as they "argued" their side of a Collective Bargaining Agreement that (somehow, smartly) just handed Kevin Garnett(notes) a $121 million deal just two years after he graduated high school.

    Still, the players screwed it up. Not the deal, which worked out in their favor. Instead, it was the way they attempted to articulate their case, while hoping that Kevin Garnett's contract somehow turned into [David Falk's client's] contract.
    And this time around, the players are acting their age. And, according to Howard Beck of the New York Times, this is no co-incidence:
    "It was a huge emphasis," Derek Fisher(notes), the president of the National Basketball Players Association, said in a telephone interview. "The reality is, we're in a great position, where guys have worked to put themselves in this place where they can potentially earn millions of dollars."

    […]
    At Fisher's direction, the union last fall distributed a 56-page lockout handbook to its 400-plus players. Tucked between tabs on "budgeting" and "player services" is a section devoted to "media," with talking points on everything from the N.B.A.'s financial losses ("vastly overstated") to franchise values ("Warriors just sold for $450M").

    But the key point, perhaps, is this simple reminder: "Please be sensitive about interviews or other media displays of a luxurious lifestyle."
    Things have changed, and that goes beyond David Falk-sponsored athletes like Patrick Ewing or Kenny Anderson speaking as if the rest of the NBA-watching public was making an average of nearly eight figures a year.

    In 1998, you had newspapers, and TV. That was it. You'll have to believe me when I tell you I wrote for the most popular non-mainstream NBA website (years before these things were called "blogs"), as evidenced by its status amongst the six NBA sites (your typical 2011-era NBA bookmarks, plus Nando.net and The Sporting News) you would see upon typing in "NBA" into any search engine. And our take didn't make a dent in anyone's line of thinking.

    touch idiocy of some NBA players during the 1998 lockout, we still fell on their side because we knew better about what owners should have done better with the 1995 CBA.
    In 2011? We know better. And the 2011 lockout is the owners' fault.

    But if the 2011 lockout results in missed NBA games? Then it will be the players' fault.
    This is not a change of heart. The owners had the blueprint in place to at least come close to working with shared revenue streams and various aspects of the 1999-era Collective Bargaining Agreement (especially as modified in 2005) to keep salaries under control and say "no thanks" when it came to overpaying players and using smarts and analytics to sign a reasonable replacement for half the price.

    Those owners declined. I don't completely agree with Malcolm Gladwell's assertion that owning an NBA team is a show-offy mess, but he's not far off. The owners could have, and especially should have, done better since 1999. If the summer of 2004 was no indication, than various summers since then should have been. This lockout is their fault. This lockout is the owners' fault. They bargained a bad deal, and then somehow utilized the worst aspects of it while they bid against themselves for players who didn't deserve what a supposedly player-grating CBA should have resulted in.

    Why should this burden fall on the players? Why should they take the fall for pound-foolish business practices gone wrong? Why should a player earning a second contract in 2015 pay for an owner that foolishly bought his team for 200 percent of what it was worth in 2005?
    I can't tell you. There's no legitimate reason why. Mortgaging the future of the type of player who will gladly take the jobs of NBA Players Association leaders like Derek Fisher and Maurice Evans in 2013 should be no concern to either Fisher and Evans (that old deli; or comedy team), current players that will stick with this league beyond 2015, or the rookies drafted last or this year. The NBA's players shouldn't give in.

    But they should. And beyond all the rhetoric, they know it. It's not that it's their turn, but … well, it's their turn.

    The players made out in 1995. They made out in 1999, and they killed it again in 2005. Their fault? Hardly.

    Their burden, to a game that owes them so much? To a group of incoming players set to sign to a league years from now? A league that North Americans could want nothing to do with for years on end following a missed 2011-12? Catosprophic for those impending NBA-types that are a few years away.

    Talk about the future employees that could be hurt by a bad deal, NBAPA. Try and remove the rhetoric and consider the future employees that will be hurt by a deal that costs all of 2011-12, NBAPA. You think that Jim in the Titans hat gives a crap about some 2014-15 rookie? He cares about a boring Thursday night next February, because 'Community' is too "meta" for him, and he doesn't even know what "meta" means. I'm right there with him. I got the "Dinner With Andre" reference, I loved it, but I also like the Spurs/Nuggets game.

    Jim also wants to watch the early LeBron and Derrick Rose(notes) contest, and the halftime bits that feature Charles Barkley. Why don't you get that, players and owners? This won't last.

    The players? They've "given up" quite a bit. Now it's time to see how the other side feels.
    The players took on rookie contracts so as to save payrolls to make it so the Milwaukee Bucks and Dallas Mavericks could afford to pay players 2-through-15 after the rookies were signed to guaranteed deals. They took on massive guaranteed contracts that were grandfathered into an era that supported ridiculous deals spent with no smart plan in place. The players dealt with an "average player" contract in the Mid-Level Exception that handed out five or six years to average players, forgetting of course that average players usually don't play that way after a year or so.

    This is the owners' fault. This is their mess. But if the players want to keep goodwill, as discussed in the piece written by Howard Beck, then they have to step up. They have to understand that it is their turn.

    Back in 1998, nobody was excited. Jordan was gone. Rodman was in Los Angeles with something called a "Carmen Electra" (read: kids? She was like Kim Kardashian, except she was a lot funnier). Nobody really cares about the NBA in late August of 2011, and they shouldn't. But that doesn't mean the goose is less golden.

    This squawking bird is better off. It's a mess, no doubt, but that mess brings in the ratings. Players should know this. Times are different -- back in 1997-98, there were three nationally televised nights on TBS and TNT to work through. Right now? TNT's Thursday night (with 26 NBA teams, and all their players potentially watching, off the clock) reigns supreme. When Ernie Johnson Jr., Kenny Smith and Charles Barkley discuss the "issues" of the week, players pay attention. They're watching. You know they are.

    Times are more engaged. And the world's lots larger than it looks today, now that the internet and easy texts are at an arm's length. But, somehow, that brings everyone closer.
    And though the players are under no obligation to settle for anything; they're sort of obligated to understand what came before them, how things were perverted, how they (and players that will never sniff the NBA again) took advantage, and what they should do from here on out.

    It's on them. This is the owners' mess.

    And this is the players' duty. The percentages in their favor have to come down. They have to help buy gas, on that jet ride from Orlando to Memphis. They have to fall back.
    Again, this lockout is the owners' fault.

    But if the NBA doesn't play a game in November? That's on the players. Don't stop for a second before blaming anyone else.

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to Unclebuck For This Useful Post:


  21. #15
    Custom User Titleist
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Another dimension, a dimension not only of sight and sound, but of mind.
    Posts
    3,548
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    I will blow out the candles on my 46th birthday cake that day and make a wish, then.

    Wish me luck!

  22. #16
    Member Speed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Brownsburg
    Posts
    8,492

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    Owners want more this time than ever before too, though. Losing the season is horrible for both sides. Losing the season for the negotiating process kills the players position though.

    My largest hope is that NO ONE wants to lose a whole season, no one.
    Last edited by Speed; 08-29-2011 at 03:01 PM.

  23. #17
    Member Speed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Brownsburg
    Posts
    8,492

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    Things I think the league will come off of:

    -Length of CBA. They won't keep the 10 year deal.
    -Amount of money/percentage they want. I think they've given themselves wiggle room

    What I think the league won't come off of

    -majority of BRI, to "win" and to make money, I've heard it said they need 49% for the owners to break even. I think they won't take less 52%. The agreement may be configured in a way that allows it to be said as 50/50 or even less, but I think they would lose a season over anything less than the bigger share.

    -guaranteed contracts. This is a non starter to the players, so it won't be in its purest form, but I think they'd lose the season over not having some kind of out in the Eddie Curry/Tinsley type situations.

    What I think the players will come off of

    -54 % They have to realize thats not getting it done.
    -rookie salary scale stuff

    What I think they won't come off of

    -40% by year 5, they'd lose a season before losing that much money across the board

    -guaranteed contract - they see that as a principle item.

    So we have two big items.
    Money, which I honestly think they can get a number, if the owners really want a season and aren't trying to completely 'win'. The players are already willing to move towards give backs, the owners just have to be willing to 'win' without complete domination.

    Guaranteed contracts, someone who is really smart needs to find a mutually palateable solution here and I have no idea what that is. I'd suppose signing bonus' like the NFL could play a part? Its going to a tough item. Guys don't want cut cuz of an injury they can't control, but I think they also understand when guy embezzle money by phoning it in after signing a big contract.

    My guess is they keep fully guaranteed contract, but they are now limited to 4 years total.

    So in the end my guess is we have another 50 game season. The CBA on a 6 year deal and will be split 53/47 in the owners favor, but we'll get told its 50/50 based on some different inclusion/exclusions of revenue/expense. I think you'll have shorter guaranteed contracts. Thats the just of it.

    You'll still have Bird rights, probably, in some form. Bigger advantages for the original team to keep star players.

    Hunter will say they won, but were willing to help the league as partners. Stern will say he is happy for the players and feel like he works for them as much as the owners. Derek Fisher will work for the league in 2 years

  24. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Speed For This Useful Post:


  25. #18
    Artificial Intelligence wintermute's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,190

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    Nice analysis, Speed.

    I do think that the players will concede on money while the owners will concede on the hard cap. But even without a pure hard cap, I do agree with you that the owners will want some kind of Eddy Curry provision. A one-time amnesty is probably in the cards, but that's not a long term solution.

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

    Guaranteed contracts, someone who is really smart needs to find a mutually palateable solution here and I have no idea what that is. I'd suppose signing bonus' like the NFL could play a part? Its going to a tough item. Guys don't want cut cuz of an injury they can't control, but I think they also understand when guy embezzle money by phoning it in after signing a big contract.

    My guess is they keep fully guaranteed contract, but they are now limited to 4 years total.
    Reducing contract lengths is as good a guess as any.

    NFL-style signing bonus would work similarly to a predetermined buyout right? That could help but won't mean much unless the buyout is a substantial discount compared to the value of the contract.

    I actually like one of the early owner proposals for contracts to have a maximum 2 years guaranteed, with declining partial guarantees in the later years. But I don't see the players agreeing to something like that.

    So yeah, maybe the only workable compromise here is for shorter contract lengths. Teams won't be burdened with over long contracts, but on the flip side, players get to become free agents more often. Not a good thing though for those teams afraid of losing star players. But maybe there's a franchise tag system that allows teams to offer their star player a contract with more money/longer years.

    Quote Originally Posted by Speed View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Hunter will say they won, but were willing to help the league as partners. Stern will say he is happy for the players and feel like he works for them as much as the owners. Derek Fisher will work for the league in 2 years
    Cynical, but probably spot on

  26. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to wintermute For This Useful Post:


  27. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Dillon, Co
    Posts
    3,900

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    I think the league has already given in on guaranteed contracts but I agree that I think they'll be shorter.
    I also agree that I don't see a 10 year cba getting passed.
    The league seems to want some kind of franchise player system that rewards players for staying with the same team. Perhaps they could eliminate sign and trades then offer a max contract based of tenure with the same team.
    I don't see the owners giving in on the hard cap. Too many small market owners want this.
    If you throw out the hard cap and just change the bri #"s that only solves some of the financial issues but none of the competitive balance issues.

  28. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Lifelong Indy-area resident
    Age
    62
    Posts
    4,644

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    On the surface, I completely agree, but I think it's because both sides realize that neither one is going to budge until money begins to be lost, so it's a matter of waiting for the bleeding to begin. I find that stupid, but understandable.
    Ah... there in lies the problem.

    If 22 of the teams are truly in the red, it seems to me that they lose less money by simply paying their staffs than by also paying their players and running up costs when operations resume.... if they were to operate under the present CBA or anything like it.

    Therefore, it is worth it to those 22 owners to hold out until hell freezes over if the players aren't willing to come off of their current position. With so many teams losing money, I think this negotation is in a stalemate. Management will not budge until the players have closed the gap considerably. And, if their statement that 22 teams are losing money, I can't really say I blame the owners. They would at least like to be close to breaking even.

  29. #21
    Wasting Light Hicks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583
    Mood

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    It's a stalemate for now, but in the long run this is going to be won by the owners. They have a lot more money (billionaires beat millionaires), and they still bring in money from their non NBA businesses.

  30. #22
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    54
    Posts
    11,465

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    Quote Originally Posted by Hicks View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    It's a stalemate for now, but in the long run this is going to be won by the owners. They have a lot more money (billionaires beat millionaires), and they still bring in money from their non NBA businesses.
    Will it be a Pyrrhic victory for the teams themselves, though? If fans are alienated to the point that even restructuring from a new CBA can't help teams where attendance drops below sustainable levels, what happens?

    For the players it is about income and freedom of movement. For the owners it's about long-term viability, and at some point losing a season might make that viability more difficult to achieve.
    BillS

    "Every time I pitched it was like throwing gasoline on a fire. Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw!"
    - Ebby Calvin "Nuke" LaLoosh

  31. #23
    Member Speed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Brownsburg
    Posts
    8,492

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    Quote Originally Posted by BillS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Will it be a Pyrrhic victory for the teams themselves, though? If fans are alienated to the point that even restructuring from a new CBA can't help teams where attendance drops below sustainable levels, what happens?

    For the players it is about income and freedom of movement. For the owners it's about long-term viability, and at some point losing a season might make that viability more difficult to achieve.
    Its a good question, I wonder what the impacts were for MLB and NHL from losing seasons.

  32. #24
    billbradley
    Guest

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    Quote Originally Posted by BillS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    For the owners it's about long-term viability, and at some point losing a season might make that viability more difficult to achieve.
    I think this is the key. How can the owners win both of these battles?

  33. #25

    Default Re: September 15th: The first deadline

    Quote Originally Posted by Speed View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Its a good question, I wonder what the impacts were for MLB and NHL from losing seasons.

    I can't speak to the NHL, but MLB was mired in issues with fans until the steroid fueled Homerun Race with McGuire and Sosa. Think about that---MLB let all that go so they could get the fans back. They turned the other way on arguably making the playing field fair, and now are suffering even greater consequences of bad PR. The new Homerun champ isn't even looked at as the champ, and so many records should be asterisked over a time frame. All of this arguably related to a lost season from labor disputes.

    How desperate will the NBA be to get fans back?

  34. The Following User Says Thank You to Phildog For This Useful Post:


Similar Threads

  1. Trade Deadline: Black Thursday Winners and Losers
    By 90'sNBARocked in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 03-01-2011, 12:05 PM
  2. Let's Make A Deal
    By 90'sNBARocked in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 84
    Last Post: 12-05-2010, 09:17 PM
  3. Could someone with ESPN insider post this article
    By dannygranger in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-03-2010, 08:36 AM
  4. IndyStar: O'Brien expects no changes before deadline
    By Shade in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-21-2008, 04:17 PM
  5. (Mark Montieth) Deadline no concern to Pacers
    By Will Galen in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-19-2004, 06:14 AM

Posting Permissions

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