Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Eliminate the Salary Cap? | Cuban Radical (Big Market) Idea

  1. #1
    Since 1984 1984's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,824

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Eliminate the Salary Cap? | Cuban Radical (Big Market) Idea

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...2_a8&eref=sihp

    NBA: Union, not Cuban, proposed eliminating salary cap


    Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz1btqLVCwn

    NEW YORK (AP) -- The NBA players' association, not Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, proposed the elimination of the salary cap during negotiations aimed at ending months of labor strife, a league official said Tuesday.
    NBA senior vice president Mike Bass said union executive director Billy Hunter made "several misstatements" during an hour-long podcast with ESPN.com on Monday. Among them was the revelation of the salary cap plan, which Bass said was actually an exception to the cap, not the elimination of it.
    Hunter said that, during a meeting last week, Cuban proposed what he called a "game changer" - a plan to replace the salary cap with a heavy tax for teams that spent to a certain level. Hunter said the players were interested in discussing it further and that two or three other owners in the room were really excited about it, but then were told by the owners they wouldn't pursue it.
    "On behalf of the league, Mark Cuban proposed adding a new salary cap exception, not eliminating the salary cap," Bass said. "It was the union that, in response, proposed eliminating the salary cap, a proposal that was even worse for the NBA than the union's prior proposals."
    Hunter speculated during the podcast that owners backed away from the idea of eliminating the salary cap because it had been implemented under Commissioner David Stern long ago.
    "And so I don't know whether there's any pushback because of that," Hunter said. "But we were prepared to pursue that whole idea of going into a different direction, where we would be able to, wouldn't have to worry about a cap. So the exceptions, salaries, all of that would be, there would be no limit with the exception of there being obviously a cap at the top, i.e., a quite heavy tax that teams would have to confront if they went above a certain number.
    "But what happened was the owners decided, at least the leaders of their delegation, decided they had to take it back in a different direction. They said we don't want to address that."
    The NBA does not allow owners to comment on the negotiations. A person briefed on the content of the meetings said Cuban's actual proposal was much different than what Hunter suggested, and was surprised the union ignored it given that it would have met much of what players were seeking.
    The sides met for three days with a federal mediator before talks broke down after players said owners insisted they commit to a 50-50 split of revenues before any further discussions about the salary cap system could continue. Small groups of officials from each side will resume talks Wednesday, a person with knowledge of the plans said, and NBA would soon have to cancel more games without a deal.
    Union officials were angry with the league's characterization of the breakdown of the talks Thursday. Now the league is unhappy with Hunter's portrayal of the negotiations, such as when he mentioned items like a hard salary cap and salary rollbacks that owners are no longer proposing.
    "In his podcast interview with Bill Simmons, Billy Hunter makes several misstatements and blatantly mischaracterizes the parties' negotiations, the financial benefit to players from the NBA's latest offer, and the benefits from the system changes the NBA has proposed to improve team competitiveness," Bass said.
    Bass also said the union has proposed a 10-year collective bargaining agreement, with mutual opt-outs after years six and eight. Owners have been seeking a 10-year deal, but the union has repeatedly said it doesn't want to go longer than six years.
    The union would like players to get out from the rookie salary scale quicker than five years, with Hunter mentioning MVP Derrick Rose and Rookie of the Year Blake Griffin on the podcast as players who are underpaid because they are still locked into their scale figures.
    "In response to the union's suggestion that top-performing rookies have an opportunity to get higher pay, we have proposed a new bonus pool for rookie scale players who earn designated league honors like MVP and All-NBA first, second, or third teams," Bass said. "Billy fails to mention this."
    However, union spokesman Dan Wasserman said the league has never presented a dollar figure that would go with the bonus pool.
    Bass also disputed Hunter's notion that the owners are seeking a more favorable CBA because many of them lost money in their other businesses as a result of the economic downtown.
    "The owners reasonably believe they should have the opportunity to make a profit in a business that annually generates over $4 billion in revenue and pays the players over $2 billion," Bass said. "It has nothing whatsoever to do with making up for losses in other businesses."


    Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz1btq8IOk2

  2. #2
    Dood. Ownagedood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Franklin
    Age
    24
    Posts
    2,638

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Eliminate the Salary Cap? | Cuban Radical (Big Market) Idea

    I'm quite certain that would be the death of Pacer Basketball...

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


  4. #3
    Since 1984 1984's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,824

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Eliminate the Salary Cap? | Cuban Radical (Big Market) Idea

    Yes. I agree, AND I believe this is a subversive form of contraction. A way for Cuban to outspend the small market teams in to shallow graves.

  5. #4

    Default Re: Eliminate the Salary Cap? | Cuban Radical (Big Market) Idea

    That's just sickening that a majority of players probably would support eliminating the salary cap. I'm glad that the small market owners are a majority force of money and power. Their pockets run as deep as the other owners. They just own teams in small markets and lose money due to the NBA being an unfair joke currently.

    I'm ready to cancel the season if a fair, balanced, and competitive league does not come out of this deal.

    I'm just really worried about losing the guys on our team like Hibbert, Rush, Stephenson, etc. because we didn't get to properly evaluate them or give them a contract extension this season before the free agency begins. If there is no cap we will surely lose them to the highest bidder because Simon isn't Cuban and doesn't run the Pacers like his expensive hobby.

    And isn't there already virtually no cap now? Teams just pay the luxury tax? Isn't that why the NBA isn't balanced and a majority of the teams are losing money already? Inflated contracts due to the joke of a salary cap, and big market favoritism is why we have reached the breaking point. The only way to fix the problem is with a hard cap and T.V. and ticket revenue sharing. All teams make money. The whole NBA becomes more profitable. This is a small group of billionaires stealing all the profits of a bigger group of billionaires. I still maintain my stance the owners losing money have more money and power than the owners of the big markets teams that are making money.

    This is truly a battle of the giants. Luckily we are on the side of the majority force.
    Last edited by Midcoasted; 10-26-2011 at 11:23 AM.

  6. #5
    Member pacergod2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    2,886
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Eliminate the Salary Cap? | Cuban Radical (Big Market) Idea

    I bet there would be a dog fight over where that Tax Line Cuban proposes would be. Is it $75M or is it $60M. There would be a huge contingent of owners in favor of making that as low as possible. The large market owners would fight that and so would the players.

    I have suggested a similar approach to what they are suggesting. There would have to be significant revenue sharing in this model for it to work. I would think that number would have to come in somewhere around $65M. Anybody over it pays $4 to $1 if we suggest a system similar to what Cuban I believe is suggesting. I still would prefer local TV revenues to be shared and roughly a $2.50 to one ratio for overspending. That would make more sense or all parties, IMO. It would seemingly simplify the system a bit for ease in future negotiations.

    I think the owners have to take the angle that more players will get paid by more teams with equitable distribution. Without that only four or five teams can afford to really pay anyone. There will be restrictions on their pay regardless of which market they are in, so why not push for 25 teams like the Pacers to be able to consistently afford 15 guys who average $4+M per year? I think if the players don't want to reduce their BRI split they should agree to a "harder line salary cap" that includes more revenue sharing and should ask the owners to split local TV revenues in return for shortening contracts by one year as well. I hate the exceptions, because they seem to help the large market teams be more competitive yearly after spending too much and the smaller markets with a lower payroll are burdened with either a lower salary cap or taking the exceptions. There should be a cap band where you get taxed $1 to $1 for being under $45M and $2.5 to $1 for being over $65M. Then everything is fair game in free agency.

    Oh and raises of 8% and 10.5% are a killer of the system. They need to be scaled back to 3% and 5% or 4% and 6%. Even 5% and 7% would get us in the right direction. Limit deals to 4 years. Five to stay with your team and lose the sign and trade. Three years would be max for an extension.

    I would also propose a special exemption for teams. They get one chance to get rid of a player contract if waived within the time frame of the new CBA. This could be called the Gilbert Arenas rule, where a team would have to apply to the league to drop one contract from their salary cap. Then the team and player would go to mediation over the reasons behind it. If it is behavioral, then the standard could be set at a team not having to pay any of the contract for something significant. Jamaal Tinsley could reap say 50% of his contract considering his legal snafus and it wouldn't have hurt the Pacers' cap. If we dropped Murphy, he would get the full contract for just not being very good. These onerous contracts prevent other, more deserving players from getting paid. It would have to occur before the trade deadline in any given year.

    Give the players something to vote on. Please.
    "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

  7. #6
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    55
    Posts
    12,182

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Eliminate the Salary Cap? | Cuban Radical (Big Market) Idea

    So how does this work with the "no punitive tax" stance of the NBPA? I suspect they want no cap PLUS a fairly toothless tax structure.
    BillS

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

  8. #7
    Member pacergod2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    2,886
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: Eliminate the Salary Cap? | Cuban Radical (Big Market) Idea

    Quote Originally Posted by BillS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    So how does this work with the "no punitive tax" stance of the NBPA? I suspect they want no cap PLUS a fairly toothless tax structure.
    No punitive tax would effectively kill the league's attempt at fair competitive balance. More reason to undermine the thoughts of the NBPA. I just don't get what they are talking about sometimes. And it isn't because they are talking over my head.
    "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

  9. #8
    Over the pond ballism's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Baltics (Europe)
    Posts
    2,427

    Default Re: Eliminate the Salary Cap? | Cuban Radical (Big Market) Idea

    Crazy. I guess Donald Sterling would love this -- keep your salaries low, and watch the tax money come to you. Profit.
    But this would open doors for any contender to go bankrupt, even the big market ones. Knicks buy Dwight, CP3, Iggy and a bench, end up at 100+ mil, win the next 10 titles and spend billions on luxury tax alone in that decade. Tell me that wouldn't happen?
    Not good for the league at all.

    PS I'm not even sure why the players want this.
    If the BRI split stays, the players will have to give most of the money (if not all) back anyway. No serious gain. It just kills the league.
    Sounds like a counterproductive offer. Simply for PR.
    Or do they want to remove any BRI split as well?
    Last edited by ballism; 10-26-2011 at 08:22 PM.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to ballism For This Useful Post:


  11. #9

    Default Re: Eliminate the Salary Cap? | Cuban Radical (Big Market) Idea

    Quote Originally Posted by ballism View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    . . . Or do they want to remove any BRI split as well?
    not sure about the rest, but the players would love doing away with the BRI split. there are years that no BRI split would work against the players, but usually the players are the one's giving money back to the owners.

Similar Threads

  1. The Official Pacers Digest F.A.Q. Thread
    By Hicks in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 81
    Last Post: 09-02-2013, 05:30 PM
  2. CBA 101
    By Young in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 11-25-2010, 11:54 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-09-2009, 03:40 AM
  4. Mark Cuban on NBA rules
    By Grant in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-15-2004, 12:43 PM
  5. Who will you root for now?
    By Shade in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 06-03-2004, 04:28 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
  •