Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 15
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 15 template Next
  • #106
    Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

    Letter from Fisher to the players. he knew it would be leaked and it was, but still interesting, wonder if the part I put in bold is true, that the real conflict is amongst the owners. I would guess that is partially true to a certain extent


    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...?sct=nba_t2_a3


    Sam Amick

    LAS VEGAS -- Derek Fisher is determined to make the NBA players meeting productive instead of divisive.

    With about 70 players expected to meet here on Thursday, the National Basketball Players' Association president sent an impassioned email to his colleagues. The letter, obtained by SI.com from a player and published in full below, criticizes agents who have been calling for the decertification of the union and asks players to remain supportive of its efforts.

    It's the second deliberate and creative wrinkle Fisher has added to the meeting. As reported Wednesday night by SI.com, NFLPA head DeMaurice Smith will be speaking at the session after accepting an invitation from the Lakers' guard.

    ***
    To Each & Every Player,
    After the latest round of meetings, I thought it would be best to update you personally as to where the leadership of the National Basketball Players Association stands, where the negotiations stand where we are headed and the reasons why.

    Without a doubt, someone will be leaking this. I know it. The moment you read this you will know it. So, I say all with the fullest transparency.

    I was elected as your President. By you. For you. I take great pride and am honored to serve the over 400 members of our association. I and our Executive Committee take this job and this role seriously and will not agree to an unfair deal on behalf of you and our players. Period.

    I'm not looking out just for the marquee guy, I'm looking out for the guy that dreams of being a professional basketball player and gets a minimum deal. I'm not just trying to protect the guy on a team in a huge market. I'm protecting the player that is in a small market with incredibly loyal fans.

    I've made it clear, I want to play. You have each made it clear, you want to play. The fans have been unwavering, they want their basketball. The thousand of employees that work in the arenas, the ticket offices, the concession stands, they want a season. We all want to go back to work.

    The league and the team owners have locked us out. This was not our choice. Our employers decided to stop allowing us to do our jobs.

    My job since July 1st is to find a solution. To find an outcome that protects each of you and your livelihoods and continues to allow us to play the game we love so much and the fans love supporting.

    Since before the lockout began, I have spent hours upon hours, days, months, years, working on preparing you, the fans and the media about the possibilities. Now as the lockout has set in, reality of the situation is here.

    The most recent meetings in New York were effective. What you have been told by your agents, representatives and the media is probably speculative and inaccurate.

    What actually happened in those meetings was discussion, brainstorming and a sharing of options by both sides. The turning point this past Tuesday was not a disagreement between the players and the owners. It was actually a fundamental divide between the owners internally. They could not agree with each other on specific points of the deal and therefore it caused conflict within the league and its owners.

    So it is our hope that today, Thursday, at the owners meeting in Dallas that they work out their differences, come up with a revenue sharing plan that will protect their teams and are then ready to come together and sign off on the agreement we as a smaller group deemed reasonable.

    Decertification seems to be a hot button issue today in the media. So I'd like to address it. I've read yesterday's stories and find the position of these agents interesting. I have made myself available to each and every agent. But not once have I heard from them. If they are so concerned about the direction of the union, then why have they not contacted me? Each and every one of them mentioned has been in meetings with me. I've answered their questions, I've been told they support you, their players and our Players Association. So if there is a genuine concern, a suggestion, a question, call me. Email me. Text me. I'm working tirelessly each and every day on behalf of the over 400 players that they represent. Working for nothing but the best interests of THEIR guys. I don't make a commission, I don't make a salary for serving as President. I have NO ulterior motives. None.

    It is because they have not come to me once that I question their motives.

    I work every day on these negotiations. I work so that each player from Blake Griffin to Tyler Hansbrough, Pau Gasol to De'Andre Jordan, Dwight Howard to Jrue Holiday, Taj Gibson to Danny Granger, Steve Nash to Luke Babbit and every single player get a fair and reasonable deal. Not just for this year, not just for next year but for years to come. So that the league that WE the players largely helped build, continues to grow and thrive.

    So to address the agents that have decided to say their piece yesterday, I don't mind. Perhaps they are trying to make news. Perhaps they just want to show you, their clients, they are working hard. But what would be appreciated by the 400+ players would be the support of our agents and constructive ideas, suggestions and solutions that are in our best interests. Not the push for a drastic move that leaves their players without a union, without pensions, without health care. We just aren't there.

    I will remain committed to finding resolution to this because I know how important this is. I ask you to remain united with me and your over 400 allies, friends, brothers and colleagues. We are a powerful group if we remain united and focused on the task at hand.

    I urge every single one of you to call me, text me, email me with anything. An idea, a suggestion, a concern, a question. I represent you. I work for you.

    So to each player, each fan, each agent, each media member who ends up reading this...I stand behind this message. It comes from me, a 15 year veteran of basketball, the game I dreamt of playing as a kid, the game I love so much. I'm a teammate, I'm a father, I'm a son, I'm a husband, I'm a brother, but right now, the role I must work so hard to honor is the one as PA President. And I ask each of you to stand with me, stand by me and urge the league and the owners to come together and allow the game of basketball to continue to grow and thrive. We're ready.

    Sincerely,
    Derek
    Last edited by Unclebuck; 09-15-2011, 03:36 PM.

    Comment

    • #107
      Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

      http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...?sct=nba_t2_a4

      Sam Amick>INSIDE THE NBA

      Decertification rumbles growing as players face reality of lockout



      http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz1Y3H3Ssbf

      LAS VEGAS -- When NBA journeyman Melvin Ely heard the latest doomsday news of the league's labor situation, he offered a hearty shrug.

      His good-riddance tour had already begun, as he recently decided to play in China on a one-year, no opt-out deal that he expects to be completed next week. After eight seasons with five teams as a role player, he has no intention of ever coming back to the NBA in his basketball life.

      As for the rest of the players? They might be right behind him given the latest turn of events.

      After the third session between NBA and union representatives in the last week -- and with optimism seemingly on the rise that this season might be saved -- both sides reported a major step back following negotiations on Tuesday. National Basketball Players Association executive director Billy Hunter and president Derek Fisher predicted that training camp and at least half the season were seriously in jeopardy, with owners continuing to insist on a hard salary cap while Hunter deemed it a "blood issue" for his camp. Although both sides are scheduled to meet with their respective constituents on Thursday (the owners in Dallas, the players in Vegas), no further meetings are scheduled between them.

      Some players taking part in Impact Basketball's Competitive Training Series here were shocked. The internal sentiment had turned since last week, with the optimism rooted in the perceived reality that the owners were finally willing to take the necessary steps to get a deal done.

      THOMSEN: Owners, players agree to disagree as talks stall

      "I just thought we wouldn't have a lockout after the type of season we had last season," Wizards forward Rashard Lewis said. "As a whole, the playoffs were awesome. [You had] Miami not winning the championship, so I'm sure the fans are anticipating to see what happens with them this year. Kevin Durant is an awesome player. The list goes on and on. There's a lot of good teams. Derrick Rose is the youngest MVP ever, and the Bulls were the best team in the league [in the regular season]. There's just so [many] things that happened this year that you'd think the NBA would make something happen because the fans are anticipating it.

      "It is shocking. I don't want to bad-mouth the owners, or even on our side, but I think there's just so much great talent in the NBA they've got to figure out something. Meet in the middle."

      Instead, as Bobcats forward Corey Maggette put it, it's "back to the drawing board." And straight to the unemployment line.

      VIDEO: Stern, Hunter frustrated with lack of progress

      "Now guys have to make a decision about playing elsewhere, maintaining a living and all that," said Maggette, who was among the many who had been encouraged by the tenor of last week's talks. "As of right now, everyone is unemployed. You have to re-evaluate [your situation]. At the end of the day, you're unemployed right now and you have to do a job in order to feed your families or whatever.

      "I'm not saying guys don't have money or that they're not saving their money the right way, but ultimately -- if you get fired or you have to find yourself another job -- you've got to put out another résumé and pull another gig."

      If only it were that simple.

      The Chinese Basketball Association has made it clear that it will not allow opt-out clauses in its contracts that let players return to the NBA when the lockout lifts. The Euroleague, meanwhile, has made it known that its teams have little interest in renting players during the work stoppage only to see them leave midway through the season.

      Nonetheless, Maggette, a 12-year veteran who earned $10.2 million last season and would make $10.9 million in 2011-12, has been in serious talks with Greek team PAOK, but said he remains unsure what lies ahead. It's a very different situation for players like Detroit's Austin Daye, the third-year small forward who is owed $1.9 million next season.

      Daye recently left agent Bill Duffy and has been taking his time in selecting new representation. Yet with the dire state of lockout affairs and international jobs available certainly limited, his need for an agent has never been greater.

      "Toward the end of this month and going forward, I'm going to be looking at playing overseas, I guess," Daye said. "I need to find a job so I can make some money and also to play and get some experience. That's what my team needs, too. All the players that are young need as much experience as possible."

      With the momentum of the talks seemingly gone, numerous agent sources who spoke with SI.com said the pressure on Hunter is now greater than ever. While some agents have been pushing decertification of the union all along, Hunter's strategy was to engage commissioner David Stern and company in a meaningful dialogue about a solution while awaiting the outcome of the National Labor Relations Board case that was filed in late May.

      Now, however, the voices of the most ardent supporters of decertification have their "I-told-you-so" moment. The players are short on time and even shorter on leverage, and, as ESPN.com reported, the likes of power agents Arn Tellem, Mark Bartelstein, Bill Duffy, Jeff Schwartz and Dan Fegan are indeed pushing for decertification even as Hunter continues to avoid it.

      One source with knowledge of that component said Hunter -- who can be sidestepped in the decertification process -- is still being included in the conversations about the merits of that strategy and no decision had been made regarding the next step as of late Tuesday night. While decertifying and filing antitrust lawsuits against the league could certainly provide leverage, some legal experts estimate that the move would likely wipe out the 2011-12 season while taking approximately two years to reach a resolution in court.

      As for when they'll be back on an NBA court again, the very players who wish this week had gone differently insist they're prepared to sacrifice for their greater good.

      "Guys are just concerned about the future of the NBA," Lewis said. "The older guys made the way for us to be paid well, and have guaranteed contracts. And I think the same for the guys who will come behind us.

      "You don't want to just say, 'Well, I got mine.' We're all a family. We want to make sure [players] don't get taken advantage of and get bad deals."


      Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz1Y3H9p9uV
      Last edited by Unclebuck; 09-15-2011, 03:41 PM.

      Comment

      • #108
        Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

        Kings Tut has a great point, that they played within the system and now have a much better team, because they did what they could. Smart. I hate them, but it is still Riley outsmarting people. He seems to do that frequently.

        I think the problem is that the system is too open ended. How many of those contracts to MLE players turned out well? Not many. The system needs to be more restrictive. The market for players shouldn't be touched. Let the players make what they can within a manageable system.
        "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."

        Comment

        • #109
          Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

          http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...2_a6&eref=sihp

          NBA players turn to NFLPA's Smith

          LAS VEGAS -- Maybe this NBA players meeting won't be so gloom and doom after all.

          According to a source close to union president Derek Fisher, NFL Players Association head DeMaurice Smith is expected to address a group of about 70 players in Las Vegas on Thursday morning. It's a creative and well-timed wrinkle that came as a result of Fisher's invite, with the NFL's equivalent to National Basketball Players Association executive director Billy Hunter sure to relieve some of the tension in the room.

          The hope, as Fisher sees it, is that Smith can help buoy the players' spirits after discussions with the owners broke down on Tuesday, while also educating them on the complex issues involved in this process.

          The owners are meeting in Dallas on Thursday. The chance remains that commissioner David Stern could persuade his hard-lined contingent to relent on core issues like a hard salary cap as long as they receive the sort of financial givebacks from players that allow them to be profitable. Union officials were encouraged by last week's progress and surprised at the immediacy with which it all came to a halt, but there is some optimism because the economic disagreements -- if not the systematic ones -- haven't appeared as insurmountable as it might have appeared recently.

          Phoenix Suns player representative Jared Dudley indicated on Wednesday that the players had offered to lower their portion of basketball-related income from the previous 57 percent to approximately 53 percent. "If 52 or 51 gets the deal done," Dudley added, "I'm almost positive we'd do that. But the [owners] are trying to go in the 40s. We're not willing to go 40s."

          AMICK: Players growing upset with lack of progress

          The players meeting was sure to be short on substance and long on drama, as numerous agents continue to call for Hunter's head and players travel here to take the pulse of the situation. Enter Smith, who remained unified with his constituents throughout the NFL's recent lockout and knows plenty about the option so many NBA agents are pushing for: decertification.

          Yet as NBPA outside counsel Jeffrey Kessler told SI.com last month, the NFL and NBA situations are vastly different when it comes to that possible strategy. Even if players gathered the required 30 percent approval to decertify without the NBPA executive committee's consent, the voting process, which is conducted through the National Labor Relations Board, would take approximately two months and the legal obstacles would grow even more challenging from there. The NBA has already filed a preemptive lawsuit seeking a ruling that decertification is illegal in the Southern District of New York. Because that's a court that has ruled in the league's favor before, the NBPA is in the process of filing a motion to dismiss the lawsuit. That move will only delay the process further.

          As Dudley made clear, these are the sorts of details that players are eager to learn more about.

          "I asked Billy one time, I said, 'What are the negatives of decertification? 'If two months from now, four months from now, we had no deal done, would it be a negative to decertify but you still talk to [the owners]?' " said Dudley, whose agent, Mark Bartelstein, is known to favor decertification. "It was kind of iffy on the answers. That's something I'll bring up to him [on Thursday]. He's very open to discuss that, and he needs to discuss that. He's our leader."

          On a day when Hunter seemed destined to be under an intense and unwanted spotlight, there will be another leader there too to help provide some answers.

          Comment

          • #110
            Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

            Originally posted by King Tuts Tomb View Post
            The cap number itself means nothing. 22 teams were over the cap last year.

            You can argue all you want about whether the Heat will be able to keep the big three under the new system and the fact is we just don't know. It hasn't been worked out yet. But from what I've seen it looks like it will allow some forgiveness for contracts signed under the old cap system. I highly doubt the NBA is going to break up a team that brings them so much publicity.

            The original argument that the Heat overspent more than any other major market team is pretty clearly wrong. Whether you have a problem with the top ten markets outspending the bottom ten is an entirely different argument. The Heat were held up as a singular example of overspending. They're not.
            Maybe we're working with two different defintions of overspend. I'm thinking that anything spent over the cap is overspending, so the cap is definitely an important part of the discussion.

            I agree that the Heat aren't the only teams that overspent. But they are an example of the flaws of the current system. There is no way the Pacers can compete in a system that doesn't have any teeth to really punish teams for overspending.

            IMHO NY/LA/Miami/etc shouldn't have a competive advantage because they operate in a market that allows them to massively overpay.
            “Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

            Comment

            • #111
              Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

              For some reason I thought the players meeting in Las Vegas was the most important meeting of today, but I'm starting to think, no the owners meeting in Dallas is. I suppose this article comfirms what Fisher is tellking the players in regards to the owners not in agreement

              I do think it is rather obvious that today is the most important day of the lockout thus far.


              http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/pos...tinue-in-a-way


              Thursday, September 15, 2011
              Negotiations continue, in a way



              By Henry Abbott

              The league and players are not meeting with each other, but that doesn't mean today couldn't be a hugely important day in terms of saving the season.

              The action is in Dallas

              This NBA Board of Governors meeting promises to be a lively one, with big implications for the current CBA.

              For one thing, the owners are due to talk about the very tricky issue of revenue sharing. As in, taking money from some owners to give it to others. That topic would be lively at your local Brownie meeting. It's hardcore between 30 hard-charging, competitive entrepreneurial types.



              Even more importantly, the 30 owners need to figure out how much they really hate soft salary caps -- because we know two things:
              • They are not unanimous on this.
              • David Stern is getting out his whip.
              The most obvious sign of this comes from Stern himself.

              Until recently, and for obvious reasons, Stern has been ironclad in presenting owners as entirely united. The owners bargain more strongly if they are seen as one entity, with one mind. So Stern is generally very opposed to letting the public or the players know that the owners have diverse views, and in that vein he has prevented owners and team employees from speaking publicly about the CBA at all.

              In New York on Tuesday, however, Stern broke with tradition, and admitted his owners were not on the same page on everything, which applies just a little pressure to those unnamed owners who are being difficult.

              Here's how it happened: The players say they were ready to make what they thought was a very meaningful economic offer to the owners. But before they did, they wanted to know that the soft cap would remain.

              In response to that, the owners did what both sides have done many times, and left the bargaining table to confer among themselves. (At CBA meetings, both sides typically have "caucus rooms" for just this purpose.) The owners huddled for three hours before deciding they would not respond to the players' offer. Meeting over.

              Later, the careful Stern decided to share with the public that the 11 owners in the room were not unified on how to handle the players' offer:
              As you might guess, I don't know how many owners we had, but we had as many views ... We were not unanimous in every aspect of it. But all of the owners were completely unified in the view that we needed a system that at the end of the day allowed 30 teams to compete. And we went back to the players and said that although we have some ideas, we've been talking to each other, agreeing, disagreeing, coming up with everything that we possibly could to see if there was still time to save the season, it actually didn't make sense for us to respond to their non-negotiable demand that everything remain the same that it was, and that we'd be best off going back and reporting to our respective sides at the meetings we'd have on Thursday.
              Thursday. That's today; The day when Stern gets to try to unify his owners in figuring out how to respond to the union's current position.

              The action is Las Vegas



              Billy Hunter has not shown the slightest inclination to decertify his union. There are all kinds of things that might be driving this:
              • He'd lose his job, at least temporarily.
              • The legal fees would be astronomical.
              • Many of the key decisions in the process would be handed to a judge, randomizing some things that the players now have under control.
              • Decertification did not work very well for the NFL players.
              But the best reason for Hunter to be against decertification is that he has a good track record of getting strong results from players when facing owners with the same leverage (although perhaps a different mood) than they have now. He knows this game, and predicted in March that it would all come down to the hard cap. Does anybody still think the players lost the CBA talks in 1998 and 2005, now that players have enjoyed some of the best salaries in sports all the way through a profound recession? Isn't it clear that these current talks are about rectifying the players' resounding victories of the past?

              As it is, Hunter and Stern both hint they are close to meeting on economic issues. And Hunter has pressure on the owners to assess their stance on the hard cap. If you were Hunter, I could see wondering why everyone was in a panic about decertifcation now, when the real negotiations have just begun, and are underway, in a sense, even today.

              In any case, the open question is what the mood is among the rank and file. There have long been grumbles about this or that aspect of Hunter's leadership. Does he have the support of the players, now that the pressure has been ratcheted up? With the help of DeMaurice Smith and Derek Fisher, today's his day to consolidate. And if he does, it's a good bet that whenever resolution comes, it will come from Hunter sitting across a table from Stern.

              If however, the mood is to make something happen now, then players will have to go down the road of decertification, as has been suggested by many of their agents, which would shake things up dramatically, increasing the risks for both parties.




              Last edited by Unclebuck; 09-15-2011, 03:59 PM.

              Comment

              • #112
                Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

                Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post
                Letter from Fisher to the players.

                Sincerely,
                Derek
                Powerful!! Well done, sir.

                Comment

                • #113
                  Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

                  Thanks UB for keeping up with these articles. I can't believe that the owners were having discussions without being on the same page. The players forced the owners into a corner they figured the owners weren't united on. It sounds as if it worked well. I still think the owners win these negotiations overall, but I think the players won by forcing the owners into figuring out what it would take for a deal. This league absolutely needs more significant revenue sharing if there is a soft cap.
                  "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."

                  Comment

                  • #114
                    Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

                    Okay, at the next meeting, someone get all the agents into a room and lock them in while the PA and owners meet!
                    "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                    "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                    Comment

                    • #115
                      Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

                      Originally posted by Since86 View Post

                      IMHO NY/LA/Miami/etc shouldn't have a competive advantage because they operate in a market that allows them to massively overpay.
                      I think King Tut's point is that Miami is just not in the same league as LA or NY when it comes to overspending. Heck, they don't even compare with Dallas or Orlando. If you want to talk about the evils of overspending, point to those teams.

                      Miami is a different problem, one where three elite players agreed to take less money in order to play together. Would a lower cap make the Miami scenario impossible? Maybe, or maybe the three players simply agree to take even less money, or else maybe it's only LeBron and Wade in Miami. A neater solution would be to increase the max individual salary, which would make the financial sacrifice much greater for the players involved if they still want to team together.

                      Comment

                      • #116
                        Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

                        Originally posted by D-Fish View Post
                        I work every day on these negotiations. I work so that each player from Blake Griffin to Tyler Hansbrough, Pau Gasol to De'Andre Jordan, Dwight Howard to Jrue Holiday, Taj Gibson to Danny Granger, Steve Nash to Luke Babbit and every single player get a fair and reasonable deal. Not just for this year, not just for next year but for years to come. So that the league that WE the players largely helped build, continues to grow and thrive.
                        Anyone else catch this part? I liked how two of our guys were name dropped.

                        Comment

                        • #117
                          Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

                          Originally posted by wintermute View Post
                          I think King Tut's point is that Miami is just not in the same league as LA or NY when it comes to overspending. Heck, they don't even compare with Dallas or Orlando. If you want to talk about the evils of overspending, point to those teams.
                          Miami is a different problem, one where three elite players agreed to take less money in order to play together. Would a lower cap make the Miami scenario impossible? Maybe, or maybe the three players simply agree to take even less money, or else maybe it's only LeBron and Wade in Miami. A neater solution would be to increase the max individual salary, which would make the financial sacrifice much greater for the players involved if they still want to team together.



                          I agree with this, but the payroll of Miami today is nothing to what it will be as the contracts of the big 3 increase through the next few years and they then have the highest payroll in the nba. I don't think I read that anyone thinks Miami is a bigger problem then L.A., N.Y. or Dallas though.
                          I take issue with teams being able to outspend the Pacers to give them an unfair advantage. I also take issue with the collusion of a group of superstars manipulating the game to give Miami an unfair advantage over the Pacers. I do not want the players to have this kind of control to where they can fix the game, which is what they've legally pulled off under this ridiculous cba.
                          I also agree that if we have a hard cap then max contracts should be increased or perhaps given no limit. Lets' see if Lebron wants to take 10 mil in Miami or 35 mil playing for the Bucks.
                          BTW:
                          Post #1000 and it only took me 7 years to get here.
                          Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

                          Comment

                          • #118
                            Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

                            Miami would eventually be in the same cateory as LAL/NY though. Unless the league allows them to drop a player, or they trade away one of the big 3, they're going to have a $80-90M. In a few years they will have $70M tied up in 6 players. Even if they sign 9 players to the league minimum, they will get above the $80M mark easily.


                            IMHO without a hard cap, or atleast a significant punishment for overspending like a $5 penalty instead of a $1, would be the neatest solution.

                            As long as teams are able to overspend, and only receive a slap on the wrist, there will be a select few that will continue overspending. The Lakers/Knicks being the biggest two.
                            “Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                            Comment

                            • #119
                              Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

                              Originally posted by Unclebuck View Post

                              As it is, Hunter and Stern both hint they are close to meeting on economic issues. And Hunter has pressure on the owners to assess their stance on the hard cap. If you were Hunter, I could see wondering why everyone was in a panic about decertifcation now, when the real negotiations have just begun, and are underway, in a sense, even today.
                              I kinda agree with this. You do get the sense that they've come close to a breakthrough without the decertification threat, so it seems premature to whip it out now.

                              My feeling now is that the two sides had an agreement in principle last week (players give on revenue split, owners give on hard cap), but that the owners balked in their larger meeting. I think that's why the NBPA members were so outraged in their comments, because they thought they had a deal already. So yeah I guess the owners' meeting is the one to watch.

                              On the players' side, I hope they don't try to decertify. IMO it would just add a lot of uncertainty to the situation without giving any particular advantage to the players. No need to rush, see how Hunter's strategy plays out first.

                              Comment

                              • #120
                                Re: Today's meetings are over: Don't expect NBA ball until 2012

                                Originally posted by Scot Pollard View Post
                                The Canada teams seem the be the only ones making money in the NHL.

                                They have a lot of poor American teams and they should do something about them.
                                This is only partly true. For sure there are a lot of American teams in the red, but four of the six most profitable NHL franchises are American (Rangers, Red Wings, Flyers and Bruins) and the profits of the two Canadian teams on the list (Maple Leafs and Canadiens) are tied almost exclusively to fat cable monopolies. Plus there's the intangible that can't be measured in dollars, i.e. the parity of the post-lockout NHL. Since the canceled 2004-'05 season that ushered in the salary cap era, a different team has won the Stanley Cup EVERY SINGLE YEAR. What's more, there's even parity within the parity, as two big-market teams (Anaheim Ducks, Chicago Blackhawks), two mid-market teams (Detroit Red Wings, Boston Bruins) and two small-market teams (Carolina Hurricanes, Pittsburgh Penguins) have won the championship.
                                "Reggie Miller is the hardest player to guard." --Kobe Bryant

                                "Playing Reggie Miller drives me nuts. It's like chicken-fighting with a woman." --Michael Jordan

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 15 template Next
                                Working...
                                X