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

NEWS ONLY Lockout thread

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 7
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 template Next
  • #46
    Re: NEWS ONLY Lockout thread

    http://espn.go.com/espn/commentary/s...nd-lockout-now

    Sources tell ESPN that the National Labor Relations Board appears ready to issue a ruling on the union's clam of unfair labor practices against the NBA.
    If the players' claim is successful, the NLRB would ask a federal court for an injunction that ends the lockout.
    The players contend that the NBA has made "draconian demands and changes" to the collective bargaining agreement and imposed a lockout when there was "no impasse in bargaining."
    The union asserts that the owners have made "harsh, inflexible, and grossly regressive 'takeaway' demands" intended to remove benefits the players have bargained for since 1995. The league has used "take it or leave it" tactics without "appropriate tradeoffs," say the players.
    The players also claim the NBA engaged in "surface bargaining," without the actual intent of negotiating a new agreement with the players in good faith.
    The NBA seems to recognize the risks presented by the union's claim. While the management's side does not usually participate in early maneuvering at the NLRB, the NBA has taken steps to provide the NLRB with a significant amount of information in an attempt to dispute the union's complaint.
    The NLRB's members are appointed by President Barack Obama and the board is considered by many to be predisposed to protecting union interests.




    Read more: http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap...#ixzz1bWFJz956
    Surface bargaining. System changes. Draconian demands. Yep, it's the language of labor; and as far as we're concerned here in our Courtside Seat, that kind of lingo is a labor of love. Of course, we're talking about the 'L' word again: Lockout. We'll get to some juicy obstruction of justice and misdemeanor battery a little later; but today, we start with another capital letter. We start with …
    The X Factor in the Lockout

    In a flurry of acrimony and accusation, negotiations between NBA players and owners have collapsed. Even the assistance of a skilled mediator, George Cohen, did not draw the warring factions closer together, and might even have pushed them further apart. But there is still a ray of hope. A federal agency -- an unlikely agency, in that it doesn't have a long history of being effective in sports labor disputes -- has a chance now to make a difference as it is preparing a decision that could bring the lockout to a sudden end.
    Officials of the National Labor Relations Board, sources say, appear to be ready to act on a players' union claim that NBA owners are guilty of unfair labor practices in their demands for "draconian demands and changes" and the declaration of a lockout when there was "no impasse in bargaining."



    With board members appointed by President Obama in control, the NLRB has been leaning toward unions in most disputes. If the board agrees with the players that the owners have been guilty of bad faith in their bargaining and their lockout, the board would ask a federal judge for an injunction that would stop the lockout.
    How important is the NLRB action? In most labor disputes, the management side of the dispute (the owners) does not participate in early NLRB skirmishing. In the NBA players' case, however, the owners have submitted considerable evidence to the NLRB in an effort to postpone an action that could destroy their lockout.
    The possibility of an imminent decision from the board helps explain why the NBA players haven't followed the lead of players in the NFL, who disclaimed their union and filed antitrust litigation against the owners. The NBA players, it appears, made a decision early in the process that the NLRB would be their home court. If they disclaimed their union, they would be barred from pursuing their grievances in the NLRB and would lose what they clearly see as a source of potential leverage.


    (An aside. For what it's worth, the legal nomenclature on "disclaim" and "decertify" has been evolving. "Disclaim" is the quick action with a vote of the members to abandon their rights as a union. It's what the NFL players did at the beginning of their league's lockout, though the word "decertify" was broadly used, including here. "Decertify" is now taken to describe a supervised NLRB election in which the members vote on whether to keep their current union. That's a process that takes months. Courtside Seat is not sure why this redefinition has occurred, but knows it has happened.)
    NLRB lawyers and investigators have been analyzing the players' claims since May, when the union filed the first of a series of three increasingly detailed complaints about the owners and their bargaining tactics.



    The key issue in both the NLRB's investigation and in Cohen's mediation attempts is what is now known as "system changes." Both sides have edged closer and closer on money issues; and by now, it is easy to see a compromise on the horizon when the owners are offering 49 percent to 51 percent of basketball related income and the players are demanding 53 percent. If that difference was the only obstacle, training camps would be open.
    But the "system changes" are behind this week's long mediation sessions, and may produce a blockbuster decision from the NLRB.
    The players insist in their NLRB complaints that from the outset of negotiations for a new collective bargaining agreement in August 2009, the owners have been making "harsh, inflexible, and grossly regressive 'takeaway' demands." What does that mean? It means, if the union is correct, that the owners want to take back from the players major benefits that the players have struggled to achieve in negotiations going back to 1995. These benefits include guaranteed contracts and a relatively soft salary cap, and exceptions to the salary cap that are highly beneficial to players.
    The owners not only want changes in these basic structures, the players argue, but they are demanding those changes in "take it or leave it" terms without "appropriate tradeoffs." The players are describing something known in the labor world as "surface bargaining." They are saying that all of the meetings and all of the exchanges of proposals between August 2009 and June 30 of this year (when the contract expired and the lockout began) were sham maneuvers designed only to stall progress until a lockout was possible.
    In addition to the charges of bogus bargaining, the players note that the owners "have admitted in negotiations that the lockout will cost them approximately $1.5 billion per year." In a nice bit of understatement, the players say the loss of $1.5 billion is not a "sufficient business reason" for the lockout.
    The lockout itself is also a part of the players' claim that the owners' bargaining tactics are "destructive to the collective bargaining process" and violate players' rights under the laws that govern unions and bargaining.



    It's a clever double-barreled argument from the players. They lay it out this way: The bargaining before the lockout was a sham and a violation of the law, or the bargaining was lawful and the owners declared a lockout when there was no impasse. The players win either way.
    If the NLRB concludes that the players are correct in their descriptions of the owners' bargaining, the board will rule in favor of the players. The board would file an action against the NBA and demand that the league cease its bargaining tactics and its lockout. The legal action is called a "10(j)" in reference to the section of labor law that defines it. If you could somehow eavesdrop on a conversation among NBA players right now, it would not be a big surprise to hear them talking about their "10(j)." And it will not be a big surprise if the union's NLRB gambit is successful.
    It would be a dramatic setback for commissioner David Stern and the owners. They would argue about it before the board and in federal court, but their lockout would end and the owners would lose the leverage they have tried to establish for more than two years.
    An NLRB decision would be the first time the board has acted in a sports dispute since MLB owners locked out baseball players after a players strike eliminated the World Series in 1994. Responding to an NLRB request for an injunction then, then-federal district judge Sonia Sotomayor (now on the U.S. Supreme Court) ruled that the owners were guilty of bad faith bargaining and ended a work stoppage and re-established the primacy of the players' union.
    Both the players and the owners will be huffing and puffing for the next few days, accusing each other of all sorts of things. But instead of listening to them, it might be a good idea to keep an eye on the NLRB headquarters in Washington. A decision from the board would change everything. It might be the last and best hope for an NBA season.
    Why do teams tank? Ask a Spurs fan.

    Comment

    • #47
      Re: NEWS ONLY Lockout thread

      Chris Sheridan summarizes where the to sides stand:

      http://sheridanhoops.com/2011/10/23/...aining-issues/

      Sheridan column: Breakdown of financial and system differences

      By Chris Sheridan
      October 23, 2011 at 2:34 PM

      NEW YORK — Have you cooled off yet, guys?

      The next step in the NBA lockout is likely to be a phone call placed from the league office to the players’ association. It’ll be a courtesy call to inform the union that an announcement is forthcoming that another chunk of games is being canceled.

      The call could end there, or it could include a kicker: “Feel like sitting down together again?”

      Let’s face it: At some point, the logical and inevitable thing to do is to re-engage in dialogue, drop the preconditions once again and see if it might be mutually beneficial to try to finish off negotiations to end this madness before the possibility of having an 82-game season becomes moot.

      This fight has become foolish, idiocy in its finest form.

      Take this example, for instance:

      The NBA is a business that brought in $4.2 billion last season, and the owners and players are a mere $100 million per season apart on the financial side of their negotiations. They will lose $800 million by wiping out a month of the schedule, yet that is what they seem to be intent on doing to show what tough negotiators they are. (It is worth noting that the only people making money from the NBA lockout are the law firms representing the two sides).

      Burning down the village in order to save it? Yep.

      By now you should be familiar with what is keeping the sides apart. The owners are offering a 50/50 split of basketball related income; the players are asking for 52.5 percent. Each percentage point equals $40 million. Do the math, and it’s $100 million per year.

      But there also are differences in what the salary cap system will look like, although many of those differences were narrowed in the 30 1/2 hours of federally mediated talks held last week. Here is where the sides stand on a number of those system issues:

      _ Mid-level exception: Contrary to reports elsewhere, there is not a complete agreement on this particular piece of the puzzle. Yes, the sides have agreed that the maximum mid-level exception should be $5 million, but the owners want it to max out at $15 million over three years (no annual raises), while the union wants the maximum mid-level to be for four years, with 7 or 8 percent annual raises depending on the length of the contract.

      _ Restricted free agency: The union went into these talks asking that the waiting time for a team to match an offer to a restricted free agent be reduced from 7 days. The owners have acquiesced, and the window for matching will be reduced to 3 or 4 days. The union also is asking that restricted free agency be removed for players coming off their rookie scale contracts, which would allow first-round picks to become unrestricted after four years instead of five, which is the case for second-round picks.

      _ Trade rules: Under the old system, the salaries of players being traded had to be within 125 percent of each other (if both trading teams were over the salary cap). This rule will be loosened considerably, although a final formula has not been agreed to. The players want the percentage to rise to 225 percent (whereby, for instance, a player making $1 million could be traded for a player making $2.25 million), while the owners have indicated a willingness to allow the percentage to rise to 140 or 150 percent — although teams paying the luxury tax would have a tighter restraint.

      _ The “stretch exception”: Under this proposal, a team could waive any player and stretch out the remainder of the money he is owed, reducing the salary cap number for that waived player. For instance, if an underperforming player had three years left on his contract and was waived under the stretch exception, his remaining unpaid salary would be stretched out over a period as long as seven years. (Example: A player owed $21 million for three years who is waived under the stretch exception would still be paid his $21 million, but the cap cost would be spread over seven years, meaning he would count $3 million annually against the cap instead of $7 million.) In theory, this would free up more money to be paid to players who were worthy of the increased salary. (Also, an additional pile of money would be freed up through the amnesty clause, a one-time opportunity when this deal gets done for each team to waive one player without his salary counting against the salary cap or the luxury tax. This clause would be especially helpful to Orlando, which could remove Gilbert Arenas and the $62.4 million he is owed over the next three years, and Portland, which could do the same with Brandon Roy’s $49 million in guaranteed money over the next three seasons.)

      _ Maximum annual raises: There has been little movement here, with the owners asking that maximum raises be 4 1/2 percent for Bird players and 3 percent for others. The union wants to keep the current system of 10.5 percent raises for Bird players, with the caveat that the maximum raises would drop to 9 percent for a player signing a four- or five-year contract. For non-Bird players the union is asking for maximum raises of 8 percent in two- and three-year contracts, and 7 percent for players receiving four- or five-year deals.

      _ The escrow tax: Under the old system, 9 percent of every player’s salary was withheld to ensure that players, as a whole, received no more than 57 percent of BRI (More than $160 million in withheld escrow funds from last season were refunded to players in August). The owners want to change things to have an NHL-style system with an unlimited escrow tax withheld, while the union wants to keep something resembling the present system in place.

      _ Base-year compensation: The is an incredibly complicated rule dealing with the cap number for players who are in the first year of a new contract that pays them considerably more than they earned in their previous deal (i.e. a player coming off a rookie scale contract who signs a max deal). The union wants the rule eliminated, and the owners are open to that idea — except in the case of luxury tax-paying teams, and when the base-year player is involved in a sign-and-trade deal.

      _ Additional Bird restrictions: The owners have backed off their previous demands that no team could have more than three Bird players on its roster at any time, and that no tax-paying team could use the Bird exception on more than one player per season. The owners are continuing to ask that tax-paying teams be prohibited from using the mid-level exception or the so-called Early Bird exception.

      _ Maximum salaries: The owners have withdrawn their demands for changes to the maximum salary structure for individual players. The old system will remain, with the hard cap on individual salaries remaining roughly 25 percent of the cap for players with 1-6 years of service, 30 percent for players with 7-9 years, and 35 percent for players with 10 or more years of experience.

      Comment

      • #48
        Re: NEWS ONLY Lockout thread

        A report on Billy Hunter's interview with Simmons

        http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/e...48484/32918768

        Billy Hunter was on the B.S. Report to discuss the lockout, spending about an hour discussing any and everything about the current state of labor talks.

        He said he sees these negotiations as similar to 1998's lockout that resulted in 32 lost games, but felt that last week's long negotiations were going to yield something positive.

        "I thought we were trying to reach compromise when we were there last week," Hunter said. "I suspect it's more about an internal battle that may be brewing or that's occuring between the big and small markets over the proposals we've submitted.

        "We don't want to be totally exploited."

        Hunter recounted a meeting with David Stern in Cleveland a few years ago during the postseason where Stern said his owners were ready and willing to miss an entire season to force player salary rollbacks.

        Hunter said that the owners have acknowledged that 53 percent covers their losses and gives them the "possibility" of making a profit, citing specifically Peter Holt. And also said that players, having come down from 57 percent to as low as 52.5 in terms of Basketball Related Income split, are starting to dig into these negotiations for more reasons than just money, implying that it has moved past just dollars and cents, but is about the principle of getting a fair deal and they're willing to take the hit in order to get it. Now it's becoming a moral issue to them.

        "They're principled individuals," Hunter said. "After a while, it becomes a principle ... the players are a little bit more strident."

        Hunter said that during last week's long negotiations there were multiple ideas presented, with one interesting concept coming from Mavericks owner Mark Cuban. Hunter said Cuban came up with a structure called the "Game-changer" that included no salary cap. Hunter said he took that back to the players and they had a version of it they liked and then Hunter said two or three owners were very excited about it. And then a couple small market owners put the kibosh on it.

        "We're open to the idea Mark Cuban put on the table," he said.

        Hunter also commeted on NHL player Bill Guerin's statements that holding out for a deal wasn't worth it, saying that he and his staff have been "very transparent" with the players about how much they'll lose per week, per month or even for a season. But also said the players are actively pursuing every opportunity to make a deal.

        "We've indicated that we're ready to sit down and negotiate with them in a minute's notice," Hunter said. "I'm prepared to do anything within reason -- within reason -- to get a deal."

        Hunter relayed that he had told the owners that concessions on systems issues might make the NBA's 50-50 offer "more palatable" to players. Meaning, I think, that owners could get their desired 50-50 BRI split if they'll work on some of their systematic demands. But Hunter said the owners will only negotiate system on the precondition of a 50-50 split. Which is when Dan Gilbert evidently told Hunter to "trust his gut" on the system.

        Hunter was asked about Bryant Gumbel's comments that compared Stern to a "plantation overseer," simply answering, "I don't think David is racist at all." But he did try and explain why Stern's being so hard-headed on these negotiations.

        "I think the reason David's being so stubborn is he's got a new crop of owners," Hunter said. "He's got all these guys who are extremely successful, making billions of dollars and they bought these franchises. And they just have a different perspective."

        It's honestly easy to hear Hunter's side of the story and lean towards the players. He presents a side that's very open to every compromise, open to every idea but is being met with a hard wall of stubborn owners looking for a blowout victory in these negotiations. Is it encouraging? Somewhat. Hunter was very straightforward with how much the players are willing to concede to get a deal done. I think they're position is out in the open. They want a deal where they can feel that the owners didn't get everything they wanted and raked them over the coals.

        If it eventually comes to that, the players will be ready to deal. How long that's going to take is the question.
        Link to actual podcast

        http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...t-billy-hunter

        Comment

        • #49
          Re: NEWS ONLY Lockout thread

          Report: NBA to cancel more games

          http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/71...cording-report

          The NBA plans to cancel two more weeks of its regular season, a source told the New York Daily News.

          This would be the third time commissioner David Stern has postponed games as the league's lockout of the players continues. The NBA had previously canceled the preseason and the first two weeks of its regular season which was set to begin on Nov. 1.

          According to the Daily News' source, this latest cancellation would total at least 102 games and run through Nov. 28.

          The source told the Daily News that the NBA will announce the latest cancellation of games on Tuesday.

          At present, the league's annual slate of Christmas Day games remain a possibility, however no new talks between the owners and players union are scheduled.

          After three days and 30 hours of meetings with a federal mediator, negotiations fell apart last week when union officials said they were told they must commit to a 50-50 split of revenues before owners would agree to discuss the salary cap system.

          "Right now, they're saying it's got to be a precondition. If we're going to meet, you've got to agree to accept 50-50. So as long as that edict is out there, then when are we going to meet?" players' association executive director Billy Hunter said last week. "We're saying we're unwilling to meet unless we can talk about the system independent of the number."

          With more games possibly being canceled and the two sides not speaking, the question is will there be an NBA season. While neither side has said definitively one way or the other, the combatants both seem prepared in the event the season is canceled.

          "The competitive issues and the economic issues, certainly we don't want to lose the season, I don't think the NHL did either. It ended up happening," Spurs owner Peter Holt, chairman of the owners' labor relations committee, said last week. "There are certain things that we feel we must have."

          Hunter said at the conclusion of last week's talks that the players are equally as committed.

          "This thing is on a slippery slope and we're already losing games, the first two weeks, and if we continue to go in that decline, it may become intractable to get people to move from their respective positions."
          Sittin on top of the world!

          Comment

          • #50
            Re: NEWS ONLY Lockout thread

            http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/71...ng-sources-say

            Sources: Owners talk revenue sharing

            By Henry Abbott

            Updated: October 25, 2011, 12:57 PM ET

            NEW YORK -- NBA owners were meeting Tuesday in New York to discuss revenue sharing between high-revenue and low-revenue teams, sources directly involved in the talks said.

            More than 10 owners and a large number of team staff were present, while other owners and staff were joining the talks by phone, sources said.

            The meeting follows a New York Daily News report that the NBA plans to announce it is canceling another two weeks of regular-season games on Tuesday. The NBA already has canceled its entire preseason and first two weeks of regular-season games.

            Tuesday, sources with knowledge of the situation told ESPN The Magazine's Chris Broussard that representatives for the NBA owners and players talked Monday. The sources did not say whether the parties met in person or spoke over the telephone, but said the discussions were lengthy and related to collective bargaining.

            Revenue sharing remains a major issue in the NBA lockout, which entered its 117th day on Tuesday. Commissioner David Stern has said the owners will address the system after the owners and players agree on a new collective bargaining agreement, while the players have insisted it be part of a new CBA.

            Tuesday's owners' meeting is the continuation of a conversation that began at the league's Board of Governors meeting in New York last Wednesday and Thursday. At that time, deputy commissioner Adam Silver said the league planned to dramatically increase the amount high-revenue teams share with low-revenue teams from roughly $60 million to about $150 million per season.

            Eight NBA teams made a combined $150 million in profit last year, while 22 lost a combined $450 million, for a combined league-wide loss of $300 million, league sources say. Sharing an amount equal to the total combined profits of the moneymaking teams clearly has the potential to be complex, and Silver called the last talks on the topic "robust."

            "A few of our owners," Silver told reporters at the time, "remarked after the robust revenue discussion last night that we might want the assistant of the federal mediator for our revenue sharing discussions, as well."

            Silver also has cautioned that revenue-sharing talks have "in no way" impeded progress in talks with the players. But evidently the union disagrees.

            NBA players' union executive director Billy Hunter told Grantland's Bill Simmons on Monday that "there appears to be some impediment" in talks with the NBA, adding "I think revenue sharing is the elephant in the room right now."

            Henry Abbott is a senior NBA writer for ESPN.com. Information from ESPN The Magazine senior writer Chris Broussard was used in this report.
            Last edited by Speed; 10-25-2011, 01:06 PM.

            Comment

            • #51
              Re: NEWS ONLY Lockout thread


              The players and owners are returning to the bargaining table on Wednesday, six days after their federally mediated talks broke off when the union declined the NBA league office's demand that the union accept an even 50-50 BRI share before bargaining could proceed.

              Surprisingly, the NBA held off on issuing any more game cancellations on Tuesday. But such an announcement is expected soon if the parties cannot come to a deal.

              The sides are scheduled to meet at a midtown Manhattan hotel on Wednesday to once again see if their talks can produce substantial movement toward completion of a new collective bargaining agreement and the start of the NBA regular season.
              http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/ba...table_to_.html
              "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


              Comment

              • #52
                Re: NEWS ONLY Lockout thread

                http://www.pacersdigest.com/showthre...t=66778&page=3

                Lockout update: Talks to resume today
                2 Comments

                ■By Chris Sheridan
                ■October 26, 2011 at 7:32 AM


                NEW YORK — The NBA lockout could be settled by tonight. Or, talks could drag into the wee hours of Thursday morning and then resume after the sides get a few hours of sleep, setting up Friday as settlement day.

                Or, the whole thing could blow up again as it did last Thursday.

                All we know for sure is that owners and players have agreed to meet again today in another attempt at ending the NBA lockout. They are apart by a mere $100 million per season on the revenue split, and they still have numerous system issues to resolve, as detailed here a couple days ago.

                If they split the differences and walk out together holding their noses but also holding hands, we could have NBA basketball by the end of November, which in theory would allow for a full 82-game schedule to be played if the end of the regular season is moved back two weeks to the end of April.

                If an agreement is reached, a whole new schedule will be drawn up.

                From Howard Beck of the New York Times: “When the N.B.A. canceled the first 100 games of the season this month, it immediately released its 29 arenas from any obligations for those dates. For now, the arenas are still bound to honor the printed schedule from Nov. 15 and beyond. There are two notable exceptions. A Lakers game at Staples Center against the Toronto Raptors, scheduled for Dec. 13, has been dropped in favor of a Jay-Z and Kanye West concert, The Orange County Register reported last week. The change was made with the N.B.A.’s approval and with assurances that the Lakers-Raptors game could be accommodated on another night. The league clarified in a statement that the change was not an indication that December games had been canceled, but rather that the printed schedule was defunct. “With the cancellation of the first two weeks of the season, the N.B.A. schedule would have to be reworked and certain dates — including Dec. 13 for a Lakers game at Staples Center — would not be part of any revised schedule,” said the statement, which was published by The Register. A Bulls game against the San Antonio Spurs, scheduled for Nov. 30 at United Center, has also been bumped for the Jay-Z tour. So far, no other arenas have received permission to release N.B.A. dates beyond Nov. 14.”
                Sittin on top of the world!

                Comment

                • #53
                  Re: NEWS ONLY Lockout thread

                  Owners Drop 50-50 Precondition
                  http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap...#ixzz1buIKDZo4

                  The NBA owners have dropped their insistence that players agree to a 50/50 split of BRI as a precondition to discuss system issues.

                  The precondition was blamed for talks breaking apart last week.
                  Oldness comes with a smile
                  To every love given child
                  Oldness comes to rile
                  The youth who dream suicide

                  Comment

                  • #54
                    Re: NEWS ONLY Lockout thread

                    http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/1...eason-prevails

                    By Ken Berger
                    CBSSports.com NBA Insider

                    Comment

                    • #55
                      Re: NEWS ONLY Lockout thread

                      John Reid:Wow, NBA and the players association are reportedly moving closer to getting a deal done, according to reportsabout 25 minutes ago
                      Read more: http://hoopshype.com/twitter/media.html#ixzz1buge6WmR

                      Fools gold or could it actualy come to fruition?

                      Sittin on top of the world!

                      Comment

                      • #56
                        Re: NEWS ONLY Lockout thread

                        Any word on if the mediator(s) is/are present is today's meeting?
                        "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                        Comment

                        • #57
                          Re: NEWS ONLY Lockout thread

                          WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski
                          Clearly, the NBA and NBPA made some measure of progress talking quietly over last 48-72 hours leading into bargaining session today in NY.

                          WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski
                          Two sources -- one on ownership side, one union -- with direct knowledge of latest proposals are encouraged with movement on both sides.

                          Comment

                          • #58
                            Re: NEWS ONLY Lockout thread

                            The NBA and NBPA continue to make progress on reaching a deal on a new collective bargaining agreement.

                            One source said a deal could be reached by the end of the week.

                            "Lots of real progress tonight," said the source.
                            http://twitter.com/#!/ChrisMannixSI
                            "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                            Comment

                            • #59
                              Re: NEWS ONLY Lockout thread

                              Couple Woj tweets:

                              Adrian Wojnarowski
                              Despite NBA, NBPA downplaying expectations, "significant progress" has been made toward agreement on system issues, sources tell Y! Sports.
                              Adrian Wojnarowski
                              Says one source briefed on talks: "They need (Thursday) to punch it over end-line."

                              Comment

                              • #60
                                Re: NEWS ONLY Lockout thread

                                http://sheridanhoops.com/2011/10/27/...till-possible/

                                Lockout update: After 15+ hours of talks, 82 games still possible
                                By Chris Sheridan
                                October 27, 2011 at 4:48 AM

                                NEW YORK — Progress is being made, an 82-game schedule remains achievable, but there could still be several more days of talks before the NBA lockout is settled.

                                After 15 hours and 20 minutes spent bargaining behind closed doors, those three items were the sum product of the messages delivered by NBA commissioner David Stern and the leaders of the NBA Players Association early this morning following what was clearly and unquestionably a productive collective bargaining session.

                                Are they closer to a deal? Yes.

                                Is a deal within reach in the next 24-48 hours? It’d probably be a stretch to go that far.

                                “There is no deal on anything until there is a deal on everything,” Stern said in his closing statement as the clock read 3:58 a.m. after the sides spent half of Wednesday and part of Thursday discussing salary cap system issues, never once broaching the subject of the split of revenues on which the owners and players are currently $100 million per season apart.

                                Stern described the talks as “arduous, difficult and productive,” and deputy commissioner Adam Silver said there was “no question we did make progress on significant issues. There are still significant issues left, but we have crystalized what those issues are.”

                                All in all, there was a measured-but-positive spin coming from both sides, although union director Billy Hunter said the resumption of talks at 2 p.m. and whatever transpires in the hours afterward will go a long way toward determining whether a suitable middle ground on the system issues can be found.

                                Hunter also said a deal needs to be made by “Sunday or Monday” in order to preserve an 82-game season that would inevitably include a heftier dose of back-to-back games than teams are accustomed to.

                                Neither side revealed specifics of the system issues that were discussed, but it is well known that the sides have been trying to reach compromises on how punitive the new luxury tax system will be, what changes will be made regarding restricted and unrestricted free agency, along with various other tweaks to the current salary cap system that would keep it a “soft” enough system for the players to find palatable.

                                “I have a pretty good idea of what they’d like, and we’re trying very hard to get them what they’d like,” Stern said. “We’re trying to apply a tourniquet and move forward. That has always been our goal.”

                                Stern said there will be issues related to arena availability, travel schedules and having to compress a full slate of games into a tighter time frame. He also used the phrase “this week” in describing the time frame for getting a deal done in order to save an 82-game schedule.

                                One could fairly ascertain after hearing from both sides that the discussions are somewhat plodding, and union president Derek Fisher cautioned that “Now is too early to gauge what progress is being made.”

                                Asked if there was at least a meeting of the minds, Fisher said: “I think that’s a little bit of a reach.”

                                So the lockout lives on, but there is clearly more than a glimmer of hope that a mutually agreeable resolution can come within reach over the next few days.

                                And once it is within reach, it’ll come down to a question of whether both sides are willing to make a leap to the middle on the split of revenues in order to close the deal.

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 template Next
                                Working...
                                X