WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski
Calls included several All-Stars. One source on calls told Y!: "We're beyond frustrated with concessions that have already been made."
4 minutes ago

WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski
There were two conference calls held this week -- Tuesday and Thursday -- without knowledge of NBPA officials, sources tell Y!
7 minutes ago

WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski
As many as 50 NBA players were part of conference call with anti-trust attorney Thursday discussing union decertification, sources tell Y!
9 minutes ago

if this happens the season is toast.

CrushAlot wrote:I agree if it happens the season is over. Maybe this news will temper some of the hardline owners that seem intent to go for the jugular in this dispute and something can happen on Saturday. The last things owners want is for the NBPA to decertify.

agreed that it's one of the only points of leverage the players have. i guess we'll see if the threat is enough. actually going through with it is the nuclear option. and it didn't really work for the NFL players.

nixluva wrote:The NFL players are perhaps the weakest union outside of the NHL! I think the NBPA would gain some leverage if they threaten to decertify for real. I don't wanna see it happen but it's the only way to get the owners to give just a little. The owners have already gotten a lot of what they wanted and basically none of the changes benefit the players, so the owners don't have to twist thd knife too. Let's get this thing done!

it's further from getting done than it ever has been.

What's going to be a shame, is by the time they're playing again, they're going to lose way more than ~4% (2%/52%) money-wise, and in the end, this just hurts the league all around.

To destroy all the goodwill caused by one of the greatest NBA seasons we've had in the last 20 years and the Cinderella story of the Mavs is just disgusting. We are talking about millionaires arguing with billionaires over a few percentage points. Not cool at all.

Both sides have completely disgusted me.

nixluva wrote:

If the owners do still want a season they should give little more and look to push the season dates later in the year to try and make the season as close to a full season as possible. All they have to do is not have any break between the end of the season and the draft and they could reschedule games during that time period.

The main problem up til now is that a large chunk of the owners couldn't care less whether there is a season or not, because they are looking at getting a deal that will drastically increase their team value for when they sell it- they stand to make hundreds of millions if they get the deal they want, so really a season or even two seasons of lost revenue is essentially nothing to them. No season would be a win for them.

That is why this decertification threat could be valuable to the players (if the owners believe it and if it is credible). Why? Because if implimented it would destroy the value of the kinds of teams that are blocking a deal. Without a union the smaller owners would be stuck in a system with no cap what so ever- the big teams could spend as much as they like- no one would play for the loss making teams because they'd always get outbid. On top of that they would have the threat of triple damages hanging over them for years- their teams would be unsellable. So the threat of decertification targets these kinds of owners, who have been hindering a fair deal.

Personally, at this point I think the hardline owners and the hardline players should f*** off and form their own league and can posture with each other and strike and lockout 'til their hearts content, leaving the reasonable players and owners to get a reasonable deal and start playing basketball again.

eViL wrote:i'm beginning to feel like no season is a real possibility now. unfortunately, decertification should have happened in July. i'm not sure that decertification will work for the NBA players any more than it did for the NFL guys. it will certainly create leverage, but will they win in the end? i don't know. i guess the NFL guys didn't take it all the way either. the problem is, all of these NBA players are looking at short careers. can they afford to spend a third of their career in court? it's a tough call. it really feels like Billy Hunter sh!t the bed on this one. how do you lose so much in a negotiation and still not at least have a deal?

The starting point is not 57% but 53%. Im not saying the players made a mistake, but that was where they wanted to be. Owners 47%. Where you start from their is the issue (exemptions).

I disagree that owners should take it in the gut cuz they will make out when they sell.

Business can't run forever with negative balance. Lakers are not for a short run profit. Some teams are owned for long periods of time, and the values cannot be justified if the teams lose money.

Fans are frustrated and want hoop.

What is fair? Really, I don't know!
I can't get my head around the numbers for both sides. Both have valid points.

eViL wrote:you know Nalod, from reading your posts over the years, i get the idea that you are a man who appreciates personal responsibility. the type of guy that'd see something like Occupy Wall Street, and their crusade to change the system, to make it better "for the people," and in response you'd say: "hey, my hard work got me a great life. you just need to work hard and make good decisions. the system is not perfect but it works."

that's why i find it surprising that you don't advocate that the owners put a little work into making better decisions on how to run their businesses rather than trying to rig the system to guarantee profits no matter how dumb they are. i know your point is that they are trying to make better decisions by fixing the system, but isn't that a bit disingenuous? they know the conditions in which they operate, are we to believe that the teams and their management are so dumb that they need a foolproof system to save them from themselves?

look, if you're the Bobcats and you draft Adam Morrison in front of Brandon Roy and Rudy Gay, or if you draft Sean May in front of Danny Granger or Rajon Rondo, you deserve to lose, no? what business is guaranteed profits? in what other industry can you pay an employee like Lebron James $20M a year when he in fact brings in over $80M a year for your business? the players have caps on what they can make and the owners still want a floor under which their revenues can't fall?

the owners should just take their overwhelming victory and ratify the deal. why must they win in an utter blowout at the expense of the fans? this really reeks of a tantrum by all the small markets in reaction the Knicks and Miami getting stacked in short order.

Evil, you make some very good points and I also thank you for taking the time to put it as you did. You hit the head on the nail reading me (Mostly) and funny you should use the Bobcats who have dumfounded me for years!

I would agree on most of your points and perhaps this is why there is a split among owners.

I guess in a perfect world we have some kind of revenue sharing and PROFIT sharing on top where both participate on a successful model.

Thank you for a well constructed response and one NOT filled with personal emotion but a clear purpose.

Regarding the "Occupy" movement, I am employed with a Member stock Exchange firm. Im a bit bias but almost would have to say "Occupy" washington not Wall St. cuz while many of the "Rules" might be immoral, they are legal. Change the rules and you change the system. I applaud in part both the Tea Party for bringing the deficit to the forfront and "Occupy" for airing its frustrations. Its time for a change. OUr country has long forgot the beauty of the Constitution and what freedom really means. Both movements lack a clear direction but its a start. The extreme Tea Party members are flat out as wrong as those all the way to the left in the "Occupy".

In my world I am compensated by my performance and when my firm is not doing well we also have to pay for the sins of mismanagement. I am free to leave but also free to invest in the company.

I also recognize I am given this opportinity as the company was already built long before I got here. The NBA built on the sweat of the players and the capital put forth by the owners. I'd like to see both succeed. Given that, I can't be passionate about either side.

YOu did peg me as one that looks at all sides and recognizes despite the flaws most things work. Looking at the worlds ecnomies our is effeciant despite its flaws. They all have flaws, but thats part of the system! Well done!

Nalod wrote:

eViL wrote:you know Nalod, from reading your posts over the years, i get the idea that you are a man who appreciates personal responsibility. the type of guy that'd see something like Occupy Wall Street, and their crusade to change the system, to make it better "for the people," and in response you'd say: "hey, my hard work got me a great life. you just need to work hard and make good decisions. the system is not perfect but it works."

that's why i find it surprising that you don't advocate that the owners put a little work into making better decisions on how to run their businesses rather than trying to rig the system to guarantee profits no matter how dumb they are. i know your point is that they are trying to make better decisions by fixing the system, but isn't that a bit disingenuous? they know the conditions in which they operate, are we to believe that the teams and their management are so dumb that they need a foolproof system to save them from themselves?

look, if you're the Bobcats and you draft Adam Morrison in front of Brandon Roy and Rudy Gay, or if you draft Sean May in front of Danny Granger or Rajon Rondo, you deserve to lose, no? what business is guaranteed profits? in what other industry can you pay an employee like Lebron James $20M a year when he in fact brings in over $80M a year for your business? the players have caps on what they can make and the owners still want a floor under which their revenues can't fall?

the owners should just take their overwhelming victory and ratify the deal. why must they win in an utter blowout at the expense of the fans? this really reeks of a tantrum by all the small markets in reaction the Knicks and Miami getting stacked in short order.

Evil, you make some very good points and I also thank you for taking the time to put it as you did. You hit the head on the nail reading me (Mostly) and funny you should use the Bobcats who have dumfounded me for years!

I would agree on most of your points and perhaps this is why there is a split among owners.

I guess in a perfect world we have some kind of revenue sharing and PROFIT sharing on top where both participate on a successful model.

Thank you for a well constructed response and one NOT filled with personal emotion but a clear purpose.

Regarding the "Occupy" movement, I am employed with a Member stock Exchange firm. Im a bit bias but almost would have to say "Occupy" washington not Wall St. cuz while many of the "Rules" might be immoral, they are legal. Change the rules and you change the system. I applaud in part both the Tea Party for bringing the deficit to the forfront and "Occupy" for airing its frustrations. Its time for a change. OUr country has long forgot the beauty of the Constitution and what freedom really means. Both movements lack a clear direction but its a start. The extreme Tea Party members are flat out as wrong as those all the way to the left in the "Occupy".

In my world I am compensated by my performance and when my firm is not doing well we also have to pay for the sins of mismanagement. I am free to leave but also free to invest in the company.

I also recognize I am given this opportinity as the company was already built long before I got here. The NBA built on the sweat of the players and the capital put forth by the owners. I'd like to see both succeed. Given that, I can't be passionate about either side.

YOu did peg me as one that looks at all sides and recognizes despite the flaws most things work. Looking at the worlds ecnomies our is effeciant despite its flaws. They all have flaws, but thats part of the system! Well done!

thanks. it's like we're old friends. we must be careful though. civilized debate will make this a boring place. haha!

Andrew wrote:

eViL wrote:...the owners still want a floor under which their revenues can't fall?

Is this true? Are you talking about the BRI split, because from my understanding that number sets the minimum level of salary the owners must spend. In no way does in guarantee profit. I think the idea of guaranteed profit is a well placed seed of thought by someone on the players side.

Actually the way BRI works it doesn't really act as a minimum on an individual team basis. The money is pooled into an Escrow account and probably from a matter of practicality come from the League TV revenue so that it isn't something the league would have to wait to collect from the owners. So if an individual team has a very low payroll they aren't cutting a check for an additional amount. They just don't get check from the league from escrow account.

Besides BRI isn't really all the money that the league is making! That's a myth he owners promote. Then you also have the fact that the owners fudge numbers by using estimates and not exact numbers. For example the Knicks TV deal payment to the league is based on the old Lakers local TV deal! I mean come on! You know that MSG makes boatloads of money and they don't have to report that to the league, only the estimated amount! You should all read the CBA and look at the details. Teams don't pay 100% of signage or side deals from related businesses it's often 40-50%.