Vmart wrote:

AnubisADL wrote:I'm confident a deal will get hammered out.

The player will accept a lesser percentage to keep guaranteed contracts.

I'm on the owners side on this. I like the idea of guaranteed contracts but jerome James, Eddie Curry and some others like Alan Houston should come to mind when discussing Guaranteed contracts.

I can't agree with this. There haven't been enough Eddy Curry types to punish the entire league. There's a way that the owners could come to some agreement with the players on contract lengths. The real issue is that the league hasn't been able to come up with revenue sharing plan all the owners would agree to. They owners are the ones that have handed out ridiculous contracts. What the heck was the deal with the Joe Johnson contract extension??? Is that a player problem or an owner problem? No one forced the Knicks to give Jerome James that contract! Admit it, this is a mostly owner made problem.

Nalod wrote:

Vmart wrote:If it is a owner problem then it is in their right to fix the problem. A bad guaranteed contract can keep a club hostage for many years. Guys I hate to say it but players need to be paid for playing. I guarantee it that if the rule was you have to be active to earn full amount of the salary, guys like Curry would have been in better shape and ready to play the game. Alan Houston type contracts wouldn't be so bad. If Alan Houston's $100 Million was reduced to $25 Million would it have been so bad? I think Players will agree with this because at the end of the day in sports it is all crap shoot on who will get hurt and who won't, who will dog it and who won't.

That is a hell of a statement right there.

you can't always look at an injury like that..Eddie curry was able to play, Mike refuse to play him because he didn't think he would help..Just lace the contracts with incentives, split the BRI 50/50, serious injuries (30 games or more) are partially covered by INS, and lets play some damn basketball you greedy f'''s.

Don't forget, STERN gets zero salary during this lockout..

My point was about the supposed $300 mil the NBA teams collectively lost. Which isn't really true either since some teams actually turned a profit. But overall that amount of money would be easy to recover spread out over all the teams. $10 mil a team isn't a lot of money. Revenue sharing is all on the owners and being more responsible with signing big contracts is also on the owners. The league could contract and save some money too. So how are the players responsible for the problems the league has?