[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Owners Reportedly Scrap Hard Salary Cap
Author Thread
Ira
Posts: 24688
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/14/2001
Member: #91
9/28/2011  6:22 AM
Owners Reportedly Scrap Hard Salary Cap
September 27th, 2011 at 10:38 PM
By Anthony Raia

In what seems to be shocking news, according to Yahoo Sports, the NBA owners have moved on from their demands for a hard salary cap. Instead of a hard cap the penalties for teams going over the cap would be tougher. Under the current system teams are taxed dollar for dollar the amount that they exceed the cap.

The owners proposed at Tuesday’s negotiating session an idea similar to the current system that allows teams to pay a luxury tax for going over the cap. Only, now there would be ultra-punitive measures against higher-spending teams. The current system has teams pay a dollar-for-dollar tax for exceeding the cap.

The owners still are steadfast on dropping the percentage of revenue the players receive into the mid to low 40's. Based on several statements from NBA players, some are willing to concede on this issue to salvage the season. If the players and Billy Hunter can come to an agreement on that issue, we may see end to the lockout, and finally see a 2011 season.

AUTOADVERT
Ira
Posts: 24688
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/14/2001
Member: #91
9/28/2011  6:29 AM
Source - http://www.knicks101.com/2011/09/27/owners-reportedly-scrap-hard-salary-cap/
SupremeCommander
Posts: 34057
Alba Posts: 35
Joined: 4/28/2006
Member: #1127

9/28/2011  7:18 AM
ahhhh good ol compromise. Seems sensible to meet halfway. I have no love for either side in this. Just love for me. And I want to see some fkin basketball
DLeethal wrote: Lol Rick needs a safe space
TheGame
Posts: 26632
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/15/2006
Member: #1154
USA
9/28/2011  2:10 PM    LAST EDITED: 9/28/2011  2:10 PM
This is what had to happen if the season was going to be saved. The owners' new proposal is so limited that it might as well be a hard cap, but now the parties can start negotiating and hopefully reach an agreement within the next 2 weeks.
Trust the Process
MaTT4281
Posts: 34877
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #538
USA
9/28/2011  2:35 PM
alanhahn
Angry fan stops car on busy NYC street in front of Billy Hunter and pounds his door: "We want basketball!" he growled. "Get this done!"

Which one of you *******s can I thank for this?

DrAlphaeus
Posts: 23751
Alba Posts: 10
Joined: 12/19/2007
Member: #1781

9/28/2011  4:51 PM
That Malcolm Gladwell article drops on Grantland and now leaks of the owners' spirit of fairness... coinkidink?
Baba Booey 2016 — "It's Silly Season"
CrushAlot
Posts: 59764
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/25/2003
Member: #452
USA
9/28/2011  7:33 PM
Berger has a much more ominous take on the dropping of the hard cap. He says the flex cap proposed would function as a hard cap. More from his article:

And yet neither side evidently was prepared to move enough Wednesday to get within reach of a deal. That moment of truth, one way or another, should come in the next 96 hours.

Once the league agreed to replace its insistence on a hard cap with the more punitive luxury tax and other provisions -- a "breakthrough," as one person familar with the talks called it -- it sparked "the process of negotiation" that the two sides have arrived at now.

"There could be some compromises reached," the person said.

According to multiple sources familiar with the talks, the owners did not enhance their economic offer Wednesday, instead focusing on using systemic changes to hit the number they are seeking to achieve -- still 46 percent for the players over the life of a new deal. The problem, sources say, is that the players are not willing to accept a deal at that percentage, and that some of the systemic adjustments the league has proposed as alternatives to a hard team cap will act like a hard cap -- such as a luxury-tax system that rises from dollar-for-dollar tax to $2 or more.

NBPA executive director Billy Hunter has called a hard team salary cap a "blood issue" for the union, and Fisher wrote in a letter to the union membership this week that he and Hunter will continue to oppose any deal that includes one "unless you, the group we represent, tell us otherwise."

In addition to what they presented as hard cap alternatives -- which also included a reduction in the Bird and mid-level exceptions -- league negotiators also have presented a concept that could drive a wedge in the players' association. In exchange for keeping certain spending exceptions in place -- albeit in a reduced form -- one idea floated by the owners was a gradual reduction in existing contracts -- the "R" word, as in rollbacks -- that would minimize the financial hit for players who will be signing deals under the new system.

Such a proposal would alleviate the problem of players such as James, Wade, Stoudemire, Anthony, Chris Bosh and Joe Johnson having outsized contracts compared to stars who'd be faced with signing lesser deals under a new system. In essence, the players who already are under contract would take a percentage cut in the early years of a new CBA -- 5 percent the first year, 7.5 the second and 10 percent in the third year, sources said -- so that players like Derrick Rose, Dwight Howard, Chris Paul and Deron Williams wouldn't bear a disproportionate share of the burden when they sign their max deals under the reduced salary structure the owners are seeking.

The provisions are not geared strictly for the star class of players; in fact, the proposed rollbacks would be across the board, "for everyone," a person with knowledge of the idea said. And while this concept may alleviate the problem of having future stars bear more of a burden, it would create other problems -- not the least of which is the players' unwillingness to accept a percentage of BRI in the mid 40s that would make such rollbacks necessary.

It is for this, and other reasons -- such as restrictions the owners would want even in a soft-cap system -- that a person familiar with the owners' ideas told CBSSports.com Tuesday night that what they were proposing was deemed "alarming" by union officials.

And it is why Stern said Wednesday, "We are not near a deal."

"I'm focused on, let’s get the two committees in and see whether they can either have a season or not have a season," Stern said. "And that’s what’s at risk this weekend."

But amid all the comments made throughout these negotiations, it was an ordinary fan who hit a home run Wednesday with the most sensible statement yet. As Hunter and other union officials spoke with reporters on the street outside the hotel hosting negotiations, a guy in a white luxury sedan stopped in the middle of the street and started pounding on his door panel.

"We want basketball!" the fan shouted. "Stop the playing and get it done!"

He then drove off, heading west, having made the most sense of anyone.

http://ken-berger.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/11838893/32342533

I'm tired,I'm tired, I'm so tired right now......Kristaps Porzingis 1/3/18
Panos
Posts: 30080
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 1/6/2004
Member: #520
9/28/2011  7:33 PM
MaTT4281 wrote:
alanhahn
Angry Allanfan stops car on busy NYC street in front of Billy Hunter and pounds his door: "We want basketball!" he growled. "Get this done!"

Which one of you *******s can I thank for this?

Fixed

CrushAlot
Posts: 59764
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/25/2003
Member: #452
USA
9/28/2011  7:45 PM
Updated: September 28, 2011, 7:34 PM ET
David Stern: Season hangs in balanceEmail Print Comments778 By Marc Stein
ESPN.com
Archive
When NBA labor talks resume Friday, NBA commissioner David Stern is planning to threaten players with the cancellation of the entire 2011-12 season if the sides haven't made major progress toward a deal by the end of the weekend, according to sources close to the talks.

Although sources said the union views such an extreme stance as more of a negotiating tactic than a legitimate threat, Stern went almost that far in his comments to reporters in New York on Wednesday after a second straight day of negotiations.

Referring to meetings scheduled Friday that are expected to attract as many as 15 owners and star players such as the Heat's LeBron James, Stern said: "I'm focused on let's get the two committees in and see whether they can either have a season or not have a season, and that's what's at risk this weekend."



I'm focused on let's get the two committees in and see whether they can either have a season or not have a season, and that's what's at risk this weekend.


-- David Stern
In 1998-99, the only season in NBA history in which regular-season games were lost to a work stoppage, no deal was reached until Jan. 6, 1999, with a 50-game season finally starting on Feb. 6, 1999.

It remains to be seen if Stern's remarks Thursday will have the intended "scare" effect and convince a players to accept a deal now on the premise that the NBA is not willing to stage a shortened season this time.

At a minimum, sources said, cancellation of regular-season games next week is a certainty if a deal isn't within sight by Monday.

The league and the union did agree Wednesday to meet again Friday and likely through the weekend, but Stern warned that there are "enormous consequences at play" in coming days. Sources said that the sides need to have an agreement in principle by the middle of the next week at the latest in order to ensure that the entire 82-game regular season, scheduled to begin Nov. 1, can be played.

Two days' worth of talks ended Wednesday to allow negotiators from both sides observer the Rosh Hashanah holiday that began Wednesday night at sundown.

Each side has summoned its respective bargaining committee to New York on Friday for the most important stretch of the lockout to date, pledging to meet through the weekend if progress toward a new collective bargaining agreement is being made.

NBA Players Association executive director Billy Hunter has called for his executive committee members, as well as some of the league's superstars such as Kobe Bryant and James, to meet Friday in New York, sources told ESPN The Magazine's Chris Broussard. Bryant, though, has been in Europe all week on a Nike promotional tour and is not expected to back in time for Friday's session.

Sources told Broussard that Stern is also scheduled to meet with league owners Friday, with owners and players expected to end up in the same room for negotiations. If James attends, that could result in his first face-to-face meeting with Cleveland Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert since James left Cleveland for Miami last summer.


NBA Lockout
The NBA owners have locked out the players, and little progress has been made in negotiations. ESPN.com Topics keeps you up to date with all of the latest on the NBA's ongoing lockout. Topics Page »

Union president Derek Fisher of the Los Angeles Lakers said of the expanded meetings: "I think it points more toward the calendar than actually being able to measure progress. It points to the realities that we face with our calendar and that if we can't find a way to get some common ground really, really soon, then the time of starting the regular season at its scheduled date is going to be in jeopardy big-time."

With the scheduled Nov. 1 season openers just over a month away, Stern said there would be "a lot of risk" attached to a failure to reach an agreement in principle by the end of the week. But both sides made it clear in press briefings after Wednesday's talks that there hasn't been enough progress to put them on the verge of a deal.

The lockout entered its 90th day Wednesday.

During Tuesday's bargaining session in New York, Stern offered a new proposal to the players' union that budged slightly from the owners' long-held position on establishing a hard cap, league sources familiar with the negotiations told ESPN The Magazine's Ric Bucher.

Stern wouldn't comment Wednesday when asked whether owners had softened their salary-cap stance. Nor would he say if the season could still start on Nov. 1 without having any preseason play at all.

"I shouldn't deal with hypotheticals here," he said.

"All I'd say to that is that there are enormous consequences at play here on the basis of the weekend," Stern continued. "Either we'll make very good progress -- and we know what that would mean, we know how good that would be, without putting dates to it -- or we won't make any progress and then it won't be a question of just starting the season on time, there will be a lot at risk because of the absence of progress."

Training camps have already been postponed and 43 preseason games scheduled for Oct. 9-15 were canceled last week. The league has said it will make decisions about the remainder of exhibition play as warranted, but further cancellations were expected at week's end even before Stern turned up the pressure with his comments Wednesday.

Fisher said the players' executive committee could be joined Friday by other star players who would be invited if their schedules allowed. The owners' labor relations committee consists of 11 members, but Fisher acknowledged that there could be about 15 owners present.

"I can't say that common ground is evident, but our desire to try to get there I think is there," Fisher said. "We still have a great deal of issues to work through, so there won't be any magic that will happen this weekend to just make those things go away, but we have to put the time in."

Bucher reported Tuesday night that owners did not offer players a finite annual team limit on salaries but are willing to relax their insistence on a hard cap only if certain conditions are met.

Those conditions include:

• The "Larry Bird exception," which allows teams to exceed the cap to retain their own free agents regardless of their other committed salaries, is limited to one player per team per season.

• The mid-level exception, which the league valued at $5.8 million last season and could be extended by as many as five years, is reduced in length and size.

• The current luxury tax, the $1-for-$1 penalty a team must pay to the league for the amount it exceeds the salary cap, is to be severely increased.

In last week's negotiating session, owners proposed that the players' share of basketball-related income (BRI) be sliced from 57 percent to 46 percent. Broussard reported Tuesday that the owners' BRI offer had increased to 48 percent.

Sources say that the owners also want a five percent reduction on all existing salaries for this season, a 7.5 percent reduction of all 2012-13 salaries and 10 percent reduction of 2013-14 salaries.

Bryant, meanwhile, said Wednesday during his tour stop in Italy that it's "very possible" he'll play there if the lockout drags on, noting that he regards the country like home because he spent part of his childhood there while father Joe "Jellybean" Bryant was playing professionally in Italy.

Virtus Bologna has made numerous contract offers to the Los Angeles Lakers star. The club told The Associated Press that the latest talks are centered on an offer a $2.5 million offer for 10 games over 40 days from Oct. 9 to Nov. 16. That would come out to about $1.5 million after taxes.

"It's very possible -- it would be a dream for me," Bryant said Wednesday in Milan, according to the Gazzetta dello Sport newspaper. "There's an opportunity that we've been discussing over the last few days. It's very possible and that's good news for me."

Marc Stein is a senior NBA writer for ESPN.com. ESPN The Magazine's Chris Broussard and Ric Bucher and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7031637/nba-lockout-david-stern-threaten-cancelation-season-sources-say

Netsdaily has links to articles from Berger, Sheridan, Broussard, Bucher, Amico, Deveny... about todays meetings on their site at the end of the first article.

I'm tired,I'm tired, I'm so tired right now......Kristaps Porzingis 1/3/18
franco12
Posts: 34069
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 2/19/2004
Member: #599
USA
9/29/2011  12:15 PM
For those who thought my suggestion for a players owned league was unrealistic, not so much that they aren't themselves talking about it, or at least threatening it:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/sam_amick/09/28/players.union.meeting/

Unless major concessions are made by the owners by then, the sources said players are prepared to show a united front and express their willingness to sit out the entire season -- if not more. There is a growing sentiment that missing the start of the regular season could mean missing the entire season, one that was recently reflected in the comments of agent David Falk. There has even been renewed talk of players starting a league of their own, which may or may not be realistic but is certainly indicative of their level of frustration and the types of strategies being considered.

There were hints of this we-determine-our-own-destiny approach in the latest letter from NBPA president Derek Fisher to the league's players, which was first obtained by ESPN.com.

"We are a group of some of the most talented, savvy businessmen and business owners in the world," Fisher wrote. "We have built our own brands, launched our own and other people's companies, helped our communities. I keep that in the forefront of my mind each time we go into a negotiating session.

"If a Bill Gates, Warren Buffett or Russell Simmons were in this, there is no way they would take a deal that is unfair. Not when we are the talent, the most coveted asset, the most valuable resource that drives this business. Keep that in your mind as we walk down this road shoulder to shoulder."

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/sam_amick/09/28/players.union.meeting/index.html#ixzz1ZMI9KMAJ


I'd love to see that! Sorry, but to watch billionaires try to over play their hand, and end up losing big would just be too much joy!

And, I think some of these semi organized exhibition games have been just an exercise to perhaps demonstrate that they can do exactly this- form a players owned league.

If I'm thinking this, and I'm just a casual fan, then you can bet David Falk and Kobe and all of those powerful people are thinking it too.

Nalod
Posts: 71155
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
9/29/2011  12:40 PM
franco12 wrote:For those who thought my suggestion for a players owned league was unrealistic, not so much that they aren't themselves talking about it, or at least threatening it:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/sam_amick/09/28/players.union.meeting/

Unless major concessions are made by the owners by then, the sources said players are prepared to show a united front and express their willingness to sit out the entire season -- if not more. There is a growing sentiment that missing the start of the regular season could mean missing the entire season, one that was recently reflected in the comments of agent David Falk. There has even been renewed talk of players starting a league of their own, which may or may not be realistic but is certainly indicative of their level of frustration and the types of strategies being considered.

There were hints of this we-determine-our-own-destiny approach in the latest letter from NBPA president Derek Fisher to the league's players, which was first obtained by ESPN.com.

"We are a group of some of the most talented, savvy businessmen and business owners in the world," Fisher wrote. "We have built our own brands, launched our own and other people's companies, helped our communities. I keep that in the forefront of my mind each time we go into a negotiating session.

"If a Bill Gates, Warren Buffett or Russell Simmons were in this, there is no way they would take a deal that is unfair. Not when we are the talent, the most coveted asset, the most valuable resource that drives this business. Keep that in your mind as we walk down this road shoulder to shoulder."

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/sam_amick/09/28/players.union.meeting/index.html#ixzz1ZMI9KMAJ


I'd love to see that! Sorry, but to watch billionaires try to over play their hand, and end up losing big would just be too much joy!

And, I think some of these semi organized exhibition games have been just an exercise to perhaps demonstrate that they can do exactly this- form a players owned league.

If I'm thinking this, and I'm just a casual fan, then you can bet David Falk and Kobe and all of those powerful people are thinking it too.

They are not in the league as Buffet, Gates, etc..........

Some are smart and savvy, and some are some of the dumbest high net worth individuals on the planet. Not hating but they make their money with their bodies and not their minds.

Kobe has how many years left in his body? Count him out. He is owed 83 million.

The players are talking big to try to make a united front. Good for them. A league of there own would yield bad consequences.

The moment the League ends the lock out the "new league" would be unable to employ any player that has a valid contract. Boom, game over right there.

IT would take three years to get a league planned. TV rights? Sponserships? Arenas? Players?

Trust me, the owners have considered every angle on this. Their brand is only valuable on the big stage. I don't think the league wants to rape the players. Both sides come at it hard and know where the compromise zone is.

BasketballJones
Posts: 31973
Alba Posts: 19
Joined: 7/16/2002
Member: #290
USA
9/29/2011  7:47 PM
CrushAlot wrote:Berger has a much more ominous take on the dropping of the hard cap. He says the flex cap proposed would function as a hard cap. More from his article:

A hard crap is the last thing you want.

https:// It's not so hard.
eViL
Posts: 25412
Alba Posts: 9
Joined: 1/21/2004
Member: #561
USA
9/30/2011  12:38 AM
doesn't the fact that that salaries are limited to a certain percentage of BRI operate as a pseudo-hard cap anyway?
check out my latest hip hop project: https://soundcloud.com/michaelcro http://youtu.be/scNXshrpyZo
SupremeCommander
Posts: 34057
Alba Posts: 35
Joined: 4/28/2006
Member: #1127

9/30/2011  12:51 AM
eViL wrote:doesn't the fact that that salaries are limited to a certain percentage of BRI operate as a pseudo-hard cap anyway?

league-wide? yes. team-specific? no

DLeethal wrote: Lol Rick needs a safe space
eViL
Posts: 25412
Alba Posts: 9
Joined: 1/21/2004
Member: #561
USA
9/30/2011  1:59 AM
SupremeCommander wrote:
eViL wrote:doesn't the fact that that salaries are limited to a certain percentage of BRI operate as a pseudo-hard cap anyway?

league-wide? yes. team-specific? no

yeah, i get that. that being said, if salaries are capped league-wide, why does it matter to the players if teams are hard-capped?

check out my latest hip hop project: https://soundcloud.com/michaelcro http://youtu.be/scNXshrpyZo
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
9/30/2011  4:08 AM
eViL wrote:
SupremeCommander wrote:
eViL wrote:doesn't the fact that that salaries are limited to a certain percentage of BRI operate as a pseudo-hard cap anyway?

league-wide? yes. team-specific? no

yeah, i get that. that being said, if salaries are capped league-wide, why does it matter to the players if teams are hard-capped?

Since when is a % the only important thing? If I'm Iman and I blow up into a star, the overall BRI % is one thing but what hits 1st is how much my team is willing to pay me. If there's a hard cap then it limits what I might make. My team may consider spending more on me if the soft cap hit isn't too bad. BRI Is for scrubs and stars alike but the salary cap is really about Stars and key FA's.

SupremeCommander
Posts: 34057
Alba Posts: 35
Joined: 4/28/2006
Member: #1127

9/30/2011  9:23 AM    LAST EDITED: 9/30/2011  9:26 AM
eViL wrote:
SupremeCommander wrote:
eViL wrote:doesn't the fact that that salaries are limited to a certain percentage of BRI operate as a pseudo-hard cap anyway?

league-wide? yes. team-specific? no

yeah, i get that. that being said, if salaries are capped league-wide, why does it matter to the players if teams are hard-capped?

competitive balance... part of the labor dispute is the claim that the small market teams cannot compete in this economic climate. the desire is to prevent NY, Chi, LA, etc. from controlling the majority of the big ticket players, as that would destroy the equity value of the Milwaukees of the world

DLeethal wrote: Lol Rick needs a safe space
eViL
Posts: 25412
Alba Posts: 9
Joined: 1/21/2004
Member: #561
USA
9/30/2011  11:23 AM
nixluva wrote:
eViL wrote:
SupremeCommander wrote:
eViL wrote:doesn't the fact that that salaries are limited to a certain percentage of BRI operate as a pseudo-hard cap anyway?

league-wide? yes. team-specific? no

yeah, i get that. that being said, if salaries are capped league-wide, why does it matter to the players if teams are hard-capped?

Since when is a % the only important thing? If I'm Iman and I blow up into a star, the overall BRI % is one thing but what hits 1st is how much my team is willing to pay me. If there's a hard cap then it limits what I might make. My team may consider spending more on me if the soft cap hit isn't too bad. BRI Is for scrubs and stars alike but the salary cap is really about Stars and key FA's.

not exactly. the BRI sets the parameters for all contracts. MAX contracts are tied to the BRI the same way vet minimum contracts are. essentially NBA players contracts are already hard capped. and it effects superstars moreso than anyone else. prime superstars are usually underpaid even under max deals. last offseason no one could offer Lebron more than 35% of the cap in the first year of his deal. the cap is tied to the BRI. thus, Lebron is hard-capped.

the teams are not hard-capped, but the players are. that's why i'm beginning to see the hard cap as bogus non-issue during the whole negotiations. the NBA owners scrapping the hard cap was a meaningless concession. it's not uncommon in negotiations for one party to fight hard for something they don't really want only to abandon it as a "concession" to gain what they are really after. it wouldn't surprise me if the owners really only care about drastically reducing the players share of the BRI with the rest of the issues being ancillary.

check out my latest hip hop project: https://soundcloud.com/michaelcro http://youtu.be/scNXshrpyZo
eViL
Posts: 25412
Alba Posts: 9
Joined: 1/21/2004
Member: #561
USA
9/30/2011  11:25 AM
SupremeCommander wrote:
eViL wrote:
SupremeCommander wrote:
eViL wrote:doesn't the fact that that salaries are limited to a certain percentage of BRI operate as a pseudo-hard cap anyway?

league-wide? yes. team-specific? no

yeah, i get that. that being said, if salaries are capped league-wide, why does it matter to the players if teams are hard-capped?

competitive balance... part of the labor dispute is the claim that the small market teams cannot compete in this economic climate. the desire is to prevent NY, Chi, LA, etc. from controlling the majority of the big ticket players, as that would destroy the equity value of the Milwaukees of the world

i see that mostly an owner v. owner thing. i don't know why it's a sticking point for the players who are already essentially hard-capped anyway.

check out my latest hip hop project: https://soundcloud.com/michaelcro http://youtu.be/scNXshrpyZo
SupremeCommander
Posts: 34057
Alba Posts: 35
Joined: 4/28/2006
Member: #1127

9/30/2011  11:41 AM
eViL wrote:
SupremeCommander wrote:
eViL wrote:
SupremeCommander wrote:
eViL wrote:doesn't the fact that that salaries are limited to a certain percentage of BRI operate as a pseudo-hard cap anyway?

league-wide? yes. team-specific? no

yeah, i get that. that being said, if salaries are capped league-wide, why does it matter to the players if teams are hard-capped?

competitive balance... part of the labor dispute is the claim that the small market teams cannot compete in this economic climate. the desire is to prevent NY, Chi, LA, etc. from controlling the majority of the big ticket players, as that would destroy the equity value of the Milwaukees of the world

i see that mostly an owner v. owner thing. i don't know why it's a sticking point for the players who are already essentially hard-capped anyway.

surprisingly, not true. if the players are being asked to make financial concessions because the small market teams cannot compete, it would gold true that they have a say in the matter. the players have been advocating revenue sharing for that reason

"We need to have revenue sharing with the teams that are not making money. That's important. I play[ed] for one of the teams that's one of the worst [in revenues], Milwaukee. We've got to have [sharing] with guys like the Lakers and the big-name teams that's making tons and tons of money. Donald Sterling's another guy that makes money even if he loses. We need to figure out a way to get that going." Corey Maggette

"If it's about small-market teams not profiting, if the owners are really using that as a bargaining tool, if you're really concerned about it, then why aren't you profit-sharing like the other leagues are doing? So do we accept a deal that totally butchers our game? Because what they don't understand, if you take out mid-tier deals and say, 'Fend for bare minimum at the bottom,' they'll be individualizing our game so severely." Jermaine O'Neal

Using your logic, what say should the owners have in how the players divide their share of the revenue? that would seem to be a player v player thing

DLeethal wrote: Lol Rick needs a safe space
Owners Reportedly Scrap Hard Salary Cap

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy