The NBA will announce the cancellation of two more weeks of games Tuesday, according to the New York Daily News. David Stern has already canceled the preseason and the first two weeks of the season.

The report says this cancellation will wipe out 102 games and carry through Nov. 28.

If a deal is reached soon, Christmas Day games could still be preserved, but as it stands right now, pretty much all of November is gone. Not everyone's favorite month of the NBA, but losing a month of basketball is a pretty large dent in the season. Each team will stand to miss about 15 games.

The NBA has reportedly established extra contingency schedules that would allow for a complete 82-game season, but that's only rumor at this point. At it stands, the league will have lost almost 20 percent of the season.

Owners and players haven't met since they left their last round of long negotiations fizzled out because of system issues as well as the dreaded Basketball Related Income split.

It's not really a surprise to be back at this point of cancelling games, especially since Stern had previously indicated that Monday would be the day for games to be lost. He had actually said about two weeks ago that if meetings didn't advance negotiations that Christmas Day games would be gone as well. As of now, the Christmas games are still intact.

After last week's talks fell apart, Billy Hunter said that the path of losing games isn't always the wisest to walk down.

"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," he said.

Well, make it a month now. Hopefully it's just one of those things where it gets worse before it gets better

http://eye-on-basketball.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22748484/32928870?source=rss_blogs_NBA

Nalod wrote:

eViL wrote:F the small markets... NBA needs contraction.

Lets just be happy they don't expand again!

Two teams can bring in $900,000,000! Thats almost a billion dollars!

Put a team in Seattle? San Jose? Second in Chicago? Monterray? Mexico City? Vancouver? Kansas City? St. Louis?

Adds 30 more union jobs too!

Why did the Bullets move from Baltimore to Washington? I thought their franchise was pretty solid there, no? At least basketball wise.

Nalod wrote:Landover MD built a new arena about 1974 which was halfway between Baltimore and DC. Suburb arena built consistant with white flight from the inner city. Baltimore was in some serious decay back then.

The new Arena in Downtown DC is in a nice area and part of the trend of moving into the city. I guess demographics drive it.

It's all about Location

Most of these small markets teams will never see the same level of success that a big market team will have no matter how competive they are. I remember going to a couple of nets games when they went to the finals, the arean was half full.

You wonder how the knicks can maintain 80% capacity averging 33 wins for 8 yrs, despite not having one single all star, let alone a super star.. It's all about location..

This fight should be between the onwers, they want a even playing field, and thats never going to work

Cities that have little competition like Utah and Portland are the only game in town, and when competitive they make tons of money. Jazz are not afraid to spend money either.

Some cities are better suited and some just need a good product. Charlotte's banking complex has been hit hard and its team has not been very good since the Hornet hay days.

Shinn took the New Orleans short term pay day and came into town and within a year Katrina kicked that city's ass. Stupidity mixed with tough luck.

In a perfect world the Kings move to Disney Land and Hornets to Seattle. Charlotte should be fine if Mike got the money.

eViL wrote:F the small markets... NBA needs contraction.

+1

This is getting ridiculous. Eliminate some teams and let's get back to biz.