Moonangie wrote:I think the players would be well-advised to reject this BS offer. It's not much different than the ultimatum, and they effed up by stating a willingness to accept the 50/50 split. Now the owners have them by the nut sacks.

Yep, they really ended up painting themselves into a corner. I'm conflicted really as to whether they should accept it- I personally wouldn't if I was a player (though I do tend to be very self-defeatingly stubborn), and I think it's a system that will create more problems than it solves, but- what will really happen if they reject it? Owners are happy to lose a season (some of them own NHL teams too, so i'm sure they'd love it if fans switched sports in disgust)- will the players really stick together that long? Will the courts rule in their favour? If the bid fails, then the players are beyond screwed.

I think they should just cut their loses at this point- they were in a terrible negotiating position due to having zero leverage and a number of unique factors that combined to weaken them further- the economy, the current group of owners who don't care about basketball and are looking to get a good deal to increase the profit they get when the sell, the fact that Stat, melo, Lebron and Bosh recently left their teams and Dwight Howard and CP3 are threatening to- it's created bitterness among the owners and a desire to get back at them and make sure it doesn't happen again. The players won the last two CBA's, maybe chalk this one down as a loss and hope that factors are more in their favour next time, and opt out when they are.

smackeddog wrote:According to http://www.hoopsworld.com/nba-am-will-the-players-accept-the-deal/

- The biannual exception will be available only to non-taxpaying teams. The NBA will allow sign and trade deals for tax paying teams, on a limited and restricted basis.

- Extend-and-trade deals, such as the one signed by Carmelo Anthony last season, will be prohibited.

- The midlevel exception will be set at $5 million for non-taxpaying teams, with a maximum length between three and four years (alternating annually). The value of the exception will grow by 3 percent annually, starting in Year 3. The Mid-Level would not be available to a team if its use would push them into luxury tax.

- The mini-midlevel exception will be set at $3 million for taxpaying teams, with a maximum length of three years, and cannot be used in consecutive years. Its value will also grow at 3 percent annually.

- A 10 percent escrow tax will be withheld from player salaries, to ensure that player earnings do not exceed 50 percent of league revenues. An additional withholding will be applied in Year 1 “to account for business uncertainty” stemming from the lockout.

- Maximum contract lengths will be five years for “Bird” free agents and four years for others.

- Annual contract increases will be 5.5 percent for “Bird” players and 3.5 percent for others.

- Players will be paid a prorated share of their 2011-12 salaries, based on the number of games played once the season starts, with a 72-game season on the table.

- Team and player contract options will be prohibited in new contracts, other than rookie deals. But a player can opt out of the final year of a contract if he agrees to zero salary protection (i.e., if it is non-guaranteed).

- The Basketball Related Revenue Split will be 50-50, with the NBA locking in salaries and benefits equal to last season for the first two years of the deal insuring the players lose no money in accepting a reduced BRI share.

- The Luxury Tax would be an escalating tax based on tiers over the tax line. The tax will increase for every $5 million spent beyond the established line – starting at $70 million in the first year of the labor deal. Teams would be charged a tax of $1.50 for every dollar over the $70 million tax line. That number increases to $1.75 after $5 million over ($75 million), $2.25 after $10 million ($80 million) and $3 after $15 million ($85 million).

- The Repeater Tax would offer an additional $1 charge to each tax tier for teams that exceed the Luxury Tax more than three times in a five year span. Allowing teams to dip into the Luxury Tax, but penalize teams who stay above the tax line for too long.

- There will be a one-time Amnesty Cut allowed. 100% of this cut will be removed from the Luxury Tax and the Salary cap, however 100% of the cut salary will be paid in full to the player and the value of the cut contract will count towards the BRI calculation.

I really take issue with the banning teams from using the MLE if it puts them over the tax threshold- it's ridiculous! It's a very sneaky way of basically getting rid of the MLE on the sly- so if the cap was set at $60 mil, and the tax level at $70mil, then only teams between $60 mil and $64.9 mil can actuallyt use it- how is a team possibly going to manage to set all their salaries and raises to fit within that kind of tiny range? What does a team with salaries between $65 mil and $70 mil do? They won't be entitled to the MLE or the tax MLE of $3mil. It's just a really sneaky, petty move by the owners.

There's no way the players will get back that 10% escrow, as revenues will decline this year- thats why the owners backed off salary rollbacks, they new the ecrow and BRI % would essentially achieve that for them.

The mini mid level is actually okay- if it was the full MLE size, then with the tax implications, it would have been too much of a deterent anyway.

I agree with reducing contract lengths- it makes the players a bit more accountable, while at the same time giving them a bit more freedom, so it's fair.

I don't really see any team going into the luxury levels with those penalties (though i think as Nixluva pointed out, it was on the decline anyways). Lakers are really screwed, and will have to give more money on top of that via revenue sharing.

I hope they re-calculate current salaries in terms of how much they count towards the cap to bring them into line with the new max contract structures, otherwise we're going to be disadvantaged (as is any other team who recently signed a max player- but then again, thats probably deliberate).

Overall I think the proposals are crap! And it's going to make things really difficult for us. It seems like it was cooked up based on ways of spiting the big teams, and particularly the Heat, and a way of getting back at players who left their teams. And baring that in mind, owners are shooting themselves in the foot- what are the poorly performing teams going to do in a few years if their draft picks work out and they start doing well? They're going to struggle to keep their team together and under the tax threshold.

If they'd not been so bitter, and had taken a more collabarative approach, they could have come up with a much better system. Why haven't they addressed the issue that really sinks a team- when a highly paid player gets an injury that isn't bad enough to end their career, but substantially reduces their game (eg Brandon Roy, Elton Brand etc)?

What does everyone else think?

According to what I am reading, if true, the Knick's will have the opportunity to go for 1 near max type deal this summer, and no MLE the follow the year unless we let go of every player besides of 3max contracts, + Shump? Say basically say goodbye to TD, Fields, Jorts, Shawne Williams, Derrick Brown....

Also, the salaries of Amare and Melo are going to be restructured according to the BRI?
But the cap is remaining about the same?