The biggest loser, though, has to be Stern, at least as far as reputation goes.

The biggest winners? International leagues, since they will now have a opportunity to radically remake themselves as the NEW center of hoops. They will now have their pick of the best players from the USA. Heck, I might even watch a few games.

People don't realize how much this will cost the owners too! Credit ratings, franchise values and share prices will drop! What for?

crzymdups wrote:this whole thing was one of the stupidest displays i have ever seen. both sides displayed unbelievable arrogance and probably both think they got the last laugh. i wonder when they'll wake the hell up and realize the only thing they did was vaporize the $4 BILLION the NBA would have made this year.

Selfish - Selfish - Selfish.

Me - Me - Me.

I want - I want - I want.

What about the tens of thousands of innocent, working class people who have been put out of work, or lost significant income, due to the selfishness of both the rich owners and well-to-do players. Or the cities that spent hundreds of millions of dollars to build arenas for the NBA not to play in now.

That's freedom in a market-based, capitalist society

jrodmc wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

That's freedom in a market-based, capitalist society

Therein lies the fundamental problem

This just in from Russia: it still appears communism isn't working.

China left a message: they will start printing your money for you starting next week. Yet, for some reason, there's not a long line of people trying to get into the People's Republic.

EuroUnion: Greece and Italy on sale, Cheap!

jrodmc wrote:Players get paid to play. Extremely handsomely. Please don't feed me the shiiit that they have a limited window, the spectre of injury, the uniqueness of their skill set, blah blah blah. I play pick up ball with a guy who lasted a year or two with the Nets; he's as dumb as a post, but he managed to take care of what he made and now he's living the life. 15 acre horsefarm and a McMansion and a couple of no-show jobs and fund raising gigs. Do I begrudge him for what he has? No. And neither do I begrudge owners who have hundreds of millions and employ tens of thousands with a team that they own. The player dude can't help it that he's 6'11" and Jimmie Dolan can't help it that he was born rich.

The NBA is a league of teams, not players. This is not golf, it's not tennis, it's not movie making. While your select cream at the top of the player A-list may have their own brand and may have aspirations of personal empire building, bottom line is they are employees of teams that are owned by owners that belong to a league. If you work for Walmart and their CFO decides it will look good on the balance sheet and be part of his bid for Financial Wizard of the Year to cut your benefits, you can beeatch and moan, you can accept it and be happy you have a job, or you can go work somewhere else. That's freedom in a market-based, capitalist society. Welcome to reality. The rest of the "it's not fair" syndrome is a batch of entitlement driven, victim mentality BS.

As has been stated several million times over the course of this major cluster dump of a lockout, the owners own the keys, not the players. You don't like the NBA, go play somewhere else. Oh, and have fun and don't get hurt, since it seems they don't pay that well in Turkey and Israel and China. Especially over the long haul. Why haven't more players followed Deron?; precisely because it's awfully tough to play overseas while you're staring over your shoulder hoping the real thing comes back. Poor Kobe. Only 1 million or so a month; how's he gonna feed his kids?

What I don't understand, is why haven't we seen scab players yet? Let the Stats and Melos go overseas, and move all the NBDL guys and undrafteds up, cut ticket prices and run a minor league operation for this year. At least the thousands of workers could go back to work.

You make a very good case here re: reality. I have a hard time arguing against it, even though I hate it vehemently. In a lot of ways, the players are making a foolish move here, but there is still a possibility that the owners come back again in the next few days with a slightly more reasonable offer. If not, foolish or not, the players can always tell them to fo *bleep* themselves.

Also, your "minor league" idea is very smart and could be the start of a permanent minor league that becomes an opportunity mill for lesser players to earn some scratch and get exposure. The NBA really needs such a thing and this could be a good time to implement it.

Their franchises are worth what they are because the league currently has a virtual monopoly of the world's most talented & entertaining players. Replacement players will cause revenues, team values and sponsorships to plummet. So obviously the Walmart comparison falls flat: you can't just hand Kobe's blue smock to the next person who fills out an application. A percentage of the players are elite practitioners of their craft and aren't replaceable: at least not immediately due to labor law, and not practically in terms of common sense. Even obscenely-paid employees are protected by labor law. We aren't the ones who decide whether the NBA has broken any laws, the courts are.

I don't know who is making the dumber move because I can't predict the future. Both parties are playing their hands, led by the most "hardline" members of their constituencies. So while I should not begrudge the owners for what they own, I can't begrudge the players for their position either. And I think it's easier to make the argument that the players have a "nobler" cause, in trying to make a deal that's fair for the future players who aren't even in the league yet. The owners are only thinking about future owners in terms of profits from a team sale... or maybe they are thinking of future owners in terms of their heirs. Who knows.

DrAlphaeus wrote:Reading the "it's not personal, it's business" posts from a lot of you guys has definitely toned down my emotional pro-player approach to the issue. I just think the pro-owner — or pro-"reality" — folks need to do the same. The owners hold the keys to the truck they own, but they can't load it, drive it, and unload it themselves. So great, they now have a truck they own that carries no payload.

Their franchises are worth what they are because the league currently has a virtual monopoly of the world's most talented & entertaining players. Replacement players will cause revenues, team values and sponsorships to plummet. So obviously the Walmart comparison falls flat: you can't just hand Kobe's blue smock to the next person who fills out an application. A percentage of the players are elite practitioners of their craft and aren't replaceable: at least not immediately due to labor law, and not practically in terms of common sense. Even obscenely-paid employees are protected by labor law. We aren't the ones who decide whether the NBA has broken any laws, the courts are.

I don't know who is making the dumber move because I can't predict the future. Both parties are playing their hands, led by the most "hardline" members of their constituencies. So while I should not begrudge the owners for what they own, I can't begrudge the players for their position either. And I think it's easier to make the argument that the players have a "nobler" cause, in trying to make a deal that's fair for the future players who aren't even in the league yet. The owners are only thinking about future owners in terms of profits from a team sale... or maybe they are thinking of future owners in terms of their heirs. Who knows.

well put! THe agents are really driving this thing now and thats very scarey. They are the usual suspects when it comes to the irrational.

For all we know the owners may just been wanting this all along figuring the deal they really want would be faced with bad relations but if you take it to the courts then a 3rd party decides and thats the end of that. Seems from various articles that players don't really know what to expect from the actions but think the owners would cave if put under pressure.

The owners seem to be negotiating as if to demonstrate good faith. Not getting your way does not constitute good faith, coming to the table does. I'd even say the Union never put it to vote and there seems to be some cracks in the union that would have liked to have voted. Im not sure the union can demonstrate good faith themselves. I don' know.

The league has a virtual monopoly because of the CBA and the money it pays. League owns the TV contract, the teams and controls the leases on the buildings. Cities voted to help them fund, and free enterprise sprang up to capture the game goers by putting up restaurants and bars. Nobody forced them to do so. I feel bad for them. Business is tough enough!

I suppose a new league can now be formed if so inclined. Can't imagine how that flies. NY team can play in the Meadowlands or the Nassau Coliseaum! No private jets, no state of the art private owned practice facility, no big fat contracts either.

I don't think replacement players are in the mix but if there was ever any way to it the players just opened that up. Some players will cross over and play, and once that happens others will follow suit.

If some do, then it blows a hole in their arguement.

I hope the players know what they are doing!