Are we Heading for another Lockout?

[tlance]

And then the first thing the player's union would be yelling about is collusion

It is not all on the owners - players and the players union need to share part of the blame

It isn't about owners colluding. Just don't be stupid. Offering Harrison Barnes 22 million is stupid.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

as far as parity goes-- was just listening to a pod cast---- the big markets? the Knicks- getting a meeting but FAR down Durant's list, LAL not getting a meeting, Brooklyn not getting a meeting, Washington not getting a meeting.

the favorites? OKC, SAS, GSW....

lately it seems that big free agents are not flocking to big markets, but flocking where they have the best chance to win- to teams that have the best situations on the court. I think thats what you want right?

What big FA have flocked to OKC or GSW?
Other then Aldrigde, what other big FA switched to Spurs?

 

[trojanfan12]

before when there was a lockout league revenues and the cap especially were pretty damn stagnant.

With the current explosion of revenue- and the money guys are getting- and the money owners must be making - is plenty to keep both sides happy I would hope.

it would be embarrasing to have a lockout/strike in a league so flush with cash and would prob look really really bad. I think Silver is more resolution oriented than Stern was- and the NBAPA actually has credible leadership for the first time in a long time. That should help things.

I agree. The owners would look pretty foolish to force a lockout over players salaries being too high when they are the one's agreeing to pay those salaries.

 

[WiggyRuss]

It isn't about owners colluding. Just don't be stupid. Offering Harrison Barnes 22 million is stupid.

its just ridiclous though

the union should have agreed to a smoothing mechanism.

now the 25% revenue increase is lopsidedly handed out to the guys that are lucky enough to be free agents this year.....its stupid.

If i was the players I would have had the cap only go up to like 85- and taken the rest of the money and spread it out evenly among the players--- instead of just dumping it to the guys who are lucky enough to be free agents this summer.

 

[WiggyRuss]

I agree. The owners would look pretty foolish to force a lockout over players salaries being too high when they are the one's agreeing to pay those salaries.

especially with how high revenues are - and how punitive the luxury tax now is.

the punitive nature of the tax is not gonna be felt for a few years yet- especially the repeater portion. Its gonna take 2-3 years for salaries to stablilize and teams to fill out all their cap space and be sufficiently close to the cap where they use moves to go over and get passed the lux tax line. After that- a repeater tax doesnt start hitting you until you are in the tax for a couple years.

its basically AT LEAST 3-4 years until the majority of teams have to truly worry about the provisions put in the CBA a few years ago.


I do think that one thing that will be visited during the new CBA negotiatons is max contracts. Something is wrong if Harrison Barnes is getting maxed out and making pretty much near the same money as LeBron James. I think max contracts will go up--- which would theoretically stop super teams from forming for the most part. the tricky part is how to do that without making a team to lopsided with only one guy making such a huge percentage of your payroll.

ill have NO problem when lebron signs that 200 million dollar contract a year from now- if he wants to--- its still probably underneath his true free market- market value- and what he actually brings to the franchise.

 

[wildturkey]

Nah. They'll work something out

 

[DJ]

If Bazemore gets 20 mill per season and Tyler Johnson gets 10 mill per season.....



FUCK YES.

 

[DJ]

Rumors on what some of these guys may be getting are just plain stupid.

 

[gordontrue]

Lets not forget the owners are getting just as much of a spike as the players.

The new tv deal isn't just increasing the $$$ coming into the players pockets... its increasing the $$$ coming into the owners pocket.

I'm sure there will be some negotiating and push for concession from both sides... but I think both sides are feeling pretty good about where things stand.

The owners and the players will want to keep the tv networks happy... that is their cash cow and they know it.

Will the networks be happy if there is a lockout??? Of course not.

 

[TheSnowdog]

It isn't about owners colluding. Just don't be stupid. Offering Harrison Barnes 22 million is stupid.

I don't disagree with you
Yes - owners need to be smarter
Lakers are about to give Mozgov 16+ million a year - wow

I'm not saying the owners would be colluding - I'm trying to say that those would be the first words out of the players union mouth - collusion! collusion!

 

[tlance]

I don't disagree with you
Yes - owners need to be smarter
Lakers are about to give Mozgov 16+ million a year - wow

I'm not saying the owners would be colluding - I'm trying to say that those would be the first words out of the players union mouth - collusion! collusion!

You are probably right on that.

I just remember last time public opinion sided with the owners because consensus was that players were overpaid. This time, it will be more true than ever, but those siding with owners are forgetting one very important thing.

Players are overpaid only because an owner is willing to agree to pay that figure. If the market was not the way it was, guys like Mozzy would be signing for a lot less.

I just want to make sure we blame the right people this time.

 

[anotheridiot]

The lockout will be more for the teams that want to rebuild. There is now a cap floor, which is a measly 10%, so teams that have tried to put their money away are going to be forced to buy up bad contracts just to get to the cap floor when only 9 or 10 met that threshold last year. Clevelands luxury tax hit for last season is 54 million dollars.

 

[trojanfan12]

ill have NO problem when lebron signs that 200 million dollar contract a year from now- if he wants to--- its still probably underneath his true free market- market value- and what he actually brings to the franchise.

This is why, even though it'll never happen, I agree with @TurnUpTheHeat that they should just eliminate the "max deal" and let the owners determine how much money they are willing to tie up in a player. The true elite players make their teams far more money than they will ever get paid by those teams.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

This is why, even though it'll never happen, I agree with @TurnUpTheHeat that they should just eliminate the "max deal" and let the owners determine how much money they are willing to tie up in a player. The true elite players make their teams far more money than they will ever get paid by those teams.

Like I said yesterday, once the Heat pulled off the 2010 Big 3 , the owners intent in that CBA was to create a system so the superstars collided vs joined.
It failed big time.
They will revisit it next summer.
No doubt in my mind.
Whether it leads to a long lockout like back then, who knows and hopefully not, but no way IMO that they continue to play under the current contract.

 

[trojanfan12]

Like I said yesterday, once the Heat pulled off the 2010 Big 3 , the owners intent in that CBA was to create a system so the superstars collided vs joined.
It failed big time.
They will revisit it next summer.
No doubt in my mind.
Whether it leads to a long lockout like back then, who knows and hopefully not, but no way IMO that they continue to play under the current contract.

It'll be interesting to see how it plays out for sure. I think it failed because the owners didn't think guys would take less to play together.

Do you think the owners will push for eliminating the max contract, but installing a true hard cap?

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

It'll be interesting to see how it plays out for sure. I think it failed because the owners didn't think guys would take less to play together.

Do you think the owners will push for eliminating the max contract, but installing a true hard cap?

YES, or a near hard cap. These guys run businesses where top level employees make more then secondary ones and right down the line.
Why should James be limited to make what Conley makes?
Let's see how willing superstar players are to team up with other superstars if it's costing them 10M-20M/season.


From last lockout negotiations:

"NBA commissioner David Stern offered a new proposal to the players' union in Tuesday's labor talks that modestly budged from the owners' long-held position on establishing a hard cap, according to league sources familiar with the negotiations.

Sources told ESPN The Magazine's Ric Bucher that the owners did not offer players a finite annual team limit on salaries but as of Tuesday night were willing to relax the cap only if the following conditions are met:

• 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 $7.4 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, the owners proposed that the players' share of basketball-related income, or BRI, be sliced from 57 percent to 46 percent, and a source told ESPN.com's Chris Broussard that the players were offered 48 percent of BRI on Tuesday. 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, a source said.

Even before Tuesday's session, several agents expected that the owners would relent on the hard cap but dubbed it a negotiating ruse. One prominent agent, who requested anonymity, said the players already were effectively working under a hard cap in the last deal because of the existing escrow system, whereby owners were allowed to hold and keep eight percent of each player's salary if total salary expenditures exceeded 57 percent. Although it was not outlined in Tuesday's proposal, presumably the same escrow system would be in place, only with the threshold being 46 percent of BRI."

 

[WiggyRuss]

It'll be interesting to see how it plays out for sure. I think it failed because the owners didn't think guys would take less to play together.

Do you think the owners will push for eliminating the max contract, but installing a true hard cap?

who has taken less to play together?

 

[trojanfan12]

who has taken less to play together?

Lebron, Bosh, D-Wade when they were in Miami. Duncan, Ginobili and Parker to stay together and add pieces. Dirk seems to take less every year to get another top player, they just never pick Dallas.

 

[WiggyRuss]

It isn't about owners colluding. Just don't be stupid. Offering Harrison Barnes 22 million is stupid.

why is it stupid?

i dont know what is your guys obsession with all these individual contracts and who gets what.

the only number that fucking matters is the revenue split-

why do you guys think it matters to the owners what players get what money?--- its the Players union thats likes the max contract rules....

 

[WiggyRuss]

Lebron, Bosh, D-Wade when they were in Miami. Duncan, Ginobili and Parker to stay together and add pieces. Dirk seems to take less every year to get another top player, they just never pick Dallas.

lebron dwade and bosh was prior to the new cba.

Duncan and Dirk i agree with a little bit- but they both only took less money once they were on the tail ends of their careers and had already boatloads of cash.

Parker is still making 14 a year on a deal a few years old so there is not much discount there- he makes way less than Steph.

the only instance of star players in their prime coming together to give up a material amount of money was in Miami and it was a special circumstance that we have seen once in league history.

the new CBA has barely had a chance to kick in. I doubt there is a lockout....revenues for the NBA were stagnant for years...in the last 4 years the cap is going to go from 62 to 110.--- revenue in the league almost doubling. They will figure out a way to make that work.

I have no clue why you guys think max contracts matter i nthe grand scheme of thigns. They only matter if a contingent of star players gets together and starts bitching and moaning about being underpaid---- which MIIIIIIIGHT be a hard sell after signing contracts like Al Horford and Durant and LeBron will be getting soon.