Blazers (and 9 other teams) got what they wanted?

[Fez Hammersticks]

According to numerous team sources, obviously prohibited from talking publicly, the league's labor relations committee received a written letter from 10 owners vehemently opposed to the offer presently on the table. All of them -- Charlotte, Atlanta, Philadelphia, Memphis, Indiana, Portland, Minnesota, Sacramento, Denver and Milwaukee -- were emphatic that they believe this is a bad deal, that the players should actually receive less than 50 percent. Yet, Stern went ahead and made the offer, anyway.

They don't want:

• To leave the luxury-tax penalty as it was in the previous collective bargaining agreement for the next two years before stiffer implementation kicks in during Year 3.

• The maximum length of guaranteed contracts to be shortened by just one year instead of three.

• Maximum contracts to stay the same.

• An additional midlevel exception of $2.5 million to be allowed for teams that spend up to the cap.

• Modifications in both sign-and-trade options, which the league originally wanted eliminated altogether, for teams which spent more than the luxury-tax trigger number.

LINK​

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

good.

 

[HailBlazers]

Yup, A year with no expenses.

Stupid players, we just narrowly avoided a great depression and they expect things to be the same?

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

Not surprised to *not* see Brooklyn (Dwight Howard) or New York (Chris Paul) on this list.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

I find it interesting Sterling (clippers) not on list

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

Outside Philly and Atlanta, I'm a little surprised the other mid-markets (Phoenix, Detroit, Golden State, Washington) didn't join in.

 

[illmatic99]

It's all small market teams (except for SA/UTA).

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

I find it interesting Sterling (clippers) not on list

he doesn't care about winning, just the profit margin.

 

[HailBlazers]

Above all else, president Derek Fisher and executive director Billy Hunter absolutely must submerge their egos and take the latest proposal to a vote by their 400-plus rank-and-file members -- in the interest of common sense: LINK

big ego's and meddling, money grubbing lawyers/agents, common sense take a back seat.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

he doesn't care about winning, just the profit margin.

Good point.

In fact Sterling is the owner who could scream "if you can't make a profit, sell your team." Sterling has constantly had medicore to bad rosters but makes a profit every year (I'm guessing). I do not want the Clippers being the model franchise when it comes to how to run an organization . . . but they might be just that.

 

[PapaG]

Well, this tells me that 50-50 was the very top end of what the owners are going to be willing to offer. I'm guessing that the union feels they are calling a bluff on the owners, but it's obvious that the bluff is the union's, because they didn't even allow their members to vote on the proposal. I'm guessing there was a very good reason for that, and that Hunter and the other veterans figured that no vote was better than the result they were going to see, which would be, at best, a deep fracture in their union.

 

[Ed O]

Well, this tells me that 50-50 was the very top end of what the owners are going to be willing to offer. I'm guessing that the union feels they are calling a bluff on the owners, but it's obvious that the bluff is the union's, because they didn't even allow their members to vote on the proposal. I'm guessing there was a very good reason for that, and that Hunter and the other veterans figured that no vote was better than the result they were going to see, which would be, at best, a deep fracture in their union.

I think you're right that the 50-50 was the best the players are going to do. Or the best that they would do in a CBA environment... the odds of getting to a majority of owners agreeing to a better deal when ten are against the 50-50 split... that would be tough, it seems to me.

I guess the players (or at least their leadership) feel they need to shake things up/change the rules of the game to get more, and while it might be their only hope, it might also blow up in their faces.

Ed O.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

I find it interesting Sterling (clippers) not on list

He always turns a profit! He's worked out that fielding a sucky team in a big market is a money-maker. So he doesn't want to miss games.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Stupid players, we just narrowly avoided a great depression and they expect things to be the same?

Um, remind me again how Billionaires have fared over the past few decades. Oh that's right - their wealth has MASSIVELY INCREASED!

 

[PapaG]

Um, remind me again how Billionaires have fared over the past few decades. Oh that's right - their wealth has MASSIVELY INCREASED!

Paul Allen's net worth has gone from $19 billion to ~$14 billion in the past decade or so.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Well, this tells me that 50-50 was the very top end of what the owners are going to be willing to offer.

I advise the owners that don't like it to sell quick before their teams depreciate in value. Then we can get a group of owners who are willing to go higher.

 

[HailBlazers]

Yea so attack those Billionaires at their weakest link, their attorneys?


I don't care how "unfair" the deal was, the Players totally just alienated their fans once again

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Paul Allen's net worth has gone from $19 billion to ~$14 billion in the past decade or so.

He's not really representative. He's the "lucky" Billionaire.

 

[PapaG]

I advise the owners that don't like it to sell quick before their teams depreciate in value. Then we can get a group of owners who are willing to go higher.

Who is going to buy a team without a CBA being in place? Talk about selling low...

Plus, the Hornets' sale has been in limbo for a year, and it's one of the lowest valued franchises in the NBA.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Yea so attack those Billionaires at their weakest link, they're attorneys.

Not all of them are attorneys.

Oh, you mean THEIR attorneys. Well, that's a different argument, and has nothing to do with the recession. But David Boies WAS an attorney for the NFL Owners.

 

[PapaG]

He's not really representative. He's the "lucky" Billionaire.

Donald Sterling has lost billions in real estate holdings over the past 6 years, yet I suppose he's a "good" owner to you because he is a scrooge and rarely fields a competitive team.

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Plus, the Hornets' sale has been in limbo for a year, and it's one of the lowest valued franchises in the NBA.

True. That makes me wonder what restrictions are placed on the sale of franchises. I find it hard to believe that there aren't more rich Russians like the ones who bought the Nets and Chelsea out there. Maybe the NBA really doesn't have the global reach we tend to think. I wonder if there really have been NO offers, or if the other owners get to veto particular owners. For example, Larry Ellison couldn't get the Warriors. He's obviously got the money, is he not interested in the Hornets or is he being barred by the rest of the owners?

 

[Rastapopoulos]

Donald Sterling has lost billions in real estate holdings over the past 6 years, yet I suppose he's a "good" owner to you because he is a scrooge and rarely fields a competitive team.

Yeah, I've always sung his praises. Particularly because he's a racist asshole who is probably also a serial molester.

 

[oldmangrouch]

Disgusting.

The owners won this fight long ago. They could have settled weeks ago and had a much better deal than under the current CBA. If winning isn't enough for them, what will satisfy them? Do they hate the players (and fans) that much?

 

[PapaG]

Disgusting.

The owners won this fight long ago. They could have settled weeks ago and had a much better deal than under the current CBA. If winning isn't enough for them, what will satisfy them? Do they hate the players (and fans) that much?

I wonder how a 50/50 split, a soft cap, and a phase-in period being rejected unanimously by the player reps is the owner's fault? 50/50 seems reasonable to me.