The Official S2 NBA Lockout Thread!

[Mediocre Man]

lol.

I think a lot of this crap the NBA is trying to fix is because of his team, so........

 

[soona]

This.


The NBA is in for a rude awakening if it thinks it is like football. I couldn't care less if the NBA ever plays again. I love the Trail Blazers, but only because I am from Portland. I love seeing them play and win. The NBA as a whole is unwatchable, and is never on my tv unless one of the teams is wearing scarlet and black.

I thought I was the only one who feels that way - I hate that the refs have so much influence on the games, that the calls are so subjective. And the prima dona superstars like LeBron. I only watch the Blazers for the most part as well, and wouldn't even follow the NBA if it wasn't for the 'Zers. So they're just screwing themselves . . .

 

[The Sebastian Express]

I think a lot of this crap the NBA is trying to fix is because of his team, so........

Well he threw a good portion of the other owners under the bus on twitter. I'm surprised Stern didn't go for the cool one million to be honest.

 

[THE HCP]

Derek Fisher defends loyalty in letter

By Marc Stein

In his latest letter to fellow players, union president Derek Fisher strongly denied a published report over the weekend that union president Billy Hunter and other members of the union's executive board have questioned Fisher about his relationship with NBA commissioner David Stern and deputy commissioner Adam Silver.


Fisher
In Monday night's letter, which was obtained by ESPN.com, Fisher responded to the Saturday report from FoxSports.com columnist Jason Whitlock by telling union members: "Usually I wouldn't even dignify absurd media reports with a comment. But before these reports go any further, let me say on the record to each of you, my loyalty has and always will be with the players.

"Anyone that questions that or doubts that does not know me, my history and what I stand for. And quite frankly, how dare anyone call that into question? The Players Association is united and any reports to the contrary are false. There have been no side agreements, no side negotiations or anything close. We are united in serving you and presenting the best options and getting everyone back to work."

Marc Stein is a senior NBA writer for ESPN.com.

Follow Marc Stein on Twitter: @stein_line_HQ

 

[jlprk]

However, regardless of type of owner it is pretty well agreed upon that at the current moment, the league is losing money.

It's hard to believe that with a BRI of $4B and the owners getting 43% of it. That's about $1.72B after paying all the players. Or about $60M per team, if they split it evenly.

Total BRI is 4B. 43% of that is 1.72. But 60M*30 teams is 1.8B so just players alone is already more than the portion of BRI that the owners receive. And they still need to pay all the staff, stadium fees, taxes, travel, and all the other things that corporations need to pay.

BRI doesn't include all basketball income. It excludes hundreds of millions of dollars from the 57-43 split which goes 100% to the owners.

You mean like the hundreds of millions owners spend on jets, fuel, hotels, HCP, etc?

13. What is included in Basketball Related Income (BRI)?
...
•40% of proceeds from arena signage
•40% of proceeds from luxury suites
•45% - 50% of proceeds from arena naming rights

...not included in BRI are proceeds from the grant of expansion teams, fines, and revenue sharing (e.g. luxury tax).

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q13

60% of the luxury suite money is a very large portion of the ticket sales. BRI is not all basketball related income, far from it.

A couple of weeks ago the owners put forward some split giving players 50-some percent, but with a new definition of BRI. The union didn't fall for it, but fanboys of the owners, ignorant of their tricks, quickly squawked at the union for turning it down.

 

[KingSpeed]

I thought I was the only one who feels that way - I hate that the refs have so much influence on the games, that the calls are so subjective. And the prima dona superstars like LeBron. I only watch the Blazers for the most part as well, and wouldn't even follow the NBA if it wasn't for the 'Zers. So they're just screwing themselves . . .

How so? It sounds like the lockout hasn't affected your stance at all. You only watched Blazers games before and as long as they're in the league (they are), you'll keep watching. Nothing is changed. How are you screwing them?

 

[soona]

Yeah, I agree my last sentence seemed inconsistent. I was agreeing with Mediocre Man who implied that the depth of support for the NBA isn't as deep as that of the NFL, that there are more casual fans and if they keep up this squabbling and the lockout, then they might permanently lose fans. They shouldn't assume everyone will be there waiting there anxiously if they keep this up.

 

[soona]

I asked earlier about whether or not we know if the teams actually make money (and thanks for all your helpful answers). I asked because I noticed that, with all this discussion about the lockout (66 pages and counting), posters aren't particularly taking sides with either the players or the owners. We're just discussing the lockout and following the progress of the negotiations.

It's just not easy to see if one side or the other is being unreasonable or greedy, when we don't even know what the owners' bottom line is. I do know the players have no expenses whatsoever, and just take a paycheck (and a pretty big paychecks). The owners have a ton of expenses but a big chunk of BRI and non-BRI.

So does anybody feel strongly that one side or the other is being greedy and unreasonable?

 

[illmatic99]

I think they're both greedy. They should just cut everyone's salaries in half and slash ticket prices. But I get that doesn't really work in this kind of capitalist society.

TMac:

TheReal_TMAC does mr arison's $500,000 donation get spread among the mismanaged small market teams crying poor?

ouch.

The custodian:

Brian Cardinal
When @MickyArison gets fined for his HONEST tweet, will the next CBA session reflect that as money lost or money gained for the NBA in neg.

 

[THE HCP]

^OUCH

 

[jlprk]

13. What is included in Basketball Related Income (BRI)?
...
•40% of proceeds from arena signage
•40% of proceeds from luxury suites
•45% - 50% of proceeds from arena naming rights

...not included in BRI are proceeds from the grant of expansion teams, fines, and revenue sharing (e.g. luxury tax).

Players get none of the league income from fines, because fines are excluded from the BRI definition.

But fines are incoming money to the league, so they decrease the overall deficit the league claims it has, though it strangely won't release financial statements to prove it.

However, when the owner (currently under discussion, Heat owner Micky Arison) tells you how much he lost last year, he's including any fines he individually paid, so his own fines increase the mysterious deficit he claims but won't prove.

 

[THE HCP]

Woj


The NBA and NBPA are discussing possibility of returning federal mediator George Cohen to labor talks this week, sources tell Y! Sports.

 

[Mediocre Man]

I think they're both greedy. They should just cut everyone's salaries in half and slash ticket prices. But I get that doesn't really work in this kind of capitalist society.

TMac:

ouch.

The custodian:

LOL. And they wonder why we hate them. These players have no fucking clue that some owners really are losing a butt load of money. All they know is they get theirs no matter what.

 

[julius]

I think they're both greedy. They should just cut everyone's salaries in half and slash ticket prices. But I get that doesn't really work in this kind of capitalist society.

TMac:
ouch.
The custodian:

Those quotes, imho, show how idiotic players can be.

Isn't the Miami Heat owners fine given to charity? And even if it's not, $500,000 spread over 30 teams is under 17,000.

That really won't make a lot of difference amongst the teams. And his "mismanaged small market teams crying poor" crack is rather funny, considering being in a small market plays a huge role in how much money you can spend AND it means players who want HUGE contracts won't play for them. But it's mismanaged teams who are at fault...

as for the custodian....again, 500K isn't a lot of money spread out. If teams were losing 500K a year, I'm sure the owners would be much happier than if they were losing millions.

I guess thats why these guys are athletes and not CPAs.

 

[illmatic99]

Ya I had assumed that the fines go to charity. Not really sure though.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Ya I had assumed that the fines go to charity. Not really sure though.

I am about 104% sure that all fines go towards NBA charities.

 

[THE HCP]

I think the players were being smart asses.

 

[Draco]

Players get none of the league income from fines, because fines are excluded from the BRI definition.

But fines are incoming money to the league, so they decrease the overall deficit the league claims it has, though it strangely won't release financial statements to prove it.

However, when the owner (currently under discussion, Heat owner Micky Arison) tells you how much he lost last year, he's including any fines he individually paid, so his own fines increase the mysterious deficit he claims but won't prove.

The reason the evil owners don't include fines as income is because they are all donated to charity.

 

[PapaG]

I asked earlier about whether or not we know if the teams actually make money (and thanks for all your helpful answers). I asked because I noticed that, with all this discussion about the lockout (66 pages and counting), posters aren't particularly taking sides with either the players or the owners. We're just discussing the lockout and following the progress of the negotiations.

It's just not easy to see if one side or the other is being unreasonable or greedy, when we don't even know what the owners' bottom line is. I do know the players have no expenses whatsoever, and just take a paycheck (and a pretty big paychecks). The owners have a ton of expenses but a big chunk of BRI and non-BRI.

So does anybody feel strongly that one side or the other is being greedy and unreasonable?

I'm pro-owner and have been since the start. The fact that the players are willing to give up a substantial chunk of the BRI tells me they know that there are teams that are struggling.

 

[PapaG]

LOL. And they wonder why we hate them. These players have no fucking clue that some owners really are losing a butt load of money. All they know is they get theirs no matter what.

Tracy MacGrady slamming small market owners is so fucking stupid I don't know even where to start. If any player should be the poster child for what's wrong with the NBA, it's MacGrady, who is 7th all-time in salary made for the NBA, yet couldn't even lead a team to a playoff series win. The guy has made ~$161 million in salary, and he's whining about fines that go to charity?

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...the-top-career-earners-in-nba-history/page/50

Brian Cardinal is an even bigger embarrassment. $38 million in salary for a limited scrub who has started only 57 games in an 11 year career?

 

[santeesioux]

Lol, this guy responding to Tracy McGrady's tweet is right on the money:

@TheReal_TMAC of course they would go poor when they pay bums like you 20 million to sit on the bench with nagging injuries

 

[Further]

I asked earlier about whether or not we know if the teams actually make money (and thanks for all your helpful answers). I asked because I noticed that, with all this discussion about the lockout (66 pages and counting), posters aren't particularly taking sides with either the players or the owners. We're just discussing the lockout and following the progress of the negotiations.

It's just not easy to see if one side or the other is being unreasonable or greedy, when we don't even know what the owners' bottom line is. I do know the players have no expenses whatsoever, and just take a paycheck (and a pretty big paychecks). The owners have a ton of expenses but a big chunk of BRI and non-BRI.

So does anybody feel strongly that one side or the other is being greedy and unreasonable?

Here is a thread with a poll about who posters blame. As far as who I think is right and wrong, I am not so sure I have enough information to make a solid decision. I think that both sides are greedy, but I don't really blame them for that. If you were trying to negotiate a new salary, wouldn't you want to earn as much as possible? If you were hiring somebody, wouldn't you want to pay as little as possible?

who is right and wrong is one issue, but another question is which group has the most leverage, and I think that is a much easier to answer question. The Owners. As long as the owners are willing to cancel games and possibly the whole season, then they have the leverage and will eventually come out on top in these negotiations.

 

[The_Lillard_King]

After Billy Hunter made the grand stand of marching out of Friday’s bargaining session, refusing to negotiate below 52 percent of the NBA’s revenue split, there emerged a strong movement within the Players Association that’s vows the union will never let him act so unilaterally again.

From superstars to midlevel players to rookies, there’s an unmistakable push to complete the final elements of the system and take this labor deal to the union’s 400-plus membership. Beyond that, there’s an even larger movement to push Hunter, the Players Association’s executive director, out the door once these labor talks are done. All hell’s broken loose within the union, and no one is exactly sure how they’re going to get a deal to the finish line.


http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_y...w-wojnarowski_nba_lockout_billy_hunter_110111

 

[THE HCP]

Amico


Spoke to seven NBA players, each said he would agree to 50-50 split of BRI. Link to FOX Sports column shortly.

 

[illmatic99]

From the wojadouche article.

Within the NBPA, the frustration with Hunter is this: Hunter knows where the deal will be made, but he’s engaged in a smear campaign to frame Fisher as a sellout to the league.

Does he really expect his readers to believe this drivel?

 

[THE HCP]

RT @HowardBeckNYT: Looks like federal mediator will not be rejoining NBA labor talks. Nor are any (non-mediated) talks scheduled.

 

[Blazinaway]

Amico


Spoke to seven NBA players, each said he would agree to 50-50 split of BRI. Link to FOX Sports column shortly.

I'd wager that if the players got the chance to vote now a 50/50 deal would easily pass, assuming the other things we have heard on other issues are correct.

 

[Fez Hammersticks]

Buy or sell -- The players will end up with under 50% BRI the longer this drags on.

 

[julius]

Buy or sell -- The players will end up with under 50% BRI the longer this drags on.

a more important question would be...buy or sell the fans giving a shit anymore.

 

[THE HCP]

Billy Hunter's letter to the players..........


TO: ALL PLAYERS
As you have undoubtedly heard, negotiations with the owners aimed at ending their 4-month lockout collapsed on Friday, October 28. After three days of productive talks, which followed a week of negotiations aided by the Federal Mediation & Conciliation Service, the owners held firm to their ultimatum that we take a 50/50 split in BRI. It was at this moment that the Negotiating Committee and I decided that it no longer made sense for the union to continue the negotiations, and I led our group out of the room. Derek sent out a thoughtful letter last night summarizing his thoughts, and I want to follow up to reinforce his message of solidarity and reflect on where we may go from here.
Let me begin with some positive news. During the marathon session last Wednesday and the two days that followed on Thursday and Friday, we made great progress in working through many of the system issues that must be resolved before a deal can be reached. While the soft cap/luxury tax system we are negotiating is far from perfect and contains positives and negatives for both sides, I believe that if the last few system issues are resolved in our favor, it will be one that we can recommend to you. Without question, we have given more than the owners, but at bottom, we are determined to defend the principles we have fought for throughout - guaranteed contracts, healthy minimums, fair maximums, a strong middle class, and a true market for free agency.
Unfortunately, there is still work to do before we can declare these victories, and several important system issues must be resolved. So far, we have agreed to raise the team salary floor and implement a more punitive tax system that will diminish the gap between high and low spending teams. However, we still must fight to keep all teams in the market for player services, and as a result many key issues remain, including limiting additional penalties for repeat taxpayers, insuring that the luxury tax is not overly oppressive, and the continued availability of the midlevel exception and sign and trade transactions for taxpaying teams. While these issues may sit outside the spotlight, they have a major effect on player working conditions and the ability to create a robust and fair market for player services. Further, we must have additional discussions on revenue sharing. Based on the limited review we were finally granted last Friday, the revenue sharing system proposed by the NBA addresses the profitability issues of small market teams. However, it reduces the incentive for small market teams to grow revenues and improve.
Our meeting on Friday, however, did not collapse because of system issues. Our Negotiating Committee reached the unanimous conclusion that the NBA's 50% ultimatum, combined with the league's hard line position on the remaining system issues, was unacceptable for the players.
As you know, NBA players have received 57% of BRI for many years. In an effort to make a deal and save the season, in past meetings we have offered to reduce our share to as low as 52.5% with certain system issues in our favor. On Friday, considering the many system points we had already conceded, I hoped and expected the owners would move towards our proposed BRI number. Instead, Commissioner Stern insisted that the NBA would move no further than 50%, and I ended the meeting.
In my view, a 50/50 split of BRI does not adequately compensate the players for our services to the NBA. Remember that BRI does not reflect the total revenues generated by the NBA. The NBA is allowed to take hundreds of millions in "expense credits" before sharing any revenue with the players ($543m in 2010-11). Given this, under the NBA's proposal, the players would receive only 44% of total revenue generated by the league. By comparison, we received 50% of total revenue under the previous CBA, and our 53/47 proposal would reduce the player share to 46.4% of total revenues. In addition, compared to our former 57/43 split, the owner's proposed 50/50 shifts more than $300 million per year to the owners, which equates to more than $3 billion over a 10-year deal. A move of this magnitude guarantees operating profits for all owners irrespective of quality of management and does not allow players to adequately share in the growth of the league.
It is important that you know that our Negotiating Committee has made every possible effort to resolve this conflict. We have proposed a diverse array of ideas and concepts to address the NBA's concerns about competitive balance and salary disparities. Regarding the BRI split, we have made significant compromises in an effort to bridge the financial gap that separates us. In fact, our offer of 53% amounts to an average of $185 million per year in financial givebacks, which, even under the most pessimistic interpretation of the league's financial statements, covers the league's entire purported operating loss.
The NBA, however, seems resigned to testing the resolve of our players through intimidation and hard bargaining tactics. They have given us "take it or leave it" ultimatums, threatened to end the season prematurely, reached out to players in an attempt to divide us, misled the press, and pre-conditioned further talks on our acceptance of significant concessions. This is an unacceptable form of negotiation, especially where the respective fates of the players and the owners are inextricably related. Moreover, it does nothing but damage the relationship between the league and union.
Furthermore, in recent weeks you have no doubt seen, heard or read Commissioner Stern in the media as he embarked on a media blitz intended to scare players and inflame the public. Do not buy into this. This public saber rattling is common in high profile and high stakes negotiations, and we anticipate that it will continue and intensify as the lockout continues. We will not be intimidated by public threats, ultimatums and manufactured drop dead dates. We will stand firm in our resolve to negotiate a fair deal for our current membership and those who will join our ranks in the future.
Your role is an important one. The owners need to know that we will stand strong until they are ready to finish negotiating a fair deal - not one reached with preconditions, and not one forced down our throat with the threat of missed paychecks. We have prepared for this moment for over two years and now we are here. We are proud of the actions of our Committee and take great comfort in knowing that we have your support.
One final note before I conclude. Contrary to what is being said in the media, Derek, myself and the Negotiating Committee are of one accord. Derek is a fearless defender of player rights both at the bargaining table and behind the scenes, and he carries out his duties as President with the same degree of courage, focus and tenacity that he has exhibited on the court as a five-time champion. We are all well served to have Derek in a leadership capacity during these negotiations.
We will communicate more details on short-term and long-term logistical plans in dealing with this lockout and updates on the negotiations. Thank you again, and please feel free to contact me or the staff with any questions or concerns.
-- G.W.H.


Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/sam_amick/11/01/labor.meeting/index.html#ixzz1cWXTI7tL