By Chris Sheridan
NEW YORK — If things had gone poorly Tuesday in the jump-started NBA collective bargaining talks, the sides would have let that be known.
So it should probably be seen as a positive sign that the owners and players retreated to their neutral corners after meeting for less than three hours and agreed to meet again today.
I tweeted back on June 30 that there was probably a deal to be done at 52/48 in terms of the split in revenue (the players dropping from 57 percent of revenues to 52), and I think that remains the case. But if union director Billy Hunter brings forward a 50/50 split or even a 51/49 split, there would be a strong possibility that the deal would fail to be ratified by the union membership, which would put the sides back at Square One (and put Hunter out of a job).
One of the concepts the players have resented most during these negotiations is that the sides are assuming 4 percent annual growth per season, but the players would not get any of those additional revenues because the owners were asking them to accept an offer that flatlined player salaries at $2 billion over the first seven seasons of the proposed 10-year deal.
That helps explain this line from union president Derek Fisher in the memo he recently sent to players:
“Our game has never been more popular and we’re poised to see tremendous revenue growth over the next 5 to 6 years. … We must share fairly in the continued growth of our business. Any deal that decouples us from a fair share of the revenue growth in the years ahead is a deal we cannot accept. Period!”
As for the players’ resistance to a hard salary cap, there is a middle ground that would likely be palatable to both sides: Keep the luxury tax, but make it more punitive — something like $2 in tax for every $1 spent over the threshold, rather than the current dollar-for-dollar tax. That would provide more revenue sharing money, in addition to the tripling of revenue sharing from income such as gate receipts and local television dollars that commissioner David Stern has promised.
“There are a number of team owners that will not lose the season over the hard cap system. We’ve been clear from Day 1 of this process that we cannot sign off on a deal that attempts in any way to include a hard salary cap for our teams. That has not changed,” Fisher wrote in his memo.
Again, I must stress that this is a financial negotiation much more than it is a systemic negotiation, and when there is a deal on how many aggregate dollars are devoted to player salaries, the rest of the agreement will fall into place over the course of 2-3 days.
So if the “ideas and concepts” that were discussed Tuesday included the players getting a piece of that projected 4 percent annual revenue growth the sides have been using as their economic model, we could be moving closer to a deal. So stay tuned, and I will report more info as I acquire it.
UPDATE: Adrian Wojnarowski of Yahoo Sports reports the owners have indeed moved off their insistence on a hard cap, restoring the luxury tax but making it more punitive:
“The owners proposed at Tuesday’s negotiating session an idea similar to the current system that allows teams to pay a luxury tax for going over the cap. Only, now there would be ultra-punitive measures against higher-spending teams. The current system has teams pay a dollar-for-dollar tax for exceeding the cap.”
UPDATE: Ken Berger of CBSSports suggests the owners will propose a 50-50 split of revenues when the sides reconvene Wednesday.
“Among the many concepts league negotiators proposed Tuesday were a more punitive luxury tax and adjustments to two key spending exceptions that teams had under previous agreements: the Larry Bird exception and the mid-level exception. Both would have been eliminated under the owners’ original proposal from two years ago, with many of those dramatic systemic changes living on in subsequent proposals until Tuesday.
There is a feeling among two people who have been briefed on the talks that the owners will come forward Wednesday with an enhanced version of the concepts proposed Tuesday. According to the sources, among the additions could be a proposed 50-50 revenue split, which to this point the league has not reached in terms of the players’ average share over the life of a new CBA in its previous proposals.”
UPDATE: Ric Bucher of ESPN.com reports the owners have specified that the Larry Bird exception would only be used on one player per team per season:
“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.
Lonnie says
Let these cry baby millionaire NBA players get a real job……..Lets start a new league like the NFL did years ago with the USFL………These guys think their irreplaceable
Joel says
I think i have a solution to the system that could work for all parties. There should a soft cap, set at 65 million that you can go over for any reason, get rid of all exceptions. However you can only go over the cap up to 85 million. The teams between 65-75 pay a dollar luxury tax between 75-85 pay a 2 dollar luxury tax which goes to small market teams. I believe that the heat would have won had they been able to spend like the mavs. it was not fair and there was a difference of 30 million in salaries. Teams should be able to spend as much as their components, and when teams want to spend to compete, the money goes to the teams that need it most. You could also eliminate the hard cap and make another bracket from 85-95 where you pay 4 on the dollar. The players get their BRI no matter what, a competitive system needs to be in place to ensure growth in the league. You can change the numbers however to make it work, its the idea of a marginal luxury tax and no more exceptions. I feel like exceptions create a massive barrier betwen teams like the lakers (3 MLE’s, multiple bird rights) and the heat who have a hard time spending more.
Joel says
components = opponents
Let the season start says
Im not sure anybody is going to feel bad for the Heats ability to attract Free agents. Just throwing that out there. They arent in a horrible position regardless of their cap. 2 of the top 5 players in basketball, and both are significantly under 30 yrs old. The Heat have a legit chance to compete as is… under ANY new cba agreement.
Joel says
The heat are a team like any other, and should not be treated any differently. The knicks are in the same boat, the celts have a much higher salary than the knicks and there compared apples to apples, its not fair. Teams should be able to spend as much as their opponents at any time. You really think if dallas was at 62 mill, they could win a championship? Teams that win have massive payrolls, period, it needs to change that any team can spend as much as any team. eliminating exceptions and good revenue sharing will do that.
JustPLAY says
Hopefully Wednesday we will know more and the season will be saved! I can miss pre season but we need this deal done before the season gets cancelled
kantankruz says
Well, that update is a little exciting.
Let the season start says
I really hope that you are right, but do you have any sources what so ever about anything right now. Its odd how there is almost no information out there about why the meeting was so short. usually there are reporters analysing everything fisher and stern say during the questions. I dont even see any footage of either of them available. its odd that with such an important week… there doesnt seem to be any information good or bad anywhere to be found…. maybe a twitter account will get hacked soon, who knows.