NEW YORK — The above image is the new Avatar on colleague Alan Hahn’s Twitter account — @alanhahn.
Yes, nuclear winter arrived yesterday, the day before what was supposed to be the first payday for players in the 2011-12 NBA season. But today is forecast to be another 65 degree day in the city that used to be the headquarters of the National Basketball Players Association, which technically no longer exists. Sort of. Just don’t try checking their Web site for clarification.
It is time for another mea culpa, because I have maintained a sense of optimism throughout this arduous negotiation and failed to back off when I should have. A little less than two weeks ago, when Billy Hunter was still demanding a 52.5 percent share of revenues but would not answer my question at union headquarters about whether he was prepared to drop one penny below 52 percent, as he had previously claimed, an alarm bell should have gone off.
And when Hunter dropped all the way down to 50-50 without being very, very specific about what that 50-50 offer was contingent upon, I should have forecast both his demise and the demise of this negotiation.
The best deal that Hunter and David Stern could have done to save face, save an 82-game season and save some semblance of the goodwill from the public that had been built up over the past few seasons was a 51-49 split. Once Hunter showed a willingness to drop to 50-50, he had given away the store. He went past the tipping point, commissioner David Stern did not throw him a lifeline, and the 50 players in the room yesterday were so ready to abandon ship that it took less than an hour from the time attorney David Boies entered the room to get to the point where the player reps were raising their hands in unanimity to have a new captain steering their vessel.
Who knows where this thing goes next, because the winds can shift dramatically in this epic epoch of idiocy. If I am Stern, I immediately either call Jeffrey Kessler and make him a better offer, or I start bellowing about how the latest proposal should have been put to a vote of the entire player population, trying to make someone else the villain and the object of the public’s scorn. (He’ll likely choose the latter).
But you know what? Stern has only himself to blame, because he could have pushed this thing over the finish line two weeks ago when the possibility of an 82-game season was still alive. Instead, he hammered away and hammered away, bringing out the competitive edge in his players, who wouldn’t be playing pro sports for a living if they hadn’t been born with the competitiveness gene. There is a reason why there is a mercy rule in several sports, and it should have been invoked. Instead, Stern went for a 50-point victory when he was leading by 40 late in the fourth quarter, and now look at how that strategy has panned out.
One of the themes I have constantly come back to is that these were smart, reasonable men negotiating this deal, and common sense and logic dictated that a mutually acceptable endgame was going to be there for both sides to embrace, even if they had to do so reluctantly.
You know what? I was naive. And to those readers who have complained that I gave them a false sense of hope, I apologize. But you know what else? This should have been settled. Everyone can see that. It was the logical thing to do.
But sometimes, logic is trumped by greed and idiocy. Life ain’t always fair. That is the lesson of the day.
With that, let’s have our daily look around the Web, where vitriol is in such high supply that today’s excerpts run a little longer than usual:
From Jason Whitlock of FOXSports.com: “After Stern’s media mouthpieces were done blasting the players, the commissioner took to his business partners’ airwaves (ESPN) and blasted the players again. He called Hunter irresponsible, described the union’s move to decertify a “charade” and generally dumped all over union leadership. Throughout this process, Stern has huffed and puffed about take-it-or-leave-it proposals/ultimatums. He played the role of bully. And maybe in the coming days he will back up that tough talk with even tougher action. Maybe Stern will cancel the season and make good on his promise to give the players an even worse deal. If so, his legacy as commissioner should go up in flames along with the season. Stern never struck the right tone with players. He treated the players like they’re the media members who live in fear of Stern’s wrath. He treated the players with little regard for respect. Unlike the media, the players do have a rare skill that has significant value globally. They’re not going to respond well to being bullied. As commissioner, Stern’s goal should’ve been about getting a deal done and making sure his workers were happy going back to work. Stern should’ve demanded that his media mouthpieces fully and fairly aired the players‘ position so the players felt like they had been heard and respected. Stern’s bully tactics backfired.”
From Ian Thomsen of SI.com: For the NBA owners and players to shut down their league during the worst economic times in more than 60 years has got to be the dumbest thing they could imagine doing. At a time when so many businesses are fighting for every last dollar, the NBA players and owners are giving back money to their season-ticket holders — their die-hard fans — and saying we don’t want it. Put that money back in your pockets for now, and when we decide to start playing again, think about whether we are worthy of your investment. The priorities and sensibilities of the owners and players exemplify an arrogance that now threatens the future of their business. But the players and owners don’t see it that way. They are too focused on viewing their relationship as a divorce rather than a marriage. Someday the owners and players are going to view this argument the way millions of people around the world view it today. At that time in the distant future, when it will be far too late, everyone involved is going to feel regret for his role in a mess that — given the economic environment and the pessimistic mood of the country — threatens to become worse than the Tim Donaghy scandal, the 2004 brawl in Detroit and the 1998-99 lockout combined.”
From Adrian Wojnarowski of Yahoo Sports: ” As much as anything, the NBA has started down this dark, uncertain path because leadership has been so deplorable. From union officials to agents, from star players to the commissioner’s office to hardline owners, they’ve all conspired to take a do-able deal and push it to a catastrophic brink that will cause irreparable damage to the industry. … Ultimately, Stern has failed to finesse those hardliners, instead inspiring as much loathing with some owners as he has with players. He can’t sell a fair deal to his hardline owners, which left him unable to sell a one-sided agreement to his players. A source briefed on the meeting said (Kobe) Bryant essentially told those player reps: If we’re going to give up our salaries for a year, you better be in this for the long run. You better be prepared to fight. Make no mistake: Hunter didn’t sell those players on a long court battle, a possible victory with millions and millions of dollars paid for damages. He sold it as a way to lure the owners back to the table, to do something he had been unwilling to do out of self-interest for the longest time: Create leverage and take the fight to the NBA. He’ll never admit it, but those players didn’t walk out of the room completely believing they had forfeited a year’s salary. Too many of the player reps didn’t know the difference between a disclaimer of interest, decertification and “Dancing with the Stars” when they walked into that meeting. As it usually goes in these labor talks, whoever gets the players’ ears last can talk them in and out of almost any directive. The agents were locked out, cell phones confiscated at the door, and Hunter had a captive audience with some big fancy antitrust lawyers to make his case. Too many of those player reps are young kids who were given the task as a locker-room punishment, or older guys looking for the free annual meeting in the Caribbean. Hunter should’ve been out recruiting the best of the best for this labor fight, but why would he want Shane Battier in that room, challenging him, asking him like he did in June: Why are you still taking a salary when the NFL’s DeMaurice Smith gave up his during the lockout? Hunter sold a plan that – surprise, surprise – keeps him on his $2.5 million salary, keeps him in charge of the court battle. But most of all, this move gives the NBA a much better chance of selling a judge on Stern’s charges that this was a charade, a phony negotiating tactic.”
From Dave D’Allessandro of the Newark Star-Ledger: ” By already agreeing to drop their share of the basketball-related income from 57 percent to 50 percent, the players in effect helped the owners make up for any shortfall they claim to have had last year. That’s the most significant concession to come out of the last six months of “negotiation” by far. Not enough. There are other givebacks all over the latest league proposal. Some are absurd, some are not. An example of the latter: Owners wanted to stop the trend of players leaving for larger markets, mostly by preventing taxpaying teams from having sign-and-trade options in free agency; and by killing “extend-and-trade” deals, such as the one Carmelo Anthony took with Denver last year. Fine. We’re not entirely against some restrictions, frankly. It had to be administered after what happened to poor Dan Gilbert, who had the value of his Cleveland franchise drop from $467 million to $220 million when one guy with a massive ego split for South Beach. Of course, if such a thing had to happen at all, we’re not entirely against it happening to an owner like Gilbert — a fellow practiced in the art of suckering the public into iffy outlays, as both a subprime mortgage whiz and casino owner. It’s guys like Gilbert who have driven this lockout. We’re glad the players stood up to him, even if some think the numbers are fair. But sometimes it’s not about numbers. The NBA’s asset is its work force: They don’t produce a product, the laborers themselves are the product. And if the majority of the work force thinks it’s getting a raw deal, it’s time to use whatever leverage you have. Take it to court, or at least threaten the move. Yes, there has been failure on both sides. The players don’t always understand the business model, or appreciate that some of it has to change. The owners’ failure is about tone and sensibility. You don’t say, “Take it or leave it” to these guys, especially when you’re not giving anything back. A judge would agree: You can’t give ultimatums and call yourself “a negotiator.” And since that’s true — and league attorneys know it — this will never get to a judge.”
From Ken Berger of CBSSports.com: “The blood, for the moment, is on the players’ hands — because they once again allowed themselves to be cornered in this negotiation, with another ultimatum and no good way out. And when professional athletes — and Hunter — have no other choice but to fight, they are always going to fight. The owners pushed too hard, demanded too much, sought absolute victory to the point where they are going to wind up beating themselves. A $3 billion shift from players to owners by lowering player salaries from 57 percent of revenues to 50 percent — a $300 million annual giveback, all of the money the owners said they were losing — wasn’t enough. The owners sent Stern in for blood, and he’s got it now — all over him. The players? What was described Monday at the Westin Times Square — site of the infamous blowup of talks over the BRI split on Oct. 4 — had the feeling of a pre-ordained act to remove Hunter from power and transform this fiasco from a pointless staredown into the mother of all antitrust lawsuits. As Hunter described, union officials explained the owners’ proposal, which would’ve been replaced by a far worse one if the players didn’t accept it. He then laid out the options: present it to the full body for a vote; reject it; make a counterproposal; or give the NBPA the authority to “do whatever they deem necessary and appropriate going forward,” Hunter said. “And then all of a sudden, the players said, ‘No, we want to talk about decertification or disclaimer,’ ” Hunter said. “So it actually came from the floor. And when it came from the floor, then that’s when we began to engage on the issue.” The players then decided that a disclaimer was the route they wanted to pursue, because, you know, players tend to spend a lot of time sitting around thinking of obscure legal strategies. … A disclaimer was the one weapon at the union’s disposal that causes the most chaos the fastest, so maybe there is legal genius in that alone. Once the players file their antitrust lawsuit, the league presumably would follow through on its threat to void all player contracts. Technically, the league would be free to start over — with new rules, a new draft, and new ways of assigning players to teams. The players would bargain individually, and they wouldn’t be considered scabs since they are no longer represented by a union. But a disclaimer isn’t a stronger hand than decertification, and unlike decertification, bargaining talks cannot continue between the league and union. All that can result is a settlement reached by the attorneys — which at some point would take the form of a collective bargaining agreement if a simple majority of players voted to reinstate the union and the owners decided to recognize it. But that eventuality is a long way off, and it would be a moot point if a federal judge rules that the union’s disclaimer tactic is a sham.”
I think Ian Thomsen hit it right on the button. Arrogance.
The Euroleague is a legitamate threat. Ersan Ilyasova signed with Istanbul for the NBA equivalent of $9million/year. He isn’t even the highest paid player in Europe. If the Euroleague bring in more talent, their product will improve and there should be even more money to go around (hypothetically).
If the owners win the dispute, a 60-40 split and hardcap will lower player salaries substantially. There will be resentment, so why not go to Europe and make more cash and give the finger to the owners? I don’t want this to happen because I want to watch my team play. Regardless, if I was told 2 years ago that Deron Williams will be playing in Turkey, I would have thought for an “NBA cares” community service promotion.
The majority of NBA players have enough problems playing in Canada, let alone Europe. I’d love to see Bosh live in Turkey and complain about it “smelling different”, haha. Oh, and remember Antonio Davis? After he was rewarded a rich contract (the likes of which no other team would have signed him to given his age and production), he begged out because he didn’t want his kids learning stuff like “metric”, because it would confuse them…
Oh right. And there’s no ESPN.
I will always maintain they couldn’t get me out in the 1994 World Series. And it is looking like I will not miss a single free throw in the 2011-12 NBA season.
Either Stern overplayed his hand or owners really wanted to cancel the season because they want an entire new structure in place. either way, theis is on NBA management. Stern may have proved the adage that there’s no fool like and old fool
Just once, I beg you Chris, just say that the season is over so the opposite can happen and bball can start asap, ya big dummy.
Lebron and Carmello are the big reason for this impasse. The owners are hell-bent on not losing their stars. With Dwight, Paul, and Dwill up, the owners are not letting them go without a fight.
The this is, the last proposal sent out by the owners would still not prevent Carmelo, Dwight, CP3, etc from leaving their teams.
The best case for the owners would be to either implement a franchise tag, or take away Bird Rights from players traded to a new team for a certain period of time. Something along those lines.
The recent owners proposal was good for the players. I do believe a change increasing the minimum salary would be preferable, but nonetheless a good deal for the employees. Not only did the employees (players) get to split 50% of basketball related income, but they also would have 1% of BRI put into a pension plan on their behalf. Further, they benefited from the marketing of the league which allows them to maximize endorsement deals.
It’s too bad that the players were deprived an opportunity to vote. With roughly 450 union members, I believe the proposal would have passed quite easily and thus the decision not to give the employees that opportunity.
Certainly the players have every right to excerise their legal challenge. I just feel bad that many of these players have lost a great opportunity to maximize their financial future.
Quite easily? They already had 200+ signatures for a decertification vote. That means they only needed about 26 or so for a majority. I don’t think that would be too hard to find. The player reps, who probably have a much better sense of how their constinuecy feels than anyone in the public, appeared to vote unanimously against the deal. Further, I don’t see a large public outcry from the players railing against what the union just did. Should they have had a vote? That’s a fair question. Would the players have voted in favor of the deal? No reason other than pure speculation to believe that.
Agree. I can only speculate as to the result of a vote. But if each player was provided all the information (and reports exist that they were not), I think the deal was a no brainer. Just an opinion but getting 51% of BRI (1% of that established as an ongoing annuity) plus all the other benefits offered the players is a good deal in my humble view.
I really do feel bad for many of the players. Time will tell but I believe they will regret not taking the latest deal offered by the owners.
I don’t think you were naive, Chris. I think you were sensible. A year or two from now Billy Hunter will have to look a player in the face and say ‘Per my cousel, I cost you $2 million dollars in salary you will never see again’ and now here we are with a hard-lined bitterly contentious litigated deal not remotely worth what you sacrificed to achieve it.
It is all about risk and reward. The risk is giving away guaranteed money. The risk is never seeing it again. The risk is fan apathy disloyalty and disdain. The risk is the clock ticking on your career. The reward is what…??? When you become a RFA or UFA 5 teams bid for your services instead of two teams? You make 70 to 90% on a dollar to play 20 minutes a game and average 6 points? Show me another professional basketball league that compensates its players at that level.
If I was Billy Hunter I would have said ‘This is a bad deal. David Stern is a prick at the negotiating table. But if we allow our egos and personal animosity to rule our decisions, we are going to regret it. This risk is not worth the reward to pursue disclaimer of interest or desertification. I wish I could have got more concessions from the owners but this is where we stand. The risk is more and more lost paychecks. The risk is a lost season(s). The risk is signing a worse deal in the months and years ahead.
The reward is possibly treble damages, but in good faith and good conscious I cannot advise we take that path since there is NO precedent in the courts that will be successful.” Then I could sleep at night.
Thank you for this beautiful post
There is precedent in the courts. In 1984 (85?) the USFL won their antitrust suit against the NFL. And were awarded in the words of Mortimer Duke from trading places, the sum of “one dollar”. Trebled it worked out to $3 dollars.
The reward is the possibility of $6 billion dollars in damages, precious BRI points (1 point estimated at $40 million per year) that the union doesn’t have to fork over to the owners which results in billions of dollars as the decades add up (because if history is any guide, players never see these BRI points again once they are given up, the public wouldn’t stand for it), the possiblity of a free market system where you are paid base upon what you are worth, or most of all, the possibility of getting a more fair CBA.
You seem to be looking at this situation as what is in the best interest of “this group of players”. What you have to understand is that the reason “this group of players” are in the situation they are in is due to the sacrifice of those before them. It would be a diservice and a slap in the face to those before and after to take what is in best interest for “this group of players” at the detrmient of all other future/past players.
Obviously, if it was what it is in the best interest of “this group of player”, you would be correct. But it’s not. It the players as a whole. Not the one’s playing in the NBA year 2011.
This most recent prediction was incredibly naive at the least. Everything coming out of these meetings has shown that the owners have always wanted to miss games. It’s pretty clear that there is infighting between the owners and Stern has been powerless to unite them making him powerless to actually negotiate with the players and come up with a deal that would pass. Billy Hunter might be the worst lead negotiator in the history of collective bargaining and is equally powerless and now is just trying to save his job, which he somehow managed to do. There was no reason to believe that anything but decertification was going to come out of this latest meeting. What comes next is anyone’s guess, but this result was clear as day.
Good morning Chris Sheridan and fellow Sheridan Hoops followers!
I’m well rested after watching last night’s NFL game between teams from two sparsely populated upper Midwest states. The same game that featured the NFL’s best player in Aaron Rodgers.
I’m waiting for the ratings to come in, but it is quite possible that maybe upwards of 18 or 20 million people tuned in for the game. That would be more than the 17 million who on average watched last season’s NBA Finals between Miami and Dallas.
I’m not sure how those ratings occur, because as we all know, the only way a successful sports league can be run is to have the big superstars all using their free will to play for the big market teams on the coasts. Or at least that is what Lakers and Heat fans keep telling me.
Poor Aaron Rodgers. He’s stuck in Green Bay by virtue of the evil threat of that franchise tag the league holds over him.
Poor NFL. The CBA they operate under is so antiquated and cramps their business model terribly. Maybe they can learn from Billy Hunter and David Boies here about how to do things right!
You are right Americans do love football more than basketball
There is no doubt a cause and effect issue with his post, but you cannot deny that the NFL and it’s star players are operating just fine under their current model, and the revenue sharing that they have along with the fixed salary cap plays a part in the parity of the league.
Most definitely the NFL’s salary structure helps but also the 16 game regular season and single elimination playoffs with respect to parity, The NBA is trying to become more like the NFL without tying themselves together financially through nationwide TV deals.
Paulpressey, I just want to thank you for your input here. You have consistently nailed it — your comments here are more informative about the underlying issues at stake than anything in the mainstream media.
People arguing that the NBA needs dynasties because they’ve always had dynasties are a little like the people who argued that Europe needed to be ruled by dynastic kings because it was always so. I totally agree that for the NBA to survive and thrive, it needs to become relevant to fans outside the 5 biggest markets.
Do you have a blog or something? If not maybe Chris can put you on his staff.
So Stern got the players to bring themselves to their own knees? Just by threats and fake ultimatums, lol. Now he waits for the players to take him to court so he can file to have all their contracts and benefits voided, and then they’ll be forced to take 37% BRI and a hard cap. Wow. Did the players think that the courts are a threat to Stern? He’s had his lawyers check everything he has done every step of the way. Winning in court is all about money, and the owners have much deeper pockets then the players. No season, bring on the NHL type hard cap, cull all the bad contracts and hit reset. See everyone next year.
If it actually gets to a decision, either one side or the other will win big. Given the uncertainty of court, I can’t imagine either the owners or the players taking on that risk. But hey, I didn’t think they’d get this far without a deal given that the players all but conceded on BRI.
The problem here Vincent is the players aren’t looking for a ‘win’ they are looking to be treated fairly and they don’t believe the offers that have been proposed are fair at all. The only way the players win is by getting back out on the court and doing what each and everyone of them want to do. Play ball and show off their talents. But they are not willing to destroy what they have helped create for future players by accepting any deal the owners put forward.
I hope people stop feeding the players lines about “fairness”, because that is only going to scuttle any chance at a deal. Fairness is the worst word you can use at a negotiating table, because that inevitably leads to people taking positions/stands on certain issues, often a negotiation killer.
So please, take fairness out of your rhetoric. I wouldn’t want a player accidentally reading your post and thinking that “ya, damn right I deserve 57% of BRI, time to go to court!”
IF the players won it would be a free market system with the superstars getting $30mil+ and everyone else getting peanuts, welcome to the new NBA aka WWE. If the owners win its NHL hard cap, but I don’t see them picking up the phone to come back to the table. It has to be the players and they think decertification is a threat. I think its what Stern has wanted all along.
You know, I’ve begun wondering about that myself. Is it possible that the league wanted to blow up the season and just manipulated the players into doing so?
But if that is true, what’s the point? Perhaps the owners thought this would be the only way to reset the league?
Anyway, interesting conspiracy theory!
It just seems that the owners were just going thru the motions negotiating, and Stern isn’t an idiot, he knew things were going this route or he wouldn’t have filed the preemptive lawsuit back in August. Stern knows players make bad decisions when they get emotional, and all he had to do was feed them. If he gets a complete reset on contracts and a hard cap out of this he is a genius.
The two sides deserve each other. Both sides failed. Sad thing is, I’m willing to bet that 90% of the players have absolutely no clue as to what they agreed to. Basically said ok to the 3 guys in the room that stand to make most from a disclaimer of interest. I just feel bad for the many employees and small businesses that will suffer as a result of their stupidity, greed and ignorance.
The players should have decertified a long time ago. I think doing it now might help, but they’ve already given up so much, so what are they really gonna get back? Not much, in all likelihood. Every week or two they’ve been giving up a percentage of BRI, while watching the luxury tax go up, agreeing to more restrictions, etc.. Now they’re stuck basically making their last stand all the way in November, with their backs against the wall.
With that being said, the owners really are trying to run up the score, when the union probably figured that they’d take all the concessions they got and be content. They already got $280mil back so why not just call off the dogs? No one actually believes that the owners lost $300mil last season and yet they still got a huge amount of money back anyway, basically gifted to them from the union. That should have been enough for them, but apparently not. They may ultimately get what they want, but missing a season is not going to go over well with fans, and right now, that’s a huge possibility.
To be fair, many of the owners were as concerned about the system as the money. The league actually abandoned most of its suggested system changes and had proposed a system almost identical to the last one, with the exception of some more limitations on tax paying teams and less limitations on teams close to the cap.
Whether those are fair or not is up for debate, but the rhetoric the union throws around about those system changes destroying the free agent market is hilarious.
Hm, I agree that the owners gave up on most of their hard cap demands. But the restrictions on tax-paying teams for signing/trading players and the more punitive luxury tax ends up being a double-whammy that should be a pretty good deterrent to teams looking to go over the tax. Obviously only time will tell on that, but the players are right to be concerned about the effect it will have on player movement. However, given the fact that they make millions of dollars, I have no sympathy for them, even if they have to play in “undesirable” places.
If I paid someone $2.5m a year to negotiate a good contract for me and then they said after two and half years of negotiating that eh couldn’t get a good deal, I’d fire him on the spot.
Why the players are sticking with Billy Hunter is beyond me.
And why more players didn’t insist on a vote is also baffling. They obviously don’t care, pay far too much attention to their agents (who in turn only care about their 10% regardless of what Jerry Maguire said), and therefore deserve to miss their money.
And as for Stern, well this was hardball played too hard.
People need to swallow their pride and fast. And when the NBA comes back they should give something back to the fans, such as first game will be free. And a massive apology.
Where is the Guan Weija colums at? They are supposed to be out every Wednesday.
I want my CBA updates. And I don’t mean collective bargaining agreement updates.
Tomorrow, Michael. Guan took last week off.
So you do read the comments from your crazies
The players conceded nothing because nothing existed – the previous CBA was over and therefore worthless.Every CBA negotiations can start from scratch, especially if one side feels that the previous CBA was unfair.
The players had a great run in the past CBA, and now it is over, that’s all. The problem is that the players had it so good for so long, they began to think that they are entitled to run the league. I believe that they will be proved wrong and they will definitely regret not taking this deal, which really was pretty fair. I wish someone offered that deal to me….
The CBA doesn’t start from scratch when gauranteed contracts are already in place that were signed and allowed under the previous CBA. You start with the previous system, and go from there.
Notice how under the owner’s proposal on Youtube, they didn’t mention anything about draft orders, roster spots, scheduling, etc. Hmm… wonder why? You would think if they were starting from scratch, they would need to clarify all of those issues.
Couldn’t disagree more that the league and commissioner Stern is the problem. The players are to blame for this. A s a matter of fact, i think Stern gave them too much in trying to facilitate a deal. I hope he tears them a new one on court and have them begging to take a 60-40 split of BRI, a hard cap and non-guaranteed contracts.
How can you possibly say this?
The NBPA has already conceded 12% of their revenues and agreed to system changes which ultimately lead to a more competitive league. Stern has always used bullying and scare tactics to ensure the players do as he wishes, for example when Rondo was going to be fined $25000 per gamme for wearing his nba headband upside down. That is simply ridiculous. I agree that the players needed to make a stand. In actual fact this move should probably have happened around October when the first ultimatums started coming out of Sterns mouth. The NBA is coming off the most successful year ever and why? Although it may be one of the reasons behind the lockout (lack of competitive balance) it is because of the wade/lebron melo/stat kobe/gasol combinations that is increasing the leagues popularity globally.
League owners are feeling the losses in small market teams but due to the downturned economy this is bound to happen to a certain extent. However owners aren’t just feeling the heat from their investments in NBA teams but in other businesses across the US and globally. This is where they have noted that they have dug themselves into a very deep hole offering players 57% of BRI in the last CBA. Stern and the other hardnosed owners need to eat their pride and get directly back into negotiations with the disbanded player body.
Because at the end of the day the only assets the NBA teams own is their players and without them, the trickle down effect of spending through restaurants bars etc. will destroy all the goodwill the NBA has worked so hard to establish.
I’ll respond to you later Jeremy
People keep bringing up “players as assets”, and while that’s true, keep in mind that if Kobe was playing in some backwater league in Italy tearing it up, 1) he would be making a fraction of what he’s making now; and 2) he would not be the global brand he is today. So, not only does it work both ways. But also keep in mind that there are players lined up all over the place to play in the NBA.
Imagine a day where all of a sudden, Wade, Durant, Kobe, LeBron, Howard, Paul, and Gasol suddenly disappeared from the NBA, never to be heard from again. We will say: dang, those guys were so good, and now they’re gone. And we’ll do that for maybe 6 months until the playoffs come and new stars emerge to take their place.
Players come and go. Some make more of a mark (Jordan) than others (Luc Longley). But at the end of the day, someone just as talented will come along and seize the opportunity to become a star in the NBA.
So say what you want about the “players being the asset”, but the league makes stars. The stars do not make the league. Aging guarantees that. Even Jordan had to leave at some point, and what happened when he left? That’s right. We found new stars to dote on.
And I’m not even going to bother responding to your lack of empathy for small market teams watching the super teams poach their stars. You must be from LA.
The players kept banging on about the future, but to be honest the NBA’s proposal really was about the future.
The league would be so much better if Milwaukee and Indiana were matching up with Dallas and Miami.
The championship is really only going to be between 5 or 6 teams at the moment and that does need to change. Players will always get paid vast sums of money, but they would get paid more if 20+ teams were competing for titles, and therefore competing for signatures.
The NBA is what it is because of the players. The product is what makes any business run. In the case of all sports, musicians, actors, actresses and all other entertainment entities, the product is the talent. It is true that the NBA showcases that talent but that is a necessary duty of the owners and the NBA. It is no different than any other business in the sense that if an owner of a particular business wants to make a profit, he/she must advertise its product, improve its product, and create a business environment that attracts consumers and increases demand for its product.
The uniqueness of entertainment, (sports is entertainment), is that businessmen invest in human talent. Would anyone agree that agents should get 50% of a players income? Agents have a similar role as the NBA when it comes to players. Agents are trusted to do the things necessary to put its clients in the best situation to be successful. The difference between the NBA and agents… there is only one NBA and there is an abundance of agents wishing to make a profit off of these players’ talents.
As far as the league making stars, that’s a very small truth. The league (as is all other sports leagues) is set up to display its very best. The NBA offers the best basketball players in the World. Imagine a league without Dwight, D. Rose, Kobe, Lebron, D. Wade and all other elite players, and the best the NBA could offer was Dan Gadzuric, Darko Milicic, Kwame Brown, and a host of other lackluster players. The NBA would not be a multi-Billion dollar industry.
Also, of the the four major US sports I know that the MLB, NFL, and NBA all at one point featured two separate leagues. Whereas in the case of the MLB and NFL, those entities merged to create one super league, the ABA (the NBA’s counterpart) failed as the NBA created a better platform and showcased the best product, thus attracting more consumers.
Last point. Would Nike give Footlocker more than 50% of its product sales? Not even close. Would Ralph Lauren give Macy’s, Dillards, or any other department store in which his products are sold 50% of his product sales? Hell no. It can be agreed that stores like Footlocker and department stores like Macy’s offer a platform for those products to be sold around the world which in turn increases the value of those products. But Nike nor Ralph Lauren nor Coca Cola or any other company would give away half of their revenue at the point-of-sale. So why should the players?
So long as the NBA holds the title as America’s best league and pays the best, you will see that good players will come and go, only to be replaced by more good players, which we will all grow to love. So I really think you give the players more credit than they deserve. Kobe isn’t Kobe without the NBA.
Regarding your point that the league would somehow not be as good without the stars, you do realize that we’d just make stars out of whoever was around, right? You think we would stop making stars just because the best players just happened to disappear? Obviously, it would take time, but once Kwame Brown starts putting down 20 and 10 because he has Reggie Evans guarding him every night, guess what – we will make him a star. That’s precisely how stardom works. They will become a star when we decide to dote on them. And we will dote on them when they find success in the best league in the world.
With respect to your analogy about department stores, you’ve completely lost me. You realize that in your analogy, LeBron, Kobe et al. are actually the shoes/clothes, i.e., the products, right?
So your question should be, why would the clothes/shoes/products sold by Macy’s give Macy’s 50% of the product? Now, you might be thinking that the question makes no sense. But it just so happens that it makes no sense in the same way that your analogy makes no sense.
You are right there will always be players to come along after the old ones go away. There was Bill Russell, then came Kareem, Magic, Bird, and Jordan. KG and Kobe lead in their contemporaries. Lebron, Carmelo, and DWade followed. So yeah there will always be players to come along after those leave. That’s life. You are also right on another note. It will take a while before the league is back to where it is (or was) today. It took over a half century for the NBA to get to where it is. And it was a player that made it so. His name is Michael Jordan. Jordan (as a player) has had more to do with the success of the NBA as anyone in the history of the league. In the mean time, while the NBA is waiting for the next Jordan or Carmelo or Durant or Paul, the NBA owners will struggle to put a product on the floor that produces like what it has now. And how many fans will hang around to wait for it?
But you are totally wrong on the point that stars are made. Good players are born with a talent. Stars take that talent and add a work ethic and a will to be a star. Superstars have the talent, work ethic, will, and that “IT” factor. If Stars could be made, then what has happened to boxing? Where is that next great Heavy Weight? The sport of boxing is a prime example of a sport that struggles without true Stars to market.
As far as my analogy, you are right again. The players are the product. The thing that you are missing is that, the players are also the owners of that product (the same as Nike and the same as Ralph Lauren). That is why there is a CBA to be negotiated. The NBA stocks its store with a product that is owned by the players. And the players have the right to negotiate fair compensation for the use of the product.
“The NBPA has already conceded 12% of their revenues and agreed to system changes which ultimately lead to a more competitive league.”
To be fair, the NBPA has not agreed to do anything. Never did the union actually offer a proposal where they split the revenue 50-50. In bargaining they agreed to 50-50 without the system changes. The final offer from the league had 50-50 and the system changes you claim they agreed to, and instead of even voting on the offer, they disbanded the union and effectively ended negotiations until the case gets to the courts. In fact, every time they were confronted with a hard cap, the most effective system change, the players called it a blood issue – and upon disbanding they called the system changes that had been negotiated ‘basically a hard cap.’
There is fault on both sides here, but you cannot say the union did anything more than decrease their pay – which they should have if you use the NBA’s entire history and not just the most recent CBA as a baseline for what the players should be paid.
OK correct the NBPA had not ‘agreed’ to a 50-50 revenue split but would have been prepared to settle for one if BRI was the main concern for owners but they maintain that to accept this deduction in player salaries they were not willing to change the system bar from a few small clauses…amnesty etc. This is not an unreasonably thing to do. As SHeridan said, these are some of the best competitors in the world and to expect them to back down on all issues is not realistic.
In relation to “disbanded the union and effectively ended negotiations until the case gets to the courts” – the reason the NBPA disbanded rather than decertified IS so they can still maintain negotiations with the league in a hope that they will respond to the players in a more democratic manner, where negotiation techniques will be used rather than threats and ultimatums. This should allow for the players and the owners to meet up in the middle as this is the only way, US as basketball fans will be able to watch and enjoy a season within the next 12 months.
Jeremy,
There is definitely more subtext to the “few small clauses” that caused the hangup. Basically, the players are saying that freedom of player movement is a “blood issue”. Small market owners are saying losing superstars for nothing (a la LeBron, thus devaluing the Cavs franchise by millions of dollars) is unacceptable. Where do you meet in the middle exactly? The owners already gave up their hardline stance of a hard cap. Where do you expect them to go from there?
At the end of the day, something’s gotta give here. Players flocking to super teams is viewed as unacceptable by the owners, and I agree with them. It creates a situation where fans of small market teams don’t even care to watch unless they happen to be lucky enough to draft a Kevin Durant who has expressed willingness to stay the long haul. For the Denvers, the Orlandos, the Torontos, the New Orleans, the Utahs (and the list goes on), why even bother supporting your team? I will still watch basketball, but it may be only during the “marquee matchups” and the Conference Finals and Finals. Everything else won’t be worth watching. Seasons tickets? No need. I don’t want to watch my team lose 41 times a year to vastly superior teams. I’ll just stream it all over the internet.
Or maybe you were right from the beginning and the owners aren’t greedy morons. In other words, the owners had decided that they are not playing by the same rules of the previous CBA anymore because the rules suck for them and for the game.
Therefore, it makes perfect sense that they would be willing to play hardball and even lose a season. It makes excellent sense if you own a team and do not want to play the Washington General to the Miami Heatles for the next decade and on top of that – you are losing money. No, Chris, the owners aren’t stupid – but you and many other reporters are pretty stupid for not seeing this obvious situation. The players are also stupid for thinking they – the inmates – can run the asylum. Well, the owners of the asylum have made it clear that will not happen. Can a court of law force the owners to run a business they believe is bad for them? Maybe in Communist Russia. In the US, today? I highly doubt it, and so should you.
Couldn’t have said it better myself Yogi. I am absolutely appalled how any reasonable reporter could not come to the conclusion that the players screwed themselves. After the fiasco called ‘The decision’ and the tragedy called ‘the wedding” where Chris Paul spouted off in front of the Owner of the Denver Nuggets that he Carmelo and Amare would form a big three in New York. Then watch as Carmelo practically forced his way to New York. Now with rumors of Dwight Howard jettisoning his way out of Orlando to team up Deron in Brooklyn which would essentially leave the rest of the eastern conference at the mercy of 3 super teams. This in addition to the league losing in excess of 300 million dollars and Journalists think this is the owners fault and that they are “being unreasonable” and have “pushed too hard”? BULL SHIT!
This crap rests squarely on the players and their childish and irresponsible behavior with the freedoms that they have been granted. It is my belief that they have indeed lost touch with reality, and it is my ardent desire that they be taught a lesson in humility and taught that lesson very very harshly.
How dare they exert their free will, what childish childish human beings!
Did you follow the negotiations? NBA wanted to tell the union what deal to sign and the union pushed back trying to keep things as close as possible to the previous CBA (for better or worse since it was a pretty bad one for the owners 10+ years after).
Since then it has been a struggle as to how much the union was willing to concede. They’ve slowly came down on the money; to around the 300M annual loss the league claimed while the union disputed its merits(should they really be responsible for helping finance the purchase of franchises?). And decided that they wouldn’t also concede too much on a system that has given them a whole lot of freedom in player movement, because the owners demand it.
The NBA could have gotten almost everything they wanted and a full season but chose not to concede from their desired end game. Just like the players chose not to concede any further yesterday. Both sides are walking over a cliff over a power struggle as near as I can figure.
The players are employees. When my boss tells me that I’m being moved to a different location I either move or find a new job. If the players don’t like playing in Minnesota or Oklahoma they can move to Europe.
For the amount of money these people are paid they can put up with a second tier city for a few years and then retire in New York.
Yep.
Where did i ever say the players exerting their free will was childish? The CHILDISH, IRRESPONSIBLE AND DOWN RIGHT FOOLISH BEHAVIOR i’m talking about is putting on a one hour TV special to announce which team you want to go to without informing the owner of the team what your “decision” will be before hand. The CHILDISH, IRRESPONSIBLE AND DOWN RIGHT FOOLISH BEHAVIOR i’m talking about is having absolutely no class by announcing THOUGH STILL UNDER CONTRACT WITH YOUR CURRENT TEAM that you and your buddies are gonna team up in New York IN THE PRESENCE OF THE OWNER OF ONE OF THE OWNERS YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT SCREWING OVER!
The CHILDISH, IRRESPONSIBLE AND DOWN RIGHT FOOLISH BEHAVIOR i’m talking about is months later watching Carmelo Anthony basically hold the nuggets at ransom, for the majority of the 2010/2011 season and force a trade to a team Chris Paul had already said they were going to!
The CHILDISH, IRRESPONSIBLE AND DOWN RIGHT FOOLISH BEHAVIOR i’m talking about is Dwight Howard insinuating that he needs a bigger market to do more, stoke rumors about forcing his way to Los Angeles by tweeting a pic of himself wearing a Lakers hat, with absolutely no consideration for what the fans and ownership of the Magic might feel since they had already lost another super star to the Lakers which basically put the franchise in a hole for nearly a decade.
so you tell me. Should the owners sit back and watch this happening and say ok lets play basketball? I know that if i were and owner under these circumstances i’d do the exact same thing as they are doing now. Any reasonable, sensible, and forward thinking human being would do the same. and if it mean’t losing a season, as much as that would hurt, it would hurt even more than seeing the league continue on the path that the players , not the owners, have led us down. I welcome a nuclear winter if the ownership get what it wants.
So basically you think the owners should tell the players what to do because they know best. Sounds great!
Owners have never done childish things? See the behavior of Gilbert, Dan. WHo cares what toast you give at a wedding. You clearly have a personal bias against the players, the roots of which you should consider exploring.
Just look at this negotiation coldly. One side conceded a lot. The other side wanted even more. That’s that.
The owners claimed that this negotiation was about some NBA teams losiong money. Once they got all of their supposed losses back in the negotiation, then they started another fight, to restructure the league to enforce greater team parity ( a luxury tax system that functions like a harder cap, fewer exceptions for taxpayers, etc.). That’s a completely separate negotiation that they tried to shoehorn in, after getting what they had said they had wanted in the original negotiation. That is the definition of acting in bad faith.
No, the owners should dictate the terms of the league because they are OWNERS. A novel idea i know, but that’s how it works in the real word.
Real world isn’t the NBA, the NBA is a fantasy world where people play basketball to distract you from real life. It isn’t your desk job where you are integral to making some product and selling it to the public.
The players provide entertainment and theater to the public and the owners market the players.
In the ‘real world’ the best employees, whether they be in finance, medicine, media or any other profession are more likely to have the option to work for the best companies as these are the ones that are prepared to offer their employees the most. Can you see any sort of trend here in the NBA, these higly skilled athletes want to further their careers in situations where it is going to be the most compensating and complementary for their personal goals and aspirations.
I can’t blame them for that.
And for those haters there is nothing to be gained from bitterness and jealousy. Be thankful that you get to watch these players… in whatever uniform they are wearing.
I have to agree with you there. The NBA players are in a fantasy world right now, where they get paid millions of dollars to play a game 3-4 times a week . But guess what? They’re about to get a heaping helping dose of it right quick. I hope they like how it tastes.
Owners get paid millions of dollars for doing nothing. Wall Street execs get millions of dollars for using my money to take risks that either make them rich, or if they lose those, bets, get them bailed out. At least players provide some clear value to the world by entertaining me. Why do you ahte them so much? I bet they work a lot harder than the Jim Dolans of the world, who just spend Daddy’s money.
Smart people tell me that venture capitalists and Wall Street execs are responsible for the efficiency of our economy (not investing money in dog coats but into gas fired turbines along with fracking for NG)–the value is somewhat unclear but supposed to be there.
The really interesting part is hearing that it may have been the superstar players that scuttled the deal because they were upset about the restrictions to S&Ts for luxury teams. Knowing that, if I were the owners I’d do my best to divide and conquer, and make sure it was mainly the superstars that got screwed, haha.
After all, no matter how many millions they make, they still only get one vote.