NBA Lockout and Collective Bargaining Agreement Discussion

[aholbert32]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Then you'd end up with something similar to Baseball. Horrible TV ratings. Dudes would rather watch College Football than MLB playoffs in general. Why? Because the glamor teams aren't in it.

You have a situation where the Bobcats and T-Wolves are in the Finals...that is not good. Not good at all. Unless the NBA manages to manufacture more "superstars". I suppose they could hype Derrick and Kemba in that situation...

Basketball doesnt work that way. Cleveland is a small market and Cavs games got great ratings during the Lebron Era. Same with Denver and Melo.

[Kashanova]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

nba should have contract bonuses like mlb has.

for example

20ppg + 250K
75+ games played 200k
All star appearance 200K
mvp award 500K

stuff like that

[aholbert32]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

nba should have contract bonuses like mlb has.

for example

20ppg + 250K
75+ games played 200k
All star appearance 200K
mvp award 500K

stuff like that

That actually is on the table. Something the owners offered.

[Dice]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Thats way better than a team being force to keep Eddy Curry on the bench for 2 yrs just collecting money.

Actually, the Eddie Curry example is a bad example of why there should be an amnesty clause. The clause should be used in a situation where a player signs with a clean bill and then during his time he gets hurt, arrested or whatever that keeps him from playing on the court. In the Eddie Curry situation, the Knicks(as well as the rest of the league) knew about his heart condition AND his laziness before they got him. BUT yet, they still got him and got stuck with him. A team like that should pay the price for signing a high risk guy at that price knowing about his issues before hand.

[da ThRONe]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Its not *** backwards at all. Here is the thing: There are 30 owners who are human. They are going to make mistakes and give out bad contracts whether there is an amnesty clause or not. I dont know how ANYONE could hate the amnesty clause. It gives the owners an opportunity to correct past contract mistakes and it gives players the opportunity to double dip. They get paid the entire old contract PLUS a new contract with another team. Thats way better than a team being force to keep Eddy Curry on the bench for 2 yrs just collecting money.

People love to kill the owners for bad contracts but thats all in hindsight. The two biggest current contracts that owners get killed on are Lewis and Arenas. In hindsight they look horrible. At the time, they looked like they overpaid but they werent horrible. Lewis was coming off three straight 20 plus point years and an all star appearance. Plus he was 25 at the time. Giving a max deal to a 20 plus point, 25 year old player isnt a horrible deal. What makes it horrible is that he regressed as a player.

I've already talked about the Arenas deal but at the time it wasnt a horrible deal either. No one knew that knee injury would keep him out for almost 3 yrs.

GMs are always going to make bad calls but I think allowing them to correct mistakes does a ton for competitive balance.

So those guys can go to the big market title contenders for the MLE. On top of that. This hurts the smaller market teams because teams like the Lakers/Knicks can just cut somebody and have cap space for a D. Howard or C. Paul. How is that good for competitive balance? And this will just end up costing the owners more money.

Plus I'm not sympathic toward management getting a cap pass for past mistake. You made those deals now live with it.

[aholbert32]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Actually, the Eddie Curry example is a bad example of why there should be an amnesty clause. The clause should be used in a situation where a player signs with a clean bill and then during his time he gets hurt, arrested or whatever that keeps him from playing on the court. In the Eddie Curry situation, the Knicks(as well as the rest of the league) knew about his heart condition AND his laziness before they got him. BUT yet, they still got him and got stuck with him. A team like that should pay the price for signing a high risk guy at that price knowing about his issues before hand.

Why? They are paying the price. They still have to pay him. Its not like they can terminate the contract. All this does is allow them to free up a roster spot and gives them a chance to make their team better.

I'm a Wizards season ticket holder. Why should I be forced to watch Lewis under perform for the next two years? Because the Wizards made a mistake and assumed Arenas would be ok 3 yrs ago?

Also the clause can only be used once a year so its not like teams will be free of bad contracts all at once. A team like the Lakers will have to choose between Walton and Artest's contract and choose one and live with the other.

[aholbert32]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

So those guys can go to the big market title contenders for the MLE. On top of that. This hurts the smaller market teams because teams like the Lakers/Knicks can just cut somebody and have cap space for a D. Howard or C. Paul. How is that good for competitive balance? And this will just end up costing the owners more money.

Plus I'm not sympathic toward management getting a cap pass for past mistake. You made those deals now live with it.

It actually wont. They are already paying those contracts anyway and you are assuming that the replacement player will get a big contract. In most cases, they wont.

Regarding Howard and Paul, the changes to the Bird exception will make it more of an advantage for small market teams to keep its players. Think Dwight would be talking about going to LA if he was going to get 1 yr and 20-30 mil less? Think he still would go to LA if he knew the Magic could cut Arenas and have room to sign another star FA. ****, add to that zero income tax in FL.

I have no problem with a system that presents the player with a choice....stay with your team and get a longer deal and more money or lose that and go to another team. I would have ZERO problem if Lebron decided to go Miami and accepted less than a max deal. I also think that a player like Lebron would be willing to stay with his team if he felt like they can reload if the GM makes a mistake.

[Dice]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Why? They are paying the price. They still have to pay him. Its not like they can terminate the contract. All this does is allow them to free up a roster spot and gives them a chance to make their team better.

I'm a Wizards season ticket holder. Why should I be forced to watch Lewis under perform for the next two years? Because the Wizards made a mistake and assumed Arenas would be ok 3 yrs ago?

Also the clause can only be used once a year so its not like teams will be free of bad contracts all at once. A team like the Lakers will have to choose between Walton and Artest's contract and choose one and live with the other.

I think it should be a case by case situation. Now I agree that the Arenas deal should fall under the amnesty clause. He did suffer an unsuspecting injury and the Wizards didn't expect him to go "O-Dogg" in the locker room over a gambling debt.

But when you have undisclosed knowledge of a player before you sign him, once you sign him(or trade for him) he's yours until the end. Or until you can trade him.

Having uncircumstantial events is one thing. But knowing a particular player being lazy before hand, I don't think the clause should apply to this. And plus he was a known health risk.

[da ThRONe]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

nba should have contract bonuses like mlb has.

for example

20ppg + 250K
75+ games played 200k
All star appearance 200K
mvp award 500K

stuff like that

This is kind of a double edge sword. On one hand this may motivate players, but it can also promote selfish play.

[aholbert32]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

I think it should be a case by case situation. Now I agree that the Arenas deal should fall under the amnesty clause. He did suffer an unsuspecting injury and the Wizards didn't expect him to go "O-Dogg" in the locker room over a gambling debt.

But when you have undisclosed knowledge of a player before you sign him, once you sign him(or trade for him) he's yours until the end. Or until you can trade him.

Having uncircumstantial events is one thing. But knowing a particular player being lazy before hand, I don't think the clause should apply to this. And plus he was a known health risk.

How do you do that though? Again, the Knicks could argue that Curry's other injuries (other than the heart) led to him underperforming his contract.

Then if you trade Curry...can the team that traded for him use the clause on him?

[Dice]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

How do you do that though? Again, the Knicks could argue that Curry's other injuries (other than the heart) led to him underperforming his contract.

Then if you trade Curry...can the team that traded for him use the clause on him?

I see what your saying because the laziness part could be subjective. But the Bulls had official medical records about his heart. That alone should automatically void them using the amensty clause.

And as far as using it on a traded player? I'm not sure. I'd have to think about that one for a little.

[da ThRONe]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

It actually wont. They are already paying those contracts anyway and you are assuming that the replacement player will get a big contract. In most cases, they wont.

Paying a guy for not playing for you intentionally is losing money whether they'll give another big contract or not.

Regarding Howard and Paul, the changes to the Bird exception will make it more of an advantage for small market teams to keep its players. Think Dwight would be talking about going to LA if he was going to get 1 yr and 20-30 mil less? Think he still would go to LA if he knew the Magic could cut Arenas and have room to sign another star FA. ****, add to that zero income tax in FL.

This is assuming the Bird rule is being altered this drastically. Which I'm not sure the players will go for.

I have no problem with a system that presents the player with a choice....stay with your team and get a longer deal and more money or lose that and go to another team. I would have ZERO problem if Lebron decided to go Miami and accepted less than a max deal. I also think that a player like Lebron would be willing to stay with his team if he felt like they can reload if the GM makes a mistake.

You or I may not have a problem with it, but the players most likely will.

[da ThRONe]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

This amnesty rule would also require a bi-law that makes amnesty released players ineligible for the MLE.

[cmebfresh]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

I heard the owners agreed on something?

[aholbert32]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Paying a guy for not playing for you intentionally is losing money whether they'll give another big contract or not.



This is assuming the Bird rule is being altered this drastically. Which I'm not sure the players will go for.



You or I may not have a problem with it, but the players most likely will.

The players aren't objecting to the amnesty clause. Its seems to be one of the few things they can agree about. The only beef is about how long the payout will be.

The players don't seem to have much of an issue with the Bird rules changes either. All comments I've heard from them have been that they are ok with an incentive to keep players at home. There issue is with the number of guaranteed years that a bird exception player gets.