NBA Lockout and Collective Bargaining Agreement Discussion

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • RedSceptile
    MVP
    • Jun 2011
    • 3680

    #166
    Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

    I wouldn't say a get out of jail fee card, but protection from unforeseen bad luck, and lazy players. At the same time a way for players to get out of horrible situations if they have just cause.

    I made a post on the previous page here it is for reiteration.

    Well I had an idea similar to yours that could work one of two ways.

    Max Deal Five Years; Owners still can sign players to these contracts but certain stipulations would affect whether or not they lose value (protecting them against the Gilbert Arenas and Eddy Curry's).

    1) After 2 and a half seasons of play depending on whether the player lived up to the contract, they can be bought out at 25% of the highest year's salary. So if you signed Eddy Curry to a 5 year 100 million dollar contract and his play doesn't warrant it (I'll get on to that in a minute) you can buy out the rest of his contract for 4 million on a 20 million per year scale.

    2) To be fair to the owner every max deal would have completely non-negotiable stipulations the most important being playing time. If over 2 seasons and a half (205 games) the player has missed significant time i.e. games (roughly one third of the total games or an average of 28 games a season these numbers can be ironned out obviously) due to INJURIES not things like Coach Decision DNP, or Family Emergencies the contract can be bought out so that something that seemed like a good decision in hindsight doesn't turn ugly fast because of sudden injuries (Tracy McGrady, Yao Ming, Grant Hill and so on).

    3) This one I'm still play-testing with, this is the performance aspect of the contract. How this works is two fold; allow for the oversight of "stat padders" versus guys who have been consistent their careers. Everyone knows that stat padder, the guy who puts up huge numbers on a bad team, or suddenly puts up huge numbers the last year of his contract, gets signed to a lucrative deal and then fades into the sunset. Guys like these would be under intense scrutiny i.e. if they have a history of being a mediocre player, the contract comes with a clause that dictates that if after 2.5 seasons the average production is like 25% less than what they signed at they canb be bought out. Now some people are wondering "What if he's an elite player and sacrificed for the greater good of the team!?" well then that's on the owner and said player can sign anywhere else at his own discretion. Now Mr. Consistent isn't exempted from this, if he was keeping his play consistent, then it started to tail-off once his contract began he'd face the same consequences.

    4) Lastly, is the player-out option. Say Player X signed a lucrative contract with a contender. For whatever reason management decides to blow the roster up and he's stuck on a rebuilding team (sound familiar anyone?) if the team fails to make the playoffs in back-to-back seasons, Player X has the option to void his contract (not receiving any pay) and become a free agent. So if for example Rip Hamilton wanted out of Detroit, after the Pisons have missed the Playoffs in consecutive seasons, he can have his contract void (also removing it from Detroit's salary cap) and sign elsewhere.

    I know my ideas are jumbled, but tell me what you guys like/dislike, constructive criticism would be appreciated.

    Comment

    • TheMatrix31
      RF
      • Jul 2002
      • 52899

      #167
      Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

      I like your ideas, Red.

      And people are against the owners having any security net simply because it's the "big bad evil owners with the money."

      Nothing more than that, in my opinion.

      What kind of risks are the players taking? Seems like owners/teams shoulder all of the issues right now. Players have grown to hold teams hostage, and their power is growing more and more. It's absurd.

      Oh, BTW, I really hate Robert Sarver. With the most violent passion I hate him.

      Comment

      • The 24th Letter
        ERA
        • Oct 2007
        • 39373

        #168
        Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

        no different than the "big bad players making alot of money so they shouldnt have a say in anything"' crowd.

        both crowds are wrong, but I dont think its unreasonable to say owners should be responsible for their actions.
        Last edited by The 24th Letter; 09-16-2011, 06:18 PM.

        Comment

        • ProfessaPackMan
          Bamma
          • Mar 2008
          • 63852

          #169
          Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

          Easier said than done, especially when we aren't the ones running the team.

          The only thing people keep saying are "Well they should do their research" when doing "enough research" still doesn't help. It's not like they have special Nightvision/Thermal Goggles that can easily identify a player who's ONLY in it for the money from the ones that aren't.

          Like Matrix said, there are way too many players who put up a "front", cash in and then stop giving a crap because they got their money.(Albert Haynesworth comes to mind as an example of this)

          Now you tell me what kind of research is gonna be able to predict that happening 1-2 years out? Predict that someone who produced and put up very good numbers on the final 2 years of his contract, hit FA and got another contract from someone else and the next 3 years, hasn't matched the production that he had prior to getting a new deal?

          For example, let's say I see Deron Williams tearing it up in the last 3 years of his contract and then I re-sign him to a new contract once his old one expires(We'll say it's a 6 year deal). He starts off playing great in the beginning but then he starts having issues with his Wrist on his shooting hand(which BTW were not an issue before)and over the next 2-3 years, he starts missing games(more than he has missed in his entire career)and his production starts dropping significantly, I'm giving him all the time in the world to get back to his old self and it's not happening, then why should I have to be stuck his with contract? Especially when they weren't any signs at all that this would all happen?

          I don't see the issue with giving Owners one, especially if it's a case where a player is injured for the majority of the contract. And once they use it then they have to wait at least 3 years before they can get another one.
          #RespectTheCulture

          Comment

          • OSUFan_88
            Outback Jesus
            • Jul 2004
            • 25642

            #170
            Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

            Originally posted by Dice
            Because owners should be held to a certain standard as well. If you don't know how to run a team, then you don't need to own one.
            If you don't know how to play basketball, then you don't need to have a contract.

            If you cannot keep your body in shape, then you don't need to have a contract.

            Works for both sides.

            I'm...very iffy on having Gilbert in the room. I think he has some very valid points that should be heard. I also think Gilbert is too hard headed and vindictive to be on the negotiation table.

            BTW, Bill Simmons making fun of Tits contract is so stupid. How dare the Cavaliers pay $5million to one of the best 3 point shooters and LeBron's best friend! RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!
            Too Old To Game Club

            Urban Meyer is lol.

            Comment

            • ProfessaPackMan
              Bamma
              • Mar 2008
              • 63852

              #171
              Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

              Originally posted by RedSceptile
              I wouldn't say a get out of jail fee card, but protection from unforeseen bad luck, and lazy players. At the same time a way for players to get out of horrible situations if they have just cause.

              I made a post on the previous page here it is for reiteration.

              Well I had an idea similar to yours that could work one of two ways.

              Max Deal Five Years; Owners still can sign players to these contracts but certain stipulations would affect whether or not they lose value (protecting them against the Gilbert Arenas and Eddy Curry's).

              1) After 2 and a half seasons of play depending on whether the player lived up to the contract, they can be bought out at 25% of the highest year's salary. So if you signed Eddy Curry to a 5 year 100 million dollar contract and his play doesn't warrant it (I'll get on to that in a minute) you can buy out the rest of his contract for 4 million on a 20 million per year scale.

              2) To be fair to the owner every max deal would have completely non-negotiable stipulations the most important being playing time. If over 2 seasons and a half (205 games) the player has missed significant time i.e. games (roughly one third of the total games or an average of 28 games a season these numbers can be ironned out obviously) due to INJURIES not things like Coach Decision DNP, or Family Emergencies the contract can be bought out so that something that seemed like a good decision in hindsight doesn't turn ugly fast because of sudden injuries (Tracy McGrady, Yao Ming, Grant Hill and so on).

              3) This one I'm still play-testing with, this is the performance aspect of the contract. How this works is two fold; allow for the oversight of "stat padders" versus guys who have been consistent their careers. Everyone knows that stat padder, the guy who puts up huge numbers on a bad team, or suddenly puts up huge numbers the last year of his contract, gets signed to a lucrative deal and then fades into the sunset. Guys like these would be under intense scrutiny i.e. if they have a history of being a mediocre player, the contract comes with a clause that dictates that if after 2.5 seasons the average production is like 25% less than what they signed at they canb be bought out. Now some people are wondering "What if he's an elite player and sacrificed for the greater good of the team!?" well then that's on the owner and said player can sign anywhere else at his own discretion. Now Mr. Consistent isn't exempted from this, if he was keeping his play consistent, then it started to tail-off once his contract began he'd face the same consequences.

              4) Lastly, is the player-out option. Say Player X signed a lucrative contract with a contender. For whatever reason management decides to blow the roster up and he's stuck on a rebuilding team (sound familiar anyone?) if the team fails to make the playoffs in back-to-back seasons, Player X has the option to void his contract (not receiving any pay) and become a free agent. So if for example Rip Hamilton wanted out of Detroit, after the Pisons have missed the Playoffs in consecutive seasons, he can have his contract void (also removing it from Detroit's salary cap) and sign elsewhere.

              I know my ideas are jumbled, but tell me what you guys like/dislike, constructive criticism would be appreciated.
              This I DO agree with and probably makes more sense than what I brought up.
              #RespectTheCulture

              Comment

              • DukeC
                Banned
                • Jul 2011
                • 5751

                #172
                Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

                Really, it's usually the owners fault for over-paying/caving into the demands of a free agents/players.

                No one in thier right mind would give Boris Diaw a 5yr/$45 million deal. Is that the player's fault an owner gave him his asking price? Same situation with Rashard Lewis when he signed that $99 million dolloar deal (with Orlando I think). That's his fault? It's the owners fault for not laughing at him and telling him to "Get out of here" with that sort of asking price. After seeing that the owners wouldn't budge on such a deal I'm sure Rashard would have re-thunk his asking price.

                But the problem is usually some bone-headed owner caves in and F's it up for the rest of them :/

                Comment

                • The 24th Letter
                  ERA
                  • Oct 2007
                  • 39373

                  #173
                  Originally posted by ProfessaPackMan
                  Easier said than done, especially when we aren't the ones running the team.

                  The only thing people keep saying are "Well they should do their research" when doing "enough research" still doesn't help. It's not like they have special Nightvision/Thermal Goggles that can easily identify a player who's ONLY in it for the money from the ones that aren't.

                  Like Matrix said, there are way too many players who put up a "front", cash in and then stop giving a crap because they got their money.(Albert Haynesworth comes to mind as an example of this)

                  Now you tell me what kind of research is gonna be able to predict that happening 1-2 years out? Predict that someone who produced and put up very good numbers on the final 2 years of his contract, hit FA and got another contract from someone else and the next 3 years, hasn't matched the production that he had prior to getting a new deal?

                  For example, let's say I see Deron Williams tearing it up in the last 3 years of his contract and then I re-sign him to a new contract once his old one expires(We'll say it's a 6 year deal). He starts off playing great in the beginning but then he starts having issues with his Wrist on his shooting hand(which BTW were not an issue before)and over the next 2-3 years, he starts missing games(more than he has missed in his entire career)and his production starts dropping significantly, I'm giving him all the time in the world to get back to his old self and it's not happening, then why should I have to be stuck his with contract? Especially when they weren't any signs at all that this would all happen?

                  I don't see the issue with giving Owners one, especially if it's a case where a player is injured for the majority of the contract. And once they use it then they have to wait at least 3 years before they can get another one.
                  Then lets give every player a no trade clause in their contract.

                  Its a business, its give and take, its risk.

                  That said im not completely against SOME kind of protection but I definitely dont want to reward irresponsible owners. I can tell you without thermal goggles that giving Travis Outlaw his contract was a bad idea....

                  EDIT: read Reds post, not a bad idea...

                  Comment

                  • OSUFan_88
                    Outback Jesus
                    • Jul 2004
                    • 25642

                    #174
                    Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

                    Originally posted by DukeC
                    Really, it's usually the owners fault for over-paying/caving into the demands of a free agents/players.

                    No one in thier right mind would give Boris Diaw a 5yr/$45 million deal. Is that the player's fault an owner gave him his asking price? Same situation with Rashard Lewis when he signed that $99 million dolloar deal (with Orlando I think). That's his fault? It's the owners fault for not laughing at him and telling him to "Get out of here" with that sort of asking price. After seeing that the owners wouldn't budge on such a deal I'm sure Rashard would have re-thunk his asking price.

                    But the problem is usually some bone-headed owner caves in and F's it up for the rest of them :/
                    So the rest of the owners should roll over and die and accept the fact that one owner can inflate the entire market?

                    Saying "That's the way the system goes" is lunacy. Life cannot be fair, but Sports should be. If we are arguing that we should accept a broken system where one stupid owner can **** it up for the rest of them, then I don't know what to say.

                    Playing games in a broken system is not as important as fixing the system and then playing games.
                    Too Old To Game Club

                    Urban Meyer is lol.

                    Comment

                    • ProfessaPackMan
                      Bamma
                      • Mar 2008
                      • 63852

                      #175
                      Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

                      24, you will not get an argument from me about OutLOL's contract man
                      #RespectTheCulture

                      Comment

                      • da ThRONe
                        Fire LesS Miles ASAP!
                        • Mar 2009
                        • 8528

                        #176
                        Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

                        So Ed Curry wasn't overweight and lazy until after he signed his deal? Even most knowledgeable fans can call out some of the worst deals. Joe Johnson, Rudy Gay, Rashard Lewis, Emeka Okafor and so on and so forth. My point is you should not be able to make risky investment without some kind of penalty.

                        I proposed the idea of having a opt out cause for both players and teams 50-60% through the contract. I think it's unfair to force players to honor contracts and not the franchises.
                        You looking at the Chair MAN!

                        Number may not tell the whole story ,but they never lie either.

                        Comment

                        • ProfessaPackMan
                          Bamma
                          • Mar 2008
                          • 63852

                          #177
                          Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

                          And again, it's EASY for us to say "Oh, you shouldn't have gave him that contract" when WE'RE not the ones giving them out.

                          Each situation is different man.
                          #RespectTheCulture

                          Comment

                          • DukeC
                            Banned
                            • Jul 2011
                            • 5751

                            #178
                            Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

                            Originally posted by ProfessaPackMan
                            And again, it's EASY for us to say "Oh, you shouldn't have gave him that contract" when WE'RE not the ones giving them out.

                            Each situation is different man.
                            True enough. Some of those contracts though...it's just...unexplainable.

                            I wish the rest of us had some kind of safety net for scams/shady dealings

                            Comment

                            • da ThRONe
                              Fire LesS Miles ASAP!
                              • Mar 2009
                              • 8528

                              #179
                              Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

                              Originally posted by OSUFan_88
                              So the rest of the owners should roll over and die and accept the fact that one owner can inflate the entire market?

                              Saying "That's the way the system goes" is lunacy. Life cannot be fair, but Sports should be. If we are arguing that we should accept a broken system where one stupid owner can **** it up for the rest of them, then I don't know what to say.

                              Playing games in a broken system is not as important as fixing the system and then playing games.
                              So it's fair to allow FO's to make these deals, but not honor them? At the same time expecting the players to honor them even if the deal ends up not fair for their production.

                              That's why I say give both sides an opt out clause half way. That's about as fair as it gets. I don't agree with caps on contract lengths but with this system 7 years are fine. Neither side will be obligated to either side more than 4 years at a time.
                              You looking at the Chair MAN!

                              Number may not tell the whole story ,but they never lie either.

                              Comment

                              • TheMatrix31
                                RF
                                • Jul 2002
                                • 52899

                                #180
                                Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

                                As it is now, the owners carry MUCH more of a burden than the players do.

                                Comment

                                Working...