NBA Lockout and Collective Bargaining Agreement Discussion

[DukeC]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Why should they be guranteed to break even though? That makes no sense. If the fans don't support thier teams (Because of outreagoues ticket prices, or if the team sucks), then by all means enforce contraction or relocate.

I wish I could own a business that could gurantee me that I wouldn't have any debts

Anyone that pays Joe Johnson that much money deserves to not make a profit. I'm sorry, but if the owners wish to overinflate the market...it's up to them to say enough is enough and stop paying them that much money, or at least decrease the length of the contract. No one told you to sign Joe Johnson to a max deal. Or Rudy Gay. Or Rashard Lewis. Just because his peers were getting that much money does not mean that HE should get it.

If Joe Johnson wished to get a max deal, let him walk and go bankrupt some other team :/

[da ThRONe]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

No they wouldnt. They would get significantly less money. Overall revenue would drop because Sterling barely promotes his team and before Blake Griffin his team attendance and revenue was middle of the pack. He makes enough from his other businesses that he doesnt care if the Clippers make him rich.

This is the case because Sterling can ride the coat tail of all the other owners. If that wasn't the case he would have to make some afford to make a profit.

[OSUFan_88]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Why should they be guranteed to break even though?

They should not be guaranteed to break even. I don't think anyone is arguing they should.

[aholbert32]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Yes, owners take financial risk. BUT to say players have no risk at all is not true. Players take personal risk for future earnings in regards to injury. As you and most people know, these players are paid most on their history and not their future. So the question becomes, is one risk greater than the other? Grant Hill is a perfect example of BOTH sides of the risk. He signed a big contract with the Magic and then the Magic doctors misdiagnosed him and just let him play on the bum ankles and basically ruined his career. While the Magic still ended up paying him, Hill was never the same player and probably blew his hall of fame chances because the Magic in their infinite wisdom let him ruin his feet. So when he finally left the Magic, he ended up signing with the Suns for less than $2 million, when he should have been in his prime making max money.

You have Hill's story wrong. He wasnt misdiagnosed. He actually stole money from Orlando. He was injured in Detroit. Played in the playoffs on that bum ankle and injured it further. He told the Magic, he would be healthy the next year (Magic's doctors thought it was possible) and he proceed to miss most of the next 3 seasons while getting paid max money. He chose to play on that ankle in Detroit because it was FA year and he wanted to guarantee a max deal.

[Dice]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

There is NOTHING the owners could give up.

It was a one sided CBA for the players. They got 57%. The Allen Houston clause went away in the last CBA. The midlevel exception. The luxury tax stayed the same.

Which is what they agreed to in 2005. They also agree to 55% of BRI in 1999, a lockout that many thought the owners won.

And the owners got all their concessions back in 99. Cap rookie money. Cap players’ salaries. All things to keep another Jordan or Kevin Garnett contract from happening again. They got it and they still aren’t happy.

The owners will build a new system and they’ll find a way to blow it up, just like they’re doing now.

[aholbert32]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

This is the case because Sterling can ride the coat tail of all the other owners. If that wasn't the case he would have to make some afford to make a profit.

There is no revenue sharing in the NBA...how is he riding other owners coattails?

[da ThRONe]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Why should they be guranteed to break even though? That makes no sense. If the fans don't support thier teams (Because of outreagoues ticket prices, or if the team sucks), then by all means enforce contraction or relocate.

I wish I could own a business that could gurantee me that I wouldn't have any debts

Anyone that pays Joe Johnson that much money deserves to not make a profit. I'm sorry, but if the owners wish to overinflate the market...it's up to them to say enough is enough and stop paying them that much money, or at least decrease the length of the contract. No one told you to sign Joe Johnson to a max deal. Or Rudy Gay. Or Rashard Lewis. Just because his peers were getting that much money does not mean that HE should get it.

If Joe Johnson wished to get a max deal, let him walk and go bankrupt some other team :/

I don't think anybody think the system is appropriate right now, but the idea that this should give the owners a pass to get whatever they want is ridiculous to me.

It's baffling that so many people are willing to give the owners so much leeway when they are the ones responsible for just as much of the problem as the players are. Especially when they can do more from their side to assure the owners all get better profits.

[da ThRONe]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

There is no revenue sharing in the NBA...how is he riding other owners coattails?

There is revenue sharing in the league.

[OSUFan_88]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Which is what they agreed to in 2005. They also agree to 55% of BRI in 1999, a lockout that many thought the owners won.

And the owners got all their concessions back in 99. Cap rookie money. Cap players’ salaries. All things to keep another Jordan or Kevin Garnett contract from happening again. They got it and they still aren’t happy.

The owners will build a new system and they’ll find a way to blow it up, just like they’re doing now.

The only reason people thought the owners won the last CBA was because the climate of the NBA was significantly better than it is now. They could have probably accepted 40% and broke even.

Now, the NBA has lost a majority of it's fans *ironically because of that lockout* and the NBA is quickly losing money in a majority of its teams.

[aholbert32]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

There is revenue sharing in the league.

There is? Are you talking about the tax money? Thats not true revenue sharing. Sterling was managing the Clippers that way before the luxury tax even existed. LOL.

[DukeC]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

They should not be guaranteed to break even. I don't think anyone is arguing they should.

Is that not what 50-51% of the BRI means?

Owning an NBA team just isn't a wise investment in the first place. Dudes go in knowing they're going to lose money...and still buy it anyway....then complain that thier losing money? You knew what the current CBA was. You knew the revenue split...why invest/own a team when you know it's going to take years to even afford for the investment to pay off.

Because for most owners (well...the old ones anyway, not the new ones), owning an NBA team is a hobby (that just so happens to make them money...20 years later). The loss of money is to be expected. Just like videogaming is a hobby. We're paying 60 bucks a pop (Or for Amazon 30-45) to play videogames. We don't profit from that, but it gives us enjoyment. The only way we'd make money would be if we participated in tournaments/professional gaming.

Going back to teh team thing, if you're not in a major market, you're just not going to make money. Especially if that state/city already has an NFL team. The NFL makes money because it is America's sport. It is completely our own, and we treat it like our firstborn son. The firstborn gets all our support while the others (NHL, MLB,NBA) are afterthoughts.

[Dice]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

You have Hill's story wrong. He wasnt misdiagnosed. He actually stole money from Orlando. He was injured in Detroit. Played in the playoffs on that bum ankle and injured it further. He told the Magic, he would be healthy the next year (Magic's doctors thought it was possible) and he proceed to miss most of the next 3 seasons while getting paid max money. He chose to play on that ankle in Detroit because it was FA year and he wanted to guarantee a max deal.

Well, I'm just going by what Grant Hill said. If you want to call him a liar, then fine.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/grant-hill-says-detroit-orlando-mismanaged-injuries-042711

Hill had surgery on his ankle in May. He visited Orlando in July while still needing the help of crutches. He signed a contract in August. By Labor Day, the Magic had him participating in pickup games.

“They had me out there playing,” Hill said. “I might play once a week. My ankle was hurting. I wasn’t really supposed to be out there. I wasn’t supposed to be playing. I’d never really been hurt before so I didn’t know what rehab really was. I’m trying to play. I’m icing all the time. I’m getting through the month, probably playing pickup three or four times in the whole month. We get to training camp, I might have practiced once or twice during camp. I stumble through preseason playing three or four games.

On Halloween, the Magic opened the season with an 11-point victory over the Wizards. Hill was in the starting lineup.

“The next day the doctor who performed (my) surgery picks the paper up and saw that I played like 30 minutes and he was irate,” Hill said. “I wasn’t supposed to be on the court doing basketball-related activity until December. So somewhere along the line, the ball was dropped. And certainly I didn’t know that until the doctor informed me of that. Apparently he had forwarded all the information down there to Orlando. I was told to follow the instructions. I played in another game in Miami the next night and they shut me down to do rehab for five or six weeks. By then it was too late. What should’ve been a six- or seven-month recovery before you get on the court to play, I was on the court in three or four months.

[OSUFan_88]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Is that not what 50-51% of the BRI means?

Owning an NBA team just isn't a wise investment in the first place. Dudes go in knowing they're going to lose money...and still buy it anyway....then complain that thier losing money? You knew what the current CBA was. You knew the revenue split...why invest/own a team when you know it's going to take years to even afford for the investment to pay off.

Because for most owners (well...the old ones anyway, not the new ones), owning an NBA team is a hobby (that just so happens to make them money...20 years later). The loss of money is to be expected. Just like videogaming is a hobby. We're paying 60 bucks a pop (Or for Amazon 30-45) to play videogames. We don't profit from that, but it gives us enjoyment. The only way we'd make money would be if we participated in tournaments/professional gaming.

Going back to teh team thing, if you're not in a major market, you're just not going to make money. Especially if that state/city already has an NFL team. The NFL makes money because it is America's sport. It is completely our own, and we treat it like our firstborn son. The firstborn gets all our support while the others (NHL, MLB,NBA) are afterthoughts.

50% of the BRI means they take in 50% of the basketball related income. That doesn't mean that all teams will break even if it is at 50%.

As for the team thing, teams in baseball make money because of revenue sharing. Teams in the NHL make money because of revenue sharing. Team in the NBA don't make money because they do not have revenue sharing.

[da ThRONe]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

There is? Are you talking about the tax money? Thats not true revenue sharing. Sterling was managing the Clippers that way before the luxury tax even existed. LOL.

The national tv deal is split. Attendance and local tv deals aren't.

[da ThRONe]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

50% of the BRI means they take in 50% of the basketball related income. That doesn't mean that all teams will break even if it is at 50%.

As for the team thing, teams in baseball make money because of revenue sharing. Teams in the NHL make money because of revenue sharing. Team in the NBA don't make money because they do not have revenue sharing.

1st is this 50-50 after the owners take a cut?

And even if it's not 7% of the BRI is around 280 million dollars that's the money the league is crying about. So that's about as close to ensuring every team makes a profit as it's going to get.