NBA Lockout and Collective Bargaining Agreement Discussion

[OSUFan_88]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

I wonder what was Gilbert's thoughts on a Hard Cap before July 8, 2010?

Doesn't matter now.

Gilbert has never been afraid to spend money.

[23]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

I'm telling you right now:

Gilbert will get the votes from all the owners, or atleast a majority. All the small market teams will rally around Gilbert. Plus, Gilbert and Cuban are good friends.

Gilbert will not rest until there is a salary cap.

BTW, I think Billy Hunter getting the boot is a good thing. The players could accept a hard cap, and no union chief will be the one that folded on the hard cap.

I also think Stern's time is quickly fading. He's lost all his supporters among the owners. I don't think it's crazy to assume we get a new NBA commissioner by the end of the lockout either.

Man you took this rally way overboard

Thats not going to happen at all

[Dice]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

What makes you say that? I see you have alot of hope which is a very good thing.. but training camp on time? wow!

Im curious though, whats the reason?

I don't think that's going to happen either. BUT it was in response to a post of Stern not being commissioner. I know either is unlikely to happen BUT I bet that Lil Wayne starts signing gospel music before I believe Stern is removed as NBA commissioner.

[RedSceptile]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Well I think it's actually safe to assume this is Stern's last CBA (there've been talks of Stern sticking around for another 4 years then retiring). Despite Stern working for the owners, do any of us really think Stern wants his legacy to be tarnished with a "NBA beginning a meteoric rise, but lost a season under David Stern" on his legacy? Despite his stance Stern needs not wants this season badly. He's been looking for this kind of media draw since Michael Jordan retired, and you can arguably say this is almost a golden age of Basketball.

I'd say ever since the formation of the Boston Big Three, the league has been gaining more interest steadily from the mid 2000s flatline it previously was at. He's watched the Lakers rise back to dominance, Chicago (a huge basketball market) and New York (having bonifide superstars for the first time in almost a decade), as well as OKC with another of the young marketable superstars in Kevin Durant go on the upswing. There's the Nets moving to Brooklyn with a true superstar in Deron Williams. That's not to even mention the likes of the Clippers (don't laugh), the Wizards with electrifying talents in Blake Griffin and John Wall. The league is seeing an influx in marketable talent, Stern might show his poker face to the media but he needs this season badly.

To lose a year of the Miami Big Three, the Lakers getting older, Dwight Howard, Chris Paul, and Deron Williams free agent hype? I think Stern might kick himself for the rest of his days, best believe he's in the ear of some owners trying to get them to be a bit more lenient from the hard-nosed front they put on.

[OSUFan_88]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Man you took this rally way overboard

Thats not going to happen at all

What is not going to happen at all?

[aholbert32]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Looks like Sarver and Gilbert are the main ones causing a rift among the owners and demanding a hard cap.

"Owners and players initially found reason for optimism during Tuesday's meetings. Commissioner David Stern and Peter Holt, the head of the owners' executive committee, felt that the players' proposal to take 52 or 53 percent of basketball-related income, compared to 57 under the previous agreement, was basically fair, sources said.

Owners were seriously considering coming off of their demand for a salary freeze and would allow players' future earnings to be tied into the league's revenue growth, a critical point for players. The owners also were willing to allow the players to maintain their current salaries, without rollbacks, sources said.


But when the owners left the players to meet among themselves for around three hours, Cleveland's Dan Gilbert and Phoenix's Robert Sarver expressed their dissatisfaction with many of the points, sources said. The sources said that the Knicks' James Dolan and the Lakers' Jerry Buss were visibly annoyed by the hardline demands of Gilbert and Sarver."

[RedSceptile]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Looks like Sarver and Gilbert are the main ones causing a rift among the owners and demanding a hard cap.

"Owners and players initially found reason for optimism during Tuesday's meetings. Commissioner David Stern and Peter Holt, the head of the owners' executive committee, felt that the players' proposal to take 52 or 53 percent of basketball-related income, compared to 57 under the previous agreement, was basically fair, sources said.

Owners were seriously considering coming off of their demand for a salary freeze and would allow players' future earnings to be tied into the league's revenue growth, a critical point for players. The owners also were willing to allow the players to maintain their current salaries, without rollbacks, sources said.


But when the owners left the players to meet among themselves for around three hours, Cleveland's Dan Gilbert and Phoenix's Robert Sarver expressed their dissatisfaction with many of the points, sources said. The sources said that the Knicks' James Dolan and the Lakers' Jerry Buss were visibly annoyed by the hardline demands of Gilbert and Sarver."

Am I the only one who finds irony in the two opponents being Sarver and Gilbert? Let's not forget Sarver was the one who wouldn't pay Amare and Gilbert's franchise savior in James, walked last summer. Coincidence? I think not.

[Dice]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Am I the only one who finds irony in the two opponents being Sarver and Gilbert? Let's not forget Sarver was the one who wouldn't pay Amare and Gilbert's franchise savior in James, walked last summer. Coincidence? I think not.

No coincident at all. These two are just prime examples of the personality of the modern NBA owner of when the bottom line of profit is not there then they want to change the system in their favor. Sarver went into buying the Suns then realizing that instead of going over the luxury tax and possibly going for a championship, he sells his draft picks for cash and dumps some key guys from the 2004 team that won them 62 games. He came into the deal with an ignorant mindset of business first, basketball second. If you approach owning an NBA team like that, then you end up like Sarver and a few other owners like him. That’s why I actually admire a guy like Mark Cuban as an NBA owner. He knew when he bought the Mavs that he was going to take a financial hit. BUT that’s ok because he knew that it was going to cost him to get some players and even though it took longer than expected, he reaps the rewards with an NBA championship last year. Cuban took the hit to make the investment and waited for it to pay off in the end. Owners being cheapskates for the sake of being cheapskates is not a fault of the system. Sarver could care less about what happens on the court. As long as he’s not loosing money, he’s ok.

Then you got the mighty Dan Gilbert. Gilbert is a guy who’s also interested in the bottom line of profit. Many believe that Gilbert was upset with LeBron leaving because he lost his chance at getting a championship. Which in a sense is true. BUT I believe that Gilbert is upset at LeBron leaving more because LeBron was his cash cow. I don’t think Gilbert would have gave two-****s about winning a championship. If LeBron had stayed in Cleveland for another 5 years and the Cavs would have continued to fail to win the championship, Gilbert wouldn’t have said a word about LeBron nor his play. As long as he kept getting LeBron jersey sales, Gilbert would have been content to loose every Eastern Conference Finals for the next 5 years. When LeBron was in Cleveland, they were making money. Now that LeBron is not there, Cleveland is taking a serious hit. So suddenly, Gilbert thinks the system is unfair to small market teams?

BUT I guess when you have the billionaire complex; you feel that you can change the system to sway your way. I wished us common folk could do the same.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

I'm sorry but thats ridiculous. If your team drafts and has a decent GM well you have a pretty good chance of being a contender. San Antonio is example #1 of that. So is OKC. So is Portland. So is Memphis.

What you are arguing for is the destruction of small market basketball. A league where only NY, LA, Chicago and Miami are able to win championships. No one wants that.

Portland and Memphis are contenders?

That's news to me.

I'm one of the few people on here that WANTS a Hard Cap to happen and happen FAST but if they're not willing to agree to that, then just make it the Wild, Wild West and spend what you want to spend. I'll take that if it means getting a NBA season started back up.

[RedSceptile]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Portland and Memphis are contenders?

That's news to me.

I'm one of the few people on here that WANTS a Hard Cap to happen and happen FAST but if they're not willing to agree to that, then just make it the Wild, Wild West and spend what you want to spend. I'll take that if it means getting a NBA season started back up.

Portland isn't that far off in actuality they've just been hit badly by the injury bug and Memphis has a starting five (assuming they resign Marc Gasol) that can contend with any team on any given night. I think if anything we've learned from the champion Mavericks (and the 2004 Pistons to a lesser extent) you can win with one "star" (which is really too ambiguous a term) and get by with a well structured team. I'm not so much for a hard cap in the way that in Basketball compared to say Football there's so little room for error. You can essentially construct a team with players from multiple rounds (Tom Brady anyone?) because you've got such a larger roster and more chances to screw up and just keep going.

I think you have to look at so many aspects, I just see a hard cap as a bandage right now.

[Dice]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Portland and Memphis are contenders?

That's news to me.

I'm one of the few people on here that WANTS a Hard Cap to happen and happen FAST but if they're not willing to agree to that, then just make it the Wild, Wild West and spend what you want to spend. I'll take that if it means getting a NBA season started back up.

Probably not. But the argument of a hard cap brings two falsehoods:
1. It’ll save money for franchises in the red.
2. It’ll bring more parity to the league.

Franchises in the red is not the cause of high player salaries. The Grizzlies is a team that’s been losing money for a couple of years and during the last couple of years they’ve been at the bottom of player salaries ever since they traded Pau Gasol. So cutting player salaries for them still hasn’t gotten them out of the hole.

A hard cap will have an adverse effect in the NBA in terms of competition. Yes, you won’t be able to build superstar teams anymore with free agency. BUT with a hard cap, there would be more movement of superstars in the league because teams will not be able to afford them anymore. And as with some of the elite teams, you take away their superstars and they barely make the playoffs. A Dallas team without Dirk is not a championship team. Sorry, I don’t care how you spin it about them having gamers in Jason Terry and Jason Kidd. They’re not winning it without Dirk. But let’s say a hard cap was in place and Dallas was force to let go Dirk because they could pay him? That knocks Dallas off from winning the championship. Same goes with the Bulls. The Bulls can’t afford Rose and they had to let him go because of the cap, there goes the Bulls chances of winning the title.

The more concerning point is why crucify a franchise who smartly make some key moves with the penalty of a hard cap? Take the Thunder for example. Most of their key players are players that they drafted. So you have to break them up because they wouldn’t be able to afford Westbrook, Durrant and Harden at the same time. That’ll be totally unfair to OKC and there not even a big market team.

[TheMatrix31]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Am I the only one who finds irony in the two opponents being Sarver and Gilbert? Let's not forget Sarver was the one who wouldn't pay Amare and Gilbert's franchise savior in James, walked last summer. Coincidence? I think not.

I'm the furthest thing you'll ever see from a Sarver supporter, BUT Sarver didn't refuse to pay Amare. The issue was over the guaranteed years, not the total worth of the contract. The Knicks won the money battle because they were willing to give him all five years guaranteed. Sarver didn't want to do that because of the injuries Amare's had over the course of his career.

Sarver isn't "cheap" in that he'll never spend money. He's spent a lot of money overall, and is pretty much always at or over the salary cap. HOWEVER, the issue is where and how the other money is being spent. Signing off on deals like Marcus Banks, Diaw's 5/45, Warrick, etc.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Then get rid of it(cap)altogether.

[RedSceptile]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

Then get rid of it(cap)altogether.

Right...so we can just rename the Lakers, Knick and Bulls to the Yankees?

Not really helping the cause you know.

[TheMatrix31]

Re: NBA Lockout and Collective Barganing Agreement Discussion

If it ever went uncapped, Dallas would win every year hands down