Corey Maggette on NBA Lockout: "We just took eight steps back" -- Well, yes and no
Hey, remember when the Sun shone brighter, the birds chirped music most sweet, and NBA lockout news had turned optimistic?
You know, this whole past week?
It began with NBPA vice president Roger Mason's accidental "Looking like a season. How u" tweet that he today admitted was not a hack, but intended to be a text message. And NBA reporter Chris Sheridan was extremely bright about the negotiations. And everyone realized as long as each side made some concessions, maybe - just maybe - this season could miss zero games.
Then yesterday's meeting convened and each party spoke to the media.
Boom. Sudden storm clouds materialized in the blue sky. The birds began chirping Nickelback.
This from NBPA president Derek Fisher:
"We've advised (the players) they may have to sit out half the season before we get a deal."
Bobcats forward Corey Maggette wasn't very enthused either saying, "We just took eight steps back. Someone needs to compromise. The owners have to compromise."
Before you get into the fetal position and curl up with all the Ben & Jerry's the local supermarket stocks, it is important to make note that some significant financial issues took major steps to compromise.
As CBS' Ken Berger reports, both sides moved closer towards common ground on BRI (Basketball-Related Income) percentage:
Neither side would say how far the players moved economically, but a person with knowledge of the negotiations said they expressed a willingness to move lower than the 54.3 percent of basketball-related income they last proposed on June 30 as a starting point in a six-year deal. Stern disputed the players' contention that the owners haven't made an economic move since the day before the lockout was imposed. Nobody outside the room knows how many millions the two sides shaved off the gap, but it hardly matters since everyone seemed willing to concede that they've at least dipped their toes on common ground when it comes to dollars.
So it's not the end of the world? Well, it's not so simple.
But don't get too excited either. There still seems to be a wide gap between the NBPA and the NBA concerning the salary cap, with the owners wanting a hard cap and the players wanting to retain a soft cap system.
In short, the owners have great leverage and know they can put the pressure on the players in negotiations. They're going for the jugular to get what they want and facing concessions is seemingly not an option the owners want to face at all.
And this is the point of contention where the stalemate lies. NBPA executive director Billy Hunter calls this a "blood issue." Stern and Silver refuse to let it go as non-negotiable. All that progress above with the players letting the owners have a greater percentage of BRI goes out the window if the NBPA is as hard-nosed about a soft cap as they say. The player's association is OK with conceding some BRI but they are not willing to concede that and agree to a hard cap. The NBA has the supreme leverage and as long as they want a hard cap and the players refuse it, the BRI compromise appears moot.
As September hurtles onward, the possibility of games being canceled and players missing checks has become very real. For some owners, the missed revenue is just peachy because more pressure is applied to NBA players to agree to a new CBA that is even less in their favor than the current offer(s) on the table.
Add on to this the news that five extremely prominent agents are arguing for the NBPA to decertify, which they argue could create the uncertainty to move the leverage at least partially onto the players' court.
The agents' view is that the owners currently have most, if not all, of the leverage in these talks and that something needs to be done to turn the tide. They believe decertification will do the trick, creating uncertainty and wresting control away from the owners.
"The union has been negotiating with the league for a year and a half and the owners haven't changed their stance, so the conversation the agents had was about how to work with the union to enhance its strategy," a person close to the situation said on condition of anonymity. "The feeling is that decertification is the weapon that has to be pulled out of the arsenal, that it's the most effective way to change the dynamics of the negotiations."
Maggette clearly understands the problem: "I don't care how much money that the NBA players have, you cannot beat billionaires."
If decertification does indeed not happen, the NBPA must realize they have little to no leverage and take a better deal than what they will likely be offered in, say, November.
But at this point in time, that doesn't seem acceptable to Billy Hunter and the NBPA.
The lockout's end may be out of sight right now, but the sides have taken steps toward compromise in some regards. How long the lockout continues is reliant on the unwavering stalemate between the NBA and the NBPA concerning how the league's system will operate in the future.
Last week's optimism was fun, but the reality of the situation is that there are good odds that this lockout will last a good bit longer.
23 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Glad to see that someone besides me is reading mixed feelings...
http://www.tradestreetpost.com/2011-articles/september/the-lockout-marches-oni-think.html
Bobcats Basketball is my only pro sports passion...
It worked out fine.
They didn’t miss a game, and got huge concessions from the owners.
Advance apologies if the contents of this sports-based post offended you. I'm just aiming to educate the masses. My law professor says they're asses.
Panthers '011: This is what we've been waiting for...we get to overpay the core of a 2-14 team!
by MichaelProcton on Sep 16, 2011 6:08 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m really starting to side with the owners on this one…I mean, I don’t understand why the players are so opposed to a hard cap. Particularly the 50% playing in small markets that make a less desirable landing spot.
"With the third pick of the 2006 NBA Draft, the Charlotte Bobcats select, Adam Morrison, Gonzaga."
I'm with the owners
At some point, someone has to put their foot down and get right down to the reality of it…
I hope you checked out my article…
Bobcats Basketball is my only pro sports passion...
by andrewlail76 on Sep 14, 2011 5:20 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Did you write an article about this?
by Basketball Rambler on Sep 16, 2011 2:46 PM EDT up reply actions
I think that link above may have something to do with it...
Just a hunch. ;^)
Newton for '11 ROY!
Walker for '11 ROY!
Biyombo for '11 DPOY!
Do you guys run a blog or something?
by Basketball Rambler on Sep 21, 2011 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions
I run one...yes...
Along with 3 others that used to frequent this site.
We consider it to be a brother site to this one. This site brought us together.
Bobcats Basketball is my only pro sports passion...
by andrewlail76 on Sep 21, 2011 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions
I view my love for the Bobcats as a romantic love.
Maybe it should be called a girlfriend site?
I always viewed myself as a one woman man, but maybe there is room in my heart for two equally hot Bobcats related blog sites.
by Basketball Rambler on Sep 22, 2011 9:59 AM EDT up reply actions
Well...
I suppose it could be a sister site…
or
perhaps a cousin site?
That way, I’m dropping the gender issue completely…just to keep everyone wondering.
Bobcats Basketball is my only pro sports passion...
by andrewlail76 on Sep 22, 2011 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Or a brotha site?
Advance apologies if the contents of this sports-based post offended you. I'm just aiming to educate the masses. My law professor says they're asses.
Panthers '011: This is what we've been waiting for...we get to overpay the core of a 2-14 team!
by MichaelProcton on Sep 22, 2011 1:23 PM EDT up reply actions
Whoa now...
Bobcats Basketball is my only pro sports passion...
by andrewlail76 on Sep 22, 2011 3:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Less money for them.
The players don’t care about a particular team or market being competitive, particularly if it’s not their team.
Advance apologies if the contents of this sports-based post offended you. I'm just aiming to educate the masses. My law professor says they're asses.
Panthers '011: This is what we've been waiting for...we get to overpay the core of a 2-14 team!
by MichaelProcton on Sep 16, 2011 6:09 PM EDT up reply actions
bc it isnt fair
y should players have to have their salaries reduced? They want the players to negotiate their 57% of revenue sharing AND have a hard cap? Not fair at all. If a player doesnt cost too much, dont spend. What owners need to do is hire better scouts. If owners want to spend ridiculous amounts on players then thats their fault. It wont make any larger market any smaller. With a hard cap, players are still gonna want to go to LA and NY more than MIL and Toronto. Plain and simple. So instead of making players take pay cuts, simply sign players with the same abilities. For every Maggette, there’s an AL Thornton. For every JR SMith, there’s a Von Wafer. For every Monta Ellis, there’s a Marcus Thornton. For every Zach Randolph, there’s a Mareese Speights. For every Gerald Wallaice, its a Martell Webster. Its just FO are lazy and wanna sign the Steph “I literally got my ankles broke several times” Curry than DJ “14 and 6 with all the defense on me and no one to pass it to” Augustin.
Also players need to stop being so timid and step up with demands of their own. Im sure the owners will budge . But when you leave all the demands to the owners, of course no one is gonna move. There will be a season but the strategies have to change and if decertification is the way, so be it. NO OWNER can afford to miss out on a season. Teams like the Lakers and Spurs and Celtics have a closing window. Middle teams like the Blazers and Magic dont have long before their main pieces are FAs. And upcoming teams like the Nets and Bobcats will have to complete start from scratch yet again with even less of a selection to choose from being that all the FAs will flock to certain teams. We may have an advantage in that it will be more to choose from but with a missed season (even with a hard cap) no one will wanna come here unless they are guaranteed to be a starter…
I think you're off base here
The owners CANNOT save money under the current system. When they bring in more revenues and reduce their expenses (like they did this season), they have to shell out massive amounts of cash to the players just because they got less than 57%. The owners are screwed in this model and it has to change.
I’m baffled at why the hard cap is such a big deal though. It’s all about splitting the BRI. That really want change how much goes to the players in a hard or soft cap, it just may shift which players get the money.
My heart pumps no Kool-Aid
by Bring Back Primoz on Sep 14, 2011 6:56 PM EDT up reply actions
You're right about the financial givebacks...
But you’re wrong about the effect a hard cap would have. Players would not be able to go to big markets in the numbers they do now without significant pay cuts because those teams would be unable to fit their salaries under the cap.
Advance apologies if the contents of this sports-based post offended you. I'm just aiming to educate the masses. My law professor says they're asses.
Panthers '011: This is what we've been waiting for...we get to overpay the core of a 2-14 team!
by MichaelProcton on Sep 16, 2011 6:28 PM EDT up reply actions
I'm actually leaning with the players at this point
The definition of compromise is both sides conceding to find a mutually acceptable resolution. The players have made multiple concessions about the revenue split thus far.
What concessions have the owners made at this point, exactly? At this point (from our admittedly blurred perspective outside the meeting room), this looks more like a hostage negotiation than a bargaining process.
My view is...
Owners made an offer and the players walked away…for weeks…
They had good discussions in small groups…decided to get together in larger groups…
They got back together and the players offered to be more flexible in the revenue share, and the owners made the same offer…
Now in negotiations, I would imagine that there should be some back and forth…arguments for and against facets of the new CBA. If the players are willing to reduce the revenue share, something has to be sent back by the owners. Let’s say for the sake of argument, the owners now come back and they say that they will remove the non-guaranteed contract idea, but they want to still keep a hard cap in the future. The hard cap would need to be enforced as current contracts expire. Let’s say a team is in the Lux. Tax zone. Well, as contracts expire on their team, and the payroll decreases, so does the lux tax they pay, and they can sign players, but it would be with the understanding that the payroll will be bleeding down to that hard cap number. If the players accept the waiving of the non-guarantee, then they look at the hard cap…they won’t be losing money in the short term, and odds are that for most of the high paid players, they won’t lose much in the long term either because by the time their contract is up, they won’t be drawing a max salary again anyway.
No one is hearing anything other than the owners aren’t budging…that’s not how negotiations work. You can’t make me believe that they sat in a room for multiple hours and sid yes and no back and forth at each other, and now there is NOTHING that is new to offer. The owners and players are both talking today. Both sides should take all of…well…today and decide what they do and don’t like and come up with alternatives. Monday there should be another meeting…with everyone…then take what each side doesn’t like and compromise. As it stands, both sides are to blame because they are both being more stubborn and less open minded.
Negotiations shouldn’t take a month. My thoughts, you make less changes and you make the CBA a 5 year term. Make small changes every 5 years instead of radical changes every decade. Is there a rule that the CBA has to be 10 years long? I think it should only be as long as the longest allowable NBA player contract.
There’s your solution…a 5 year CBA and make a few changes every 5 years. The problem is that the owners have given, and given, and given foolishly, so every CBA meeting is the players trying to get more, and the owners can’t offer much more…at least that’s how I see it.
A hard cap should be researched over the next 5 years, and contract terms should be researched and new limits put on them over the next 5 years as well. Then, in 5 years, the contracts would start being in line to fit a hard cap.
Bobcats Basketball is my only pro sports passion...
by andrewlail76 on Sep 15, 2011 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions
I was so burned out from the NFL lockout
that I stay as far away from NBA negotiation news as possible. I can barely manage to even skim over this stuff. Ugh.
Newton for '11 ROY!
Walker for '11 ROY!
Biyombo for '11 DPOY!
Understand that...
I only really get into the NBA, so this is KILLING me!
Bobcats Basketball is my only pro sports passion...
by andrewlail76 on Sep 16, 2011 12:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Football is 1A for me, Basketball is 1B
So this like reliving a nightmare all over again. Wake me when it’s over!
Newton for '11 ROY!
Walker for '11 ROY!
Biyombo for '11 DPOY!

by 


















