You can't have scabs in a lockout - only in a strike initiated by the players (like the NFL players' strike in 1982).
what is interesting to me is this notion that players going overseas puts pressue on the owners. If I am an owner, I would love to see my star go overseas for a variety of reasons. First, he gets a new fanbase that he brings back to your team. Second, he realizes how good he has it in the NBA. No matter what, they are going to get paid Millions of dollars less overseas. They don't have the private jets, the best practice facility, the comfort, the infrastructure, the exposure from tv, all of that they have in the states and within the NBA that it is done with the utmost professionalism while overseas leagues still have sketchy finance ruless and no real structure or protection. It is a short term answer for the players to goto, but only maybe 10-20 total have spots to be able to pull this off, if that even. And no matter what it is a step down. Deron is one of the highest paid in europe already and its still less than half his NBA salary, with a team who might miss payments, who doesnt have a private jet, the pratice facilities won't be like the states, etc. The players once again will learn their lesson that htey are not immune to a recession like everyone else.
It's hard to say exactly how long it will go, but I think games will be missed. There is simply too much for the owners to gain by NOT playing. This isn't like the NFL lockout where the owners stand to lose money by not playing.
Weird Scenario, borderline missing the entire season or a delayed season. Worst case scenario, the entire season is cancelled. Best Case scenario (in my opinion), they come to a deal around February or March, the season ends in July or August, within a 40 or 50 game season.
The owners aren't going to gain money by not playing - they will lose out. But the big issue is that they need to fix their league for the long-term. At the end of the day, a better deal will make them more over the long run than losing a season will cost them in the short term. So I agree with the end result - the owners will hold their position to break the union. I think there's a very real possibility of them losing an entire season here - the issues are far bigger than they were in the last lockout.
Yes, absolutely. They have a broken system that needs to be overhauled. Their current labor agreement ended and the two sides haven't been able to come up with a new agreement yet. Until they do, I have no problem with either side shutting things down - whether it be a lockout or a strike. The NHL was in same boat - the system that was in place was all messed up and created an uncompetitive and dysfunctional league. The NHL blew itself up, but by most accounts now, is healthier than ever as a league. (disclaimer: I'm not a hockey fan, so I have no idea the details on the NHL's situation)
If they do that they risk losing fan interest. They aren't the nfl. Suppose they miss a season and ratings are down 25%. How does that affect franchise valuations. Losing Lebron cost the cavs owner over a 100mil in his franchise. Look at houston as an example, people barely care about the rockets. Les had Yao to keep the valuation high, but now that he is gone what will happen. The lockout isn't going to affect the stars much as they will get paid by nike or they can play overseas. The NHL was never very popular so they had less to lose. A few years ago they were playing on Versus. NFL players have short shelf life have limited opportunities so they owners have more leverage.
Agreed - and that's the short term loss they have to deal with. They aren't the NFL, but they aren't the NHL either. They aren't going to be relegated to the Outdoor Life Network or whatever other nonsense the NHL fell to. The NBA is probably more like MLB - they'll suffer in the short term but if they make the product better, it will fix things in the long run. To do that, teams have to be viable, and the league structure has to make it possible for teams to be competitive. You can't have all the stars shifting to 3 or 4 cities. You can't have the payscales all messed up. Etc. It will come down to a test of wills - and in the short term, this will hurt both sides a lot. But, owners don't live paycheck to paycheck, so they can wait things out longer if they choose. If players were smart - unfortunately for them, the vast majority of them are not financially savvy - they would have been prepping for this for the last year or two. Unlike the NFL, where lots of players make smaller amounts, even the crappiest NBA players generally make $1MM+ annually. Outside of the lower-tier rookie contracts, they could all easily have saved a year or two's worth of living expenses without much effort. But they haven't, so at some point, they are going to need a paycheck. That's why I assume the owners will win out in the test of wills.
I think you're right. I've been primarily an NHL fan for 15 years, though still not well-versed in the financial side of things. As far as I understand it, the NHL felt negative effects from the lockout for 2-3 seasons after, but has more than recovered. Some markets in the NHL continue to struggle just because of overexpansion in the 90's, but that's a whole different animal. I think NBA fans and employees alike can look to the NHL lockout as a reference guide on how the NBA lockout should and shouldn't be handled. Gary Bettman is similarly 'hated' by almost everyone. I think it comes with the territory of being the commissioner. Don't get me wrong, I do hate David Stern.
ESPN always said there would be a shortened season the last time, and it was just 50 games and they hurried the schedule to get that. ESPN always said the NFL would probably not miss regular season games this year. On the other hand, from the start, ESPN has said that the NBA is not getting a deal until January 2012 at the earliest, and some of their NBA "insiders" claim the league won't start until October, or even January of 2013. The consensus reporting is always that the owners will not agree to any deal unless there is about a 40-45 percent reduction in player salaries and that they will lockout the entire season to get that. I think it is being very optimistic to think that no games will be missed.
I think they will miss a whole season. The only way that does not happen is if Big Market Teams start revenue sharing their local market TV deals. See the NFL does not have this problem. You can only see a game on tv on one of six networks Nfl network Fox Nbc espn\espn Cbs Nfl season ticket Its easy to slice the tv money pile in nfl. In the nba it is harder because there are so many more games being shown on a multitude of networks. Every team negotiates their only local deal and receive the majority of the revenue on the deal. What Stern and The rest of the Big market owners need to get through their skulls is the lakers can't play them selves. The have to play teams like the twolves and the bucks and the hornets. They smaller market teams are just as important to have a season so every team to should share in the Revenue equally from all sources. Till that change is made small and mid market teams are going stay in the red regardless of what they do with player salaries.
OK? So what? The point is that he will get paid millions less nonetheless, play with less talented teammates, play in worse stadiums, practice in worse facilities, without the best doctors/medical/training staff, he won't have a private plane like most nba teams, the same infrastructure of marketing, tv exposure. Its a decent plan B, but all this shows is the NBA dwarfs the euroleagues in terms of money,professionalism, and comfort and this will bring it to the forefront.
Small market teams want a lockout, big medium teams do not. It's the teams with bad management, who feel they are being left out, that want to drag the lockout on, and are causing this problem. I doubt any of the best owners in the games want a lockout, which would be most of the playoff teams. Btw, did you know the Knicks did not pay luxary tax, even with 2 Max players, shows how you can build a playoff team under the cap.
Building a playoff team is not that difficult - more than half the teams in the league make the playoffs. In the East, a team that was 37-45 made the playoffs. Building a championship contender is very different from building a playoff team. I don't think the latter is anyone's ultimate goal.
