In This Thread Every Post Must Contain A Lockout Update

OlajuwonFan81 · Nov 7, 2011

Instead of the NBAPA rejecting the offer outright, they should just send a counter-proposal. Since they are so close on BRI and some system issues i just think that a few counter-proposals by both sides will end up resolving this issue. I'm sure the NBA Owners might be willing to tweak a few things in order to get this deal done by Wed.

ascaptjack · Nov 7, 2011

http://ken-berger.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/11838893/33172640

NEW YORK -- Officials from the players' union would like to arrange one more round of bargaining with the league before Wednesday's deadline to accept the owners' latest proposal or face a far worse one, sources confirmed to CBSSports.com Monday.

But there are fears on both sides that hard-line owners who aren't comfortable with the deal as it stands now will resist such a meeting because they prefer the 47 percent deal with a more restrictive salary cap -- the deal commissioner David Stern said Sunday would be on the table if the union rejected the existing proposal.

The delicate state of negotiations faced increasing pressure from hard liners on both sides Monday, with players and agents pushing for union decertification continuing to organize those efforts and hard-line owners believing this is the last chance for a more liberal proposal before they gain control.

"I think, at the end of the day, this group (of hard-line owners) said, 'OK, we will let you do it your way up until Wednesday,'" a person in contact with ownership told CBSSports.com Monday.

If the players didn't accept by Wednesday, those owners would say, "We do a deal on our terms," the person said.

In addition to a 47 percent share of revenues for the players and a flex cap, those terms also would include a relinquishing of guaranteed contracts and a rollback of existing salaries, sources familiar with the hard-line owners' position said.

The deal on the table for the players to accept by Wednesday includes a 50-50 split of revenues, which a significant number of mid-level players are believed to be amenable to and which superstar Kobe Bryant also would be willing to accept, SI.com reported. The proposal includes a band of 49-51 percent for the players, which union attorney Jeffrey Kessler characterized Sunday morning as "a fraud" because revenues would have to explode with 20 percent annual growth for the players ever to receive 51 percent. The union has proposed a 51-49 split in favor of the players, with 1 percent going to benefits for retired players.

It seems unlikely that the union would accept the current deal and recommend it to the players for a vote before Wednesday, but members of the executive committee were scheduled to speak Monday afternoon on a conference call to plot their next move ahead of a mandatory meeting of all 30 player reps Tuesday in New York. Union leaders' key objections center around system issues that they feel league negotiators did not go far enough in addressing during the most recent round of bargaining that led to Sunday morning's ultimatum. As ESPN.com reported, union negotiators feel that with a few tweaks to the remaining unresolved system issues, they would feel more comfortable recommending the proposal for a vote rather than risk having the process co-opted by radicals on both sides.

A successful decertification movement combined with the hard-line owners taking over with their 47 percent offer would throw the talks into chaos and imperil the entire 2011-12 season.

Some of the differences between the two sides' positions on outstanding system issues are so minor that fear is growing among a significant number of moderate agents who do not favor decertification that the season could be lost over issues that would have little impact on the financial state of the league and efforts to improve competitive balance. For example, the two sides are only 50 cents apart on the additional luxury tax that would be imposed for teams that spend up to $10 million over the tax line and have identical proposals for a $1 additional tax for teams that spend more than $10 million over.

The two sides' disagreement over whether tax-paying teams should be allowed to engage in sign-and-trade transactions also is largely irrelevant. According to a union source, there were only five transactions in which tax-payers took on a signed-and-traded player during the entire six-year CBA that expired July 1.

On two more key unresolved issues that the union views as paramount to an acceptable deal, the league already has met the players halfway. In the owners' existing proposal, teams that wade into the luxury tax would receive 50 percent of the tax payments foregone by making the move above the tax. And on mid-level contracts for tax-paying teams, the compromise proposed by the league calls for tax teams to be able to offer two-year deals starting at $2.5 million every other year. The union's most recent proposal called for four-year mid-level deals starting at $5 million for tax teams.

But efforts to close the gap on those final issues could be imperiled by the players' decertification movement and by intransigence among the original group of hard-line owners, who have tried in recent weeks to recruit more owners to their side. According to a person familiar with ownership dynamics, the so-called "original" hard-line teams were Atlanta, Charlotte, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Memphis, Philadelphia, Washington, Portland and Minnesota. There has been growing support in recent weeks for the hard-liners' position that Stern has given up too much in the negotiations -- thus, the ultimatum and subsequent shift to a more severe proposal if the players fail to accept the deal on the table by the close of business Wednesday.
Click to expand...

DaDakota · Nov 7, 2011

The hardline owners outnumber the big clubs - so the Union needs to take the deal.

But I really like the hardliners proposals, especially getting rid of guaranteed contracts.....

That is UBER appealing to anyone that understands how much better the games and season would be with motivated players.

DD

ascaptjack · Nov 7, 2011

Another great article by Zach Lowe of SI.com about one of the most insignificant issues that could potentially be the cause of the season being canceled.

http://nba-point-forward.si.com/2011/11/07/sign-and-trade-rules-shouldnt-hold-up-a-deal/

You can understand why the NBA and the players’ union are fighting over certain issues. And then there are things like the league’s proposal to ban teams that pay the luxury tax from engaging in sign-and-trade transactions.

About a week ago, I started going through transaction logs to find out how many teams since 2005 had paid the luxury tax in one season and then used a sign-and-trade to acquire a high-profile player from another team. I had a hunch there were few such transactions, and I was right: Ken Berger of CBS Sports concluded Sunday night that five sign-and-trades over the last six years fit the criteria, with only a couple involving big names (Shawn Marion to Dallas from Toronto in 2009, for instance).

Refresher course: Sign-and-trades allow teams to re-sign a free agent and immediately deal him. Teams use the sign-and-trade when they know a particular player wants to leave. The free agents in question prefer to use a sign-and-trade rather than simply signing with their new teams because the sign-and-trade method brings more money; incumbent teams can offer their free agents more salary and years than rival suitors. The sign-and-trade system also gives capped-out teams a chance to obtain a player they could not otherwise afford.

Major sign-and-trades from the summer of 2010 included Miami’s deals for LeBron James (with Cleveland) and Chris Bosh (Toronto) and Chicago’s acquisition of Carlos Boozer (Utah). Important thing about the LeBron and Boozer deals: Both involved a star player moving from a taxpaying team (the Cavaliers and Jazz) to a team that had not paid the tax the previous season (the Heat and Bulls). The league is fighting to keep taxpaying teams from doing sign-and-trade deals because they fear the glamour markets using such transactions to lure free agents from smaller markets.

Boozer and James (and others) used the sign-and-trade rules to move from non-glamour to glamour markets, but they did so in a way that the league’s proposed ban is not really designed to prevent — by going from a tax team to a non-tax team. There are actually more of these sort of sign-and-trades than the opposite type — the alleged nightmare scenario in which a rich team with an already bloated cap sheet steals a star player from a middle-rung team with a reasonable cap number.

This equation might shift in the future, with a handful of the glamour/big-market clubs set to be in or near the tax a year from now. The Heat will be bumping up against the tax every season; the Knicks will be up there if they nab a third star to go with Carmelo Anthony and Amar’e Stoudemire; the Bulls will get expensive fast once Derrick Rose’s inevitable extension kicks in; and the Lakers and Mavericks are habitual taxpayers. So perhaps there is some forward-looking vision here. But there will always be exceptions; the Celtics, Nets and Clippers all have pretty clean cap sheets going forward, and some big-market clubs are always going to be able to get themselves on either side of a sign-and-trade deal.

This goes back to something I wrote a couple of weeks ago on the notion of blaming the lockout on Miami’s sign-and-trade bonanza: You’re never going to be able to legislate smart cap management out of the league. If the NBA really wants to help small-market teams keep their stars, the evidence suggests that it needs to do something more dramatic — ban sign-and-trades altogether, create something like a franchise-player tag (which goes hand-in-hand with banning sign-and-trades in order to be meaningful) or something else.

In lots of ways, the so-called Carmelo Rule, which does not appear to be on the table anymore, represented a more effective way of addressing this alleged problem. That rule would have made it more difficult to trade for a player in the last year of his contract and then re-sign him in the following offseason. The rule would have essentially banned teams over the salary cap from trading for such a player and then using that player’s Bird Rights to re-sign him to a deal worth the most that player could make (or something approaching it). This would, in theory, prevent the Lakers from dealing for Dwight Howard next season and then re-signing him to a max-level extension.

As is, the proposed sign-and-trade ban has affected so few transactions that it’s hard to understand why it has become a blood issue for both sides. It would artificially reduce the total amount of money in the system by forcing free agents to accept less money on a new team, but the players’ total salary is tied to league revenue. From the union’s perspective, the sign-and-trade ban would restrain movement and reduce a player’s leverage.

It’s part of a package of such proposals, including the much more serious issue of whether tax teams can use the mid-level exception, which under the latest proposal would allow teams over the cap to offer a player $5 million per year. Teams could also split that among multiple players, as many did under the old system. If six or seven teams pay the luxury tax, taking the mid-level exception away from them or providing them with a much smaller version of it could have concrete effects on a dozen or so players every year. It also robs other free agents of a key source of leverage. It matters.

The sign-and-trade stuff doesn’t matter as much, and my hunch is that both sides view it as perhaps the lowest priority among the five or six key issues holding up a deal. If that hunch is wrong, we’re in big trouble.
Click to expand...

Folks, this could be the issue that cancels the season.

Interesting to note that 2 of the 5 S&T that happened since the last CBA were done by 2 of the most hardline owners in the NBA.

Sarver (Hedo to the Suns) and Heisley (Marko Jaric to Grizzlies). Talk about being a hypocrite.

TheGreat · Nov 7, 2011

I have that feeling the players will HAVE to accept it on Wednesday, anybody with me or thinking the opposite?

ascaptjack · Nov 7, 2011

DaDakota said: ↑

The hardline owners outnumber the big clubs - so the Union needs to take the deal.

But I really like the hardliners proposals, especially getting rid of guaranteed contracts.....

That is UBER appealing to anyone that understands how much better the games and season would be with motivated players.

DD
Click to expand...

The hard line owners are a joke. I hope they go bankrupt because of this lockout, which, unfortunately, won't happen.

Anyone who is on the side of Sarver, Gilbert and Heisley is a complete moron for supporting those incompetent owners.

ascaptjack · Nov 7, 2011

TheGreat said: ↑

I have that feeling the players will HAVE to accept it on Wednesday, anybody with me or thinking the opposite?
Click to expand...

They technically don't "have to" accept it.

I still say that some of the issues can be tweaked by Wednesday.

The S&T issue, for one, is a complete joke.

TheGreat · Nov 7, 2011

Players want to PLAY.

LeBron isn't going to want to lose a season, Wade wont, Kobe wont, Garnett wont, Duncan wont, etc.

I think they get it done Wednesday.

DaDakota · Nov 7, 2011

ascaptjack said: ↑

The hard line owners are a joke. I hope they go bankrupt because of this lockout, which, unfortunately, won't happen.

Anyone who is on the side of Sarver, Gilbert and Heisley is a complete moron for supporting those incompetent owners.
Click to expand...

There is a reason you are a rookie....

Just find a little patience, this will all work out, if the season is lost...big deal, go fly a kite, watch the NCAA's....they will eventually work it out....

Personally, I would rather this be worked out so the league is viable going forward - I don't care how long it takes.

DD

ascaptjack · Nov 7, 2011

TheGreat said: ↑

Players want to PLAY.

LeBron isn't going to want to lose a season, Wade wont, Kobe wont, Garnett wont, Duncan wont, etc.

I think they get it done Wednesday.
Click to expand...

Apparently Jared Dudley and Aaron Brooks are.

Thirty2zero Aaron Brooks
“@JaredDudley619: RT @JD944: @JaredDudley619 Are you willing to sacrifice entire season/salary to stand up for players ( Yes!)”

ascaptjack · Nov 7, 2011

DaDakota said: ↑

There is a reason you are a rookie....

Just find a little patience, this will all work out, if the season is lost...big deal, go fly a kite, watch the NCAA's....they will eventually work it out....

Personally, I would rather this be worked out so the league is viable going forward - I don't care how long it takes.

DD
Click to expand...

So you are willing to go a whole season without watching the beloved Rockets for pointless issues, that in hindsight, won't affect you at all directly or indirectly?

Bravo! Kudos to you sir!

There will never be parity in the NBA like there is in the NFL.

I don't care if the Owners get 100% of the BRI split or the players as well. As long as I get to watch the Rockets, I don't really care about all the other stuff.

DaDakota · Nov 7, 2011

ascaptjack said: ↑

There will never be parity in the NBA like there is in the NFL.

I don't care if the Owners get 100% of the BRI split or the players as well. As long as I get to watch the Rockets, I don't really care about all the other stuff.
Click to expand...

You are wrong on so many points, it matters greatly.

This will get closer to parity and give your beloved Rockets a better than average chance of competing.

I want to watch the Rockets too, but I am willing to wait for the dust to settle and for the owners to set a course that gives our favorite team a great chance at success.

Did you not notice how Morey failed to even lure any big named free agent?

If the owners institute a system that stops the big market teams from being able to stockpile all the talent, it will force them to look at medium market teams that are well run, and that is the Rockets - in spades.

I understand the impatience, but there are greater forces at work here than missing a few games.

The players have been missing the boat the entire time, EVERY proposal they have made basically keeps the same system in place, and the owners have said that will not work.

The economy tanked, the values of some of these franchises went down, and they need to cut costs, that is how the world works.

The players have ZERO risk, they are free to go get a job elsewhere if they don't like it.

If they don't take this deal - I hope the owners crush them and get a hard cap, and get rid of guaranteed contracts.

THAT would truly make the game better....maybe not this year...but for the next 20 years....and that is worth it, IMO.

DD

A_3PO · Nov 7, 2011

TheGreat said: ↑

I have that feeling the players will HAVE to accept it on Wednesday, anybody with me or thinking the opposite?
Click to expand...

I was optimistic twice before and was dead wrong. I still have a hunch sense could prevail with the players but the Three Stooges might prevent it from happening.

ascaptjack · Nov 7, 2011

NazrMohammed Nazr Mohammed by sam_amick
In business ur never suppose to make it personal or make an emotional decision but I think it's going that way. Pride from both sides...

ascaptjack · Nov 7, 2011

ascaptjack said: ↑

NazrMohammed Nazr Mohammed by sam_amick
In business ur never suppose to make it personal or make an emotional decision but I think it's going that way. Pride from both sides...
Click to expand...

NazrMohammed Nazr Mohammed by sam_amick
...faith but I hope their/our pride aren't making the decisions here. Cooler heads need to prevail quickly. But what can u do when u feel...

NazrMohammed Nazr Mohammed by sam_amick
...like ur backed against a wall?!?! There's 3 options...take the deal, counter offer(probably wont work), or decertify the union and put...

NazrMohammed Nazr Mohammed by sam_amick
...it in the hands of the courts. #NBALockout #LetUsPlay #StandUnited

ascaptjack · Nov 7, 2011

ChrisMannixSI Chris Mannix
My opinion on the labor dispute: The union has given enough back. No business in the world has a system that guarantees a profit

J.R. · Nov 7, 2011

.....

ascaptjack · Nov 7, 2011

ChrisMannixSI Chris Mannix
At some point, owners need to recognize they don't NEED to give Jerome James $30 million. Or Rashard Lewis $118 million.

ChrisMannixSI Chris Mannix
There has to be culpability. Players have offered to give back $200 mill/year. This deal, or some close variation, should be one owners take

DaDakota · Nov 7, 2011

Chris Mannix is not a business owner - the small market teams are making a stand to stop from being trucked.

The last CBA was horrible for them.

Let's see what happens, but one must think a lot of players will want to take the deal and not lose a year of their careers, a year in which their earnings will NEVER be made up.

DD

ascaptjack · Nov 7, 2011

ChrisMannixSI Chris Mannix
I'm in favor of a stiff luxury tax. Small markets should not be penalized because of where they play.

ChrisMannixSI Chris Mannix
OKC, for example, should have every advantage to keep stars they were smarter than everyone else in drafting.

ChrisMannixSI Chris Mannix
But a 52-48 split (in favor of the players) is fair. It just is. Get it done, and let's all get back to work.

Forums

In This Thread Every Post Must Contain A Lockout Update

OlajuwonFan81 Member

ascaptjack Member

DaDakota Balance wins
Supporting Member

ascaptjack Member

TheGreat Member

ascaptjack Member

ascaptjack Member

TheGreat Member

DaDakota Balance wins
Supporting Member

ascaptjack Member

ascaptjack Member

DaDakota Balance wins
Supporting Member

A_3PO Member

ascaptjack Member

ascaptjack Member

ascaptjack Member

J.R. Member

ascaptjack Member

DaDakota Balance wins
Supporting Member

ascaptjack Member

Share This Page

About ClutchFans

Rockets Content

Support ClutchFans!

In This Thread Every Post Must Contain A Lockout Update

OlajuwonFan81 Member

ascaptjack Member

DaDakota Balance wins Supporting Member

ascaptjack Member

TheGreat Member

ascaptjack Member

ascaptjack Member

TheGreat Member

DaDakota Balance wins Supporting Member

ascaptjack Member

ascaptjack Member

DaDakota Balance wins Supporting Member

A_3PO Member

ascaptjack Member

ascaptjack Member

ascaptjack Member

J.R. Member

ascaptjack Member

DaDakota Balance wins Supporting Member

ascaptjack Member

Share This Page

DaDakota Balance wins
Supporting Member

DaDakota Balance wins
Supporting Member

DaDakota Balance wins
Supporting Member

DaDakota Balance wins
Supporting Member