We vote first. After 135-day lockout, which side u with?

Screw them both.

 

^
I'm gonna pretend that this was a rhetorical question.

 

Im on the side of the owners - more specifically those in smaller markets who need a hard cap to be both competetive & mildly profitable.

I'd be good with losing the entire season if it meant getting a hard cap.

As it stands now , players have too much to say about the competetive balance of the league with their desire to play in specific markets. Who wants to live and play in Memphis or Toronto when they can force their way to Miami or LA.
If a player wants to play only for a specific team then he should expect to have to make some sort of finaicial sacrifice when it affects the competetive balance of the entire league.

Not only the above - Small market teams cant stay profitable when they have to spend with the deep pocket markets , again affecting competetive balance.

In the history of the NBA two teams have participated in roughly 50% of every finals series - it should come as no surprise that those two teams are the Lakers and Celtics. Two teams with large markets and deep pockets.
That sucks for 28 other teams and their fans and owners .... many of which cant fill the stadiums because they cant compete on the court.

Those same large market teams are the driving force behind the massive salaries we see in today's NBA too as they are often willing to pay significantly more than those smaller market teams are willing or able to.


Do the players , owners or fans really want contraction ?!
Contraction is inevitable under the current circumstances where mid and small market teams cant turn a profit.

 

Three thing that belie your claim:
1. Miami is about 20th in player salary - we had a bigger salary than the Heat. A hard cap would do the exact OPPOSITE of what you want - if Miami and Cleveland are offering the same amount of money, all other factors aside, I pick Miami every time. That's just a fact of life, and no NBA rule short of franchise tag ( which I would never support) would change that. The best way to prevent that is to get rid of the max, or - gasp - MAKE A GOOD TEAM. Like, not Cleveland, and not Orlando.
2. I like how you mentioned Memphis. You know, the same Memphis that just inked one of the better PFs in the league to a long-term extension this last season because they have a potentially good team.
3. The Celtics have been one of the hawks during this mess, and can you explain how they've used their big pockets to a distinct advantage over everyone ever since Bird retired again?

And yeah, I can support contraction. Why not? No one would suggest contracting the Rockets after all.

 

I dont get that, I thought the owners offered a 50-50 deal and the players didnt accept it.

 

Erm there's really no reason to support the players. Oh boo-hoo, Joe Johnson goes from 26 million a year to 22M a year...anybody shedding tears yet? Anybody?

OTH, the owners needs to have something to save themselves from their own stupidity. Yes, its sort of silly that way, but at this point I'd rather have function over form. One of the major reasons Football is 100x more popular than the NFL isn't because AMF is inherently better than bball, but rather there is more parity in the NFL. The owners there crushed the union so bad the players had to play on unguaranteed contracts for short contract years despite playing one of the most physical sports in the world. As a result you have every player working hard for their money, and scrubs who perform on their contract years and then fade away can get tossed out relatively painlessly. Because of this the NFL is more exciting, a crap team like the Lions who have sucked for millenia can become one of the scariest teams in the L despite whiffing on 2 of their top 3 picks in recent years. A team like the Patriots who have been drafting like mad and have had like 6 first rounders in the last 3 years are still one-and-done in the playoffs. NFL is more entertaining simply because everyone can become better in a short amount of time.

In the NBA though its a different story. Its awesome if you nab a KD or a DH in the draft, but if you get an Oden, Roy, Eddy Curry, Beasley? Well then tough luck, your team will suck for an eternity. There has to be a way for teams to hit the reset button when they mess up. It'll make it more entertaining for everyone except the players. But the players are already making millions playing a children's game, so I don't see why anyone should have any sympathy for them. Its not like they keep the money anyway, 90% of NBA players end up broke and in debt 6 years after they retire.

 

Slavery of players whose average salary is 5.5 Million dollars.

 

What happened to your rep DD?

 

yea I don't care who gets more money, but I just want people to be accountable. The idea that eddy curry, tinsley, tj ford, richard hamilton, stromile swift, ai, jerome james, and the list just goes on could decide they want to be unfprofessional, detrimental to the team, lazy, get fat, bad practice habits, not accept team role and then you still have to pay them regardless is the most ludicrous thing I have seen. I am fine wiht giving them heavy millions, but hold them accountable, if not unguaranteed contracts, shorter contracts that do not allow this behavior.
Imagine having an employee or hiring someone for a service and after they did a good job you show good faith and lock them up by paying for a years worth of service and they just stop doing a good job, giving attitude, so on and expect you to still pay them.
And this idea that it is not about parity but more about good management. If San antonio or Thunder did not get the lucky lotteries in years that guys like Tim Duncan and Kevin durant (who are bonafide superstars with the rare mentality to be happy in small markets) then they would be mediocre teams at best. If those guys decide to leave despite good management a la Denver-Carmello just for location or better market or to play with a friend, then that good management goes out the window now doesn't it?

So those examples are usually the only ones they can cite and don't hold too much water.

both sides are at fault, but the players wanting guarantees, not held accountable, and are basing their choices on a spoiled inflated bubble which was the last CBA is simply unrealistic. NO sides are right, but I am for more of a fair NBA,parity, more competitive balance so I can enjoy every match and I am on the owners side for especially system issues

 

owners...
A) I'll support the players when YOU and I get a say into how the companies WE work for are run
B) Players only have a vested interest for their paycheck today, the owners have to do what is best for the ongoing business
C) Owners were putting time and money into making the NBA the sucess it is before many of these players were even born!

The players are preventing the NBA from being better... NBA should be modeled after NFL... hardcap and be able to cut bonehead players who arent living up to their contracts...
love many of the players, but I wouldnt trust these guys to run MY finances - would you? LOL

 

If the owners give the players more of the BRI ..... they still lose money. They are first and foremost a business .... and businesses that lose money go away.

 

Neither.

My only concern is that each lockout shows me how dirty, evil, nasty, cunning, sneaky, and filthy rich these players and owners are, and frankly it has made me lose a LOT of interest and I doubt I'll be catching more than 20-30 regular season Rocket games this season.

 

I tangled with the all powerful Oz.

DD

 

This here is the truth.

 

I'm with the players on this one because I genuinely believe they can make it without the NBA platform. Basketball is a great product, the NBA itself, I'm not convinced is as important as we all like to think. Basketball is obviously an incredibly popular global sport, but the NFL is still far superior.

Without the players there is no NBA. And, there is no rule that says owning an NBA franchise should have to be a profitable endeavor. NBA owners want to be babied. They need boundaries and constraints, because without them they'll make stupid decisions.

 

I pissed off the great and powerful OZ.

DD

 

If only he were powerful enough to end this lockout...

 

That is pretty naive. Basketball is the foundation, but the media work, the inrastructure, the exposure, tv deals that the NBA has set up over the past few decades under stern's watch is quintessential. There is a reason no league competes with the NBA. Euroleague games are full with rabid and enthusiastic fans, but when NBA players go there, they know the competition is pretty good(Dirk, Manu, all these guys have played there), but the infrastructure doesn't compare to the NBA
you don't realize the intricacies that go on that allow the players to just focus on hoops. You have a full time medical staff, you have private jets, you have extra practice facitilities, loads of coaches, then you have exposure on networks that stern ahs set up, websites and access to the players that makes them the multi millionaire recognizeable 'stars' that we see today. It is almost unparallell in the way they have set it up and just because we see the end work we think its just basketball. From uniforms, shoes, to adds on each stadium, anyone keen and familiar with the business world can see just that you are scratching the surface when we see those games that show case these unique talents that obviously are the foundation of it, but would not be what they are without the system in place.

I think Magic Johnson had enough of this Stern being a "plantation owner" and really set the record straight since he was there in the 80s when stern took over and knows the progress made

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=Au5L2zfU1BSZ.sAPOFc1Nc28vLYF?slug=ap-stern-racialcomment

Magic says :

“This league is more diverse than any other league and has more minorities in powerful positions than any other league,” Johnson said during a phone interview. “That’s all about David Stern and his vision and what he wanted to do. He made sure minorities had high-ranking positions from the league office all the way down to coaches and front office people.”


layers such as Johnson and Bill Russell called the league office to support Stern, who is leading owners in a bitter dispute with the players.

“It was David Stern who took this league worldwide. And so those guys know it was because of David Stern and what he was able to do,” Johnson said.

Johnson recalled it was Stern who offered him a place in the 1992 NBA All-Star game, even over some players’ wishes after he had retired the previous November because of HIV. And it was Stern who included Johnson that summer on the Dream Team that won the Olympic gold medal.

And it was Stern, he said, who called him after Johnson’s comments about Thomas in his book ignited a public feud between the longtime friends, urging Johnson to work it out.

“He has always done what’s right for both the players and owners. I’m going to have to say this personally, David, he didn’t have to do that. That’s the type of commissioner he is.

“He always is looking out for the players and what’s best for the league, and I disagree with anybody who says he’s trying to be a plantation owner. It’s ridiculous we’re even talking about it.”

 

70% players / 30% owners.

 

neither they are both greedy ass ****s