1st 2 weeks of the Season Cancelled

[Shimey013]

David Stern announces in New York that the first two weeks of the NBA's regular season have been canceled.


from @espn and @Rachel_nichols

RT @Rachel__Nichols: Stern also says at his press conference that the two sides are "very… (cont)

[ShaqEatsThat]

dont worry almost time for REAL basketball... college basketball>NBA
the nba is a show not basketball

[hairyangryfella]

I am so angry about this. And I completely and utterly blame the greed of the players. The owners want to make money, after all, it IS a business. The players get paid INSANE amounts of money to play a fairly simple game... and all this 'let us play' and 'we want to play' is a load of BS. If they wanted to play they would. Instead they want to be paid.
Case in point - Joe Johnson. Does anybody in the world (other than his agent and the fools that gave him the contract) think he deserves the money he's earning? And the players want MORE share??
F##k off you greedy c###s and play the damn game.

[pingbling23]

its sad, the players want to get paid what they are "worth", and its sad weve let them get to a point where they can make that kind of money. they should just do the 50/50 deal and be done with it, the players need the owners and the owners need the players. unless all these athletes want to start their own league and have all the responsibilities these franchises have, then they can have 100%

[jameshues]

dont worry almost time for REAL basketball... college basketball>NBA
the nba is a show not basketball

Oh shut up. I love the show that is the NBA. I don't care what you call "real basketball," the NBA is more exciting and I like it more. I respect that you like college more and I don't have a problem with it, but there's no reason to post an off-topic comment ripping on the NBA. Honestly whenever anyone posts about the lockout is seems like there always has to be an idiot chiming in who says the NBA is stupid. I'm so sick of it.

[UltimateDeron]

Case in point - Joe Johnson. Does anybody in the world (other than his agent and the fools that gave him the contract) think he deserves the money he's earning? And the players want MORE share??
F##k off you greedy c###s and play the damn game.

Brandon Roy too. He's getting paid a crap load, yet he's coming off the bench now due to his knee issues. This is the kind of stuff that owners hate. The guaranteed contracts like Roy's are terrible.

I remember a few years back the Bulls had a fat tub of lard on the bench named Jerome James. He was getting paid something like $10 million a season to wear a suite and watch games from the bench. Thats what the Knicks paid him I guess, and the Bulls traded for him because his contract was rather valuable once it expired. I feel that once the guy became unable to play that his contract should be voided. Why pay him millions to do nothing? Maybe thats just me...

[UltimateDeron]

Oh shut up. I love the show that is the NBA. I don't care what you call "real basketball," the NBA is more exciting and I like it more. I respect that you like college more and I don't have a problem with it, but there's no reason to post an off-topic comment ripping on the NBA. Honestly whenever anyone posts about the lockout is seems like there always has to be an idiot chiming in who says the NBA is stupid. I'm so sick of it.

Agreed. Well, kind of. I love college basketball and pro basketball as well. I just love basketball. But I agree with the fact that someone always comes into a NBA lockout thread saying "Good. No one will miss it." Ummm... yes, we will miss it dearly. Millions of fans will miss it!

[tupark82]

what i didn't understand from the beginning and still don't understand now is, what makes the players or anyone else believe that they will somehow reach a deal by holding out? they are guaranteed to get a worse deal if they accept anything else later on(just as they did in 99), and now they are going to lose what was guaranteed money. and then they want to play the victim and say oh "we got locked out so don't blame us" and going to twitter and doing all this dumb crap about "let us play" thinking that would get what, sympathy from who? the fans? both sides are truly stupid for not getting this done, but at this point, i would say the players are even dumber. they have absolutely nothing to gain by holding out like this, especially if they expected the owners to stay their position, which they insist they knew all along. but go ahead players. "stand strong" and "be prepared" to lose money because you will be able to accomplish...? it's actually kind of disgusting, these two parties and their needless greediness.

[UltimateDeron]

what i didn't understand from the beginning and still don't understand now is, what makes the players or anyone else believe that they will somehow reach a deal by holding out? they are guaranteed to get a worse deal if they accept anything else later on(just as they did in 99), and now they are going to lose what was guaranteed money. and then they want to play the victim and say oh "we got locked out so don't blame us" and going to twitter and doing all this dumb crap about "let us play" thinking that would get what, sympathy from who? the fans? both sides are truly stupid for not getting this done, but at this point, i would say the players are even dumber. they have absolutely nothing to gain by holding out like this, especially if they expected the owners to stay their position, which they insist they knew all along. but go ahead players. "stand strong" and "be prepared" to lose money because you will be able to accomplish...? it's actually kind of disgusting, these two parties and their needless greediness.

Yeah, I dont understand the whole "Lets us play" crap on twitter by the players. LET YOURSELF PLAY YOU GREEDY #@#@#@#@#@#@#@S!

[hairyangryfella]

Yeah, I dont understand the whole "Lets us play" crap on twitter by the players. LET YOURSELF PLAY YOU GREEDY #@#@#@#@#@#@#@S!

And that's exactly how I feel and why I'm so pissed at them...

[UltimateDeron]

Ugh. Watching and listening to Derek Fisher on NBAtv right now. The guy is so full of crap when he talks. "We are doing everything we can to bring the fans basketball this season"... Give me a break! That's not even close to being the truth. Then he says "We expected this to come to this (that they would miss regular season games)" Uhhh okay, you're telling me you went into all of those meetings with the thought in your head that you're not going to get a deal done?

I think its time for a change. I think they need a younger president of the players association. A player that is hungry for a championship and actually has a career to play for (unlike Derek Fisher who is on the verge of retirement). David Stern needs to go as well, because this is now twice under his watch that the NBA has lost games due to a lockout.

[hairyangryfella]

Ugh. Watching and listening to Derek Fisher on NBAtv right now. The guy is so full of crap when he talks. "We are doing everything we can to bring the fans basketball this season"... Give me a break! That's not even close to being the truth. Then he says "We expected this to come to this (that they would miss regular season games)" Uhhh okay, you're telling me you went into all of those meetings with the thought in your head that you're not going to get a deal done?

I think its time for a change. I think they need a younger president of the players association. A player that is hungry for a championship and actually has a career to play for (unlike Derek Fisher who is on the verge of retirement). David Stern needs to go as well, because this is now twice under his watch that the NBA has lost games due to a lockout.

If I had any Derek Fisher cards I'd tear them up and send them to him, telling him to stop being such a ####

[fullmetal]

its sad, the players want to get paid what they are "worth", and its sad weve let them get to a point where they can make that kind of money. they should just do the 50/50 deal and be done with it, the players need the owners and the owners need the players. unless all these athletes want to start their own league and have all the responsibilities these franchises have, then they can have 100%


Players do not deserve 50% of profits. The team ownership takes on ALL the risk of the venture and deserve the majority of the reward. The average worker in any company does not shoulder the risk of the company and should be compensated accordingly. The NBA players act like the 'occupy' fools who believe they are entitled to the rewards without accepting the risk.

[pac213up]

Players do not deserve 50% of profits. The team ownership takes on ALL the risk of the venture and deserve the majority of the reward. The average worker in any company does not shoulder the risk of the company and should be compensated accordingly. The NBA players act like the 'occupy' fools who believe they are entitled to the rewards without accepting the risk.

The average worker in any company is easily replaceable, you cannot really say the same about an NBA player. The game is all about the talent the players bring. The risk for an NBA owner is minimal given the structure of the league.

[fullmetal]

The average worker in any company is easily replaceable, you cannot really say the same about an NBA player. The game is all about the talent the players bring. The risk for an NBA owner is minimal given the structure of the league.

The talent pool is larger than we think. The limiting factor is the number of positions. There are far more qualified surgeons than openings for surgeons, the same for NBA players. Yes, they are specialized and are good at what they do, but the talent pool for replacement is there. The brand factor of the player's name isn't, but the basketball skill is.

The players risk nothing monetarily. They are not responsible for securing the venue, the staffers, the logistics of travel, the securing of loans and cash flows. Many of the organizations have not been in the black for years. I don't know who is to blame. I know that owners wish they had hired better economists before things got this far out of hand. It is very difficult to deflate the finances of an industry after you let it inflate so egregiously.

[bballcardkid4]

I am so angry about this. And I completely and utterly blame the greed of the players. The owners want to make money, after all, it IS a business. The players get paid INSANE amounts of money to play a fairly simple game... and all this 'let us play' and 'we want to play' is a load of BS. If they wanted to play they would. Instead they want to be paid.
Case in point - Joe Johnson. Does anybody in the world (other than his agent and the fools that gave him the contract) think he deserves the money he's earning? And the players want MORE share??
F##k off you greedy c###s and play the damn game.

Yeah, Joe Johnson definitely isn't a 60 mil player. With his stats... maybe 15 million. MAYBE

[pac213up]

The talent pool is larger than we think. The limiting factor is the number of positions. There are far more qualified surgeons than openings for surgeons, the same for NBA players. Yes, they are specialized and are good at what they do, but the talent pool for replacement is there. The brand factor of the player's name isn't, but the basketball skill is.


The talent pool of quality NBA players is hardly what you suggest. There is a huge gap between the top 3 players on any team and the bottom 5 on average. The bottom 5 may be indeed replaceable by the talent pool you mention. Unfortunately I do not pay for my season tickets to see Robin Lopez, Jose Calderon, or Mario Chalmers. I pay to see Kevin Garnett, Kobe Bryant, and Lebron James. Owners understand this which is why they gave them 57% previously and is why they will get at least 50% this time around as well.

[PackAttack419]

dont worry almost time for REAL basketball... college basketball>NBA
the nba is a show not basketball

college basketball is so real.. why? b/c they dont get paid? so you want to watch perennial powerhouse kansas beat up on a lil independent school by 40+? what's the fun in that?

i enjoy ncaa too, but to say that college is more REAL makes very little sense to me

I am so angry about this. And I completely and utterly blame the greed of the players. The owners want to make money, after all, it IS a business. The players get paid INSANE amounts of money to play a fairly simple game... and all this 'let us play' and 'we want to play' is a load of BS. If they wanted to play they would. Instead they want to be paid.
Case in point - Joe Johnson. Does anybody in the world (other than his agent and the fools that gave him the contract) think he deserves the money he's earning? And the players want MORE share??
F##k off you greedy c###s and play the damn game.

it is 110% the owners and GMs faults, NOT THE PLAYERS. you guys really need to wake up and realize it's NOT the players' fault how it got to here:

let's say you're a doctor, and let's say you're making 100,000 salary per year. a diff hospital wants you and you negotiate your way up to 500,000 per year. WHOSE FAULT IS IT THAT YOU'RE NOW WAY OVERPAID. the hospital could have better distributed their money and hired diff staff members

the casual fan knew that gilbert arenas was not worth a 110+ mil extension, or rashard lewis for 110+ mil as well, or joe johnson for 120 mil (when i doubted any other team woulda given even 100), but how the heck is it the players' or agents' fault that the irresponsible GM wants to throw money away and that the incompetent owner signs off on it? travis outlaw for 34 mil, channing frye for 30 mil, hakim warrick for 18 mil, al harrington for 30 (or was it 40?), mike miller for 30 for 5 years, etc etc the list goes on and this was ALL FROM LAST SUMMER, aka the last free agency summer before the current CBA ended. in other words, all the idiotic owners who want a hard cap and are supposedly pissed off and losing money decided to throw away money a mere 12 months ago (looking at you 'frugal' Robert Sarver).


the only thing i will agree with is that it has gotten out of hand, to the point where avg players want semi-star money and semi-stars want all-star money, and all-stars want franchise player money, etc. and therefore, this new CBA is needed to restructure future contracts and expectations.

[coolz]

college basketball is so real.. why? b/c they dont get paid? so you want to watch perennial powerhouse kansas beat up on a lil independent school by 40+? what's the fun in that?

i enjoy ncaa too, but to say that college is more REAL makes very little sense to me



it is 110% the owners and GMs faults, NOT THE PLAYERS. you guys really need to wake up and realize it's NOT the players' fault how it got to here:

let's say you're a doctor, and let's say you're making 100,000 salary per year. a diff hospital wants you and you negotiate your way up to 500,000 per year. WHOSE FAULT IS IT THAT YOU'RE NOW WAY OVERPAID. the hospital could have better distributed their money and hired diff staff members

the casual fan knew that gilbert arenas was not worth a 110+ mil extension, or rashard lewis for 110+ mil as well, or joe johnson for 120 mil (when i doubted any other team woulda given even 100), but how the heck is it the players' or agents' fault that the irresponsible GM wants to throw money away and that the incompetent owner signs off on it? travis outlaw for 34 mil, channing frye for 30 mil, hakim warrick for 18 mil, al harrington for 30 (or was it 40?), mike miller for 30 for 5 years, etc etc the list goes on and this was ALL FROM LAST SUMMER, aka the last free agency summer before the current CBA ended. in other words, all the idiotic owners who want a hard cap and are supposedly pissed off and losing money decided to throw away money a mere 12 months ago (looking at you 'frugal' Robert Sarver).


the only thing i will agree with is that it has gotten out of hand, to the point where avg players want semi-star money and semi-stars want all-star money, and all-stars want franchise player money, etc. and therefore, this new CBA is needed to restructure future contracts and expectations.

It's 50% owner's fault, and 50% players fault

[tupark82]

and therefore, this new CBA is needed to restructure future contracts and expectations.

and that's what they are trying to do, but the owner's as well as the players greediness and unwillingness to compromise in any shape or form (they are still formally stuck at 47 and 53!!) is what is causing this, so the blame certainly goes to the players as well. to say the players are not to blame when they are a part of this stubborn "negotiation" process doesn't make sense.

[Orangejello727]

They should follow the route of the NFL. No guarenteed contracts. Meaning you sign a damn deal for 8 yrs, thats fine. But if you dont perform, you can be cut off the team whenever they choose. This way only the best survive

I dont want to hear about how the owners are making so much much from other aspect of business under contract and that the players deserve some of that money. Its a load of crap. I do a job at work and make my company a ton of money, but Im not entitled to any of it directly. What makes atheletes think they are above everyone else?

I blame owners to agreeing to such large contracts. I blame players for thinking they are worth anything close to that!!

No more Unions!!

[asujbl]

Peace Out NBA - It was nice knowing you.

I love all the posts (not on here necessarily) comparing the NBA to the NFL - which is the equivalent of comparing apples to bowling balls.

The NFL was locked out over profit distribution - legit profits. The NBA is locked out because there are many teams straight losing money.

It's not even close to the same.

[tupark82]

Peace Out NBA - It was nice knowing you.

I love all the posts (not on here necessarily) comparing the NBA to the NFL - which is the equivalent of comparing apples to bowling balls.

The NFL was locked out over profit distribution - legit profits. The NBA is locked out because there are many teams straight losing money.

It's not even close to the same.

Exclusive: How An NBA Team Makes Money Disappear [UPDATE WITH CORRECTION] (http://deadspin.com/5816870/exclusive-how-and-why-an-nba-team-makes-a-7-million-profit-look-like-a-28-million-loss)

[IndySportsCards]

Only Two? Dang! I was hoping for at least Twelve.

[gamboooler]

I posted this on a team site I frequent and I'm lazy, so I'm copying and pasting...

"I’m curious what leverage the players think they have? At some point, the players can’t recoup the dollars they lost by holding out under this CBA. They could hold out and make things better for future players by setting them up with a solid deal in place, but let’s be real… The average NBA player is only out for himself.

And what real alternatives are there for the players? Go overseas to make half of what you make in the States while living in a foreign country? Not really what most players want to do. Are they going to form their own league? I think not…

Meanwhile, the owners have other avenues for income. A number of them own teams as luxuries… it’s no sweat for them to miss a few games. If you believe the owners’ narrative that they’re hemorrhaging money, then they have absolutely no incentive to agree to what the players want.

Seems to me that the long-term players (the agents and the NBPA) don’t have the majority of their current clients/members best interest in mind. The agents, NBPA, and the owners all have a chance at making more money long-term based on how the negotiations go. But the players of 2011-12 who have an average shelf-life of 5 years might end up losing big time.

Just my two cents."

The players should take what they can get and be done with it. This whole "LET US PLAY" is foolish and disingenuous. They're being taken advantage of by those who have more to gain from holding out.

[fullmetal]

Players are simply the puppets of their agents. Wiley attorney/agents are the cause because they are feeding their clients every piece of information on what to say and what to do. I would suspect that many players, due to contractual obligations with their agent, are unable to voice their OWN opinion.

We have all heard several players 'voice their mind' and you don't exactly hear wisdom from their mouth.

[bigcwd2000]

I thought I heard them say on ESPN last night that the owners were going to go 47 for them to 53 revenue total for the players. If the players really wanted to "play the game" they would take this deal and be done with it.

[jameshues]

Only Two? Dang! I was hoping for at least Twelve.

Hi, please refer to my previous post. Now would be a good time for you to shut up, leave, and not come back. Please refrain from any further posts on this thread and kindly @#$%! off :)!

[FrankieP]

Has anyone heard, in the event there isn't a season, if Panini would be able to make cards?

[gamboooler]

Take this for what it's worth, but NBA2k12 wasn't able to include rookies in the game. Going off that, I would guess they could make cards but could not include the rookies. If they were smart, they would put out a Chronology-like set under the Court Kings name with all on-card autos and all veterans/HOF. That could easily hold people over for at least another month.

[tupark82]

Cameramen Brawl Outside NBA Lockout Meeting - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-9vzoOn2dig)

DO YOU SEE WHAT MADNESS THE LOCKOUT HAS BROUGHT ABOUT??? LOL

[lakernation10]

Cameramen Brawl Outside NBA Lockout Meeting - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-9vzoOn2dig)

DO YOU SEE WHAT MADNESS THE LOCKOUT HAS BROUGHT ABOUT??? LOL

hahahah that was some gay ass fighting.. None of them know how to fight. People who use there legs are pussies.. leave that to the UFC..

[tupark82]

it's not even that. it's just obvious that neither of them wanted to be in that situation whatsoever lol

[TrueNE_09]

Lazy f*cks. Greedy selfish a**holes.

This is so much more than about the players & owners.

The fans.

And those employed by the stadiums, arenas, etc. Think about how many people work at these places to make it possible for games to be played? All those people out of a job. That is a damn lot of people out of work, and it couldn't come at a better time.

Greedy f*cks.

[coolz]

Lazy f*cks. Greedy selfish a**holes.

This is so much more than about the players & owners.

The fans.

And those employed by the stadiums, arenas, etc. Think about how many people work at these places to make it possible for games to be played? All those people out of a job. That is a damn lot of people out of work, and it couldn't come at a better time.

Greedy f*cks.

I know...it's sad
Why can't both sides budge a little and just meet in the middle
They're gonna do it later anyway

[bettydaw1970]

hahahah that was some gay ass fighting.. None of them know how to fight. People who use there legs are pussies.. leave that to the UFC..

really? anderson silva is a pussy?

http://i1128.photobucket.com/albums/m493/Hallzy911/silva_belfort23og6.gif

[alexlazarevich]

The previous contract between the owners and players ended on June 30th 2011. That contract split BRI (basketball related income) 57% to the players and 43% to the owners.

The owners demanded 50-50 split in a new contract which was supposed to start on July 1st 2011.

The players refused the 7% paycut.

The owners locked out the players on July 1st 2011.

The players are willing to take a pay cut down to 53%, a 4% pay cut from their previous contract.

The owners refuse that compromise and insist on 50-50, a 7% paycut to the players.

Until someone explains to me why the owners insist on the 7% pay cut to the players, I don't see how this is anyone's fault but the owners.

And it's amazing how much sports news someone can watch and not get an answer to that essential question.

Source: 2011 NBA lockout - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_NBA_lockout), ESPN news, other online news sources...

[tupark82]

Post-doomsday NBA column: Players beware (http://sheridanhoops.com/2011/10/11/hubbard-column-players-beware-its-a-cold-blooded-financial-world/)

this is an absolutely brilliant article. in fact, i think all nba players need to read this article so that they can get off the planet that they're in right now and realize that the only thing this lockout will do is allow them to lose money and accomplish absolutely nothing in the end except lost time and the loss of fan support.

as for the post above me, why do the owners insist on 7% pay cut or whatever it is that they're asking for? because they are the owners, they feel the past 2 negotiations heavily favored the players, and they want to see a very favorable profit for organizations THEY run where they treat their players like they are royal princes. running a sports franchise is a big deal. if i'm(or anyone else for that matter) not making the kind of profits necessary to run a franchise, why would i do it and why would i flush that much money into it? the bottom line is, if this is what they want, it might suck for the players to have to settle for less, but they must be out of their minds if they think anyone on this planet is going to feel sorry for them because they might make 3 million instead of 5 million. they are too greedy and ungrateful for what they already have for being in the nba.

[SelfDestruct808]

hahahah that was some gay ass fighting.. None of them know how to fight. People who use there legs are pussies.. leave that to the UFC..

muay thai fighters uses legs, they ain't pussies. But those two, obviously ain't one. But they do have some whack azz stance.

[Zerokruel]

Hi, please refer to my previous post. Now would be a good time for you to shut up, leave, and not come back. Please refrain from any further posts on this thread and kindly @#$%! off :)!

Please refrain to this post... You're not the sherriff of this town. You don't get to tell people what to do - and that respect you lack is going to bite you in the ass real quick.

Have a nice day.

[alexlazarevich]

Post-doomsday NBA column: Players beware (http://sheridanhoops.com/2011/10/11/hubbard-column-players-beware-its-a-cold-blooded-financial-world/)

this is an absolutely brilliant article. in fact, i think all nba players need to read this article so that they can get off the planet that they're in right now and realize that the only thing this lockout will do is allow them to lose money and accomplish absolutely nothing in the end except lost time and the loss of fan support.

as for the post above me, why do the owners insist on 7% pay cut or whatever it is that they're asking for? because they are the owners, they feel the past 2 negotiations heavily favored the players, and they want to see a very favorable profit for organizations THEY run where they treat their players like they are royal princes. running a sports franchise is a big deal. if i'm(or anyone else for that matter) not making the kind of profits necessary to run a franchise, why would i do it and why would i flush that much money into it? the bottom line is, if this is what they want, it might suck for the players to have to settle for less, but they must be out of their minds if they think anyone on this planet is going to feel sorry for them because they might make 3 million instead of 5 million. they are too greedy and ungrateful for what they already have for being in the nba.

That's a good article, and your point is a good one. I just wish the owners explained their financial troubles in greater detail.

Some of these owners are multi-100 millionaires, and billionaires, who might make bad business decisions regarding their teams. We need to make sure that if the players take a substantial pay cut that it's to save the league from a bad market, not to save the league because some owners are making poor business decisions that drag down everyone with them.

A pay cut from 5 to 3 mill might seem fair to you or I, but if that pay cut is going to supplement a lot of poor business decisions by some crappy owners, than I would NOT support that pay cut.

Asking the players to accept 7% less than the last contract is a lot of money. If that's what it takes to keep the league going, then so be it, but maybe the owners need to make a stronger case showing that fact?

[pac213up]

That's a good article, and your point is a good one. I just wish the owners explained their financial troubles in greater detail.

Some of these owners are multi-100 millionaires, and billionaires, who might make bad business decisions regarding their teams. We need to make sure that if the players take a substantial pay cut that it's to save the league from a bad market, not to save the league because some owners are making poor business decisions that drag down everyone with them.

A pay cut from 5 to 3 mill might seem fair to you or I, but if that pay cut is going to supplement a lot of poor business decisions by some crappy owners, than I would NOT support that pay cut.

Asking the players to accept 7% less than the last contract is a lot of money. If that's what it takes to keep the league going, then so be it, but maybe the owners need to make a stronger case showing that fact?

I think the players are more open to a 50/50 split than some think. There are other system issues that need to be worked out before they completely give in on that issue though. Also it is still not known if the 50/50 split is under the same BRI definition previously used or under a new one owners have been pushing which deducts $350 million for misc NBA expenses. This would in effect create a system where the players are taking 47%.

[Qwasian]

you know one thing that the owners need to learn...... without the players they make NOTHING...... the players deserve more because without them you don't fill the seats, you don't sell the jerseys, etc.....

Nba players can go other places and make money without the NBA.....

the NBA cannot do "ANYTHING" without the players..........

the players "ARE" the "PRODUCT"

not only is that a fact, but the big name players, completely make the league....... I coulld take 10 players out of the NBA and the ratings would fall IMMEDIATELY

Kevin Durant
Blake Griffin
Derrick Rose
Rajon Rondo
Lebron James
Kobe Bryant
John Wall
Amare Stoudemire
Carmelo Anthony
Chris Paul



Take these 10 players out of the NBA and the revenue will fall to peices.........


so the owners really need to understand that fact and how valueable the players are.

the nba is not a league like football with widespread "TEAM" fans.... it's a player driven league

the owners don't want to see super teams, they don't want the league lopsided, but it's going to always be that way, players love to play in certain cities, and that will never change.......

the owners need to wake up, realize that the players deserve the money they get and move on.

and the owners are causing this whole thing....... it was already a deal drawn up, they decided to change it, they want more money, not the players, the players would have easily agreed to what was already in place and kept it moving, the owners are being greedy because the economy buckled so they want to make the same money they always did at the players expense.. and it's NOT GOING TO HAPPEN........ the league will fold up first.

[mrveggieman]

Has anyone heard, in the event there isn't a season, if Panini would be able to make cards?

Panini will not be making any nba cards until the lockout is resolved. :(

[coolz]

you know one thing that the owners need to learn...... without the players they make NOTHING...... the players deserve more because without them you don't fill the seats, you don't sell the jerseys, etc.....

Nba players can go other places and make money without the NBA.....

the NBA cannot do "ANYTHING" without the players..........

the players "ARE" the "PRODUCT"

not only is that a fact, but the big name players, completely make the league....... I coulld take 10 players out of the NBA and the ratings would fall IMMEDIATELY

Kevin Durant
Blake Griffin
Derrick Rose
Rajon Rondo
Lebron James
Kobe Bryant
John Wall
Amare Stoudemire
Carmelo Anthony
Chris Paul



Take these 10 players out of the NBA and the revenue will fall to peices.........


so the owners really need to understand that fact and how valueable the players are.

the nba is not a league like football with widespread "TEAM" fans.... it's a player driven league

the owners don't want to see super teams, they don't want the league lopsided, but it's going to always be that way, players love to play in certain cities, and that will never change.......

the owners need to wake up, realize that the players deserve the money they get and move on.

and the owners are causing this whole thing....... it was already a deal drawn up, they decided to change it, they want more money, not the players, the players would have easily agreed to what was already in place and kept it moving, the owners are being greedy because the economy buckled so they want to make the same money they always did at the players expense.. and it's NOT GOING TO HAPPEN........ the league will fold up first.

Change Rajon Rondo to Dwyane Wade please ;)

[Qwasian]

Change Rajon Rondo to Dwyane Wade please ;)

rondo's jersey actually sells better than wades, the celtics are really popular.

wade is the better player I agree, but he's not more popular.

[ebitz]

with all this said do you guys think a season will eventually start this year? I think a shorter season is better anyways, too many games as it is

[alexlazarevich]

with all this said do you guys think a season will eventually start this year? I think a shorter season is better anyways, too many games as it is

I'm not an expert at all. My guess is they'll cancel an additional two weeks of the season, people will really start freaking out, then they'll get a deal done. Total of a month lost.

If they cancel the entire season, both sides will lose so much more. I sure hope they get it figured out over the next 2-3 weeks.

[Qwasian]

with all this said do you guys think a season will eventually start this year? I think a shorter season is better anyways, too many games as it is

no, there isn't going to be a season this year. it's like they are completely opposite on terms, and it's not like how the NFL was....... and look how long it took the NFL to come together..........

you have NBA teams that have ZERO popularity and have to give away the tickets, and the owners are trying to compensate for that through the players salaries..... "NEVER HAPPEN".

players would rather stop playing than accept the terms, and owners would rather stop the league than continue to operate for nobody. you literally have games with almost nobody in the audience constantly.....

i'm thinking the best way to do it is to contract the league a bit, or chop off the amount of games........ that's the only way they will come up with a deal, and i "DOUBT" that happens this year.

the whole thing almost has to be restructured..... they don't want super teams and the players want super teams.

[ebitz]

to me its hard to imagine that given how much money everyone stands to lost if there is not a season that they would actually let it get to that point

[Qwasian]

to me its hard to imagine that given how much money everyone stands to lost if there is not a season that they would actually let it get to that point

it's not really an option..... who is just going to accept a huge chop? if either side excepts a deal from the other they get completely screwed right now.

but in the end, the owners are the ones who are going to have to accept a deal, not the players. they are the ones attempting to be greedy.

the owners are trying to fight centralization of the league with top teams/markets..... and it's not possible to do.... they need to come off what they are talking about and roll with the times, or they will eventually get left.

there is NO WAY to try to do what the owners are trying to do.... which is have wack teams keep they stars and markets...... because the wack teams have no markets to begin with........

they give away timberwolves tickets in the supermarket for free...... it's just not going to happen for the owners.

the OWNERS are trying to grow the overall league...... the players are trying to just play by the market that's available, and playing by the market available is the "ONLY" way you can do it..... you can't force people to come to games or like the NBA in markets that don't exist, that will never happen.

[asujbl]

it's not really an option..... who is just going to accept a huge chop? if either side excepts a deal from the other they get completely screwed right now.

but in the end, the owners are the ones who are going to have to accept a deal, not the players. they are the ones attempting to be greedy.

the owners are trying to fight centralization of the league with top teams/markets..... and it's not possible to do.... they need to come off what they are talking about and roll with the times, or they will eventually get left.

there is NO WAY to try to do what the owners are trying to do.... which is have wack teams keep they stars and markets...... because the wack teams have no markets to begin with........

they give away timberwolves tickets in the supermarket for free...... it's just not going to happen for the owners.

the OWNERS are trying to grow the overall league...... the players are trying to just play by the market that's available, and playing by the market available is the "ONLY" way you can do it..... you can't force people to come to games or like the NBA in markets that don't exist, that will never happen.

This is so far off base it isn't even funny.

The owners can all live without missing paychecks. Alot of the players can't.

Bill Simmons said it best - this is like the writers strike in Hollywood last year to years ago - they knew they'd never win and at the end of the day they'd never get that money back.

Owners can be greedy - because they are all already rich and have other business ventures - for every LeBron and Kobe there are 10 other guys that need those paychecks.

[Qwasian]

you know absolutely "NOTHING" about the economy or nba by your statement....

you think kobe, lebron or carmelo can't live without a paycheck? get real, they make more off endorsements than they do playing.

OWNERS aren't as rich as you think...... most rich peoples money is invested, stop speculating something you DO NOT KNOW........

let me ask you this...... try paying rent, utilities, taxes, etc on an NBA arena for a year that you can't use.....then tell me how rich people will be......

you don't understand that the owners are in just as bad of a position as the players because the money they have is on paper.... so when you start getting in a bad situation you have interest, fines, penalties, and money starts to crash & burn when it's not moving in a positive direction and it's difficult to stop. the NBA owners are invested in the NBA... it's not like you can just close it off and move forward with other things, it doesn't work like that.... can you stop paying a car payment or a light bill and expect to just pick it up next year at your house? NO you owe all year EITHER WAY.........

the revenue generated by the players pays for all the owners expenses..... the money figure they have starts to become a huge chopping block the minute the season doesn't occur.... and they fortune starts getting chopped away in large chunks IMMEDIATELY....

you think it's easy to get another lebron or kobe? that couldn't be more further from the truth...... lebron was drafted in 03 and there hasn't been another player anywhere near that caliber every since........ durant & rose are the closest...... so you got what? 3 superstars in almost a decade, but they are easy to come by? get real man.. your clueless.

[ManInTheMirror]

you think kobe, lebron or carmelo can't live without a paycheck? get real, they make more off endorsements than they do playing.
It's obvious he wasn't speaking on Kobe, Lebron or Carmelo. He was speaking on the no-names that we hear nothing and know nothing about.

[Qwasian]

It's obvious he wasn't speaking on Kobe, Lebron or Carmelo. He was speaking on the no-names that we hear nothing and know nothing about.

the no names nobody will care about, they aren't the ones who will have a voice or get this deal done..... the deal is going to be done within the reps of the players union and big names. rookies & benchwarmers aren't going to matter one bit in this contract.

[coolz]

the no names nobody will care about, they aren't the ones who will have a voice or get this deal done..... the deal is going to be done within the reps of the players union and big names. rookies & benchwarmers aren't going to matter one bit in this contract.

???
400+ players have to vote, and they need majority to win

[Qwasian]

???
400+ players have to vote, and they need majority to win

yes and the big names & players union reps have to get a deal done to even vote..... once it's time to vote they've already won.

[pac213up]

the revenue generated by the players pays for all the owners expenses..... the money figure they have starts to become a huge chopping block the minute the season doesn't occur.... and they fortune starts getting chopped away in large chunks IMMEDIATELY....

.

Not really. The owners still have the TV revenues coming in and $$ from season ticket holders. They will not have any cash flow issues during the lockout. Anything they lose during this period will be negotiated back into the new CBA.

[FrankieP]

Panini will not be making any nba cards until the lockout is resolved. :(

Thanks. That's what I thought. I'm sure the owners don't the players to make any kind of money (on NBA properties) until this is cleared up.

[Qwasian]

Not really. The owners still have the TV revenues coming in and $$ from season ticket holders. They will not have any cash flow issues during the lockout. Anything they lose during this period will be negotiated back into the new CBA.

the owners have TV revenue from games that aren't TV? that's a good one.... FALSE REPORT.........

who's buying season tickets with no season on the horizon?


do you even think before you type?

[gamboooler]

An argument of, "the players drive the game so the current system should stay in place," is incredibly flawed.

The owners claim they're losing money under the current model. So what incentive do they have to sign a deal they don't like? It doesn't matter if the players are the product. Owning an NBA team is a luxury for them, it's not their main source of income.

On the other hand, the NBA is every player's cash cow. The players need their paychecks. If they don't like the deal offered, they have four options. 1) They can go overseas. Not exactly an ideal option. They'll be making less than half of what they'd make in the NBA and have to live in a foreign country. Some of those leagues are notorious for not paying their players, and safety is a concern for the players in some areas. When you've been making $5 million a year in the NBA, you're being offered $4 million a year to continue playing in the NBA, and you're being offered $2 million to play overseas, do you really think the players are going to choose overseas to prove a point?

2) The players could form their own league. This is so unrealistic that it's almost not worth discussing. You'd have to find 30 new owners, get 30 new stadium leases, line up a TV deal, etc. etc. The list goes on. And in the unlikely event this did happen, there is absolutely no way the players end up making as much as they did under what the current owners are offering. There probably wouldn't even be 30 teams in this new league, which means less jobs for the players. It's a terrible idea.

3) The players can go find other employment. Again, so unlikely it's laughable.

4) The players can take a 50/50 BRI split under a revised system. The players feel entitled to keep making what they're making under a deal that was entered into under very different economic conditions. That's just not going to happen.

The owners control the checkbooks. They put the framework in place that allows these players to make millions of dollars. If they want to continue playing, they have to play under their rules or else they need to look elsewhere. And as I've already laid out, elsewhere is not very desirable. What's truly funny/sad is that once the middle of December rolls around, all of those middle-to-lower tier NBA guys are going to have lost enough money that they will never be able to recoup it in their careers. The agents don't care because they want the best system in place for all of their present and future clients long-term. The NBPA doesn't care because of the same reasons. Those guys are getting lost in the shuffle. I think they're receiving some very poor advice.

[Qwasian]

how is it unrealistic to keep making money under the same deal? it's on a percentage, so if the market goes down so does the percentage they make, it fluctuates naturally with the economy, there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with that deal....... it's not a set in stone amount it's a percentage...... they won't make the same money anyway under the same deal, why should the owners make "MORE" of a percentage just because they feel like it? how's that a fair shake?

[bigcwd2000]

Panini will not be making any nba cards until the lockout is resolved. :(

Hallelujah! :D

[gamboooler]

how is it unrealistic to keep making money under the same deal? it's on a percentage, so if the market goes down so does the percentage they make, it fluctuates naturally with the economy, there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with that deal....... it's not a set in stone amount it's a percentage...... they won't make the same money anyway under the same deal, why should the owners make "MORE" of a percentage just because they feel like it? how's that a fair shake?

You do realize that the BRI split is only one aspect of negotiations, right? It seems like you think that's the sticking point of the whole deal when it's not.

Owners want less years on guaranteed contracts, less dollars on max deals, a more penalizing luxury tax, and exception reform. They claim the system is broken. If that is the case, they have no incentive to negotiate. The BRI split is just one way of reforming the system. The higher the percentage of the BRI the owners receive, the more in tact the current system can stay. The higher the percentage of the BRI the players receive, the more the system needs to change. The players conceded 4% of the BRI and want the entire system to stay in place. If you believe the owners that they're losing $300 million a year or whatever their number is, that's not enough.

You're also failing to take in to account that if the economy continues to suffer, the percentages they're talking about will be out of a smaller pie. The expenses for the owners don't go down just because there's a percentage split on revenue.

Finally, I don't think the players are entitled to anything just because of the former CBA. You're operating under a false premise when you say something isn't "fair" because it's less than what they got last time. This is a new deal. The owners are only going to offer what they're going to offer. If the players don't like it, they're free to pursue other avenues.

Personally, I believe the owners are being less than up front when they claim $300 million in losses. I also don't believe the players should be penalized for incompetent management. But I also realize that the owners are holding almost all the cards here. The majority of these players will be out of the league in 5 years, and they need to get their money while they can. They need to accept the best deal they can get for themselves before it's too late.

[pac213up]

the owners have TV revenue from games that aren't TV? that's a good one.... FALSE REPORT.........

who's buying season tickets with no season on the horizon?


do you even think before you type?

Season tickets are generally paid for well before the season begins. Mine were paid for a month before the Celtics made the playoffs last year. In most cases the teams provide season tickets holders the option of refunding for games missed but provide incentives for not doing so. This means teams collected most of the money well in advance of the lockout and most season ticket holders will leave the money with them.

In terms of the FALSE REPORT...you should probably do a little research before opening your ignorant mouth. The National TV contracts ($930 million) have a clause in them that requires the the payment during a lockout. The money for the lost games shifts to a loan.

The cost of the incentives to keep the season ticket holders, the loan dollars, and local TV revenue losses, will all be recouped in the new CBA.

[Qwasian]

yes I do realize it'ss only one aspect, but it's one of the most important aspects......

them "CLAIMING" the system is broken, is not a true statement though, they are lying.

$300 million a year loss is based on "PROJECTED REVENUE"...... of course you are going to have loss in a down economy, that's already noted before the figures are added up, the percentages account for that. they are trying to claim they entered into a deal in a good economy like they gave players extra, and now can't afford to give them extra in this economy.... it's simply NOT TRUE.........

same economy baseball pays players, similiar values. if you operate on a percentage, you can't claim foul, because everybody makes less in a down economy....... no NBA team actually lost money, that statement is false. they just didn't make as much money as they thought they would, or projected that they would make, so they call that a loss, but it's really not a loss, it's just a down economy, they actually still make plenty of money. they paint the picture a certain way, but we are talking about a "BILLION" dollar industry..........if a team loses money it's because they were chasing a dream and doing things they weren't supposed to do in the first place, making bad contracts/trades/etc.

if the team doesn't operate outside of it's means it will absolutely make money under the agreement that was in place.

[Qwasian]

Season tickets are generally paid for well before the season begins. Mine were paid for a month before the Celtics made the playoffs last year. In most cases the teams provide season tickets holders the option of refunding for games missed but provide incentives for not doing so. This means teams collected most of the money well in advance of the lockout and most season ticket holders will leave the money with them.

In terms of the FALSE REPORT...you should probably do a little research before opening your ignorant mouth. The National TV contracts ($930 million) have a clause in them that requires the the payment during a lockout. The money for the lost games shifts to a loan.

The cost of the incentives to keep the season ticket holders, the loan dollars, and local TV revenue losses, will all be recouped in the new CBA.



Recouped From Who?

[asujbl]

you know absolutely "NOTHING" about the economy or nba by your statement....

you think kobe, lebron or carmelo can't live without a paycheck? get real, they make more off endorsements than they do playing.

OWNERS aren't as rich as you think...... most rich peoples money is invested, stop speculating something you DO NOT KNOW........

let me ask you this...... try paying rent, utilities, taxes, etc on an NBA arena for a year that you can't use.....then tell me how rich people will be......

you don't understand that the owners are in just as bad of a position as the players because the money they have is on paper.... so when you start getting in a bad situation you have interest, fines, penalties, and money starts to crash & burn when it's not moving in a positive direction and it's difficult to stop. the NBA owners are invested in the NBA... it's not like you can just close it off and move forward with other things, it doesn't work like that.... can you stop paying a car payment or a light bill and expect to just pick it up next year at your house? NO you owe all year EITHER WAY.........

the revenue generated by the players pays for all the owners expenses..... the money figure they have starts to become a huge chopping block the minute the season doesn't occur.... and they fortune starts getting chopped away in large chunks IMMEDIATELY....

you think it's easy to get another lebron or kobe? that couldn't be more further from the truth...... lebron was drafted in 03 and there hasn't been another player anywhere near that caliber every since........ durant & rose are the closest...... so you got what? 3 superstars in almost a decade, but they are easy to come by? get real man.. your clueless.

I don't even know where to start on everything you wrote that is so ridiculous...

#1 - everyone with a brain knows I wasn't talking about the "stars" that are trying to lend credibility to the Union stance. Those guys don't make the decision - it's all the players that need the paycheck next month

#2 - I work in Pro Sports - in the Front Office of a team - I'm well aware how the finances of it work.

And with that I'm done even replying to the stupid stuff you posted.

[gamboooler]

yes I do realize it'ss only one aspect, but it's one of the most important aspects......

them "CLAIMING" the system is broken, is not a true statement though, they are lying.

$300 million a year loss is based on "PROJECTED REVENUE"...... of course you are going to have loss in a down economy, that's already noted before the figures are added up, the percentages account for that. they are trying to claim they entered into a deal in a good economy like they gave players extra, and now can't afford to give them extra in this economy.... it's simply NOT TRUE.........

same economy baseball pays players, similiar values. if you operate on a percentage, you can't claim foul, because everybody makes less in a down economy....... no NBA team actually lost money, that statement is false. they just didn't make as much money as they thought they would, or projected that they would make, so they call that a loss, but it's really not a loss, it's just a down economy, they actually still make plenty of money. they paint the picture a certain way, but we are talking about a "BILLION" dollar industry..........if a team loses money it's because they were chasing a dream and doing things they weren't supposed to do in the first place, making bad contracts/trades/etc.

if the team doesn't operate outside of it's means it will absolutely make money under the agreement that was in place.

No, the $300 million is losses isn't projected, they claim that is the cumulative total of actual team losses. You're assuming every team in the NBA is making money, but that is absolutely false. Last I checked I think around 13 teams lost money last season. And comparing the NBA to the NFL or MLB is apples to oranges for obvious reasons (smallest TV deal, fraction of the gate revenue of MLB, etc.).

I was going to keep responding, but it's clear you're just arguing an opinion that's based on your own perception of reality. There's no point in continuing.

[Qwasian]

I don't even know where to start on everything you wrote that is so ridiculous...

#1 - everyone with a brain knows I wasn't talking about the "stars" that are trying to lend credibility to the Union stance. Those guys don't make the decision - it's all the players that need the paycheck next month

#2 - I work in Pro Sports - in the Front Office of a team - I'm well aware how the finances of it work.

And with that I'm done even replying to the stupid stuff you posted.

alot of people work in sports, doesn't mean they know anything about it. being a ball boy at the stadium doesn't give you any insight to finances and contracts.

[pac213up]

Recouped From Who?

Really? You have to ask that question? Obviously from the players. They owners will simply give back less than they were originally willing to.

Here is a link to your FALSE REPORT nonsense as well.

TV dollars give NBA owners advantage over players during lockout - NBA - Sporting News (http://aol.sportingnews.com/nba/feed/2010-10/nba-labor/story/tv-dollars-give-nba-owners-advantage-over-players-during-lockout).

[Qwasian]

No, the $300 million is losses isn't projected, they claim that is the cumulative total of actual team losses. You're assuming every team in the NBA is making money, but that is absolutely false. Last I checked I think around 13 teams lost money last season. And comparing the NBA to the NFL or MLB is apples to oranges for obvious reasons (smallest TV deal, fraction of the gate revenue of MLB, etc.).

I was going to keep responding, but it's clear you're just arguing an opinion that's based on your own perception of reality. There's no point in continuing.

are we supposed to cry for a team because they overpaid gilbert arenas and rashard lewis?

they spent the money when they didn't have it, so that's the players fault now?

if your a small team, small market, spend accordingly and you wouldn't lose money.

small teams are trying to compete with bigger markets and just betting the farm on winning, that's why they lose money. they didn't actually *LOSE" money, they spent more money than they made. that's the teams fault, not the NBA or the players.

[Qwasian]

Really? You have to ask that question? Obviously from the players. They owners will simply give back less than they were originally willing to.

Here is a link to your FALSE REPORT nonsense as well.

TV dollars give NBA owners advantage over players during lockout - NBA - Sporting News (http://aol.sportingnews.com/nba/feed/2010-10/nba-labor/story/tv-dollars-give-nba-owners-advantage-over-players-during-lockout).

like previously stated, that's only if players agree to it in a new agreement, which they won't..... they are starting from scratch, REMEMBER?

i'm sure the players are going to take on a new huge bill of the NBA in a new agreement...... HIGHLY DOUBT THAT..........especially since they don't have to.

[coolz]

Assuming $340 million loss is real,

I think going 50-50 is pretty fair.

7% difference equals $280 going into owner's portion

They would still lose $60 million if the Revenue stays the same, and their expenses stay the same

And they should reduce their expenses to cover the $60 million and reduce it more to become their profit

[asujbl]

alot of people work in sports, doesn't mean they know anything about it. being a ball boy at the stadium doesn't give you any insight to finances and contracts.

Nevermind - not worth the post.

[pac213up]

like previously stated, that's only if players agree to it in a new agreement, which they won't..... they are starting from scratch, REMEMBER?

i'm sure the players are going to take on a new huge bill of the NBA in a new agreement...... HIGHLY DOUBT THAT..........especially since they don't have to.

The players will have no choice unless they prefer to play in Europe or Asia. At some point - sooner rather than later - the average NBA player will have cash flow problems. When that happens all that tough talk from the union will go out the door. What you HIGHLY DOUBT is irrelevant because as proven throughout this post.....YOU ARE CLUELESS!.:)!

Here are more links explaining how players have almost zero leverage in this situation.

NBA lockout: Players have zero leverage - latimes.com (http://lakersblog.latimes.com/lakersblog/2011/10/nba-lockout-fans-should-blame-the-owners-.html)
LeBron James, fellow NBA stars lack leverage against owners - Sam Amick - SI.com (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/sam_amick/10/11/lockout.games.canceled/index.html?eref=fannation)
NBA lockout: Players must recognize the power of the owners' leverage - ESPN Los Angeles (http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/story/_/id/7028458/players-recognize-power-owners-leverage)
NBA owners have all the leverage in the lockout - Sports Blog | Top Sports Blog | Best Sports News ? Sympatico Sports - The Cheap Seats (http://www.thecheapseats.ca/2011/09/nba-owners-have-all-the-leverage-in-lockout.html)

I'm done with this post.

[Qwasian]

Assuming $340 million loss is real,

I think going 50-50 is pretty fair.

7% difference equals $280 going into owner's portion

They would still lose $60 million if the Revenue stays the same, and their expenses stay the same

And they should reduce their expenses to cover the $60 million and reduce it more to become their profit



do you honestly think it's fair, to do this, when the wizards are paying rashard lewis over 20 million and lebron makes around 16 million a year?

I mean the owners are crying because they made poor decisions, gilbert arenas makes around 20 mil a year..........kobe makes like 20......

I got a plan, don't pay players insane amounts and you wouldn't have this issue.

the players should suffer for horrible mis-management of funds?

[asujbl]

The players will have no choice unless they prefer to play in Europe or Asia. At some point - sooner rather than later - the average NBA player will have cash flow problems. When that happens all that tough talk from the union will go out the door. What you HIGHLY DOUBT is irrelevant because as proven throughout this post.....YOU ARE CLUELESS!.:)!

Here are more links explaining how players have almost zero leverage in this situation.

NBA lockout: Players have zero leverage - latimes.com (http://lakersblog.latimes.com/lakersblog/2011/10/nba-lockout-fans-should-blame-the-owners-.html)
LeBron James, fellow NBA stars lack leverage against owners - Sam Amick - SI.com (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/sam_amick/10/11/lockout.games.canceled/index.html?eref=fannation)
NBA lockout: Players must recognize the power of the owners' leverage - ESPN Los Angeles (http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/story/_/id/7028458/players-recognize-power-owners-leverage)
NBA owners have all the leverage in the lockout - Sports Blog | Top Sports Blog | Best Sports News ? Sympatico Sports - The Cheap Seats (http://www.thecheapseats.ca/2011/09/nba-owners-have-all-the-leverage-in-lockout.html)

I'm done with this post.

What are doing bringing logic into this?

[Qwasian]

The players will have no choice unless they prefer to play in Europe or Asia. At some point - sooner rather than later - the average NBA player will have cash flow problems. When that happens all that tough talk from the union will go out the door. What you HIGHLY DOUBT is irrelevant because as proven throughout this post.....YOU ARE CLUELESS!.:)!

Here are more links explaining how players have almost zero leverage in this situation.

NBA lockout: Players have zero leverage - latimes.com (http://lakersblog.latimes.com/lakersblog/2011/10/nba-lockout-fans-should-blame-the-owners-.html)
LeBron James, fellow NBA stars lack leverage against owners - Sam Amick - SI.com (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/sam_amick/10/11/lockout.games.canceled/index.html?eref=fannation)
NBA lockout: Players must recognize the power of the owners' leverage - ESPN Los Angeles (http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/story/_/id/7028458/players-recognize-power-owners-leverage)
NBA owners have all the leverage in the lockout - Sports Blog | Top Sports Blog | Best Sports News ? Sympatico Sports - The Cheap Seats (http://www.thecheapseats.ca/2011/09/nba-owners-have-all-the-leverage-in-lockout.html)

I'm done with this post.



if players as a union move overseas they could easily make similiar salaries within a year. people/revenue will follow the players, not the owners. people could care less who owns a team, or the brand name on it. they want to see the sport played.

[coolz]

Assuming $340 million loss is real,

I think going 50-50 is pretty fair.

7% difference equals $280 going into owner's portion

They would still lose $60 million if the Revenue stays the same, and their expenses stay the same

And they should reduce their expenses to cover the $60 million and reduce it more to become their profit

do you honestly think it's fair, to do this, when the wizards are paying rashard lewis over 20 million and lebron makes around 16 million a year?

I mean the owners are crying because they made poor decisions, gilbert arenas makes around 20 mil a year..........kobe makes like 20......

I got a plan, don't pay players insane amounts and you wouldn't have this issue.

the players should suffer for horrible mis-management of funds?

Well i'm talking strictly BRI & profitability perspective
No, I don't think it's fair to pay Rashard Lewis 20 M and Lebron 16M
And I agree in that aspect to change the rules

But anyway, your example doesn't really relate to my post on BRI
with BRI at 57%, it doesn't matter who owners pay...whether they overpay Rashard 20M , or if they overpay Joe Johnson 20M....it doesn't matter

BRI at 57% means players(collectively) will get 57% portion of the pie, no matter how.
If player's salaries total doesn't reach 57%, the union will get the rest and then distributed to players

[tupark82]

if players as a union move overseas they could easily make similiar salaries within a year. people/revenue will follow the players, not the owners. people could care less who owns a team, or the brand name on it. they want to see the sport played.

what? lol... that first sentence, where do you get that assumption from? that's just simply not true. the teams overseas isn't suddenly going to change their system and format to accommodate nba players(which they would have to do if what you said would be true), not to mention the nba players would NEVER do this, which makes that statement all the more pointless.

who the hell is going to follow the nba players for going over seas from the US?? no one is going to do that. you think anyone cares about what the guys that went over to china will be doing? i'm pretty sure no one gives a hoot about what's happened to deron williams since going over to besiktas. if the rest follows(in another universe maybe), they will all be forgotten by most except the most die hard of fans.

[pac213up]

if players as a union move overseas they could easily make similiar salaries within a year. people/revenue will follow the players, not the owners. people could care less who owns a team, or the brand name on it. they want to see the sport played.

If you believe that is a realistic option then, quite honestly, you are not a person that can be reasoned with. (And them is my last wordz):devil:

[Qwasian]

Well i'm talking strictly BRI & profitability perspective
No, I don't think it's fair to pay Rashard Lewis 20 M and Lebron 16M
And I agree in that aspect to change the rules

But anyway, your example doesn't really relate to my post on BRI
with BRI at 57%, it doesn't matter who owners pay...whether they overpay Rashard 20M , or if they overpay Joe Johnson 20M....it doesn't matter

BRI at 57% means players(collectively) will get 57% portion of the pie, no matter how.
If player's salaries total doesn't reach 57%, the union will get the rest and then distributed to players

it absolutely "DOES" matter, because if they didn't overpay the players and make bad business decisions they wouldn't lose money, the income is there for them to make money, they just overspent. the average team has 100 million in revenue a year.... a typical percentage of salary on that is around 60-70 percent per team, if they spend "OVER" that percentage trying to win, then they lose money.... that's not the players fault, that's the team's fault... all they have to do to make money is spend less, and the revenue for the team will be in the plus column, they have money coming in, they are just spending it.

why should the players have to pay teams because they overspent with bad decisions? if that's the case then shouldn't dwight howard, or lebron be able to step into a team and say, don't spend my money on rashard lewis and gilbert arenas? I mean where is the line drawn?

they already had a deal in place, and because of mis-management of teams they want to put it on the players? why? GREED

[coolz]

it absolutely "DOES" matter, because if they didn't overpay the players and make bad business decisions they wouldn't lose money, the income is there for them to make money, they just overspent. the average team has 100 million in revenue a year.... a typical percentage of salary on that is around 60-70 percent per team, if they spend "OVER" that percentage trying to win, then they lose money.... that's not the players fault, that's the team's fault... all they have to do to make money is spend less, and the revenue for the team will be in the plus column, they have money coming in, they are just spending it.

why should the players have to pay teams because they overspent with bad decisions? if that's the case then shouldn't dwight howard, or lebron be able to step into a team and say, don't spend my money on rashard lewis and gilbert arenas? I mean where is the line drawn?

they already had a deal in place, and because of mis-management of teams they want to put it on the players? why? GREED

I think you may want to study a bit on the BRI split...
The typical percentage (or average I should say) for last year is close to 57% of their revenue....which is the BRI split

$4 Billion total revenue, under previous BRI split players are GUARANTEED to get 57% = $2.28 Billion

[Qwasian]

I think you may want to study a bit on the BRI split...
The typical percentage (or average I should say) for last year is close to 57% of their revenue....which is the BRI split

$4 Billion total revenue, under previous BRI split players are GUARANTEED to get 57% = $2.28 Billion

and what point of my statement are you debating? I agree with what you typed, the cap/salaries adjust with the income, why should they get a different percentage.......

[coolz]

and what point of my statement are you debating? I agree with what you typed, the cap/salaries adjust with the income, why should they get a different percentage.......

They should get a different percentage because apparently 43% revenue that goes to the owners is not enough to cover the expenses, hence why they lost a combined $340 Million

[Qwasian]

They should get a different percentage because apparently 43% revenue that goes to the owners is not enough to cover the expenses, hence why they lost a combined $340 Million

this is not true though, the revenue "IS" enough to cover the expenses, they just spend the revenue overtop of what they take in...... it's not mandatory that a team spends the revenue it takes in, just remember that factor....

the problem is, small market teams are spending like big market teams and losing money trying to keep up and win............

for example the grizzlies are a team that lost money to get into the playoffs and build a strong team........ yet they have a small market........

you spent outside of the salary because you had the money and you lost money, that was a choice on that team....... they should not have spent outside of the incoming money knowing what the dollar value was.

lets say for example a team is taking in 100 million...... decrease your spending amount. don't spend all the way up to the cap, knowing you don't have the money. if your a small town team and know the revenue isn't available you can't spend..... but these teams just did it anyway knowing it would cause a problem and fall back on someone else......

realistically the income from the BRI split is not what made the teams lose money anyway, if that was the case, EVERY team across the board would have lost money, because it's an split and percentage........

the money loss is from the incoming revenue of ticket sales etc.

[Orangejello727]

How about we stop giving the rich a tax break? damn sorry thats off topic.

But in general if they stop using stupid loopholes in the tax structure that skim on paying up or claming losses not as big as they say, it would make it much easier to understand that the owners arent kicking the bucket nor close to it.

Players make too much money. They spend like no tomorrow and will be dire creek before you know it (Latrell Sprewell example of having to feed his kids). Owners need to stop cooking their books to make it looks like they are losing 10 x more than they are.

Ahh screw it. I hate basketball anyways!!. I hope the Globtrotters show up on tv more often now!

[coolz]

this is not true though, the revenue "IS" enough to cover the expenses, they just spend the revenue overtop of what they take in...... it's not mandatory that a team spends the revenue it takes in, just remember that factor....

the problem is, small market teams are spending like big market teams and losing money trying to keep up and win............

for example the grizzlies are a team that lost money to get into the playoffs and build a strong team........ yet they have a small market........

you spent outside of the salary because you had the money and you lost money, that was a choice on that team....... they should not have spent outside of the incoming money knowing what the dollar value was.

lets say for example a team is taking in 100 million...... decrease your spending amount. don't spend all the way up to the cap, knowing you don't have the money. if your a small town team and know the revenue isn't available you can't spend..... but these teams just did it anyway knowing it would cause a problem and fall back on someone else......

realistically the income from the BRI split is not what made the teams lose money anyway, if that was the case, EVERY team across the board would have lost money, because it's an split and percentage........

the money loss is from the incoming revenue of ticket sales etc.

I agree with you about your opinion in individual teams
The disparity between big market teams and small-market teams is huge
In a sense, your post is actually siding with the owners / David Stern

Last Year's number analysis:
Total Combined Revenue: 4 Billion
Total Player's salaries - 57% : 2.28 Billion
Total Revenue for owner - 43% : 1.72 Billion

Owner's perspective:
Revenue: 1.72 Billion
Expenses other than player's salaries: 2.06 Billion
Net Loss: 0.34 Billion or 340 Million

I think 50-50 is pretty fair split, and then the owner still has to cut expenses to make profit

Also agree that they need better revenue sharing

[Qwasian]

if the salary cap is done correctly it's impossible to lose money...... because you can only spend what you take in, teams overspent and that's the bottom line

if you take 100% of revenue and divide it, you can only lose money if you spend OVERTOP of the X amount of dollars you were allowed to spend.

teams with a bunch of cash CHOOSE to do this, so they can win in small markets, they just want to see the team win, so they spend anyway....... that's not the players fault, that's the owners CHOICE........

why should a player be subjected to decrease in salary because the owners CHOOSE to overspend?

the players didn't overspend or act irresponsibly, the owners did, so why is the blame placed on the players? the players operated within the deal they had in place, the owners did not.


this whole debate is based on the economy being bad, so the owners say, it's my team, I want to make the same thing and spend just as wreckless when the economy was good and i'm going to make the players pay for it, but in my opinion that's not a fair agreement....... they didn't have to lock out, they could have kept the old agreement and spent wisely.

owners really are shooting themselves in the foot trying to do this, because big named stars are not going to play for wack teams either way...... as you can see lebron took less money to go play for the heat, so that concept won't work, the celtics took less money to form that team......

lebron was paid outside in endorsements & promises to make him come to miami obviously, he now owns pat rileys old house...... and that's pretty much the irresponsible type of activity the team owners constantly do to try to get ahead in the NBA......

whats the difference in this agreement? you will just have people pay outside of basketball for top named stars and all the big cities will still have all the big players, that's essentially what they already did to get around the cap.

and if you push the players into a corner on this agreement it's only going to get WAYYYY WORSE. you cannot stop the fans, and revenue of big cities...... it won't happen...... they want the big players and they will get the big players, one way or another. and the players also want to play in those places.

[Orangejello727]

I think the players will concede before the owners do. How many of the players live pay cheque to pay cheque already?? most of them will drop like flies and youll see them throwing one off all star games and pick up games to make money!!

[ShaqEatsThat]

if players as a union move overseas they could easily make similiar salaries within a year. people/revenue will follow the players, not the owners. people could care less who owns a team, or the brand name on it. they want to see the sport played.

acutally i dont care if a bunch of 90 year old men played for the knicks I AM A KNICKS FAN, not a carmelo fan or amare fan, yes i like them because they play for MY team but i dont care who wears the uniform I will be there cheering for my team

same goes for my college team that changes players yearly

[ShaqEatsThat]

Ooh obama your so fine your so fine you blow my mind obama! Hey hey obama!

[Qwasian]

acutally i dont care if a bunch of 90 year old men played for the knicks I AM A KNICKS FAN, not a carmelo fan or amare fan, yes i like them because they play for MY team but i dont care who wears the uniform I will be there cheering for my team

same goes for my college team that changes players yearly

yeah, but that's not the overall feeling........ it's alot of people who do support teams and are die hard fans but the majority aren't.

[fullmetal]

This is so far off base it isn't even funny.

The owners can all live without missing paychecks. Alot of the players can't.

Bill Simmons said it best - this is like the writers strike in Hollywood last year to years ago - they knew they'd never win and at the end of the day they'd never get that money back.

Owners can be greedy - because they are all already rich and have other business ventures - for every LeBron and Kobe there are 10 other guys that need those paychecks.

This is the United States of America. Every individual has the right to pursue wealth and no one is entitled to the wealth of others. Stating that an owner has other revenue streams isn't a valid argument. An owner isn't obligated to 'cave in' to demands. The risk is on the owners' shoulders, not on the players.

The owners have ever right to lock out the players, even 'can' the NBA for several years. The players who know nothing of economics or even basic rules of business act like they control the negotiations. I would actually enjoy it if the owners cancelled the NBA for 3-4 seasons. The players would soon enough learn how good they had it.

No NBA player 'needs' that paycheck. They are given that paycheck as reimbursement for their service. No owner is obligated to pay them.

[tupark82]

NBA talks headed to federal mediator - CBSSports.com (http://ken-berger.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/11838893/32681742)

anything being done is better than nothing being done.

[tupark82]

Rodman to NBA players: 'Bow down' - NBA - Yahoo! Sports (http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=Ag69F9e6j_Sb10.Jabd3urq8vLYF?slug=ap-nbalabor-rodman)

Rick Barry sensibly agrees that this lockout is ?insane? and ?so stupid? - Ball Don't Lie - NBABlog - Yahoo! Sports (http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ball_dont_lie/post/Rick-Barry-sensibly-agrees-that-this-lockout-is-?urn=nba-wp9339)

even former players think the players need to stop being stupid. that's when you gotta know that the players have to rethink their situation some. again, i ask the question that nobody can answer: what will holding their ground accomplish?

[pingbling23]

gotta love rodman!!!! i like the points rick barry make also.