NBA players in Europe

[TheTruthFot18]

Ok so now that DWill made the first move, I see Amare and KD saying something similar. Whether they actually do it or not is one thing, but say they do: does this put more pressure on the NBA and Stern to work a deal out and keep these players here at all costs? Some new rules adjusted but just the idea of keeping them out of foreign leagues.

Thoughts? 

[ederson]

It`s not like NBA loses the players. DWill (and i`m sure everyone that follows) has a out clause and will be back the momment the lockout ends.

[CelticG1]

It`s not like NBA loses the players. DWill (and i`m sure everyone that follows) has a out clause and will be back the momment the lockout ends.

It just gives them more leverage. If the lockout is raised tomorrow that's one thing but if they play any games with a Euro team thats another.

I'm assuming owners want to protect their expensive and valuable assets and if these guys start playing for other organizations in Euro league games I'm sure the owners will get  a little more antsy to get something done quicker

[Chris]

While the owners might not be happy to lose a little leverage (although, I don't think William's relatively small deal did much to help the players cause), I think Stern in particular, and probably some of the more progressive owners actually look at this as a good thing.

The players are growing the brand by playing in Europe, so when they return to the NBA (and so far there have been no indications of any significant players going over there longterm), they will be even more marketable globally, and will bring in more revenue. 

[greenpride32]

I'm betting owners are praying guys like Roy, Arenas, Rashard Lewis go overseas and get injured; that way they can void their contracts. 

[Chris]

I'm betting owners are praying guys like Roy, Arenas, Rashard Lewis go overseas and get injured; that way they can void their contracts. 

I don't think they would be able to void their contracts for that.

[PosImpos]

I forget who said it, but I find merit with the idea that NBA players taking deals in Europe doesn't give them as much leverage against the owners as many people seem to think.

There's no way an NBA player will ever get paid in Europe what he'd get in the USA -- even under the owners' proposed new CBA.  So what are the players telling the owners -- "we're willing to play elsewhere for much less money"?  If that's the case, why wouldn't they be willing to play right here in the U.S. for much less money?

I think it's just a way for some guys to play basketball and expand their global profile during the lockout, not really a viable method for putting pressure on the owners, or a reasonable money-making alternative.

[gileyal]

Great article calling the bluff...

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/os-shannonowens-nba-players-overseas-20110711,0,6426165.column

[Moranis]

I forget who said it, but I find merit with the idea that NBA players taking deals in Europe doesn't give them as much leverage against the owners as many people seem to think.

There's no way an NBA player will ever get paid in Europe what he'd get in the USA -- even under the owners' proposed new CBA.  So what are the players telling the owners -- "we're willing to play elsewhere for much less money"?  If that's the case, why wouldn't they be willing to play right here in the U.S. for much less money?

I think it's just a way for some guys to play basketball and expand their global profile during the lockout, not really a viable method for putting pressure on the owners, or a reasonable money-making alternative.

I wouldn't be so sure of that.  If the NBA player was a free agent and could sign a long term contract and was a legit star I could see a team signing Kobe Bryant to a 20 million a year contract.  The publicity alone would be tremendous to the team.

[PosImpos]

I forget who said it, but I find merit with the idea that NBA players taking deals in Europe doesn't give them as much leverage against the owners as many people seem to think.

There's no way an NBA player will ever get paid in Europe what he'd get in the USA -- even under the owners' proposed new CBA.  So what are the players telling the owners -- "we're willing to play elsewhere for much less money"?  If that's the case, why wouldn't they be willing to play right here in the U.S. for much less money?

I think it's just a way for some guys to play basketball and expand their global profile during the lockout, not really a viable method for putting pressure on the owners, or a reasonable money-making alternative.

I wouldn't be so sure of that.  If the NBA player was a free agent and could sign a long term contract and was a legit star I could see a team signing Kobe Bryant to a 20 million a year contract.  The publicity alone would be tremendous to the team.

What's the most lucrative contract a player has ever gotten in Europe?

[ederson]

It much be Childress

[Moranis]

I forget who said it, but I find merit with the idea that NBA players taking deals in Europe doesn't give them as much leverage against the owners as many people seem to think.

There's no way an NBA player will ever get paid in Europe what he'd get in the USA -- even under the owners' proposed new CBA.  So what are the players telling the owners -- "we're willing to play elsewhere for much less money"?  If that's the case, why wouldn't they be willing to play right here in the U.S. for much less money?

I think it's just a way for some guys to play basketball and expand their global profile during the lockout, not really a viable method for putting pressure on the owners, or a reasonable money-making alternative.

I wouldn't be so sure of that.  If the NBA player was a free agent and could sign a long term contract and was a legit star I could see a team signing Kobe Bryant to a 20 million a year contract.  The publicity alone would be tremendous to the team.

What's the most lucrative contract a player has ever gotten in Europe?

The numbers below are NET income.


The largest contract ever was Josh Childress at 4.5 million euros per season (about 6.5 million).  Remember this is NET (after taxes, after agent fees, etc.) so Childress would have to be paid something like 9 million a year to come out the same in the NBA.  

The highest paid non-NBA player is Theo Papaloukas who made 3.5 million Euros last year with his Greek team (he was in Russia when he signed the deal and made the same the last 3 seasons).

Sarunas Jasikevicius, Juan Carlos Navarro, and Boston Nachbar who all flamed out of the NBA have 3 million euro or more deals.  Krstic just signed a 2 year 6 million euro contract.


At the current exchange rate and taking into account that those are NET incomes, those guys are all making well in excess of the MLE.  The MLE would be about 2 million NET euros a year.  

[bdm860]

I forget who said it, but I find merit with the idea that NBA players taking deals in Europe doesn't give them as much leverage against the owners as many people seem to think.

There's no way an NBA player will ever get paid in Europe what he'd get in the USA -- even under the owners' proposed new CBA.  So what are the players telling the owners -- "we're willing to play elsewhere for much less money"?  If that's the case, why wouldn't they be willing to play right here in the U.S. for much less money?

I think it's just a way for some guys to play basketball and expand their global profile during the lockout, not really a viable method for putting pressure on the owners, or a reasonable money-making alternative.

I think if A LOT of players went overseas, it would help give the players leverage, but just a few isn’t going to do it.

The leverage doesn’t come from earning a comparable amount from a competitor.  It’s not saying “I’m willing to play for less” but it’s saying “I can survive without you if my demands aren’t met.”  Because the players would have some money coming in, because they have their basic needs being met., because they’re not going to run out of money if the lockout persists, because of all this they can wait out the owners much longer.  This definitely would give the players leverage.

It’s like as a kid if your dad tells you to do chores or has strict rules, you refuse because you think you should be paid for your services or the rules are too strict, so your dad starts charging you rent, starts charging you for the food you eat, electricity you use, takes away the tv, internet, etc., and takes back everything he bought for you (clothes, bed, toys, etc.).  Or you get the “if you live in my house, you have to live by my rules” line.  You can only wait your dad out so long before you have to do what he says.

BUT, if you have a relative/friend you can live with you can wait out your dad much longer.  Sure you might have a smaller room (or have to sleep on the couch, or sleeping bag on the floor, etc.), you might not have your toys, you might not have the same luxuries, but you can get by longer without your dad.  Your dad thought if he made you sleep outside with no food you’d cave after one night.  Well now you got a roof over your head, food, running water, and electricity.  You can give your dad a fight he wasn’t ready for.

Lol or maybe I’ve just watched way too many sitcoms.  Cosby Show, My Wife and Kids, Everybody Hates Chris, Bernie Mac, Malcolm in the Middle, etc.  I’ve seen variations of this basic plot in all of them 

[LooseCannon]

The leverage doesn’t come from earning a comparable amount from a competitor.  It’s not saying “I’m willing to play for less” but it’s saying “I can survive without you if my demands aren’t met.”  Because the players would have some money coming in, because they have their basic needs being met., because they’re not going to run out of money if the lockout persists, because of all this they can wait out the owners much longer.  This definitely would give the players leverage.

Ding, ding, ding!  The owners' strategy is to starve out the players.  They're probably not going to get serious about negotiation until players start missing paychecks.  They want to force the cancellation of some games.

Look at the NFL, where the players took out a secret lockout insurance policy, the revelation of which seems to have spurred negotiations by taking away some of the owners' leverage.