Big salary rollback coming in the NBA

[greg683x]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=4894018

Pretty interesting article.  Should make the Lebron feeding frenzing more fun to watch also if this goes down.  MLE's would become abolished too.

[Donoghus]

Good luck with this, owners.   

Perhaps the biggest shocker: The owners' proposal includes a provision that would require any pre-existing deals to be revised to conform to the new deal's limits.

[Who]

The CBA stories coming out now are all nonsense.

Extreme suggestions to help negotiations at a later date.

I wouldn't pay any attention to them. Wait until it closer to the time before examining them.

[PLamb]

The CBA stories coming out now are all nonsense.

Extreme suggestions to help negotiations at a later date.

I wouldn't pay any attention to them. Wait until it closer to the time before examining them.

I agree

45% of the BRI to the players a 12% give back

Pre existing contracts will have to be modified to conform to the new CBA

A hard cap

Lower number of years on max contracts

Language making it easier to void contracts


Posturing, all posturing

I'm waiting for the heavy crackdown on drug testing next

Felony convictions warranting instant voiding of contracts will be something we start hearing

And let's not forget the inevitable 20 year age or two years out of high school minimum requirement before entering the league



They are all coming, watch, listen, read and learn

Posturing is all it is

[fairweatherfan]

A lot of what the league ultimately gets will depend on whether the players have learned from the last lockout and start saving money now so they don't immediately sink into bankruptcy once the checks stop coming.  Which means the league will probably get quite a bit. 

I don't expect a true "hard cap" because a lot of the wealthier owners just don't want one.  The cap will get "harder" though, I think.  The % the players get will probably drop but not to 45...I think the union would ultimately settle for anything above 50.  Shorter contracts are likely, as are lower standards for voiding them.

The one I think is a slamdunk is the increased age requirement; the NBA wanted 2 years all along, and the only people that would be affected by it are by definition not part of the union yet.  As a college fan that's fine with me; it increases the talent in the NCAA and gets around Bob Knight's very good argument that a 1 and done player can "attend" for his one year at some schools without ever actually going to class.

Hope it's resolved relatively early and we can avoid a stoppage, but that might be wishful thinking.

[Tnerb02]

I wonder if this will open the door for deep pocketed European owners to give star NBA players some nice paychecks.

[sk7326]

A lot of what the league ultimately gets will depend on whether the players have learned from the last lockout and start saving money now so they don't immediately sink into bankruptcy once the checks stop coming.  Which means the league will probably get quite a bit. 

I don't expect a true "hard cap" because a lot of the wealthier owners just don't want one.  The cap will get "harder" though, I think.  The % the players get will probably drop but not to 45...I think the union would ultimately settle for anything above 50.  Shorter contracts are likely, as are lower standards for voiding them.

The one I think is a slamdunk is the increased age requirement; the NBA wanted 2 years all along, and the only people that would be affected by it are by definition not part of the union yet.  As a college fan that's fine with me; it increases the talent in the NCAA and gets around Bob Knight's very good argument that a 1 and done player can "attend" for his one year at some schools without ever actually going to class.

Hope it's resolved relatively early and we can avoid a stoppage, but that might be wishful thinking.

I have zero sympathy for the NCAA - since they are not exactly operating with the kids interests in mind - look at the ghastly Andy Oliver case in baseball.  Indentured servitude yay.  The 20 year old limit helps the NCAA perhaps but Edited for profanity.  Please do not do it again.izes the notion of college every bit as much as it is Edited for profanity.  Please do not do it again.ized now, and could open the floodgates to Europe - my secret hope.  

The bombshell is that the NBA wants to fix current contracts into the new structure which is their prerogative - but not something the players should agree to.  Really the league needs to show some transparency to prove they are losing money.  Creating new rules because some owners and management are too stupid not to pay top dollar only for top talent seems ridiculously funny to me.  The max salary is unbelievably dumb - who really has a problem with LeBron making most of the money ... and how do you differentiate between top players otherwise.  The NBA is trying to create a sport where a barely trained seal can operate a basketball team.  

[pearljammer10]

Hope it happens. These guys get paid way too much money...Its sickening really.

[RebusRankin]

I have no problem with players making substantially less. They play basketball for goodness sake. Not exactly the same as a cop, firefighter, teacher, doctor or nurse.

[sk7326]

Players deserve their marginal product ... that's completely legitimate.  Since owner salary rollbacks will not come with a corresponding oh i don't know ticket price reduction, the money is going in the pockets of people who aren't precisely starving and in a lot of cases did not come into their money aside from genetic accident anyway. 

It'd be nice to say that salaries and ticket prices have something to do with each other, but they don't ... two separate decisions, especially in an enterprise where labor costs are essentially fixed. (imagine another business where your profits are guaranteed)

[More Banners]

Salary cap rules aren't really about the players at all.  A cap is about stopping the other guy from outbidding you for a player.

[PLamb]

I have a question about owners losing money

Has an NBA owner EVER sold his franchise for a net loss of money

Sure the teams may be operating at a net loss but real business people know that means squat to an owner if he has an option to sell for an overall huge total windfall over what he paid for the team plus the year to year losses accrued

Therefore, I feel for neither side in this

Players are spoiled millionaires who are celebrities playing a game for a living and owners are billionaires who can sell what they have and always make huge long term profits

Cry me a river guys

I'm struggling to get by on my hundred grand a year and people think I'm rich

LOL

[snively]

I have no problem with players making substantially less. They play basketball for goodness sake. Not exactly the same as a cop, firefighter, teacher, doctor or nurse.

And how much would you pay to watch an average cop make his daily rounds?

I BS'd my way through college to avoid buying textbooks, but I gladly shell out $100 a year for League Pass broadband.  

These guys (the good ones at least) are fantastic entertainers.  They earn the money.  

What need to go are the ridiculous guaranteed contracts.  How is it good for the sport for teams to waste half of their roster on unmovable contracts for bad or washed-up players?  Sure it adds some strategic wrinkles for the capologists among us, but it degrades the game.  

If every year was a team and player option, I think everyone would be happier.  Teams wouldn't have to pay Vin Baker even though he was showing up to work drunk and guys like KG wouldn't have to put up with crappy management for years.  Neither would teams be on the hook for $20 million to injured vets postponing retirement, nor would young stars like Brandon Roy be forced to play for well-below market value until their rookie contracts were complete.

[wdleehi]

I don't care how much they make.  Any player that is good and is smart with their money will be set for life without ever making NBA "max" money. 


I don't care how much money the franchises make.  I don't care how much money the coaches make.  I don't care how much money the owners make.  I don't care how much money the networks make.



All I care about is the NBA putting the best product they can on the court.  And I think they are failing at that by restricting teams roster flexibility with guaranteed contracts.  I think it fails the league by not increasing the age of incoming NBA players by giving scouts more time to look at them develop not to mention the extra developmental time players get in college or overseas.  (I don't care which path they take)  I think they fail by making the game star driven instead o team driven.


So, I am rooting for the teams in this fight.  I want the NBA to become a league where teams can turn around quickly.  A league where good GM and franchise's rule, not the lucky ones (Cleveland)

[QuinielaBox]

Hey, I found a topic interesting enough to comment on while waiting for the Orlando game to come on.

I have been mentioning in the past that the owners were going to feel the effects of the long and deep recession we have been in and that the overwhelming majority of the passionate fans would not continue to pay the 200 dollar nightly rental to cheer on their home teams. Attendence and BRI is on the decline and the owners need to rein in the costs.

The single biggest expense owners have is obviously player salaries. The negotiating parties must have an understanding that their industry is at stake for possibly survival. I don't think the NBA can afford to lose one or two seasons due to a labor dispute. The public will simply pay attention to the college game and a lot the players will sign contracts with teams overseas. It is not like hockey, where the fans of the NHL were practically shut out of hockey for one year (Bruins fans have been shut out for 30 years here but I digress). If the NBA shut itself down for one year, we would be p---ing and moaning on this blog board and others but would the public really care all that much? A lot of people I talk to say that NBA players are overpaid whiners. I guess the image of seeing Sheed whine around the court has made a lasting impression.

So the challenge is to limit player costs by rolling back salaries. The way to do that is to not guarentee 100% of the contract (like the NFL). Two have an hard cap that will penalize teams three dollars for every dollar spent over the salary cap. Next tie the cap to a fixed dollar amount based on the moving average of the last five years of BRI. The percentage I recommend is 54% of the BRI = to the salary cap. That means if the average BRI is 3 billion over the last 5 years, the salary cap is .54 * 3 billion / 30 teams = 54 million for the salary cap. If Wyc Grousebeck's player payroll totals 63 million, his total burden to the league is 90 million. 63 to his players, 27 to the league for exceeding the cap by 9 million.