I'd be satisfied if they start the season on Christmas Day with a 60-game schedule. Most teams play around 25 games before Christmas, so it would really only be a few extra back-to-back's per team (and no need for B2B2B's like in '99) over the remaining four months.
Of course it would be nice to settle everything within the next 2 weeks - have a shortened training camp and only 2-3 preseason games, starting the season on time - but that seems highly unlikely if not impossible at this point. Even starting the season Dec. 1st would be fine with me.
Basically anything BUT losing an entire season.
Why would that be impossible though?
I would argue that it is more likely for them to start the season on time than it would be for them to have a shortened season.
Its not like its a lot of work. Both sides just have to decide to agree on things. But, once real games start being missed, it is going to be harder to agree, because owners demands are going to grow significantly to make up for the lost revenues. And one or two missed paychecks are not going to push the players to the table that quickly to take a deal that is worse than what the owners will offer over the next 2-3 weeks.
So, I have a feeling if they do not come to an agreement in the next 2-3 weeks, in time to save the entire season (I have heard the drop dead date would be October 15), then the entire season will be lost.
Well I suppose nothing is impossible, but with each meeting that passes, it looks less and less likely. I have not heard one person with inside knowledge of the situation come out and say that they think the entire season can still be salvaged. All reports are a shortened season or none at all.
Just because they stopped talking about BRI doesn't necessarily mean they have agreed about it. If they did, does it really matter how the salary cap is structured? A hard cap prevents this new fad known as the "superteam." If the owners won't budge on a hard cap, let them phase it in, so long as they are still getting 50+% of BRI. There will be less and less 'Melo situations from now on, which I am fine with.
At this point it is unclear (at least to me) who is the greedier party.
If they get a deal done in the next two weeks, it's still too difficult to get everything in order for the beginning of November. You need an offseason of some sort. 3 days? A week? There will definitely be some change in the cap, whether it's minor or major remains to be seen. GM's will need some time to get a team together. Assume two weeks to put a bow on the new CBA, and a week for free agency and/or trades. That puts us ~2 weeks away from the scheduled start of the season. Is that really enough time for training camps and a couple preseason games?
Well, there are some people with inside knowledge who are optimistic about a full season. Chris Sheridan has been the most outspoken (and who has gone on record with that prediction), but Ken Berger and Marc Stein (and Berger has more inside info than anyone about the lockout) have both been more optimistic lately about it as well. They all know that there is a lot of posturing going on, but both sides are know that if they don't start the regular season on time, then its back to the drawing board, and all progress will be lost.
As for being able to start the season on time, it has been widely reported that all they need is about 2 weeks after a formal deal is signed to start the season...and even that can be abreviated.
They really do not need much preseason, and they can always do like the NFL and have the offseason and training camp start simultaneously.
The biggest issue will be that once they have a handshake agreement, it will take a week or so to finish drawing up the papers, etc. But once that is done, they are good to go.
And lets also remember how much money they stand to lose if they miss any games in TV revenue, not to mention how difficult it would be to reschedule them. So they will do everything they possibly can to start the season on time, even if it means that there really will be no preseason.
Topic: If the NBA season starts on time (Read 5883 times)