Good News. Labor deal is 95.632% complete

[Roy H.]

It's interesting how much the players have "given back" to the owners, while asking for "very little return".

It's all about leverage.  The owners had the facts (i.e., financial losses) on their side, and the players knew they had to make givebacks after a very generous deal last CBA.  The question was always how much they would give, and the answer seems to be "a lot".

At the same time, I wonder if the players would have been better off focusing less on "system issues", and more on the finances.

For instance, if the players had agreed to a hard cap, but insisted on 54% of BRI, would they be better off right now?  Would the owners have conceded on the financial end, if they got the ultimate prize in terms of system issues?  

In the end, it probably wouldn't have been worth it, because once there's a hard cap, it's never going away, while BRI will be in flux CBA to CBA.  Still, I wonder to what extent the players considered giving in on that particular "blood issue".

[indeedproceed]

It's interesting how much the players have "given back" to the owners, while asking for "very little return".

Half a billion dollars in basketball revenue over six years deserves "air quotes"? Make no mistake, the players have given up a lot. In fact, I'd be interested in what 'wins' the players are actually getting. Looks to me like all they're getting in these negotiations is 'bent over'.

(This is not to say that I don't think they make a lot of money, I'm just saying from the last CBA to this proposed CBA, I don't think the players are getting any 'wins')

[Roy H.]

It's interesting how much the players have "given back" to the owners, while asking for "very little return".

Half a billion dollars in basketball revenue over six years deserves "air quotes"? Make no mistake, the players have given up a lot. In fact, I'd be interested in what 'wins' the players are actually getting. Looks to me like all they're getting in these negotiations is 'bent over'.

(This is not to say that I don't think they make a lot of money, I'm just saying from the last CBA to this proposed CBA, I don't think the players are getting any 'wins')

I think there's some small win they're getting in terms of relaxing restricted free agency, and there's talk of allowing a bonus pool for rookie players who outperform their contracts.  However, on balance, those are very small things in return for a $300 million per season giveback.

[Chris]

It's interesting how much the players have "given back" to the owners, while asking for "very little return".

Half a billion dollars in basketball revenue over six years deserves "air quotes"? Make no mistake, the players have given up a lot. In fact, I'd be interested in what 'wins' the players are actually getting. Looks to me like all they're getting in these negotiations is 'bent over'.

(This is not to say that I don't think they make a lot of money, I'm just saying from the last CBA to this proposed CBA, I don't think the players are getting any 'wins')

One might even argue that the players have given up too much from a negotiating standpoint.  How many times have they said they will not go any lower...and then have gone lower? 

If you were the owners, would you really have any doubt that if you hold out a little longer, the players won't just give in on absolutely everything?

[LB3533]

It's interesting how much the players have "given back" to the owners, while asking for "very little return".

It's all about leverage.  The owners had the facts (i.e., financial losses) on their side, and the players knew they had to make givebacks after a very generous deal last CBA.  The question was always how much they would give, and the answer seems to be "a lot".

At the same time, I wonder if the players would have been better off focusing less on "system issues", and more on the finances.

For instance, if the players had agreed to a hard cap, but insisted on 54% of BRI, would they be better off right now?  Would the owners have conceded on the financial end, if they got the ultimate prize in terms of system issues? 

In the end, it probably wouldn't have been worth it, because once there's a hard cap, it's never going away, while BRI will be in flux CBA to CBA.  Still, I wonder to what extent the players considered giving in on that particular "blood issue".

It's 2011 right now, 12 years after 1999 and 6 years after 2005.

It's easy to, now sit here and say what was a favorable or non-favorable deal...with 20/20 glasses on.

Player salary is fixed with revenue, but it's a shame, non-player costs do not and did not back in '99 and '05.

It's a shame these smart business owners and their many lawyers, accountants didn't foresee these economic changes (changes that do not necessarily need a depression or recession for it to occur).

It's truly surprising how "smart" Billy Hunter and the players and then president Patrick Ewing were compared to these educated owners who bent over and allowed the players to crush these owners back then.

The thing about leverage is that it belongs to the those who have power and in general, those who have power have wealth, money.

Apparently the owners had so much power that they wanted to give some away, generously to the players back in '99 & '05.

[indeedproceed]

I do wonder why the owners are suddenly deciding that this labor agreement is so unsustainable, when attendance, viewers, and mech sales are all at high points. If it is so bad now, it had to be worse then, right?

[nickagneta]

The win the players got was no hard cap, a provision that would have severely restricted player movement, especially to the coveted big market teams. The soft cap with harsher penalties is a win because LA, New York, Brooklyn, Miami, Chicago, Boston and Dallas are still going to have higher than normal revenue streams than most teams and still will be able to go over the cap and will still be able to afford to pay the tax.

Say what you want but that is huge, IMHO.

Also, let's not forget that the other win the players got is the same, spendthrift, incompetent-to-run-a-profitable-sports-franchise, lets overpay just about everybody while bidding against nobody owners and GMs are still in charge of running NBA teams.

-Most teams will go over the cap.

-Most teams will spend the max MLE contract exemption on players that don't deserve it.

-Most teams will give good but not great players on their teams getting off their rookie contracts max level deals.

-Most teams will just continue to run their franchises the exact same way they are now and the players will get very well paid and still be able to dictate where they want to play.

[LB3533]

It's interesting how much the players have "given back" to the owners, while asking for "very little return".

Half a billion dollars in basketball revenue over six years deserves "air quotes"? Make no mistake, the players have given up a lot. In fact, I'd be interested in what 'wins' the players are actually getting. Looks to me like all they're getting in these negotiations is 'bent over'.

(This is not to say that I don't think they make a lot of money, I'm just saying from the last CBA to this proposed CBA, I don't think the players are getting any 'wins')

I put them in quotes because there is group of believers who don't believe the players have anything to give to the owners, that the previous CBA that has expired means zero in today's negotiations.

I do not belong with that camp. Because that camp also believes that the owners basically possess 100% of the current CBA and everything they concede to the players is substantial and relevant.

Why else would the owners original offer of 37-40% of the BRI, with no guaranteed contracts, hard team cap, and rollbacks on current contracts....if they didn't believe they HAD EVERYTHING.

If the players were "smart", if Billy Hunter and Derek Fisher were "smart" they would have said this:

-NBA revenue is up
-TV rating is up
-Team/franchise values are up
-Merchandise sales are pretty good
-NBA interest is up

Since all these positives have occurred on our watch, we want a raise. We want 90% of the BRI and we want all system issues to stay the same.

I feel the Union side made the mistake of trying to negotiate fairly from the very beginning.

They should have never entertained the thought of helping the owners recoup "their losses".

[Chris]

Now the rumors are starting that a deal has been reached (Apparently Dave Checketts, who used to be a GM in Utah, and works for the Pistons now, is claiming its a done deal), and they are being shot down just as quickly. 

[Kiorrik]

Still, I've got today pegged as the day.

[StartOrien]

Now the rumors are starting that a deal has been reached (Apparently Dave Checketts, who used to be a GM in Utah, and works for the Pistons now, is claiming its a done deal), and they are being shot down just as quickly. 

This is my favorite tweet so far about that:

Lockout Buzz: Report surfaces that there's a done deal... which is refuted by a dozen outlets in about 30 seconds. http://tinyurl.com/ctx8te4 Howu

[fairweatherfan]

Now the rumors are starting that a deal has been reached (Apparently Dave Checketts, who used to be a GM in Utah, and works for the Pistons now, is claiming its a done deal), and they are being shot down just as quickly. 

This is my favorite tweet so far about that:

Lockout Buzz: Report surfaces that there's a done deal... which is refuted by a dozen outlets in about 30 seconds. http://tinyurl.com/ctx8te4 Howu

Checketts isn't the type to BS, so it's probably just a good old fashioned game of Telephone gone awry.  Probably progress getting made, feeling close to a deal, but not quite there yet.

[Kiorrik]

Ah bugger, looks like it's not happening today.

[Chris]

Now the rumors are starting that a deal has been reached (Apparently Dave Checketts, who used to be a GM in Utah, and works for the Pistons now, is claiming its a done deal), and they are being shot down just as quickly. 

This is my favorite tweet so far about that:

Lockout Buzz: Report surfaces that there's a done deal... which is refuted by a dozen outlets in about 30 seconds. http://tinyurl.com/ctx8te4 Howu

Checketts isn't the type to BS, so it's probably just a good old fashioned game of Telephone gone awry.  Probably progress getting made, feeling close to a deal, but not quite there yet.

Yeah, as more information is coming in, it sounds like he may have jumped the gun, but progress is being made, and they may be close on the tough issues.  The problem is, until things like this are really done, they can blow up in a second. 

The other worrying thing is that apparently Stern has another teleconference with owners after the meeting tonight.  Which means, anything they accomplish today could be wiped out quickly.

[fairweatherfan]

Checketts clarifies:

"I've received a couple of phone calls from friends who are very close to the process who say 'We have a deal, and now it's a matter of getting everything straightened out.'"

Now that's very good news if it's accurate.