Pierce, Allen leading group looking to decertify if things don't go well

[nickagneta]

While top NBA Players Association officials were trying Thursday to establish a convincing sense of unity heading into this weekend's resumption of labor negotiations with the league, another group of players was laying the groundwork for the decertification of the union, according to sources briefed on those discussions.

At least 50 frustrated players convened on a conference call Thursday with an antitrust lawyer to discuss the ins and outs of the decertification process, sources told ESPN.com. It was the second such call this week, sources said, after a similar call Tuesday.

The most vocal player on both calls, sources said, was Boston's Paul Pierce. Those same sources identified Miami's Dwyane Wade as another vocal participant Thursday, with Orlando's Dwight Howard and Boston's Ray Allen also speaking up Tuesday.

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7185628/nba-players-working-decertification-sources-say

[Roy H.]

Because, you know, this strategy worked so well for the NFL players when they were beat down in Federal court. 

Goodbye season.

[nickagneta]

Because, you know, this strategy worked so well for the NFL players when they were beat down in Federal court. 

Goodbye season.

Yeah but I read an article that says the NFL decertification was a different type and that the NBA decertification would stand a much better chance in court. Let me see if I can find it.

[nickagneta]

Additionally, labor lawyers noted last week that the decertification path being suggested by the NBA agents would be different than the method used by NFL players earlier this year in their labor negotiations and would be tougher for the NBA to challenge as a sham, as the NFL did with the actions of the NFL players.

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2011/09/26/Labor-and-Agents/NBPA-decertification.aspx

Still, as you said Roy, either way....goodbye season.

[kevbo]

Regardless of the prospect of success in the courts, this is much more about creating leverage for the players. As of now they have none, but by decertifying and bringing in the expense and uncertainty of the courts, the players put more pressure on the owners to come off their negotiating line and make a deal.

But yes there likely goes the season. And whenever basketball does come back, with Paul and Ray leading the decertification push, we can be sure the Celtics WILL NOT be winning the NBA title. Not on Stern's watch

[LB3533]

I find it funny how people keep saying the players have no leverage.

If they really didn't have leverage the owners would stay with their original 40% offer of the BRI with minimal years non-guaranteed contracts, and roll backs of current contracts.

[Roy H.]

If they really didn't have leverage the owners would stay with their original 40% offer of the BRI with minimal years non-guaranteed contracts, and roll backs of current contracts.

Well, I think most of their leverage is that the owners would prefer to have a season.  However, that's going to exist in any labor dispute.  They don't have a lot of outside leverage, which is why they have made a lot of givebacks.

[heitingas]

players should learn their lesson from 2005 and never sign a 6 year agreement but a 10 year one, that was stupid IMO.

[Chris]

If this is just a ploy to get Hunter some leverage to negotiate over the next month or so, to get the owners to at least meet them in the middle, if not more, then I think it makes sense.

However, if this is a legitimate attempt to decertify, and if they are really trying to take away Hunters ability to negotiate any further, this could be disastrous. 

Not only could it blow up the season, but I also think it could really backfire in their faces.  Even if they can get the 120 signatures to hold a vote, I have a lot of doubts that they can get the 200+ votes to decertify, which essentially guarantees no season (or paycheck), and a lot of questions about whether they could even pull it back together before next year.  I think there are a ton of players who would vote to take what the NBA is offering, so they can get back on the court, and start making money again.

The timing on this is the most peculiar though, if it is for real.  I think it would have made sense in July, in the hopes of saving this season.  And it would have a lot more support after this season is cancelled.  But right now, they are kind of in no-mans land, which makes me think it really is just a ploy for leverage.

[kevbo]

If they really didn't have leverage the owners would stay with their original 40% offer of the BRI with minimal years non-guaranteed contracts, and roll backs of current contracts.

Well, I think most of their leverage is that the owners would prefer to have a season.  However, that's going to exist in any labor dispute.  They don't have a lot of outside leverage, which is why they have made a lot of givebacks.

Well put Roy. My saying the players have no leverage is slight hyperbole, but aside from decertification, they have little to cajole ownership into settling aside from the threat to walk away from the table altogether (as Billy Hunter already did last week).

Hear's my quick comparison of bargaining positions:

Owners control:
- The arenas
- Broadcasting rights
- support staff
- travel logistics
- Antitrust exemption
- Brand/legacy
- Merchandising
- lucrative Non-NBA businesses

Players have:
- basketball talent
- A few transcendent stars
- earnings to date
- smaller (relative to owners) amount of non-NBA business income
- very few non-NBA alternative pro basketball options (Europe, China)
- the threat of decertifying and challenging the NBA's antitrust status

I'm sure I'm leaving some things out, but that's my quick list.

Taking away decertification/antitrust factors, I think of it like this: hypothetically, is it easier for NBA players to create a viable competitor to the NBA, or is it easier for the NBA to develop an alternative set of players to displace the current crop of players? However you answer that question determines who you think has the leverage. IMO, the owners have all the leverage because finding an alternate set of players w/r/t their current assets is far more feasible than the players finding an alternate league to ply their skills.

[kevbo]

The timing on this is the most peculiar though, if it is for real.  I think it would have made sense in July, in the hopes of saving this season.  And it would have a lot more support after this season is cancelled.  But right now, they are kind of in no-mans land, which makes me think it really is just a ploy for leverage.

I agree. One way I think the timing make sense is because the zone of agreement is so well defined now, at least according to the NYT's Howard Beck. If they had really pursued this back in July, without much sense of where the two sides may find agreement, it might have just set fire to everything. I read this as a gambit by the players to frighten the owners away from worsening their offer and to move above the 50/50 line.

[Chris]

The timing on this is the most peculiar though, if it is for real.  I think it would have made sense in July, in the hopes of saving this season.  And it would have a lot more support after this season is cancelled.  But right now, they are kind of in no-mans land, which makes me think it really is just a ploy for leverage.

I agree. One way I think the timing make sense is because the zone of agreement is so well defined now, at least according to the NYT's Howard Beck. If they had really pursued this back in July, without much sense of where the two sides may find agreement, it might have just set fire to everything. I read this as a gambit by the players to frighten the owners away from worsening their offer and to move above the 50/50 line.

Well, if they had done it in July, they could have seen it through in the manner it is really meant for...by taking it through the courts.  But by doing it right now, it is too late for the courts to save the season, but too early to explode the season on their own (which decertification would do).

But, this is all from a logical standpoint, and logic is still taking shots of Jamison in the hotel bar with George Cohen, after being thrown out of the negotiating room.

[Celtics4ever]

I think this gambit will ultimately fail.  All Stern has do is cancel some more games and what I would do if I was him is call their bluff.

PP and Allen can afford it.  There are a lot more who can't afford than can though I would bet.  These may not go along with the big money group.

Ultimately, this whole thing is going to hurt the league.  Both owners and players come across as greedy.   I know we love the NBA ( some of us just love the Celtics, like me though) but basketball is behind both baseball and the NFL, isn't it?   I can see this causing casual fans to leave in droves.   These are tough economic times and people may spend their entertainment dollar elsewhere give this strike.  With a lackluster non competative finals too it might turn peeps off.  I know a lot of people who don't care.  Obviously, we do but we are not the masses.

[kevbo]

The timing on this is the most peculiar though, if it is for real.  I think it would have made sense in July, in the hopes of saving this season.  And it would have a lot more support after this season is cancelled.  But right now, they are kind of in no-mans land, which makes me think it really is just a ploy for leverage.

I agree. One way I think the timing make sense is because the zone of agreement is so well defined now, at least according to the NYT's Howard Beck. If they had really pursued this back in July, without much sense of where the two sides may find agreement, it might have just set fire to everything. I read this as a gambit by the players to frighten the owners away from worsening their offer and to move above the 50/50 line.

Well, if they had done it in July, they could have seen it through in the manner it is really meant for...by taking it through the courts.  But by doing it right now, it is too late for the courts to save the season, but too early to explode the season on their own (which decertification would do).

But, this is all from a logical standpoint, and logic is still taking shots of Jamison in the hotel bar with George Cohen, after being thrown out of the negotiating room.

Hahaha TP for the second graf. I agree with you 100%, if I were in charge, I would have taken it to the courts in July and let the lawyers duke it out. But I can understand the current approach somewhat from the perspective of decertification being the ultimate last resort for the players. I presume in July (against all logic) the players had hope of a more reasonable bargaining process with owners, and wanted to see where it led before playing the only trump card (decertification) they had. Cause once they go that route, the ball is truly in the hands of the courts.

Either way, I think I'm going to join logic and George Cohen tonight for some Jameson myself. Then maybe some NBA 2K. Best I can do.

[nickagneta]

If they had taken this to decertification in July then it is more than likely that they would have lost for sure in court. Part of the very conservative Eighth Court's ruling against the NFLPA decertification is that it was just a ploy by the players to get the owners to give concessions in their negotiations. the court didn't feel that the players were actually earnest in decertification because they tried to do it before the lockout even started.

With the NBPA, however, they have been locked out for 4 months, negotiations are at a breaking point, the union has negotiated in good faith and yet the lockout still goes on. The NBPA are looking into a more liberal court to file and their decertification appears as an earnest attempt to decertify and may hold more credence with the court putting pressure on the owners to try to end things before a final decertification vote is allowed by the court.

I don't know. I frustrated. I want NBA basketball and don't care anymore but I thought it strange that someone like Pierce, who is probably on his last NBA contract and who, one way or the other, this new CBA won't effect him, is so vocal about the decertification. Is he really so pro-union and pro-players or is he doing this because he feels he owes it to his agent?