Who Do You Blame (Merged)

[Cman]

Lakers  


WHO ELSE  

TP! That should be added to the poll.

EDIT: I'd also be fine if you added "Yankees" to that list.

[Evantime34]

I am more prone to blame the owners. Most of the teams that are bad make bad personnel decisions. The bad teams don't draw fans. When you don't draw fans you lose money. The owners are looking to players to pitch in to cover their losses that were caused by them mismanaging their businesses.

However, that is not the biggest reason I blame the owners. The players gave in a lot on bri % so the owners losses have been covered. If they sign better contracts and draft good players in the future they will be have profitable franchises. It should not fall on the players to create a system that protects the owners from themselves, if the franchises aren't profitable they should look inward.

The players have given up an estimated 300+ MM (per year) with their 7% decrease in BRI, even though the owners 300 mm assessment of loses might be overstated. Chris Duhon stated that some owners expense stadium rental despite owning the company that owns the stadium.

A lot of people believe the players are being greedy and they are on a scale we the average people can understand. While the owners are being greedy on a high level corporate white colar scale.

[GreenFaith1819]

It's because of Frank & Dodd and Obama's Healthcare.

Sorry JK, I thought I was Michelle Bachmann for a second.

lol...I was going to blame Allen Iverson.

The owners and the players haven't practiced enough at negotiating.

j/k AI - Love ya.

But Mike Wilbon sums up my thoughts in this IMO well-written article:

http://espn.go.com/espn/commentary/story/_/page/wilbon-111114/the-nba-labor-impasse-reached-particularly-objectionable-economy

[PosImpos]

It's because of Frank & Dodd and Obama's Healthcare.

Sorry JK, I thought I was Michelle Bachmann for a second.

lol...I was going to blame Allen Iverson.

The owners and the players haven't practiced enough at negotiating.

j/k AI - Love ya.

But Mike Wilbon sums up my thoughts in this IMO well-written article:

http://espn.go.com/espn/commentary/story/_/page/wilbon-111114/the-nba-labor-impasse-reached-particularly-objectionable-economy

I was just going to post that.  I loved Wilbon's article.  He gets right to the heart of the matter. 

Nobody is blameless in this matter, but in this economic climate it is utterly ridiculous for the players to refuse to play, to go to work because they don't want to take a slight paycut on their multi-million dollar contracts.

[Interceptor]

I was just going to post that.  I loved Wilbon's article.  He gets right to the heart of the matter. 

Nobody is blameless in this matter, but in this economic climate it is utterly ridiculous for the players to refuse to play, to go to work because they don't want to take a slight paycut on their multi-million dollar contracts.

Players refusing to play? This is a lockout, not a strike.

[PosImpos]

I am more prone to blame the owners. Most of the teams that are bad make bad personnel decisions. The bad teams don't draw fans. When you don't draw fans you lose money. The owners are looking to players to pitch in to cover their losses that were caused by them mismanaging their businesses.

However, that is not the biggest reason I blame the owners. The players gave in a lot on bri % so the owners losses have been covered. If they sign better contracts and draft good players in the future they will be have profitable franchises. It should not fall on the players to create a system that protects the owners from themselves, if the franchises aren't profitable they should look inward.

The players have given up an estimated 300+ MM (per year) with their 7% decrease in BRI, even though the owners 300 mm assessment of loses might be overstated. Chris Duhon stated that some owners expense stadium rental despite owning the company that owns the stadium.

A lot of people believe the players are being greedy and they are on a scale we the average people can understand. While the owners are being greedy on a high level corporate white colar scale.

The way I see it, it's the owner's league and if they want to change the way the system works in their league so that there is more competitive balance and restriction on player movement and the ability of bigger teams to hand out huge contracts (and consequently raise the market price for all teams), it's their prerogative. 

The players have every right to expect reasonable benefits and fair compensation, and to have some freedom in choosing where and how they play.  But I just don't see what is so bad about the owners' most recent proposal.  So it's not as nice for the players as the last deal.  Boo hoo.  The players still get to make millions upon millions of dollars, and they still have a great deal of freedom in choosing where to play -- just not as much.

The last deal was much more favorable for the players than the owners wanted, and I don't blame the owners for wanting something better.  The last deal is what gave us The Decision and the Melo-drama and Deron Williams being shipped out of Utah well before his contract was up.  The last deal gave us Eddy Curry's contract and Gilbert Arenas and Rashard Lewis making more money than anybody else in the NBA last season.  The last deal allowed the Lakers to spend twice as much as the poorer teams in the league. 

[PosImpos]

I was just going to post that.  I loved Wilbon's article.  He gets right to the heart of the matter. 

Nobody is blameless in this matter, but in this economic climate it is utterly ridiculous for the players to refuse to play, to go to work because they don't want to take a slight paycut on their multi-million dollar contracts.

Players refusing to play? This is a lockout, not a strike.

The players could have accepted the deal the owners proposed and be getting ready to play right now.  How is that not refusing to play?

[indeedproceed]

I was just going to post that.  I loved Wilbon's article.  He gets right to the heart of the matter. 

Nobody is blameless in this matter, but in this economic climate it is utterly ridiculous for the players to refuse to play, to go to work because they don't want to take a slight paycut on their multi-million dollar contracts.

Players refusing to play? This is a lockout, not a strike.

The players could have accepted the deal the owners proposed and be getting ready to play right now.  How is that not refusing to play?

Meh, the players could just as easily have played for free. How is that not refusing to play?

The whole notion of 'this economic climate' and pointing out how much money the players make is a non-starter, because its wholly irrelevant. In what economic climate is it appropriate to get bent over and completely screwed both in the immediate and in the long term? The economic climate AND the salary of the players is irrelevant in this negotiation in terms of whether or not they're getting a fair deal.

[Interceptor]

The players could have accepted the deal the owners proposed and be getting ready to play right now.  How is that not refusing to play?

How is it refusing to play? Nobody in the NBPA wants to quit basketball. By the way, I can play this game all day.

[Fafnir]

It's because of Frank & Dodd and Obama's Healthcare.

Sorry JK, I thought I was Michelle Bachmann for a second.

lol...I was going to blame Allen Iverson.

The owners and the players haven't practiced enough at negotiating.

j/k AI - Love ya.

But Mike Wilbon sums up my thoughts in this IMO well-written article:

http://espn.go.com/espn/commentary/story/_/page/wilbon-111114/the-nba-labor-impasse-reached-particularly-objectionable-economy

I was just going to post that.  I loved Wilbon's article.  He gets right to the heart of the matter. 

Nobody is blameless in this matter, but in this economic climate it is utterly ridiculous for the players to refuse to play, to go to work because they don't want to take a slight paycut on their multi-million dollar contracts.

Michael Wilbon and you are awfully cavalier about how other people should just accept a massive wage cut and structural changes to their career/workplace. Its always very easy to spend or give away other people's career earnings.

The players would play under the current system at a 10+% wage cut (in BRI) right now.

[thirstyboots18]

There is plenty of blame to go around...right down to the fans who continue to shell out ridiculous $ amounts for tickets and NBA related goods....

[PosImpos]

The players could have accepted the deal the owners proposed and be getting ready to play right now.  How is that not refusing to play?

How is it refusing to play? Nobody in the NBPA wants to quit basketball. By the way, I can play this game all day.

Fine, we'll play semantics.  The players could have accepted what is in my opinion a reasonable deal given the circumstances, but chose not to because they appear determined not to accept anything that isnt totally favorable to them.  The players could be making millions of dollars to play a game but refuse because the terms arent favorable enough.

Give me a break.

[indeedproceed]

The players could have accepted the deal the owners proposed and be getting ready to play right now.  How is that not refusing to play?

How is it refusing to play? Nobody in the NBPA wants to quit basketball. By the way, I can play this game all day.

Fine, we'll play semantics.  The players could have accepted what is in my opinion a reasonable deal given the circumstances, but chose not to because they appear determined not to accept anything that isnt totally favorable to them.

I really think if that's what you believe that you don't have a great handle on where the negotiations are right now. Everyone (aside from David Stern) agrees that even the most recent owners' offer (which allegedly is supposed to be the 'best one yet') is still immensely favorable to the owners. Those who say the players should accept it don't do it based on anything close to fairness, they just believe nothing better is coming down the line.

[fairweatherfan]

The players could have accepted what is in my opinion a reasonable deal given the circumstances, but chose not to because they appear determined not to accept anything that isnt totally favorable to them. 

This is a joke, right?  Did you sleep through 3 months of the players making concession after concession?

[indeedproceed]

The players could have accepted what is in my opinion a reasonable deal given the circumstances, but chose not to because they appear determined not to accept anything that isnt totally favorable to them. 

This is a joke, right?  Did you sleep through 3 months of the players making concession after concession?

Did you see the recent 'first born son' clause, wherein if owners don't recover at least 83% of the BRI then players must immediately send their first born sons to Castle Mordor in Newark, NJ to serve as 'pages' until the matter is resolved?