The Lockout has arrived.
- Thread starter rainmaker
- Start date
I don't remember the exact details but I think Bosh is the only one that ultimately left any money on the table. LBJ eventually forced the Cavs to do the sign and trade so he got a max contract. One of the things a hard cap would do is make it impossible to even carry a full roster if you signed those guys and had to sign everyone else to minimum deals. Now if you coupled that with the ability to franchise say 3 players and take a fixed cap hit but pay them anything you want - AND made those rights 100% non-transferable - players would actually have to choose between getting paid and playing on a super team for peanuts. Somehow I think that if those guys really did take a serious pay cut - like say they were playing for 5 million each, then some may have even respected what they did. But as it was they all got raises from their previous deals.
The max contract did indeed follow the law of unexpected outcomes and eventually cleared the way for stars to bolt. But the alternative as it was forming up in the late 90s was just disgusting and rampantly unfair to anybody without big money. Its why I am very much in favor at this point of simply slapping a franchise player clause into the CBA instead of constantly fiddling around trying to entice people to do the right thing with financial gimmicks. There is a problem, just suck it up and address it directly and accept the consequences (more Vince Carter/Melo drama queening as the football holdout becomes possible). Its really the only way to counterbalance a young and not very educated set wanting nothing more than to live the high life in Miami with the hunnies anyway.
Not quite. The sign and trade deals didn't add any money to the player's base contracts. It just added a year to the entire deal plus they could now get 10.5% raises as opposed to just 8.5 had they not signed outright. But still, they all had to take base year's of $14.5 million even with the sign and trade when the max was worth $16.8 million.
Last edited:
That too although I still think it should be limited to a certain extent. For example, make the max salary for a player staying in his market be 20% higher than if he bolts. The bogus extra year and extra 2% on the raises doesn't do nearly enough to keep stars at home.
As for the MLE, the big 3 are already together so you have to look at ways to minimize them getting better which is where the MLE idea comes from.
Also, I like the rumor I'm hearing about only allowing one bird rights signing per year. The big 3 all become free in the same season so someone would have to go. Even if you get one to not opt out, you still have the remaining 2 that they will have to choose from. Sure, they could trade one of them but with the rest of the league knowing that they have no leverage, they wouldn't get nearly as much value in return.
This works especially well for the Kings since Hickson, Evans and Cousins all become free agents in separate seasons. They could conceivably sign all 3 to max deals if they were actually worth it and stay within the confines of the new cba should it adopt that rule.
As for the MLE, the big 3 are already together so you have to look at ways to minimize them getting better which is where the MLE idea comes from.
Also, I like the rumor I'm hearing about only allowing one bird rights signing per year. The big 3 all become free in the same season so someone would have to go. Even if you get one to not opt out, you still have the remaining 2 that they will have to choose from. Sure, they could trade one of them but with the rest of the league knowing that they have no leverage, they wouldn't get nearly as much value in return.
This works especially well for the Kings since Hickson, Evans and Cousins all become free agents in separate seasons. They could conceivably sign all 3 to max deals if they were actually worth it and stay within the confines of the new cba should it adopt that rule.
Last edited:
Just one more reason to dislike this jerk
http://basketball.realgm.com/wireta...ess_Was_Being_Made_Until_Garnett_Entered_Room
http://basketball.realgm.com/wireta...ess_Was_Being_Made_Until_Garnett_Entered_Room
http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/216060/NBA_Official_Progress_Was_Being_Made_Until_Garnett_Entered_Room
I just read this article about Garnett being defiant and messing up the negotiations. The article makes me kinda curious why players are even part of the negotiation discussions at all. It seems like this whole process would go a lot faster if Billy Hunter met with the players, figured out what offer they would take, and then went to meet with Stern. I don't understand why the players need to be coming into the negotiations and mucking up the whole process.
It seems to me that a lot of the emotion and fanfare would be taken out of the process just by letting the negotiators meet by themselves, discuss a deal, and then take it back to their respective partys to see if they could get a deal done that way.
I just read this article about Garnett being defiant and messing up the negotiations. The article makes me kinda curious why players are even part of the negotiation discussions at all. It seems like this whole process would go a lot faster if Billy Hunter met with the players, figured out what offer they would take, and then went to meet with Stern. I don't understand why the players need to be coming into the negotiations and mucking up the whole process.
It seems to me that a lot of the emotion and fanfare would be taken out of the process just by letting the negotiators meet by themselves, discuss a deal, and then take it back to their respective partys to see if they could get a deal done that way.
I didn't really didn't think Garnett would go his entire career being a complete prick. My wife ran into him at a MN restaurant. He was a complete D1*^. After he left the staff apologized to her for him and said that he had a very bad rep around town. Good to see he's doing his best to screw up this NBA season.
I thought about that also but the problem is that owners in New York and Canada would have to pay a ton more than owners in Florida and Texas. The Raptors, Knicks and Nets would put up a fight on that one.
OTOH, I'm guessing we could see another form or revenue sharing to compensate the Canadian and New York markets somehow but that would start getting really confusing.
OTOH, I'm guessing we could see another form or revenue sharing to compensate the Canadian and New York markets somehow but that would start getting really confusing.
Agents get in there and really mess up negotiations, too. While I totally get why they want to tell their payers what they should and shouldn't accept in the negotiations, I think agents should be barred from communicating with any of the players during negotiations. It's not a contract between agents the NBA and the players for cripes sake.
Bryant Gumbel plays race card in bashing Stern over strained negotiations - saying commish is "plantation overseer!" All I can say is "Free Michael Jordan!"
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/spor...BA-Commish-Plantation-Overseer-132129268.html
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/spor...BA-Commish-Plantation-Overseer-132129268.html
It's already hard to make trades for basketball reasons with the rules regarding money, a variable cap would make it harder. Sorry Houston, we'd love to trade you Billups, but your state's taxes are just too low and we can't take back that much dead money.
Also, I don't think the NBA wants roster moves tied to fights over state taxes. Mark Stein is reporting that, if Atlanta cuts taxes to curb high unemployment, they will be over the cap and they will send Josh Smith to Minnasota in a salary dump. Or "Well, Jerry Brown got his higher taxes passed, but on the bright side the Kings got another 2.7 million in cap space."
Most of the time the bigger markets have both higher taxes and more local ad money for the player, thus its often a wash. Miami is an exception. So are Houston and Dallas, but you have to live in Texas.
Also, I don't think the NBA wants roster moves tied to fights over state taxes. Mark Stein is reporting that, if Atlanta cuts taxes to curb high unemployment, they will be over the cap and they will send Josh Smith to Minnasota in a salary dump. Or "Well, Jerry Brown got his higher taxes passed, but on the bright side the Kings got another 2.7 million in cap space."
Most of the time the bigger markets have both higher taxes and more local ad money for the player, thus its often a wash. Miami is an exception. So are Houston and Dallas, but you have to live in Texas.
What are they doing different in Canada? I thought they took in Canadian dollars from the fans, but their cap and everything was set in US dollars like every other team.
This was a big problem a few years ago, when they we're pulling in .75 and playing out $1 ... but because the US dollar is getting pounded that's no much of an issue right now.
Is that not right?
This was a big problem a few years ago, when they we're pulling in .75 and playing out $1 ... but because the US dollar is getting pounded that's no much of an issue right now.
Is that not right?
I realize it's a ton of money and I don't feel sorry for them one bit. My point is that it gave Miami a competitive advantage when those guys took less than the max. They were able to add $9 million worth of extra free agents. You can argue about whether spending it on Haslem and Miller was the right thing to do but for the sake of competitive balance, it would've been nice if 2 of the 3 best players in the game didn't wind up as the 23rd and 24th highest paid.
They are losing money not playing... Losing more money not playing than the concessions they are looking for in the deal.. It is only for this year that they are losing money, and they are looking beyond this year, but each game that is cancelled hurts them in regards to the deal vs not playing.. If they lose the whole year they basically just gave the owners what they wanted. The owners can give them a sweet deal and still come out ahead being that the players lost a whole year of pay.
http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q66
Per Larry Coon, every team can pay the players a 20% signing bonus. It's a tax rule that applies to the bonus that helps the Raptors on the taxes issue. Thus, the Raptors have a tax loop hole they can use, but all 30 teams have the same signing bonus rules, cap, ect.
So it's just more tax rules, and the same system for everybody. However, the league did put the rule in place to help force the loop hole.
_______
As to this lockout,
The NBA players want to live in a world where: (1) they pay no expenses; (2) get 50% of all income no matter what; and (3) with guaranteed deals, their contracts aren't tied to performance for 3-5 years at a time in a league where many play for 2-7 years.
The owners are trying to protect themselves from a league full of people that can decide how to pay players based upon how they impact their business, and that's a crappy reason to shut the game down.
The players are screaming about "fair" but they can't point to any other business in the world that works like the system they don't want to give up. The closest thing would be football, which doesn't have guaranteed deals and does have a hard cap. But of course, those are "blood issues" for the players and the reason we don't have a CBA. The player's argument has very little logic to it
Per Larry Coon, every team can pay the players a 20% signing bonus. It's a tax rule that applies to the bonus that helps the Raptors on the taxes issue. Thus, the Raptors have a tax loop hole they can use, but all 30 teams have the same signing bonus rules, cap, ect.
So it's just more tax rules, and the same system for everybody. However, the league did put the rule in place to help force the loop hole.
_______
As to this lockout,
The NBA players want to live in a world where: (1) they pay no expenses; (2) get 50% of all income no matter what; and (3) with guaranteed deals, their contracts aren't tied to performance for 3-5 years at a time in a league where many play for 2-7 years.
The owners are trying to protect themselves from a league full of people that can decide how to pay players based upon how they impact their business, and that's a crappy reason to shut the game down.
The players are screaming about "fair" but they can't point to any other business in the world that works like the system they don't want to give up. The closest thing would be football, which doesn't have guaranteed deals and does have a hard cap. But of course, those are "blood issues" for the players and the reason we don't have a CBA. The player's argument has very little logic to it