TTown Kings
Bench
scroll about a quarter of the way down, #281
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/090415
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/090415
Bill Simmons on Beno
- Thread starter TTown Kings
- Start date
bloom
Starter
There's things that this league needs to change on and guaranteed contracts is one of them. Or at least there should be a rule that says that the players have to play 2 solid years back to back before getting a solid long contract.
I really tried to support Beno and not give up on him when the season started but he's been so down and finger pointy that it makes me wonder. We should have just offered him a contract until the 2010 year and just let him think about it.
Someone, somewhere in this league must want him.
CruzDude
Senior Member sharing a brew with bajaden
It isn't the league that is stupid, it is what the owners do or feel they have to do and caving in to the union and CBA. They approve the player payments, they approved the CBA giving 58% of revenues to the players and it was the owners who approved guaranteed contracts. Now we are in the worst recession in three generations and the players make the same whether they produce or not. The GM's hands are tied. If they don't pay Beno what his agent wants he goes somewhere else. Good or bad, there weren't any decent FA PG's floating around 2 years ago.
The stupid element of the league is letting this happen, letting the prisoners run the prison. The NFL got smart: No Guaranteed Contracts. Then the players load up signing bonuses up front. You can't win. The only way fans can win is to support the owners having a work stoppage in 2010/2011 and giving the owners a chance to level the playing field of money, getting away from multi-year guaranteed contracts. Better yet to have incentive and milestone based contracts based on "team" performance. Private industry gives bonus's to employees when the company does well and no bonus when the do not.
The owners can afford that. By not losing money, as some 80% of them are, they are making money from their other enterprises. The big market teams (NY, LA, Chi) will always make money but the rest have a tough time and nearly half the teams in the league losing more than $18M a year and some up to $25M.
The players union will always push for guaranteed salaries and the players, most of them anyway, go along and shut up. So its us fans as the only ones who can try to make our voices heard and make our receding finances heard.
Unfortunately, its a chicken and egg situation. The owners on one side trying to buy their way into the playoffs, the union and players on the other wanting guaranteed money without any incentives or milestones to show they earned it. If you and I earn a decent salary then slack off and our performance decreases you can get fired without cause these days. Lets put THAT into the CBA!!!
The stupid element of the league is letting this happen, letting the prisoners run the prison. The NFL got smart: No Guaranteed Contracts. Then the players load up signing bonuses up front. You can't win. The only way fans can win is to support the owners having a work stoppage in 2010/2011 and giving the owners a chance to level the playing field of money, getting away from multi-year guaranteed contracts. Better yet to have incentive and milestone based contracts based on "team" performance. Private industry gives bonus's to employees when the company does well and no bonus when the do not.
The owners can afford that. By not losing money, as some 80% of them are, they are making money from their other enterprises. The big market teams (NY, LA, Chi) will always make money but the rest have a tough time and nearly half the teams in the league losing more than $18M a year and some up to $25M.
The players union will always push for guaranteed salaries and the players, most of them anyway, go along and shut up. So its us fans as the only ones who can try to make our voices heard and make our receding finances heard.
Unfortunately, its a chicken and egg situation. The owners on one side trying to buy their way into the playoffs, the union and players on the other wanting guaranteed money without any incentives or milestones to show they earned it. If you and I earn a decent salary then slack off and our performance decreases you can get fired without cause these days. Lets put THAT into the CBA!!!
Last edited:
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
You really don't know what you are suggesting there. Guaranteed salaries are always a convenient target, but they are also just about the only reason we exist as a fanbase. No guaranteed contracts, we never have "the team". Turnover is constant. Every year its a new group of guys. There are no retired numbers, and power teams buy up all the talent.
Teh NFL only works because its baltantly unfair -- they broke their union over there for all intents and purposes and so now you have guaranteed contracts...but they are only guaranteed one way. The players are beholden to the owners, but the owners are not beholden to the players. The player signs a contract and then he's bound to play for his team, but the owners can fire a player at any time. Its basically a one way contract, and players respond to the situation with all the ugly holdouts and whatnot trying to match the owners' freedom. Is that ideal for a sprots fan? Do not know. But its a unique and blatantly unbalanced system (if the contracts were truly non-guaranteed either way, the player could just walk away from it at any time too, and there basically wouldn't be any contract).
And while I have always been a fan of performance incentives, consider:
1) performance tied to players' numbers = player plays for his own numbers, pouts and whines if he does not get shots or minutes; meanwhile team has incentive to not play certian guys
2) performance tied to wins = players all have incentive to go to teams already winning
The solution is not that simple, and I can't believe that you are actually suggesting losing the 2010-2011 season?? That would be utter and complete disaster for the NBA. They need to tweak the system, drop the players' percentage of revenue some, lower the length of contracts (although that will inevitably start costing teams continuity and potentially even raise salries as you have more players coming up as FAs each year all demanding more than they are worth), and especiually figure out some provision to deal wiht the big mega-posion contracts when guys get hurt or are named Eddy Curry or whatever.
Teh NFL only works because its baltantly unfair -- they broke their union over there for all intents and purposes and so now you have guaranteed contracts...but they are only guaranteed one way. The players are beholden to the owners, but the owners are not beholden to the players. The player signs a contract and then he's bound to play for his team, but the owners can fire a player at any time. Its basically a one way contract, and players respond to the situation with all the ugly holdouts and whatnot trying to match the owners' freedom. Is that ideal for a sprots fan? Do not know. But its a unique and blatantly unbalanced system (if the contracts were truly non-guaranteed either way, the player could just walk away from it at any time too, and there basically wouldn't be any contract).
And while I have always been a fan of performance incentives, consider:
1) performance tied to players' numbers = player plays for his own numbers, pouts and whines if he does not get shots or minutes; meanwhile team has incentive to not play certian guys
2) performance tied to wins = players all have incentive to go to teams already winning
The solution is not that simple, and I can't believe that you are actually suggesting losing the 2010-2011 season?? That would be utter and complete disaster for the NBA. They need to tweak the system, drop the players' percentage of revenue some, lower the length of contracts (although that will inevitably start costing teams continuity and potentially even raise salries as you have more players coming up as FAs each year all demanding more than they are worth), and especiually figure out some provision to deal wiht the big mega-posion contracts when guys get hurt or are named Eddy Curry or whatever.
MassachusettsKingsFan
All-Star
honestly, I think the system needs to stay the way it is ..
We just need GM's who know what there doing.
We just need GM's who know what there doing.
sidney
Starter
Even a tweak of the current system will be met with major opposition from the players. Owners I'm sure are seething as they go through a period of losing millions and borrowing from the league every year while many guys get their 10M/year without contributing. I'm sure their demands are going to feel extreme to the player's union. Right now it looks like the odds of a lockout are better than not
The NFL union is broken and I don't think that is a good thing, player salaries are the least of their worries in that regard, but I must disagree as I have before about the NFL being one way, the "ugly holdouts" give the players every bit as much leverage as the owners and the players who hold out almost always get what they want. But otherwise I agree with everything you wrote here. No way would I be willing to lose a season, the last time we lost half a season it took time to fix for the average public and when hockey lost a whole season it destroyed their tv coverage for years (4 years and still broken).
This is just the case of ownership being dumb. We all saw this coming as it played out last summer and Simmons's take that Udrih could be replaced by just about any other NBA quality PG and given the same minutes would get similar production was discussed ad nauseum here. The Kings obviously felt he showed more potential and paid him. Boneheaded move, end of story. Smart management is the answer here.
Amory
Bench
I could see that happening in the next 20 years, maybe.
Probably going to go to something like 5, 4 and 4 next change.
bloom
Starter
I know I have stated before - regarding Beno- about the guaranteed NBA contracts. I know that these types of contracts help teams like ours. I really didn’t fully mean that we should just throw these guarantee contracts out the window (even though I did state it before) but there should be some sort of rule change – in Beno’s case, since he played only one solid year, he should have to prove himself the second year before we give him something that will let him relax.
I believe that guaranteed contracts are beneficial but they need to be adjusted. Ever since the Webber’s knee injury I’ve been pretty strong on players and their contracts. I think that a 3-year deal is more than enough for any player. And if they have too (absolutely have too) then add the 4th year as a team option. But I really don’t like anything more than a 3-year deal.
And I didn’t say we should lose the 2010-2011 season. My thought was, that we could also draft another point guard during Beno’s stay. And if Beno proves himself in that time than we extend him while also having a nice back-up point guard with our draft pick. Sorry if I sounded like we should just lose that season, it’s not what I meant.
Anyway, thanks Brick for a little more insight.
I believe that guaranteed contracts are beneficial but they need to be adjusted. Ever since the Webber’s knee injury I’ve been pretty strong on players and their contracts. I think that a 3-year deal is more than enough for any player. And if they have too (absolutely have too) then add the 4th year as a team option. But I really don’t like anything more than a 3-year deal.
And I didn’t say we should lose the 2010-2011 season. My thought was, that we could also draft another point guard during Beno’s stay. And if Beno proves himself in that time than we extend him while also having a nice back-up point guard with our draft pick. Sorry if I sounded like we should just lose that season, it’s not what I meant.
Anyway, thanks Brick for a little more insight.
Maybe they could allow a team to eat one contract every 2 years with no hit on the salary cap. Player gets paid in full (minus any earnings he gets from another team).
But here's the catch - any team that exercises this option may not raise ticket prices under any circumstance until the end of the contract or the end of the 2 year window, whichever is longer. Also if they eat a 5 year contract they have to wait 5 years to exercise again.
This saves a team from catastrophic injury or one boneheaded move and the fans don't foot the bill.
But here's the catch - any team that exercises this option may not raise ticket prices under any circumstance until the end of the contract or the end of the 2 year window, whichever is longer. Also if they eat a 5 year contract they have to wait 5 years to exercise again.
This saves a team from catastrophic injury or one boneheaded move and the fans don't foot the bill.
The NFL suggests that you're wrong. They're BY FAR the most profitable AND entertaining league, because if you don't produce, you don't get paid.
Bricklayer
Don't Make Me Use The Bat
They're by far the most profitable and entertaining league because of the sport they play, and its place in our culture, and that they play only 16 games a season. Its apples and oranges. Hell, its apples and hermit crabs.
hammystyle
Starter
True, but that's also why comparing the player's unions is unfair. The NFL wouldn't work with the same type of contract structure as the NBA. A guaranteed player contract in the NFL isn't feasible because players erode quicker to age and injury in that sport. Guaranteed contracts would ruin the league in my opinion.
Having the contracts guaranteed under the current salary cap rules would ruin the league for sure, but this is one area where the union has totally failed the NFL players. Every extra snap is a potential career or life altering injury. The biggest black mark on the NFL is what happens to players after they hang up their cleats.
CaminoChaos
Bench
What does all this have to do with Beno. Let's get back on track. Let's talk about Beno.
Beno stinks.
There's my $0.02.
Beno stinks.
There's my $0.02.
Brick is right as to why the NFL is the most profitable leauge. However, the reason why the contract system works there is because you can go from stud to dud in a one play much more frequently than the NBA, simply because of the nature of the sport. See, Alexander, Shaun and Tomlinson, LaDanian. On the flip side, immagine if the NBA decided to go away with long term contracts.... players like Dwight Howard, LBJ, Paul, Wade... you'd have teams destroying the squad just to be able to have room to sign those players. You'd lose the concept of "team". It's already lost on a lot of NFL teams... the quintessential team you root for is devoid of much of personality short of a few teams because of such a high turnover of players. A big reason why, I, personally, prefer the NBA. There are very few career guys in the NFL... injuries a big part but those big bonuses attract players more than contracts. NBA would have a hard time surviving that.
How would the money translate? Do players like LBJ and Kobe go from making 15 mil a year down to 5-7 mil, but command 30 million in bonuses? Good luck explaining to your fanbase that you just spend 30 mil for a LBJ 2 year rental (plus salary, plus incentive bonuses...) I might just be ranting, but it would not work, at least not at first glance.
How would the money translate? Do players like LBJ and Kobe go from making 15 mil a year down to 5-7 mil, but command 30 million in bonuses? Good luck explaining to your fanbase that you just spend 30 mil for a LBJ 2 year rental (plus salary, plus incentive bonuses...) I might just be ranting, but it would not work, at least not at first glance.
Yeah, I think it's time to make the amnesty provision a fixture in the CBA. Not every year, once every two or three years, and rather than having it restricted to luxury tax ramifications, it takes the player's contract off the salary cap altogether. If the NBA's objective is to stimulate parity (true parity will never happen), then make it easier for a team to get over bad luck and mistakes. So if you sign Jermaine O'neal to a $126 million contract and he ages like Mel Gibson in Forever Young, you can make a move to get that deal off your books. You're still paying him, and you're still financially affected by the move, but you can wash it off the books with an amnesty provision.
Now, we don't want to create a culture where the big money teams can just sign bad deals and get rid of them if they don't work out, and get back under the cap and the tax threshold (which would hurt the small money teams as they wouldn't benefit from the luxury tax payments). There is some tweaking that needs to be done to the CBA, but it's not completely broken. Smart managers are able to build good teams in a relatively short period of by making good decisions (and getting lucky).
One and Done
Bench
It seems that we are trading the Kenny Thomas countdown for the Beno countdown. Sigh...4 More Years...
CruzDude
Senior Member sharing a brew with bajaden
Well this has been a stimulating thread and pushed a bunch of buttons. There remains one big, major, stumbling, dumm problem in the NBA. The owners ego vs. the Union's ego. No where is the fan even considered or cared about in all this.
But with the economic downturn we are in, the 80% of the NBA teams not making money are hurting even more and there is nothing with the current CBA that can be done about it. Look at the major auto manufacturing unions, they negotiate lower benefits while keeping salaries unrealistically high, solving nothing. The CBA does not come up again for 2 years. Posturing now (2009-2010 season) is merely to protect gains made. And the owners appear to have made no gains in lowering their losses this year.
The CBA appears broken when viewed in the disaster of an economic climate we are all in and suffering. Everyone has to give up a bunch, salary, benefits, jobs, income except the NBA players. They seem much like the Wall Street bankers who got bailouts then used some of our, the publics, money to pay themselves bonuses for killing their banks and the economy.
I didn't advocate losing the 2010-11 season. I only pointed out that may be the only way to get the attention of the overpaid players and their union. For most owners, not losing $15-$25 million a year is like making money.
There is not a simple or easy solution in all this. Without guaranteed contracts, the big markets buy up the talent like the Yankees, Red Socks and Angles and buy a championship. Except then the small market Marlins come along and whip everyones butt (almost).
There is more parity now in the NBA then ever and once the $20M contracts of Shaq, AI, Marbury, et al go away, not likely to see those again. Maybe the best solution is a "Hard" salary cap instead of the "soft" cap we have now. An absolute upper limit on payroll for players. No grandfather or Larry Bird clauses either. Then lower the team player limit from current 15 down to 12 but with proviso that each team can "stash" up to 3 players on their D-League team and bring them back as many times as they wish in a year.
THere is no easy solution folks. We all can agree on that. But something has to be fixed to get the fans back.
But with the economic downturn we are in, the 80% of the NBA teams not making money are hurting even more and there is nothing with the current CBA that can be done about it. Look at the major auto manufacturing unions, they negotiate lower benefits while keeping salaries unrealistically high, solving nothing. The CBA does not come up again for 2 years. Posturing now (2009-2010 season) is merely to protect gains made. And the owners appear to have made no gains in lowering their losses this year.
The CBA appears broken when viewed in the disaster of an economic climate we are all in and suffering. Everyone has to give up a bunch, salary, benefits, jobs, income except the NBA players. They seem much like the Wall Street bankers who got bailouts then used some of our, the publics, money to pay themselves bonuses for killing their banks and the economy.
I didn't advocate losing the 2010-11 season. I only pointed out that may be the only way to get the attention of the overpaid players and their union. For most owners, not losing $15-$25 million a year is like making money.
There is not a simple or easy solution in all this. Without guaranteed contracts, the big markets buy up the talent like the Yankees, Red Socks and Angles and buy a championship. Except then the small market Marlins come along and whip everyones butt (almost).
There is more parity now in the NBA then ever and once the $20M contracts of Shaq, AI, Marbury, et al go away, not likely to see those again. Maybe the best solution is a "Hard" salary cap instead of the "soft" cap we have now. An absolute upper limit on payroll for players. No grandfather or Larry Bird clauses either. Then lower the team player limit from current 15 down to 12 but with proviso that each team can "stash" up to 3 players on their D-League team and bring them back as many times as they wish in a year.
THere is no easy solution folks. We all can agree on that. But something has to be fixed to get the fans back.
That's a pretty good view I would have to agree with. Something has to be done to control this spending. However, like you said it's not an easy fix. The "recession" has not hit the players yet. When successful teams like Hornets start dismantling the team without any regard to how it will affect their performance, players will have to take notice. At the end though, it boils down to personel.
Those Marlins that are a small market team have been one of the youngest in the leauge for years, but they consistently have great talent go through their ranks. Why? Excellent scouting and smart (albeit cheap) front office. Everybody in their right mind knew that Beno was a career backup that had a career year. We were not going anywhere this year, and we damn well could have picked up a FA or D leauger for a fraction of the cost. Unless management had some sort of master plan that did not come to fruition, it was a BAD move. Period. We've had a couple here in the past few years, and we just need better moves. You don't need to be the richest to be the best. You have to be the smartest. There are only a handful of players worth the money they are currently being paid.
Ex : KG is about to make 21 million next season. The Celtics knew when they traded for him that he would be a great addition at the moment, but he is getting older, has been playing at 110% for 10 years now, and was going to break down sooner than later. Is he worth it? NO. They sacrified the future for the present. They won a title. Now, unless everything else plays out without a problem, that team will be mediocre. They overpaid, plain and simple, and bought a title. That is what they wanted though, and it is up to the front office to decide the future of the team.
Those Marlins that are a small market team have been one of the youngest in the leauge for years, but they consistently have great talent go through their ranks. Why? Excellent scouting and smart (albeit cheap) front office. Everybody in their right mind knew that Beno was a career backup that had a career year. We were not going anywhere this year, and we damn well could have picked up a FA or D leauger for a fraction of the cost. Unless management had some sort of master plan that did not come to fruition, it was a BAD move. Period. We've had a couple here in the past few years, and we just need better moves. You don't need to be the richest to be the best. You have to be the smartest. There are only a handful of players worth the money they are currently being paid.
Ex : KG is about to make 21 million next season. The Celtics knew when they traded for him that he would be a great addition at the moment, but he is getting older, has been playing at 110% for 10 years now, and was going to break down sooner than later. Is he worth it? NO. They sacrified the future for the present. They won a title. Now, unless everything else plays out without a problem, that team will be mediocre. They overpaid, plain and simple, and bought a title. That is what they wanted though, and it is up to the front office to decide the future of the team.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
