The Lockout has arrived.

[Rookie]

No one makes anyone anything, it's all an exchange. Fans are not donating money to the NBA, they're paying for entertainment and merchandise, and that's what they get.

A customer bring in money for the business by purchasing their product, hense customers make money for the business. If I led you to believe we donate money, then my bad. Right now, if the business don't try to please the customer, there will be a backlash where some will no longer want the product. Therefor the business will lose money (profit). And to tell me that if the players getting whatever they want and the system not fixed, I believe there will be a repercussion. But if the owners can setup a system where most customers believe it to be fair then there will be less customer leaving. Who knows, it could possibly increase customer.

"Star" players thought I pay to see their arrogant self is rediculous IMO. Don't get me wrong, good employee make good product and bring in customer as well but no matter how good the product is, I would not pay if I felt I'm being ripped off.

 

[Vlade4GM]

A customer bring in money for the business by purchasing their product, hense customers make money for the business. If I led you to believe we donate money, then my bad. Right now, if the business don't try to please the customer, there will be a backlash where some will no longer want the product. Therefor the business will lose money (profit). And to tell me that if the players getting whatever they want and the system not fixed, I believe there will be a repercussion. But if the owners can setup a system where most customers believe it to be fair then there will be less customer leaving. Who knows, it could possibly increase customer.

"Star" players thought I pay to see their arrogant self is rediculous IMO. Don't get me wrong, good employee make good product and bring in customer as well but no matter how good the product is, I would not pay if I felt I'm being ripped off.

OR their product makes money for their business, and the players are the product. You're just phrasing things to favor yourself when it can be legitimately stated either way.

They have to please the players just like they have to please the fans. The players have to please the owners as well if they want the means to make money on their craft, and the fans have to please the owners in order to get the kind of entertainment they desire. It's all an exchange of goods/services

 

[Rookie]

Like I said, I may be a small portion but if pleasing the players meaning screwing with the customer than by all mean go for it. Fans have to please the owners? That's pretty much nail why we probably won't come to an understanding. I just have to accept it. What's that saying "agree to disagree". .

 

[bajaden]

OR their product makes money for their business, and the players are the product. You're just phrasing things to favor yourself when it can be legitimately stated either way.

They have to please the players just like they have to please the fans. The players have to please the owners as well if they want the means to make money on their craft, and the fans have to please the owners in order to get the kind of entertainment they desire. It's all an exchange of goods/services

Excuse me! The fans have to please the owners? Just when did that happen? I'm a fan, and I don't have to please anyone. Lets make no mistake, the fans are the single most important part of the equation. The second part is the product, or the players. You present a bad product, and no one is going to buy it. But the owners are the one's that make it happen. If they decide to close their doors and go elsewhere, there is no product for the fans. Just ask Seattle.

The fans, and as a by product, but still the fans, TV are the goose that lays the golden egg. Take that away, and there is no NBA. Period! The problem is that when it comes to negotiations like these, we have no legitimate voice. Our power comes after the fact, when the negotiations are all done. We show our disapproval by not showing up for the games.

I have no sympathy for either the owners or the players. Please don't ask me to feel sorry for a bunch of overpaid players, or wealthy owners, while secondary workers are now out of work. These people are no different than the politicians in washington. They live in a bubble surrounded by like kind, and they lose all prospective of how the real world works. By no means do I mean to imply that all the players or owners fall into that catagory. But those that don't are content to sit by and let others, with a different agenda than their own, run the negotiations.

To say that hey, I made 15 million last year, and your asking me to take 14.5 mil in the future for the good of the league. Just how the hell am I going to feed my family on that petty amount? If thats your attitude, you've just lost a lot of fans in the country. This isn't about right or wrong, or fair! Its about common sense. Of which at the moment there seems to be a lack of. Personally I'm tired of the BS being thrown around by both sides. None of it makes any sense to the average fan, who worries about having enough money to buy two beers and a couple of hotdogs at a game. Get the deal done, because I'm sick of the BS. And please, don't tell me I have to please anyone!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They want my buck, they damm well better think about how to please me. There! I feel better.

 

[Superman]

To say that hey, I made 15 million last year, and your asking me to take 14.5 mil in the future for the good of the league. Just how the hell am I going to feed my family on that petty amount? If thats your attitude, you've just lost a lot of fans in the country.

Who has said that? I don't see any Latrell Sprewell's in the CBA negotiations (and I should mention that Sprewell's stupid comment was about his own salary and had nothing to do with collective bargaining).

It seems like you're projecting your frustrations out on the players, attributing to them a stance that they have not taken. The players have been willing to take a drastic cut to their BRI split. Their resistance at this point is to system issues, as far as I understand.

 

[arwen undomiel]

I have no sympathy for either the owners or the players. Please don't ask me to feel sorry for a bunch of overpaid players, or wealthy owners, while secondary workers are now out of work. These people are no different than the politicians in washington. They live in a bubble surrounded by like kind, and they lose all prospective of how the real world works. By no means do I mean to imply that all the players or owners fall into that catagory. But those that don't are content to sit by and let others, with a different agenda than their own, run the negotiations.

To say that hey, I made 15 million last year, and your asking me to take 14.5 mil in the future for the good of the league. Just how the hell am I going to feed my family on that petty amount? If thats your attitude, you've just lost a lot of fans in the country. This isn't about right or wrong, or fair! Its about common sense. Of which at the moment there seems to be a lack of. Personally I'm tired of the BS being thrown around by both sides. None of it makes any sense to the average fan, who worries about having enough money to buy two beers and a couple of hotdogs at a game. Get the deal done, because I'm sick of the BS. And please, don't tell me I have to please anyone!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They want my buck, they damm well better think about how to please me. There! I feel better.

You expressed that far better than I could. It's exactly how I feel about the whole *expletive deleted* thing. As for wanting my buck, both sides have a lot of kissing up to the fans to do when this is finally resolved. It took MLB 10 years to recover their attendance after the 1994 strike.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1856626

 

[Vlade4GM]

Excuse me! The fans have to please the owners? Just when did that happen? I'm a fan, and I don't have to please anyone. Lets make no mistake, the fans are the single most important part of the equation. The second part is the product, or the players. You present a bad product, and no one is going to buy it. But the owners are the one's that make it happen. If they decide to close their doors and go elsewhere, there is no product for the fans. Just ask Seattle.

The fans, and as a by product, but still the fans, TV are the goose that lays the golden egg. Take that away, and there is no NBA. Period! The problem is that when it comes to negotiations like these, we have no legitimate voice. Our power comes after the fact, when the negotiations are all done. We show our disapproval by not showing up for the games.

I have no sympathy for either the owners or the players. Please don't ask me to feel sorry for a bunch of overpaid players, or wealthy owners, while secondary workers are now out of work. These people are no different than the politicians in washington. They live in a bubble surrounded by like kind, and they lose all prospective of how the real world works. By no means do I mean to imply that all the players or owners fall into that catagory. But those that don't are content to sit by and let others, with a different agenda than their own, run the negotiations.

To say that hey, I made 15 million last year, and your asking me to take 14.5 mil in the future for the good of the league. Just how the hell am I going to feed my family on that petty amount? If thats your attitude, you've just lost a lot of fans in the country. This isn't about right or wrong, or fair! Its about common sense. Of which at the moment there seems to be a lack of. Personally I'm tired of the BS being thrown around by both sides. None of it makes any sense to the average fan, who worries about having enough money to buy two beers and a couple of hotdogs at a game. Get the deal done, because I'm sick of the BS. And please, don't tell me I have to please anyone!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They want my buck, they damm well better think about how to please me. There! I feel better.

Baja, I was just trying to carryover his terminology. My point was that everything is an exchange, fans (or customers) have to provide (whether directly or indirectly) a certain amount of revenue to keep the business viable. There's a trade between owners and fans, just like there's a trade between players and owners, so everyone has to please each other, so to speak. You are not doing any more of a service for the NBA than they are doing for you.

Someone has yet to really justify why these two entities should take on the perspective of the "real world." I can play the same game with the "real world" people, who ***** about not having their precious basketball when there are impoverished people dying of thirst, starvation and disease all around the world. Probably the money we spend on entertainment in this country could save millions upon millions of lives worldwide. Oh poor little NBA fans and small business owners/employees, I'm sure they'll die in the streets if they lose the NBA.

If you're going to play the perspective game, you don't get to arbitrarily stop it at your convenience. Neither the players nor the owners are making the argument that the fans are obligated to keep buying into their product despite their dissatisfaction with the lockout, so the fans have no business acting like the NBA and the players are obligated to end the lockout in order to entertain them.

I don't think anyone is really asking you to hand out your sympathy to either of the entities involved. If they have, no one seriously expects you to feel sorry for them the same way you would some homeless person on the street.

 

[Uncia03]

I keep hoping that the players are just throwing out this Disclaimer of Interest to see if they can get the Owners to budge quickly, but are still willing to 'blink first'.

Everyone seems to be saying that with the proposal currently offered by the league, it's the players who are making all the concessions.
From my point of view, it seems as if the Owners made more concessions than the players with the last proposal.

Here is why:

1.) Revenue Concessions

The players' slice of the pie was going to go from 57% to 50%. While that could end up being a billion dollars over the full 10-year contract, it still leaves the players as having the highest average salary of any athlete in the world.

It's odd. You have one party who have the highest average salaries in the world and are guaranteed that money. Then you have the other party which claims that 2/3rds of them are not even making a profit. (Yes, you can cook the books to some extent, but the owners are not making a profit of 2 billion a year like the players)

So the players are making concessions, but it's a 7% paycut, and still allows them the guaranteed profit to be the highest average paid players in the world, plus all the perks (charter jets, hotels, world-class training factilities, ect) that come with the position.

So from a revenue standpoint:
Slight Edge to the Players as far as making the most concessions

2.) System Concessions

Here's my problem with the players. Fisher basically said, "We broke our backs to go down to a paltry 50% split of Income. Because of that undue hardship, we demand that all system issues remain status quo."

Here's my question to all of you: In looking at the system changes presented in the most recent proposal, which of the 'A' list items are bad for the game of basketball?

I personally don't see any. There some slight restrictions for teams over the salary cap. But then there's amnesty and the stretch proposal which are great for both players and owners, as well as the minimum salary a team has to have on the team which is a clear win for the players.

The system changes the owners are asking for will help a little bit as far as competitive balance. I haven't seen anyone (other than players who care only about themselves) look at the proposals and say "That system change is bad for basketball, the Owners are crazy to be pushing for it."

Now if the owners had the ability to start from scratch you know what they'd do?
They would have a hard cap or something similiar, perhaps with limited bird-right exceptions.
They would have unguaranteed contracts.
They would have a franchise tag.


None of those items are in the current proposal, but we know that the 1st two were in the initial proposal, and you can bet they would have put in something for a franchise tag if they felt they had any shot at all.

(There was talk today of the Buffalo Bills ending Ryan Fitzpatrick's contract at the end of the year. They signed him to a new 6 year 59 million dollar contract a month ago. At the end of the season, they could drop the contract and only end up paying him about 10 million dollars. Don't you think the NBA owners would love to have the ability to do the same thing, especially since a single player and large contract can destroy a team for years?)

So for that reason, I feel that the owners are making major concessions on system related issues. It doesn't matter that those items aren't in place right now. What matters is that the owners really want them, and backed off of them in order to try and get a deal done.

When you look at the last deal, then see what the owners want, then see what they finally proposed, it's clear that the owners took most of what they wanted off the table, and kept the system far closer to what we last had year.

So as far as system changes I think that the Owners were the ones to make the major concessions to get a deal done, and the system concessions made by the Owners far outweight the revenue concessions the Players made.

So at this point I don't expect the Owners to back down.
If it's true that 2/3rds of the owners lost money last season, then they can survive a year with-out basketball.
In their minds the system isn't anywhere near where they want it to be, but they made the current proposal so that there could be basketball this year.

The players rejected it, and if the players aren't willing to blink, then we are going to miss this season, and possibly the season after, and ultimately, I don't think the players win this litigation.

Interestingly enough, if we do lose the season it could end up being great for the Kings.
As recently discussed in another thread the Kings would be big winners in just about any system put in place to determine draft position. And the upcoming draft will be absolutely stacked.

But not only that, if this really gets dragged out, at the end of the day I think the Owners are going to get a lot of the system issues that they want, and those system changes should be small-market team friendly.

I don't want to lose a year of basketball. I want to wake up tomorrow, find out that the players realized that the Owners are not going to yield, and accept the last proposal by the League so we can have basketball by Christmas.

I'd say we have at most 5-6 more weeks before the season is cancelled. I'm not very hopeful at this point that the players will cave to save the season, and I'd be very surprised if the Owners did.

 

[RichieInRocklin]

I admit that I haven't read the previous 40+ pages, but I would like to get my 2 cents in. The latest CBA made it possible for the top 5 free agents to move to any city they wanted. What was coming down the pike was a "super city" league of 5 or 6 top teams and all the other 24 or 25 teams would suck hind tit. The current owners tried to negotiate a NEW system where all of the 30 teams would have an "equal" chance of competing. Poor Minneapolis or Sacramento, who could'nt get the corporate sponsorship or TV contracts of the top 5 or 6 big market teams, had to make BAD decisions and overpay mediocre players just to keep a fan base. It has very little to do with good management (although that really helps), as much as chance. San Antonio had two lucky drafts when they were able to draft the Admiral and later Duncan. The rest, the supporting cast, was done very well, but without the two biggies, wouldn't have had the success that it has had. YES, success does require good decisions, but it also requires an equal playing field. A hard cap would go a long way towards an equal playing field. Guaranteed contracts (which only the NBA has, I think, in pro sports), is such a plus to the players, I can't imagine them not putting the owner's proposal to the entire players and quibbling about the "hard cap", etc. In the real world where I worked for many years, if you didn't produce, you were out. Anyhow, that's my 2 cents worth !!

 

[Vlade4GM]

Baseball has unlimited guaranteed contracts and absolutely no cap, so basketball hardly has the most extreme player-friendly system.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

So the players are making concessions, but it's a 7% paycut, and still allows them the guaranteed profit to be the highest average paid players in the world, plus all the perks (charter jets, hotels, world-class training factilities, ect) that come with the position.

Keep in mind that the players aren't moving from 100% to 93% (that would be a 7% pay cut) but from 57% to 50% - 7 points of BRI but a 12.3% reduction overall. It's a cut that needs to be made (or something similar) but 7 points is a bit more than 7%.

 

[Rookie]

Baja, I was just trying to carryover his terminology. My point was that everything is an exchange, fans (or customers) have to provide (whether directly or indirectly) a certain amount of revenue to keep the business viable. There's a trade between owners and fans, just like there's a trade between players and owners, so everyone has to please each other, so to speak. You are not doing any more of a service for the NBA than they are doing for you.

Someone has yet to really justify why these two entities should take on the perspective of the "real world." I can play the same game with the "real world" people, who ***** about not having their precious basketball when there are impoverished people dying of thirst, starvation and disease all around the world. Probably the money we spend on entertainment in this country could save millions upon millions of lives worldwide. Oh poor little NBA fans and small business owners/employees, I'm sure they'll die in the streets if they lose the NBA.

If you're going to play the perspective game, you don't get to arbitrarily stop it at your convenience. Neither the players nor the owners are making the argument that the fans are obligated to keep buying into their product despite their dissatisfaction with the lockout, so the fans have no business acting like the NBA and the players are obligated to end the lockout in order to entertain them.

I don't think anyone is really asking you to hand out your sympathy to either of the entities involved. If they have, no one seriously expects you to feel sorry for them the same way you would some homeless person on the street.

Sorry Vlade, I still have to disagree with you. I didn't realized I stop at my convenient. I thought my point was made so I ended it.

However if you like me to talk more on the real world, then here it is:

1. The real world you mentioned, should not affect how people want to spend their short life. I don't understand how people dying of thirst, starvation and whatever else would affect people wanting to spend their money wisely on what make them happy. I do believe in helping others but I wouldn't sacrifice my life doing it (there are heroes that do that and I respect them greatly). Sorry if I'm a little selfish and rather take my kids to a game than donating that money to help people around the world. And I will also enjoy a good old Thanksgiving with my family and buy unnecessary things on black friday for gifts. (Hmm buying create jobs, so I'm actually helping a lot )

Regarding the fans and the NBA:
2. I don't think any of us are stating "poor" us fans. I'm not upset, I'm just stating the cause and effect. It was an agrument against your view that the players should have it their way. However I believe that would not fix the system and therfore customers could possibly leave (me as an example). As a result $$$$$$$ can be lost. Do I care, of course not, but if you don't think the league care, I believe you're greatly mistaken. We can debate on that if you like but that was my whole point on the customer/business post.

Regarding fans have no business between owners/players lockuot:
3. I agreed the owners and players can do whatever they want with the lockout. But so can the fans. There are fans that already pissed off enough to never come back. And there will be more fans leaving if they don't improve the system (like me). And yes, they better hell entertain the fans and prove why we should return..because if not, I can see more people leaving. Just like one fan (plenty felt the same way) puts it, they have a lot of "kissing up" to do. I understand they don't give a rat *** about the fans but we do bring in the $$$$. And I be damned if they don't care about that.

Regarding handing out sympathy:
4. Belive me, I feel no sympathy for the owners/players, and that was the whole point. It's pretty simple from my view, please us or we'll take our money somewhere else. Similary I wouldn't come back to a restuarant if the service was horrible, even if the food was good.

I hope you see this as a friendly debate, like I do. I enjoy your perspective and agreed that we should do more to help the less fortunate. But my point on the "real world" still stand.

Anyway have a great TG everyone! I can't wait to watch the Niners.

 

[Vlade4GM]

Rookie, that post was directed mainly towards Baja. Only the first paragraph was in reference to what I was saying in response to you, the rest was a direct response to his words.

1. If that's the case, then it should apply to the players and owners as well, that was my whole point. I wasn't trying to make anyone feel guilty for the way they live, I was just trying to point out that it was a double standard.

2. I think Baja was doing that a little bit. He didn't convince me that his grievances had more inherent worth than anyone else's.

I think the entities involved all understand the cause and effect here. They understand the consequences as it relates to them, but that doesn't mean they're obligated to the fans to avoid those consequences.

For the record, I have not stated that the players should necessarily "have it their way." I wouldn't say that the system changes that I'd personally be for would align with what the players would want, and I don't have a personal preference for the BRI split. That doesn't mean I don't think the players have negotiated in bad faith though, they may have negotiated in poor strategy, but I think they've made enough concessions on the BRI to reasonably expect a little give from the owners on the system issues.

3. Of course, but when have they given off the impression that the fans are obligated to stick around, or that they owe them their loyalty regardless of the lockout results? I mean, sure, they may make decisions that end up being bad for business, but those are their decisions to make and their consequences to accept. If they're obligated to make smart business decisions to anyone, then they're obligated to themselves, not to the fans.

4. That's fine, but Baja was pretty much saying "why should they be bickering over these huge amounts when the true woe lies with me and the average American?" I just turned that around on him and basically asked why should we be bickering about having one less option for entertainment when there are people suffering from impoverished conditions around the world?

Between the fans, players, and owners, I don't think that any of their situations are really all that sympathetic when looked at in the grand scheme of things, not that that is the perspective I think things should necessarily be viewed from in this case.

 

[Dime Dropper]

NBA and Players are in talks again since yesterday, and more should be known later (according to Adrain Wojnarowski on twitter - very reliable source). No idea what they're talking about but it can't really do any further damage at this point.

 

[Vlade4GM]

I'm sure they'll give it another shot to get a deal done by 11/25.

 

[bajaden]

. That's fine, but Baja was pretty much saying "why should they be bickering over these huge amounts when the true woe lies with me and the average American?" I just turned that around on him and basically asked why should we be bickering about having one less option for entertainment when there are people suffering from impoverished conditions around the world?

I sometimes think people only hear, or read what they want to read. I understand perfectly why they're (to use your term "bickering"). I was merely replying to your inference that the fans have to please the owners. As I've stated, I have no dog in this hunt. I just want it settled, and it should have been settled by now. The last deal offered by the owners, in my opinion, wass a fair deal. Both sides have given, and both sides would like to have more. I've read the deal from top to bottom, and if I was a player, and I was looking at the alternative, I would have agreed to what was in the deal, but I would have wanted to keep negotiating on the second level items.

I happen to love basketball. Therefore I have a selfish interest in having a season. My reference to people of lesser means, was not a reference to starving people around the world, but to the average joe blow, many of whom are on a limited income, like myself, that have a hard time understanding or sympathizing with either side in this debate. These people are called the fans. And you seem to put the fans into nothing but a recieving or accepting position in the outcome of this debate. The NBA is what it is, because it went to a star system. It was a great idea, but also a dangerous one. If you percieve Melo as a great player, great teammate, generally all around good guy, your inclined to buy tickets or watch him on TV. But if you percieve him as a great player, but also as a selfish, all about me, and screw the rest of you type player, then your going to lose some of those fans.

We live in a world of perception, and many times perception built on lies or misconceptions. These things matter! How many people didn't want the Kings to draft Cousins, based on the perceptions they had of him.? Some of which were true, but many that wern't. My point is, that the average fan may take some interest in the negotiations, but in gereral, they just want to watch some basketball, and don't understand why there isn't an agreement. And most importantly, don't care whose right or wrong, or whose winning or losing. There are a lot of people that just see both sides as rich greedy people arguing over who gets the biggest piece of the pie. When you start arguing over millions of dollars, you lose the average fans compasion.

I grant you that you and I may see it differently, but I don't think its a good idea to forget who ultimately pays the bills, or take them for granted. And taking them for granted is exactly what both sides are doing. As the great man of wisdom Clint Eastwood said in one of his movies. "Tomorrow is promised to no one."

 

[kingsboi]

We are all being brainwashed by any reports saying anything significant will get done here.

 

[pshn80]

We are all being brainwashed by any reports saying anything significant will get done here.

I don't feel brainwashed, I feel hopeful. And that's not bad. The loss of a season has seemed more and more likely. A meeting, negotiations of any kind, is far better for my psyche than nothing going on. And the two sides, no matter what else may be said about them, are certainly not playing mind games with the fans. I think both sides are desperate to begin the season, to play basketball. Here's hoping good things result. Cheers.

 

[bajaden]

I don't feel brainwashed, I feel hopeful. And that's not bad. The loss of a season has seemed more and more likely. A meeting, negotiations of any kind, is far better for my psyche than nothing going on. And the two sides, no matter what else may be said about them, are certainly not playing mind games with the fans. I think both sides are desperate to begin the season, to play basketball. Here's hoping good things result. Cheers.

My problem with these type of negotiations, is that both sides have a bottom line. But, neither is willing to go to that bottom line with any sense of urgency. So both sides move slowly, bit by bit to where they think their bottom line is. Probably hoping that they can settle for more than they anticipated. But it never seems to happen, and before you know it, its November and you still don't have a deal. Now the season is in jeapordy, and if there is a deal, its for a shortened season.

In the end, both sides usually give up more than they thought their bottom line was. But if they had gotten to that line sooner, then the real negotiations could have began sooner. Having said all that, its just the nature of the beast, and apparently its unadvoidable. At least they're talking again, so there's still hope. It has to be done quickly though if they want to play on christmas day.

 

[Superman]

They would have unguaranteed contracts.

You make a lot of points, some I agree with, some I disagree with. I just wanted to point this out again:

Guaranteed contracts are not a system issue. The reason players have guaranteed contracts in the NBA is because it's become status quo through individual negotiations. Every player doesn't have a fully guaranteed contract.

This has bearing on contract amounts and BRI, also. Owners have given players these fully guaranteed contracts for hundreds of millions of dollars. Owners agreed to give players 57% of BRI (which is what max contracts are based on). The reason NBA players have the highest average salary of major sports -- not that it's relevant -- is because the owners have allowed that to be the case.

 

[Vlade4GM]

I sometimes think people only hear, or read what they want to read. I understand perfectly why they're (to use your term "bickering"). I was merely replying to your inference that the fans have to please the owners. As I've stated, I have no dog in this hunt. I just want it settled, and it should have been settled by now. The last deal offered by the owners, in my opinion, wass a fair deal. Both sides have given, and both sides would like to have more. I've read the deal from top to bottom, and if I was a player, and I was looking at the alternative, I would have agreed to what was in the deal, but I would have wanted to keep negotiating on the second level items.

I happen to love basketball. Therefore I have a selfish interest in having a season. My reference to people of lesser means, was not a reference to starving people around the world, but to the average joe blow, many of whom are on a limited income, like myself, that have a hard time understanding or sympathizing with either side in this debate. These people are called the fans. And you seem to put the fans into nothing but a recieving or accepting position in the outcome of this debate. The NBA is what it is, because it went to a star system. It was a great idea, but also a dangerous one. If you percieve Melo as a great player, great teammate, generally all around good guy, your inclined to buy tickets or watch him on TV. But if you percieve him as a great player, but also as a selfish, all about me, and screw the rest of you type player, then your going to lose some of those fans.

We live in a world of perception, and many times perception built on lies or misconceptions. These things matter! How many people didn't want the Kings to draft Cousins, based on the perceptions they had of him.? Some of which were true, but many that wern't. My point is, that the average fan may take some interest in the negotiations, but in gereral, they just want to watch some basketball, and don't understand why there isn't an agreement. And most importantly, don't care whose right or wrong, or whose winning or losing. There are a lot of people that just see both sides as rich greedy people arguing over who gets the biggest piece of the pie. When you start arguing over millions of dollars, you lose the average fans compasion.

I grant you that you and I may see it differently, but I don't think its a good idea to forget who ultimately pays the bills, or take them for granted. And taking them for granted is exactly what both sides are doing. As the great man of wisdom Clint Eastwood said in one of his movies. "Tomorrow is promised to no one."

I went back and read my post where I made that "fans have to please the owners" comment, and there is no excuse for isolating that comment and taking it out of context as much as you have. I think you're either not going to get what I meant no matter how much I try to clarify, or you're willfully misinterpreting me. I hope it's the former.

This was the comment I was mainly responding to:

These people [players and owners] are no different than the politicians in washington. They live in a bubble surrounded by like kind, and they lose all prospective of how the real world works.

Maybe I'm inferring too much from this comment, but it seemed to me to imply that you're suggesting that they should have some perspective on how the "real world" works. What leads you to believe that they don't have this perspective, and what do they need it for?

So what are you arguing? That the owners and players need to understand the fans' ignorance/lack of perspective of their positions so they understand their grievances better? Why? If you're saying because it'll hurt their business if they don't value the fans' grievances more, then: a.) That's awfully altruistic of you to care about their financial success, and b.) What makes you think they don't understand that the lockout can cause fans to become disgruntled and lose interest? That's a well documented occurrence during major sports work stoppages. You don't think they factor that in as a risk into their bottom line? Of course they do, and even if they didn't, that's their mistake to make, they're not obligated to the fans to make good decisions for themselves.

I don't really put fans anywhere in this debate, I'm sure the fans' satisfaction factors into the NBA's bottom line along with other things, but if they deem other factors more important, or take their patronage for granted, then I'm sorry, the fans don't have enough power to influence things in their selfish favor. Fans are not owed anything, you seem to have this attitude that they are, either that or you're just very altruistically concerned about rich people's financial well-being.

To put it in basic terms, the fans can pay for the product or not pay for the product, the players can play or not play, and the owners can provide venue or not provide venue. These are the leverages (simply put of course) that these particular entities have, and the NBA falls apart if they don't have all of them. The fans don't pay the NBA's bills any more than your employer's have paid yours, or your employer's customers have paid yours, or your employer's customers' employers have paid yours, or your employer's customers' employers' customers have paid yours. None of them pay your bills, you exchange your work for your employer's money, and you pay your bills with your money (or work, if you prefer to look at it that way.) The fans (presumably) have not paid on consignment to the NBA for their entertainment services, so the NBA owes them nothing. They have gotten what they have paid for. Yes, they have the freedom to cease buying their product, but then again, the NBA has the freedom to take them for granted and perhaps make a poor business decision for themselves in the process.

 

[bajaden]

I went back and read my post where I made that "fans have to please the owners" comment, and there is no excuse for isolating that comment and taking it out of context as much as you have. I think you're either not going to get what I meant no matter how much I try to clarify, or you're willfully misinterpreting me. I hope it's the former.

This was the comment I was mainly responding to:



Maybe I'm inferring too much from this comment, but it seemed to me to imply that you're suggesting that they should have some perspective on how the "real world" works. What leads you to believe that they don't have this perspective, and what do they need it for?

So what are you arguing? That the owners and players need to understand the fans' ignorance/lack of perspective of their positions so they understand their grievances better? Why? If you're saying because it'll hurt their business if they don't value the fans' grievances more, then: a.) That's awfully altruistic of you to care about their financial success, and b.) What makes you think they don't understand that the lockout can cause fans to become disgruntled and lose interest? That's a well documented occurrence during major sports work stoppages. You don't think they factor that in as a risk into their bottom line? Of course they do, and even if they didn't, that's their mistake to make, they're not obligated to the fans to make good decisions for themselves.

I don't really put fans anywhere in this debate, I'm sure the fans' satisfaction factors into the NBA's bottom line along with other things, but if they deem other factors more important, or take their patronage for granted, then I'm sorry, the fans don't have enough power to influence things in their selfish favor. Fans are not owed anything, you seem to have this attitude that they are, either that or you're just very altruistically concerned about rich people's financial well-being.

To put it in basic terms, the fans can pay for the product or not pay for the product, the players can play or not play, and the owners can provide venue or not provide venue. These are the leverages (simply put of course) that these particular entities have, and the NBA falls apart if they don't have all of them. The fans don't pay the NBA's bills any more than your employer's have paid yours, or your employer's customers have paid yours, or your employer's customers' employers have paid yours, or your employer's customers' employers' customers have paid yours. None of them pay your bills, you exchange your work for your employer's money, and you pay your bills with your money (or work, if you prefer to look at it that way.) The fans (presumably) have not paid on consignment to the NBA for their entertainment services, so the NBA owes them nothing. They have gotten what they have paid for. Yes, they have the freedom to cease buying their product, but then again, the NBA has the freedom to take them for granted and perhaps make a poor business decision for themselves in the process.

Vlade, first of all, I was self-employed. And my customers paid my bills. Its that simple! I'm not going to trace that particular dollar up and down the food chain to see how many times its been spent. My customer is what came first and foremost. Because without them, I didn't have a business. I'll be honest. I don't have any idea what the hell your talking about or even arguing about. But you can take your comment about me caring more about rich peoples well being and shove it where the sun doesn't shine. You know nothing about me, and if you did, you would have never made that comment. Its insulting and pathetic at the same time. I'm done with you!

 

[rainmaker]

I went back and read my post where I made that "fans have to please the owners" comment, and there is no excuse for isolating that comment and taking it out of context as much as you have. I think you're either not going to get what I meant no matter how much I try to clarify, or you're willfully misinterpreting me. I hope it's the former.

This was the comment I was mainly responding to:



Maybe I'm inferring too much from this comment, but it seemed to me to imply that you're suggesting that they should have some perspective on how the "real world" works. What leads you to believe that they don't have this perspective, and what do they need it for?

So what are you arguing? That the owners and players need to understand the fans' ignorance/lack of perspective of their positions so they understand their grievances better? Why? If you're saying because it'll hurt their business if they don't value the fans' grievances more, then: a.) That's awfully altruistic of you to care about their financial success, and b.) What makes you think they don't understand that the lockout can cause fans to become disgruntled and lose interest? That's a well documented occurrence during major sports work stoppages. You don't think they factor that in as a risk into their bottom line? Of course they do, and even if they didn't, that's their mistake to make, they're not obligated to the fans to make good decisions for themselves.

I don't really put fans anywhere in this debate, I'm sure the fans' satisfaction factors into the NBA's bottom line along with other things, but if they deem other factors more important, or take their patronage for granted, then I'm sorry, the fans don't have enough power to influence things in their selfish favor. Fans are not owed anything, you seem to have this attitude that they are, either that or you're just very altruistically concerned about rich people's financial well-being.

To put it in basic terms, the fans can pay for the product or not pay for the product, the players can play or not play, and the owners can provide venue or not provide venue. These are the leverages (simply put of course) that these particular entities have, and the NBA falls apart if they don't have all of them. The fans don't pay the NBA's bills any more than your employer's have paid yours, or your employer's customers have paid yours, or your employer's customers' employers have paid yours, or your employer's customers' employers' customers have paid yours. None of them pay your bills, you exchange your work for your employer's money, and you pay your bills with your money (or work, if you prefer to look at it that way.) The fans (presumably) have not paid on consignment to the NBA for their entertainment services, so the NBA owes them nothing. They have gotten what they have paid for. Yes, they have the freedom to cease buying their product, but then again, the NBA has the freedom to take them for granted and perhaps make a poor business decision for themselves in the process.

You make little to no sense. Have to agree with Baja. I haven't a clue what you're arguing about anymore. You're all over the place, making mindless assumptions, contradicting yourself, and attempting to break it down into "basic terms" which aren't applicable to this current situation, nor make much sense.

 

[Vlade4GM]

Vlade, first of all, I was self-employed. And my customers paid my bills. Its that simple! I'm not going to trace that particular dollar up and down the food chain to see how many times its been spent. My customer is what came first and foremost. Because without them, I didn't have a business. I'll be honest. I don't have any idea what the hell your talking about or even arguing about. But you can take your comment about me caring more about rich peoples well being and shove it where the sun doesn't shine. You know nothing about me, and if you did, you would have never made that comment. Its insulting and pathetic at the same time. I'm done with you!

You pretty much just misinterpreted or missed the point of everything I said, but whatever, there's no point in going on any further.

 

[mac]

You make little to no sense. Have to agree with Baja. I haven't a clue what you're arguing about anymore. You're all over the place, making mindless assumptions, contradicting yourself, and attempting to break it down into "basic terms" which aren't applicable to this current situation, nor make much sense.

I felt this way a few pages ago. Not quite sure what Vlade is arguing for anymore.

 

[Trueblood]

For those who still want a season, me being one of them, I'm hearing that the major impediment to getting a deal done is the escrow tax withholding system.

The players are offering to put 10% of their salaries in an escrow account which is an increase from the 8% that they used to get.

The owners want a system that guarantees that things get down to 50/50 even if collecting the full 10% doesn't get it all the way down.

I've been fully supportive of the owners since the players didn't vote on the current deal but if this is what keeps the season from happening then I think they're nuts. At worst, the players BRI split shouldn't be much higher than 52 or 53% in a bad revenue year and the owners collect the full 10%. If I'm the owners, I throw in the towel on this issue. As a fan, I could care less about BRI. The owners already have their stupid 50/50. The last thing we need to hear is them crying about needing to collect more than 10% of a player's salary that they BOTH already agreed to.

 

[bajaden]

For those who still want a season, me being one of them, I'm hearing that the major impediment to getting a deal done is the escrow tax withholding system.

The players are offering to put 10% of their salaries in an escrow account which is an increase from the 8% that they used to get.

The owners want a system that guarantees that things get down to 50/50 even if collecting the full 10% doesn't get it all the way down.

I've been fully supportive of the owners since the players didn't vote on the current deal but if this is what keeps the season from happening then I think they're nuts. At worst, the players BRI split shouldn't be much higher than 52 or 53% in a bad revenue year and the owners collect the full 10%. If I'm the owners, I throw in the towel on this issue. As a fan, I could care less about BRI. The owners already have their stupid 50/50. The last thing we need to hear is them crying about needing to collect more than 10% of a player's salary that they BOTH already agreed to.

I totally agree with you. I'm not sure why this is even in dispute, unless there's something I'm not understanding about it. If I'm the owners, this is a done deal.

 

[bajaden]

I want to wish a Happy Thanksgiving to everyone, and yes, that includes you Vlade. There's much to be thankful for despite the lack of NBA basketball. As King Henry the II said in the movie, "Lion in the Winter", " I'm alive, 50, and king, all at the same time. I have much to be grateful for" None of us are Kings, at least I don't think so, but we should count the blessings we have.

And on another note, and a reason to be a little more optimistic.

"The Times, meanwhile, reported that Hunter has hired Jim Quinn, formerly the union's chief outside counsel, to replace union lawyer Jeffrey Kessler and help complete the deal. Kessler has had a combustible relationship with Stern and other owners during the past few months of negotiations. Quinn played a similar closer's role in the 1998-99 lockout and is said to have good relationships with both Hunter and Stern after years of participating in such talks."

 

[pshn80]

I want to wish a Happy Thanksgiving to everyone, and yes, that includes you Vlade. There's much to be thankful for despite the lack of NBA basketball. As King Henry the II said in the movie, "Lion in the Winter", " I'm alive, 50, and king, all at the same time. I have much to be grateful for" None of us are Kings, at least I don't think so, but we should count the blessings we have.

"There's much to be thankful for despite the lack of NBA basketball AND THE LACK OF NORTH CAL DUNGENESS CRAB. All else is well. Cheers.

 

[bajaden]

"There's much to be thankful for despite the lack of NBA basketball AND THE LACK OF NORTH CAL DUNGENESS CRAB. All else is well. Cheers.

I must sadly tell you that down here in Ensenada, we have a cousin of the King crab in abundance. I'll dedicate one to you.