NBA situation has gotten ugly...

[cuseincincy]

I agree...in JUNE!!!

During the last 5 minutes in June would be more appropriate.

 

[longislandcuse]

During the last 5 minutes in June would be more appropriate.

Yes, during the last 5 minutes...how original!!! Just like every other sport that is competitive and usually goes down to the wire.

 

[cuseincincy]

Yes, during the last 5 minutes...how original!!! Just like every other sport that is competitive and usually goes down to the wire.

No, I meant literally from 11:55 pm to 11:59:59 pm on June 30. :bat:

 

[longislandcuse]

OK then --I hope both of you have a great chat about overpaid athletes needing more money. Good night.

I know, were such losers. We actually follow professional athletes as well as collegiate ones. Sorry were not Penn State enough in our devotion to collegiate sports.

 

[cto]

To people who say they havent watched the NBA since Jordan years, I get it...but the NBA now is great. The storylines and starpower are unmatched. It will be a serious travesty to not have a season if that should happen.

Odd potential fall-out if there is no season. Men's Olympic team. How out of shape will these guys be come next summer? What will be their comparative skills after no one's seen them play in over a year? It will make for interesting selection decisions by Coach K, JB, etc., as they try to put together the best USA team next summer. Let's hope some of the stars stay in reasonably good shape.

 

[Knicks411]

Odd potential fall-out if there is no season. Men's Olympic team. How out of shape will these guys be come next summer? What will be their comparative skills after no one's seen them play in over a year? It will make for interesting selection decisions by Coach K, JB, etc., as they try to put together the best USA team next summer. Let's hope some of the stars stay in reasonably good shape.

I don't think it'll be that much of an issue. Most of the guys who would be selected for the team aren't the Shawn Kemp types, who would get out of shape during the lockout.

Maybe they'll get even more time to work out in April, May, etc.

 

[DJR44]

"The owners own the basketball." End of discussion. They can pay whatever they want, If they want to enforce a hard cap so all the cities in this country have a chance to compete..I'm all for it.

Now the players have a choice. Don't play. They can find another league to pay them a tremendous amount of money that they would earn if they agree to the proposed 50/50 deal with all the restrictions. Wait one second...there is no other league.

OK they can go to Europe and play. Nope doesn't make sense won't make as much money in Europe ( save for a few superstars) so they can't do that.

OK they can barnstorm and play exhibition games...lovely but no money there.

The world is a lot different play than the last agreement and the league needs to put restrictions on the money and movement among the players so smaller cities can keep there superstars (like NFL). See with the so called BAD deal they are being offered they will make more money than 99% of the public. Can't feel bad for players they lose court of public opinion. Is this new deal worse than the last deal? YUP. TOUGH. Take it or leave it and if you leave it you will be come crawling back next year and you will earn less. Owners are dug in...gravytrain is over.

 

[OttoMets]

To people who say they havent watched the NBA since Jordan years, I get it...but the NBA now is great. The storylines and starpower are unmatched.

That's part of why the NBA has lost appeal for me. The ESPNification and force-feeding things like "storylines" for a team sport whose competition alone was good enough to sell itself for decades bugs me.

Every year I try to watch some NBA ball, but it's difficult to stick with it. And a lot of the blame goes to ESPN and its professional wrestling -style hype of match-ups (and glorification of less impressive aspects of the game).

 

[Knicks411]

The world is a lot different play than the last agreement and the league needs to put restrictions on the money and movement among the players so smaller cities can keep there superstars (like NFL). See with the so called BAD deal they are being offered they will make more money than 99% of the public.

Which is of course the also true for the owners, regardless of how the BRI is divided up. Always seems to be forgotten.

Lebron didn't leave Cleveland because he could get more money. He actually took less money. The owners are a lot less interested in competitive balance than they are in saving money. Which is their prerogative, i guess. We'll see what the courts say. I don't think they were anywhere close to bargaining in good faith, especially if you believe that there were some owners who thought the most recent deal on the table was too much to give to the players.

The players gave up $3 billion over 10 years, and that still wasn't enough. But Stern has the gall to say the agents were greedy?

 

[Rocco]

Odd potential fall-out if there is no season. Men's Olympic team. How out of shape will these guys be come next summer? What will be their comparative skills after no one's seen them play in over a year? It will make for interesting selection decisions by Coach K, JB, etc., as they try to put together the best USA team next summer. Let's hope some of the stars stay in reasonably good shape.

Good point. While some players have said they will play overseas, others have said that they will in pickup games. The players that don't participate in other leagues, etc won't be in great shape if they haven't been playing consistent competitive basketball for that long though. Lean more heavily towards college players at that point or is that disallowed?

 

[Knicks411]

Good point. While some players have said they will play overseas, others have said that they will in pickup games. The players that don't participate in other leagues, etc won't be in great shape if they haven't been playing consistent competitive basketball for that long though. Lean more heavily towards college players at that point or is that disallowed?

We're talking about the absolute cream of the crop here. The 10 or so best asketball players on the planet (give or take a few). They ave pride in their ability, and they're going to be ready to play in the Olympics. I would not be worried about this. If anything, they will be able to give even more in the olympics, if they aren't burned out from a long season of playing.

 

[kyleslamb]

The NBA Owners have somehow made it possible for me to feel sorry for athletes making millions of dollars a year. How do you possibly negotiate when the owners position is to take and take and take, give nothing in return and issue ultimatums?

If some of the teams are losing money as is being reported, why should they give something in return that means money will still be lost? Shouldn't they hold to a position that guarantees them at least some profit? Frankly I think a business should not negotiate if it's going to mean they're still running at a deficit.

I'm not convinced the teams are losing as much money as the accounting shows, mind you, but nonetheless I trust there are indeed some teams losing money and I don't expect them to give up any in negotiations if it doesn't yield a surplus.

For what it's worth, by the way, the NBA players have it made compared to musicians and actors. Those fields, which are similarly based on the talent and popularity of the content-providers, pay less than 20% of gross revenues to even the most popular contributors. So for the NBA players to get 50% of gross revenue is awfully fortuitous to begin with.

 

[Knicks411]

If some of the teams are losing money as is being reported, why should they give something in return that means money will still be lost? Shouldn't they hold to a position that guarantees them at least some profit? Frankly I think a business should not negotiate if it's going to mean they're still running at a deficit.

I'm not convinced the teams are losing as much money as the accounting shows, mind you, but nonetheless I trust there are indeed some teams losing money and I don't expect them to give up any in negotiations if it doesn't yield a surplus.

The players have already given up $3 billion over the next 10 years. I would hope that wipes away most of the "losses" the owners are claiming. And maybe if the league hadn't negotiated such a bad TV deal before, they'd be making more money. But I guess that's the players fault.

Furthermore, couldn't some of the loss issues be taken care of with revenue sharing from one team to another, like the NFL does? Why don't the Knicks and Lakers give up some of their profits to the teams that are "losing" money?

Or I could relay what a former player said to one of the owners about a decade ago.

"If you can't make a profit, you should sell your team.""

I guess Michael Jordan has a different opinion now that he's on the other side of the table.

"Those fields, which are similarly based on the talent and popularity of the content-providers, pay less than 20% of gross revenues to even the most popular contributors. So for the NBA players to get 50% of gross revenue is awfully fortuitous to begin with."

What exactly do you mean this? Actors as a whole? Individual actors?

 

[kyleslamb]

The players have already given up $3 billion over the next 10 years. I would hope that wipes away most of the "losses" the owners are claiming. And maybe if the league hadn't negotiated such a bad TV deal before, they'd be making more money. But I guess that's the players fault.

Or I could relay what a former player said to one of the owners about a decade ago.

"If you can't make a profit, you should sell your team.""

I guess Michael Jordan has a different opinion now that he's on the other side of the table.

Some would say perhaps it's a different perspective when you're the one that actually has to pay the money, eh? I wouldn't suggest he's a hypocrite, I would say he's realized it's not as easy as it sounds now that he's been on the other side of the table.

It doesn't matter how much the players have already given up in negotiations, it matters what the owners need to receive in order for their teams to profit. It is, after all, a business, so they should not accept any less than it requires for them to make money. I don't know how much that is, but it might not be prudent to assume $3 billion automatically does that.

I'm not feeling terribly sorry for the owners, as they agreed to the deal to begin with. However, I think it's silly to fault them for realizing their mistakes and trying to recover from them. Good for them. They have the right to look out for their business interests.

 

[Knicks411]

Some would say perhaps it's a different perspective when you're the one that actually has to pay the money, eh? I wouldn't suggest he's a hypocrite, I would say he's realized it's not as easy as it sounds now that he's been on the other side of the table.

It doesn't matter how much the players have already given up in negotiations, it matters what the owners need to receive in order for their teams to profit. It is, after all, a business, so they should not accept any less than it requires for them to make money. I don't know how much that is, but it might not be prudent to assume $3 billion automatically does that.

I'm not feeling terribly sorry for the owners, as they agreed to the deal to begin with. However, I think it's silly to fault them for realizing their mistakes and trying to recover from them. Good for them. They have the right to look out for their business interests.

They absolutely do, don't get me wrong. But like I said, which you responded to before I got in with an edit, what about revenue sharing? That should wipe away some of those losses. And I find it impossible to believe the league is losing roughly $300 million per year. Team values wouldn't be on the rise if that was the case. I think they're lying about how much money they are truly losing. Are there individual teams losing money? That is certainly possible, but you have A) revenue sharing, as I keep hammering on, and B) a 10-12% reduction in salaries the NBA has pretty much agreed on that should take care of that.

This just sucks. I see one side that is willing to make a deal and compromise, and another side who just wants to crush the union.

 

[longislandcuse]

They absolutely do, don't get me wrong. But like I said, which you responded to before I got in with an edit, what about revenue sharing? That should wipe away some of those losses. And I find it impossible to believe the league is losing roughly $300 million per year. Team values wouldn't be on the rise if that was the case. I think they're lying about how much money they are truly losing. Are there individual teams losing money? That is certainly possible, but you have A) revenue sharing, as I keep hammering on, and B) a 10-12% reduction in salaries the NBA has pretty much agreed on that should take care of that.

This just sucks. I see one side that is willing to make a deal and compromise, and another side who just wants to crush the union.

The parting shot on The Sports Reporters was directed at the NBA Owners where they brought up the fact that the Warriors and 76ers sold at huge profits. Noone except the owners can figure out how they are losing so much money...

 

[Knicks411]

The thing I can't get over in retrospect is how the players got 57% last time.

 

[kyleslamb]

The parting shot on The Sports Reporters was directed at the NBA Owners where they brought up the fact that the Warriors and 76ers sold at huge profits. Noone except the owners can figure out how they are losing so much money...

An independent audit confirmed their numbers and Forbes' estimates show several teams losing money too. It's really not that big of a mystery. Even the players have acknowledged the losses, though they disagree with the amounts.

I'm sure some teams are robbing Peter to pay Paul, and shifting assets from one place to another to make the numbers look worse. But it's also indisputable at this point that there are some teams losing money. Too many independent organizations have more or less confirmed that.

 

[Knicks411]

I'm sure some teams are robbing Peter to pay Paul, and shifting assets from one place to another to make the numbers look worse. But it's also indisputable at this point that there are some teams losing money. Too many independent organizations have more or less confirmed that.

I think it's likely there are some teams losing money, but reducing salaries by 10-12% and distributing some of that if you have to should take care of the few teams that are losing money. (Maybe teams like New Orleans, Milwaukee, possibly the Kings?)

I definitely don't believe the numbers the league was parroting, like $400 million per year. No way.

 

[OttoMets]

Eliminating the Hornets, Hawks, Grizzlies, and Bobcats might solve a few problems.

 

[Upstate]

I think this is why I want these players to stay in school. I look around these press conferences, and see these kids that have literally probably completed 4 or 5 total classes post-high school voting to split billions of dollars of revenue and I just don't trust them to make the right decision. Meanwhile, on the other side of the table are guys with doctorates who have obviously succeeded based on their brain power and not how high they can jump. From an outside view, who really hasn't paid much attention to the lockout news, I couldn't see myself siding with Kemba "Not One Book" Walker and Josh "What is Math" Selby in a situation like this.

 

[Zelda Zonk]

OK then --I hope both of you have a great chat about overpaid athletes needing more money. Good night.

As if every one of the college players you revere aren't trying desperately to join that club.

Reality is for everyone. Have some.

But, seriously, folks--- I love the NBA. Aside from ANY SU game, and the end-season tournaments, i'd rather watch NBA games.

• No vitale. No Duke sermons.
• The NBA has all of the best college players.
• The level of play is higher. For all those who say the NBA guys "don't play defense," i wonder why it is that the best collegians struggle when they reach the next level. It isn't because they forget how to shoot.
• I'd rather track a player's history, FROM college and into the pros than watch him play for a college team i have to worry about being 'better than SU.' My SU allegiance gives me a weird thing about being envious of other good college players/teams/programs. I can like Elton Brand as a pro. At Duke? No, suh.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

The thing I can't get over in retrospect is how the players got 57% last time.

And that was considered a major win for the owners.

 

[longislandcuse]

I think this is why I want these players to stay in school. I look around these press conferences, and see these kids that have literally probably completed 4 or 5 total classes post-high school voting to split billions of dollars of revenue and I just don't trust them to make the right decision. Meanwhile, on the other side of the table are guys with doctorates who have obviously succeeded based on their brain power and not how high they can jump. From an outside view, who really hasn't paid much attention to the lockout news, I couldn't see myself siding with Kemba "Not One Book" Walker and Josh "What is Math" Selby in a situation like this.

Some guys are very smart and well informed though. Spencer Hawes as an example.

 

[kyleslamb]

I think it's likely there are some teams losing money, but reducing salaries by 10-12% and distributing some of that if you have to should take care of the few teams that are losing money. (Maybe teams like New Orleans, Milwaukee, possibly the Kings?)

I definitely don't believe the numbers the league was parroting, like $400 million per year. No way.

Well as I said, those numbers were verified through an independent audit. So believe what you wish, but they have shown to be legit.