Lockout News Thread

[Mexi]

whatever
i want a short season anyways

someone will budge

 

[RipCity32]

If I was an owner I'd be willing to lose a season.. Players have too much power as is.

Yeah, can't say I don't blame them.

 

[.infamous]

Its dumb as hell that the players wanting 52 percent of the league revenue. Yes they are the products of the league, but the owners have to pay for all kinds of shit. Players are way to greedy man.

 

[jonathanlambert33]

The good thing that could come of this, if I'm reading the reports right, is that it looks like the cap/luxury tax will work a lot like a hard cap. That's what the NBA needs.

 

[DJT]

The owners said their next offer will result in them wanting more money, from all the money they are losing in these next weeks/months.

So i'm guessing they might go to 51-48 for them, which the players will laugh at and leave...

I just hope the players are in this for the long haul and don't give the players anything over 51%

 

[elcheato]

samardo24 Jahlove24 (Samardo Samuels)
50/50 sound good to me whats the problem. It's church money away

Have a feeling that's how every non star player feels..

 

[buzzy]

Damn players should just take the fucking 50/50. I want my basketball.

Hope to see them cave in once they actually start losing paychecks, i.e. the next couple of weeks.

 

[jonathanlambert33]

Summary of what's been agreed on:

Yet if the negotiating pattern holds — and the breakdown in talks is quickly followed by another last-gasp return to the table — it should not take long to complete the deal.

Tentative agreements are already in place on the following major items:

¶ Luxury-tax rate: Teams will be charged $1.50 per $1 spent beyond a threshold, replacing the previous dollar-for-dollar tax, according to people who have seen the plan.

To further discourage spending, the tax will increase for every $5 million spent beyond the threshold: to $1.75 after $5 million, $2.50 after $10 million and $3.25 after $15 million.

Under this system, the Los Angeles Lakers would have paid $45 million in taxes last season, compared with $20 million under the old formula. (The rates could still change based on other tradeoffs.)

¶ Contract lengths: Players with “Bird” rights will be eligible for five-year deals, while others will be limited to four. The previous C.B.A. allowed for six-year (Bird) and five-year deals. The 1999 C.B.A. allowed for seven-year (Bird) and six-year deals.

¶ Raises: Annual raises will be reduced by several percentage points, possibly as low as 5.5 percent for Bird players and 3.5 percent for non-Bird players. The prior deal allowed raises as high as 10.5 percent (Bird) and 8 percent.

¶ Midlevel exception: It will start at $5 million, a decrease of $800,000. The contract length and annual raises attached to the exception remain under discussion.

¶ Amnesty clause: Each team will be permitted to waive one player, with pay — anytime during the life of the C.B.A. — and have his salary be exempt from the cap and the luxury tax. Its use will be limited to players already under contract as of July 1, 2011.

¶ Stretch exception: Teams will be permitted to stretch out payments to waived players, spreading out the cap hit, over several seasons. The payment schedule will be set by doubling the years left on the contract and adding one. (Thus a team waiving a player with two years left could pay him over five years.)

There are a few critical issues still under debate. The N.B.A. wants to further punish tax-paying teams by denying them use of the midlevel exception and sign-and-trade deals, and wants additional penalties for “repeat offenders.” The union opposes those measures.

Nearly all of the new provisions will benefit the owners. In return, the players will gain an easing of trade rules and relaxed regulations on restricted free agents.

So the broad parameters of an agreement are in place. The gap on the revenue split is significant, but manageable. As N.B.A. officials have said many times, both sides know where the deal is — they just have to get there.

 

[Elite]

The Amnesty Clause is REALLY interesting for Miami. They could waive Mike Miller and get his contract off the books, or, waive Bosh and run the risk of letting Dwight reach free agency and going all in for him.

 

[CameronCrazy06]

They wouldn't waive Bosh...

 

[NV]

Don't really follow the NBA that much at all but I was just curious, how long away are they from coming to an agreement?

 

[DJT]

Yeah, no way they waive Bosh. I heard most teams are real skeptical about using it, and they want like 2 years to be able to decide on using an amnesty on a player.

 

[CameronCrazy06]

We’re at a point of both crisis and opportunity in the NBA’s collective bargaining talks, and that means folks all over the league are going to come out and suggest (or predict) what either side should do. People are angry and worried, and opinions are flying. David Aldridge of NBA.com is both plugged-in and cautious in his reporting as he says he has the owners’ strategy figured out:

Those were the choices the league laid out to the union in Friday’s disheartening session, according to numerous sources. Fifty-fifty with almost nothing for the tax threshold-breakers, or 53-47 for the league with the negotiations the two sides had worked out all week.

In other words, the league will “give” the players 50 percent of basketball-related income if the players agree to a system in which tax-paying teams do not get to use the mid-level exception and other means through which teams over the cap can nonetheless keeping spending. If the union really wants those exceptions to remain in place for all teams, then the league is going to demand a 53 percent share of basketball-related income, Aldridge reports. The difference — three percentage points — amounts to about $125 million per year going to owners instead of players.

It’s an interesting either-or scenario that cuts to the heart of the union’s dilemma here — a choice the union will fight not to make. On the one hand, taking the larger share of basketball-related income without the exceptions would give the players, as a whole, more raw dollars. But taking the mid-level away from the biggest spenders would likely shift some of that money away from the middle-class veterans who thrive on the mid-level (think Al Harrington, Metta World Peace, Jermaine O’Neal and Steve Blake for recent examples) and toward star players who are going to get their money regardless. Those mid-level players are going to get jobs anyway, but without that particular exception, they may earn less over fewer years.

Keeping those exceptions would maintain those mid-level contracts and some overall market flexibility, but do you fight for those things at the cost of $125 million spread across the total player pool?

Again, the union justifiably wants both a greater share of basketball-related income and something like the current soft cap flexibility for the big spenders. How long are they willing to fight for that double?

 

[Pugz]

if the amenisty does happen, bye-bye ben gordon!

 

[Elite]

if the amenisty does happen, bye-bye ben gordon!

Or Charlie Villanueva...or Rip Hamilton.

lol

 

[RipCity32]

I wish we could amnesty waive Joe Dumars.

 

[lonesomefx]

I wish we could amnesty waive Joe Dumars.

lmfao. i really laughed at this.

 

[Elite]

Don't think this amnesty thing could come at a better time for Miami. Tons of guys who can still play will be cut simply because they're overpaid. Then they'll hit the FA market knowing that they're already getting paid a lot of money so they'll probably be looking to compete instead of for the money in FA.

Bringing in someone like Baron Davis, Marcus Camby, Brandon Roy, or Brendan Haywood could really help this team.

Obviously we wouldn't be able to get all four of those guys, nor is it a forgone conclusion that they get waived but those are some of the guys who are certainly going to be considered, but if we could grab Davis and Camby or Davis and Haywood we'd be a much better team.

 

[elcheato]

Pretty sure last year you said Baron Davis sucked..

 

[Pugz]

Or Charlie Villanueva...or Rip Hamilton.

lol

ben has a longer deal. id rather him be gone and i am a fan of his.