NBA Labor Issue

[DenverSooner]

What I don't get about the NBA is that as I understand things there are no contracts with the players right now (perhaps I misunderstand this). If that is the case, why don't the players simply tell the owners to F.O. and start a new league. It could be the World Basketball Association or the North American Basketball Association or the National Baskeball League with the unions owning the teams. There would likely be some issues with venues at first; however, those issues would resolve themselves quite quickly. David Stern can go straigt to he__ and this labor dispute would be over.

If I represented the union this would be the avenue I would be exploring. I suspect I am missing something but the way they report these labor disputes is like the guys are no longer under contract.

 

[bocabull]

The players are overplaying their hand right now because they have nothing to lose. They only lose money when games aren't played.

This is why Stern has made idle threats about canceling the season. But his recent threat about canceling games is getting close to reality.

Expect a deal within the next month. Sounds like the sides are getting really close. Just some last minute posturing on the final revenue sharing %. When push comes to shove and the game checks/league revenue is at risk they will compromise on the final %.

My bet is 51.5% players 48.5% owners which is halfway from where they are now.

 

[boksooner]

The big question will be how hard or soft the cap ends up. I think you split is probably right; I just wonder how many exceptions will work their way into the agreement (mid-level, Bird, etc.).

 

[thebigabd]

I know that most players are idiots and will be broke if they dont play.

I know that most owners are not idiots and have millions/billions tied up in other investments, companies, etc.

Owners will be fine, players wont. Therefore, players will cave.

 

[Tony]

I know that most players are idiots and will be broke if they dont play.

I know that most owners are not idiots and have millions/billions tied up in other investments, companies, etc.

Owners will be fine, players wont. Therefore, players will cave.

Hilarious.

 

[thebigabd]

Hilarious.

and true....

 

[Tony]

and true....

Not true.

Explain to me why the business geniuses that run NBA teams have managed to (according to them) run their industry into financial ruin, despite taxpayers paying hundreds of millions of dollars for their facilities. You'd think smart guys would be more financially savvy than that.

 

[DenverSooner]

Interesting discussion but it does not address the point of whether or not the players are under contract. If they are not, they should tell the owners they are forming their own league. That would drastically changes the negotiations. The owners would claim they have the rights to the arenas but that is called a liability not an asset. Most cities have an alternative venue.

The television networks don't care who owns the teams. The American people don't care if the team in Miami is called the Heat or the Divers, they just want to see Lebron. I truly don't understand why the players don't simply take the entire industry from the owners. I normally would not say such a thing because I normally don't think workers have this much power, however, in professional sports there are no material assets other than the players. New coaches can be found, new logos can be designed. None of that nonsense matters and to the extent it does, the owners will mess themselves trying to save their franchies worth hundreds of milllions of dollars. Just the threat of doing this is a game changer. If the issue is money to finance it, call up Bill Gates or someone else with a ton of money. If the players have the legal right to do this, the owners would have no choice but to cave.

 

[thebigabd]

If they are not, they should tell the owners they are forming their own league. That would drastically changes the negotiations. The owners would claim they have the rights to the arenas but that is called a liability not an asset. Most cities have an alternative venue.

Forming your own league would be a colossal project. Would need revenue, ability to pay-out contracts, buy new facilities, and go from everything from advertising to concessions. It would take years to get off the ground.

I don't think the players or unions have the ability or know-how to pull of such a thing. All the union knows how to do is try to get more money for the players, and all the players know how to do is play basketball. They can't run something of this size.

The television networks don't care who owns the teams.

The TV networks will still want to deal with a competent association, and one with stability. They dont want to sell valuable tv time for something that could and would fall apart.

Most cities have an alternative venue.

Right, I guess OKC could play in Gallagher-Iba or something.

I truly don't understand why the players don't simply take the entire industry from the owners.

Because they don't have the capital or know-how to do it. A large portion of these guys are literally idiots.

Explain to me why the business geniuses that run NBA teams have managed to (according to them) run their industry into financial ruin, despite taxpayers paying hundreds of millions of dollars for their facilities. You'd think smart guys would be more financially savvy than that.

Well, most companies don't have to pay their employees this much. I mean, how is this for a payroll:

Dexter Pittman: $474,000
Mario Chalmers: $854,000
Jamaal Magloire: $854,000
Juwan Howard: $854,000
Erick Dampier: $854,000
Mike Bibby: $854,000
James Jones: $1.1 million
Ilgauskas: $1.4 million
Eddie House: $1.4 million
Joel Anthony: $3.3 million
Udonis Haslem: $3.5 million
Mike Miller: $5 million
Dwayne Wade: $14.2 million
Lebron James: $14.5 million
Chris Bosh: $14.5 million

Then you have coaches and assistant coaches who make millions. Then you have doctors, training staff, facilities, etc.

PLUS, you have to advertise for all these guys. That costs millions. Then you have to manufacture all of their shirts, jerseys, media guides, shorts, etc. Then you to pay for the upkeep of the arenas. That costs millions. Then you have to pay hundreds of other people anything from $8.00 an hour for custodial staff to six-figure and up executives. Then you have to pay taxes on everything. Thats millions. There is even more to it than that.

On top of all that, the players and coaches constantly want more money.

 

[Tony]

Well, most companies don't have to pay their employees.

Actually, most companies DO have to pay their employees, and they do it without the luxury of the taxpayers paying for their building. Not sure what you mean by that.

Newsflash: There is not a law forcing these owners to own professional basketball teams. There are plenty of people lining up that would love to own one. The Atlanta Hawks just sold for $300 million. If the NBA is such a bad investment, the current owners should cash out now. You'd think such genius businessmen could figure that out.

You can moan all you want about how much the players make, but the reality is their salaries are actually artificially deflated from what they would make on the open market, because the salary cap exists. And, as you so effectively articulated to Denver, the NBA has an effective monopoly on the sport so players have no choice but to negotiate their contracts under the constraints of a salary cap.

 

[NickZepp]

If the top players start playing in Europe or overseas there may not be a lot of motivation from the players side get a deal done fast. That's what sucks. Some of the lower tier players that don't really have a Europe option may be screwed.

 

[NickZepp]

What real companies don't pay their employees? Wouldn't it be illegal for a company to have people working for them without paying them?

 

[Tony]

BTW it is downright ludicrous to suggest that NBA teams print media guides or make t-shirts out of the goodness of their hearts and just because that comes with being an NBA owner. Owners do those things because they make money hand-over-fist on them, and if they don't, they are absolute idiots. Being able to license out your brand to apparel companies is one of the perks of being an NBA owner, not one obstacles, and to argue otherwise is absurd.

 

[Tony]

That's not even getting to the issue of the draft, which is ridiculously owner-friendly. Not just the rookie salary scale, but the entire concept itself.

How much do you think Blake Griffin would have made on the open market coming out of college if he was up to the highest bidder and there was no salary cap?

 

[DenverSooner]

Money is not the issue with union forming it's own league. Bill gates and Donald Trump could back the entire league at 6.5% interest with a 5% take on the TV contract for ever. I would speculate that would amount to a usurious rate of interest if it were structured as interest but you just call it equity and it is fine.

 

[thebigabd]

Actually, most companies DO have to pay their employees

Ugh, typo. I meant to say most companies don't have to pay their employees millions per year.

If the NBA is such a bad investment, the current owners should cash out now. You'd think such genius businessmen could figure that out.

It's a bad investment and now there is a lockout because of it. Anything where you have to give players almost all basketball-related earnings is a bad investment.

You can moan all you want about how much the players make, but the reality is their salaries are actually artificially deflated from what they would make on the open market, because the salary cap exists.

The salary cap evens the playing field. You rarely have a situation in the NBA where one team literally bought a championship. The Heat tried to do it last year and it didnt work. But if there was no cap and an open market system, you can bet your ass that someone like the Lakers would buy Kobe Bryant, Dwight Howard, Kevin Durant, Dirk Nowitzki, etc. It creates a competitive disadvantage, especially for teams with less history in smaller markets (say, Milwaukee, Minnesota, Oklahoma City, etc).

BTW it is downright ludicrous to suggest that NBA teams print media guides or make t-shirts out of the goodness of their hearts and just because that comes with being an NBA owner. Owners do those things because they make money hand-over-fist on them, and if they don't, they are absolute idiots. Being able to license out your brand to apparel companies is one of the perks of being an NBA owner, not one obstacles, and to argue otherwise is absurd.

Not when you have to give 60% of all "basketball related income" to the players. At that point it becomes an obstacle. That would be like you owning a lemonade stand and giving 60% of your profit to the guy brewing the lemonade. Would you even want to own that stand at that point? I sure as hell wouldnt.

Unless, of course, those types of things are not considered "basketball related income" as they put it. If I am wrong on that, I will toss this argument.

That's not even getting to the issue of the draft, which is ridiculously owner-friendly. Not just the rookie salary scale, but the entire concept itself.

How much do you think Blake Griffin would have made on the open market coming out of college if he was up to the highest bidder and there was no salary cap?

The draft and salary cap give the other teams in the league with less money and smaller markets a chance to put together a competitive team. You think Durant and Westbrook would be an OKC in the open market?

In your world, there would be 4-6 loaded super teams (probably Dallas, LAL, Miami, New York, Boston) that would use their name, city, and money to buy up all the best players, and the other 24 teams would be left with the scraps.

Its not a viable option. Without a draft and owners having the "rights" to certain players through free agency and the draft, how in the hell would Minnesota, Milwaukee, Indy, Sacramento, OKC, Charlotte, etc make it?

 

[ousooners1baby]

Question......How much is a media guide now? If it is under $10 at a game I would be shocked. Therefore, I do not believe they are printed for fans enjoyment without making big bucks on them.

 

[thebigabd]

Question......How much is a media guide now? If it is under $10 at a game I would be shocked. Therefore, I do not believe they are printed for fans enjoyment without making big bucks on them.

I was just reeling stuff off that I see at games... food, jerseys, shorts, misc stuff, media guides, etc. I wasnt trying to say, "OMG! THEY HAVE TO PRINT THE MEDIA GUIDE!", lol.

Geez, people pick the most insignificant thing out of the argument, lol.

 

[bocabull]

Hang in there guys. This is about over and since it's close to the end each side will ratchet up the rhetoric for PR purposes.

The real leverage for the owners is about to start when they cancel games which is why the owners canceled the most recent meeting. When those game checks stop going out the players lose bigtime.

As for who is right or wrong ... nobody. This is free enterprise and collective bargaining. Two mainstays that make the US system the best in the world. Both sides are negotiating for the best deal for their interests. The side who has the most leverage when all is said and done will come out a little ahead which is the way it should work.

We shall see who has the most leverage but when it's done it will be water under the bridge.

 

[DenverSooner]

In your world, there would be 4-6 loaded super teams (probably Dallas, LAL, Miami, New York, Boston) that would use their name, city, and money to buy up all the best players, and the other 24 teams would be left with the scraps.

Its not a viable option. Without a draft and owners having the "rights" to certain players through free agency and the draft, how in the hell would Minnesota, Milwaukee, Indy, Sacramento, OKC, Charlotte, etc make it?

Have you ever seen MLB? I am pretty sure they don't have a salary cap in baseball and it works. The Yankees spend the most and win the most but they don't always win.

Your notion that this couldn't work is a wrong in my opinion. In OKC the franchise could play in the Myriad (I am assuming it is still there) until the owner filed bankruptcy and then move back to new arena (they could also play in Tulsa). The TV money will flow instantly, the ticket sales will happen instantly. Regardless the idea doesn't need to work to be a complete game changer in the negotiation. If the threat is real, the owners would almost have to cave.

Edit - If I represented the union the first thing I would do is divide the owners, then I would go after Stern.