View Poll Results: Should the players accept the current proposal by owners by Wednesday?

Voters
31. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    24 77.42%
  • No - not a good deal, keep negotiating

    3 9.68%
  • No - not a good deal, decertify

    4 12.90%
Page 38 of 98 FirstFirst ... 28 36 37 38 39 40 48 88 ... LastLast
Results 741 to 760 of 1944

Thread: The Lockout & the Raptors: Players approve CBA, Owners too! (1944)

  1. #741
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,002
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
    Disagree with this.
    I'd say the Sport itself is the Factory.
    Fair enough - owners are the promoters who provide the capital to pay and care for the help.

    The owners don't provide the players with the Talent or the Skill.
    They just capitalize on it, and sell it to the masses.
    Which in turn pays the players. WIthout the owners/league backing, the players would never receive the attention and compensation they do. Sure there would be another league - but we'd be in the same situation with those owners as well.


    Do you think that its fair that NCAA athletes make the Schools BILLIONS and yet see nothing in return?
    I wouldn't say nothing - next to nothing but not nothing. They get scholarships, world class facilities, and a platform to develop craft to go on and make money. But who are we kidding: it is peanuts in the big picture and that is not the issue - we are talking NBA.


    Of $60M.
    And a winimum Team Payroll of No-less than $48M(ish). Thats more than ALOT of NBA teams are paying on Salaries right now.
    If by ALOT you mean 1, then I agree. 29 of 30 teams in the NBA had a payroll of over $50M with a softcap of $58M. The only team under $50M was Sacramento at just under $40M. 20 of 30 teams paid $64M or more (would have been 21 except for Denver Melo trade).

    The NHL also has a roster of 23 compared to the NBA's 15 (which is usually 14).

    Are you actually trying to say that NONE of this is due to the Owners own Hand, Matt?
    Of course the owners have a hand in their current situation. They agreed to it in 2005. Now it is over and they want a new agreement. The contract was for 6 years and they are up. What entitlement do the players have to 53%?

  2. #742
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    686
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    They have taken responsibility. They made a mistake by extending a deal that hurt them. That was their mistake. Those obligations were connected to an agreement that no longer exists. They now have no obligations to pay the players anything until both sides come to a new agreement. The contract is over, time to move on friend.
    Making a mistake is not taking responsibility for it. And yes their contract with the union is over, not their contracts with individual players though. Yet they are trying to adjust their current responsibilities to individual players through their new contract with the union.

    Lets see the owners work out a new system while not touching current salaries. Then they would be taking responsibility for their prior actions.

    Actually they won't be operating in a system built around ungodly risks if they get their way and this is the first lockout in 12 years.
    A hard cap will make contracts much more risky as teams will have less ability to compensate for them. Atleast right now teams have the ability, if they choose, to 'hedge' against injuries, or players not working out etc. Under a hard cap they won't. It makes payroll risk smaller as a whole, while increasing the risk of every individual contract.

    Spending X dollars on a player under a Y cap is less risky than paying X dollars to player under a Y-1 cap.

    And as we already know, its the not Lebron or Dwight contracts that are problematic. Its the Gilbert Arenas and Rashard Lewis contracts that are. A hard cap does nothing to fix that... it only makes it worse.
    Last edited by GarbageTime; Thu Oct 13th, 2011 at 06:16 PM.

  3. #743
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,002
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote GarbageTime wrote: View Post
    Making a mistake is not taking responsibility for it. And yes their contract with the union is over, not their contracts with individual players though. Yet they are trying to adjust their current responsibilities to individual players through their new contract with the union.

    Lets see the owners work out a new system while not touching current salaries. Then they would be taking responsibility for their prior actions.



    A hard cap will make contracts much more risky as teams will have less ability to compensate for them. Atleast right now teams have the ability, if they choose, to 'hedge' against injuries, or players not working out etc. Under a hard cap they won't. It makes payroll risk smaller as a whole, while increasing the risk of every individual contract.

    Spending X dollars under a Y cap is less risky than paying X dollars under Y-1 cap.

    And as we already know, its the not Lebron or Dwight contracts that are problematic. Its the Gilbert Arenas and Rashard Lewis contracts that are. A hard cap does nothing to fix that... it only makes it worse.

    Impr
    The players association has the choice to role back contracts for those under contract or leave fewer dollars for their free agent colleagues. It is all the same amount of dollars for the players, it is how it gets distributed.

    Luckily owners are attempting to take contracts from 5/6 years to 3/4 years max. If contracts were only 4 years max for re-signing FA's or sign and trade FA's and 3 years for another team FA, both Gilbert and Rashard would be off the books now.

  4. #744
    Super Moderator Joey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    7,435
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    owners are the promoters.
    Perfect. Great analogy actually, Matt.

    They are Don King. I like it. hahah


    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    Which in turn pays the players. WIthout the owners/league backing, the players would never receive the attention and compensation they do. Sure there would be another league - but we'd be in the same situation with those owners as well.
    Except that the players would never run out of People trying to make money off of their talents.
    The owners WILL run out of Players that they can make Real money off of.

    But yes its the Catch-22 I mentioned. It's a tough call.

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    If by ALOT you mean 1, then I agree. 29 of 30 teams in the NBA had a payroll of over $50M with a softcap of $58M. The only team under $50M was Sacramento at just under $40M. 20 of 30 teams paid $64M or more (would have been 21 except for Denver Melo trade).
    Are we looking at the same information?
    Hoopshype says 16 were under $50M?
    Or is what I'm reading just plain wrong? haha


    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    What entitlement do the players have to 53%?
    Suppose just as much as the Owners have to the 53% they desire.
    Last edited by Joey; Thu Oct 13th, 2011 at 06:23 PM.
    In Masai we Trust.

  5. #745
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    686
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Apollo wrote: View Post
    The owners aren't asking for guarantees. They're telling the players they're taking 50% of the revenue. If the economy tanks even worse, who's giving them this guaranteed money you speak of?
    You are right there, and I probably worded it incorrectly initially. I meant it as capitalism doesn't mean you are or will operate under a profit.

  6. #746
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    686
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    The players association has the choice to role back contracts for those under contract or leave fewer dollars for their free agent colleagues. It is all the same amount of dollars for the players, it is how it gets distributed.

    Luckily owners are attempting to take contracts from 5/6 years to 3/4 years max. If contracts were only 4 years max for re-signing FA's or sign and trade FA's and 3 years for another team FA, both Gilbert and Rashard would be off the books now.
    And the PA is currently offering to do both, just not up to the owners liking. Again remember this is a lockout and the players have offered both salary cuts and future salary restrictions.

    But it also does nothing to address the owner's current responsibilities. I'd bet the players would have no problems (or atleast less of a problem) with the owners offering a smaller future salaries, while taking X% of each current salary and not including it under the cap. In this way owners can meet their current obligations (responsibilities) while being able to adjust for their future system.

    personally this is something I'd be much more for. But thats just me.

    as for the second part... that is completely irrelevant. The next Gilbert Arenas or Rashard Lewis will sign a 4 year contract (or whatever it may be) under the new system and be a burden on their team for the remaining life of the contract. Those two were just examples of the type of problematic contracts.

  7. #747
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    686
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
    Are we looking at the same information?
    Hoopshype says 16 were under $50M?
    Or is what I'm reading just plain wrong? haha
    They are technically incomplete as no moves were made this offseason... so those are not full team rosters

  8. #748
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,002
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote GarbageTime wrote: View Post
    They are technically incomplete as no moves were made this offseason... so those are not full team rosters
    Exactly. They are the 2011-12 rosters on the books thus far (i.e.without free agency, rookie contracts, or extensions).

  9. #749
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,002
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
    Perfect. Great analogy actually, Matt.

    They are Don King. I like it. hahah




    Except that the players would never run out of People trying to make money off of their talents.
    The owners WILL run out of Players that they can make Real money off of.

    But yes its the Catch-22 I mentioned. It's a tough call.



    Are we looking at the same information?
    Hoopshype says 16 were under $50M?
    Or is what I'm reading just plain wrong? haha




    Suppose just as much as the Owners have to the 53% they desire.
    I was looking at 2010-11 information. 2011-12 rosters there at HoopsHype.com do not have rookie deals, free agency, or extensions.

    With regards to 53%, what risk are players taking? What money, capital, or resources are they investing? There only 22 people in the NBA or associated with the NBA last year who did not make money and they were all owners.

  10. #750
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,002
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Interesting quotes from Stern. Unfortunately we are at the point where neither side can be believed 100% as they both seek fan approval and the other's condemnation:

    Via Hoopshype.com:

    Henry Abbott: Stern also says idea of 50/50 BRI split came a month ago from the union's "negotiator." http://player.radio.com/player… Twitter

    Tommy Dee: Stern: We offered the union to look at our books. Union declined. Twitter
    Stern is known as a master manipulator by various media reports. So credibility is an issue here.

    On the other hand, if this is true, it seems as if the union doesn't care many teams are being run in to the ground and they know the league's claims are in fact true.

    Unfortunately, again, is except Larry Coon, I've yet to come across an impartial journalist in this multi-billion dollar 'squabble'.

  11. #751
    Super Moderator Joey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    7,435
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Matt52 wrote: View Post
    With regards to 53%, what risk are players taking? What money, capital, or resources are they investing? There only 22 people in the NBA or associated with the NBA last year who did not make money and they were all owners.
    They are risking bodily injury, that could potentially put them in a stretcher and never have a career again.
    Not sure the owners can say the same. You can always make more money. You can't buy new ACLs. New Ankles. New backs. New shoulders. etc.


    And once again, 22 in the red is what the owners say.
    Its very easy to make losses appear on the books, while still pulling in profit.
    And thats if thats even what the books actually say.
    No way the Union would 'decline' to look at the books. Thats ridiculous.


    And as for the payrolls, that is my mistake.
    Didn't realize until afterwards they were the current payrolls.
    In Masai we Trust.

  12. #752
    Super Moderator Joey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    7,435
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    And the other thing is that the BRI% doesn't say how much the Players HAVE TO make.

    Its the LIMIT to what they CAN make. These two should not be confused.

    If the owners don't exceed the % split, then they don't have to come up with the difference.
    The players just get to keep their own money that is being withheld from them in escrow.

    ADD Which is actually perfectly demonstrated here, by the great Larry Coon, in the Second Chart down. Example A.


    So if the owners get smart and stop dishing out stupid contracts, then maybe they only have to give out 50% worth of revenue. Or 47%. Or whatever their hearts desire.
    Last edited by Joey; Thu Oct 13th, 2011 at 08:10 PM.
    In Masai we Trust.

  13. #753
    Administrator Apollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    11,948
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
    They are risking bodily injury, that could potentially put them in a stretcher and never have a career again.
    Not sure the owners can say the same. You can always make more money. You can't buy new ACLs. New Ankles. New backs. New shoulders. etc.
    Give me a break. That's why there is insurance Joey.

  14. #754
    Raptors Republic Hall of Famer mcHAPPY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    19,002
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Apollo wrote: View Post
    Give me a break. That's why there is insurance Joey.
    Which the team/owner pays for on the player contract.

    Players can take out additional insurance to protect future earnings.

  15. #755
    Super Moderator Joey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    7,435
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Apollo wrote: View Post
    Give me a break. That's why there is insurance Joey.
    Lol, Give you a break Apollo? Ya, I'm done with this anyway. Unfortunately, this forum of debate will solve nothing.

    But you must have been on the owners side in the NFL lockout though, eh?
    Whats another couple of games in the season. Not like their heads and bodies can't handle it.
    They're insured.
    Last edited by Joey; Fri Oct 14th, 2011 at 07:39 AM.
    In Masai we Trust.

  16. #756
    Raptors Republic Starter
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    686
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
    They are risking bodily injury, that could potentially put them in a stretcher and never have a career again.
    Not sure the owners can say the same. You can always make more money. You can't buy new ACLs. New Ankles. New backs. New shoulders. etc.


    And once again, 22 in the red is what the owners say.
    Its very easy to make losses appear on the books, while still pulling in profit.
    And thats if thats even what the books actually say.
    No way the Union would 'decline' to look at the books. Thats ridiculous.


    And as for the payrolls, that is my mistake.
    Didn't realize until afterwards they were the current payrolls
    .
    I did the same thing the first time I looked at it. I was like "what the hell Denver with a 28 mil payroll" and BC let Ujiri go?

  17. #757
    Raptors Republic Superstar TheGloveinRapsUniform's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Markham, Ontario
    Posts
    2,851
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Apollo wrote: View Post
    I hear you friend but keep this in mind though: The NBA PA only has enough money to pay the players for less than a month. These guys live lavish lifestyles. Cut the money pipeline off and you'll see them blinking 100 times per minute. I think the worst case scenario is half a season of work stoppage. Especially if the NBA convinces FIBA to close the doors to their guys.
    If the lower salary players will allow the higher salary players to speak for them, then they're toast. Mind you, the all-stars dont entirely rely on their paychecks, they have endorsements, appearances, etc. And its fairly obvious, the lower-salary players are the ones who are signing up in europe to play. Up until the lower-salary players dont speak up, then the season will not start.

  18. #758
    Administrator Apollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    11,948
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
    Lol, Give you a break Apollo? Ya, I'm done with this anyway. Unfortunately, this forum of debate will solve nothing.
    If we're going to debate this and you're going to use points that don't make sense what am I supposed to say? 3% extra out of billions because they could twist an ankle makes no sense and we told you why.

    Quote joey_hesketh wrote: View Post
    But you must have been on the owners side in the NFL lockout though, eh?
    Whats another couple of games in the season. Not like their heads and bodies can't handle it.
    They're insured.
    Comparing the in game abuse of basketball to football is like comparing a pillow fight to UFC.

    Quote tbihis wrote: View Post
    If the lower salary players will allow the higher salary players to speak for them, then they're toast. Mind you, the all-stars dont entirely rely on their paychecks, they have endorsements, appearances, etc. And its fairly obvious, the lower-salary players are the ones who are signing up in europe to play. Up until the lower-salary players dont speak up, then the season will not start.
    The PA can compensate the players for one month. After that they're out of money. It will be really interesting come December to see what the players think about 50%... If its even still on the table. It probably won't be still on the table.

  19. #759
    Raptors Republic Superstar heinz57's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    in a van down by the river
    Posts
    2,798
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    they should just get scab workers to play. im sure there are hundreds of willing players who are willing to not jump on the union grenade just to get a pay cheque to play a game.

    sure the quality of the game will go down... but seriously, f$%# millionaires who need labor unions for themselves. f$%# them right up their f$%#ing a$%&oles.

  20. #760
    Super Moderator Joey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    7,435
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Apollo wrote: View Post
    If we're going to debate this and you're going to use points that don't make sense what am I supposed to say? 3% extra out of billions because they could twist an ankle makes no sense and we told you why.
    I'm using points that don't make any sense? Really Apollo? And yes, my point was all about a twisted ankle... Indeed.

    I'm done with this. I'll let you guys solve the problem. Clearly I'm not making sense.



    Quote Apollo wrote: View Post
    Comparing the in game abuse of basketball to football is like comparing a pillow fight to UFC.
    I love it when people don't actually answer questions, and instead think providing a stupid analogy is an answer.

    I'd like to see you tell Iverson, or Bogut, or Garbajose, or TJ Ford or Chris Paul that a pillow fight almost cost them their career. Or when guys like Rondo dislocate their elbow, or Nash breaks his face and keeps playing.

    For you to dismiss the fact that the players put their bodies on the line is ridiculous, and to me THAT doesn't make any sense.
    In Masai we Trust.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •