DFDepressed FanDepressed Fan



, all the time

The Owners' Proposal


It worked

The Magic tax level is RIDICULOUS based on their roster. I mean maybe the Mavs and lakers and even celtics can be justified, but the magics just is a demonstration of how poor management can screw you no matter what.

The waiving option helps them out a lot at least to try and build up a new team but can they do it in time to keep dwight?

I don't think the players are going to approve this.

Couple things I liked

1. BYC gone in trades. Stupid thing makes things more difficult.

2. Undercap teams get more room (150%, instead of 125) for matching.

3. Sign and trades do not allow bird rights.

4. No extension/trade trade/extension right away stuff

Those all sound like good system changes.

Some of it is written in legalese and is almost circutuous - doing my best to understand it

I don't really know enough of the legal details to comment on whether this is a "fair deal" or not. I'm just frustrated that the two sides have been unable to reach an agreement.

Stephen A Smith feels the players need to sign cause this is the best offer they're going to get.

I think the players are delusional and entered this entire process with the wrong idea and feeling that they had a stronger position than they actually ahd

Players more delusional than Stephen A? Preposterous!

Unquestionably, this deal is designed to make teams think long and hard about going into the luxury tax. In fact, only teams with a legit shot at winning a title that season would probably do it, and they'd have to have a plan for getting back out of it relatively quickly.

I do kind of think this would help level the playing field, though, and it would also make owners more accountable in that the floor is being raised significantly.

What is the penalty for a team being under the salary threshold? Do they pay the difference and it goes into some sort of escrow account?

It's not spelled out. I would guess that would be the case though, they owe the cash.

The amnesty thing is interesting in salaries paid to cut players would still count toward the players share of the BRI. that could be a significant number over the first three years of the deal.

They are getting paid, so why wouldn't it count?

Is there something about players having to pay back money if they go above 51% of BRI? Sort of the reverse of what the owners had to do?

that's what the escrow is for. The owners are really covered up to 61% if 10% of pay is held in escrow.

I believe this says that either side can get out of the deal after six years, meaning the punitive luxury tax will really only be in effect for 3 years before the CBA can be renegotiated. If that means anything.

Yeah, does mutual mean that EITHER can or BOTH need to opt out?:)

Miami has $72M committed to LeBron, Wade, Bosh, Miller, Haslem and Norris Cole in the first year the luxury tax penalties would go into effect. If they don't amnesty Miller, Haslem or both, they're going to be WAY into the luxury tax to keep that group together.

Ugh, had a thought last night I wanted to turn into a post. Friggin day job is getting in the way.

Like the new layout.

Players reject deal, and will file anti-trust action against the NBA

Kaboom, bye-bye nba season

johnrosz on Nov 14 at 13:59

So anyway, we're not gonna have a season I guess. At least we'll get a decent draft pick and Elton will be on an expiring by the time hoops comes back

Unsurprising outcome - let the pr spin and machinations begin

johnrosz on Nov 14 at 14:06

Hope they enjoy 46 percent BRI and a hard cap

I finally get a winter when I'll be in Philly, and there will be no season.

Oh well, what team should I start following? I'm leading towards watching Euroleague games, but my Spanish is not so good. So maybe I should follow a college team?

I was really looking forward to watching the Sixers, but losing the season will hurt them a whole lot more than it hurts me. And when the NBA does return, I'll probably be less into it than I was.

johnrosz reply to tk76 on Nov 14 at 14:22

I can't believe they're doing this. Since this is going to be a year plus long thing...I'd like to see some contraction, but that's wishful thinking

Why can't you believe it? Your rosy optimism never matched with anything the players said out loud. This was inevitable, the players never gave any indication they were ready to sign something so vastly different from what they signed last time. I'm not sure why anyone is surprised this is what's happened.

johnrosz reply to GoSixers on Nov 14 at 14:30

I thought there'd be enough realists in the room to drop the tough guy act when it was all said and done. Now they're being led to slaughter.

I think they would have caved, but they have not yet even missed an actual paycheck. So the process happened to fast for the owners to really exert their leverage.

Forgetting what was said publicly, it's hard to believe that a group of adults can be this stupid.


1. The Tea Party
2. People who thought giving mortgages to people with sub 500 credit ratings was a good idea
3. Religious Zealots
4. Scientologists

Look around you - there are groups of 'adults' every day who do things and believe things even stupider - even when millions aren't at stake

Its like when someone is told they owe a bunch of money on their credit card or their house has lost a lot of value. People understand it, but it does not hit home the same as when you can actually get you house or credit cards taken away.

Sort of like how the political parties cannot come to consensus to solve the nations financial mess. The sides know the stakes and the money involved, but by the time the consequences start happening (default) it will be to late. Same thing happened with the NBA season.

Political parties only want to win and get re-elected

The problems of the average american are as irrelevant to them as they are to etan thomas - don't fool yourself

These guys barely have a high school education and the guys that are advising them are agents and union leaders who have their own agenda. Can you really blame the players?

Yes - because they don't bother to educate themselves on the issues...they put their fate in someone elses hands - they have NO ONE to blame but themselves

I'm very, very angry right now.

@ChrisMannixSI: One veteran player texted that his union rep "never called and never asked" his opinion on the offer.

johnrosz reply to Brian on Nov 14 at 14:32

the superstars that can go earn millions overseas are the ones playing the tough guy card.

Why isn't Jodie Meeks a player rep? Guys that are actually going to be affected by this deal? Dumb

Um - who do you think the player reps are - didn't we go through this already?

Sharone Wright reply to Brian on Nov 14 at 14:34

I am totally surprised. They were pretty close on everything, I thought. The players kind of agreed to 50-50 and they were running out of things to argue about. This seems like pride more than anything else. The players were disproportionately offended by the ultimatum for some reason.

No - they weren't close on everything - which is part of the problem - too many people thought this was ALL sbout the BRI - cause that's how the owners framed it - but Hunter and Fisher were talking about the system issues - that's more than the BRI and the owners tried to frame the public perception in their favor and make the players look like the bad guys

which they did a helluva job on actually - they're both at fault - but NBA PR was better so the players will take more blame

Sharone Wright reply to GoSixers on Nov 14 at 14:41

But it wasn't just the owners talking about BRI. The players were constantly talking about the BRI and 52.5, etc. Oh man, this sucks. Well, at least I will save money on season tix. This is as bad as when the Sixers picked me 6th in the draft. :)

They talked about other specific changes as well (read the proposal pdf)...the players always focused on BRI being the ONLY thing they had to compromise on. They were deluded to think that if they came in 'low enough' on the BRI then nothing eles would change. TO me it was obvious from everything Stern ever said that they wanted serious change to the system not just a BRI adjustment and the players seemed clueless - Hunter should be fired immediately

Sharone Wright reply to GoSixers on Nov 14 at 14:54

He pretty much is fired. The attorneys run the show now in court. He should get 0% of his BRI.

So anyone who follows nba twitterers - what's they gots to say about this here shenanigan?

I haven't seen anything, though I think Fisher/Hunter asked for silence.

Though since there won't be a union anymore, I'm not sure who would hold them accountable.

Sharone Wright on Nov 14 at 14:49

Boy, our new owners really are making things happen, aren't they? Welcome to the NBA.

I guess this means that the agents, hardline owners and KG's of the world have won. Hope they enjoy their victory. A large proportion of 4 Billion dollars that they won't be getting, and thousands of normal people who will be losing money during a bad economy.

From the agents perspective:
They knew the players had zerol leverage so the figured why noty take a shot in the courts. Plus, its not like the agents have anything to lose from a lost season.

From the hard line owners perspective:
Will make more money not playing. And their only shot at ever winning a a championship is to have bigger system changes than the players would ever agree to right now.

from KG's perspective:
I am a superstar. You are all nothing without me. You have no right to negotiate better terms. I have already made $270,000,000 in my career, and don't need to meet you half way because I am KG.

johnrosz on Nov 14 at 14:55

Stern seems amazed/amused that they didn't at least put it to a vote for entire union body.

He should be. I can't believe that 450 union members are giving up a huge chunk of their careers w/out even getting to vote on it.

johnrosz reply to Brian on Nov 14 at 15:00

I know there aren't a ton of Bill Simmons fans here, but his term "lack of intellectual capital" on the union side is quite true.

They have no idea how badly this is going to turn out. I don't think I've read one scenario where this turns out in their favor.

He should be - and I am too - I didn't think the union would pass it but it's hubris not to put it to a union vote

It is amazing to me that the sides can spend hundreds of hours in face to face negotiations, and still not have a good read on what the other side will do.

Sharone Wright on Nov 14 at 14:58

Didn't Demaurice Smith already tell them that decertification isn't goig to help them? They have almost no shot of winning in the courts. Agh.

And it will be hard to call anything a win when they lose an season and a year of their careers.

Best case in the courts is winning a big judgment. Of course, it'll take a year to get the win, then another 2 or 3 years for the appeals process w/ no hoops being paid in the mean time. So they break even if they win say, $6B in the law suit.

johnrosz reply to tk76 on Nov 14 at 15:02

we might be looking at something crazy like non guaranteed deals. the union has opened themselves up to disaster, "blood issues" are fair game now

The first thing we're going to hear about is tearing up every contract because they were written under the CBA which is null and void because one of the negotiating partners no longer exists.

I still think there could be a season. The drop dead date is a while away. But obviously things do not look good- but that is sometime what has to happen for a deal to get done.

In 1 month the players will finally have missed some paychecks, and have a better view of what they are headed for. It is possible that at that point clearer heads will prevail (if the league allows them to make a deal.)

If all of that happens, what are the odds Stern can get enough owners to agree to the deal the union just spat on?

Sharone Wright reply to Brian on Nov 14 at 15:14

Not good.

johnrosz reply to Brian on Nov 14 at 15:15

Reports were coming out the other day that Stern hated the quality of the 50 game season, and has been dead set on getting at least 70 games in.

At this point, I think the hardliners are going to lose any shred of sanity that they've ever had. They'll go for the kill.

50 games is better than 0 games though.

The union first has to have the de-certify pre vote right - and then you get the 45 day clock? Can they settle within that or is the vote 'mandatory'?

From what they were saying before, they have 45 days after the vote in order to still negotiate.

The trials are a whole different animal. They go on forever and are just to gain leverage.

Sharone Wright reply to GoSixers on Nov 14 at 15:35

I think the union's going to file a notice of disclaimer. different from a decertification in that the union disclaims the players. No vote needed. No 45 day waiting period.

Yeah - ESPN said they did that already - i didn't know what it meant - something about them not being a union but a trade organizatoin

Seriously - one of these sports networks needs a labor lawyer :)

johnrosz on Nov 14 at 15:38

Marreese Speights
Why did the players do that smfh

Sharone Wright on Nov 14 at 15:39

Marreese Speights' verified Twitter account: RT @Mospeights16 Why did the players do that smfh

johnrosz reply to Sharone Wright on Nov 14 at 15:40

it's like the team reps don't even represent the union

Someone ask Speights if he READ the proposal? Or has a clue what it said

johnrosz reply to GoSixers on Nov 14 at 15:45

of course he didn't, but I'm sure he wants to get his paycheck. I think he's right in his blissful ignorance though, the players really shouldn't have done that.

The problem is that if yo ucall for an 'uneducated' vote - then you got 8 years of a monkey running a country - uninformed voters are just bad - from the players point of view - if they called for a vote but all the players didn't read the proposal then they're bitching about it AFTER it's approved? Leadership looks even more incompetent

This was a BAD deal for the payers but it was the best they are really going to get in my opinion

johnrosz reply to GoSixers on Nov 14 at 15:55

The players that are informed on the clearly lopsided deal don't seem to be informed on the most probable outcomes of what they decided to do today. Of course Kessler says he can win in court, he gets paid a handsome sum for this, and it's his job to think he can win.

Today was the day that the realists needed to speak up, and they didn't. The idiots like Spencer Hawes were the ones who ruled the room today. A guy that doesn't even know what he stands for. Now the overwhelming opinion from the media and the legal experts that they've spoken to is that the NBPA made a critical mistake on this one.

If the players are percieved to cave then Kessler's reputation is hurt.

If he wins a legal batter that effects the landscape of labor relations moving forward then Kessler gets a big career boost. Even if it is a hollow victory for the players given they end up losing money.

Sharone Wright on Nov 14 at 15:44

This Kessler guy is a gold-plated jerk.

Did you see the quote about how the guys who were on the 'opposite' sides of the NFL negotiation are on the same side for the NBA means the players must be in the right?

I laughed - it means the players are paying and ownership has good in house counsel :)

Sharone Wright reply to GoSixers on Nov 14 at 16:06

Yes, I did. Kessler lost handily in the NFL lockout, so why do the players expect anything different now?

Cause they're not decertifying but moving to a trade association? (Anyone find the difference yet)

The issues in the NFL and NBA are quite different - for the NFL it more about the revenue split (in a different way, not the percentage but the skim off the top). There weren't major changes in many other places, aside from rookie contracts, which the active players don't care much about, in terms of free agency and player movement.

The players in the NBA feel that the owners proposals make free agency too onerous and thus basically do away with free agency - that's how I see it - they are going to accuse the owners of establishing a system that doesn't give players the rights they deserve.

It's not curt flood (who lost) but still...

Like I said above, the players could win in the courts over system issues.

That would be good news for Kessler and the agents- but would be a costly and hollow victory for players )and be bad for the fans of most teams.)

I don't believe anything is going to be decided in the courts regarding system issues. It's my understanding that this is purely seeking damages, and maybe if a couple of early rulings go the players' way, the league would be motivated to sweeten their offer. Of course, if it goes like the NFL law suit went, then the owners will simply be emboldened to go back to their original offer.

johnrosz reply to tk76 on Nov 14 at 17:48

I haven't seen any indication that they can win anything significant in court. And I've read that any tangible victory in court would take 2 or 3 years. I don't know...

A noble effort by the players, but they're going to end up being the generation that destroyed player rights, when they intended to make a stand for that very cause.

johnrosz on Nov 14 at 17:57

Anyone who's looking for some positives...

We'll never have to see Spencer Hawes in a Sixers uniform again.

My first smile of the day.

johnrosz reply to Brian on Nov 14 at 18:10

2012 FA pool will be impressive.

Owners should amnesty Iguodala in my opinion, make a huge splash in FA with his money.

Then use the cap space from EB's expiring in 2013.

Bang, complete rebuild in a 2 year period.

Thoughts on my half baked idea?

Depends on how the amnesty works

Dumping your best player to improve your team is a horrible idea

why would a veteran wanna come to a team without Iguodala - no way that team wins

that's it for now

I think you wait and see if you need to amnesty Iguodala to make cap space. If you've got Dwight Howard on the hook, I think you'd be better off letting Brand go to clear the space and keeping Iguodala to put the best team possible on the floor to play w/ Dwight.

Of course, you're assuming there will be a season next year, and I'm not sure that's a safe assumption if/when this season is lost. It's not like the owners are suddenly going to offer the players a better deal, and this collective-formerly-known-as-a-union is super unified and has a ton of backbone. If it's stuck in the courts, we could be talking about seasons.

On the plus side, maybe we'll get to see some good college basketball for a change if teams are actually staying together for four years.

Oh - i think there will be a season next year - all those players going cashless for an entire season? they'll buckle - they'll cave - exactly like mr burns and his shiny sidekick planned

You know whose most screwed in this - rookies - those dudes can't go back to school and they can't make money

The Voose is cleaning up in Montenegro.

johnrosz reply to GoSixers on Nov 14 at 18:29

the union had Keyon Dooling answering questions to the available media after the press conference. He looked like a scared child, he was asking where Billy Hunter and Wasserman were when the questions got technical. Like a scared child asking for his mommy.

These players have no idea what they're getting into. At what point does reality set in for them? January? Or next August

I think the first missed check will come this month.

I believe November 16th

johnrosz reply to GoSixers on Nov 14 at 18:47

that would be hilarious, a complete 180 and a change of tune after they realized the NBA was not bluffing

Expand/Contract all comments

Leave a comment