Berger on the CBA Talks (The Big Lockout Thread) (Farewell to the Lockout and the Thread, p. 259)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 255, 256, 257, 258, 259  Next

 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Topic HOF This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
magic_bryant
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 18179

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 7:41 pm    Post subject:

AH- How is your cynical answer any different than what I suggested just two weeks ago when the "player reps" turned down the take-it-or-leave-it deal? Hunter played the player reps then by not telling them to take it to vote. Now two weeks later, he gets basically the same deal and gives them the "ok" to take it to vote..?

As was the case from the get-go, it was all about Hunter's ego, Stern's ego, the players' ego, and the owners' ego. Everyone wanted to win. Hunter just played his cards accordingly.
_________________
Stephon Marbury on Kobe: "He's the only person on 'dis earth that can do 'dat. He guards people, like shuts 'em down. Then, to do 'dat on 'da offensive end. It's like 'Damn, I can't score on him AND he about to bust my ass."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 23917

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 11:30 pm    Post subject:

composite wrote:
Perhaps, but it gives a buffer of an extra $10 mil or so, b/c the punitive measures don't kick in.


You can look at it that way, but the soft cap really isn't a "cap" at all. It's just a threshold after which a team loses the unrestricted right to sign players. Instead, the team has to use "exceptions." I wouldn't call that a buffer.


Last edited by Aeneas Hunter on Tue Nov 29, 2011 11:41 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 23917

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 11:35 pm    Post subject:

composite wrote:
So long as NBA players are earning millions playing basketball, they will never, ever, ever go on strike.

Think about it - these NBA players barely had the political will to stand up to a LOCKOUT. Do you seriously think they'll have the political will to initiate a STRIKE?


No, but I can imagine the union opting out of the new CBA in six years and forcing another lockout. I think the owners will opt out first, though.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 23917

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 11:38 pm    Post subject:

Quote:
If that occurs, the re-formed union would then begin discussions with the NBA on the remaining items that were not addressed in Saturday's agreement, including several of the so-called "B List" issues that need to be answered.


Considering the significance of some of the B list issues, that's a bit troubling. The league had some pretty major demands on the B list.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 23917

PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2011 11:43 pm    Post subject:

magic_bryant wrote:
AH- How is your cynical answer any different than what I suggested just two weeks ago when the "player reps" turned down the take-it-or-leave-it deal?


Do you seriously think I remember some post you wrote two weeks ago? Anyway, I've been cynical about Billy Hunter for a lot longer than two weeks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Rick12322
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 27 Jun 2005
Posts: 19164

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 7:04 am    Post subject:

How does revenue sharing(which apparently is different from the luxury tax) work? What determines who pays and who receives?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 29866

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 7:17 am    Post subject:

venturalakersfan wrote:
Can someone explain the 6-month rule when doing an extend and trade? I heard a writer discussing it on radio, and supposedly it will prevent players from demanding a trade to a certain team if his existing team doesn't like the deal.


It's something the owners have asked for, which is still to be negotiated.

Right now, a player can sign an extension and immediately be traded (as what happened with Carmelo Anthony).

The owners want a 6-month buffer. If a player signs an extension with his current team, he can't be traded to another team for six months. If a player is traded, he can't sign an extension with his new team for six months.

It would stop platers from forcing a trade to a team at the same time they sign a maximum contract extension.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 23917

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 8:22 am    Post subject:

Rick12322 wrote:
How does revenue sharing(which apparently is different from the luxury tax) work? What determines who pays and who receives?


There is supposedly an agreement among the owners on this, but it is not yet public information.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Wilt
LG Contributor
LG Contributor


Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 12002

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:14 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
Can someone explain the 6-month rule when doing an extend and trade? I heard a writer discussing it on radio, and supposedly it will prevent players from demanding a trade to a certain team if his existing team doesn't like the deal.


It's something the owners have asked for, which is still to be negotiated.

Right now, a player can sign an extension and immediately be traded (as what happened with Carmelo Anthony).

The owners want a 6-month buffer. If a player signs an extension with his current team, he can't be traded to another team for six months. If a player is traded, he can't sign an extension with his new team for six months.

It would stop platers from forcing a trade to a team at the same time they sign a maximum contract extension.


That's a pretty good idea, though I'd extend it to a year. But maybe the players objected to that.
_________________
¡Hala Madrid!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Rick12322
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 27 Jun 2005
Posts: 19164

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:25 am    Post subject:

Talk about no leverage, anything negotiated after the lawsuit is dismissed is probably in the bag for owners.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 23917

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:54 am    Post subject:

Rick12322 wrote:
Talk about no leverage, anything negotiated after the lawsuit is dismissed is probably in the bag for owners.


Really neither side has any leverage at this point. Still, I'm not counting the settlement as a done deal until those B list issues are resolved. The owners still have the ability to make a mess of things.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Rick12322
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 27 Jun 2005
Posts: 19164

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:56 am    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Rick12322 wrote:
Talk about no leverage, anything negotiated after the lawsuit is dismissed is probably in the bag for owners.


Really neither side has any leverage at this point. Still, I'm not counting the settlement as a done deal until those B list issues are resolved. The owners still have the ability to make a mess of things.


How can the lawsuit remain in force after the players reform the union?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Lowest Merion
Retired


Joined: 22 Jun 2010
Posts: 10720

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:16 am    Post subject:

Marc Stein:
Quote:
NBPA tells players and agents it needs 260 signed union authorization cards by Thursday night or it can't keep working on new CBA w/league

Story link coming shortly, but NBPA fears w/out 260 signed union authorization cards turned in by Thursday night, new CBA could be delayed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Lowest Merion
Retired


Joined: 22 Jun 2010
Posts: 10720

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:18 am    Post subject:

Zach Lowe's latest:
Quote:
The NBA and the players who served as plaintiffs in a landmark antitrust case against the league struck a deal late Tuesday night to settle the lawsuit, pending the re-formation of the players’ union and the writing of a new collective bargaining agreement, according to sources close to the talks.


http://nba-point-forward.si.com/2011/11/30/sources-players-settle-lawsuit-against-league/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 29866

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:21 am    Post subject:

Wilt wrote:
activeverb wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
Can someone explain the 6-month rule when doing an extend and trade? I heard a writer discussing it on radio, and supposedly it will prevent players from demanding a trade to a certain team if his existing team doesn't like the deal.


It's something the owners have asked for, which is still to be negotiated.

Right now, a player can sign an extension and immediately be traded (as what happened with Carmelo Anthony).

The owners want a 6-month buffer. If a player signs an extension with his current team, he can't be traded to another team for six months. If a player is traded, he can't sign an extension with his new team for six months.

It would stop platers from forcing a trade to a team at the same time they sign a maximum contract extension.


That's a pretty good idea, though I'd extend it to a year. But maybe the players objected to that.



The players haven't agreed to the 6-month buffer yet. This is one of several important B issues that still need to be negotiated. The players, of course, would prefer a buffer of no kind because it limits player movement.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 29866

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 10:25 am    Post subject:

Rick12322 wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Rick12322 wrote:
Talk about no leverage, anything negotiated after the lawsuit is dismissed is probably in the bag for owners.


Really neither side has any leverage at this point. Still, I'm not counting the settlement as a done deal until those B list issues are resolved. The owners still have the ability to make a mess of things.


How can the lawsuit remain in force after the players reform the union?



The reformation of the union is necessary to conduct the official settlement talks. If the talks don't reach an agreement, the union can disclaim again and the lawsuit can go forward. I don't know if that would require the lawsuit to be re-filed, but either way that would be a minor technical matter. For all practical purposes, the lawsuit is in force until a settlement is reached.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 29866

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 12:13 pm    Post subject:

Rick12322 wrote:
Talk about no leverage, anything negotiated after the lawsuit is dismissed is probably in the bag for owners.


The lawsuit hasn't been dismissed. The purpose of the settlement talks is to end the lawsuit. If the union and league don't reach agreement on the B issues, or if the players don't agree approve the CBA, the lawsuit would go forward.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
composite
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 31 May 2005
Posts: 3017

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 1:04 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
composite wrote:
So long as NBA players are earning millions playing basketball, they will never, ever, ever go on strike.

Think about it - these NBA players barely had the political will to stand up to a LOCKOUT. Do you seriously think they'll have the political will to initiate a STRIKE?


No, but I can imagine the union opting out of the new CBA in six years and forcing another lockout. I think the owners will opt out first, though.


The union will never opt out. If the union opts out, they risk getting a worse deal from the owners. Again, what's their leverage vs the owners? Both sides know the union won't strike.

If the NBA's revenues are up, and the owners are making a massive windfall from this deal compared w/ the previous one, guess what? So are the players! Their 51% kicks in, and since overall revenues are up, their take-home is much higher. They'll be ecstatic. A strike will be the farthest thing on their mind.

C'mon AH. If there's one thing this lockout should've taught you, is that tall black men making millions of dollars playing basketball for a short career don't have much stomach for a prolonged labor dispute.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
OX1947
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 30 Jun 2001
Posts: 14951
Location: Winchester, CA.

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 2:22 pm    Post subject:

composite wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
composite wrote:
So long as NBA players are earning millions playing basketball, they will never, ever, ever go on strike.

Think about it - these NBA players barely had the political will to stand up to a LOCKOUT. Do you seriously think they'll have the political will to initiate a STRIKE?


No, but I can imagine the union opting out of the new CBA in six years and forcing another lockout. I think the owners will opt out first, though.


The union will never opt out. If the union opts out, they risk getting a worse deal from the owners. Again, what's their leverage vs the owners? Both sides know the union won't strike.

If the NBA's revenues are up, and the owners are making a massive windfall from this deal compared w/ the previous one, guess what? So are the players! Their 51% kicks in, and since overall revenues are up, their take-home is much higher. They'll be ecstatic. A strike will be the farthest thing on their mind.

C'mon AH. If there's one thing this lockout should've taught you, is that tall black men making millions of dollars playing basketball for a short career don't have much stomach for a prolonged labor dispute.


What about the white players?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Reply with quote
RG73
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 14 Jul 2001
Posts: 11120

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 3:12 pm    Post subject:

composite wrote:


C'mon AH. If there's one thing this lockout should've taught you, is that tall black men making millions of dollars playing basketball for a short career don't have much stomach for a prolonged labor dispute.


Just wow.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 137814
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 5:02 pm    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
Can someone explain the 6-month rule when doing an extend and trade? I heard a writer discussing it on radio, and supposedly it will prevent players from demanding a trade to a certain team if his existing team doesn't like the deal.


It's something the owners have asked for, which is still to be negotiated.

Right now, a player can sign an extension and immediately be traded (as what happened with Carmelo Anthony).

The owners want a 6-month buffer. If a player signs an extension with his current team, he can't be traded to another team for six months. If a player is traded, he can't sign an extension with his new team for six months.

It would stop platers from forcing a trade to a team at the same time they sign a maximum contract extension.


Thanks, I did find a reference to it. It looks like an alternative extend and trade option is to sign an extension limited to two years with only 4.5% raises, and being able to be traded immediately.
_________________
If you could choose between dating a supermodel or going fishing, would it be saltwater or freshwater?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 23917

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:34 pm    Post subject:

Rick12322 wrote:
How can the lawsuit remain in force after the players reform the union?


In theory, the lawsuit could proceed all the way to judgment, though it would be limited to damages suffered during the period between decertification and recertification. Of course, the owners are insisting that the lawsuit be resolved as part of the deal, but the union isn't a plaintiff and has no power to settle the lawsuit without the consent of the named players. You may recall that there were some issues with the named plaintiffs in the NFL lawsuit.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 23917

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 6:42 pm    Post subject:

composite wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
composite wrote:
So long as NBA players are earning millions playing basketball, they will never, ever, ever go on strike.

Think about it - these NBA players barely had the political will to stand up to a LOCKOUT. Do you seriously think they'll have the political will to initiate a STRIKE?


No, but I can imagine the union opting out of the new CBA in six years and forcing another lockout. I think the owners will opt out first, though.


The union will never opt out. If the union opts out, they risk getting a worse deal from the owners. Again, what's their leverage vs the owners? Both sides know the union won't strike.

If the NBA's revenues are up, and the owners are making a massive windfall from this deal compared w/ the previous one, guess what? So are the players! Their 51% kicks in, and since overall revenues are up, their take-home is much higher. They'll be ecstatic. A strike will be the farthest thing on their mind.

C'mon AH. If there's one thing this lockout should've taught you, is that tall black men making millions of dollars playing basketball for a short career don't have much stomach for a prolonged labor dispute.


Oh, you're probably right, but I can imagine circumstances arising that would cause the NBPA to opt out. That's different from going on strike. I don't dispute that it's highly unlikely to happen. I expect the owners to opt out, and I expect the players to go straight to decertification next time. We'll talk about it in 2017.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
babyskyhook
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 15 Jul 2009
Posts: 17811
Location: The Garden Island

PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:28 pm    Post subject:

babyskyhook wrote:
BobbyJ wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
BobbyJ wrote:
I am listening to the Stephen A Smith show on 710 ESPN. Smith says he has a high ranking source that says a deal will be done in about 1 1/2 weeks.


Chris Sheridan is a source now?


I don't know. He didn't say who is source was. It's kind of interesting that 1 1/2 weeks is right around 11/25 which would give the league 30 days and xmas day games could still be played.



I was thinking that today. The owners will give on the system issues in time for the NBA to open its season on Christmas day. Would make a lot of sense and be a great day to kick off the season.

A Christmas present to the fans.



Looks like that Christmas present is getting closer!!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 23917

PostPosted: Thu Dec 01, 2011 8:10 am    Post subject:

Berger:

Quote:
An important sidebar to the reauthorization of the union as the players' bargaining representative is a push from about a dozen agents to have executive director Billy Hunter re-installed only on an interim basis. The agents, essentially the group that was behind the push for decertification during the bargaining talks, are dissatisfied with Hunter's leadership and want the players to have a say in who will lead the union going forward rather than have Hunter return to power with a new contract. "Players aren't saying it, but they're [angry]," one of the agents said Wednesday "And on top of that, they lost 20 percent of their money for a deal that could've been done two months ago."


http://www.cbssports.com/nba/story/16299009/postups-free-agency-signing-days-away-but-frenzy-exists

I consider this to be good news. I was worried that the agents might be quietly organizing a movement to reject the deal. None of them have made any public comments about the deal, after all. Instead, it appears that they're focused on getting rid of Billy Hunter. The last passage from the excerpt quoted above is the painful truth for the players.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Topic HOF All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 255, 256, 257, 258, 259  Next
Page 256 of 259
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB