I think there was discussion after the fact by the Players Union that they should have agreed to a mechanism that smoothed the cap increase over multiple years. The league had proposed a number of solutions, including giving a large chunk of revenue to the Union to distribute. Just seeing a singular spike didn’t do good things for most teams or most players.
The union was dead set against smoothing the last time around. Hopefully their attitude has changed.
I'll be surprised if the union's position changes. The union's job is to get as much money to its members as possible. If that means that some guys get overpaid and that some teams hand out bad contracts, that's not the union's problem. If the union favors some players over others, it has a potential conflict of interest.
The real question is not how the teams and the fans perceived the last big salary cap increase, but rather how the players perceived it. There were a bunch of players who profited greatly from it. _________________ Internet Argument Resolved
I think there was discussion after the fact by the Players Union that they should have agreed to a mechanism that smoothed the cap increase over multiple years. The league had proposed a number of solutions, including giving a large chunk of revenue to the Union to distribute. Just seeing a singular spike didn’t do good things for most teams or most players.
The union was dead set against smoothing the last time around. Hopefully their attitude has changed.
I'll be surprised if the union's position changes. The union's job is to get as much money to its members as possible. If that means that some guys get overpaid and that some teams hand out bad contracts, that's not the union's problem. If the union favors some players over others, it has a potential conflict of interest.
The real question is not how the teams and the fans perceived the last big salary cap increase, but rather how the players perceived it. There were a bunch of players who profited greatly from it.
I have a little trouble understanding the union's position. If you smooth that just means more players get the money, rather than a few free agents profiting. The total amount the players get doesn't change.
I think there was discussion after the fact by the Players Union that they should have agreed to a mechanism that smoothed the cap increase over multiple years. The league had proposed a number of solutions, including giving a large chunk of revenue to the Union to distribute. Just seeing a singular spike didn’t do good things for most teams or most players.
The union was dead set against smoothing the last time around. Hopefully their attitude has changed.
I'll be surprised if the union's position changes. The union's job is to get as much money to its members as possible. If that means that some guys get overpaid and that some teams hand out bad contracts, that's not the union's problem. If the union favors some players over others, it has a potential conflict of interest.
The real question is not how the teams and the fans perceived the last big salary cap increase, but rather how the players perceived it. There were a bunch of players who profited greatly from it.
I have a little trouble understanding the union's position. If you smooth that just means more players get the money, rather than a few free agents profiting. The total amount the players get doesn't change.
AE - I think it is the union’s problem when irresponsible team spending leads to multiple years of lean free agent seasons. That’s where the “lesson learned” came from, as more members were unhappy than those who cashed in. _________________ Austin Reaves keeps his game tight, like Kobe Bryant on game night.
I think there was discussion after the fact by the Players Union that they should have agreed to a mechanism that smoothed the cap increase over multiple years. The league had proposed a number of solutions, including giving a large chunk of revenue to the Union to distribute. Just seeing a singular spike didn’t do good things for most teams or most players.
The union was dead set against smoothing the last time around. Hopefully their attitude has changed.
I'll be surprised if the union's position changes. The union's job is to get as much money to its members as possible. If that means that some guys get overpaid and that some teams hand out bad contracts, that's not the union's problem. If the union favors some players over others, it has a potential conflict of interest.
The real question is not how the teams and the fans perceived the last big salary cap increase, but rather how the players perceived it. There were a bunch of players who profited greatly from it.
I have a little trouble understanding the union's position. If you smooth that just means more players get the money, rather than a few free agents profiting. The total amount the players get doesn't change.
Q: Who runs the union?
A: I'm not sure, but when Chris Paul became President, it became easier to max players who were over 35 years old . . . _________________ On Lakersground, a concern troll is someone who is a fan of another team, but pretends to be a Lakers fan with "concerns".
I think there was discussion after the fact by the Players Union that they should have agreed to a mechanism that smoothed the cap increase over multiple years. The league had proposed a number of solutions, including giving a large chunk of revenue to the Union to distribute. Just seeing a singular spike didn’t do good things for most teams or most players.
The union was dead set against smoothing the last time around. Hopefully their attitude has changed.
I'll be surprised if the union's position changes. The union's job is to get as much money to its members as possible. If that means that some guys get overpaid and that some teams hand out bad contracts, that's not the union's problem. If the union favors some players over others, it has a potential conflict of interest.
The real question is not how the teams and the fans perceived the last big salary cap increase, but rather how the players perceived it. There were a bunch of players who profited greatly from it.
I have a little trouble understanding the union's position. If you smooth that just means more players get the money, rather than a few free agents profiting. The total amount the players get doesn't change.
Q: Who runs the union?
A: I'm not sure, but when Chris Paul became President, it became easier to max players who were over 35 years old . . .
I don't believe there's anything in the current CBA that facilitates that. I think it's simply the fact that with modern training, nutrition, rest (something that was vastly underlooked) and overall body maintenance, we're seeing a lot of super star players play well into their 30s. The fitness revolution of the last 15 years is unlike any we've seen (and yes, I include the one in the late 70s early 80s). _________________ KOBE
I'll be surprised if the union's position changes. The union's job is to get as much money to its members as possible. If that means that some guys get overpaid and that some teams hand out bad contracts, that's not the union's problem. If the union favors some players over others, it has a potential conflict of interest.
The real question is not how the teams and the fans perceived the last big salary cap increase, but rather how the players perceived it. There were a bunch of players who profited greatly from it.
I have a little trouble understanding the union's position. If you smooth that just means more players get the money, rather than a few free agents profiting. The total amount the players get doesn't change.
The problem is that the union isn't supposed to be making those sorts of decisions. There are winners and losers whichever way you go. If the union just follows the CBA, it doesn't take sides. If it agrees to smoothing, it does take sides. For example, let's assume that the enormous salary cap increase would arrive in the summer of 2025. Player A is a free agent in the summer of 2025. Player B is a free agent in the summer of 2026. Player A would be hurt by smoothing, while Player B would benefit. It's awkward for a union to get into those sorts of decisions during the course of a CBA (as opposed to CBA negotiations).
Anyway, as I said, a lot depends on how the players and agents perceived the last salary cap bump. If the players and agents liked it, then that is more important to the union than what owners and fans think. _________________ Internet Argument Resolved
A: I'm not sure, but when Chris Paul became President, it became easier to max players who were over 35 years old . . .
I don't believe there's anything in the current CBA that facilitates that. I think it's simply the fact that with modern training, nutrition, rest (something that was vastly underlooked) and overall body maintenance, we're seeing a lot of super star players play well into their 30s. The fitness revolution of the last 15 years is unlike any we've seen (and yes, I include the one in the late 70s early 80s).
He's referring to the over-38 rule. The rule has gone from over-35 to over-36 and is now over-38. I don't know that it was really driven Chris Paul, but it does make it easier to give extended contracts to older players. _________________ Internet Argument Resolved
Joined: 14 Apr 2001 Posts: 144575 Location: The Gold Coast
Posted: Mon Sep 20, 2021 7:35 am Post subject:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
activeverb wrote:
Laker's Fan wrote:
I think there was discussion after the fact by the Players Union that they should have agreed to a mechanism that smoothed the cap increase over multiple years. The league had proposed a number of solutions, including giving a large chunk of revenue to the Union to distribute. Just seeing a singular spike didn’t do good things for most teams or most players.
The union was dead set against smoothing the last time around. Hopefully their attitude has changed.
I'll be surprised if the union's position changes. The union's job is to get as much money to its members as possible. If that means that some guys get overpaid and that some teams hand out bad contracts, that's not the union's problem. If the union favors some players over others, it has a potential conflict of interest.
The real question is not how the teams and the fans perceived the last big salary cap increase, but rather how the players perceived it. There were a bunch of players who profited greatly from it.
The real question is why would networks pay more when ratings are in the tank? Are advertisers willing to pay more to be seen less? NBA TV ratings were never great but some of that previous base has tuned out. _________________ RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
I'll be surprised if the union's position changes. The union's job is to get as much money to its members as possible. If that means that some guys get overpaid and that some teams hand out bad contracts, that's not the union's problem. If the union favors some players over others, it has a potential conflict of interest.
The real question is not how the teams and the fans perceived the last big salary cap increase, but rather how the players perceived it. There were a bunch of players who profited greatly from it.
The real question is why would networks pay more when ratings are in the tank? Are advertisers willing to pay more to be seen less? NBA TV ratings were never great but some of that previous base has tuned out.
Raw TV ratings were more important in the old days. The whole equation has evolved when it comes to TV and media in general. Here’s an article from a few months back:
A: I'm not sure, but when Chris Paul became President, it became easier to max players who were over 35 years old . . .
I don't believe there's anything in the current CBA that facilitates that. I think it's simply the fact that with modern training, nutrition, rest (something that was vastly underlooked) and overall body maintenance, we're seeing a lot of super star players play well into their 30s. The fitness revolution of the last 15 years is unlike any we've seen (and yes, I include the one in the late 70s early 80s).
He's referring to the over-38 rule. The rule has gone from over-35 to over-36 and is now over-38. I don't know that it was really driven Chris Paul, but it does make it easier to give extended contracts to older players.
Bingo. The speculation is that CP3's agency was behind the Over-35 rule becoming the Over-38 rule. CP3 couldn't have signed his prior contract with the Over-35 rule, because his 3rd year salary would've been $86 million. _________________ On Lakersground, a concern troll is someone who is a fan of another team, but pretends to be a Lakers fan with "concerns".
I think there was discussion after the fact by the Players Union that they should have agreed to a mechanism that smoothed the cap increase over multiple years. The league had proposed a number of solutions, including giving a large chunk of revenue to the Union to distribute. Just seeing a singular spike didn’t do good things for most teams or most players.
The union was dead set against smoothing the last time around. Hopefully their attitude has changed.
I'll be surprised if the union's position changes. The union's job is to get as much money to its members as possible. If that means that some guys get overpaid and that some teams hand out bad contracts, that's not the union's problem. If the union favors some players over others, it has a potential conflict of interest.
The real question is not how the teams and the fans perceived the last big salary cap increase, but rather how the players perceived it. There were a bunch of players who profited greatly from it.
The real question is why would networks pay more when ratings are in the tank? Are advertisers willing to pay more to be seen less? NBA TV ratings were never great but some of that previous base has tuned out.
Yawn. That's the ol' "white people who actually buy the tickets and luxury suites are tired of the thugs and shenanigans and aren't going to watch anymore" trope that has been around in the NBA and NFL since the 80's.
- It started with "Pro-Football is just the NBA with helmets, so white people are just going to watch more college football" because the vast majority of skill position players in the NFL were black. That was in the late 70s/early 80s. The NFL continued to break revenue records.
- Both the NFL & Nike were going to go out of business because of Kaepernick & kneeling. Nike stock price has tripled since signing the Kaepernick deal and revenues have climbed steadily. NFL revenue climbed post-kneeling, as well, until the pandemic last year (it was still healthy).
- In 2005, David Stern tried to implement a dress code for NBA players. Charles Barkley famously crowed that no sponsors or fans were going to pay to see Allen Iverson wearing cornrows and baggy pants. Players openly defied the code. When Adam Silver became commissioner in 2014, he pretty much dropped the code. NBA revenue has risen off the charts since then.
But, but, but . . . ratings are dropping!
Not quite. Under the Nielssen system, everyone's ratings are dropping - sports, news, soap operas, variety shows, etc. Viewership styles have changed over the past 30 years - particularly with the advent of technology. Bottom line is people are still watching, just not in the same way or at the same time.
Without writing a treatise, networks have figured out how to monetize viewership that doesn't occur on the live broadcast. My wife was working on her Masters 12-13 years ago and her project was on TV revenues. She got to interview a bigwig at Warner Brothers who (without giving her all the details) told her that networks saw the change coming in the 90s with the advent of the internet and had been preparing new ways to capture eyes and revenues. _________________ On Lakersground, a concern troll is someone who is a fan of another team, but pretends to be a Lakers fan with "concerns".
@MarcJSpears
Warriors are working out free agent guards Isaiah Thomas, Avery Bradley & ex-Warrior Quinn Cook among others this week, sources told
@TheUndefeated. Warriors would like to sign a big man & 2 guards for camp. Workouts will include 5-on-5 games with a diverse group of free agents.
3 ex-Lakers on that list.
And yes Cp3 was integral in helping lobby the over-38 rule, along with Bron when they were Prez/VP respectively.
Also for those interested, the NBPA prez is now CJ McCollum with Iggy taking on VP duties. Among the players taking on leadership roles, Kyrie, Barnes, Biyombo, JaylenB, Brogdon, Temple, GWilliams.
Also Dudz used to be our team rep with AC as our alternate. Obviously those roles have to be filled again, but I’m sure Russ is a good bet seeing how he was the Wiz’s alternate behind Beal. _________________ Not familiar with the salary cap/CBA rules & how it impacts our Lakers?
#GetFamiliar by CLICKING HERE!
- In 2005, David Stern tried to implement a dress code for NBA players. Charles Barkley famously crowed that no sponsors or fans were going to pay to see Allen Iverson wearing cornrows and baggy pants. Players openly defied the code. When Adam Silver became commissioner in 2014, he pretty much dropped the code. NBA revenue has risen off the charts since then.
I agree with most of what you said, but not this part. Actually, it surprised a lot of people how quickly the NBA players embraced the dress code. Within a short time, players were competing with each other to see who could be the most stylish. NBA players have actually became fashion influencers. _________________ Internet Argument Resolved
well, the whole "metrosexual" thing gained steam soon after 2005. definitely by the time of the "Kobe Suits". i mean Bean's tailoring was straight FIRE!
we are firmly in the era of professional athletes more likely to be dripping in Thom Browne like LeBron, than Iverson and his baggy pants.
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Dr. Laker wrote:
- In 2005, David Stern tried to implement a dress code for NBA players. Charles Barkley famously crowed that no sponsors or fans were going to pay to see Allen Iverson wearing cornrows and baggy pants. Players openly defied the code. When Adam Silver became commissioner in 2014, he pretty much dropped the code. NBA revenue has risen off the charts since then.
I agree with most of what you said, but not this part. Actually, it surprised a lot of people how quickly the NBA players embraced the dress code. Within a short time, players were competing with each other to see who could be the most stylish. NBA players have actually became fashion influencers.
- In 2005, David Stern tried to implement a dress code for NBA players. Charles Barkley famously crowed that no sponsors or fans were going to pay to see Allen Iverson wearing cornrows and baggy pants. Players openly defied the code. When Adam Silver became commissioner in 2014, he pretty much dropped the code. NBA revenue has risen off the charts since then.
I agree with most of what you said, but not this part. Actually, it surprised a lot of people how quickly the NBA players embraced the dress code. Within a short time, players were competing with each other to see who could be the most stylish. NBA players have actually became fashion influencers.
That's more accurate.
When the dress code was implemented in 2005, Allen Iverson and a few other guys complained, but most of the players embraced it pretty quickly.
When Adam Silver became commissioner, he made the dress code more lenient. But by then it was irrelevant really. The reasons for the dress code had become moot, players were already fashion icons, and the NBA wasn't really worrying about enforcing a dress code anymore.
- In 2005, David Stern tried to implement a dress code for NBA players. Charles Barkley famously crowed that no sponsors or fans were going to pay to see Allen Iverson wearing cornrows and baggy pants. Players openly defied the code. When Adam Silver became commissioner in 2014, he pretty much dropped the code. NBA revenue has risen off the charts since then.
I agree with most of what you said, but not this part. Actually, it surprised a lot of people how quickly the NBA players embraced the dress code. Within a short time, players were competing with each other to see who could be the most stylish. NBA players have actually became fashion influencers.
I will concede the point. _________________ On Lakersground, a concern troll is someone who is a fan of another team, but pretends to be a Lakers fan with "concerns".
35y/o Monta on deck? Damn, how much playmaking help does Bron need? Seriously tho, it’s about time they went away from that cockamamie idea of Bron at exclusive point duties. Dude needed this type of assist from the moment he got here. Zo in yr1 helped, but it’s been nearly all bad since. Regular season Rondo saved him by stepping in the booth and shedding his street clothes to rage as playoff Rondo. That doesn’t happen, Bron would have probably gassed out.
Quote:
After working out with the Houston Rockets and Dallas Mavericks, Monta Ellis has received another interest from a contender in the Western Conference.
Los Angeles Lakers have reached out to Ellis‘ business manager Derrius Nelson of Dagger Basketball Agency, who quickly arranged a conference call with his client Monday.
The Lakers, through their newly hired basketball operations coaching associate Jordan Henriquez-Roberts, have expressed interest in working out the veteran guard.
I told coach Roberts that Tae is not big on being a star anymore. He’s been there already,” Nelson told Empire Sports Media. “His [possible] addition can make them one of the best LA Lakers teams to go down in history. With Tae being there, it would be crazy!”
“Derrius, that’s why I’m calling because I know what type of player Monta is. I was a huge fan of him; his works and the time he put in the NBA overrides a lot of guys that’s been coming to work out because he is reliable,” Roberts was quoted as saying to Nelson.
Ellis has previously played under Lakers coach Frank Vogel in Indiana. In his lone season under Vogel, Ellis averaged 13.8 points and 4.7 assists.
I think there was discussion after the fact by the Players Union that they should have agreed to a mechanism that smoothed the cap increase over multiple years. The league had proposed a number of solutions, including giving a large chunk of revenue to the Union to distribute. Just seeing a singular spike didn’t do good things for most teams or most players.
The union was dead set against smoothing the last time around. Hopefully their attitude has changed.
I'll be surprised if the union's position changes. The union's job is to get as much money to its members as possible. If that means that some guys get overpaid and that some teams hand out bad contracts, that's not the union's problem. If the union favors some players over others, it has a potential conflict of interest.
The real question is not how the teams and the fans perceived the last big salary cap increase, but rather how the players perceived it. There were a bunch of players who profited greatly from it.
The real question is why would networks pay more when ratings are in the tank? Are advertisers willing to pay more to be seen less? NBA TV ratings were never great but some of that previous base has tuned out.
Yawn. That's the ol' "white people who actually buy the tickets and luxury suites are tired of the thugs and shenanigans and aren't going to watch anymore" trope that has been around in the NBA and NFL since the 80's.
- It started with "Pro-Football is just the NBA with helmets, so white people are just going to watch more college football" because the vast majority of skill position players in the NFL were black. That was in the late 70s/early 80s. The NFL continued to break revenue records.
- Both the NFL & Nike were going to go out of business because of Kaepernick & kneeling. Nike stock price has tripled since signing the Kaepernick deal and revenues have climbed steadily. NFL revenue climbed post-kneeling, as well, until the pandemic last year (it was still healthy).
- In 2005, David Stern tried to implement a dress code for NBA players. Charles Barkley famously crowed that no sponsors or fans were going to pay to see Allen Iverson wearing cornrows and baggy pants. Players openly defied the code. When Adam Silver became commissioner in 2014, he pretty much dropped the code. NBA revenue has risen off the charts since then.
But, but, but . . . ratings are dropping!
Not quite. Under the Nielssen system, everyone's ratings are dropping - sports, news, soap operas, variety shows, etc. Viewership styles have changed over the past 30 years - particularly with the advent of technology. Bottom line is people are still watching, just not in the same way or at the same time.
Without writing a treatise, networks have figured out how to monetize viewership that doesn't occur on the live broadcast. My wife was working on her Masters 12-13 years ago and her project was on TV revenues. She got to interview a bigwig at Warner Brothers who (without giving her all the details) told her that networks saw the change coming in the 90s with the advent of the internet and had been preparing new ways to capture eyes and revenues.
It makes some people feel good to say "nobody likes the NBA because"...they say that to justify what they feel and why they feel they are correct.
It's a fallacy using anecdotal "everybody agrees with me" evidence.
You hit the nail on the head though about who and why. _________________ Build around team players, not ISO players.
Wait, he hasn't played in four years. Hell, why aren't we working out Marcus Banks?
Should be make’em dance Lance imho. Has history with both us & Vogs and has the physical traits to be deterrent on the wing vs our opps.
Meanwhile, Lakers ownership gets a bit richer...AC probably rolling over in his grave right about now.
Quote:
The Lakers unveiled a new sponsor for their jersey patches Monday: Bibigo, a South Korean line of dumplings, sauces and frozen meals.
The five-year agreement is worth more than $100 million, according to people familiar with the deal but not authorized to disclose its terms publicly. NBA jersey patch deals have sold for an average range of $7 million to $10 million per year, according to The Athletic.
Did the bibigo logo really have to have green in it? Somehow I know jodeke is responsible for this.
Thank goodness, the logo on the jerseys will be wiped clean of that despicable green.
I hang out with a crew on Saturday mornings at a cigar shop. About 10 years ago, I convinced them that we should adopt an EPL team, since I made them watch soccer. I picked Blackpool, which was a long shot team that, in fact, got relegated after one year. We all bought shirts. This is what it looked like:
It turns out that Wonga was a payday loan company that became highly controversial and was referred to as a "legal loan shark." It eventually crashed, burned, and dissolved in bankruptcy. In hindsight, I would have been fine with a logo with chopsticks. _________________ Internet Argument Resolved
I just read a rumor that Avery Bradley was open to a heat return but the Heat wasn’t interested. Does Avery Bradley run people the wrong way? The Lakers didn’t want him back Heat don’t want him and he’s just sitting out there jobless. _________________ Coach Vogel, Kidd, Hollins
Max slot : Kawhi
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
