Another lockout possible?

[alfdogg 0]

Smell the ratings posted this in the offseason thread, I thought it deserved its own topic.

 

(AP story about a possible lockout)

 

Union director Billy Hunter addressed several players and has said the possibility of another NBA lockout next summer is possible.

 

`We don't come to this process as neophytes. We don't have the same kind of naivety that we had before,'' Hunter told The Associated Press. ``The guys understand that the negotiations could ultimately result in another lockout, and they have to prepare themselves for that.

 

``If the owners are not inclined to retreat from their current proposal, there's a high probability there can be another lockout,'' Hunter said.

 

Union members say the league has asked for numerous concessions in an initial proposal presented during two preliminary bargaining sessions held after the All-Star break. Owners are seeking a four-year maximum length for any contract, higher luxury tax rates for the clubs with the largest payrolls and lower thresholds to trigger the luxury and escrow taxes.

 

``How would I describe the proposal? A step back,'' Hunter said. ``In many ways it mirrors the proposal that was presented in 1998, a proposal that lasted at least five months and called for significant rollbacks and forced the players to dig in.

 

``I suspect that if that continues to be the attitude of the owners, then they might get the same type of reaction from this group of players as they got in 1998 -- becoming just as entrenched and instrident as the owners are in terms of what their position is, and where we should and should not be.''

 

NBA commissioner David Stern, upon hearing Hunter's remarks, took a conciliatory tone.

 

``I'm optimistic. I'm glad that the players are engaged and involved, because whenever you have people who understand the economics of a business thoroughly, you're more likely to reach an agreement,'' Stern said in a telephone interview.

 

``I won't even characterize some of the ideas the players represented that they might like to see, but it's fair to say that whenever the players or owners put forth a proposal, it's done with expectation there could be some changes -- but that's where negotiations come in. And those negotiations are where deals get done, not by hurling threats in the newspapers.''

[Guest MikeSC]

Wow, NBA seems to ALMOST be on the verge of actually getting fans again --- and the union decides to fuck things up.

 

Yup, unions in pro sports are SUCH a boon.

-=Mike

[therealworldschampion 0]

If there is another lockout, I wonder which players will make the idiotic statements that were made in the 1998-1999 lockout.(Patrick Ewing's "Taking food out of our kids' mouths." comment comes to mind.)

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

So the League starts out by asking for ridiculous concessions, and its the players' fault somehow?

[Steviekick 0]

Owners are seeking a four-year maximum length for any contract, higher luxury tax rates for the clubs with the largest payrolls and lower thresholds to trigger the luxury and escrow taxes.

 

I kind of agree with the maximum contract length. It prevents players from being stuck on a team.

 

The higher luxury tax is kind of a good idea, but I can definitely understand the argument of how some of the players feel that they are underpaid in the scheme of the total revenue of the team.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

I kind of agree with the maximum contract length. It prevents players from being stuck on a team.

 

If they don't want to be stuck on a team, don't take the deal. Players take long term deals because its a guaranteed deal, and in the world of professional sports, where an injury can ruin your career tomorrow, that's important.

[Steviekick 0]

I know, but having rosters change up quicker can only be a good thing.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

I know, but having rosters change up quicker can only be a good thing.

Not necessarily. Alot of people wax poetic about how players should stay loyal to their teams. Whether that's good or bad is debatable. But I despise the NFL's system of player movement.

[Mole 0]

I never understand why these lockouts happen.

 

Why don't they start working on the new deal NOW instead of waiting till the last minute? I know they work on it now, but actually get the real talks going.

 

I actually watched the NBA this year and they got a new fan in me. However if this lockout does happen after next season, I will loose all respect for the league.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Why don't they start working on the new deal NOW instead of waiting till the last minute? I know they work on it now, but actually get the real talks going.

 

Essentially its all a power game. Each side is trying to push the other as far as it can.

[Mole 0]

Just being greedy fucks?

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Just being greedy fucks?

Yes and no. All labor negotiations go through this process, and in the realm of public sports, its almost a game. The owners hold negotiating power during the offseason, when a lockout doesn't hurt themselves, just the playoffs. Conversely, the players hold power during the season, when a strike could hurt revenue. The players have problems because their negotiating power comes at the expense of the fans. Its all a matter of how you perceive it.

 

Personally, I'm a proponent that athletes should receive fair market value for their services. They are valuable because they possess elite skills that few others possess. Owners bid top dollar for their services, and receive top dollar for displaying them towards the public. I feel athletes are entitled. Many others disagree, of course.

[MrRant 0]

I kind of agree with the maximum contract length. It prevents players from being stuck on a team.

 

If they don't want to be stuck on a team, don't take the deal. Players take long term deals because its a guaranteed deal, and in the world of professional sports, where an injury can ruin your career tomorrow, that's important.

I think it's more so that a team won't be fucked for years to come by signing a one hit wonder to a 6 year - 50 million deal and can't move him.

[Steviekick 0]

I kind of agree with the maximum contract length. It prevents players from being stuck on a team.

 

If they don't want to be stuck on a team, don't take the deal. Players take long term deals because its a guaranteed deal, and in the world of professional sports, where an injury can ruin your career tomorrow, that's important.

I think it's more so that a team won't be fucked for years to come by signing a one hit wonder to a 6 year - 50 million deal and can't move him.

That's what I was thinking of saying but couldn't figure out how to.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

That's their responsibility then. No reason to set an artificial restriction.