- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Belinelli Gets Qualifying Offer, Smith Does Not
Posted on 7/1/11 at 1:42 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 7/1/11 at 1:42 pm to SlowFlowPro
belinelli getting 3 mil is the reason we have a lockout...
2
Posted on 7/1/11 at 1:44 pm to chalmetteowl
quote:
belinelli getting 3 mil is the reason we have a lockout...
Not really. 3 mil isn't shite for a 4 year vet
Posted on 7/1/11 at 1:52 pm to chalmetteowl
some of you guys are ridiculous. The minimum salary is for end of bench guys, Belinelli started most of last year and is at least a solid rotation player. He's at most overpaid by $1 - $1.5 million. Guys like Arenas, Rashard Lewis, Peja and Posey are the reason we're having a lockout.
Posted on 7/1/11 at 3:35 pm to TigerinATL
quote:
He's at most overpaid by $1 - $1.5 million
to be fair, that's almost half his salary at its peak
quote:
Guys like Arenas, Rashard Lewis, Peja and Posey are the reason we're having a lockout.
nobody put a gun to the owners' heads to offer those deals
in fact, the owner/gm of the magic had lewis, and then arranged a deal in order to pay him MORE money
This post was edited on 7/1/11 at 10:04 pm
Posted on 7/1/11 at 4:03 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
to be fair, that's almost half his salary at its peak
Teams don't loose money by paying $3 million to a guy that will average 20 minutes per game, they lose money by paying $15+ million to a guy that will average 20 minutes a game. Switching to percentages when the total amount is so small is just playing games.
quote:
nobody put a gun to the owners' heads to offer those deals
You always bring this up as if the owners being at fault is relevant. If the owners didn't have superior leverage to the players it might matter but they don't so it doesn't. If the owners want a system that protects them from themselves then they will get a system that protects them from themselves. Fair has nothing to do with the CBA.
Posted on 7/1/11 at 9:44 pm to TigerinATL
Teams loose money by going over the cap, paying a luxury tax and still sucking.
Posted on 7/1/11 at 10:04 pm to TigerinATL
quote:
If the owners didn't have superior leverage to the players it might matter but they don't
who offers the contracts?
Posted on 7/2/11 at 5:42 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
who offers the contracts?
If it's not a completely hard cap at an economically profitable level we'll be here again with the owners wanting more changes in 10 years. They expanded the league too much restricting the supply of players making them offer stupid deals. One of the reasons the players object to shorter, less guaranteed contracts is because there currently isn't a rule making the owners offer this, they just do because that's what the market price is.
Yes the owners have done it to themselves and are looking for rules to protect them from themselves, but in the end they make the rules. Something that's in shorter supply than superstar basketball players is business men with favorable stadium leases and billion dollar TV deals.
Posted on 7/2/11 at 10:30 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
nobody put a gun to the owners' heads to offer those deals
in fact, the owner/gm of the magic had lewis, and then arranged a deal in order to pay him MORE money
What is this, chicken or the egg? Why the hell does it matter who is making who do what? The problem is it isn't working now.
Facts are the longer the lockout drags, the owners will be benefiting, while the players will have to make do on their savings. In my world, that means one side will still lose money, while the other will gain money.
A war of attrition means the owners win.
The players are just trying to go down fighting.
Posted on 7/3/11 at 10:31 am to Eman5805
quote:
What is this, chicken or the egg?
no, we know who is the cause of the financial problems and escalating salaries: the owners
quote:
Why the hell does it matter who is making who do what?
well you create rules to regulate behavior, preferably you want to regulate the behavior of the party causing the strife
quote:
A war of attrition means the owners win.
i don't think anybody believes the players will win if the owners fail to negotiate in bad faith and just drag this out
i read an article last night where the owners aren't even really trying to negotiate. the players conceded some (not all) of what the owners wanted, with a plan that guarantees profit to the owners, and the owners didn't even really acknowledge it as an option
just to illustrate this, let's say on a scale of 1-100, they're negotiating. the most extreme players' position is 1, and the most extreme owners position is 100
the owners are at about 85 and the players are at 30. the owners will not budge and aren't trying to meet at the middle
Posted on 7/3/11 at 10:37 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i read an article last night where the owners aren't even really trying to negotiate. the players conceded some (not all) of what the owners wanted, with a plan that guarantees profit to the owners, and the owners didn't even really acknowledge it as an option
Meh . . . I'd like to read that one.
Whoever is at "fault" for this mess almost doesn't matter. The model does not work. In reality it's the truly wealthy owners who don't give a shite about the cap who really caused most of the problem from the owners' side.
The owners are adamant on: reducing guaranteed contracts, lowering salaries, imposing some sort of cap that eventually becomes a hard cap at some level and adjusting the share of total revenues taken by the players. I believe they are willing to go the distance because they will lose more money having a season than if they simply let the season go. Of course, no season would do serious damage long term, I suspect.
Posted on 7/3/11 at 2:45 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i read an article last night where the owners aren't even really trying to negotiate. the players conceded some (not all) of what the owners wanted, with a plan that guarantees profit to the owners, and the owners didn't even really acknowledge it as an option
But the owners don't just want profit, they want parity too.
Profit = pay cut
Party = reduced contract length and reduced free agent movement
The only thing that can keep this from being a terrible deal for the players is if the league is desperate to have at least a partial season, which I kind of think they are.
Posted on 7/3/11 at 3:35 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
no, we know who is the cause of the financial problems and escalating salaries: the owners
Chicken or egg wasn't exactly the right analogy. But it's still irrelevant. The teams with the most money that throw it at player's feet to get them to come to their team. The problem is the teams with the deepest pockets want things more or less what they are and the players for damn sure want to keep getting overpaid.
Every one else has to keep up or get left in the dust as more teams like Miami get made. To keep that from happening, the majority of the owners, the ones alleged to be losing money, have to be the ones that force the necessary change. And the players gotta do it as well.
quote:
well you create rules to regulate behavior, preferably you want to regulate the behavior of the party causing the strife
Regulating behavior includes protecting people from themselves. And there needs to be a system where a smaller franchise isn't doomed because it makes a mistake or two along the line.
quote:
i don't think anybody believes the players will win if the owners fail to negotiate in bad faith and just drag this out
i read an article last night where the owners aren't even really trying to negotiate. the players conceded some (not all) of what the owners wanted, with a plan that guarantees profit to the owners, and the owners didn't even really acknowledge it as an option
just to illustrate this, let's say on a scale of 1-100, they're negotiating. the most extreme players' position is 1, and the most extreme owners position is 100
the owners are at about 85 and the players are at 30. the owners will not budge and aren't trying to meet at the middle
Not really interested in the specifics. Cuz it's the same with every CBA. Every business deal in general really. Whoever has the leverage is gonna lean on it at the expense of the other party.
This post was edited on 7/3/11 at 3:36 pm
Posted on 7/3/11 at 5:06 pm to VOR
quote:
The owners are adamant on: reducing guaranteed contracts, lowering salaries, imposing some sort of cap that eventually becomes a hard cap at some level and adjusting the share of total revenues taken by the players
you know, i honestly don't think "the owners" have a plan right now
i believe their plan is to have the players break, and then once that occurs, the owners will try to sort it out
quote:
Of course, no season would do serious damage long term, I suspect.
it took about 10 years to get back after the last one
Posted on 7/3/11 at 5:07 pm to TigerinATL
quote:
But the owners don't just want profit, they want parity too.
i don't believe this. not for one second
i don't believe dolan, buss, cuban, etc want parity. i just cannot believe that
quote:
Party = reduced contract length and reduced free agent movement
parity = revenue sharing and a hard cap
longer contracts keep superstars longer
Posted on 7/3/11 at 5:09 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i believe their plan is to have the players break, and then once that occurs, the owners will try to sort it out
Agreed 100%. I would say that looks bad on the NBA, but I actually think the NFL is in the same situation. Word is the owners/players are close, but after that the owners may take a few weeks themselves.
Posted on 7/3/11 at 8:01 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
i don't believe this. not for one second
Stern has been talking about profits and competitive balance from day 1 because of who's pushing for the lockout.
quote:
i don't believe dolan, buss, cuban, etc want parity. i just cannot believe that
Of course they don't but there are 8 teams making money and 22 teams losing money. How many teams do you think are happy with the status quo? This lockout has been lead by the have nots from the beginning. They're the ones that paid so much to get into their franchises in the last decade or so, they're the ones that are losing money with the status quo, and they're the ones that don't appreciate being feeder teams for the glamor market teams. They need to change the business model and they are the ones leading the lockout charge.
quote:
longer contracts keep superstars longer
They also keep you locked into mistakes. I'm sure they can come up with a way to keep stars but not sign Pejaesque deals. Something like No Sign and Trades and only long contracts through bird rules.
Posted on 7/4/11 at 11:35 am to TigerinATL
quote:
Stern has been talking about profits and competitive balance from day 1 because of who's pushing for the lockout.
he's been talking about it for 2 years. setting up the long con through PR
quote:
This lockout has been lead by the have nots from the beginning. They're the ones that paid so much to get into their franchises in the last decade or so, they're the ones that are losing money with the status quo, and they're the ones that don't appreciate being feeder teams for the glamor market teams.
those glamour market teams make the tv deals so valuable that the "have nots" willing share in
quote:
They also keep you locked into mistakes.
if this new CBA is supposed to reward good GMs and punish bad GMs, then this is a good thing
quote:
Something like No Sign and Trades
this is a way for teams to shed themselves of bad contracts
Posted on 7/4/11 at 11:51 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
dolan, buss, cuban
minority. and stern ain't in bed with them.
Posted on 7/4/11 at 11:57 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
SlowFlowPro
Sometimes you remind me of Cowherd when it comes to glamour markets.
Stern, and the majority of owners, are on board with maintainig the same number of teams and parity. Now, more than a few months ago, I believe they're serious as they can be about a new business model akin to something closer to the NHL or NFL. They're willing to risk the season over it, Buss, Cuban and Dolan be damned. Especially Cuban by the way. But we'll see.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News