What? Is the entire copy desk on vacation? Lots of mistakes in this one, easy
ones too. I was reading for information but got side tracked by all the typos
and grammatical problems.
Well, somebody got it wrong. I just read the article on ESPN and they said:"About 90 percent of NBA players get paid from Nov. 15 through
April 30, so they won't be missing checks for a while. But Stern has warned that
the offers only get worse once a lockout starts, so the league could try to push
through elements of its original proposal when bargaining resumes."So which is it? Do they get paid or not? I can't imagine they do or
they would be thrilled to get paid without performing...most of them fall into
this category anyway based on the way they play.
Nuts,if they get paid then we might not have NBA next year at all. I really hope
they don't.I haven't been following this stupid thing, but it seems
to me that cutting the player's salaries cold turkey isn't a good idea...perhaps
cutting the salaries more gradually (IE: 10% first year, 25% next, 33% third)
would work better...But I dunno...they probably already discussed
Don't be surprised if the NBA goes an entire year on the lockout. Then NFL had
better get theirs done. The NBA could become an afterthought.
Is the Jazz one of the 22 teams losing money? I'd like to see an article
assessing the overall financial health of the Jazz--the strenghts, weaknesses,
Why would the owners want shorter rookie contracts? That doesn't make any sense
to me, especially for the small market teams. Wouldn't you want to hang on to a
young talent for as long as you can? Once that rookie contract goes away the
salarie explode for talented players.
@Chewbacca... maybe because of players like Mo Almond who have to get paid about
$2million/yr while playing in the D-league?
The owners don't like the free market because the players get paid too much that
way. They effectively want thier manipulated market the safe as the NFL with
sallary caps. So commy of them.
@ Jazz Source Players get paid????No way - with a lockout the
players do not get paid. Please site the source. I read this morning all of
the ESPN articles I could find and see nothing that indicates the players get
paid. Then the agreement with the players ended - their contract with the
owners goes into a suspended status. And no they do not get back pay when the
new CBA is signed (unless negotiated in the agreement)Jazz
supporters should be praising the league for going for a hard cap. The Heat,
Lakers, and Mavs buy championships much like the Yankees in the past in
baseball. Lets support the hard cap so their is a level playing surface for all
the NBA teams. People I feel most sorry for are the little guys -
ticket takers, ushers, concession stand people... they are the forgotten part
of the lock-out equation. Up goes the unemployment rate (or second job
@Chewbacca - Fear of the unknown is why the owners want shorter rookie
contracts. Rookies are unproven and as we have seen in the past - the college
game does not always translate to the Pros (Jose Ortiz if you need an example.
So the owners do not want to commit to these long guaranteed contracts on
With all the millionaire players waiting around, it wouldn't take much to start
a new league. All those mega sports halls need to have something going on to
fill them up. Not to mention the restaurants and other vendors relying on the
games. Start another ABA where the players had fun and the fans will come
storming back. When it becomes too much of a business it isn't much fun to
I love the NBA and the Jazz. However, I am completely and utterly fine with
missing a season or two or even if professional basketball morphs into something
different all together. College basketball is better anyway. I used to feel for
Larry Miller, but Greg just doesn't do it for me - so no sympathy for the over
the top wealthy owners. Spoiled, self centered, me-first players have ruined the
game. The pinnacle of that for me was the Jerry Sloan, D-Will incidents of this
last year, along with the "talents to South Beach" debacle. The NBA
hit its peak in the 80s and 90s and the players now have no context and believe
they are the ones that built the league. Look at the Jazz roster for next year
-- who on that roster has really proven anything? Yet how many millions will the
Miller's shell out to put a young, unproven product on the floor? The league
needs discipline, contraction and less 19 year old millionaires.
The NBA is a business and you can not stay in business if you are loosing
money.I wish the players could see that. The players need to realize that they
are way over paid now. Take the new deal and lets play some ball.
I must admit--I am entirely on the owners side on this one. NBA players
salaries are easily the largest chunk of gross revenue, yet the players take on
zero risk. Zero. The players get stressed out if they don't show up to a
practice, or maybe show up late. That's the extend of the players risk.The owners, who are looking at the 40-43% of gross revenue, are
contributing to player retirement funds, stadiums, team staff, physicians,
coaches, advertising, media, etc., and still trying to hold onto a little profit
for themselves. This is where the risk is....if the revenue is less than
projected, this is what suffers, not the players. If the player signs a $1
billion deal and then gets hurt 10 days later, the team still pays the salary.
The owners have all the risk. The players are pampered little millionaires.
re: OrlandoJazzFanGo to ESPN "CBA expires, NBA locks out its
players" 4th paragraph from the bottom of the story.I agree
with you, that makes zero sense and I don't see how that can be accurate but it
is still posted there just a few minutes ago as of this posting. I would post
the link but the editorial police will like deny all my post but if you find
that story on ESPN there right now it still says that.It must be
wrong. The players can't be getting paid...what would their motivation. I'm
sure they would all be thrilled with a paid vacation for the next year.Someone else asked if the Jazz were one of the teams losing money. Yes they
were one of the teams losing money. I'm sure it was worse than normal too given
the fact they were in the luxury tax when the injuries came last season, down
economy, record tanked, and they had to unload Deron. I'm sure they lost
plenty.I hope the owners stick it to the players. It
seems like both sides are resigned to the fact that there is no chance to play
Since when do the inmates run the assylum? Players are entitled to any
particular percentage of the basketball revenues? What are the basketball
revenues? If these players want to share in the revenues, and want to
"control" so much of the enterprise, then why cant' they also share in
the losses? Huh, huh, huh. These leagues make me sick. Do it like the NFL or
give it up. I hope the league takes a year off and then see what the players
are up to. The owners can't give up on principles. However, the other thing is
owners have to shape up as well. Take the Dodgers for an example; the owners
are deialing with a divorce and live proligate lives, spending the teams funds
on lavish living; running the team into the ground.I suspect some of that is
going on with NBA owners. I can't stomach all these people doing what they are
doing and then expect the fans and whoever is buying tickets to games, etc., to
sit idily by and think all is well. Commissioner Stern and his staff also have
to bear responsibility. How much are they being paid? Unbelievable.
I've got to ask this question because I honestly don't know the answer. I can
guess at a few answers but I don't really know:With no CBA, could
the NBA owners announce a player draft inviting anybody who wants to declare for
the draft to do so? I suggest a 10-round draft with order selected by lottery
and alternating rounds going in reverse order (the last pick in the first round
gets first pick in the second round. Any players who are not drafted are free
agents to sign with any team that wants them.I know this will be
D-league quality or worse. I can't imagine any current NBA players declaring for
the draft but a lot of kids who've completed their college eligibility (Jackson
Emery??) might declare. Americans playing overseas might opt to return home to
play. And international players might also want to play in the NBA, even if it
is watered down.Any thoughts? Would anybody go to these games?
To the greedy players and the greedy owners in BOTH leagues, Mercutio said it
best: "A plague on both your houses."
Jazz SourceI don't think that ESPN reporter understood what he was
talking about. Read NBA Lockout FAQ also on the ESPN site by Larry Coon. Some
NBA players are paid in a a lump sum on July 1 and hence some have started
missing checks now. It indicates that some are paid out over 12 months so will
be receiving 2010-2011 checks up until December 1. The article
emphatically states " All players will miss their first paycheck no later
than Nov. 15." - meaning for the current season. This certainly
makes more sense - Like you I was wondering what the incentive to negotiate was.
Now those million dollar homes are at risk.
No NBA, no problem. More college ball will be on TV. Football isn't over until
January so there will be plenty to watch for the first 3 months of no NBA.
College ball is better anyway.
30% reduction in salary.................How much would your lifestyle change if
you went from making 10 million to 7 million a year? If you went from making
$60,000 to $42,000 a year it would hit you a lot harder. So what if
NBA players have to give up the Bentley and the Rolls Royce. They still will be
driving Mercedes. Or they can only live in a 3 million dollar home instead of a
4 million dollar home. It won't stop them from living a life a luxury way
beyond anything a normal person will live in their lifetime.If real
life people would boycott the NBA games and merchandise for a year when they
finally end the lockout, that would be awesome. Nothing like watching two kings
fight it out only to find that they were fighting for nothing. The fans need to
say we have had enough with high ticket prices and merchandise and spend their
money somewhere else over the next year.
Re. whether players are still getting paid. Perhaps players, like school
teachers, have the option of spreading their salary over the year or just the
duration of thier work period.
Why would anyone be on the owner's side. Again, I ask, who put a gun to Larry
Miller's head to make him AK the max contract? Did anyone force the Minnesota
Timberwolve's to give Kevin Garnett 125 million dollar contracts. Bottom line,
the owners want to win and they will pay top dollar to do that. If Mark Cuban
could spend a 1 billion dollars on players to win championships, he would in a
NY minute. That's why we have a hard cap, soft cap thing in the first place
because the owners can't resist trying to bend or break their own rules on
spending money. As for the players, well no player is overpaid if
an owner is dumb enough to give them that money. And I've never seen a player
ask the taxpayers to help pay for a new stadium or arena and/or threaten to
leave a city if they didn't get it. At least the players just ask for money
from their owners, they never ask for corporate welfare from the taxpayers.
I also love how all these NBA web pages are pulling off images of the players
and Stern promises stiff fines if any management has any contact with the
players. This seems pretty childish to me. Again, the players seem to have the
higher moral ground on this one and again, I haven't seen a player ask a
taxpayer for corporate welfare.
@eagleI agree with you 100 percent! I mean what would you do I you
only averaged 1 point a game one year (making less than $1 million) and then a
year later a team gives you a $5 million dollar contract?
Both sides have areas they need to concede on but I'm on the owners side more
than the players. The players make an average of over 5 mil per yr, that's
plenty and if I'm an owner and losing money I would want to change the CBA so
business would be profitable. It's not as though they won't still get paid
millions. The small market teams are the ones insisting on big changes because
the way it is now it isn't fair/exquitable. Parts of the CBA that just expired
were bad and need to be changed, sometimes you learn by your mistakes and that
is what the owners are saying. They agreed to things in the last CBA that they
shouldn't have and those things need to be corrected.
In the end, what CBA comes along the owners will short circuit it in their
efforts to win games. They want to have rules to protect themselves from
themselves and in the end their own greed will sabotage their rules. And then
they will want cities to subsidize their new arenas and jack up the season
I am totally on the side of the owners. I hope they never give in to the players
union. Never Never Never.
The players do not receive any checks during the lockout. When
ESPN writes "About 90 percent of NBA players get paid from Nov. 15 through
April 30, so they won't be missing checks for a while", they mean that
Nov-April is the period of the year that most players receive their checks. So
for this next few months, the players won't be missing checks, because most of
them don't receive checks July, August, Sept and October anyway. When November
arrives, however, and assuming the lockout is still going, the players will
definitely be missing checks that they normally receive.
I would like to see them get rid of guaranteed contracts. Where else in life is
one guaranteed millions of dollars irregardless of whether or not one performs?
Anything that lowers the cost of going to the games is a plus in my estimation.
I had season tickets to the Jazz in the eighties and nineties, but no more. The
entertainment is too expensive relative to other choices for my entertainment
dollar. Thanks god for HD tv though!
Someone mentioned starting a new league. ESA, and Zions use are prohibited and
under NBA contract. Same with the other cities.
Would anyone truly agree to cap their earnings? I agree that players get paid a
lot to play a kids game but at the same shouldn't they try to maximize their
pay?What the owners really want is a system in place so they can not
be foolish with their money but they want to do it on the back of the players.
Nobody forces these owners to sign a player to a contract.
eagle, Shaun - I don't think you understand the economics of the situation. The
owners compete amongst themselves for players. The owners have different amounts
of cash to invest in players, different levels of revenue, and different
motivations. If you have a big-market owner (meaning he has bigger demand for
tickets and bigger arenas and therefore a lot more revenue) who is a
multi-billionaire to start with and simply wants to win, the ONLY things
preventing that owner from outbidding everyone else to get ALL of the best
players is the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) with its salary cap, draft,
and revenue sharing provisions. Without those things, the NBA would be
non-competitive. In other words, Utah would be like a minor league team and the
Knicks, Celtics, and Lakers would be perennial champions. Come to think of it,
they are anyway because the CBA has such a soft cap and because free agents have
so much freedom to choose to go to the big market teams and the owners willing
to spend more have so much trade latitude under the CBA. So when you
read about the league's "competitive balance," it's the above that's
The only problem davewhittle is that this large market and small market thing is
way overrated. The Jazz had one of the largest payrolls in the NBA. The Jazz,
except in recent years, were consistent winners and made the NBA finals twice.
The Spurs won three titles and are considered a small market team. If you are
smart you can hire a great coach say like Popovich, find a player deep in the
draft like Tony Parker and win a lot of games. Tim Duncan, as good as it gets,
stayed in San Antonio and did not flee for a big market team, nor did players
like John Stockton or Karl Malone (until his very last year). NY has the
biggest market and the Knicks basically stink year in and year out. OKC is as
small market as they come and made the western conference semi-finals. The Lakers win, not just because they are in LA but because they have
great ownership, Jerry West, great coaching as in Phil Jackson and Kobe Bryant.
Chicago won because they had Jackson, MJ and Pippen. But small market Portland
could have had MJ but they drafted Bowie. Enough said.
@eagle, I agree w/ you regarding the owners so let me make myself clear. I too
am sick and tired of the "pleading poverty case" by the players. Both
sides have to buck up and take responsibility for their pathetic actions.
Money/greed is ruining the sport and we the fan suffers--"enough
said"Now, with that said, one can't compare to the days of
Stockton and Malone to the now-l-D "greedy Will, Lebron, Melo, and this
list goes on. You should know that players are different (different era of bball
with Gen Y'ers) and mentality is so very different. Corrupt/greedy
agents--Boras??? Need I say more. Players may stick around a small market team
for the short-term but the current trend is to bounce to a "big"
market team.....It's different all the way around; not loyalty as shown by
Stockton/Malone. Great management/coaches such as the Spurs have
made a difference and I hope it can continue in the years to come. But our
Duncans, Malone's, Stocktons, Barkley's are so few and far between any more.
It's truly sad....
Um, eagle, Jerry Buss owns the Lakers, not Jerry West.Best thing
about the lockout - Maybe we will get a year without having to see / hear /
smell LeChoke James.Worst thing about the Lockout - About September
15th, my Laker jones gets nigh unbearable......Luckily, I live in
Texas - HS Football starts in August, so that will offer considerable diversion.
J-TX-He was not saying that West owns the Lakers. He said that the owner
and West and the coaches and Kobe made the team.Although I have no
sympathy for the players, I do not believe that the 22 of the teams are losing
money. Things like accelerated depreciation show tax losses that are not cash
losses. And I agree with everyone who criticizes the owners for their corporate
welfare and their constant blackmailing of home towns. Both sides, owners and
players deserve no sympathy. Moreover, there will always be billionaires ready
to buy a team....no matter how much it loses.
Joe5, here is what I have come up with. The league I
invision would have 18 teams in three divisions. Most of the teams would be in
the TV market area of several NBA teams and others would be located in former
NBA towns and Large TV Market cities as well as some obvious expansion
locations. The league would have the following member cities.West
DivisionFresno, CA Savemart centerSeattle,WA Key AreanAnaheim, CA Honda CenterSan Deago, CA Cox ArenaTuscon, AZ
"McKale Center Las Vegas, NV Thomas and MackEast
DivisionNew York, NYHardford, CNTrenton, NJBaltimore, MLTampa, FLColumbia, SCCentral DivisionKansas City, Kn (KU)Baton Rouge, LA (LSU) Austin, Texas
(UT)Madison, WS (Wisconson) Springfield, Il Columbus, OH (OSU)
it is still a weak arguement...siding with the players...when you have seen all
the fiasco that has happened during the past season...Melo
Drama...D-Will...Lebron James' mess...and you still side with the players?...im
siding a bit with the owners...not all owners have a multi-billionaire
owner...and the team is his private toy...some of these teams are a family
business...critical to a family's earning...but still they are rich...but if the
owners cut their losses...you would only have 8 teams playing...and fans are no
longer interested...might as well...make the league competitive...no more 20M
dollar contracts...for a guy like joe johnson...
Who cares?College sports has it all over professional, where money
rules and egos inflate.Good riddance.If and when the
love of the game returns to pro sports, I might watch a game or two.
wayne: I love it! I don't know what rules apply but this would deliver the
message that the players are NOT the product. The product is world-class
basketball competition.The league existed before MJ. It will
continue to exist after Kobe. At best, a player breezes across the fabric of NBA
history for a decade or two and then fades into the folklore of the league.
Unless he is Wilt (who made impacts to the game that are still with us) or
someone like that, his mark fades in a year or two.There is no
player that is greater than the league. NONE!!! If LeBron and Dirk and Wade all
left the league forever, the league would continue to exist.This is
the truth that the players need to understand ...
Thanks Ed, I was remarking on the excellent draft and trades Jerry West, as GM
of the Lakers made, to build the Lakers into one of the most successful sports
franchises in sports. Plus he was pretty darn good player too. And yes Buss
does deserve credit for hiring people like West and Jackson to build the Laker
dynasty.I also agree with you Ed that there is no way 22 franchises
are losing money. Most of these losses are paper losses and a good share of
these owners (Miller family excluded) owning a sports franchise is a hobby or
passion amongst a wide portfolio of other interests. The Blazers won't take
Paul Allen into poverty nor will the Mavericks take Cuban into poverty either.
San Antonio...got lucky...a season where in David Robinson had a season ending
injury...ended up a top pick...who happens to be Tim Duncan...but you have to
admit...two of their big three...came from late first round and early second
round picks....Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili...but still...they luck out...other
than that...if teams would want to really bring one home...the question here
is...as one poster pointed out...is competitiveness....in the West...its very
competitive...but in the NBA overall...its not getting exciting...when you see a
pumped up Heat team...destroying the Wizards...if having a hard cap of lets say
65-70M...it would be fun that every game what ever team is playing...it would be
tough...plus...as athletes...i dont think you should be a millionaire because of
it....there a lot of low paying but very important jobs out there that deserves
Get ready fans to "pony" up more to the three primma-donnas that
control our sporting lives from financial to whatever. That being the media,
owners, and players. They just can't agree on how to spend our hard earned money
"now" and need to argue about future monetary gifts they will be
extracting from "ALL" households whether a fan or not in the future!