Tuesday, November 29th, 2011 at 12:31 pm  |  12 responses

Players Get Played

Owners get richer, while players and fans didn’t get a damn thing.

by Dave Zirin / @EdgeofSports

Originally published at The Nation

The news blared with the electric intensity of a Black Friday taser. The NBA is back, baby! A 66-game season! Returning on Christmas Day, no less! As former journalist and current NBA talking head Michael Wilbon cheered, “The League couldn’t stage a more satisfying comeback. Even if those games are all moved to TNT, I’ll feel the same way about the Christmas Day return.”

There were those bitter adversaries, NBA Commissioner David Stern and National Basketball Players Association Executive Director Billy Hunter, grinning ear-to-ear, discarding their suit jackets and wearing bunchy, seasonal sweaters from the Heathcliff Huxtable collection. Stern was smiling so wide, it appeared that if you poked his middle, he’d giggle like he was Poppin’ Fresh. Hunter, no doubt feeling relieved that he at least fought off a “hard cap” and other demands from ownership, was clearly in the holiday spirit as well. Only NBPA President and L.A. Lakers co-captain Derek Fisher, wearing a suit, not a sweater, his eyes bleary from the marathon bargaining session, resembled someone who’d just endured one of the more bitter sports/labor negotiations in history. He looked like he’d just emerged from a Turkish prison.

Judging by facial expressions alone, I’m going to stand with Fisher on this one. Forget the cuddly sweaters. Ignore President Obama’s personal “good deal” thumbs up. Disregard the avalanche of tweets from your favorite star player about how excited they are to get back to work. The players were dunked on and Stern is wagging his tongue while hanging from the rim. If you ignore the bells and whistles and wipe away the confetti, we have what at the bottom line is a massive transfer of wealth from players to owners: $3 billion over the next decade, to be more precise. Three billion dollars extracted from those we pay to see, to those who have spent the last 20 years treating fans and taxpayers like the cowering abused partners we are.

For those interested in the finer points of the proposed “amnesty provision” for releasing players or the “stretch clause,” please search elsewhere, although I will say that giving teams the right to invalidate guaranteed contracts is a severe concession for the union to make. It also will do more to help big-market teams that spend carelessly than the much-discussed poor, small-market squads. In other words, there is nothing in this collective bargaining agreement that changes the basic contours for reaching a Championship: Teams that draft well and manage their cap will thrive no matter the size of their region (see San Antonio and Oklahoma City), and teams that spend blindly (the Knicks and Nets) or are owned by people proud to be stupid (the Kings or the Suns) will suffer.

The deal won’t make LeBron’s sphincter unclench in the Playoffs and it won’t make Carmelo play defense. It won’t make Kobe any younger or Andrew Bynum any healthier. The League will still be the League. There are no promises that the owners will plow this newfound lucre into their teams. In fact, there are now greater restraints on spending than before. There are no assurances that any funds will be earmarked for coaches or scouts. There are no announcements that any of these savings will translate into lower ticket prices or NBA package discounts for fans. All it means is that the owners have received a financial windfall because they own and we don’t. Now Donald Sterling, owner of the L.A. Clippers, can buy some more slums. Now Phil Anschutz, minority boss of the Lakers, can keep fighting the teaching of evolution in schools. Now Dick Devos of the Orlando Magic can give even more generously to Focus on the Family. Now every shadowy Koch brothers/Karl Rove political outfit that takes unlimited contributions will get a serious windfall just in time for the 2012 elections. Break out the bubbly.

This should sting every player, because coming off a year with record revenues, they should have been getting more, and instead they took historic cuts. Instead, their contracts are now not fully guaranteed. Instead, they are weakened. They are weakened even though they are the game. For the millions who paid good money to watch the Chicago Bulls player Michael Jordan soar, no one ever paid a cent to see the Charlotte Hornets owner Michael Jordan molt. Athletes are different than typical workers, and not just because their paychecks tower over our own. They are different because they fulfill the roles in production as both workers and product. They are the shoemaker and the shoe. Or as former Washington football great Brian Mitchell said to me, “In a restaurant, a chef cooks a steak. In sports, we are the chef and we are the steaks.”

For 15 years, young stars picked in the Draft’s first round have seen their salaries constrained. Derrick Rose, the NBA’s 21-year-old MVP, has the 126th-highest salary in the League. On an open market, he would make maybe five times his current income. There are also new provisions, still to be finalized, on raising the age of eligibility and whether owners will have the power to send players to their developmental league, along with dramatic salary reductions. Still, expect the players to approve it, because in the end, players average six years in the League. Giving up one-sixth of the expected earnings for your entire life was not an option.

I understand that, but it didn’t have to be this way. This deal is just all so very pre-Occupy Wall Street. I wish more players had spoken out and not let David Stern’s PR machine define them as “greedy millionaires, insensitive to the public’s suffering in these hard economic times.” I wish more had directly raised the issues of Occupy Wall Street, like 11-year veteran Etan Thomas, who wrote, “While the issues raised by the Wall Street occupiers differ from the issues of this lockout, aren’t there obvious parallels in power imbalance? Who is in the same position of power as the 1 percent? Who wants a bailout for their own mismanagement decisions? Who is more closely aligned with the corporate interests from which the Wall Street occupiers are looking to reclaim the country?”

I wish they had taken their fight out of the boardroom and into the public sphere. Make no mistake, I’m an NBA junkie and I’m thrilled to be watching ball sooner rather than later. But with every game of this warped, bastardized 66-game season, I’ll remember that we had a lockout where the rich got richer, the players got played and the fans didn’t get a damn thing.

  • Add a Comment
  • Share
  • RSS

Tags: ,

  • Sebastian

    So something closer to a real partnership revenue split is anathema?

    The players should have known that those brain-dead folks that convinced ownership to accept 43% of revenue back in the day would (and should) have been taken to the insane asylum by now.

    People who sign a bad deal usually don’t want to extend it.

  • Jono

    “LeBron’s sphincter unclench” really? you gonna write something like that? those are some filthy thoughts going through your head mr zirin..

  • dahon

    let it go….its good the ball is bouncing again…lets play ball

  • Evolutionary

    Folks just don’t understand the significance of the opportunity the players just missed. Sometimes you have an opportunity to do something really extraordinary – that changes the way things are done. It takes courage and sacrifice. I guess it sounds crazy to people but the players either recognized their worth and started their own league or they took a less than favorable deal. It was an either or. They chose the later when they didn’t have to. Fear and lack of consciousness result in the status quo: players getting played, the rich getting richer, the poor getting poorer…

  • Lan

    Agreed. A few things could have been done to better the system. What’s the point of having a clause “to Invalidate a guaranteed contract”?

  • T Bone

    Some interesting points in this article…. But unfortunately, Mr Zirin, there were a few points of stupidity that really put me off.
    Dave, you have styled yourself as a writer that can see past the PR machines of major media, and all the BS that goes along with it, but then you go and write this:

    “Now Donald Sterling, owner of the L.A. Clippers, can buy some more slums. Now Phil Anschutz, minority boss of the Lakers, can keep fighting the teaching of evolution in schools. Now Dick Devos of the Orlando Magic can give even more generously to Focus on the Family.”

    I am perfectly happy to speak out about Donald Sterling’s dubious business practices, but to group that with the two other examples you use is foolish. You may not be intending it that way, but the implication that is made is that these other examples are in the same category as Mr Sterling’s dealings.
    Anyone willing to look at thing with an unbiased and open mind will find out that there is more scientific proof against the theory of evolution than there is for it (look up the book Darwin’s Black Box for some education). Unfortunately, the theory of evolution is being taught as fact in schools, while even Charles Darwin himself said it could only be a theory. So for somebody who styles himself as you do, it was a big surprise to see you write this.
    As far as Dick Devos’ giving to Focus on the Family – how on earth can you suggest that this is a bad thing?!?! Have you no idea of the amount of good that this organisation does?!?! If only more people gave to organisations such as this, it could well make the world a better place. This is the kind of organisation that helps those who live in the ‘slums’ owned by Donald Sterling!
    The entire world looked on in horror at what happened in New Orleans, and we know how much that place means to you. So tell me Mr Zirin; was it Donald Sterling who helped people recover from that or was it organisations like Focus on the Family?
    To group these together is exceedingly uneducated, and terrible journalism.

  • Jerome

    @Lan,

    Invalidating a contract will go something like this, as far as I understand, an all-star (productive) player will be offered a lot of money to move to a team with championship potential, said player will take the huge contract. Whether the championship is won or not, should the player begin to decline production-wise,the contract would be nullified. Good deal eh?

  • Jerome

    @Tbone,

    Focus on the Family is the continuation of “The Crusades” that colonized and opressed entire civilizations in every corner of the world throughout history. The only reason they “help” in any way, shape or form is to increase their profile and subsidize “the cause”. Their policies/ propaganda are all hurting North American families, which is rather ironic.

  • The Spaniard

    You idiots have a problem putting numbers into context. Just because something is split 50/50 doesn’t make it a “fair deal”.

    The players got robbed.

    Plus, even with this new deal the owners still have the same “fake” problems they were distracting you with in the first place.

  • http://hoopistani.blogspot.com hoopistani

    one of the best articles i’ve ever read on this website

  • Gill

    As usual, only a couple of comments of one of the most well-written and important articles posted on SLAM this year. Good on you, Dave, for writing about these matters!

  • burnt_chicken

    searing read! agreed.

Advertisement