Breaking: NBA Files Lawsuit Against NBPA

JTaylor, you’re complaining about Stern’s credentials as an attorney? Uhm, how about you do some research on Billy Hunter and then holla back.

This move is designed to prevent the players from getting to the courts for a few months if they decided to decertify. Delay is the best move for the owners, and they know that. They also want to keep this argument away from a judge, not because they would lose in court because they probably wouldn’t, but because lots of info would come out about how the League handles things.
On another note, taking money overseas as a short term way to gain leverage while you attempt to get a better deal from your current employer is not hypocritical. It’s not more hypocritical than NBA owners renting out their arenas to various events when they would normally be hosting basketball games. Or running their other businesses to support themselves. Players have to pursue other revenue options, or they will be force to capitulate completely. But, Bryan is right, and I’ve said it before, the players will turn on each long before they owners do the same.

bryan: i agree with one caveat – the owners are not looking for a willingness to negotiate from the players (they already have that), what they want is for the players to cave in and take their proposal as is. that’s a big difference. and i do agree that the “middle class” in the nba is an issue. if we’re being real, as david falk was pointing out, kobe and lebron are severly underpaid. these two guys generate so much revenue for the league, they should be making 40 million a year at the very least. on the other hand, guys like chris bosh and pau gasol are severly overpaid when looking at what they bring in. in a completely free market, half of one team’s salary cap would go to its superstar. it’s funny to think about the nba has a pseudo-socialist system.

It would be much larger and impact far more players.
In order to meet Deron Williams’ salary demands that Turkish team had to get a special sponsor. And Williams’ salary was what Mike Miller might get over here.
Even with a $45 million hard cap, which is what the owners originally proposed, you would still have players at the top of the pyramid making big bucks. The people who would suffer the most are your mid-level guys like Varejo, Miller and Perkins. Now way do you spend $8 million on Kendrick Perkins if that represents nearly 20 percent of your total cap space.

the philosopher: deron’s current contract would pay him 16 mil this year, i think it’s safe to say that, under a new cba, he would still make more than one third of that.

i do agree that 7-year contracts are too long. you never know when you’ll sign a JO that will lose his legs midway through the contract. what i would like his 4 guaranteed years and then 3 optional years (options for both the team and the players – if one pary wants to opt out then the deal is off).

i feel only for the players that are against this lockout and want to play nba ball. but no sympathy for those jackarse players who don’t earn their keep, nor do i have any sympathy for those who want to play overseas…

Allen:
I can respect that perspective.
T-Money:
Okay. Say he gets half. Is that still considerably bigger?
I guess it would be, depending on one’s outlook or perspective.

However, fans and their proxies in the media put a lot of pressure on teams to make splashy moves, which leads to problems.

Allenp, I agree with you. Teams do keep overpaying the Rob Schneiders so that Adam Sandlers stay happy. The owners seem to want to reap successful business profits without operating like one would. I do agree with your proposed changes though. Seems “fair” to all involved. Shorter contracts mean we get to see “contract year” effort more often and BRI split the players get right now is pretty lopsided.

AllenP, I see your point but how is that formula good for a sports league?
Having a commissioner that only cares about keeping the owners happy aka “fattening their pockets” is not good for any business let alone a league that needs to put out good products on the court for the fans to come. Most owners are satisfied with losing as long as they are making money, teams like the clippers have traded away good player after good player just so they don’t have to pay them in the name of saving a buck.
If that’s the case, the NBA should have two different entities running the show. One side that strictly represents the owner’s interests and another that looks out for the players. No, I’m not talking about the current system we have today, where one side (the commissioner) controls everything and has the say so on player conduct, rules on the court and control of revenue streams aka jersey sales and tv contracts. Both sides should have equal control over everything that goes on in the League.

Let’s take some of the wildest assumptions by readers on this site and explore them from an economics point of view.

“The NBA didn’t lose money”
“Owners are greedy”

Even so, the owners have put their own money (or taken highly leveraged positions) to purchase a franchise. If they don’t feel the business is earning them an acceptable ROI then it’s their perogative to try to make their business more profitable.

At the same time the players have the right to try to secure themselves the best possible employment arrangement. The players won the last CBA and the economics have proven that that arrangement was not mutually beneficial. Even though it sucks to take a pay cut, it’s either that or play in Turkey, Europe, China, Australia etc for even less pay and worse living conditions.

My prediction is that a significant amount (or all) of the NBA season is lost and players play internationally which will in turn force the owners to concede some of their demands. In the end, the owners will be clear cut winners of this CBA.

THE ONLY WAY the players win this CBA is if the owners are bluffing about the losses, in which case we’ll see a last minute deal. But if 22/30 teams are losing money, they won’t hesitate to wait for a CBA that provides them with a more profitable economic landscape.

Put it this way, the players need the NBA more than the owners do…

1. It is revisionist history to say that players won the last CBA. Nobody believed that at the time, and the perception was that the players caved because they had managed their finances so poorly they couldn’t survive without their bloated paychecks. Check the record.
2. Business owners have the right to attempt to maximize their profits. When they do that at the expense of their employees, it’s called greed. The owners could all turn a profit if they agreed to a better revenue sharing model similar to what MLB does. They have refused because the larger owners don’t want to subsidize the smaller ones. So, they’d rather end basketball to break the player’s union so they can all make even more money. As of right now, the only people to offer to give up anything have been the players who have already agreed to rollback their share of the BRI to 54 percent from 57 percent.

AllenP, all fair points but how are the players not equals to the owners when the only reason fans come to a game or watch it on TV is because of the players. In my opinion that makes them superior to the owners because without the services of the Kobes, Durants, and Howards, no one, I repeat, no one would watch or come to games.
Look at what KD did at Rucker Park, everyone’s talking about it including every major sports channel. I don’t ever remember anyone reporting on the restaurant Mark Cuban visited last week or the 9 holes of golf Mikhail Prokhorov played. The owners should be grateful that guys like Wilt, Russell, Kareem, Magic, Bird, MJ, and others put in the dedication and time in the gym to become the sole reason why so many people around the world love NBA basketball today.

MikeC, I’d like limitations on Bird rights too. I’d like to cap the number of players a team can retain via Bird rights. That way teams will only use them for something like 2-4 players they consider to be their core. Guys that don’t even crack the starting 5 should not get Bird rights.

You know… it just keeps getting more hatable… I was hating the way the players were simply refusing to negotiate anything, thinking what they have is what they should remain to have. And I read this and I thought the owners were suing over the lack of negotiations by the players. Now I learn they’re suing to take away every tool that the players have during the lockout. I mean, really. This is driving me away as a basketball fan.

I mean don’t get me wrong, I’m very interested, but I’m not experienced in business…..at all to this point I’m sure there are some things I don’t know about the lockout.

weirdest thing about this is Stern who is trying to take money away from players reportidly is making 23 million a year which ahh is way more than every player except like kobe and a couple others

this is a public announcement

who will be sorry for guys who make 6 or 7 or even 8 figures a year putting a ball in a basket when the average american make $40000????

stop kidding!!