PDA

View Full Version : LOCKOUT!?!?!?!??!?!?


fin4life
05-18-2005, 05:04 PM
ESPN reported that the league has broken off negotiations with the players union. Lockout looks un-avoidable.

mavsman
05-18-2005, 06:14 PM
That's weird. I just try to imagine what would happen in England, Italy, Spain or Germany if you told the fans that there wasn't a soccer season to be played next year and it's not a fun picture I'm coming up with. Guess the "it's only a game"-approach works better on your side of the pond.

Pirate
05-18-2005, 06:46 PM
I wouldnt get all bothered yet. There are still about 45 days left before the deadline, and most of the issues have already been hashed out. Each team needs to dig in its heels a tiny bit to feel like they are getting the best deal possible - but there is still a world of time to make a deal. Heck, if the deadline was Sunday and they both desperately wanted to do a deal before the deadline, they would get it done in a couple of days I bet.

Thespiralgoeson
05-18-2005, 07:28 PM
I hope you're right, Pirate, because I can't stand the offseason. I literally count the days until the next season starts. I need my Mavs!!!

rakesh.s
05-18-2005, 09:27 PM
Billy Hunter just comes off as an asshole imo..

What does the league want? Reduction of 7 year contracts to 5, and an age limit? Is that a lot to ask? Will players suffer without 2 more years on their deal?

Every time they talk to Hunter, it's always "we will not make any concessions" ...what an idiot

ocelot_ark
05-18-2005, 11:59 PM
Shit like this is what makes the NBA lose the casual observer. Hell, it makes ME not want to watch them. OH - is that $18 million for 5 years not enough? Freakin' A - the nation of Peru could survive on that.

poohrichardson
05-19-2005, 01:10 AM
I think the max contract should be 4 years.. or maybe even 3.. the shorter the contracts, the more players feel they need to prove, and the better the overall game is.

kingrex
05-19-2005, 10:02 AM
Originally posted by: poohrichardson
I think the max contract should be 4 years.. or maybe even 3.. the shorter the contracts, the more players feel they need to prove, and the better the overall game is.

The contract length can be a crap shoot at times for both the player and the team. It protects the player in case of injury, and it benefits the team by locking a good player. I like what your saying, but I don't think it will happen.

Dooby
05-19-2005, 06:14 PM
The main objection of the players association is that the league is profitable. The only teams losing money are those that owned by billionaires who don't care (Mark, that means you). Why is the league demanding more? Frankly, I am not sure I blame the players in this.

What is going to kill the players association is that it is very clear the negotiations are being run by the agents, which is about the most unsympathetic group of people on the planet.

Stern is trying to set up NBA free agency like MLB. He wants shorter contracts so that there are more free agents every year. More free agents means more competition and would help keep salaries low. It really is pretty clever. That, and noone should ever be allowed to give fuckers like Matt Maloney** guaranteed money for six years; teams need to be saved from themselves.

**Sure, I could have used Tariq Abdul Wahed for local flavor, but Matt Maloney was funnier.

chumdawg
05-19-2005, 06:35 PM
Dooby, do you think that Cuban is operating the Mavericks at a loss?

Dooby
05-20-2005, 09:22 AM
I recall reading somewhere a year or two ago that the Mavs operated at a loss. From what I recall of the numbers, the loss was about equal to the luxury tax payments. If there were no luxury tax, it wouldn't surprise me if Cuban broke even or made a little money. If the Mavs are profitable, then the owners have no business crying over the CBA.