NBA · Prepare for an NBA lockout in October 2011 (page 1)

From ESPN Chris Broussard

In conversations with front-office executives Tuesday night, I was told some strong stuff regarding the upcoming Collective Bargaining Agreement. As you probably know, the current CBA will end after the 2010-2011 season.

The gist of what I was told is that the owners will go for the jugular and drop the players’ salaries immensely.

I spoke with one executive about Amare Stoudemire and was told that, the way owners are talking now, Stoudemire wouldn’t even get a five-year contract worth $60 million under the next CBA. That sounded crazy to me, but when I spoke with a team owner an hour later, he made the executive sound tame.

“The owners are really going to chop the money down,’’ the owner said. “I think Stoudemire would get $5 or $6 million [annually] in the next deal. The bottom line is that things are going to change dramatically.’’

Five to six million dollars for a five-time All-Star in his prime? That sounds cruel compared with the players’ current salaries, so cruel that I just don’t believe it. A general manager I spoke with later agreed that that was an extreme.

“That [$5 million for Stoudemire] sounds a little bizarre, but player salaries are definitely going to take a hit,’’ the GM said. “Players that come up for contracts under the new CBA are going to find themselves getting a lot less money.’’

It’s well-known that owners will try to shorten contracts. Currently, players can sign contracts as long as six years. One GM told me the owners are looking to shorten the maximum length of a contract to four or five years. He added that they have actually discussed trying to guarantee only the first two years of a four-year deal, and that the third and fourth years would be guaranteed only if a player reached certain performance-based incentives the previous season.

In other words, it would be closer to the NFL than to today’s NBA.

“Those concepts are being discussed,’’ another GM told me. “Is there a sentiment among some [owners] that they’d like to have it like football? Yeah. But I think that’s out of bounds.’’

Severe drops in salary. Non-guaranteed contracts. Billy Hunter, the Executive Director of the Players Association, will not settle for that without a fight, and the owners know it.

“There’s going to be a lockout,’’ the owner said. “There’s not even a doubt in my mind about that. Billy’s not going to make a deal like that. Teams are already saving up money for a strike.’’

Maybe the players should start saving too.

the league would be better off if the players actually had to PLAY for their money. imagine that.

Lakers' Fisher: Big salary hit not likelyComment Email Print Share By Chris Sheridan
ESPN.com
Archive
BOSTON -- If NBA owners ask players to give back an inordinate amount of money in collective bargaining talks, those talks at All-Star Weekend probably won't last long.

That was the implication from union president Derek Fisher of the Los Angeles Lakers in the wake of a report on SI.com that owners will seek to cut the players' share of revenues from 57 to 45 percent.

"I don't foresee any situation where we agree to a deal that flips the percentage in that manner, but there are a lot of ways to get to a destination or a goal," Fisher told ESPN.com.

Owners are expected to make their first formal proposal to the players' union in the coming days, and the sides have scheduled a collective bargaining session for All-Star Weekend, Feb. 12-14. The sides have met several times, formally and informally, but this will be the first time either side will have already put forth a formal proposal -- meaning a tenor will have been set.

A reduction from 57 percent of revenues, which the players are now guaranteed, to 45 percent would be tantamount to a 21 percent drop in player salary expenditures.

The NBA would not comment on the accuracy of the SI.com report.

"It's a negotiation, so I don't think we'd be surprised if there's an overreach," Fisher said. "So we'll see when we receive it how it looks, but I don't know if we should box ourselves in to just sending back our response to what they sent.

It is anticipated the NBA will seek shorter contracts (the maximum length is currently six years), mechanisms to make less of that money guaranteed, and a hard or harder salary cap to help stem leaguewide financial losses the owners claim are reaching hundreds of million of dollars annually.

The union is on record as saying it believes the current system is working for the owners, in large part because the structure of the labor deal negotiated in 2005 has steadily reduced the amount of future dollars committed to player payrolls.

Union director Billy Hunter has offered to extend the current agreement, though the NBA has strongly indicated that such an option is out of the question.

"In these meetings we've really tried to give them a feel for exactly what we are looking in this deal, as well," Fisher told ESPN.com. "I don't think any side has any intentions on dragging it out unnecessarily, but at the same time we have year and a half [remaining on the current agreement, which expires at the end of the 2010-11 season]. We're serious in our approach to getting this started sooner than later, but we're not going

If the players have to give back 20%, then a max deal starts at 12mil.

Keep this in mind THIS season as we guage what kind of contract DLee is worth.

He could conceivably make more than a Max player in the 2011-2012 season.

In addition, owners are requesting a drastic reduction in player salaries.

The proposal was sent to the union earlier this week and seeks a reduction in the players' share of basketball-related income from 57 percent to well below 50 percent, according to a report.

Owners also are seeking some aspects of a hard cap -- a departure from the current luxury-tax system -- and a reduction in the length and amount of max contracts.

According to Ken Berger of CBS Sports, the two sides will meet during All-Star weekend for their first face-to-face bargaining session as they try to reach an agreement before the current deal expires in 2011.

Just draw the line at 51% and call it a day!

Better start recording your games!!! There's gonna be a lockout and no NBA to watch!

By Adrian Wojnarowski, Yahoo! Sports Feb 6, 12:48 pm EST

Here’s how an NBA front-office executive described the document the commissioner’s office delivered to the union to start labor negotiations: “It’s just a photocopy of Stern’s middle finger.”

He was kind of kidding.

The owners want to take a far greater percentage of the basketball-related income. They want to pay millions less for maximum deals and shorten contracts. Most of all, they want a hard salary cap and assurances that protect themselves against a diminished economy and, well, themselves. Everything is hurtling toward a 2011 lockout, a negotiation that’ll likely feel far more like a standoff.

Owners have delivered commissioner David Stern an unmistakable mandate: Get our money back and get us profitable. The tone is downright nasty on the owners’ side. There exists an undercurrent of desperation within much of ownership, a sense they’re hell-bent on bringing the players to their knees.

“It isn’t just a matter of the union losing,” one Eastern Conference GM said. “It’s a matter of how badly they lose.”

Who stands to lose the most? That’s the compelling subplot. Where do the players give and where do they stand ground? The players most responsible for selling tickets, television ratings and merchandise – the Kobe Bryants, LeBron Jameses and Dwyane Wades – could be the ones taking the biggest hit.

The idea of raising superstar salaries and paying the middle- and lower-class players less won’t wash in a one-man, one-vote union. “If they cut the highest 25 or 30 salaries by, say, 35 percent, you’re not going to have to change that much more for [the owners] to get what they want financially,” another player agent said. “LeBron can scream and shout all he wants, but this is a one-man, one-vote union. Once guys figure out that 400 or so players will benefit by the top few taking a major cut, what do you think they’re going to do?”

Here’s an issue some believe the union could make a bargaining chip: contraction. Hunter has never been open to losing jobs with the elimination of the most financially strapped teams, but some believe he might be more accepting of the idea with the massive losses some owners insist they’re incurring in fledgling markets. Let the rest of the owners buy out, say, two teams, and then share the larger piece of TV and merchandising money.

Of course, that talk will go nowhere with Stern, whom one owner insisted would “never let [contraction] happen on his watch.” As another GM said, “Stern won’t let the WNBA go under, even though most of his owners are tired of taking losses on it. You think he’s going to let that happen with his NBA teams?”

This is a desperate time in the NBA, and there will be desperation in these talks. They’ll go into these negotiations with 30 teams and they’ll come out with 30, but the landscape of the NBA could be dramatically different. The way trades are done and free agents are signed and teams are likely to be transformed, and it could take a long lockout – maybe much, if not all, of the 2011-12 season – to get there.

Yes, the NBA delivered its players an initial proposal and it sure did look like a big finger flicked in the union’s face.