Knicks · birds rights case (page 4)

subzero0 wrote:I dont understand why the league would not want have players keep their bird rights in this fasion. What does the league have to gain from keeping the bird rights from players who are cut and picked up?

Smaller payrolls. Players get bigger raises with bird rights, which means owners spend more.

knickscity wrote:

subzero0 wrote:I dont understand why the league would not want have players keep their bird rights in this fasion. What does the league have to gain from keeping the bird rights from players who are cut and picked up?

Smaller payrolls. Players get bigger raises with bird rights, which means owners spend more.

"LEVERAGE"

Just like any other corporation, the owners can have their players by the balls and not the other way around.
You know that prick, that is called your boss, that thinks he owns u, well, even NBA players face it too.
The owners as a whole, want control over the players abilities to command contracts, using other teams as a threat if not, they leave.

The more the players can make, the more they will try to demand.
Now I am not saying Lin or/and Novak, with Billups, and JJ HIckson do not deserve it, in fact I think they all do....

These are the situations they tried to improve in the new CBA.
Teams that are under the cap are usually teams that suck, will have a more leverage to attract good players

versus

teams that are over the tax bracket by limiting their powers, abilities to acquire talent
Instead of drafting a player with their top picks and have them leave after their rookie contracts

They are protecting the smaller market teams, especially when they are losing, and no one wants to go to sign with them.
With all these "ALL Star Trio's forming" they have to limit the power and abilities of teams, to keep the NBA from losing franchises.

Since the ruling right now is they can't pay them, they wouldn't even have such a conversation.
Dolan doesn't mind spending much more money, a reason why we are hated by the league.
Because we mess up the market, being used on all FA's signings.
Giving out full MLE, with 1st round draft picks in trades, and buying picks from teams that can barely sustain themselves.

RonRon wrote:

knickscity wrote:

subzero0 wrote:I dont understand why the league would not want have players keep their bird rights in this fasion. What does the league have to gain from keeping the bird rights from players who are cut and picked up?

Smaller payrolls. Players get bigger raises with bird rights, which means owners spend more.

"LEVERAGE"

Just like any other corporation, the owners can have their players by the balls and not the other way around.
You know that prick, that is called your boss, that thinks he owns u, well, even NBA players face it too.
The owners as a whole, want control over the players abilities to command contracts, using other teams as a threat if not, they leave.

The more the players can make, the more they will try to demand.
Now I am not saying Lin or/and Novak, with Billups, and JJ HIckson do not deserve it, in fact I think they all do....

These are the situations they tried to improve in the new CBA.
Teams that are under the cap are usually teams that suck, will have a more leverage to attract good players

versus

teams that are over the tax bracket by limiting their powers, abilities to acquire talent
Instead of drafting a player with their top picks and have them leave after their rookie contracts

They are protecting the smaller market teams, especially when they are losing, and no one wants to go to sign with them.
With all these "ALL Star Trio's forming" they have to limit the power and abilities of teams, to keep the NBA from losing franchises.

Since the ruling right now is they can't pay them, they wouldn't even have such a conversation.
Dolan doesn't mind spending much more money, a reason why we are hated by the league.
Because we mess up the market, being used on all FA's signings.
Giving out full MLE, with 1st round draft picks in trades, and buying picks from teams that can barely sustain themselves.

Your hate for the man is blinding you.

Novak can get a ton of money from another team.

Its about teams spreading the talent around also. Novak get get a max contract from a team who has cap space.

this is about taking away teams ability to spend over the cap.

I do side with the union on this one but lets keep it accurate.

Drafted players by the team have the Bird rights.

Basically if a team can take a player off the waiver and have to pay his contract then they have to have the cap space at that time. The arguement is if they aquired the player via trade it would equate.

This has little to do with players getting paid. If he is due a raise then Novack, like Lin are in demand and can get paid elsewhere. And they likely will.

League hates dolan cuz he is stupid.

Nalod wrote:

RonRon wrote:

knickscity wrote:

subzero0 wrote:I dont understand why the league would not want have players keep their bird rights in this fasion. What does the league have to gain from keeping the bird rights from players who are cut and picked up?

Smaller payrolls. Players get bigger raises with bird rights, which means owners spend more.

"LEVERAGE"

Just like any other corporation, the owners can have their players by the balls and not the other way around.
You know that prick, that is called your boss, that thinks he owns u, well, even NBA players face it too.
The owners as a whole, want control over the players abilities to command contracts, using other teams as a threat if not, they leave.

The more the players can make, the more they will try to demand.
Now I am not saying Lin or/and Novak, with Billups, and JJ HIckson do not deserve it, in fact I think they all do....

These are the situations they tried to improve in the new CBA.
Teams that are under the cap are usually teams that suck, will have a more leverage to attract good players

versus

teams that are over the tax bracket by limiting their powers, abilities to acquire talent
Instead of drafting a player with their top picks and have them leave after their rookie contracts

They are protecting the smaller market teams, especially when they are losing, and no one wants to go to sign with them.
With all these "ALL Star Trio's forming" they have to limit the power and abilities of teams, to keep the NBA from losing franchises.

Since the ruling right now is they can't pay them, they wouldn't even have such a conversation.
Dolan doesn't mind spending much more money, a reason why we are hated by the league.
Because we mess up the market, being used on all FA's signings.
Giving out full MLE, with 1st round draft picks in trades, and buying picks from teams that can barely sustain themselves.

Your hate for the man is blinding you.

Novak can get a ton of money from another team.

Its about teams spreading the talent around also. Novak get get a max contract from a team who has cap space.

this is about taking away teams ability to spend over the cap.

I do side with the union on this one but lets keep it accurate.

Drafted players by the team have the Bird rights.

Basically if a team can take a player off the waiver and have to pay his contract then they have to have the cap space at that time. The arguement is if they aquired the player via trade it would equate.

This has little to do with players getting paid. If he is due a raise then Novack, like Lin are in demand and can get paid elsewhere. And they likely will.

League hates dolan cuz he is stupid.

Dolan's stupidity is the only thing saving the league from perennial Knicks dominance. The man is willing to max out his salary cap every season. He just insists on doing so in the most inefficient Jerome James way possible. Imagine if we only overpaid 50% of the time instead of 100%....

GodSaveTheKnicks wrote:

Nalod wrote:

RonRon wrote:

knickscity wrote:

subzero0 wrote:I dont understand why the league would not want have players keep their bird rights in this fasion. What does the league have to gain from keeping the bird rights from players who are cut and picked up?

Smaller payrolls. Players get bigger raises with bird rights, which means owners spend more.

"LEVERAGE"

Just like any other corporation, the owners can have their players by the balls and not the other way around.
You know that prick, that is called your boss, that thinks he owns u, well, even NBA players face it too.
The owners as a whole, want control over the players abilities to command contracts, using other teams as a threat if not, they leave.

The more the players can make, the more they will try to demand.
Now I am not saying Lin or/and Novak, with Billups, and JJ HIckson do not deserve it, in fact I think they all do....

These are the situations they tried to improve in the new CBA.
Teams that are under the cap are usually teams that suck, will have a more leverage to attract good players

versus

teams that are over the tax bracket by limiting their powers, abilities to acquire talent
Instead of drafting a player with their top picks and have them leave after their rookie contracts

They are protecting the smaller market teams, especially when they are losing, and no one wants to go to sign with them.
With all these "ALL Star Trio's forming" they have to limit the power and abilities of teams, to keep the NBA from losing franchises.

Since the ruling right now is they can't pay them, they wouldn't even have such a conversation.
Dolan doesn't mind spending much more money, a reason why we are hated by the league.
Because we mess up the market, being used on all FA's signings.
Giving out full MLE, with 1st round draft picks in trades, and buying picks from teams that can barely sustain themselves.

Your hate for the man is blinding you.

Novak can get a ton of money from another team.

Its about teams spreading the talent around also. Novak get get a max contract from a team who has cap space.

this is about taking away teams ability to spend over the cap.

I do side with the union on this one but lets keep it accurate.

Drafted players by the team have the Bird rights.

Basically if a team can take a player off the waiver and have to pay his contract then they have to have the cap space at that time. The arguement is if they aquired the player via trade it would equate.

This has little to do with players getting paid. If he is due a raise then Novack, like Lin are in demand and can get paid elsewhere. And they likely will.

League hates dolan cuz he is stupid.

Dolan's stupidity is the only thing saving the league from perennial Knicks dominance. The man is willing to max out his salary cap every season. He just insists on doing so in the most inefficient Jerome James way possible. Imagine if we only overpaid 50% of the time instead of 100%....

His spending isn't an issue, it's who has been doing the actual deals that has been the issue.

Overpaying by less wouldn't correct that.

Has there been any news on this since the hearing? I feel that the long period between the hearing and the arbitrator's ruling is good for us. If the arbitrator was going to rule in favor of the NBA I figure his decision would have come fairly quickly. The fact that it's been several days means, to me, that he's looking to justify overturning the language in the CBA.

VCoug wrote:Has there been any news on this since the hearing? I feel that the long period between the hearing and the arbitrator's ruling is good for us. If the arbitrator was going to rule in favor of the NBA I figure his decision would have come fairly quickly. The fact that it's been several days means, to me, that he's looking to justify overturning the language in the CBA.

There will be an answer by Juy 1st. the longer is goes the better it might be

IrishKnickFan wrote:

VCoug wrote:Has there been any news on this since the hearing? I feel that the long period between the hearing and the arbitrator's ruling is good for us. If the arbitrator was going to rule in favor of the NBA I figure his decision would have come fairly quickly. The fact that it's been several days means, to me, that he's looking to justify overturning the language in the CBA.

There will be an answer by Juy 1st. the longer is goes the better it might be

Most arbitrator take the standard of around 14 days.

It gives them time to review the case, work on other items, and give both parties the confidence in thinking the took a hard look at the events, when they probably had an answer that same day.