What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

*NBA THREAD* Abe will be missed (3 Viewers)

A whole set of odds, then, can give a general sense of public confidence surrounding a story like the NBA lockout. Consider the odds released Friday by Bodog.eu for the number of games played in the 2011-12 NBA season (via EOB ):No games: 5/482 games: 8/51-50 games: 3/151-81 games: 5/1
I guess they're a little more optimistic that I am but not much.
 
So, is there going to be basketball this season?
Highly doubtful. I'd set the odds of having a full season at about 2% and a half season at about 15%.
Can I get these odds in a bet.Ridiculous.
I'll take action on this as well.
2% on a full season is pretty optimistic at this point. If by half season you mean over 40.5 games, 15 % might be a tad low but not much.
There will be a season. No doubt in my mind. Can some games be missed? Yes, but I think we'll get our answer to that question over the next few days. Now is the time to reach an agreement.
 
So, is there going to be basketball this season?
Highly doubtful. I'd set the odds of having a full season at about 2% and a half season at about 15%.
Can I get these odds in a bet.Ridiculous.
I'll take action on this as well.
2% on a full season is pretty optimistic at this point. If by half season you mean over 40.5 games, 15 % might be a tad low but not much.
There will be a season. No doubt in my mind. Can some games be missed? Yes, but I think we'll get our answer to that question over the next few days. Now is the time to reach an agreement.
Yes it is. How's that working out?What's been the best news so far? That Wade didn't go so far as to actually punch Stern in the mouth?

I think games being missed is all but a forgone conclusion at this point.

If we're playing a guessing game. I give the chance of a full 81 game season as 0.000001%.

It's hard to make a guess on a half-season. A sliver of progress would help, but that hasn't happened yet.

I'd guess there's about a 40% chance that a 41 or more games get played.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pretty telling that no one cares to talk about this.
What is there to say? I'm afraid that no one involved sees the big picture, which isn't surprising since so much money is at stake.The owners won't continue with a system that is similar to the one they just finished. I truly believe many of them will sit out indefinitely. The agents are only looking out for themselves and the top guys. The top guys are so loaded that they don't care if they miss some time. Guys like Garnett and Kobe are probably loving the extra rest. The mid-tier guys won't speak up since they are overpaid, so they fall in line with the top guys. And no one cares about the lower rung guys because they can be easily replaced by the tons of street free agents who would gladly sit on the end of the bench for 400k a year.I honestly wouldn't be surprised if we missed more than a year. I think everyone knew that this year was going to be gone. Sometime next summer they'll start to "make progress" only to find that the owners aren't backing off some of their demands. Then next August we'll start hearing rumblings that 2012 is in danger as well...
 
I figure they'll start up in December/January. That's right about the time everyone will start feeling the pain. As we've seen multiple times over, not all the big money players are so great at managing their finances, and the owners who do usually turn a profit on operating their teams are going to get antsy, particularly the ones with championship ready rosters.

 
Gotta love the marathon bargaining session yesterday and getting back at it today. I'd be surprised if they aren't making significant progress. Good chance some sort of tenitive deal is reached today, IMO.

 
Heard Coach K on the radio this morning talking about how the Olympics are a little early this year and they'd start practicing early July. If the NBA settles and wants to get a full season in, that will be interesting. I personally think Stern & Co. need to be aware of the Olympic start date and have their season completed by then no matter what.

 
Gotta love the marathon bargaining session yesterday and getting back at it today. I'd be surprised if they aren't making significant progress. Good chance some sort of tenitive deal is reached today, IMO.
By all accounts, they aren't making any significant progress.
And several accounts were LeBron would sign with New York. I am not sure I trust all these "sources". We'll see though.
 
Pretty sure I'm with the players in not trusting a thing Gilbert says. When the NBAs two point men are from two of the smallest markets without Stern in the room, nothing is getting done.

 
Anyone picking up Shaq's book? Sounds like there'll be some nice fuel in there for the Kobe haters based on some excerpts they read on the radio here in L.A. yesterday.

 
Also, Luke Walton considering retirement. Doctors have basically told him not to play hoops if he wants a functioning back for the rest of his life. Sad for Walton as he seems like a good person, but this could be a real break for the Lakers. That would let them use amnesty on Artest or Blake. :excited:

 
'Gr00vus said:
Also, Luke Walton considering retirement. Doctors have basically told him not to play hoops if he wants a functioning back for the rest of his life. Sad for Walton as he seems like a good person, but this could be a real break for the Lakers. That would let them use amnesty on Artest or Blake. :excited:
I would love for them to do this amnesty thing with SA and Richard Jefferson.
 
Screw these guys - seems like all the real issus that effect the game are done - its all down to split of revenue....no fan will shed tears over that. I hope they lose the season at this point and are given a dose of reality like baseball when they returned from strike....NBA is not football or baseball. People can live without NBA. Stern has tainted his legacy with this stupidity.

 
The players were never going to go less then 50/50. Basically the owners were at 50/50 and the players were at 57%.

Seven points. Players have given back 4.5pts and are at 52.5% while most likely giving ground on length of contracts. Unless you think the owners should receive everything they want the players have been more then fair.

I'd like to see something where max length of contract is three years with a team option for a fourth year.

Hunter has said he understands the uncertainty the next 10 years entails. He's willing to do a shorter contract, say 3-4 years. Owners won't have it. They know they are going to get a sweet deal and want to lock the players up for 10 years.

Don't know how you can be on ownership side at this point. Players have made huge concessions. Doubt AEG gets 50% of the take when the Rolling Stones sellout Staples.

 
Unless you think the owners should receive everything they want the players have been more then fair.
The side that negotiates better should receive everything they want.
Don't know how you can be on ownership side at this point. Players have made huge concessions. Doubt AEG gets 50% of the take when the Rolling Stones sellout Staples.
Its pretty tough to be on anyone's side in this.
 
Unless you think the owners should receive everything they want the players have been more then fair.
The side that negotiates better should receive everything they want.
Don't know how you can be on ownership side at this point. Players have made huge concessions. Doubt AEG gets 50% of the take when the Rolling Stones sellout Staples.
Its pretty tough to be on anyone's side in this.
I would actually be curious to see where the regulars in this thread fall at this stage. I'm about 95% on the player's side, simply because I resent the owners' suggestion that ownership of a basketball team-- a thing that invariably appreciates at a ridiculous pace-- should be evaluated as a business instead of an investment that may, on occasion, require expenditures to maintain and improve.The 5% is because the NBA players have the best of both worlds - they make money right out of the gate unlike baseball players, they have guaranteed money unlike football players, and they have very little risk of serious bodily harm unlike football players and hockey players.
 
If they were starting from scratch I'd say a 50/50 split is fair, then build the other concessions around it. But that's not the background for this negotiation. The players have conceded on the luxury tax being more oppressive, shorter contracts, lower mid level exception and 5% off the amount of revenue they were getting from the last deal. That's quite a bit to give back, so I'm thinking the owners should take the 52% now and hammer them for the remaining 2% in the next deal.

Regardless, I hope Arenas and Reshard Lewis aren't heavily in debt, because they're not going to see dime one of their remaining contracts. It'll be an interesting free agent market when all the amnesty cuts are through.

 
If they were starting from scratch I'd say a 50/50 split is fair, then build the other concessions around it. But that's not the background for this negotiation. The players have conceded on the luxury tax being more oppressive, shorter contracts, lower mid level exception and 5% off the amount of revenue they were getting from the last deal. That's quite a bit to give back, so I'm thinking the owners should take the 52% now and hammer them for the remaining 2% in the next deal.

Regardless, I hope Arenas and Reshard Lewis aren't heavily in debt, because they're not going to see dime one of their remaining contracts. It'll be an interesting free agent market when all the amnesty cuts are through.
No way this happens. They'll still have to pay them, it just wont count against the luxury tax.
 
a thing that invariably appreciates at a ridiculous pace--
How true is that for small market teams like Sacremento among others?
Is it not? I've always just assumed it was true of all professional sports teams.

For example, your "small market" team, the Sacramento Kings, have almost doubled in value since they were purchased by the Maloofs in 1998. That's a decent ROI, no? And it's an ego buy to boot. It's fun, it gets you into parties with celebrities, comes with great seats, gets you laid constantly, doubles in value every decade or so, and offers you a decent return on your investment, and I'm supposed to feel bad because it doesn't also guarantee you more annual revenue than annual expenditures?

 
What's frustrating is that extra 2.5% of BRI isn't worth fighting over anymore. They're better off swallowing their pride and making a deal before they have to cancel more games.

 
Unless you think the owners should receive everything they want the players have been more then fair.
The side that negotiates better should receive everything they want.
Don't know how you can be on ownership side at this point. Players have made huge concessions. Doubt AEG gets 50% of the take when the Rolling Stones sellout Staples.
Its pretty tough to be on anyone's side in this.
I would actually be curious to see where the regulars in this thread fall at this stage. I'm about 95% on the player's side, simply because I resent the owners' suggestion that ownership of a basketball team-- a thing that invariably appreciates at a ridiculous pace-- should be evaluated as a business instead of an investment that may, on occasion, require expenditures to maintain and improve.The 5% is because the NBA players have the best of both worlds - they make money right out of the gate unlike baseball players, they have guaranteed money unlike football players, and they have very little risk of serious bodily harm unlike football players and hockey players.
NBA players do have it good. But also only around 450 spots available. I also don't think it's that useful to compare the NBA to NFL unions. The NFL union is a joke. M. Forte is making 600k this year. A 30-second commercial on Sunday Night Football costs 500k.
 
I would actually be curious to see where the regulars in this thread fall at this stage. I'm about 95% on the player's side, simply because I resent the owners' suggestion that ownership of a basketball team-- a thing that invariably appreciates at a ridiculous pace-- should be evaluated as a business instead of an investment that may, on occasion, require expenditures to maintain and improve.The 5% is because the NBA players have the best of both worlds - they make money right out of the gate unlike baseball players, they have guaranteed money unlike football players, and they have very little risk of serious bodily harm unlike football players and hockey players.
I'm probably closer to being on the owners side but not by much. I'm sick of seeing the Eddie Curry's, Charlie V's, Alonzo Mourning's, Marbury's, etc. and don't mind the players as a whole getting screwed for it. God would I love non-guaranteed contracts. I know, the owners sign these deals and its all their fault, blah blah blah. The players union was dumb enough to think they had a chance in these negotiations and they are getting what they deserve. They should have fought to the final hour but once there were games about to be cancelled, they should have taken what they could get. They are doing nothing but hurting themselves by being stubborn. Note: I pretty much side with the owners for strikes/lockouts of any sort (except for things like working conditions/safety). If you don't like the offer management is giving, find another job!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top