NBA and NBPA pushed closer to a deal on a new CBA

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> General Basketball Discussion Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
MJST
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 26083

PostPosted: Thu Oct 20, 2016 5:50 pm    Post subject: NBA and NBPA pushed closer to a deal on a new CBA

Adrian Wojnarowski ‏@WojVerticalNBA 26m26 minutes ago
Sources: After Wednesday labor meeting, NBA and NBPA pushed closer to a deal on a new CBA. Most major items agreed on, deal within sight.

Adrian Wojnarowski ‏@WojVerticalNBA 24m24 minutes ago
Among items that will be in final CBA agreement: NBA's "one-and-done" college draft rule will remain in place, sources tell @TheVertical.

Adrian Wojnarowski ‏@WojVerticalNBA 14m14 minutes ago
The NBA and NBPA's Basketball Related Income (BRI) split will be unchanged in a new CBA deal, league sources tell @TheVertical.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Lowest Merion
Retired


Joined: 22 Jun 2010
Posts: 10720

PostPosted: Thu Oct 20, 2016 7:58 pm    Post subject:

Ah, man. If true, that's no fun.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
The Brain
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 03 Oct 2016
Posts: 515
Location: Avatar courtesy of Jodeke, my friend.

PostPosted: Thu Oct 20, 2016 9:47 pm    Post subject:

Seriously, Adam Silver in 2 years has been as flawless a commish as you could be. I do wish the one and done was off the table though. Either scrap it or make it a 2 and done.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Thu Oct 20, 2016 11:05 pm    Post subject:

The Brain wrote:
Seriously, Adam Silver in 2 years has been as flawless a commish as you could be. I do wish the one and done was off the table though. Either scrap it or make it a 2 and done.


The one and done rule is completely exploitative, and I am surprised no one has yet fought it with an age-discrimination suit. I don't know that there's much evidence that 1 or 2 years in college are better for a player than coming straight out of high school -- in all cases, some will be busts, some will make it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 11264

PostPosted: Fri Oct 21, 2016 7:49 am    Post subject:

It's collectively bargained, so it's legal. And it's really not that it's better for a given player, it's that the league gets an extra year to see how that player develops before deciding whether he becomes a "given player."

It's an issue that was never going to get any pushback from the players. The raison d'etre of a union is to protect its membership, and for every young guy the league lets in, a current member loses his job.

BTW, I was told back in July that this was going to get done before December 15, so I'm glad it's all working out according to plan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Fri Oct 21, 2016 10:40 am    Post subject:

LarryCoon wrote:
It's collectively bargained, so it's legal.



It's legal in that it's withstood cases that take an antitrust approach. As far as I know, no one's ever challenged it based on age discrimination, though there has been speculation that challenge could be successful.

LarryCoon wrote:
And it's really not that it's better for a given player, it's that the league gets an extra year to see how that player develops before deciding whether he becomes a "given player."


Well, the league (and union) do often perpetuated the hypocrisy that they are protecting players who aren't ready for the league. That aside, I don't see why the league's self-interest should trump the self-interest of the players coming into the league.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144432
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Fri Oct 21, 2016 1:14 pm    Post subject:

LarryCoon wrote:
It's collectively bargained, so it's legal. And it's really not that it's better for a given player, it's that the league gets an extra year to see how that player develops before deciding whether he becomes a "given player."

It's an issue that was never going to get any pushback from the players. The raison d'etre of a union is to protect its membership, and for every young guy the league lets in, a current member loses his job.

BTW, I was told back in July that this was going to get done before December 15, so I'm glad it's all working out according to plan.


I couldn't see how the union could be for or against the one and done rule. The number of players in the league is basically stagnant. I am not sure how union dues are paid, but if it is a percentage of income then maybe more vets would mean higher paid players and more dues.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Fri Oct 21, 2016 1:37 pm    Post subject:

venturalakersfan wrote:
LarryCoon wrote:
It's collectively bargained, so it's legal. And it's really not that it's better for a given player, it's that the league gets an extra year to see how that player develops before deciding whether he becomes a "given player."

It's an issue that was never going to get any pushback from the players. The raison d'etre of a union is to protect its membership, and for every young guy the league lets in, a current member loses his job.

BTW, I was told back in July that this was going to get done before December 15, so I'm glad it's all working out according to plan.


I couldn't see how the union could be for or against the one and done rule. The number of players in the league is basically stagnant. I am not sure how union dues are paid, but if it is a percentage of income then maybe more vets would mean higher paid players and more dues.


That didn't make a lot of sense. Every year, there are going to be first round picks with guaranteed salaries who will take the place of players who retire or are cut.

The one-and-done rule only affects who the replacements are; it doesn't quash the inevitable changing of the guard.

It's simplistic to suggest that the union gives no thought or feels no responsibility to the next wave of players.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
jonnybravo
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 21 Sep 2007
Posts: 30619

PostPosted: Fri Oct 21, 2016 2:25 pm    Post subject:

Didn't Maurice Clarett go after the NFL for similar reasons and lost? I don't think it'd end well.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Fri Oct 21, 2016 3:10 pm    Post subject:

LarryCoon wrote:
It's collectively bargained, so it's legal. And it's really not that it's better for a given player, it's that the league gets an extra year to see how that player develops before deciding whether he becomes a "given player."

It's an issue that was never going to get any pushback from the players. The raison d'etre of a union is to protect its membership, and for every young guy the league lets in, a current member loses his job.

BTW, I was told back in July that this was going to get done before December 15, so I'm glad it's all working out according to plan.


The non-statutory labor exemption does not apply to discrimination claims. Otherwise, an employer and a union could bargain for racial or sexual preferences. Title VII has specific provisions to prohibit this.

However, the age discrimination statute applies only to workers who are over 40. If the NBA and the NBPA negotiated a provision that required players to retire at 40, or something like that, it would be illegal. 18 year olds get no protection.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Fri Oct 21, 2016 3:11 pm    Post subject:

jonnybravo wrote:
Didn't Maurice Clarett go after the NFL for similar reasons and lost? I don't think it'd end well.


Yes. That was an antitrust claim, not an age discrimination claim.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Mon Oct 24, 2016 7:49 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
LarryCoon wrote:
It's collectively bargained, so it's legal. And it's really not that it's better for a given player, it's that the league gets an extra year to see how that player develops before deciding whether he becomes a "given player."

It's an issue that was never going to get any pushback from the players. The raison d'etre of a union is to protect its membership, and for every young guy the league lets in, a current member loses his job.

BTW, I was told back in July that this was going to get done before December 15, so I'm glad it's all working out according to plan.


The non-statutory labor exemption does not apply to discrimination claims. Otherwise, an employer and a union could bargain for racial or sexual preferences. Title VII has specific provisions to prohibit this.

However, the age discrimination statute applies only to workers who are over 40. If the NBA and the NBPA negotiated a provision that required players to retire at 40, or something like that, it would be illegal. 18 year olds get no protection.


If I'm correct, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that reverse age discrimination wasn't illegal in a case 15 or so years ago. However, I think all but one or two of the six judges in the majority are no longer on the court. So is it feasible a new court could rule the other way? (I have to admit I don't know what the current court's leaning on this matter is)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
VegasLakerFan
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 25 Dec 2011
Posts: 1835

PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2016 1:50 am    Post subject:

The Brain wrote:
Seriously, Adam Silver in 2 years has been as flawless a commish as you could be. I do wish the one and done was off the table though. Either scrap it or make it a 2 and done.


His only blemish in my eyes was jumping too soon at the jerseys ads. Why do it when the league is flourishing? Save it for when the league might have some trouble down the road. Now the only next step is to go soccer style and remove the team and city names in favor of companies. I think that was the one thing David Stern really got right, as much as he sucked.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763

PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2016 5:02 am    Post subject:

activeverb wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
LarryCoon wrote:
It's collectively bargained, so it's legal. And it's really not that it's better for a given player, it's that the league gets an extra year to see how that player develops before deciding whether he becomes a "given player."

It's an issue that was never going to get any pushback from the players. The raison d'etre of a union is to protect its membership, and for every young guy the league lets in, a current member loses his job.

BTW, I was told back in July that this was going to get done before December 15, so I'm glad it's all working out according to plan.


The non-statutory labor exemption does not apply to discrimination claims. Otherwise, an employer and a union could bargain for racial or sexual preferences. Title VII has specific provisions to prohibit this.

However, the age discrimination statute applies only to workers who are over 40. If the NBA and the NBPA negotiated a provision that required players to retire at 40, or something like that, it would be illegal. 18 year olds get no protection.


If I'm correct, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that reverse age discrimination wasn't illegal in a case 15 or so years ago. However, I think all but one or two of the six judges in the majority are no longer on the court. So is it feasible a new court could rule the other way? (I have to admit I don't know what the current court's leaning on this matter is)


That's not quite correct. The plaintiffs in that case were 40 and over and thus were covered by the statute. The argument was that the company was providing special benefits to people who were over 50, but were not providing those benefits to people who were 40-49. In other words, the company was discriminating against people who were 40-49. That's no help to an 18 year old, and besides, the 40-49 plaintiffs lost.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2016 5:33 am    Post subject:

The Brain wrote:
Seriously, Adam Silver in 2 years has been as flawless a commish as you could be. I do wish the one and done was off the table though. Either scrap it or make it a 2 and done.


He will be "flawless" once he gets the Lakers a #1 pick this year, even if we have the 10th worst record.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 24995

PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2016 5:40 am    Post subject:

The one and done helps NCAA keeps top HS prospects in the country albeit inky for 1 yr (better than zero yr), that's 1 yr worth of star $ that don't need to be shared with the player
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
wolfpaclaker
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 29 May 2002
Posts: 58318

PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2016 8:32 am    Post subject:

No amnesty is going to bite these owners and GMs in the butt. They handed out some huge contracts this summer. I would have thought the amnesty being there was a given.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
MJST
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 26083

PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2016 8:54 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
The Brain wrote:
Seriously, Adam Silver in 2 years has been as flawless a commish as you could be. I do wish the one and done was off the table though. Either scrap it or make it a 2 and done.


He will be "flawless" once he gets the Lakers a #1 pick this year, even if we have the 10th worst record.


There's no more bent envelopes though.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
activeverb
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470

PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2016 12:26 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
activeverb wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
LarryCoon wrote:
It's collectively bargained, so it's legal. And it's really not that it's better for a given player, it's that the league gets an extra year to see how that player develops before deciding whether he becomes a "given player."

It's an issue that was never going to get any pushback from the players. The raison d'etre of a union is to protect its membership, and for every young guy the league lets in, a current member loses his job.

BTW, I was told back in July that this was going to get done before December 15, so I'm glad it's all working out according to plan.


The non-statutory labor exemption does not apply to discrimination claims. Otherwise, an employer and a union could bargain for racial or sexual preferences. Title VII has specific provisions to prohibit this.

However, the age discrimination statute applies only to workers who are over 40. If the NBA and the NBPA negotiated a provision that required players to retire at 40, or something like that, it would be illegal. 18 year olds get no protection.


If I'm correct, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that reverse age discrimination wasn't illegal in a case 15 or so years ago. However, I think all but one or two of the six judges in the majority are no longer on the court. So is it feasible a new court could rule the other way? (I have to admit I don't know what the current court's leaning on this matter is)


That's not quite correct. The plaintiffs in that case were 40 and over and thus were covered by the statute. The argument was that the company was providing special benefits to people who were over 50, but were not providing those benefits to people who were 40-49. In other words, the company was discriminating against people who were 40-49. That's no help to an 18 year old, and besides, the 40-49 plaintiffs lost.


Interesting. Thanks for the clarification.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
audioaxes
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 12573

PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2016 2:44 pm    Post subject:

now is a very crappy time to be a crappy team. Great teams have much more room to sign/resign valuable players while crappy teams like the Lakers are stuck overpaying for over the hill players like Deng and Moz.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Gatekeeper
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 11 Jan 2012
Posts: 5103
Location: Southland Native

PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2016 3:03 pm    Post subject:

So no shortened season... how disappointing. Kidding
_________________
Character
Manchester United | Greatest European Moments
Fabric of United - Our Belief
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
MJST
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 26083

PostPosted: Sat Oct 29, 2016 11:50 am    Post subject:

Quote:
Read somewhere that they are gonna add 2 spots for D-League spots. So basically you have your 15 players plus 2 that are exclusively in the D-League. I'm guessing then you can also have the 14th and 15 guy jump back and forth. This would be pretty big for the D-League if true.

via bigfetz



HUGE if true. Especially for player development.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
JUST-MING
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 43951

PostPosted: Sat Oct 29, 2016 2:27 pm    Post subject:

Do the owners get another trade veto in the new agreement? .
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> General Basketball Discussion All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB