Extra Innings Runner Not Headed To MLB New NBA Jersey Deals Could Signal Changing Market IndyCar's KV Racing Team Being Shut Down NBPA, Players Look To Profit Off Images Sources: St-Pierre On Verge Of UFC Return League Notes NBA Attendance Flat Headed Into All-Star Break Going Off The Grid: NBA All-Star Edition Are Knicks Bad For Long-Term NBA Image? Magic Wants Control Of Lakers' Operations
SBD/November 28, 2011/Leagues and Governing Bodies
Specifics On The Deal Terms In The NBA's New CBA
Published November 28, 2011
WANT MORE GREAT STORIES LIKE THIS?
CLICK ON ONE OF THESE BUTTONS
SPECIFICS OF NBA's PROPOSED LABOR DEAL
|•||The players will receive anywhere from 49 percent to 51 percent of basketball-related income based on revenue projections.|
|•||Maximum contract lengths: five years for Larry Bird rights players; four years for non-Bird players.|
|•||A player finishing his rookie scale contract will be eligible to receive a maximum salary equal to 30 percent of the salary cap if he signs with his prior team and meets certain performance benchmarks.|
|•||Annual salary increases: 7.5 percent for Bird players; and 4.5 percent for non-Bird players.|
|•||Midlevel exception: up to $5 million starting salary with four-year maximum contract length for teams that don't exceed the luxury tax threshold by more than $4 million.|
|•||New $2.5 million exception for teams below the salary cap to go over the cap.|
|•||No reduction in rookie scale or minimum salaries.|
|•||Player options are allowed for all players, similar to the previous collective bargaining agreement.|
|•||Extend-and-trade contracts will continue to be permitted.|
|•||Escrow pool: Ten percent of player salaries will be held each year.|
|•||Teams now have three days to match offer sheets given to their own restricted free agents.|
|•||Minimum team salary increases to 85 percent of the salary cap in the first two years of the deal and 90 percent of the cap in the years thereafter.|
|•||Each team has one amnesty clause to use on a player currently under contract. The players' salary will be removed from the team's cap (SPORTS.YAHOO.com, 11/26).|
IT'S ALL ABOUT COMPROMISE: CBSSPORTS.com's Ken Berger wrote the labor dispute "finally came down to something that had been sorely lacking. Compromise" (CBSSPORTS.com, 11/26). USA TODAY's Jeff Zillgitt writes, "For long time, it looked as if players were going to get crushed on many of the issues." However, they recovered "considerable ground on those issues." Zillgitt: "How did it get done? Compromise" (USA TODAY, 11/28). SI.com's Chris Mannix noted the NBA is "happy with this deal," and the players are "OK with it." The league "got much of what it wanted." It "reduced the players' share of BRI by at least six percent and will ultimately put significant restrictions on player movement, through the luxury tax, that will prevent big or more attractive markets from luring top players away from their incumbent teams" (SI.com, 11/26). TRUE HOOP's Henry Abbott noted compared to NBA Commissioner David Stern, NBPA Exec Dir Billy Hunter "has a bigger, less predictable group that has surprised him more than once in this process with stridence." Many of the players "are incredibly competitive and are sensitive to the idea Stern and the owners have walked on them." Abbott wrote if he were selling the deal to the players, "these are some of the points I'd make: NBA free agency -- the bedrock of every players’ market value -- is not everything it once was, but it’s alive and well." In addition, the Bird exception "is essentially untouched," and minimum team payrolls "will be climbing" (ESPN.com, 11/26). In L.A., Wharton & Bresnahan noted it "appears that owners stand to benefit the most" from the new deal. Owners "sought to cut expenses," and also "wanted to stop wealthy, large-market franchises from grossly outspending their small-market competitors." That means "less money for players, but they appeared to score a minor victory with provisions that would allow free agents to move easily around the league" (L.A. TIMES, 11/27).
of BRI from '11-12 season will be 51.2%
PLAYER MOVEMENT: ESPN.com’s Larry Coon noted with the “elimination of the harsher penalties for taxpaying teams, the union hopes it is able to preserve the freedom of movement that is the lifeblood of free agency” (ESPN.com, 11/26). In Dallas, Eddie Sefko wrote the owners “got what they hope will be a more restrictive system of free agency for big-spending teams that are over the luxury-tax threshold.” The players, meanwhile, “kept many of the free-agent components that were important to them” (DALLAS MORNING NEWS, 11/27). Also in Dallas, Tim Cowlishaw wrote, “I’m not sure the new NBA will look drastically different from the old one. ... I think little was lost and at least something useful probably was gained.” The NBA “remains a league without a hard salary cap,” and the best news for fans is that the “days of incomprehensible trades may be coming to an end” (DALLAS MORNING NEWS, 11/27). The WALL STREET JOURNAL's Kevin Clark writes fans "won't notice much of a difference" in the new CBA. Despite "systematic changes like reducing contract length and increasing fees for high-spending teams, most think it will be business as usual." Former Trail Blazers exec Tom Penn said, "This is not a seismic shift. The system still favors aggressive owners who are in go-for-it mode. It will just cost them more" (WALL STREET JOURNAL, 11/28). In Ft. Lauderdale, Ira Winderman noted nowhere is the proposed new CBA “more punitive than with the toll it will exact on teams operating above the luxury-tax threshold” (South Florida SUN-SENTINEL, 11/27). ESPN.com’s Brian Windhorst noted the Heat “ended up being winners in the 11th hour system changes the owners made to get the players to finally agree on the framework” of a CBA. Reportedly, the “biggest move was owners allowing teams that are not more than $4 million over the luxury tax line to use the full mid-level exception of $5 million” (ESPN.com, 11/26).
AMNESTY NOW! In N.Y., Howard Beck notes the NBA is "giving every team a multimillion-dollar do-over as part of its new labor deal." Under the amnesty clause, "each team can waive one player and remove him from the salary cap -- creating room to sign another player and potentially saving millions in luxury-tax penalties." The new labor deal is "packed with measures to mitigate payroll gaffes: shorter contracts, smaller raises and a new 'stretch' provision that lets teams spread payments (and cap hits) over several years." The intention is to "let teams recover more quickly from their mistakes and to provide roster flexibility" (N.Y. TIMES, 11/28). The SUN-SENTINEL's Winderman notes instead of players "being released under the league's 'amnesty' provision going directly to the open market, a bidding system has been put in place for teams operating below the league's salary cap to add such players at a deep discount." A source said the clause is there "so the Lakers can't go in and scoop up all the players" (South Florida SUN-SENTINEL, 11/28).
SOLVING THE RIDDLE: NBCSPORTS.com’s Matt Moore wrote over the next six years, “owners have a lot to prove. They have to prove they can profit under the new system, that their biggest enemy is not themselves and their own inabilities to control spending and make wise decisions. They have to prove that competitive balance can be achieved and that small markets can now compete.” The BRI split “should help, but there’s still the capacity for teams to fail” (NBCSPORTS.com, 11/26). In Newark, Dave D’Alessandro wrote for the “first time in NBA history, we get to watch general managers -- the drunken sailors of these proceedings -- try to get control of themselves.” The rules “have changed,” and the constraints “seem to be real, even without a hard cap” (Newark STAR-LEDGER, 11/27). In N.Y., Harvey Araton wrote Stern “did ultimately prove that he remains an effective dealmaker.” But he wondered, “Will the sport ultimately benefit or bomb without superteams playing deep into June?” (N.Y. TIMES, 11/27). But in Philadelphia, Phil Sheridan wrote it “sounds as if the league and the union just wasted a perfect opportunity to create a system that does work.” The league appears to be “counting on improved revenue-sharing and a more onerous luxury tax to discourage the big-market teams from overspending.” Sheridan: “Unfortunately, there isn't enough real change in the deal itself to justify the six-month lockout” (PHILADELPHIA INQUIRER, 11/27).