Cy Kluber and the Trades That Built the Tribe
November 13, 2014Boom! Browns crack top 10 in SI Power Rankings, are “team to beat in the AFC North”
November 13, 2014A few weeks back, we linked to a profile of Michele Roberts, the NBA players’ union executive director, which painted her as a no-bullshit firecracker who was ready to put the union on her back and lead them to greener pastures than they could ever imagine—the kind with commas and zeros and all kinds of presidents our past. “My past is littered with the bones of men who were foolish enough to think I was someone they could sleep on,” Roberts said of her lifetime of delivering proverbial uppercuts to anyone who dare underestimate her fortitude.
Turns out that, come 2017 when the NBA is up for yet another redecorating of its collective bargaining agreement, there are 30 other men—ones who just so happen to own NBA franchises—who may be added to her list of victims. In a story penned by ESPN.com’s Pablo S. Torre, Roberts, a trial lawyer by trade, intimated that the owners, though raking in 50 percent of revenues, are effectively replaceable and that things, for lack of a better term, are about to get real.
“Let’s call it what it is. There. Would. Be. No. Money,” she added, pausing for emphasis. “Thirty more owners can come in, and nothing will change. These guys go? The game will change. So let’s stop pretending.”
“I don’t know of any space other than the world of sports where there’s this notion that we will artificially deflate what someone’s able to make, just because,” she said, talking about a salary cap — a collectively bargained policy that, in its current form, has constrained team spending in the NBA since 1984-85. “It’s incredibly un-American. My DNA is offended by it.”
“I contend that there is no reason in the world why the union should embrace salary caps or any effort to place a barrier on the amount of money that marquee players can make.”
In addition to the salary cap, Roberts took on rookie wage scales. the potential increase of the age limit at which players can join the league, and the “smoothing” impact of the new television deal. The NBA, in signing a deal that will increase proposed salary caps, is said to be pushing for a smoothing effect that will gradually increase the caps year over year as opposed to working in tandem with the immediate increase of revenues to the league.
What sort of impact these ideals have come 2017 will remain to be seen. The last CBA discussions resulted in a lockout and a shortened season, and the ultimate decisions were not nearly as much of a change as those that Roberts has in mind. Meanwhile, the Cleveland Cavaliers, title contenders for the foreseeable future, will not only have to deal with other teams having beaucoup cap space landing in their laps, but the potential that one (or more) of the years within their contention window could have a union-based bump in the road.
While James Jones is the team’s player representative, it is expected that LeBron James and other superstars have a bigger role in the upcoming negotiations than they have in years past. Two summers ago, James considered becoming president of the National Basketball Players Association, but opted against it for time commitment reasons. Conversely, it was team owner Dan Gilbert who was reportedly one of the league’s biggest proponents for a salary freeze during the last impasse.
“As a players association and as owners, we’ve got to figure out how we can continue to grow the pie and continue to grow the business of the game. That’s the No. 1 objective,” James said earlier this fall. “That should always be the No. 1 objective — how we continue to grow the game. It’s one of the most renowned games we have in this world.”
8 Comments
The free-marketer in me supports the idea, but sometimes it’s worthwhile to pay attention to the business side. If I’m a non-marquee player, I’m with the owners on this – because there’s a limit to how much cost they can incur and still feel it worthwhile to own such a business, and if they’re paying more to the top guys I’m getting less. And if these owners are in it and don’t feel it’s worthwhile from a *business* perspective, where exactly are 30 more billionaires coming from who will disagree with people who were in it?
She might win a couple concessions here and there, but it’s the majority of players who will want a cap on some players’ salaries, or it will cut out their own.
I’d hate to see a work stoppage after the last four years of enduring Cavaliers basketball but there is another part of me that relishes in it happening. Just something about millionaires and billionaires fighting over $$$ that makes me wish for a mutual destruction!
“painted her as a no-bullshit firecracker”
Whoa whoa whoa Scott, maybe you should have read the “Before You Comment” section prior to the release of this article.
sidenote: WHO LET ANTHONY PARKER INTO THAT PAAARTY?
All well and good, but the players have had strong leadership before and, unlike baseball players, inevitably and quickly succumb to “Whoa! Who’s paying for my cars and mcmansion?” LeBron and a handful of stars have their finances squared away; most of the voting union members are a missed paycheck away from losing all their new friends.
http://i.imgur.com/ye5nOg8.gif
Mutual destruction?
http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view5/2514460/shall-we-play-a-game-o.gif
Melo just wants to know when this is all gonna be over so he can go clubbin’. He’s got his Friday scarf and lensless glasses on.
“Nah son, ain’t trying to hear about contracts. When the club jump off?”