The next time someone complains about how boring the regular season can be, remind them of the NBA lockout. Also: why the players are fighting so hard against limits on the use of the mid-level exception.
Nov 10, 2011 - It's impossible to complain about the length and speed of NBA lockout talks when we know the alternative. If David Stern, Billy Hunter and family weren't holed up for 12 hours at a time, we'd be grousing over one side's obstinacy, a lack of urgency and the suffering of fans and arena workers. Talks are better than no talks, even when the talks seem to accomplish roughly the same as no talks would.
The thing that really bothers me as a fan is that every session feels final. There's no build-up or order to the season; it's a series of randomly placed screamers that all seem to end in heartbreak. With an NBA season, there's a flow, a structure. You have the regular season, with some games bigger than others. Those increase are the season wears on. Then there is the playoffs, a crescendo of exclamation that ends with the Finals. There's order, and you can always look at the calendar to see where we are.
That's not the case with the lockout, where -- for fear of losing precious leverage -- neither side indicates what is really going on. Our hunch that Wednesday was huge is of course correct; the NBA's ultimatum made sure of that. But while in a basketball game overtime is measured in minutes, in the lockout it's doled out in days. The rollercoaster of emotion that is this lockout season is pitch black, like Space Mountain. No one knows how it ends, or when. It's almost like the torture you feel when your team starts getting old, or has been injury-free for too long. You're hoping for the best, but really just waiting for the inevitable bad news.
It's not fun waiting out this lockout, even if some of the dispatches from the front lines have been worth joke status. That creates a built-in angst among fans, one that the NBA will pay for to some degree. Most fans will only care about the issues that the league and players' union continue to fight over when they actually affect their team; I'm not sure anyone outside the game has a real stake in whether tax teams get the full mid-level. Fans care, in L.A. and Miami and Dallas, because those teams are currently looking like taxpayers. There's "rooting" against those measures only because of direct impact on the ability of those teams to maintain their power. But frankly, this stuff is so fuzzy and abstract compared to even the wonky side of basketball fandom (the Trade Machine, free agency) that it must hard not to get bored.
So despite all the Lenoesque jokes about how boring the NBA regular season is, how little we care about Bobcats vs. Pacers on a Tuesday, Lord knows that game and many others like it -- ones without the star power of LeBron or Kobe, or the implications of Bulls vs. Celtics or Spurs vs. Mavericks -- are 2,000 percent more entertaining than what we're waiting out right now. All we can do is hope that the two sides can make this week's rides on Lockout Mountain are the last ones for a long, long time.
It's interesting to note that, according to Yahoo!'s Adrian Wojnarowski and SI.com's Zach Lowe, the mid-level exception for luxury tax teams remains a huge battleground. Consider the other "system issues" at stake: an extra penalty for repeat taxpayers, a ban on sign-and-trades for tax teams, a tax cliff in which teams above a certain payroll line don't receive a share of tax revenue and the mechanics of the escrow system going forward. Of the five total, four deal with spending deterrents, all aimed at tax teams or potential tax teams. But most are simply deterrents, sticks or carrots to convince teams to keep salaries down.
The ban on sign-and-trades for tax teams is an actual transaction restriction, but research has shown that the tool is hardly ever used by tax teams. It's the mid-level exception that is a real transaction restriction, one that could affect a number of players on a regular basis ... especially those well-represented in labor talks. This is a rule aimed at the Derek Fishers in the league, but more than that, it's an actual cap in the system, as opposed to the incentives and penalties that makes up the rest of the "soft salary cap." Mark Cuban can't spend his way through the mid-level rule. That's why it's such a battleground. That's why players fight it so hard. I'm not sure you can say it represents the first domino in the eventual creation of a hard cap in the NBA -- remember that owners will be pushing further in the next collective bargaining talks, in 7-10 years -- but it's a real restriction with real, insurmountable impacts on mid-rung players. It's important to the guys in the room.
The Hook runs Monday through Friday. See the archives.
17 comments
5
Nov 28
3
Nov 27
Comments
The mid-level fight is in direct response to the Heatles
it has nothing to do with money
Words of wisdom from the great Billy Dee Williams
Oh so you disagree. Well then, here is a mature, sophisticated, and compelling rebuttal.
by wallywagon11 on Nov 10, 2011 11:09 AM EST reply actions
Could you expand on that remark?
"Victory goes to the player who makes the next-to-last mistake."
- Chessmaster Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower
by lietothegirls on Nov 10, 2011 1:33 PM EST up reply actions
This CBA fight has never been about money to the players.
Everyone knew the players share was going to drop. This CBA fight has been entirely about who has the power to determine the direction of the league. The owners think it’s them, and the players think it’s them.
It’s not really anything more or less than that. So what LeBron did was attack the power structure (I have a problem with LeBron running away but not with his taking power away from the NBA owner power structure ironically) by playing matchmaker.
That’s why many, including Wally, but starting with Henry Abbott last summer said that much of the anti-LeBron sentiment was about LeBron taking power from a traditional sect of NBA culture. Here’s the key passage that I think that supports this:
You’re a history buff lttg; power struggles are rarely neat and simple. This is the way I see Wally’s statement although I’m interested to see how he feels about it.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
by pookeyguru on Nov 10, 2011 2:09 PM EST up reply actions
Nice Post!!
Right on the money with that analysis.
by StevieG. on Nov 10, 2011 5:15 PM EST up reply actions
To be honest, no that's not really what I was referring to
but we’ll see in the next few days whether the super star players really understand power and the ability to play kingmaster because they are in danger of losing it.
Words of wisdom from the great Billy Dee Williams
Oh so you disagree. Well then, here is a mature, sophisticated, and compelling rebuttal.
by wallywagon11 on Nov 10, 2011 7:10 PM EST up reply actions
First a disclaimer
[I am currently operating under the assumption that the owners are NOT 100% determined to throw a wrecking ball into everything and make up stubbling blocks but instead just greedy as heck but willing to make a deal. So for everyone who thinks the owners are just giving the players union an excuse to disclaim and then try and railroad them in the offseason and go for the serious draconian stuff way way way worse than 50% BRI, I understand but this comment isn’t for you.]
When the owners were fighting over the BRI, like I’ve said before, it was all about money money money (last paragraph). Personally, I found it a bit hilarious that the owners kept talking about how they were fighting for parity when talking about the BRI. Sorry but that is just trying to get a bigger slice of the pie, nothing else. It ain’t a stick or a carrot, it’s just bringing down expenses and that’s it. If teams were able to afford a ton of talent with the old BRI% they sure as shit can afford it now.
But, as I said above, this mid-level issue has nothing to do with money. Look, the players are going to get the same amount of money either way because their salaries are determined by BRI%. The fact that “research has shown the tool is hardly ever used by tax teams” hardly matters to the owners who want this change. This particular restriction is just trying to make it darn near impossible for teams like the Lakers, Knicks, Miami, Brooklyn Nets, and Chicago to get a supporting cast if they try and pull what the Heat did last year.
Basically they are trying to avoid a situation where a (healthy) Mike Miller can sign with one of these teams. They are trying to prevent mid level players from signing contracts with good teams in great markets. If they want the MLE money they are going to have to sign with the Twolves of the world.
Words of wisdom from the great Billy Dee Williams
Oh so you disagree. Well then, here is a mature, sophisticated, and compelling rebuttal.
by wallywagon11 on Nov 10, 2011 7:34 PM EST up reply actions
Here's the thing with Mike Miller.
Miami used it’s cap room & not the MLE to sign Miller. The only players that were not renounced were Dwyane Wade & Joel Anthony. And Udonis Haslem was also renounced then resigned with cap room.
The reality is Miami played within rules alot of owners thought weren’t possible to break. But Miami only signed minimum salary guys after Bron, Bosh, Wade, Miller, Haslem, and Anthony. That’s why the owners are so mad I think.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
by pookeyguru on Nov 10, 2011 7:45 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I have zero clue whether Miller was an MLE signing or not
I am saying the owners want to prevent those types of players from being able to sign with teams like the Heat (or Lakers, Dallas, Knicks). This specific MLE tweak is all about making it more difficult for teams like the Heat or a Chris Paul Knicks team to get role players. Add up all the tweaks together and it is all about stopping the Heattles type situation.
It has little to do with money. Players are getting paid the exact same amount either way.
As far as the reality about Miami playing within the rules, sure did but I don’t think that is why the other owners are mad. A lot of it has to do with fear and control.
Words of wisdom from the great Billy Dee Williams
Oh so you disagree. Well then, here is a mature, sophisticated, and compelling rebuttal.
by wallywagon11 on Nov 10, 2011 9:01 PM EST up reply actions
Miller was not a MLE signing.
Miami had to renounce their MLE to use their cap room. That’s one of the things that many don’t seem to understand about all this. LeBron James, Chris Bosh AND Dwyane Wade all took less money than the maximum to help Miami sign guys like Haslem, Miller, Anthony etc.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
by pookeyguru on Nov 10, 2011 10:04 PM EST up reply actions
Okay
but that doesn’t mean the league’s MLE idea isn’t a response to the Heat thing. It certaintly isn’t about money.
Words of wisdom from the great Billy Dee Williams
Oh so you disagree. Well then, here is a mature, sophisticated, and compelling rebuttal.
by wallywagon11 on Nov 10, 2011 10:10 PM EST up reply actions
Maybe I wasn't clear
I was jokingly throwing in the “(healthy) Mike Miller” because was talking about the Heat but to be honest I think of the healthy Mike Miller as a made up player because there is no such thing. Was just going for the type of player. In retrospect I would have been better off saying Ron Artest if I wanted to dare mention a real player.
Words of wisdom from the great Billy Dee Williams
Oh so you disagree. Well then, here is a mature, sophisticated, and compelling rebuttal.
by wallywagon11 on Nov 10, 2011 10:21 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah but did signing Ron Artest really make the Lakers that much better?
I’d argue no.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
by pookeyguru on Nov 10, 2011 11:21 PM EST up reply actions
oh please, don't take my analysis on what I believe their intent is and what they are trying to do
as advocating what they are trying to do.
It’s not about specific instances where the MLE signing has worked out. This isn’t a “Oh there is x, y, and z example of this being used to a Heattles like team’s benefit.” This is more pro-active then that. This is about making sure that if some players get away with forcing a pairing together (and the other system plans would try and address that) then this could at least punish them and try and make it more difficult to get a supporting cast in there.
To me it sure looks like they are throwing in every single road block they can think of to make the rules make it more difficult to do what the Heat did, which was perfectly within the rules but they are trying to close those loops, make it as impossible as they can and where they can’t they will make it hurt every way they can. It’s a lot of full on restrictions and sticks but no carrots.
Words of wisdom from the great Billy Dee Williams
Oh so you disagree. Well then, here is a mature, sophisticated, and compelling rebuttal.
by wallywagon11 on Nov 10, 2011 11:36 PM EST up reply actions
No it's about power.
It’s about keeping guys like LeBron from being matchmaker. That’s where I think Abbott absolutely nailed why so many were against what LeBron did.
No mistakes in the tango, Donna. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
by pookeyguru on Nov 10, 2011 10:21 PM EST up reply actions
Power, parity, fear, whatever you want to call it.
But these system changes that address this power to be matchmaker angle are only half of the CBA fight (and why I said above that we’ll see soon if the players understand how it works). The other half was BRI and it had little to do with being able to play matchmaker. It was money.
And if I were a member of the player’s union, my view on the BRI split or system changes and which was more important would greatly depend on who I am in the pecking order.
Words of wisdom from the great Billy Dee Williams
Oh so you disagree. Well then, here is a mature, sophisticated, and compelling rebuttal.
by wallywagon11 on Nov 10, 2011 10:31 PM EST up reply actions
Sorry the tone of this reads horribly wrong with the "But" up front
shouldn’t have been there.
Words of wisdom from the great Billy Dee Williams
Oh so you disagree. Well then, here is a mature, sophisticated, and compelling rebuttal.
by wallywagon11 on Nov 10, 2011 10:36 PM EST up reply actions
If there was a Fantasy Lockout game
I’d have no problem waiting a little longer.
Hot pickups: Sarver, Garnett etc
Bleeding Black and Purple 6710 miles South East of Sacramento.
by ZenBaller on Nov 10, 2011 4:41 PM EST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed