2011-2012 OFFICIAL NBA LOCKOUT thread

[HuskyCaucasian]

Stern is like the drunk blonde at a party. She'll grind up all up on you, and make you think happy thoughts. But she isn't taking you home.

I've never had that experience.

[Balta1701]

I've never had that experience.

With David Stern? Well there was this one time...

[Balta1701]

Here's the worst-case scenario: The players would genuinely rather lose the season than accept less than 52 percent of BRI, and the owners would really rather lose the season than pay more than 50 percent of BRI.

 

It could be so. And if it is so, this season is toast already, and it's time to start worrying about next year.

 

The last time players were very vocal in the process was when stars like Kevin Garnett made clear that they would not accept less than 53 percent.

 

A certain religion developed around that number, with players who had never previously shown an interest in the process vocalizing the importance of holding firm there. Perhaps this would be a stand players would take for reasons of history, of race, and of asserting their supremacy as not just participants, but the epicenter of this sport. Maybe it was time to show the owners who's boss, and maybe the split of BRI was the chance to say "enough already" to overreaching owners.

 

That was the feeling a month ago, and you can still detect some of that in Billy Hunter's talk, saying the owners' "eyes got bigger and they wanted more and more and more. Finally you just had to shut it down and say it can't be."

 

But what if over the last month players have lost their zeal? Weeks ago Hunter said his players were more strident than him. What if, now, Hunter is more strident than them?

 

David Stern swears that Friday's talks ended when Hunter stormed out. And before Hunter did that, Stern says "he said his phone and pager are ringing off the hook with agents."

 

Stern's point: Agents? You're listening to agents? It's tough to make a case that Hunter represents their interests. In some cases it's tough to make a case that agents and Hunter are even allies -- if there's a threat to Hunter's leadership, it's from those same men. For instance, agents can earn back lost revenue over however many decades they want to keep working. Players, though, play for just a few years, and may never earn it back.

 

Stern said the word "agents" with notable disdain, and to highlight that the most strident voices in Hunter's ear don't belong to players.

Truehoop.

[Soxfest]

Truehoop.

If Hunter is worried about agents then the cookie is going to crumble in a hurry!

[Balta1701]

If there ever is an offseason...

Coach Tom Thibodeau and his staff have been logging normal business hours at the Berto Center, albeit not working out players who are prohibited from using team facilities. John Paxson, Gar Forman and basketball management have been performing background on potential free-agent targets and preparing for various scenarios they can pursue once they receive the new collective bargaining agreement rules.

 

The Bulls will have 13 players under contract, counting the formality of signing first-round pick Jimmy Butler to his rookie deal. Fellow first-round pick Nikola Mirotic will remain overseas for at least a few seasons.

 

John Lucas III owns a fully non-guaranteed deal. The Bulls hold team options on Jannero Pargo and starting shooting guard Keith Bogans, scheduled to make $1,728,000.

 

Management had nine days to decide whether to exercise that option under teams of the old collective bargaining agreement. That deadline likely will be accelerated in a compressed free-agent period whenever the lockout ends.

 

The Bulls would be OK with bringing Bogans back. However, they will peruse the free-agent market and also see if a veteran-type scorer like Vince Carter or Richard Hamilton gets waived via an amnesty clause being collectively bargained.

 

Grant Hill, Caron Butler, Tayshaun Prince, Jamal Crawford and Jason Richardson are among the intriguing wing players who will be unrestricted free agents should they fit in the Bulls' salary structure.

 

Given that a maximum extension for Derrick Rose also is on tap, it's unlikely they'll be major players especially because they likely will be over the salary cap and only able to offer veteran's minimums.

 

Sources familiar with management's thinking said there are no plans to use the amnesty clause on any current Bull.

The combination of an amnesty clause, a surviving mid-level exemption, and a surviving luxury tax system could work out great for the Bulls.

[southsider2k5]

If there ever is an offseason...

The combination of an amnesty clause, a surviving mid-level exemption, and a surviving luxury tax system could work out great for the Bulls.

 

Wow. Getting one of those scorers in here would be huge for the Bulls. Keeping the continuity will also be big, because there isn't going to be time to get used to each other when the season starts again.

[Kyyle23]

Wow. Getting one of those scorers in here would be huge for the Bulls. Keeping the continuity will also be big, because there isn't going to be time to get used to each other when the season starts again.

 

Fortunately every other team in the NBA will have the same problem

 

[southsider2k5]

Fortunately every other team in the NBA will have the same problem

 

The Bulls are pretty much bringing back everyone. I expect them to benefit from it.

[Balta1701]

Fortunately every other team in the NBA will have the same problem

That's one thing the Bulls planned for fairly well...even if they were disappointed by Bogans, Korver, Brewer...they had them all for 2 years, so that they didn't have to panic-assemble a roster after the lockout.

[southsider2k5]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/break..._medium=twitter

 

Shaq details feud with Bryant

 

6:12 p.m. CDT, October 31, 2011

Shaquille O'Neal has detailed, in a new book, elements of his rift with former Los Angeles Lakers teammate Kobe Bryant, including details of an argument about Bryant's sexual assault case.

 

In the book, “Shaq Uncut: My Story,” O'Neal described how the two feuded over a TV interview in which Bryant was critical of O'Neal, according to an excerpt on Deadspin.com. Bryant also later expressed disappointment that O'Neal had not supported him publicly during his sexual assault case.

 

The book, co-written with respected NBA writer, Jackie MacMullen, shows an inside view of the feud between the two superstars who helped the Lakers return to glory before going their separate ways.

 

O'Neal was upset that Bryant did an unflattering interview with broadcaster Jim Gray soon after coach Phil Jackson's coaching staff told the players not to spar publicly.

 

“… So what happens? Immediately after that Kobe runs right out to Jim Gray and does this interview where he lets me have it,” the excerpt in Deadspin reads. “He said I was fat and out of shape. He said I was milking my toe injury for more time off, and the injury wasn't even that serious. (Yeah, right. It only ended my … career.) He said I was ‘lobbying for a contract extension when we have two Hall of Famers playing pretty much for free.’ I'm sitting there watching this interview and I'm gonna explode. Hours earlier we had just promised our coach we'd stop. It was a truce broken. I let the guys know, ‘I'm going to kill him.“’

 

O'Neal said the situation came to a further head when Bryant complained that after accusations of sexual assault were levied against him in Colorado, O'Neal did not defend him.

 

“Kobe stands up and goes face-to-face with me and says, ‘You always said you're my big brother, you'd do anything for me, and then this Colorado thing happens and you never even called me,“’ the excerpt reads. “I did call him. … So here we are now, and we find out he really was hurt that we didn't stand behind him. That was something new. I didn't think he gave a rat's (butt) about us either way. ‘Well, I thought you'd publicly support me, at least,' Kobe said. 'You're supposed to be my friend.’

 

“(Then-teammate) Brian Shaw chimed in with ‘Kobe, why would you think that? Shaq had all these parties and you never showed up for any of them. We invited you to dinner on the road and you didn't come. Shaq invited you to his wedding and you weren't there. Then you got married and didn't invite any of us. And now you are in the middle of this problem, this sensitive situation, and now you want all of us to step up for you. We don't even know you.“’

 

O'Neal's account said things started to calm down before he told Bryant, “If you ever say anything like what you said to Jim Gray ever again, I will kill you.”

 

Bryant responded with a shrug and said, “Whatever,” according to the excerpt.

 

“From that day on, I was done dealing with Kobe,” O'Neal writes.

[ZoomSlowik]

Awesome article pointing out the absurdity of this lockout (the owners in this case)

 

Chad Ford and Marc Stein have done a lot of hard work looking at how different teams are likely to deploy the upcoming, agreed-to-in-principle amnesty clause.

 

The clause gives every owner the right to pay off one player to go away. Owners won't wriggle out of paying the player, but they will wriggle out of any affiliated luxury taxes, while gaining cap room.

 

It's a very popular clause with fans, because it's a chance to reset all those bad contracts owners and teams have offered in the past.

 

It also exposes absurdity on the part of NBA owners.

 

Their representatives David Stern and Adam Silver have been banging the drums for so long. Owners need profits! They were $300 million in the hole last year, and even though player costs have been stable -- vague other expenses have skyrocketed -- it's the players who'll have to make the owners whole. Players simply need to play for less money.

 

And that argument has carried the day. The players opened negotiations with concessions and the next CBA will not likely include anything at all that is better for players than the last CBA. And the reason the lockout persists is that owners want not just a little more money, but a lot more money and far stricter controls over their own behavior.

 

They want to make sure, right now, that they won't get tempted to spend later.

 

Meanwhile, the 20 players the plugged-in Ford and Stein project will be cut are due nearly $500 million combined over the rest of their current deals. Those NBA owners will likely, as a league, pay an extra $500 million just to tweak rosters here and there.

 

In other words, before all the kings' horses and all the kings' men have put the league's economic model back together again, owners have already asked themselves: Would they like the right to pay players an extra $500 million to be a bit more competitive?

 

And to that they have said a resounding "Yes, we'd love to!"

 

I've been among those insisting the owners really are feeling at least limited real financial pain. Some have sold teams at losses, something you'd never do if those losses were only accounting tricks. But this is not making it easy to argue with those who say NBA owners are just faking this financial injury.

 

They not only agreed to an amnesty clause, but they have agreed to make it more flexible than ever (employable any time over the life of the deal) and -- this is huge -- they have agreed not to count amnesty dollars toward players' total share of BRI. In general, owners have perfect protection against spending crazy amounts on players. All players together share a certain percentage of league revenues. But to pay these players to go away owners will have to dig deeper. These players are guaranteed every penny even if it takes all players together over the players' to-be-determined share.

 

The owners' position is that they need to spend far less on players. Meanwhile, they are enthusiastic about this exciting opportunity to spend a lot more on players.

 

And it's not even clear that $500 million will make teams much better.

 

For instance, consider Rashard Lewis, the overpaid poster child of this clause. He is owed more than $43 million in the next two seasons. As an average NBA power forward, he's just not worth that kind of cash. Among power forwards, he had the NBA's 63rd best player efficiency rating last season.

 

But consider that he can actually play NBA basketball, and did so for 32 minutes per game last season. No, he doesn't rebound very well, but he can shoot and pass, and he doesn't turn the ball over very much. He can be part of a really good team, which we know because he recently was in Orlando.

 

If Wizards owner Ted Leonsis pays Lewis to go away, though, then Leonsis will be both out $43 million and in need of somebody who can play 32 minutes a game at power forward. There aren't a ton of those players around. Appropriate free-agent candidates include Glen Davis, Dante Cunningham, Craig Smith, Carl Landry or Jason Smith. By PER, Smith is the best of them, with the 42nd best PER. But he'd like to be paid too. Which means Leonsis will have paid Lewis' $43 million, plus another $5 million or $10 million over the next two seasons to have similar work to what Leonsis would have already paid Lewis for.

 

Would you pay $10 million to replace Rashard Lewis with Craig Smith and a bit of cap space?

 

Not if money were tight

 

I found the bolded especially funny. So there is this battle to the death over the BRI, and the owners have already agreed to allow teams to pay out millions upon millions of dollars to the players that won't count towards that total.

Edited November 1, 2011 by ZoomSlowik

[Balta1701]

Last night, the Dallas Mavericks should have received rings and a banner while hosting the Chicago Bulls.

[Kyyle23]

Last night, the Dallas Mavericks should have received rings and a banner while hosting the Chicago Bulls.

 

I, for one, am glad the Bulls didnt have to be the away team that witnessed that. It should be the Heat

 

 

Although that would probably be a good motivator for D Rose

[Steve9347]

[southsider2k5]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/break..._medium=twitter

 

First Kobe, now LeBron

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/break..._medium=twitter

 

No one can accuse Shaquille O'Neal of pulling any punches in his new book: On the heels of earlier accounts about O'Neal's feud with Kobe Bryant, the "Big Diesel" runs down LeBron James in an excerpt released Wednesday from "Shaq Uncut: My Story."

 

In an excerpt obtained by HoopsWorld.com, O'Neal talks about his experience playing with James in Cleveland.“LeBron was a huge star,” O’Neal writes in the autobiography, due out Nov. 15. “He was as big as I was in 2000 in L.A. when I was dominating the league.

 

“Our coach, Mike Brown, was a nice guy, but he had to live on edge because nobody was supposed to be confrontational with LeBron. Nobody wanted him to leave Cleveland, so he was allowed to do whatever he wanted to do.

 

“I remember one day in a film session LeBron didn’t get back on defense after a missed shot. Mike Brown didn’t say anything about it. He went to the next clip and it was Mo Williams not getting back and Mike was saying, ‘Yo, Mo, we can’t have that. You’ve got to hustle a little more.’ So Delonte West is sitting there and he’s seen enough and he stands up and says, ‘Hold up, now. You can’t be p****footing around like that. Everyone has to be accountable for what they do, not just some us.’ Mike Brown said, ‘I know, Delonte. I know.’ Mike knew Delonte was right.

 

“I’m not sure if Kobe (Bryant) is going to listen to (new Lakers coach) Mike Brown. LeBron never really did.”

 

O'Neal also addresses James' failure in the 2011 NBA Finals, comparing it to his infamous disappearing act in the 2010 playoffs against the Boston Celtics:

 

“There’s no question in Game 5 LeBron was kind of out of it. . . . I always believed he could turn it on at any moment, but for some reason he didn’t. Not against the Celtics in 2010 and not against the Mavericks in 2011. It was weird. It’s one thing to be a passer, but you are supposed to be the One.

 

“I’m watching him play against Dallas, and they’re swinging the ball and they get him a perfect open look -- and he’s kicking it to Mario Chalmers. Makes no sense. I told people, ‘It’s like Michael Jordan told me. Before you succeed, you must first fail.' "

[Balta1701]

Union executive board to meet tomorrow to work on the Union's position and avoid talk of fracturing...still no negotiations scheduled with the owners and players.

[Balta1701]

NBA schedules new talks for Saturday.

[Brian]

NBA schedules new talks for Saturday.

 

If something doesn't get done there, I fear for the season.

[Balta1701]

If something doesn't get done there, I fear for the season.

They're not going to reach a point where they stop talking, I think I'm gaining confidence in that. As long as they're talking, they'll have a shot at moving closer.

 

I wouldn't be surprised at all if they wound up close to repeating the 99 schedule with a January start.

[Kalapse]

They're not going to reach a point where they stop talking, I think I'm gaining confidence in that. As long as they're talking, they'll have a shot at moving closer.

 

I wouldn't be surprised at all if they wound up close to repeating the 99 schedule with a January start.

I believe the drop-dead date was January 7th in '99, struck a deal on the 6th and went on to have the worst season of basketball in the modern era.

[Balta1701]

I believe the drop-dead date was January 7th in '99, struck a deal on the 6th and went on to have the worst season of basketball in the modern era.

Was the worst season of basketball in the modern era because of the lockout or because the greatest dynasty of the modern era had just ended and the league had nothing to replace it?

[Rowand44]

Was the worst season of basketball in the modern era because of the lockout or because the greatest dynasty of the modern era had just ended and the league had nothing to replace it?

Like the Spurs glory years that started that year?

[bmags]

It was awful because the players were also exhausted playing so many games back to back to back.

[Balta1701]

Like the Spurs glory years that started that year?

I do not understand the phrase "Spurs glory years".

[ZoomSlowik]

Like the Spurs glory years that started that year?

 

Meh, the Lakers won the next three titles, so I'd say it was more of a transition year. The talent level was pretty awful. The East was a joke and a lot of premier players were on the decline.