We tried to explain this to you yesterday — and judging from the comments a lot of you don’t like our explanation — but it remains true:
The NBA players are rejecting offers from the owners because they don’t see them as fair. From their view it’s not about how much money they will or will not make, it’s about fairness, that they are being asked to give a lot and the owners have given nearly nothing. And as long as that stays the core issue, the union will not crack.
Players’ union vice President Mo Evans backed up our point talking to the Washington Post. Look at how he phrases the answer about potential missed paychecks.
“That’s where the owners are miscalculating the players, because we have prepared for this fight. That’s what it is, it’s a fight,” Evans said. “We’re not emboldened in our position due to ego or emotion. We’re making decisions off of fairness and we are trying to negotiate in all fairness. Again, we’ve made concessions, but capitulating is a totally different story and that’s something the players will not do….
“The obstacle is that both are contingent on one another — the economics mean absolutely nothing if the wrong system is in place,” Evans said. “We’re trying to negotiate fairly, in good faith, to put forth a system that will allow the players to grow with the owners and be fairly compensated as the game grows. . . . And to also allow players to accept and be held responsible for some of the risks associated with the game potentially not growing. But we don’t believe this game will not grow.”
Part of this comes back to the luxury tax the owners want — something to stifle the spending of big markets and create “competitive balance.” What the league wants are more close games because they think that is good for television ratings (I’m not sure that a close game makes a February matchup between Minnesota and Sacramento any more watchable, but that’s what the league wants). They want the smaller markets to feel they can win (they can already, see San Antonio).
But the fact remains that this is a negotiation — unless both sides feel they got a win, they will not reach a deal. And to get a deal done both sides will have to give up a little more.
Bringing in a federal mediator can help, but unless both sides really want to cut a deal that will not change anything. And the union doesn’t seem ready to give any more.
Sevyn Streeter said the 76ers prevented her from singing the national anthem at tonight’s game because she was wearing a “WE MATTER” jersey:
“The Philadelphia 76ers organization encourages meaningful actions to drive social change. We use our games to bring people together, to build trust and to strengthen our communities. As we move from symbolic gestures to action, we will continue to leverage our platform to positively impact our community.”
This is a continuation of Carmelo Anthony‘s argument: The emphasis should be on action in communities and there’s no longer a place for gestures like Colin Kaepernick kneeling.
But this needn’t be an either/or discussion. Community-based action is obviously important (though don’t assign responsibility to NBA players to fix racism). Recognizing the width and depth of the problem is necessary – which is why symbols matter, too.
Take Street’s shirt at face value. “We matter.” “Black lives matter.” What’s so offensive about that? There is no implicit “more” attached.
Yet, the 76ers found it antithetical to their brand.
This is why the widespread “unity” message preached by arm-locking NBA players left so much to be desired.
To the 76ers, unity meant silencing Streeter.
Is that what players were demonstrating on behalf of during the preseason? I’m sure that arena was much more united with a 76ers dancer singing the anthem than it would have been with Streeter spotlighted. But sometimes divisiveness is necessary to advance a cause.
If the 76ers don’t want Streeter using their platform to say “WE MATTER,” that’s their right. Not everyone has to support that choice, though.
No NBA players followed Colin Kaepernick’s lead by kneeling during the national anthem in the preseason.
But that courageous form of protest still found its way onto NBA courts.
A national-anthem singer knelt before a Kings game, and other did at a Heat game.
Another singer wanted to take a bold stance for the 76ers’ regular-season opener against the Thunder tonight by wearing a “WE MATTER” jersey, but she said the team stopped her.
A 76ers dancer performed the anthem instead:
The 76ers deserve some latitude to choose how someone uses their platform. But what about claiming black lives matter is antithetical to the 76ers’ brand?
The team did not immediately respond to request for comment. I will update if it does.
The Russell Westbrook era didn’t get off to the fastest start for the Thunder, who fell behind the 76ers early.
This Philadelphia fan got way ahead of himself (and any reasonable standard of decency).
Via Andy Bailey of Bleacher Report:
Oklahoma City responded with a 5-0 run, Westbrook scoring three points himself and assisting another basket.
The No. 28 pick, R.J. Hunter became the first first-rounder from last year’s draft to fall out of the NBA when the Celtics waived him.
He won’t be out of the league for long.
The Bulls, the only team with an open roster spot, appear close to adding him.
Shams Charania of Yahoo Sports:
Hunter belongs in the league. Though he must knock down shots far more reliably than he has, Hunter has potential as an outside shooter with complementary ball skills to provide value. Boston just had more NBA-caliber players than roster spots.
He’s far from a lock to succeed in the NBA, but I value Hunter about as much as Tony Snell – whom the Bulls just traded for an upgrade at backup point guard in Michael Carter-Williams. That they could so cheaply replace Snell makes that deal look even better.