Tag: NBA offer

*Jul 24 - 00:05*

Why agents hate the owners’ offer — they lose power

1 Comment

Agents are leading the charge against the latest offer from the NBA owners — agents are at the heart of decertification efforts, they are telling their clients not to take this deal.

Agents are in one sense looking out for their clients’ interest, although everything is intertwined — the more money the players make, the more money they make. To be fair, most agents are concerned about the well being of their clients beyond just the financial, but the financial is the cornerstone.

However, this fight is not about money as much as power. In the wake of what LeBron James and Carmelo Anthony did last season, the owners felt like they were losing power. They are using this Collective Bargaining Agreement to get it back.

The agents had some of that power, and they will not give it up quietly. Look what agent Mark Termini told the Cleveland Plain Dealer (via SLAM).

“The agents represent a threat to the control of the owner and the team,” said Termini, who has represented many of the top players from Ohio, including Jim Jackson, Brad Sellers, Earl Boykins and Kosta Koufos. “They want to just deal with the player. They’re going to tell him what to do, where to go, when he’s hurt, when he’s not hurt, what doctor to go to, what’s a good deal, what’s a bad deal, when he’s traded, what time to report.

“The agent gets involved in all of those decisions on behalf of the player and it’s burdensome to the team. They don’t like it. They’d like to eliminate that. So in these negotiations, as the options for the players become fewer and fewer, it has the hand-in-glove effect of reducing the role of the agent.”

Clearly that’s an agent’s spin, but the sentiment is correct. The owners and league would love to diminish the role of agents and this deal helps do that by reducing the trade options an agent could pursue for a client.

Just remember that this CBA negotiation is pretty much like everything that happens in Washington D.C. — it’s about money and power. It gets spun as being good for the people (or the fans), but it’s always about money and power.

What does a 72-game season look like? Packed like sardines.

Empty Amway Arena

Here’s the real hook for players with a season that starts Dec. 15 — they lose essentially only one paycheck.

Their salaries in a shortened season are pro-rated by games played, a 72 game season would mean 10 fewer games than normal (a 12 percent loss). That is basically a little more than one missed paycheck total for players over the course of a season. Money is the bait to tempt players to take the offer. (Teams would only lose five home games of revenue.)

For fans, what 72 games would mean is one crowded season — which is not good for quality of play. Teams normally play 15 games a month (give or take a couple), and the season would start six weeks late. So most teams would have played about 22 games by Dec. 15.

To miss only 10 games means one very condensed schedule — basically the pace of the 1999 50-game season (the last time there was a lockout) just spread over another month and a half. John Schuhmann breaks it down a little more at NBA.com.

As we laid it out last week, a 72-game schedule allows every team to play in every arena at least once. Each team would play the 15 teams in the other conference two times and the 14 teams in their own conference three times….

But if the players approve this deal, get ready for a schedule with very little time for practice or recovery from aches and pains.

What we saw in 1999 was guys who got tired and it showed more on the defensive end. Basically, things got sloppy. This is a longer version of that so expect more guys missing games with minor injuries, and expect some stretches of play where coaches will want to burn the tape (if they still used tape).

But that’s the offer on the table. If the players reject the owners’ offer, well, it likely becomes chaos. And all we’ll know is there will be less than 72 games.