Skip to content

Players might vote for deal, season, if given vote, which they won’t be

Nov 12, 2011, 7:00 PM EDT

NBPA Representatives Meet To Discuss NBA Lockout Getty Images

ESPN’s Shaun Powell reports on Twitter:

Source told me if full membership votes on the owner’s deal, NBA would open for business by Wednesday.Sat Nov 12 17:11:26 via web

This is much akin to “Unicorns may cure cancer, if they exist.” The primary problem is that unicorns don’t exist. Similarly, the rank-and-file NBA players that would vote for such a deal don’t have a voice. Those that don’t want to accept any concessions have a voice, that of the agents and the players those agents rep. Those that don’t want this deal but want to keep talking have a voice, the NBPA leadership. But there isn’t anyone to speak up for those players, no powerful voice, no strong element of leadership to say “Look, before we go all half-cocked and start chasing a victory on the wings of the decertification hippogriff, maybe we should vote on the measure to see how close we really are to it.” That player would look weak, would look like a scab, would look to be sniffing at the owners’ boots, despite the fact no one on the players’ side wants this deal, it benefits no one, and a vote simply gauges where they’re at.

So instead, we’ll just have rabble rousing and decertification and a hefty “unified” no on Monday, an opt for the courts and the loss of the 2011-2012 season. Unless someone powerful steps up to say this deal needs to get done it won’t be. The silent majority has no power if it remains silent.

  1. santolonius - Nov 12, 2011 at 7:05 PM

    the majority of commenters on this site seem to think the players negotiating this thing are selfish. it would be ironic if the majority of nba players think so too.

    • rreducla1 - Nov 13, 2011 at 3:59 AM

      RicBucher @Ric Bucher
      Never has some, as in 200-some players are for decertification, meant so much. More than 220, offer presumably would not pass a full vote.

  2. kandh2004 - Nov 12, 2011 at 7:16 PM

    Matt serious question. Is there any chance of replacement players if players don’t take deal and I’m not saying I want that, the game would be worst off for that, but just wondering

    • derekjetersmansion - Nov 12, 2011 at 7:20 PM

      Lockout, not a strike. And the product would be terrible, nonetheless.

    • hail2tharedskins - Nov 12, 2011 at 8:04 PM

      Replacement players for this season is not going to happen. If this dispute drags into next season, I would think that option would be put back on the table.

      • derekjetersmansion - Nov 12, 2011 at 8:09 PM

        Can’t have replacement players in a lockout.

  3. sunsation3413 - Nov 12, 2011 at 7:24 PM

    I am a season ticket holder and after reading all I can about the current deal on the table I am hoping they don’t accept it and the entire season gets cancelled. Why? Because I didn’t sign up to have to go see a bunch of garbage games. To say you are starting the season 2 months late but you can still play 72 games is ridiculous. They are going to cram all these games on the schedule with no training camp, no preseason. There will be injuries and guys are going to get worn out. To try to make this work just to line the pockets of the owners is wrong. If this ends up being what I get I will not be renewing my tickets again. They can argue as long as they want but without us buying tickets and going to the games, both sides lose.

  4. rreducla1 - Nov 12, 2011 at 7:53 PM

    Matt’s getting a little nervous, I guess.

  5. mondzy805 - Nov 12, 2011 at 8:15 PM

    The Owners don’t want to play.

  6. goforthanddie - Nov 12, 2011 at 8:22 PM

    “That player would look weak, would look like a scab, would look to be sniffing at the owners’ boots, ”

    You going to look Kobe in the eye and say that?

  7. scott46 - Nov 12, 2011 at 8:29 PM

    Originally the players were getting 57%, the owners 43%. The players have made good faith concessions. They should not drop a dime below 52%. Additionally after 4 or 5 years players should have a right to be a free agent. However all teams should be cap, it’s the only way to have competitive balance. You can’t have big markets out spending small markets, it’s unfair. Revenue sharing is the only way to go. We are going to have to let the courts resolve this dispute, the owner and players are to greedy and childish to do it themselves.

  8. kandh2004 - Nov 12, 2011 at 8:49 PM

    That’s what I thought replacements for a strike not lockout. I really hope it don’t come to this year or next. There is some bad basketball already can you imagine replacement players

    • derekjetersmansion - Nov 12, 2011 at 9:55 PM

      No basketball > replacement players, according to both sides haha.

  9. rajbais - Nov 12, 2011 at 10:32 PM

    Who’s Shaun Powell?

  10. rajbais - Nov 12, 2011 at 10:32 PM

    Who’s Shaun Powell?

  11. texmex2 - Nov 12, 2011 at 11:47 PM

    The players are looking at losing 2.5 billion dollars for a lost season ~WOW, there is no intergity in this only stupidity and it will only get worse going forward ~if the players wish to start legal proceeding they should start with whomever is advising them to date for they indeed do SUCK ~ no honest Judge will side by the players complaint onany anti-trust issues, for there are none to address ~they can take their talents where ever they care too, no one is stopping them…

  12. marcusfitzhugh - Nov 13, 2011 at 12:42 AM

    The players need better representation. How can THIS many games be canceled, yet the players – all 450 of them- haven’t been given the ‘opportunity’ to vote? Any of us would go crazy if we were part of a union whose ‘leadership group’ said, “we may just scrap the next 12 months of your pay, but no, you can’t vote on any of the offers that have been presented because WE DON’T THINK YOU SHOULD”

  13. rreducla1 - Nov 13, 2011 at 3:57 AM

    Then again, they might not:

    RicBucher @Ric Bucher
    Never has some, as in 200-some players are for decertification, meant so much. More than 220, offer presumably would not pass a full vote.

  14. rreducla1 - Nov 13, 2011 at 4:05 AM

    Stern, of course, blames the agents:

    “By some combination of mendacity and greed, the agents who are looking out for themselves rather than their clients are trying to scuttle the deal,” Stern said in a phone interview. “They’re engaged in what appears to be an orchestrated Twitter campaign and a series of interviews that are designed to deny the economic realities of the proposal.”

    Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/basketball/nba/11/12/stern.blames.agents.ap/index.html#ixzz1dZfsgkkI

  15. kandh2004 - Nov 13, 2011 at 12:06 PM

    Look I’m not a big fan of Stern but he is right about the agents. These guys just want the best deal for themselves cause if you think about it some of the guys they represent would not be in the league when this CBA would expire and the new players they represent would be covered. Just like with Kessler you need to get the agents out of the way to hopefully make a deal

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Will LeBron get booed Christmas Day in Miami?
Top 10 NBA Player Searches
  1. D. Rose (3150)
  2. D. Cousins (2363)
  3. L. James (2245)
  4. P. George (2217)
  5. S. Marion (2090)
  1. R. Allen (2084)
  2. K. Bryant (2004)
  3. A. Davis (2003)
  4. C. Anthony (1819)
  5. K. Love (1601)