Friday, October 14, 2011

NBA Lockout: Who is it good for?

Who is the NBA lockout helping?  I’m not sure, but I would bet that about 90% of the players would love it if the season started immediately, regardless if they have to make some compromises to make that happen.

The owners have the least to lose if there’s not an NBA season.  Most teams in the NBA don’t make much money anyway, so the owners only stand to gain a huge financial benefit if they sell the team.  Also, they have other businesses to make them money, and most of them are so ridiculously rich that it’s not going to hurt them anyway.

The NBA superstars have a lot to lose if there’s no season, but they, like the owners, are so rich that they will be fine.  Plus, they can still make a lot of money on endorsements.  Some of the NBA elite are even playing oversees during the lockout, so they can still get their millions.

That leaves the other 90% of the league, who need to play for as long as they can because they’re NBA shelf-life is only 5-6 years, and they’re annual salary is, at most, a few million dollars.  I know, it sounds like a lot, and it is, except that if they are only able to play for 5-6 years, that money has to last them a long, long time.  Not only that, but they don’t have the endorsement money that Lebron James has, and they can’t make much money oversees (especially if bigger NBA stars are playing over there).
So right now, every day that passes without an NBA game, these guys are making no money, and are getting closer to retirement.  Meanwhile, Lebron, D-Wade, and Kobe are holding out because they have huge egos and can afford to take an extended vacation.  They see themselves as heroes, doing what’s best for the players, while in reality, they aren’t helping anyone.  All they’re doing is making it very difficult for a lot of ball players to make a living. 

Who, exactly, does the NBA players association represent?  It doesn’t seem to represent the vast majority of NBA players, but rather the small elite at the top who are more interested in feeding their own egos and looking cool then doing what’s best for all the players as a collective group.  What’s the point of a players association that only represents the top 10% of the league? 

Finally, let’s not forget the fans, who actually like watching these “super-stars” play.  As an NBA fan, I’d love it if they could put their egos aside and figure something out.  For the good of the game, and most of the players, let’s hope it’s sooner rather then later.


  1. Agree that the union is clearly being driven by the superstars. I believe most rank and file players would happily settle for a 50/50 BRI split with a more punitive luxury tax that works for the owners, but the union leadership and superstars have such big egos that they can't settle for an agreement like that. Instead, they are going to holdout for a "better deal" when in the end they will end up with the same or even worse deal than they could get now, except they will end up losing $2.2 Billion for the players in the process. It makes no sense whatsoever, but that's what happens when egos and not logic drive negotiations.

    On a side note, this is actually good for the Jazz. I am rooting for the owners to stand firm and get the best deal possible, even it means missing a season, because all the changes they are seeking can only help level the playing field and make it easier for the Jazz to compete. It sucks missing a full season, but if it ends up benefiting the Jazz for the next 30 years because it is system that allows all teams to compete on an equal playing field, I'm all for it.

  2. Yeah, I agree and really hope that the owners don't give in. It just sucks that the players union are a bunch of greedy, selfish morons who have no perspective about what's happening with the economy. How can they expect to make so much money when the league, for the most part, is losing money? It's frustrating.