The deal would let teams send players to the development league and cut their pay.
Teams that used certain salary cap exceptions would lose the right to re-sign their own players.
These and other concerns filled Twitter timelines on Friday, a day after labor talks concluded. They turned out to be unfounded, speculative or simply false.
The D-League is not mentioned anywhere in the seven-page proposal that was delivered to the union on Friday — a copy of which was obtained by The New York Times.
Nor are there any measures that could curtail “Bird” rights. While some provisions might crimp the N.B.A.’s middle class, others could boost it.
In the absence of official documentation — neither the league nor the union released the proposal publicly — the rumors have prevailed. “The revised proposal is worse than the last offer,” Nazr Mohammed, a 13-year veteran, wrote Saturday on Twitter.
That sentiment was echoed by several agents and players. But a review of the N.B.A.’s previous proposal and the revised offer does not support the claim. In many areas, the league improved its offer, albeit modestly.
For instance, the league is now proposing a higher midlevel exception for luxury-tax-paying teams — $3 million for three seasons, and available every year. The league had been proposing a $2.5 million exception for two seasons, and available every other year.
The league also increased the annual raises for “Bird” players. And, at the union’s suggestion, the N.B.A. agreed that the 10-year labor deal could be terminated by either side after the sixth year, instead of the seventh.
Two provisions could conceivably hurt players in the middle of the league’s salary structure. The league wants to ban luxury-tax-paying teams from using the full midlevel exception ($5 million) and from making sign-and-trade deals. To partly compensate, the league last week created a new exception, worth $2.5 million, for up to two seasons, for teams that are just below the cap. In the past, teams with cap room were not permitted to use any exceptions, even after they surpassed the cap in a given off-season.
The league also proposed raising the minimum team salary to 90 percent of the salary cap by the 2013-14 season, which should increase spending by the more frugal franchises.
One of the N.B.A.’s new demands does leap out: a call for a 12 percent reduction in rookie and minimum-scale contracts, cutting them to 2007-8 levels.
That provision was not listed in the prior proposal, which was sent to the union Nov. 6.
The ban on luxury-tax-paying teams using midlevel exceptions and sign-and-trade deals — a major concern to agents — may have a minimal effect. Since 2005, only four players have been acquired by luxury-tax-paying teams through sign-and-trade deals. Taxpaying teams used the full midlevel exception only nine times in that period.
Moreover, because the N.B.A. guarantees the players a set percentage of revenues — 50 percent, about $2 billion a year — any shortfall in total salaries has to be made up to the players.
The speculation about teams losing “Bird” rights seems to be based on a misreading of one particular provision governing teams that move into the luxury tax. The simple explanation is that if a team is going to cross the tax threshold using multiple exceptions, it has to sign its “Bird” player first.
As for the D-League, the N.B.A. does want to grant teams the right to send any player with up to five years experience to its minor league. However, that provision is not contained in the proposal that is now up for union approval. Rather, it is one of 30 to 40 secondary items that have yet to be negotiated. Those items are typically discussed after the main framework of a deal is approved.
By any measure, the proposed deal would be a major win for the owners. The players are being asked to take a $280 million pay cut, with shorter contracts, lower raises and tighter restrictions on the top-spending teams. But league officials insist that the deal is not nearly as bad as the rumor mill suggests.
“It’s of grave concern to the league that there is an enormous amount of misinformation concerning our proposal, both on Twitter and in the more traditional media,” Adam Silver, the deputy commissioner, said Saturday night. “We believe that if the players are fully informed as to what is and is not in our proposal, they will agree that its terms are beneficial to them and represent a fair compromise.”
No comments:
Post a Comment