Here are three rules in the owners' now-rejected proposal that, if altered, would've probably resulted in this deal going to a vote, as opposed to the disaster we have on our hands at the moment:
First, this one, which essentially says non-taxpaying teams can't use non-taxpayer exceptions if it will put them over the tax, and they cannot go over the tax threshold at any point during that season. Essentially saying, if you use these exceptions, the tax threshold is now a hard cap number.
A team in any season that uses the Non-Taxpayer Mid-Level Exception or the Bi-Annual Exception, or that in year 3 or after acquires a free agent in a sign-and-trade, cannot at any time thereafter have a team salary at any point during that season in excess of the Tax level; provided, however, that a team with a team salary below the Tax level would be permitted prior to October 15 to engage in a transaction using either of the foregoing exceptions or a sign-and-trade that would result in its team salary exceeding the Tax level by no more than $5M, so long as it engages in other subsequent transactions to bring its team salary below the Tax level on October 15 and its team salary does not exceed the Tax level at any time thereafter.
It's fairly self-explanatory why players would be against that one, because it would limit their options if, say, the Knicks are willing to pay the tax to acquire them but wouldn't be allowed to use a mid-level exception to do so. But, the counter-argument to that is, "Why do you have to play for the Knicks?"
Under this proposed CBA, the minimum payroll would increase for every team, meaning there's money being spent everywhere, and the league wants to at least attempt to create some sort of competitive balance.
Second, there's this simple one, which reduces the minimum player salary:
Minimum player salary scale reduced from amounts shown in 2005 CBA for 2011-12 in proportion to overall system reduction (i.e., approx. 12% lower than under the 2005 CBA). Scale grows by 3.5% in future seasons.
Basically, if the union believes it's fighting for every player, not just the big-money players, then this rule seems unacceptable. Not only are minimum-salary players making the least money, obviously, but many of their contracts aren't guaranteed unless they reach a certain date of the season. Too much at risk for these players to be taking this level of a pay cut.
Lastly, there's another simple one:
All salaries for 2011-12 to be prorated in proportion to the number of 2011-12 regular season games that are canceled.
Now, this is 100 percent conjecture on my part, but I believe if these rules were altered, the players would have very likely put the deal to a vote.
For them, it has basically come down to freedom of player movement, and that's something of a joke because there are ways around every system.
For example, that whole extend-and-trade restriction where players would have to wait 60 days before getting a contract extension wouldn't be a deterrent if a player really wanted to head elsewhere.
What Carmelo did last year would still be possible in this deal. What the Heat did last year would still be possible. In fact, the Heat would've had an added $2.5 million exception to work with after signing the Big Three and hitting the salary cap number.
As for the additionally punitive luxury taxes, there probably would've been three or four less teams willing to dive into the tax under these rules. And it's likely none of the highest-spending teams would be willing to dive into the highest of tax levels. But it's unlikely that would've been a deal breaker.
Makes you wonder whether it's worth even threatening to lose the season for this.
It's completely fair for the players to want to negotiate further. But the risk of losing so much more at this point is probably too large. That's why going this route is so dangerous.
They're betting that those middle-of-the-road owners who David Stern convinced to accept last proposal will cave even further. But it's likely they'll go the other way and get in line with the hardliners.
If that happens, good luck even getting this deal back on the table.
Comments