Want to read the owners proposal? Here it is.

[QUOTE=Reverend Hoops][url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_C4zaisIRxQ&feature=channel_video_title[/url]


:oldlol: Stern is too much.[/QUOTE]

Yeah the propaganda machine is in full effect.
:oldlol:

Did anybody see the Sign and Trade Free Agent part?

After the 2012-13 season, taxpaying teams are prohibited to acquire a player like this. That's going to make things interesting. :oldlol:

[QUOTE=BoogieWoogieMan]Did anybody see the Sign and Trade Free Agent part?

After the 2012-13 season, taxpaying teams are prohibited to acquire a player like this. That's going to make things interesting. :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

basically making previous MLE exceptions either retire or go to d-league. but ya know, it's all about 'competitive balance', making things 'fair' and making it 'even across the board', lol

i suspect the definition of 'taxpayer' will become much more broad as well.

I think the best part is "Dear Billy,"

[quote=BoogieWoogieMan]Did anybody see the Sign and Trade Free Agent part?

After the 2012-13 season, taxpaying teams are prohibited to acquire a player like this. That's going to make things interesting. :oldlol:[/quote]If you can't get under the tax while being able to amnesty two guys (who have a grandfathered in contract) then you've got some pretty major problems.

[quote=blacknapalm]basically making previous MLE exceptions either retire or go to d-league. but ya know, it's all about 'competitive balance', making things 'fair' and making it 'even across the board', lol

i suspect the definition of 'taxpayer' will become much more broad as well.[/quote] The go to the D-League for a prorated 175k or whatever is a complete falsehood.

[QUOTE=InspiredLebowski]The go to the D-League for a prorated 175k or whatever is a complete falsehood.[/QUOTE]

i already stated the d-league thing was a rumor. the MLE exception is not though and i actually don't have much of a problem with it since it affects so few players. i'd be upset if that was a sticking point for the players.

[quote=blacknapalm]i already stated the d-league thing was a rumor. the MLE exception is not though and i actually don't have much of a problem with it since it affects so few players. i'd be upset if that was a sticking point for the players.[/quote]My fault, thought that's what you were referring to.

[QUOTE=Fiasco]I will be so choked as a Clippers fan. Because it will mean we gave away the 1st overall pick for nothing.[/QUOTE]

From Donald Sterling point of view, he saved a lot of money. You still have to pay the player you choose for the amnesty

But I agree it sucks really bad for Clippers fan !

[QUOTE=TimmyDuncan]From Donald Sterling point of view, he saved a lot of money. You still have to pay the player you choose for the amnesty

But I agree it sucks really bad for Clippers fan ![/QUOTE]

ha, now you get it man. it sucks for the clips since they have some real talent despite sterling. i really wish you guys had a better owner. owners like the NJ owner are better for the league.

InspiredLebowski, i get it man. there's been a lot of confusion over that the last week or so. i'm pretty much fine with the MLE. not perfect but good.

4 year contracts lol....next

When I read the 7 pages ... my first thought came to mind was :

[SIZE="4"]The owners want the players to play for payroll increases , instead of the players telling the owners before they play what they think they are worth. [/SIZE]

[QUOTE=BoogieWoogieMan]Did anybody see the Sign and Trade Free Agent part?

After the 2012-13 season, taxpaying teams are prohibited to acquire a player like this. That's going to make things interesting. :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

Once again - the players are trying to dedicate their worth before they play.
The only benny is that the owners have a option to obtain another player or lose the option.

Sign and trades - I never liked .

Commish : [url]http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=7234584[/url]

decert: [url]http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/9699/an-economics-professor-explains-the-nbpa-and-the-lockout[/url]

Soft cap? Who the hell are they kidding?

Trying to calculate what the Isiah Knicks would have paid in luxury tax penalty. Pretty sure it would have peaked north of $8.25/$1 of salary or a total cost to the team of ~300m+ in lux taxes alone per year (assuming it is a marginal rate- 500M+ if not marginal). Of course getting rid of one of those terrible deals each year in amnesty would have lowered that...

Still, calling it a soft cap is laughable.

[quote=HurricaneKid]Still, calling it a soft cap is laughable.[/quote]How? Soft cap has an actual defintion, you can go above it if you pay a penalty. Obviously a hard cap means you can't pay a cent over the cap. It's pretty clearly a soft cap by definition.

[QUOTE=InspiredLebowski]How? Soft cap has an actual defintion, you can go above it if you pay a penalty. Obviously a hard cap means you can't pay a cent over the cap. It's pretty clearly a soft cap by definition.[/QUOTE]

How is it a soft cap when recent teams would be paying $8 in tax for every $1 of salary? Thats not soft. Its at the very least a firm cap. There isn't a team out there that would go near this. It IS for all intents and purposes a hard cap.