NBA, Twitter / Sep 13, 2011 / 5:00 pm

Twitter Breaks Down NBA Lockout

Derek Fisher

Derek Fisher

You might have heard, but today the owners and players met once again to go over this lockout business. For a variety of reasons – not all entirely true – things had been looking hopeful in the past week or so. But alas, the news wasn’t good as both sides came out of the meetings without any further progress being made.

We could roll out 500 words on how annoying all of this is, but Twitter has been breaking down the emotional roller coaster for us over the past hour or so anyways. Take it away Twitter:


@MoneyMase: Just finished a long day of negotiations. Unfortunately we are No Where Near a deal! It’s def disappointing!

@KBergCBS: Looking like a season imploding. How u.

@Unsilent: I’m pretty sure Billy Hunter wants me to shoot myself in the face.

@noamschiller: NBA not budging on hard cap proposal, union advising players to prepare to miss at least half the season. Pretty bad.

@AnaheimAmigos: Derek Fisher could perform much better in the negotiations if there were a referee to sway each time he perceived a wrong being done to him.

@Chris_Broussard: Players said they made significant concession of $ but owners wouldn’t move off hard cap.

@Jared_Wade: I can’t imagine what Boris Diaw is going to look like by Christmas.

@noamschiller: Vince Carter was going to do this anyway. RT @KBergCBS Hunter bombshell: “We’ve advised (players) they may have to sit out half the season.”

@russbengtson: Can we pick a day that there is ZERO #NBA discussion at all on Twitter? Just one day?

@briancmahoney: No further talks are scheduled. Billy Hunter says union was prepared to make a “significant” move but owners weren’t willing to move at all.

@ChrisMannixSI: One prominent agent tells SI after hearing today’s news, he will start more aggressively seeking overseas jobs for his clients.

@treykerby: Not you, Derek Fisher. RT @BlackBoiPachino: Great work today

@sam_amick: As you’ve likely read elsewhere, the NY labor meeting was essentially a doomsday outcome. Fans lose out as season is in serious jeopardy.

@russbengtson: After today’s meeting, Kobe went back in and negotiated by himself in an empty conference room for two hours.

@HOOPmag: Best solution is to lock NBA and NBPA together in a room with Pitbull performing. No one leaves until a deal is done.

@Chris_Broussard: DStern just spoke. Bottom line: players want current soft cap system; owners want hard cap that they say will assure competitive balance

What do you think is going to happen?

Follow Sean on Twitter at @SEANesweeney.

Follow Dime on Twitter at @DimeMag.

Become a fan of Dime Magazine on Facebook HERE.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
  • MadSammyboy

    The hard cap is the way to go. Sorry, but it just is. The owners are right on that.

  • Otto

    Dime, preach to me: what is the difference between a hard cap and a soft cap? It sounds like it has something to do with bio-degradable water bottles or something.

  • beiber newz

    After today’s meeting, Kobe went back in and negotiated by himself in an empty conference room for two hours. ha taking shots at kb for practicing. still funny, but the humor wears off

  • Me


    from what i understand, a soft cap means you can only go over it to re-sign your own players. right now there’s both a hard and soft cap i think, but most of the big market teams are well over the soft cap and approaching hard cap limits. the owners want no soft cap. The hard cap would basically go down to where the soft cap is now, meaning big market teams won’t be able to hoard all the talent (ie, no “big three”).

    Anyone feel free to correct me if i’m wrong.

  • Jeff

    I think the hard cap benefits the league and the teams. The league is bigger than the players

  • http://deleted dagwaller

    @ Me – I don’t know the first thing about the real life, intricate details surrounding hard and soft caps.

    But from all that I’ve read over the past 10 years, a hard cap is just that: a cap that you can’t go over. All teams are on an even level. In other words, the Lakers, despite playing in a huge market, would have the same limits that the Milwaukee Bucks would have.

    The soft cap is more vague. I think that there are multiple ways to implement a soft cap. In the NBA, there’s the luxury tax. For every dollar over the “soft cap” (which has changed [increased] over the years) a team spends, it must pay a dollar to X. I don’t know what X is, though – maybe a common revenue pool for all the other teams? To some NBA account? David Stern? I don’t know.

    In other words, as of this past year, the teams that make more money can afford to pay more money to players. Kind of like capitalism. That’s opposed to a hard cap system, which might make sense to the video game/fantasy leaguer in all of us. Everyone would get an equal chance to pay (or overpay) for players. Kind of like socialism.

    I can see the practical and philosophical reasoning behind both. I favor the hard cap, though. It seems to punish the players, because they can’t overachieve and hope to get a fat contract here or there. In the long run, though, the players that consistently play well will be the ones that get paid.

  • jay

    this ish is real easy! knicks, bulls, lakers, boston and the 3 other big market teams make most of the money off their own networks. they are also on the majority of abc/espn and tnt game. have rev sharing and those teams aka the big market teams that have their own networks get a smaller piece of that pie or if they go overthan like the yanks and sox nation in baseball they pay the small market teams…how hard is that??
    i am furious..the dan gilbrert’s of the world are idiots. i am a business person and work the stock market. lord stern is not tim geightner. they bought at the top. like the dot.com bubble and the housing aka mortgage back market..all that is up does not stay up. if you bought too high and your cost is high..that is your problem for being a terrible business person and you lose..sorry! this is America…not a socialist country! you have sum winners and some losers..that is how the game works. sorry for going gordon gekko. just finished watching wsii. sorry!
    solve this and solve it now! i want my kobevii xmas days!! period!

  • Otto

    I see. Thanks a lot fellas. So if we impose a hard cap there’s a chance we may get to watch the Raptors vs. Bucks on Christmas day because they, or any other team, may become two of the most competitive teams in the League. Frightening thought.

  • Yikes

    so punish the teams that bring in the most money? right

  • http://deleted dagwaller

    @ Yikes – I’m all for teams making as much money as possible. Their owners and fans can reap the benefits of that situation.

    But if that gives them a competitive edge, it’s imbalanced. Teams should get an edge for intelligent use of their money, not for just having lots of money.

    The players could get bonuses for being successful – win bonuses, playoff bonuses, etc. That’d reward them for winning, rather than what they’re currently rewarded for: jacking shots in their contract years.

  • http://www.zwani.com/graphics/funny_pictures/images/88funny-pictures128.jpg JAY

    I could have sworn there were a few more posts after #10…. including one of mine. Were some deleted?? WTF

  • http://www.zwani.com/graphics/funny_pictures/images/88funny-pictures128.jpg JAY

    I’m going to regurgitate my other post that disappeared.

    Re: soft/hard cap
    I like the idea of a hard cap. It encourages parity, and discourages bloated salaries. The good players won’t get superstar money anymore… ie: Rashard Lewis. Another example: if there was a hard cap last summer do you think Bosh gets the same contract offer as Lebron??
    I like the idea of a hard cap but I don’t think a strict hard cap will work in the NBA. I think they should do a combination soft/hard cap. Maybe set the soft cap a bit higher than it is now, and the hard cap set at 3-8 mill above that, and charge $1.50 for every dollar spent above the soft cap. This way, the rich teams can still overpay guys if they wish to but only up to the hard cap. The talent will be spread throughout the league, and not concentrated on 5-6 teams.

    @Otto: “So if we impose a hard cap there’s a chance we may get to watch the Raptors vs. Bucks on Christmas day because they, or any other team, may become two of the most competitive teams in the League. Frightening thought.”
    ^ Why is it frightening?? If those two teams manage to build exciting rosters and are among the top teams in the league, why not??
    Conversely, what if the Lakers and Spurs lose their top players to free agency or retirement in the next couple of years and have losing records… you’d rather watch them play because of their history?? Personally I don’t give a damn about the jerseys or the prestige of the franchises playing. The last thing I want on xmas day, is 2 shit teams playing a nationally televised game. I want to watch the leagues best on Christmas day. If, in 2 years, that happens to be the Bucks and Raptors… fine by me.

  • MadSammyboy

    Soft cap: teams can go over the salary cap, but must pay a dollar-for-dollar luxury tax if they go over.

    Hard cap: teams can’t go over the cap, period. Any personnel move that causes a team to go over the cap is denied passage by the league, which has final approval authority on all personnel moves.

  • http://deleted dagwaller

    @ Jay – preach