Twitter reactions to the NBAPA choice to not accept

[Mission Accomplished]

Does anyone have any juicy tweets of players who are either angry or supporting.

I heard Harping is ripping the players.

 

[TroutBum]

You know what I heard? Sheep.

I also heard that your posts suck.

 

[Deleted member 848]

You know what I heard? Sheep.

I also heard that your posts suck.

/thread.

 

[InGameStrategy]

Just like selling a house, at first low-ball offer really makes you angry, BUT you kick yourself after it ends up being the best offer!!!.

o riddle me this: players, Is this great resolve--or have you gotten terribly bad advice?

read the NBA proposal- Not only would i vote yes, i would be calling all my friends around the league to do the same

[O]ne of the hardest parts of being a player: finding people who will give you good honest advice. its a huge problem for pro Matt Harpring on Twitter, athletes

decertify? not so fast..risk losing your entire contract? fans remember, stern is a step ahead always, he is very good Matt Harpring on Twitter, at what he does

https://scribe.twitter.com/#!/mharpring15

Pretty gentle and sage if you ask me.

Now, if he could get Bolerjack and Booner to exhibit the same kind of sagacity . . .

 

[NotDeadYet]

" [O]ne of the hardest parts of being a player: finding people who will give you good honest advice. ".
Sadly, the players are gonna find this out the hard way.
I'm NOT a David Stern supporter, but the players should've listened to him and DEMANDED a vote...

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

Is it really just the blue chip free agents and their agents that are unhappy with what the league offered?

 

[TheItinerantSon]

Is it really just the blue chip free agents and their agents that are unhappy with what the league offered?

no because built into the proposal (at various times) were several things that would have really harmed the guys on the lower end.

1) the owners would have been able to send players to the DLeague and pay them only 75K

2) the stiff luxury tax was essentially the slow road to a hard cap, and a hard cap would necessitate that role players have non-guaranteed contracts so that teams can maintain flexibility

3) the leauge retained the right to contract at any time without hte approval of the players union and to lower the players % of bri by the proportion of players that lost their jobs.

these issues definitely hurt hte lower tier players more.

 

[NotDeadYet]

I'd say the majority of 'average' NBA players were easily swayed to go along with the union leaders, and may well be unhappy with what they heard. As to whether they UNDERSTOOD the full implications and repurcusions of the union's actions is another story...

 

[green]

no because built into the proposal (at various times) were several things that would have really harmed the guys on the lower end.

1) the owners would have been able to send players to the DLeague and pay them only 75K

2) the stiff luxury tax was essentially the slow road to a hard cap, and a hard cap would necessitate that role players have non-guaranteed contracts so that teams can maintain flexibility

3) the leauge retained the right to contract at any time without hte approval of the players union and to lower the players % of bri by the proportion of players that lost their jobs.

these issues definitely hurt hte lower tier players more.

Aren't these talking points that Stern said wasn't really in the agreement? Supposedly the DLeague on was an Urban Legend. BUT, I, like many of today's NBA athletes, am too lazy to read the 7 measly pages.

 

[billyshelby]

no because built into the proposal (at various times) were several things that would have really harmed the guys on the lower end.

1) the owners would have been able to send players to the DLeague and pay them only 75K

2) the stiff luxury tax was essentially the slow road to a hard cap, and a hard cap would necessitate that role players have non-guaranteed contracts so that teams can maintain flexibility

3) the leauge retained the right to contract at any time without hte approval of the players union and to lower the players % of bri by the proportion of players that lost their jobs.

these issues definitely hurt hte lower tier players more.

Where are you getting any of this?

1. The league has denied this, it's not in the proposal, and the players aren't contesting this publicly to my knowledge.
2. The players contend the tax system IS a thinly veiled hard cap, not a road to one. There is nothing about non-guaranteed contracts in the proposal and both sides have agreed that contracts will be guaranteed.
3. There is nothing in the proposal about contraction. I haven't heard one player rep mention contraction as a divisive issue.

My guess is you're parroting speculation by third parties. My other guess is you're not reading a lot of the news.

 

[freakazoid]

Lockout update: Misinformation rules

NEW YORK — Players reps from all 30 NBA teams are arriving in town today, and tomorrow they’ll get debriefed on what is and what isn’t in the owners’ latest proposal.

Up until now, they’ve been getting fed plenty of bad information in the two days since the owners and players went their separate ways at the conclusion of Thursday night’s bargaining session.

Case in point: ESPN.com drew 5,000-plus comments on a story about how players could be sent down to the D-League and have their salary reduced to $75,000 during their first five seasons. A dealkiller, right?

Maybe it would be, except it is NOT in the owners’ proposal.
“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, told the New York Times on 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.”

More from the story in The Times, by Howard Beck: “Hours after the NBA delivered its final collective bargaining proposal to the players union, the rumors and the rhetoric began to flow. 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. “Bird” rights would be jeopardized. The middle class would be eliminated. 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.”

This is one of the problems that happens when you keep the media in the dark when it behooves you to let them see the light. Even if you tell the writers nothing, they still have to write something. And if falsehoods are being reported, it is incumbent upon somebody to set the record straight — and quickly — before the misinformation becomes accepted as fact.

Case in point: Kevin Durant is so upset with the proposal that he hasn’t even seen that he has already decided to vote against it, and he is considering three different overseas options.

https://sheridanhoops.com/2011/11/13/lockout-update-misinformation-rules/

 

[freakazoid]

Where are you getting any of this?

My guess is you're parroting speculation by third parties. My other guess is you're not reading a lot of the news.

There was an article that suggested these rumors were started by several agents via twitter, as an intentional smear campaign to get the players pissed off so they'd reject the offer.