| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
canadaball
Joined: 24 May 2013
Posts: 525
Back to top |
 Posted: 05/19/24 5:21 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
| pilight wrote: |
Stokes is not the best example, as offensive cyphers tend to have very limited value as free agents.
It seems far fetched that this happened with no input from Mark Davis or someone employed by him. |
Let's see: Brianna Turner makes $50k more than Stokes, and Kailani Brown just signed for $25k more.
Remember also that, before recent CBA, Stokes was actually at the very top of salary scale when in NY. As a long term veteran (I know u devalue non scorers) she was key in both LV title runs, and should not be playing so cheaply. For heavens sake, Isabelle Harrison, who can't get out of injured ward, is making $160k. Look at Gustafson who just signed with LV as free agent. Fellow free agent Stokes is only making $5k more, and their careers are not close. A quick scan of all veteran W bigs reveals that Stokes pay is in bottom 3, just slightly above Dantas, and new teammate Gustafson. Sorry, but her salary is a disgrace; then again, u can take your pick from Clark to Jackie Young etc. in looking for worst underpayment.
|
|
Silky Johnson
Joined: 29 Sep 2014
Posts: 3359
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/19/24 6:23 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| jmh1982 wrote: |
| It's one thing to have enough money from sponsors to be willing to take less to be able to help your team stay under the cap, but having a 3rd party paying all of the players 100k to presumably stay for less money is quite fishy. Wouldn't be surprised if the WNBA finds something wrong with this. |
Why would they? First they have to prove those two things are connected.
_________________
Professional Hater. The Baron of #HateHard
My team no longer exists, so I'll have to settle for hating yours.
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8264
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/19/24 6:52 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I'm not conversant with the specific payment topic of this thread or the more general issue of "fishy" payments to players, so I won't really comment except to say that it would seem inappropriate to have third party money being used to avoid, evade or nullify the contractual legalities, such as salary caps, of the CBA.
| canadaball wrote: |
| I have been frustrated that since the penalties came down last year, not one media member has asked any questions |
I will comment on this.
Women's basketball print reporters and TV commentators are certainly not investigative journalists, and many of them are really not journalists at all. The vast majority, especially those assigned or attached to specific teams, are mere extensions of and megaphones for the Sports Information departments of universities or rah-rah PR people for pro teams or networks. A credentialed reporter or internet blogger who asks difficult questions of a coach or AD, or writes a critical article, may find themselves de-credentialed. I know that from more than one example in my personal experience. |
|
canadaball
Joined: 24 May 2013
Posts: 525
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/19/24 7:00 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
I'm not conversant with the specific payment topic of this thread or the more general issue of "fishy" payments to players, so I won't really comment except to say that it would seem inappropriate to have third party money being used to avoid, evade or nullify the contractual legalities, such as salary caps, of the CBA.
| canadaball wrote: |
| I have been frustrated that since the penalties came down last year, not one media member has asked any questions |
I will comment on this.
Women's basketball print reporters and TV commentators are certainly not investigative journalists, and many of them are really not journalists at all. The vast majority, especially those assigned or attached to specific teams, are mere extensions of and megaphones for the Sports Information departments of universities or rah-rah PR people for pro teams or networks. A credentialed reporter or internet blogger who asks difficult questions of a coach or AD, or writes a critical article, may find themselves de-credentialed. I know that from more than one example in my personal experience. |
Understand completely, but the WNBA seeks treatment as a real major league sport. The NFL, NBA, NHL and MLB media have plenty of real journalists looking for truth. Can't there be just one covering the WNBA?
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11207
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/20/24 9:15 am ::: |
Reply |
|
There is no way to legally prevent players, or their family members, from receiving payments from entities other than the WNBA.
Obviously, these under or around the table payments have been going on for years, and they mimic the non-player spending that richer teams can use to attract talent.
Joe Lacob, for example, is not only going to spend lots of money on the Valkyries, he also has a complete administrative and support system set up that his players can tap into -- and Michael Alter in Chicago cannot come close to matching those systems.
The WNBA is rapidly becoming a rich owner's league, and the new CBA is going to have to reflect that. It's far too easy for any wealthy owner to arrange for $100,000 payments to each player, or jobs for a player's relatives, and as long as the salary cap is this low, it will be easy to circumvent.
That said, I don't see how the league can support $1 million dollar salaries in the wake of the collapse of regional sports networks.
Interesting times ahead ...
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
canadaball
Joined: 24 May 2013
Posts: 525
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/20/24 12:06 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
There is no way to legally prevent players, or their family members, from receiving payments from entities other than the WNBA.
Obviously, these under or around the table payments have been going on for years, and they mimic the non-player spending that richer teams can use to attract talent.
Joe Lacob, for example, is not only going to spend lots of money on the Valkyries, he also has a complete administrative and support system set up that his players can tap into -- and Michael Alter in Chicago cannot come close to matching those systems.
The WNBA is rapidly becoming a rich owner's league, and the new CBA is going to have to reflect that. It's far too easy for any wealthy owner to arrange for $100,000 payments to each player, or jobs for a player's relatives, and as long as the salary cap is this low, it will be easy to circumvent.
That said, I don't see how the league can support $1 million dollar salaries in the wake of the collapse of regional sports networks.
Interesting times ahead ... |
We are going way beyond the Aces, but here is my take. The nature of american sports with team rivalries make it easy to forget that, in reality, owners are all partners with their main goal making $. For the most part, teams operate fairly and within the rules; thus the KC Chiefs (owned by the billionaire Hunts) stand by the NFL salary cap, and struggle to keep some of their best players. Teams owned by rich owners desperate to win, who could easily break rules, just do not cheat, which makes the LV Aces pretty unique. You state that "under or around the table payments have been going on for years". I strongly disagree we see this in the major sports, tho do admit with the poor media scrutiny seen in the WNBA, it is more likely. The Minnesota Timberwolves, currently playing in NBA semifinals lost 5 first round draft picks as penalty for their Joe Smith chicanery.
I also think you are misreading the WNBA financial future. Under the current CBA, WNBA players were to receive about 20% of league revenue, but in last few years, that stream has exploded in ways the players have not shared. This year their % has fallen under 10%. https://frontofficesports.com/wnba-players-not-reaping-leagues-revenue-gains/
There have also been big changes in way people use media. How many viewers now record the most popular shows rather than watch live? which makes live sports the one vehicle where advertisers can be pretty sure they will get eyeballs. Cord cutting, and reliance on internet are making regional sports networks obsolete (I know young families that rely on internet for everything). The upcoming WNBA negotiations will feature bidding competition from ESPN and new, rich entities like Apple, Amazon etc., and Clark sure don't hurt. The W commissioner is looking for double the revenue, but, based upon what the NWSL got, could be much higher. One overlooked clue to future profits is this new charter plane agreement where W spending additional $25 mil/yr which is more than double current player salaries. Conservatively, if players just get back to that 20% revenue share in new CBA (reminder: most sports see players getting around 50%), and media revenue just doubles, that would quadruple $ available for player salaries; thus we could easily see 1 million dollar max with $250 k minimums.
Last edited by canadaball on 05/20/24 12:18 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
canadaball
Joined: 24 May 2013
Posts: 525
Back to top |
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8264
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/20/24 1:57 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
| There is no way to legally prevent players, or their family members, from receiving payments from entities other than the WNBA. |
Of course there are legal ways. If an act is forbidden in a legal, enforceable contract among parties, an aggrieved party can sue for damages or injunctions in the event of a breach of the contract by another party. More unlikely, laws can be enacted by legislative bodies, just as various states and the federal government have enacted or are considering enacting NIL laws at the college level. |
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24406
Location: London
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/20/24 2:43 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Also, some of the stuff mentioned in here is both against explicit league rules and thoroughly blatant. Valkyries players won't be working in the Warriors offices, for example. Meanwhile, there's a whole 'Diversity in Coaching Initiative' section in the CBA making hiring a player to the coaching staff of an affiliated team entirely legal under specific rules.
All of that said, I agree with ClayK that a lot of stuff in this area is hard to police, especially now billionaire owners and organisations are involved where sums that are completely inconsequential to them can double or triple a player's salary with ease.
This investigation seems entirely reasonable to me (although man did some people not like that suggestion when I expressed the sentiment on Twitter). A team that was punished for "violating league rules regarding impermissible player benefits" barely a year ago has just found a way to give all their players significant extra benefits. Maybe they're clever, or their success led to something unprecedented, or the LVCVA is just generous, but of course you look into it. Especially considering at least half the league's GMs/owners would've called to demand you look into it within five minutes of hearing about this deal. They may well find nothing, especially considering WNBA investigations don't always seem to be particularly extensive. They might just want to find out all the details of how it got set up so they can at least regulate payments like this in the next CBA. |
|
canadaball
Joined: 24 May 2013
Posts: 525
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/20/24 3:27 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Richyyy wrote: |
Also, some of the stuff mentioned in here is both against explicit league rules and thoroughly blatant. Valkyries players won't be working in the Warriors offices, for example. Meanwhile, there's a whole 'Diversity in Coaching Initiative' section in the CBA making hiring a player to the coaching staff of an affiliated team entirely legal under specific rules.
All of that said, I agree with ClayK that a lot of stuff in this area is hard to police, especially now billionaire owners and organisations are involved where sums that are completely inconsequential to them can double or triple a player's salary with ease.
This investigation seems entirely reasonable to me (although man did some people not like that suggestion when I expressed the sentiment on Twitter). A team that was punished for "violating league rules regarding impermissible player benefits" barely a year ago has just found a way to give all their players significant extra benefits. Maybe they're clever, or their success led to something unprecedented, or the LVCVA is just generous, but of course you look into it. Especially considering at least half the league's GMs/owners would've called to demand you look into it within five minutes of hearing about this deal. They may well find nothing, especially considering WNBA investigations don't always seem to be particularly extensive. They might just want to find out all the details of how it got set up so they can at least regulate payments like this in the next CBA. |
In every major USA sports league, the commissioner, under owner agreements, is given wide latitude to make decisions "for the good of the game". This is not necessarily a fair nor legal process. Remember when NBA commissioner David Stern vetoed the Chris Paul trade to the Lakers. The LV Aces continue to deny anything wrong with their Hamby dealings, but the W commissioner can be a dictator, and penalties were assessed. This new LVCA deal is just adding fuel to fire. Remember that the Aces with all their Olympians, and future HOF'ers have not one player in top 16 salary rank. This deal would see current third round pick Fair, for next 2 years, making almost $90k/yr more than Atlanta's superstar Rhyne Howard. I am confident that despite protestations of legality and the supposed complete non-involvement of the LV Aces (yeah right), the commissioner, as is her right, will quash this deal "for the good of the game".
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8264
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/20/24 3:53 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| canadaball wrote: |
| In every major USA sports league, the commissioner, under owner agreements, is given wide latitude to make decisions "for the good of the game". |
Good point. In addition to enforceable contractual provisions and legislation, many organizations and governments allow CEO's to enact rules via "executive actions," such as the uncountable number of executive orders that U.S. presidents have issued. I don't know if the Commissioner of the WNBA has that authority. |
|
bcdawg04
Joined: 12 Apr 2016
Posts: 582
Location: Seattle
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/20/24 4:29 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| canadaball wrote: |
| Richyyy wrote: |
Also, some of the stuff mentioned in here is both against explicit league rules and thoroughly blatant. Valkyries players won't be working in the Warriors offices, for example. Meanwhile, there's a whole 'Diversity in Coaching Initiative' section in the CBA making hiring a player to the coaching staff of an affiliated team entirely legal under specific rules.
All of that said, I agree with ClayK that a lot of stuff in this area is hard to police, especially now billionaire owners and organisations are involved where sums that are completely inconsequential to them can double or triple a player's salary with ease.
This investigation seems entirely reasonable to me (although man did some people not like that suggestion when I expressed the sentiment on Twitter). A team that was punished for "violating league rules regarding impermissible player benefits" barely a year ago has just found a way to give all their players significant extra benefits. Maybe they're clever, or their success led to something unprecedented, or the LVCVA is just generous, but of course you look into it. Especially considering at least half the league's GMs/owners would've called to demand you look into it within five minutes of hearing about this deal. They may well find nothing, especially considering WNBA investigations don't always seem to be particularly extensive. They might just want to find out all the details of how it got set up so they can at least regulate payments like this in the next CBA. |
In every major USA sports league, the commissioner, under owner agreements, is given wide latitude to make decisions "for the good of the game". This is not necessarily a fair nor legal process. Remember when NBA commissioner David Stern vetoed the Chris Paul trade to the Lakers. The LV Aces continue to deny anything wrong with their Hamby dealings, but the W commissioner can be a dictator, and penalties were assessed. This new LVCA deal is just adding fuel to fire. Remember that the Aces with all their Olympians, and future HOF'ers have not one player in top 16 salary rank. This deal would see current third round pick Fair, for next 2 years, making almost $90k/yr more than Atlanta's superstar Rhyne Howard. I am confident that despite protestations of legality and the supposed complete non-involvement of the LV Aces (yeah right), the commissioner, as is her right, will quash this deal "for the good of the game". |
Out of fairness and "the spirit of the rules," maybe she will quash this deal. I'm not going to hold my breath. The commissioner is a big fan of the "superteam" storyline, and I think the league is happy to prop up the Aces and Hammon.
Let's not forget that the Aces' denial of any wrongdoing regarding "their Hamby dealings" goes well beyond the impermissible benefits - they also feel they did nothing wrong in making her feel bullied when they confronted her for getting pregnant so soon after signing her contract extension. Hammon doesn't think she said anything wrong to Hamby. That is a storyline the league hates.
|
|
Richyyy
Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 24406
Location: London
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/20/24 5:05 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Good luck taking $1.2m out of the pockets of players without finding something illegal about it. No chance. At an absolute bare minimum they'd find an interpretation of a rule that had been broken. |
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8264
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/20/24 7:27 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I believe what is being investigated is a breach of sections 1(a) and 1(b) of Article XV of the CBA, entitled "CIRCUMVENTION". I will quote the relevant parts of that Article except I will omit, for readability, a lot of unnecessary words by ellipses. I've also bolded two words.
*************************
ARTICLE XV
CIRCUMVENTION
Section 1. General Prohibitions.
(a) It is the intention of the parties that the provisions agreed to herein, including . . . those relating to the Salary Cap . . . [and] the Rookie Scale . . . be interpreted so as to preserve the essential benefits achieved
by both parties to this Agreement. Neither the Players Association or . . . any . . . player . . . shall enter into any agreement . . . or undertake
any action or transaction which is . . . designed to serve the purpose of
defeating or circumventing the intention of the parties as reflected by all of the provisions of this Agreement.
(b) It shall constitute a violation of Section 1(a) above for a Team . . . to enter into an agreement or understanding with any sponsor or business partner or third party under which such sponsor, business partner or third party pays or agrees to pay compensation for basketball services (even if such compensation is ostensibly designated as being for non-basketball services) to a player under Contract to the Team.
*******************************
As I read the reports, the contracts are between the LVCVA and each individual player. That may allow the contracts to escape a violation of section 1(b) because that section only prohibits certain contracts between third parties and the "Team".
The more likely violation is of section 1(a), which applies to contracts between a third party and any "player". The argument would be that the contracts between the players and the LVCVA are "designed to serve the purpose of
defeating or circumventing the intention of the parties" with respect to, at least, the Salary Cap and the Rookie Scale. |
|
mercfan3
Joined: 23 Nov 2004
Posts: 19823
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/20/24 9:06 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I mean, at its core, this is an endorsement deal. The WNBA can’t strip those.
So I would imagine though, the company likely has to show how each player is being used.
Again, this is why a hard cap is stupid. We have WNBA fans seriously suggesting 100,000 in players pockets is bad for the game. And this happens bc we’re suspicious of player contracts.
_________________
“Anyone point out that a Donald Trump anagram is ‘Lord Dampnut’”- Colin Mochrie
|
|
canadaball
Joined: 24 May 2013
Posts: 525
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/20/24 9:30 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| mercfan3 wrote: |
I mean, at its core, this is an endorsement deal. The WNBA can’t strip those.
So I would imagine though, the company likely has to show how each player is being used.
Again, this is why a hard cap is stupid. We have WNBA fans seriously suggesting 100,000 in players pockets is bad for the game. And this happens bc we’re suspicious of player contracts. |
Other than MLB, the other major leagues operate with some form of hard cap. Total player compensation (as % of league revenues) is negotiated by union and owners, so the main purpose is to ensure an even playing field, which btw, is same reason there is a yearly draft. Looking at the NFL, NBA, and NHL, seems a success. No one is arguing for WNBA players to make less $, but it seems awfully obvious to me that this LVCA proposal will corrupt competitiveness, by giving an even greater edge to a team already found guilty last year of subverting the salary cap.
|
|
canadaball
Joined: 24 May 2013
Posts: 525
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/20/24 10:22 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
I believe what is being investigated is a breach of sections 1(a) and 1(b) of Article XV of the CBA, entitled "CIRCUMVENTION". I will quote the relevant parts of that Article except I will omit, for readability, a lot of unnecessary words by ellipses. I've also bolded two words.
*************************
ARTICLE XV
CIRCUMVENTION
Section 1. General Prohibitions.
(a) It is the intention of the parties that the provisions agreed to herein, including . . . those relating to the Salary Cap . . . [and] the Rookie Scale . . . be interpreted so as to preserve the essential benefits achieved
by both parties to this Agreement. Neither the Players Association or . . . any . . . player . . . shall enter into any agreement . . . or undertake
any action or transaction which is . . . designed to serve the purpose of
defeating or circumventing the intention of the parties as reflected by all of the provisions of this Agreement.
(b) It shall constitute a violation of Section 1(a) above for a Team . . . to enter into an agreement or understanding with any sponsor or business partner or third party under which such sponsor, business partner or third party pays or agrees to pay compensation for basketball services (even if such compensation is ostensibly designated as being for non-basketball services) to a player under Contract to the Team.
*******************************
As I read the reports, the contracts are between the LVCVA and each individual player. That may allow the contracts to escape a violation of section 1(b) because that section only prohibits certain contracts between third parties and the "Team".
The more likely violation is of section 1(a), which applies to contracts between a third party and any "player". The argument would be that the contracts between the players and the LVCVA are "designed to serve the purpose of
defeating or circumventing the intention of the parties" with respect to, at least, the Salary Cap and the Rookie Scale. |
Article XV has some interesting clauses. Consider section 5: Production of Tax Materials.
In any proceeding to enforce Section 1 or 2 above, the Arbitrator shall have the
authority, upon good cause shown, to direct any Team, Team Affiliate, or player to produce any
tax returns or other relevant tax materials disclosing income figures for the player (non-income
figures may be redacted), or disclosing expense figures by the Team or Team Affiliate (nonexpense figures may be redacted), which materials shall not be released to the general public or
the media and shall be treated as strictly confidential by all parties.
Seems to me this makes any investigation of under the table payments fairly easy. Just demand players produce their income tax returns. Given statements, at the time, that no player, other than Hamby, was even questioned, I doubt this happened last year.
Section 2 features this interesting clause: (c) A violation of Section 2(a) or 2(b) above may be proven by direct or
circumstantial evidence, including, but not limited to, evidence that a Standard Player Contract
or Team Marketing and Promotional Agreement, or any term or provision thereof, CANNOT RATIONALLY BE EXPLA
INED in the absence of conduct violative of Section 2(a) or 2(b). The foregoing
sentence shall not limit the nature or character of the evidence that may be proffered or that,
consistent with any applicable rules of evidence, may be admitted in any proceeding conducted
in accordance with the procedures set forth in this Agreement.
Proof, beyond a reasonable doubt, is not required. Circumstantial evidence and inferences can be enough. I would start with the LV Aces consistently way underpaying every key player.
There is one other important point that the media has been ignoring. Last year's Hamby investigation resulted in a finding, presumably by independent arbitor, that the Aces utilized "impermissible benefits". LV has denied all. This means one side is most definitely lying. Who do u believe?, and, further, how can one accept any statements/denials from such a bunch of apparent cheats and liars?
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 67103
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/21/24 9:13 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| If the Aces have injuries players will be fighting hard to get a hardship contract with them
_________________
I'm sick and tired of the stories that you always tell
Shakespeare couldn't tell a story that well
See, you're the largest liar that was ever created
You and Pinocchio are probably related
Full of criss-crossed fits, you lie all the time
Your tongue should be embarrassed, you're a threat to mankind
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11207
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/21/24 9:15 am ::: |
Reply |
|
As has been pointed out, any kind of serious enforcement would result in $1.2 million being taken from players. Who's going to support that?
The players? No chance, because other players will conceivably then be denied the opportunity to circumvent the cap, er, take advantage of endorsement deals.
The owners? Some of them, but again, we don't know who owns the league. 42% is owned by the NBA, and it's unclear if owners of teams in both get to "vote" twice. If so, those owners are rich enough to want to circumvent the cap, er, supply endorsement deals, and will not support any penalties. 16% is owned by somebody we don't know, but my sense would be that, if they invested $75 million, they don't really care about this pocket change.
The fans? Do they want the players paid less? Or do they prefer poorer players and a more balanced league?
And then there's the litigation factor. So the owners, whoever they are, decide to hammer the Aces and Kelsey Plum loses $100,000. She claims she does work for the agency, and goes to court. That's just the kind of publicity the league needs.
Or everyone could agree the salary cap is too low and just close their eyes until the new CBA is agreed on.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8264
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/21/24 10:27 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| mercfan3 wrote: |
| I mean, at its core, this is an endorsement deal. |
Whoever heard of an endorsement deal where some third party with a product or service to sell offered every member of a team endorsement money? And everyone the same amount, whether All-Star or rookie? It doesn't smell like a legitimate endorsement deal to me, but I don't know what precedents the league has already allowed.
In addition, the third party here is the city of Las Vegas. What exactly are all the team members endorsing? In the video of the team meeting where the chair of the LVCVA announced the money offer, he said all the players had to do to get the money was "play basketball." The press reports mention something to the effect that the players will also get Las Vegas gear to wear.
| mercfan3 wrote: |
| We have WNBA fans seriously suggesting 100,000 in players pockets is bad for the game. |
If every player in the league could get this bribe money equally, there may not be a problem. But only the Aces players get it. That surely gives the Aces an unfair competitive advantage in hiring and retaining free agents and other contracted players. Unfair team advantage via a circumvention of the CBA is surely one of the legal issues.
There was some suggestion somewhere that rich owners could open their wallets to provide similar monetary enhancements. I believe it's quite clear that the league or teams, or any of their owners, cannot do so under the CBA. It would have to be a legitimate commercial endorsement deal under the CBA by a total third party. |
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11207
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/21/24 11:00 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| mercfan3 wrote: |
| I mean, at its core, this is an endorsement deal. |
Whoever heard of an endorsement deal where some third party with a product or service to sell offered every member of a team endorsement money? And everyone the same amount, whether All-Star or rookie? It doesn't smell like a legitimate endorsement deal to me, but I don't know what precedents the league has already allowed.
In addition, the third party here is the city of Las Vegas. What exactly are all the team members endorsing? In the video of the team meeting where the chair of the LVCVA announced the money offer, he said all the players had to do to get the money was "play basketball." The press reports mention something to the effect that the players will also get Las Vegas gear to wear.
| mercfan3 wrote: |
| We have WNBA fans seriously suggesting 100,000 in players pockets is bad for the game. |
If every player in the league could get this bribe money equally, there may not be a problem. But only the Aces players get it. That surely gives the Aces an unfair competitive advantage in hiring and retaining free agents and other contracted players. Unfair team advantage via a circumvention of the CBA is surely one of the legal issues.
There was some suggestion somewhere that rich owners could open their wallets to provide similar monetary enhancements. I believe it's quite clear that the league or teams, or any of their owners, cannot do so under the CBA. It would have to be a legitimate commercial endorsement deal under the CBA by a total third party. |
It seems to me it would be extremely easy to modify this particular deal to make it satisfy all the provisions. Different payments could be made to different players, with spouses, siblings or cousins getting payments to make up the difference.
And future deals could be structured to avoid any conflicts.
And I don't think players who are already getting under-the-table payments are going to complain, nor will those who think they might. (And it would be pretty annoying to any player getting these kinds of payments for someone else in the league to complain loudly enough to take money right out of their pockets.)
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
hyperetic
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 5414
Location: Fayetteville
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/21/24 12:16 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Just a sidenote kind of question, did the Vegas people try to go through the league first or just took it upon themselves? Wouldn't it have been easier to deal with the league first? |
|
canadaball
Joined: 24 May 2013
Posts: 525
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/21/24 12:21 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| mercfan3 wrote: |
| I mean, at its core, this is an endorsement deal. |
Whoever heard of an endorsement deal where some third party with a product or service to sell offered every member of a team endorsement money? And everyone the same amount, whether All-Star or rookie? It doesn't smell like a legitimate endorsement deal to me, but I don't know what precedents the league has already allowed.
In addition, the third party here is the city of Las Vegas. What exactly are all the team members endorsing? In the video of the team meeting where the chair of the LVCVA announced the money offer, he said all the players had to do to get the money was "play basketball." The press reports mention something to the effect that the players will also get Las Vegas gear to wear.
| mercfan3 wrote: |
| We have WNBA fans seriously suggesting 100,000 in players pockets is bad for the game. |
If every player in the league could get this bribe money equally, there may not be a problem. But only the Aces players get it. That surely gives the Aces an unfair competitive advantage in hiring and retaining free agents and other contracted players. Unfair team advantage via a circumvention of the CBA is surely one of the legal issues.
There was some suggestion somewhere that rich owners could open their wallets to provide similar monetary enhancements. I believe it's quite clear that the league or teams, or any of their owners, cannot do so under the CBA. It would have to be a legitimate commercial endorsement deal under the CBA by a total third party. |
It seems to me it would be extremely easy to modify this particular deal to make it satisfy all the provisions. Different payments could be made to different players, with spouses, siblings or cousins getting payments to make up the difference.
And future deals could be structured to avoid any conflicts.
And I don't think players who are already getting under-the-table payments are going to complain, nor will those who think they might. (And it would be pretty annoying to any player getting these kinds of payments for someone else in the league to complain loudly enough to take money right out of their pockets.) |
The anticompetitive aspects are what make this LVCA proposal atrocious. In general sports leagues are particularly harsh and vigilant about any attempts to subvert the salary cap. As indicated in above CBA quotes, the W investigators are granted broad authorities (how often are employees ever required to produce their personal tax records without court order???). I highlighted the clause that says a team/player can be found guilty of circumvention simply by fact that there is no other "rational" explanation that makes sense. Point is this is not a court of law.
Concern about LV players losing out on $100k/yr extra overlooks 2 items. (1) As I have indicated, everyone knows the WNBA salary scale is going to explode after next year. It explains why virtually every player (non rookie scale) is avoiding a contract for 2026 and beyond; nobody wants to repeat the Syl Fowles mistake in signing max multiyear deal under old CBA, which cost her over $100k/yr. Point is this $100k/player will look like chicken feed very soon. (2) It is particularly ironic that concern is being voiced about Aces' players losing this $100k windfall, when so many of them, in aggregate, have taken many hundreds of thou less than their market value over last few years, presumably with no compensation. I mean, if the Aces are to be believed (highly suspect given their track record of lying in the Hamby affair)) why should anyone worry about players who willingly accept their own salary underpayments? Remember this is sport, as the Aces sadly know, where careers can end in a flash. There is a long history in sports of rich/famous players taking less than max salaries so their teammates can get paid well and team stays under cap, but are we to assume that players like Stokes, Jackie Young, Hamby (last year) and Clark are all trust funders unconcerned with their financial future in a dangerous sport?
Last edited by canadaball on 05/21/24 12:45 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
Silky Johnson
Joined: 29 Sep 2014
Posts: 3359
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/21/24 12:39 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| Whoever heard of an endorsement deal where some third party with a product or service to sell offered every member of a team endorsement money? And everyone the same amount, whether All-Star or rookie? It doesn't smell like a legitimate endorsement deal to me, but I don't know what precedents the league has already allowed. |
Well, it was not identified as an endorsement deal, but as a sponsorship. I don't know enough legalese to know what the difference is, but I'd like some sort of explanation as to why you think this sponsorship should be based on basketball performance. From my point of view, this is like if me and my piddly little AS applied for a job as a cashier at Trader Joe's, and a person with a PhD also applied for the job, and we both got hired, I wouldn't expect the PhD to have a higher starting salary than me, just because they appear to be ridiculously overqualified. What you did outside of Trader Joe's doesn't matter, at that point: we're both fucking cashiers.
The LVCVA is offering to pay $100K to the Aces players for a job that does X. If all 12 players do X, no more and no less, why should any of them be entitled to more than the rest of them?
_________________
Professional Hater. The Baron of #HateHard
My team no longer exists, so I'll have to settle for hating yours.
|
|
Luuuc
#NATC
Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 21962
Back to top |
| Posted: 05/21/24 1:42 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
The aspect of competitive advantage in recruiting that the Aces get from deals like this occurring is not ideal for the league, but all players getting the same amount is something I like a lot about this deal.
But man ... the small margin between landing on the final roster, and being the final cut, just became worth a whole lot more money in Vegas. 2025 training camp is gonna be seriously competitive.
_________________
Thanks for calling. I wait all night for calls like these.
|
|
|
|
