As I've mentioned before, in the NBA's superstars, the players have distinct leverage over the owners, and for them to move forward the NBPA has to recognize this fact and use it. Nobody goes to a basketball game to watch the owner (except maybe in LA or Dallas), or even to watch bench players.
It's the stars they comes to see, and always has been since the days of George Mikan, and unlike the NFL, putting on games with replacement players won't cut it for the owners.
In order to win, the players need to do two things:
- Earn money to neutralize the owner's leverage.
- Put the squeeze on the owners by severely reducing the value of their NBA assets.
As I've proposed earlier, an 80 or 96 man league, set in Las Vegas, and playing a 28 game schedule + playoffs is the way to go. A few things need to be borne in mind:
- After expenses, *all* revenues go to the players & the NBPA (or whichever organization replaces it), and not a percentage.
- Most of the NBA's revenue comes from two sources: merchandising and TV, and these are the easiest kinds of deals to set up. For superstars, who could now take a cut of that revenue that they generate, this could be a very attractive proposition.
- By playing in arenas that already exist, the NBPA would be able to leverage a much smaller expense base, making the start-up cost fairly manageable.
- A short season allows the NBPA to make a deal with the owners, and salvage what's left of the season.
Now, there are issues that the players and their representatives themselves have to address:
- Fair revenue sharing. Players who aren't invited to the tournament need to be fairly compensated. Strictly speaking, this isn't an issue after decertification, but it's the right thing to do, and it will curtail scab players returning to the NBA.
- Fair revenue sharing. How to split revenue between the superstars and everyone else. It's an issue right now, because many superstars like Dwayne Wade don't feel like their compensation reflects the money they're generating for the NBA.
- How to resolve endorsement conflicts. Bear in mind that for companies like Nike & Adidas, active players are far more valuable. In order to combat any NBA retribution, it might be wise for these companies to gang up into a neutral group.
- If this goes on for a couple of years, what happens to veteran players, when they decide to retire? Players like Duncan and Nash only have a small window before they're gone. This is the NBA's real long term advantage: the ability to cultivate and market new stars, although what the NCAA does will act as a cover in this case.
