By Mike Kahn
CBS SportsLine Executive Editor
Oct. 19, 1998

Even their buddy turned his back on them, so maybe the members of the National Basketball Players Association had better reconsider their position.

As

Related Links Feerick rules in favor of owners Players await owners' next move Lockout coverage: Timeline AUDIO: Both sides speak out NBA lockout columns: Alesia: Jordan can heal wounds Guest: Fans don't care about NBA Ryan: NBA does favor to fans Forum: Should either side relent in the negotiations?

the 111th day of the lockout came and left without a lot of fanfare, NBA commissioner David Stern and his deputy Russ Granik continued to be mystified by the lack of interest by the union in negotiating a new collective bargaining agreement.

The lines are clearly drawn, and when the percentage of basketball related income exceeded the benchmark 51.7 percent this past season - it came in at more than 57 percent -- the owners exercised their option to devise a new agreement.

The latest offer from the players includes a luxury tax and other proposals, none of which bring the number under 60 percent. In fact, their proposal still has the number reaching at least 63 percent -- which is 12 percent more than what caused this situation in the first place.

So now this.

Arbitrator John Feerick, who stunningly ruled to overturn the NBA's ruling on Latrell Sprewell at the beginning of the year, just said no to the union claim the 226 guaranteed contracts in the NBA should be honored during the lockout.

"Obviously, we're glad to have the ruling we got today," Granik said. "But we're trying to be realistic about it. It certainly eliminates a stumbling block, but it doesn't get us any closer to a new agreement if the players won't come to the bargaining table."

PHONE CALLS TO THE UNION WERE not immediately returned to CBS SportsLine, nor to the NBA, for that matter. Stern and Granik made it clear on a national teleconference how befuddled they have become by the inaction of executive director Billy Hunter and president Patrick Ewing. Stern sent them a letter Monday morning, prior to the ruling, further stating their position and desire to return to the bargaining table.

Hunter's written response: No bargaining will take place until after he returns from Las Vegas, where he is meeting with the players Thursday.

Sound preposterous? Of course. That means, a Friday meeting at the earliest, and if he doesn't get into it more quickly than Monday, it will be the end of next week, because the Board of Governors are meeting in New York Tuesday and Wednesday. At that time, the NBA will announce how many more regular-season games beyond the first two weeks will be canceled.

The latest ruminations about the situation have revolved around the possibility of the union decertifying. That would be great. Essentially, that would guarantee Stern, Granik and the owners would concede and cancel the entire season.

Instead of just sitting down and working out the numbers, which they originally agreed were too high anyway, they've played posturing games. The luxury tax nearly killed baseball, and isn't a good tool, despite the players' latest proposal.

"It's a place to start," union spokesman Dan Wasserman said.

NOT REALLY. WHY BOTHER AT 63 PERCENT when the 57 percent of this season is what sent nearly every team reeling? That's why the luxury tax proposal Granik took back to the union was even more ludicrous from the players' perspective. The whole notion wasn't going to work and they proved their point.

Granted, many of these owners are billionaires and there is plenty of certainty, the problems aren't of dire straits financially for more than a few teams. But that's not the point. Salaries are clearly escalating faster than revenue and it would be foolish not to throw a lid on it. Tickets already are out of sight for a middle-class family.

Stern said they are willing to make some concessions for those players who are free agents and wish to stay with their team -- hence the Larry Bird exception. And that's where the tax will work under certain guidelines. But there has to be plenty of return from the players and a way to keep the league's middle class from evaporating.

The players have lost more than $100 million worth of salaries with the cancellation of the first two weeks of the season. By next week, it probably will be another $50 million lost. And yet, Hunter was quoted Monday morning saying the players should be paid for games lost anyway, and that would be part of further negotiations.

When apprised of that statement on the conference call with the media, the usually unflappable Granik was clearly irritated.

"They lost the arbitration and the result is they're not entitled to get paid for games they did not play," Granik said. "That's over and I certainly don't see owners agreeing to pay players for games that weren't played and they lost revenue."

THAT LEAVES THEM NOWHERE. The likelihood of any productive meeting doesn't seem feasible for another 10 days or so. Stern and Granik agreed there is pressure to get this done, and are willing to do so any time. But it takes two parties to negotiate and only one seems interested at this point.

The owners want a hard cap and the players don't. That about sums it up. If there is no limit to salaries for superstars, then the rest of the players will suffer. Period.

"This union leadership has stymied us," Stern said. "We've been able to negotiate with every other executive director and president. We are unable to have any conversation about any negotiation right now. There's a situation where players are losing salary, proposals have clearly been stated. Obviously, if you increase the minimum salary, the veterans will make more rather than the minimum.

"It has to come from someplace, and it comes from the contracts at the very high end. I don't know how else to say that. We say that to the players and to owners, and we can't get any further."

There you have it. Not even winning the latest arbitration from Feerick could put a positive spin on the state of affairs for the NBA and its owners. Had he ruled in favor of the union, it would have galvanized the players. But how could he? Who gets paid during a work stoppage amid collective bargaining?

If you thought the pace of the game has been slowing down over the past few years, you were right. Unfortunately, the weight of it all has brought it down to a state it has never been before -- inertia.