Speaker 1: Besides the Lakers and the Warriors. What teams do you
Speaker 1: think this deficits the most? And what teams do you
Speaker 1: think this benefits the most.
Speaker 2: I think the teams that can get kind of dinged
Speaker 2: by this a little bit are teams like the Celtics,
Speaker 2: the Bucks, teams that have been they've been in the
Speaker 2: tax but they're never been at the you know, the Warriors, Clippers,
Speaker 2: Lakers levels of the tax. So I think that's where
Speaker 2: seventeen point five million over the tax line, that's a lot,
Speaker 2: but it's not like crazy. Right now. I think we're
Speaker 2: sitting with six teams above that. So we may see
Speaker 2: those teams say, all right, we gotta let probably not
Speaker 2: one of the star guys, but we got to move
Speaker 2: on from one of these kind of mid mid range
Speaker 2: salary type players just to rebalance. We have flexibility because
Speaker 2: otherwise it's we're really locked into this roster. Teams that
Speaker 2: are maybe a little older, so like Dallas is slightly
Speaker 2: older with some parts of their roster, so like they're
Speaker 2: in a tricky spot. The Buck's definitely older with parts
Speaker 2: of their roster. They may look at it like Chris
Speaker 2: Middleton is gonna be a free agent, and they may say, hey,
Speaker 2: we resigned Chris Middleton to a four or five year
Speaker 2: max deal or anything close to that. This is it.
Speaker 2: This is our team for the next you know, several years,
Speaker 2: unless we make trades. And they may say, all right,
Speaker 2: you know he's had injury issues. Maybe they've seen something
Speaker 2: in his play where they're like where we'll be Okay,
Speaker 2: we'll go a different direction. So I think they're gonna
Speaker 2: be different. I think the teams that benefit it's the
Speaker 2: teams that I think have pretty promising young cores and
Speaker 2: then can add to to those guys here while they're
Speaker 2: still on the lower end salary wise. So I already
Speaker 2: mentioned Oklahoma City, but our landows in that boat, Houston
Speaker 2: and Detroit. If they can flip things, well, somebody's gonna
Speaker 2: get Victor Webbin Yama. That's like already a huge you know,
Speaker 2: add to your roster and you're gonna flip. The Spurs
Speaker 2: have generally been pretty smart in those situations, so they
Speaker 2: may be able to turn things around. So I think
Speaker 2: those teams that have pretty good young cores that you
Speaker 2: can see I can see that being a playoff core
Speaker 2: in the next couple of seasons because what they have
Speaker 2: the ability to do is go add talent to those
Speaker 2: groups before they get super expensive and fully lock into
Speaker 2: what they have now. So I think they're the kind
Speaker 2: of teams that will benefit a little bit here.
Speaker 1: Even if they tried to go after a big free
Speaker 1: agent and they didn't have the salaries to match.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think so because they think what you're gonna
Speaker 2: see in those like again, I keep using the Thunder
Speaker 2: as an example here, but it's because they think they're
Speaker 2: the best one in the league. Really good young players,
Speaker 2: pretty full roster, right. They don't have a ton of
Speaker 2: roster holes. It's not like going into this summer they
Speaker 2: have to fill ten roster spots. They really only have
Speaker 2: about two or three open roster spots. They're gonna have
Speaker 2: almost thirty million in cap space to do it with.
Speaker 2: So I think back to remember a few years ago
Speaker 2: when Philadelphia was like, all right, it's time to start winning.
Speaker 2: They went out and they signed j Reddick to a
Speaker 2: one year, nineteen million dollar deal. There was like, what
Speaker 2: a ridiculous overpay for JJ Reddick. Well, Philly looked at
Speaker 2: it and said, look, we only need like two guys.
Speaker 2: We have all this cap space. Let's give a whole
Speaker 2: bunch of money to JJ Reddick, who proved to be
Speaker 2: a really good fit, help them get into the postseason,
Speaker 2: and then that's how we're gonna do it. I think
Speaker 2: you're gonna see Oklahoma City say there's one guy that
Speaker 2: we really target, we think fits what we need, and
Speaker 2: they'll be able to go get that guy and they
Speaker 2: may be able to overpay him for a year or two.
Speaker 2: As long as you do it for a year or two,
Speaker 2: not the end of the world, because the NBA just
Speaker 2: moves so quickly with the way they'll turn over rosters.
Speaker 2: As long as you're not locking into a terrible deal
Speaker 2: for four or five years, you're gonna be fine. You'll
Speaker 2: be able to move on from it and get out
Speaker 2: of it quickly enough. So I think that's what you're
Speaker 2: gonna see as teams like that do those kind of
Speaker 2: things where it's like, all right, let's let's let's kind
Speaker 2: of go here, and I think you're gonna see some
Speaker 2: free agents. They're gonna look and say, oh, that team
Speaker 2: got one Minyalla, all right, I can be the guy. Now,
Speaker 2: me and him, we're now taking this team to the
Speaker 2: next level and to the playoffs and all that and
Speaker 2: a lot of these players they love nothing more than like, Hey,
Speaker 2: I'm the conquering hero who like you know, I wrote
Speaker 2: in here and you were awful and now we're a
Speaker 2: playoff team, you'll shower me, you know, with love, and
Speaker 2: it's yeah, you were a part of it. But there
Speaker 2: are other reasons too. But that's something that you know,
Speaker 2: we know, free agents love, especially if the money's basically
Speaker 2: the same just about everywhere for them.
Speaker 1: Yeah, like a veteran contract for someone who you think
Speaker 1: can be a table setter all while like what they
Speaker 1: with the thunder kind of gotten Chris Paul on a
Speaker 1: short term deal, kind of a deal. I am curious though,
Speaker 1: because this feels the most murky, and it feels the
Speaker 1: most murky in terms of conflicts of interest potentially, but
Speaker 1: also murky in terms of we don't really know now
Speaker 1: players are going to be current players are going to
Speaker 1: be able to invest in NBA and WNBA teams. But
Speaker 1: from what I kind of can gather that this is
Speaker 1: only happening through the NBA PA selected private equity firm, Like,
Speaker 1: what are the logistics of that?
Speaker 2: Yeah, it seems so. This is something I try not
Speaker 2: to speak too in depth about things I don't really understand.
Speaker 2: But I did a lot of asking because I was
Speaker 2: very confused on this because I was like, wait, so
Speaker 2: they're gonna because the way it initially came out was
Speaker 2: like they could get ownership stakes. And my initial question was,
Speaker 2: so if I play for the Lakers and I own
Speaker 2: three percent of the team and they trade me to
Speaker 2: the Rockets, what happens to my three percent? Like where
Speaker 2: does that go? And then I think, through conversations through
Speaker 2: subsequent reporting, my understanding is what's going to happen is
Speaker 2: it sounds like there's going to be portions kind of
Speaker 2: carved out of different places within the league as a
Speaker 2: whole and within the individual teams inclusive of the WNBA
Speaker 2: as well, where players will be able to say, hey,
Speaker 2: aportional what you're giving me in my next contract. It'll
Speaker 2: run through the through the NBPA, who will manage it
Speaker 2: as a collective, through whoever they choose to manage it.
Speaker 2: Probably no different than a lot of the ways are
Speaker 2: like four oh one, k's a run and those kind
Speaker 2: of things, But it'll be we've chosen them to run this,
Speaker 2: and then that's where it'll be. Hey, as long as
Speaker 2: we all keep doing what we should do. This should
Speaker 2: be a rising tide lifts all boat situation where yeah,
Speaker 2: the teams are gonna go up in value, they're gonna
Speaker 2: be better, but my stake in this is gonna go
Speaker 2: up too, And I have more of a stake, and
Speaker 2: I feel like more of a partner with the league
Speaker 2: and with the teams as opposed to just a contract
Speaker 2: employee where I'm just you know, all right, I'm under
Speaker 2: contract and this is what it is, it's gonna be.
Speaker 2: We can really push this up from here. So I
Speaker 2: think that's gonna be kind of how that works. I'm
Speaker 2: very curious to dive deeper into that when we get
Speaker 2: the actual CBA to understand it more fully.
Speaker 1: I am curious too, And obviously you probably don't know,
Speaker 1: but the first thing that comes to mind, outside of
Speaker 1: just what teams are going to be in that fund,
Speaker 1: is it going to be every team? What happens when
Speaker 1: teams get sold? Do they distribute that wealth across the
Speaker 1: ownership group? But also like how that affect the WNBA.
Speaker 1: Do we see the WNBA salary cap now explode and
Speaker 1: invest in more of these young and up and coming players. Specifically,
Speaker 1: you're watching players like Angel Reese and Kaitlin Clark bring
Speaker 1: in three and a half million viewers on TV. I
Speaker 1: guarantee you Kaitlin Clark's not gonna want to get paid
Speaker 1: Twitter and seventy thousand dollars on a super Max deal
Speaker 1: which he makes like quadruple vet in ni own money
Speaker 1: right now.
Speaker 2: Yeah, for sure. I think what we're going to see
Speaker 2: with the WNBA, and we've we're starting to see this
Speaker 2: happen little bits, like little incremental bits, is salaries are
Speaker 2: going to start creeping out more. I think we're also
Speaker 2: going to see probably expansion of the WNBA where there's
Speaker 2: going to be new franchises because the single thing, the
Speaker 2: biggest thing I hear is there's a ton of you know,
Speaker 2: really good players out there that are buried on these
Speaker 2: benches because there's so few WNBA teams in comparison. So
Speaker 2: what happens is I think you combine those two things.
Speaker 2: And I know one of the big that they be
Speaker 2: talking to different people within the NBA as kind of
Speaker 2: the governing body of the WNBA, if you will. One
Speaker 2: of the big things I've heard through them is we
Speaker 2: don't want WNBA players to have to go to Russia
Speaker 2: in the WNBA offseason to play. We want them to
Speaker 2: play in the WNBA, them play national team commitments just
Speaker 2: like NBA players do, and that's it. We don't want
Speaker 2: them having to play in two professional leagues just to
Speaker 2: be able to make a living. Like that's not where
Speaker 2: they want it to be. And I think EVENTUA will
Speaker 2: get there. And I think this is part of it.
Speaker 2: We've seen countless NBA players, especially more in the recent years,
Speaker 2: come out in support of the WNBA. So I think
Speaker 2: part of it is you're going to see them. Hey,
Speaker 2: why they got roped into this is I'm not just
Speaker 2: investing in the NBA. I'm investing in the WNBA, in
Speaker 2: the game of basketball as a whole.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm curious also about the the players who are
Speaker 1: now able to sign non gambling endorsement deals with sports
Speaker 1: betting companies. Makes sense of that for me.
Speaker 2: Yeah, this was one where I saw a lot of
Speaker 2: reaction where people were like, oh no, and it I
Speaker 2: saw a couple people tweeting like the Tony memes from
Speaker 2: Blue Chips, you know, of like you what do you
Speaker 2: mean you took money? You know, and it was you know,
Speaker 2: it was only one time coach, you know, and it's
Speaker 2: one time. And like, I think where this would be
Speaker 2: a problem is if player X you know, tweets out, hey,
Speaker 2: bet on me to get over twenty points tonight. That's
Speaker 2: where it's like, oh, that's shaky, right, because then it's
Speaker 2: because then is it going to be you know, the
Speaker 2: gambling company says, hey, you know, we took way too
Speaker 2: many people betting you over can you score nineteen? Just
Speaker 2: to make sure we're all okay here, Like, that's where
Speaker 2: it gets real messy. I think it's probably just gonna
Speaker 2: be hey, you want to bet bet with you know,
Speaker 2: this company, and that's just going to be the ext
Speaker 2: That's what I think it'll be. It maybe extends into
Speaker 2: you know, hey, you know I can't bet on the NBA,
Speaker 2: but I love to bet on you know, uh, the
Speaker 2: NFL or you know, well whatever it is, or you know,
Speaker 2: whatever it may be no games or whatever. Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 2: I think we're going to see things like that where
Speaker 2: it'll be a player will be into commercials for you know,
Speaker 2: one of the big companies, But it's not going to
Speaker 2: be specific to like, hey, bet on my team to
Speaker 2: win the championship or anything like that, because I think
Speaker 2: then you run into competitive integrity issues and all sorts
Speaker 2: of stuff. Then they don't think the NBA wants to
Speaker 2: be involved in.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I was curious about that too. Do you think
Speaker 1: there's a possibility we start seeing these quote unquote endorsements
Speaker 1: like almost like Manning cast type stuff where you've got
Speaker 1: like a Draft Kings has a Draymond Green and a
Speaker 1: Charles Barkley All Star Weekend second Screen experience, or maybe
Speaker 1: now fan duel sponsors, you know, the podcast p type
Speaker 1: of a thing. Yeah.
Speaker 2: I think we could see definitely things like that because
Speaker 2: I think the NBA realizes they're smart at the end
Speaker 2: of the day, and the MBPA. There's money to be made,
Speaker 2: so let's go make more of it, right, Let's go
Speaker 2: get our chunk of it. By Hey, if we can
Speaker 2: increase these things, and we can do that. I mean
Speaker 2: we're seeing in arenas all over the country, we're popping
Speaker 2: up these you know what you know we're gambling is
Speaker 2: legal sports books. It sounds like right on site where
Speaker 2: it's like, hey, you can make your bets here. And
Speaker 2: I know in the states where it's legal, there's all
Speaker 2: sorts of stuff being pumped into you know, hey, grab
Speaker 2: your phone and you'll make it bet on the game
Speaker 2: and those kind of things. So I think we're going
Speaker 2: to see them lean into this. I don't think it's
Speaker 2: going to be you know, man, this is a proliferation
Speaker 2: of a million guys, you know, go gamble. I think
Speaker 2: it'll be probably just a little bit of a slow burn,
Speaker 2: but eventually it's gonna get there, much like it has
Speaker 2: become over the last couple of years, where it's just
Speaker 2: becoming more and more ingrained in the everyday life of
Speaker 2: sports fans.
Speaker 1: I forgot to ask you this to circle back really
Speaker 1: fast about the ownership element, and we'll move forward on
Speaker 1: the award stuff. But is it possible with how we're
Speaker 1: seeing the ownership stake work that a Lebron James playing
Speaker 1: in the NBA could own an expansion team or a
Speaker 1: part of an expansion team.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's one of those things where right now I
Speaker 2: don't think think that's something they're set up to do.
Speaker 2: So we're gonna see if that's where this goes. My
Speaker 2: guess is this whole invest in the league is a
Speaker 2: gateway to direct ownership stakes in teams, and I think
Speaker 2: that maybe where this goes going forward. I mean, I
Speaker 2: think it was I'm going way back here, and you know,
Speaker 2: a completely different environment. But when like Magic Johnson came
Speaker 2: out of retirement, it'd give up his ownership stake in
Speaker 2: the Lakers because he was gonna play again and those
Speaker 2: kind of things. So that's where it becomes pieces of
Speaker 2: things like that where I think right now, now that's
Speaker 2: probably not They're trying to do it through this more
Speaker 2: general investment in the league as a whole. But I
Speaker 2: think this is the let's start here and then that'll
Speaker 2: be the gateway too. Eventually, Hey, you want to own
Speaker 2: a chunk of the team you're playing for, Yeah, we
Speaker 2: can make that work, and we can figure that out. Obviously,
Speaker 2: there's gonna have to be a lot of guardrails on
Speaker 2: that because you know, if you're tradable, if you sign
Speaker 2: somewhere else, what if you do this, because they're not
Speaker 2: gonna have somebody owning you know, Hey, I own three
Speaker 2: percent of seven different teams, Like, that's not gonna happen.
Speaker 2: But we'll see where that goes. And and I think
Speaker 2: that's a very interesting way to kind of, you know,
Speaker 2: build a different form of engagement into the franchise as
Speaker 2: a whole, because now you're again, you're you're not just
Speaker 2: an employee, You're you're you're part of it, right, You're
Speaker 2: you're part of the whole deal all the way through.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I want to talk about this because I think
Speaker 1: it's under discussed. The players now in this new CBA
Speaker 1: have to play at least sixty five games to be
Speaker 1: eligible for any NBA as as well as all NBA.
Speaker 1: So who wanted this?
Speaker 2: Yeah? I think this is probably one where collectively both sides,
Speaker 2: the NBA and MBPA heard the screaming about load management.
Speaker 2: And I think the biggest place that comes in is,
Speaker 2: you know, I'm based out of Orlando. It's the Orlando
Speaker 2: fan who bought tickets to see Lebron one time a
Speaker 2: year and I played last time. I'm not playing tonight.
Speaker 2: Right in Orlando, they get a lot of guys on
Speaker 2: back to backs because of Miami. They make the Miami
Speaker 2: Orlando trip and they're on one end or the other,
Speaker 2: and that's how it goes. So I think what we
Speaker 2: see in these positions is I think a lot of
Speaker 2: these these it just gets so loud that it was
Speaker 2: probably a we got to do something. Now I can
Speaker 2: tell the NBPA they've stood up and screamed from the rooftops.
Speaker 2: It's not the players. The players do not want to say, right,
Speaker 2: if they're healthy, they generally want to play. It's the teams.
Speaker 2: And they're not saying the teams are wrong in this,
Speaker 2: but it's the teams that are mostly making these decisions.
Speaker 2: And that's that's what I think also gets lost a
Speaker 2: little bit here is I think it's hard to right.
Speaker 2: The teams are the permanent part in your life as
Speaker 2: a fan, right, And that's a nice way of saying
Speaker 2: we root for laundry. But I think that's true to
Speaker 2: an extent of like, I'm always going to root for
Speaker 2: this team, and the players may change, so I'm not
Speaker 2: necessarily going to attach to the player. And now I
Speaker 2: think we're seeing different forms of fandom where some are
Speaker 2: attaching to a player, and then player changes teams, they
Speaker 2: follow right along with the new team. But I think
Speaker 2: what's happened here is the overall load management blame has
Speaker 2: fallen so much on the players, and I don't think
Speaker 2: that's necessarily there now. I think what the league's trying
Speaker 2: to do is say, hey, can we curb this because
Speaker 2: teams are now down to somewhere between twelve and sixteen
Speaker 2: back to backs per season, So sixty five games you
Speaker 2: want to see all the back to backs? One half
Speaker 2: of them, you're good, sit them out, you don't have
Speaker 2: to play, and you'll still qualify and still be eligible
Speaker 2: for postseason awards. I think it's more of and I'm
Speaker 2: very curious because all the reporting keeps coming with there's
Speaker 2: conditions around it. But what are those conditions? Like what
Speaker 2: does that mean? Is there like, well X amount of
Speaker 2: games that the team determines the player can't play, like
Speaker 2: those don't count. I don't know how that's gonna work,
Speaker 2: but it's one of those things I'm very curious to see, Like,
Speaker 2: you know, what happens, and we all know there's gonna
Speaker 2: be a massive uproar the first time somebody has a
Speaker 2: great season but only played sixty four games, and people
Speaker 2: are gonna absolutely lose their minds and they'll be you know, well,
Speaker 2: they were the real MVP or they were the real
Speaker 2: first team player. So I don't know, but I think
Speaker 2: this was a first attempt at Hey, let's try to
Speaker 2: get these guys on the court more often, and then
Speaker 2: we'll see how it comes together. I kind of have
Speaker 2: my doubts that's gonna be how it plays out.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and I saw that. I believe it was last night.
Speaker 1: Kawhi Leonard only played a half because he's playing ago, Yeah,
Speaker 1: two nights ago, because he was going to play on
Speaker 1: a back to back, so do you. And also remember
Speaker 1: Draymond Green, he came in for one possession to be
Speaker 1: there for Clay and then that obviously changed a lot
Speaker 1: of things for sports Better took who took Draymond Green
Speaker 1: unders because they heard whispers of this is that something
Speaker 1: that you think is how teams or players are going
Speaker 1: to try to skirt the rules.
Speaker 2: That's where I think the conditions may come in because
Speaker 2: the league doesn't want to turn it into a circus
Speaker 2: and a farce of like, hey, you know tonight fifteen
Speaker 2: star players checked in or started and then they all
Speaker 2: subbed out on the first whistle because it was just there. Now,
Speaker 2: like Drew Holliday did it last year. The Bucks put
Speaker 2: him in a game for I think it was like
Speaker 2: eight seconds or whatever. He played the tip, he committed
Speaker 2: a follow and to get out of there to earn
Speaker 2: a bonus because he needed to hit the games played
Speaker 2: threshold for his bonuses. Now that's cool on the Bucks part,
Speaker 2: because all it did was cost them a couple million
Speaker 2: bucks that they wouldn't have to pay out otherwise. So
Speaker 2: geel good on the Bucks for taking care of their guy.
Speaker 2: But I don't think the league and I don't think
Speaker 2: the Players Association either wants it to turn into a
Speaker 2: bunch of guys are on the core and then they're
Speaker 2: subbed out early. But I think what you may see
Speaker 2: is you may see, huh, why did so and so
Speaker 2: only play fifteen minutes tonight? And that may be what
Speaker 2: we see more of is because I think if it
Speaker 2: becomes a whole thing where we want to make sure
Speaker 2: player access still eligible for is you have awards, all right,
Speaker 2: Well we can't sell them out right away because if
Speaker 2: you play under X minutes, maybe that's one of the
Speaker 2: conditions it doesn't count or something like that, and you're
Speaker 2: just you know, subbed without an injury. We'll have to
Speaker 2: see or you know, if my worry is, if you
Speaker 2: start saying there's injury related conditions, we're gonna get back
Speaker 2: to the old days of up back spasms. They're they're
Speaker 2: out tonight, right, and that's that's not great either. So
Speaker 2: I'm kind of withholding judgment on all this until we
Speaker 2: see what all the details are, because it just seems
Speaker 2: this one seems like a little there's just got to
Speaker 2: be other stuff going on with this, because it just
Speaker 2: seems a little too cut and dry for me to
Speaker 2: be quite that simple.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'm very sus on it because it does feel
Speaker 1: like there's a lot of ways to get around it.
Speaker 1: I think Joel Embiid would have not made Defensive Player
Speaker 1: of the Year twice. I think Draymond as well Steph
Speaker 1: Curry All NBA. And do you think that this will
Speaker 1: obviously change How does this help teams in some way too,
Speaker 1: because they say to themselves, all right, well, we don't
Speaker 1: have to pay Jalen Brown super max because he's not
Speaker 1: an All NBA player, so we can resign him for X,
Speaker 1: Y and Z instead of being hamstrung to pay him
Speaker 1: forty million.
Speaker 2: Well that's where it's kind of become a major problem,
Speaker 2: and you'll have the MVPA screaming. Is if are were
Speaker 2: in game seventy eight of the season and oh man,
Speaker 2: he's almost there, All right, let's set him out or
Speaker 2: we're just not gonna play them, and you know the
Speaker 2: team will be well, that's a coach's decision and whatever
Speaker 2: it is, and if the minute the players like, well
Speaker 2: I'm not on board with this, you did it, so
Speaker 2: I'm not now eligible. That's part of why I have
Speaker 2: an issue with the any of the contract stuff being
Speaker 2: tied to awards, because I also don't like the fact
Speaker 2: that we're both media members. I don't like the fact
Speaker 2: that the media is the one who are determining what
Speaker 2: player contracts are like, it just feels weird to me.
Speaker 2: So I don't love that whole idea of this, And
Speaker 2: I think if you want to do that, there's ways
Speaker 2: you could do it that are slightly different, where maybe
Speaker 2: you know, you involve more people, you know. But anytime
Speaker 2: you start involving players and coaches, then there's agendas and
Speaker 2: all the voting stuff. And I've been in locker rooms
Speaker 2: with the All Star voting for the player vote, We're
Speaker 2: two guys who don't even play in r at the
Speaker 2: end of the bench like, hey, you vote for me,
Speaker 2: I'll vote for you. And that's why the player vote
Speaker 2: has kind of turned into a joke too. So I
Speaker 2: don't necessarily have a great fix for that, but it's
Speaker 2: just it. If we run into a games played thing
Speaker 2: where a guy gets sat to avoid hitting a threshold
Speaker 2: that would trigger a contract marker for him. That's gonna
Speaker 2: be a major issue. You're going to hear the screaming
Speaker 2: from the rooftops on that one.
Speaker 1: Do you think there's any chance that some of this
Speaker 1: changes before it gets ratified.
Speaker 2: I think there's a chance we could see some stuff tweaked.
Speaker 2: That's why, you know. I think their language in it
Speaker 2: was like we have a tentative agreement was very clear.
Speaker 2: I think there's a reason why, Well, if you made
Speaker 2: a tentative agreement on the wee hours of Saturday morning,
Speaker 2: like you could have presented it to the Board of Governors,
Speaker 2: presented it to the players by today. Right, we're recording
Speaker 2: this on Monday, and you could have had this whole
Speaker 2: thing buttoned up and done and you know, start printing
Speaker 2: the copies on Tuesday, and we haven't gotten there. Because
Speaker 2: I think it's very clear to me tentative agreement means
Speaker 2: there's still some stuff we're working through. We're all the
Speaker 2: big stuff, we're there, it's now it's details. We're down
Speaker 2: to some of those things. I think some of this
Speaker 2: stuff might even been floated out there as let's see
Speaker 2: what the reaction is within the league, within the fans,
Speaker 2: within the media, Let's see what some of the stuff
Speaker 2: out there is. And then oh, you know what that
Speaker 2: could tweak then a late version of whatever it was,
Speaker 2: and those kind of things. I just think that's, you know,
Speaker 2: being a little bit smart about how you play it.
Speaker 2: And the other thing is, I think we've all learned
Speaker 2: through the COVID years and I knew this from my
Speaker 2: prior career and doing contract negotiations, there's always a thing
Speaker 2: called the side letter, which is, hey, we all agreed
Speaker 2: to this, it's not going the way we want. Let's
Speaker 2: do a side agreement in an amendment and adndum, whatever
Speaker 2: whatever you want to call it, where we change whatever
Speaker 2: it is and we go in the league and the
Speaker 2: players Association has gotten very good through very unfortunate circumstances
Speaker 2: over the last several years of doing that, you know,
Speaker 2: when necessary, and being able to tweak their existing agreements
Speaker 2: rather than I feel like if this was a decade ago,
Speaker 2: it would have been Nope, it is what it is
Speaker 2: and that's it, and we're not changing it. Because they
Speaker 2: didn't have a good working relationship. That's one of the
Speaker 2: biggest things that's changed, m