Pacers fighting two wars, praying for allies on either

May 10, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indiana Pacers are fighting a financial war on two fronts.

Today, consultant Rob Hunden will come in to tell the city’s Capital Improvement Board about the economic impact that Conseco Fieldhouse and the Indiana Pacers have on downtown.

I’m sure Pacers officials are hoping Hunden comes up with a report that details a massive positive impact generated by this team and this facility; and more importantly, generated by this team in this facility.

Hunden, who now works out of Chicago, formerly worked for the Indianapolis Bond Bank under then Mayor Stephen Goldsmith. He has wide ranging experience in the hotel, hospitality, tourism and convention industries.

That meeting is today at 3 p.m. at the Indiana Convention Center. Hopefully the findings will contain some meaningful analysis.

Meanwhile, the Pacers’ front office is watching closely as National Basketball Association executives begin to formulate their plan for negotiating a new collective bargaining agreement with the players.

Team owners looking to reduce costs in the next round of negotiations with the NBA Players Association are proposing serious reduction in rookies’ salaries. As much as a 30 percent reduction in rookies’ first-year pay is being proffered by owners, and even bigger cuts in years two through four.

The NBA’s collective bargaining agreement with players expires June 30, 2011. So the time to get something done is nearing fast. That can’t come soon enough for the Pacers and other NBA teams.

The Pacers have lost near $30 million each of the last two seasons, and they’re not alone. NBA Commissioner David Stern said the league’s teams have collectively lost $200 million each season from 2005 to 2009, and another $400 million during the most recently completed season.

During a public address at this year’s All-Star weekend in Dallas, Stern said players’ salaries must come down significantly.

Under the new collective bargaining agreement he is forwarding, they would. The first pick of the 2011 NBA draft will earn a first-year salary of $5.3 million—unlike the NFL, most of it guaranteed. Under the NBA’s proposal, that same player would earn $3.76 million. It’s still mostly guaranteed.

Stern is also recommending salary increases during a players’ first four years of only 2 percent. That’s far, far below what most players get now—about 7.5 percent during the first year and a whopping 26 percent to 80 percent during years three and four.

Rookies aren’t the only players likely to take a salary cut. Overall, Stern and team owners want to reduce players’ salaries by as much as 40 percent, and NBA consultant Marc Ganis said one of the league’s biggest problems is what is commonly referred to as “dead money.”

Dead money is earned by players who are past their prime but still taking in huge paychecks due to the natural progression of pay under the NBA’s guaranteed contract system—and a trade system which requires teams to exchange players of equal contracts.

Let's put that 40 percent salary reduction in context. The NBA has a salary cap, but it's a soft cap. Team's can and do exceed that cap regularly. The Pacers last year paid out $66.7 million in players' salaries. A 40 percent reduction would theoretically mean a $26.7 million annual savings for the Pacers. In case you've lost track, that savings corresponds very nicely to the amount the Pacers said they lost in each of the last two seasons.

Not surprisingly, NBA Players Association boss Billy Hunter has rejected the owners’ proposal like a weak shot in the lane. Hunter is supposed to come up with a proposal of his own, though no timeline has been given for that.

If the Pacers are going to remain in Indianapolis, they’re telling city officials they need $15 million annually to run Conseco Fieldhouse.

But even that won’t be enough. To erase that $30 million annual deficit, they’ll also need serious concessions from the players’ union.

Seeking taxpayers’ support for Fieldhouse operations on one front, and concessions from an unyielding union on the other.

In the end, you have to wonder where the Pacers’ allies in this war will come from.
 

ADVERTISEMENT
  • The need for some sort of change to the current agreement at Conseco seems obvious. If Indy tells the Pacers to leave, then we will have to pay for running Conseco without a major tennant.
    Anthony, from what you have heard, would the Pacers be willing to let the CIB take over running Conseco? I have heard that talk, but the Pacers wanting $15 million to run it and the City taking it over in lieu of the $15 million are two different things.
  • more attention needs to be given to salaries
    I'm not sure why more people aren't focusing on the need to reduce NBA players' salaries. This is the league and its teams' problem, and they're passing it onto the taxpayers. Thank goodness for another taxpayer bailout.
  • Pacers
    25% minimum accross the board salaary cuts for all personnel connected to the NBA - no exceptions. If not, the players should saddle up their greed ponies and can expect to ride the NBA down the trail of bankruptcy with no return.

    Then who funds their bling-bling, tattoo fetish, and their lavish whore-mongering life styles?

    Hmmmmmm..........
  • I don't think the public will buy it
    I don't think the public is going to buy a study paid for by the CIB. Especially one done by a former underling of Mayor Goldsmith.
  • I don't think the public will buy it
    I don't think the public is going to buy a study paid for by the CIB. Especially one done by a former underling of Mayor Goldsmith.
  • agreed and agreed
    I couldn't agree with NBA Guy any more. Hunden has many conflicts of interest in this thing. "Greed ponies," I like that one Berwick Guy.

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. These liberals are out of control. They want to drive our economy into the ground and double and triple our electric bills. Sierra Club, stay out of Indy!

  2. These activist liberal judges have gotten out of control. Thankfully we have a sensible supreme court that overturns their absurd rulings!

  3. Maybe they shouldn't be throwing money at the IRL or whatever they call it now. Probably should save that money for actual operations.

  4. For you central Indiana folks that don't know what a good pizza is, Aurelio's will take care of that. There are some good pizza places in central Indiana but nothing like this!!!

  5. I am troubled with this whole string of comments as I am not sure anyone pointed out that many of the "high paying" positions have been eliminated identified by asterisks as of fiscal year 2012. That indicates to me that the hospitals are making responsible yet difficult decisions and eliminating heavy paying positions. To make this more problematic, we have created a society of "entitlement" where individuals believe they should receive free services at no cost to them. I have yet to get a house repair done at no cost nor have I taken my car that is out of warranty for repair for free repair expecting the government to pay for it even though it is the second largest investment one makes in their life besides purchasing a home. Yet, we continue to hear verbal and aggressive abuse from the consumer who expects free services and have to reward them as a result of HCAHPS surveys which we have no influence over as it is 3rd party required by CMS. Peel the onion and get to the root of the problem...you will find that society has created the problem and our current political landscape and not the people who were fortunate to lead healthcare in the right direction before becoming distorted. As a side note, I had a friend sit in an ED in Canada for nearly two days prior to being evaluated and then finally...3 months later got a CT of the head. You pay for what you get...

ADVERTISEMENT