What About Now, Though?
Adam Silver and the NBA keep making the same offer hoping for a different outcome.
Nate Bargatze has a comedy bit where he talks about how little he knows about computers.
If I send an e-mail and it says the file is too big, I don’t know what to do. My best guess is I try to resend it. That’s what I try to do.
You know how dumb that is.
The computer is like “no”.
And I go “what about now, though?”
Reading these four lines may not make you laugh. It is only when Bargatze tells the story that you will find it funny. Timing is everything in comedy!
The joke also won’t be funny if we try to explain why you should laugh. Nevertheless – for the story I want to tell – I need to be clear why this comedy bit works (beyond Bargatze’s amazing way to tell a story). Computers don’t just suddenly change their mind about what they think is possible.
It is a very different story for human beings. At least, this is what the NBA seems to believe about WNBA players.
NBA commissioner Adam Silver said a few days ago that WNBA players will get a “big increase” in salaries in their new collective bargaining agreement but pointed to “absolute numbers” as the way to measure that growth as opposed to share of revenue.
“I think share isn’t the right way to look at it because there’s so much more revenue in the NBA. I think you should look at absolute numbers in terms of what they are making. They are going to get a big increase in this cycle of collective bargaining and they deserve it.”
To be clear, WNBA players are getting less than 7% of league revenue now (as we noted in the New York Times). The NBA (which owns more than 60% of the WNBA) has never paid the men they employ in the NBA this poorly. Back in 1983 – when NBA revenue was a bit less (in real terms – or adjusted for inflation!) than WNBA revenue will likely be next year – the NBA was happy to give the players 57% of league revenue. Even back in the 1950s – when the NBA’s real revenue (again adjusted for inflation) – was less than 10% of WNBA revenue today, the NBA gave 40% of its revenue to its players. This has never been about how much revenue the WNBA is earning. This has always been about how Adam Silver and the NBA owners have decided to treat WNBA players.
This story is told in Slaying the Trolls.
For here I want to note that back on October 10th – on the day the WNBA Finals concluded – Annie Constabile of Front Office Sports reported the following:
According to multiple sources with direct knowledge of negotiations, the WNBA’s latest proposal does not include a supermax salary at or exceeding $1 million in the first year of the deal. The league’s proposal, according to those sources, includes a supermax salary closer to $850,000 and a veteran minimum hovering around $300,000 in the first year of the proposal.
As one can see, this proposal is again in absolute terms. The WNBA – and its NBA overlords – were not offering a share of revenue back on October 10th.
If we go back to the beginning of the WNBA season, we see the same story. ESPN reported the following back in May:
One team source said it’s possible max salaries could reach $1 million, which would be an increase of approximately 300% from the current $249,244 supermax and would imply a salary cap in the range of $4 million to $5 million per team.
In that same article, we see the following from Nneke Ogwumike (the president of the player’s union):
“No player has not talked about salary,” Ogwumike said of her conversations with other players about the new CBA. “But it’s not just about the number. I think it’s about the system, you know, creating a new structure around salary -- one that doesn’t limit us the way it has in the past.” Specifically, players want to share in the gains of owners as the league grows.
So, let’s recap.
The NBA and/or its representative said they want to increase WNBA salaries in absolute terms before the season starts. The players responded, they wanted a share of revenue.
When the season ended, the NBA and/or its representative said they want to increase WNBA salaries in absolute terms. The players, though, have made it clear they want a share of revenue.
And now in the past few days, Adam Silver has reiterated the NBA’s position about an absolute increase in salaries. And once again, the WNBA players insist they want a share of revenue.
Yes, it very much appears that Adam Silver is acting like Nate Bargatze sending an e-mail.
Silver keeps making essentially the same argument. The players keep offer the same error message. Rather than changing what he is doing, though, Silver seems to be saying:
“What about now, though?”
Yes, the Bargatze version is quite a bit funnier!
One wonders how long the Silver and the NBA will keep trying this bit. It does seem so much easier for the NBA to
believe the WNBA has the same future as the NBA (because it is increasingly clear – given escalations in revenues in franchise values – this is true!)
simply agree to give the WNBA players 50% of all basketball related income. And this includes all revenue every owner of the league earns, not just revenue that is given to WNBA team owners.
Yes, it is that simple.
And a far better outcome that just imitating a Bargatze bit (not matter how good Bargatze tells the story!).
If a revenue sharing agreement was reached now (13 teams) would it decrease as more teams (18 by 2030) are added due to more teams sharing the media revenue? Or should the negotiation not have a fixed percent of revenue? Or maybe base the percent of revenue share off what would take place with 18 teams. Also, and I am thinking in terms of team cap not max and min salary, if the W went to 14 or 15 players on a team, that would stretch the cap further. In a time of rapid expansion, maybe have a fixed salary that approximately reflects a particular % of revenue share.