Man the NBA salary cap is totally ludicrous.

[tremonthustler1]

they can still have a floor. I believe its like 90% of the cap right now. so say u give a floor of 80% of the cap. 80% of $80M is $64M. most teams are easily spending that much now.

90% of 90 mil is $81 mil

80% of 90 mil is $72 mil

even if your hard cap limit is $80, guess what's gonna happen if you leave max deals the way they are:

the MLE guy that you complain about that got $8 mil a year would get $12 mil instead. It does exactly what the NBA doesn't wanna see: jack up prices for literally everyone. Then when you have that player on your squad and you can't cut him and you can't trade him and you can't work around it by going over the cap, it's gonna hurt. And on top of that, everyone would have to be under the cap, so even if your scrub has an expiring, it means nothing, which means, less trades happen, which is one of your main complaints.

A hard cap only works when contracts are nonguaranteed.

 

[kingofnyc]

NBa has made a league thats impossible to make trades and where small market teams get penelaized for drafting well and are basically farm systems to the big market teams

its a catch 22
see these owners fukked themselves over
-most of this league are mid -to- small markets... if their the majority of the league why would they agreed to this system


what they should have done was make each team choose 1 player not to be counted / excluded form on their pay roll/salary
**obviously with rules around them like he has to be part of the team for 3years or some shyt**

so for instance.... when bron became a FA on the cavs -they could have offered a blank check
and if bron still left -he would be leaving crazy $$$ off the table & the team he joining have to fit him under their cap space & he wouldnt be eligible to be that off the pay roll player till his 3rd season with his new team

 

[FTBS]

NBa has made a league thats impossible to make trades and where small market teams get penelaized for drafting well and are basically farm systems to the big market teams

Totally agree. It's comical how ass backwards the system is. What's funny is that the draw of certain markets isn't even the money, it's the market itself. If the money is close and it all comes down to preference of course guys will pick MIA or LA or NY over MIL or CLE. The max salary has done more to hurt small market teams then it has to help it. If there was no max salary Bron would still be in Cleveland, Harden would still be in OKC, Dwight would still be in ORL.

 

[Hersh]

maybe they should allow a diff set of max contracts for ur original vs new one?

like maybe even 30 million and year diff.?

bron example.

cleve could give him 5 years @ 125 millio--- anyother max would b 90 million for 4 years

---

or make that extra year that ur og gives u not count against cap?

 

[tremonthustler1]

its a catch 22
see these owners fukked themselves over
-most of this league are mid -to- small markets... if their the majority of the league why would they agreed to this system

The system as constituted involves a luxury tax that gets kicked back and redistributed to the rest of the owners. As long as big markets continue to spend in abundance it's the gift that keeps on giving. Small markets get penalized in nearly every sport for doing well because it's tougher to afford them later. Now sure the luxury tax is harsher to a smaller market team, but it's also harsher to a team that spends more money. It's just a matter of who can withstand the hit more.

what they should have done was make each team choose 1 player not to be counted / excluded form on their pay roll/salary
**obviously with rules around them like he has to be part of the team for 3years or some shyt**

so for instance.... when bron became a FA on the cavs -they could have offered a blank check
and if bron still left -he would be leaving crazy $$$ off the table & the team he joining have to fit him under their cap space & he wouldnt be eligible to be that off the pay roll player till his 3rd season with his new team

2 problems:

easy loophole around this is to backload every contract so that your most expensive years don't court

also, if you had to choose one player to do that, wouldn't Miami have chosen Wade since he would have already been there and fit your requirements?

 

[tremonthustler1]

Totally agree. It's comical how ass backwards the system is. What's funny is that the draw of certain markets isn't even the money, it's the market itself. If the money is close and it all comes down to preference of course guys will pick MIA or LA or NY over MIL or CLE. The max salary has done more to hurt small market teams then it has to help it. If there was no max salary Bron would still be in Cleveland, Harden would still be in OKC, Dwight would still be in ORL.

If there was no max salary, conceivably any player could get any price they wanted. In other words, ANY player, not just the superstar could get a ridiculous amount. That's what caused the lockout prior to the last one. Once KG in his 3rd year could look at a $100 million dollar and be like shyt got real.

 

[FTBS]

If there was no max salary, conceivably any player could get any price they wanted. In other words, ANY player, not just the superstar could get a ridiculous amount. That's what caused the lockout prior to the last one. Once KG in his 3rd year could look at a $100 million dollar and be like shyt got real.

Kg is a special talent though. He was still developing but clearly special. The Luc Longleys of the world weren't sniffing that kind of money. Even the likes of Zo or Barkley or Dream or Ewing or Kemp or Hill weren't getting that type of bread. Beyond that KG got that money to re-sign in a small market. Under todays rules he prolly woulda been gone. The only way small markets can compete is financially and the current system puts too many limits on that.

 

[tremonthustler1]

Kg is a special talent though. He was still developing but clearly special. The Luc Longleys of the world weren't sniffing that kind of money. Even the likes of Zo or Barkley or Dream or Ewing or Kemp or Hill weren't getting that type of bread. Beyond that KG got that money to re-sign in a small market. Under todays rules he prolly woulda been gone. The only way small markets can compete is financially and the current system puts too many limits on that.

The Bryant Reeves of the world were. He got a $61.8 mil extension after his first 2 seasons and fell off the face of the Earth.

Under today's rules, it would come down to which owner has the most money. Glen paid him that money because a) he could and b) he felt he had to. In some instances, a small market owner may have a lot of money, but no one to spend it on. The biggest example of this (though I wouldn't consider them a small market) is Detroit. They'll have a lot of money, a promising PG, PF, and C, and more money than they know what to do with. Who will they attract with that money? your guess is as good as mine.

 

[mastermind]

The Bryant Reeves of the world were. He got a $61.8 mil extension after his first 2 seasons and fell off the face of the Earth.

Under today's rules, it would come down to which owner has the most money. Glen paid him that money because a) he could and b) he felt he had to. In some instances, a small market owner may have a lot of money, but no one to spend it on. The biggest example of this (though I wouldn't consider them a small market) is Detroit. They'll have a lot of money, a promising PG, PF, and C, and more money than they know what to do with. Who will they attract with that money? your guess is as good as mine.

Bryant Reeves was a good player until he got fat tho. I mean the year after he signed his extension, he had the best year of his career.

Jim McIlvaine signed a big contract but that contract was seen as bad when it was signed.

 

[FTBS]

The Bryant Reeves of the world were. He got a $61.8 mil extension after his first 2 seasons and fell off the face of the Earth.

Under today's rules, it would come down to which owner has the most money. Glen paid him that money because a) he could and b) he felt he had to. In some instances, a small market owner may have a lot of money, but no one to spend it on. The biggest example of this (though I wouldn't consider them a small market) is Detroit. They'll have a lot of money, a promising PG, PF, and C, and more money than they know what to do with. Who will they attract with that money? your guess is as good as mine.

Bad contracts will always be a part of any system. You will always have overpayed guys. The problem is that u basically force teams to overpay any guy resembling a superstar. Meanwhile the actual superstars get played. Reeves wasnt seeing anywhere near the money kg, shaq, or jordan were. Meanwhile lopez and hibbert are getting the same bread Bron got coming off his rookie deal. At least with the old system stars could garner their worth.

The current system actually works against its stated intention. Teams like OKC shouldnt have to sell a superstar like Harden purely because of the luxury tax. The Pistons situation actually supports my stance. They have all that money but they are limited in how they can spend it. CP3 would pass on 25-30 mil a year for 10 years from them? They cant offer that so really whats the point in having the cap space? There only option is to either overpay undeserving guys...see 2009 or just sit on it.

 

[tremonthustler1]

The current system actually works against its stated intention. Teams like OKC shouldnt have to sell a superstar like Harden purely because of the luxury tax.

If it were the way you'd think it should be, James Harden would be earning much more than what he's getting and thus, still make it tough for OKC to afford him since naturally, KD, Westbrook, and Ibaka would all be earning more as well.

If the CBA remained exactly the same, nothing would change because while OKC may find it a little easier to pay Harden, LA would find it much easier to absorb crap contract after crap contract in order to get their superstars together, something an OKC couldn't do anyway.

The Pistons situation actually supports my stance. They have all that money but they are limited in how they can spend it. CP3 would pass on 25-30 mil a year for 10 years from them?

Only CP3 would have gotten a deal like that from the Clippers, though I get what you're saying.

 

[FTBS]

If it were the way you'd think it should be, James Harden would be earning much more than what he's getting and thus, still make it tough for OKC to afford him since naturally, KD, Westbrook, and Ibaka would all be earning more as well.

If the CBA remained exactly the same, nothing would change because while OKC may find it a little easier to pay Harden, LA would find it much easier to absorb crap contract after crap contract in order to get their superstars together, something an OKC couldn't do anyway.



Only CP3 would have gotten a deal like that from the Clippers, though I get what you're saying.

I'm not so sure Harden would be making so much more. It would all be a matter of negotiation and teams/agents actually having to think and do work. As long as you have a cap there will be limits. Baseball doesn't have a cap and you don't just see everybody and their mama making ARod money. I'm pretty sure things wouldn't get too out of hand in basketball with a cap in place. I can guarantee that Harden, or actually his agent, wouldn't have gone into OKC's offices and said "Give me what KD makes." But when you have guys like Lopez getting the max why shouldn't he ask for it.

We've been told that the purpose of the current set up is to limit the pillaging of small markets by big markets but it's actually limiting the small markets ability to hold on to and or attract talent and big markets are still doing there thing with minimal fukks being given so what's the point really?

 

[KingJudah]

The NBA is a microcosm of a corporatist/socialist economy where there is price fixing and all that. Small market teams get frozen out indirectly .

 

[Loose]

If it were the way you'd think it should be, James Harden would be earning much more than what he's getting and thus, still make it tough for OKC to afford him since naturally, KD, Westbrook, and Ibaka would all be earning more as well.

If the CBA remained exactly the same, nothing would change because while OKC may find it a little easier to pay Harden, LA would find it much easier to absorb crap contract after crap contract in order to get their superstars together, something an OKC couldn't do anyway.



Only CP3 would have gotten a deal like that from the Clippers, though I get what you're saying.

should be an player exception on resigning your own players after a certain amount of years.

 

[FTBS]

should be an player exception on resigning your own players after a certain amount of years.

Should be an automatic exception for guys you draft and then it should kick in after 4 or 5 years for guys you acquire through other means.