Warriors have highest playoff mov at 17ppg, so what's next ?

[Malta]

And what type of player do you think they will spend that extra $15-20 million on?

I'm all for the max being eliminated, but I don't think a hard cap is necessary

I think a hard cap + something where the DPE is whatever the hell a team wants to pay for 1 guy could work provided that 1 guy doesn't affect the rest of the cap.


It would prevent the situation we have now, KD wouldn't be turning down a $60 million a year offer from the Celtics if the Warriors could only offer $20-30 million. It would basically spread out the talent and still allow the non stars to get paid, basically by having 30 maxes available around the league. The Warriors would still have their core, so would a lot of other teams, but you wouldn't end up with two top 5 guys joining up via free agency.

 

[CarltonJunior]

I will say getting a hardcap will only make NBA owners richer. Who do you want getting the money, more black families or white owners?

If anything they should pick up the MLB's system and the owners give the GM's a budget to work with before a hard cap.

 

[Houston911]

And what type of player do you think they will spend that extra $15-20 million on?

I'm all for the max being eliminated, but I don't think a hard cap is necessary

Tough to say without actually doing a mock draft and assigning salaries

Regardless of who they get with 15-20 mil, it's clearly a better option than paying Conley and Durant the same thing

 

[Houston911]

I think a hard cap + something where the DPE is whatever the hell a team wants to pay for 1 guy could work provided that 1 guy doesn't affect the rest of the cap.


It would prevent the situation we have now, KD wouldn't be turning down a $60 million a year offer from the Celtics if the Warriors could only offer $20-30 million. It would basically spread out the talent and still allow the non stars to get paid, basically by having 30 maxes available around the league. The Warriors would still have their core, so would a lot of other teams, but you wouldn't end up with two top 5 guys joining up via free agency.

Explain your setup

Why do you want a max to not count against the teams cap?

Give me a hypothetical roster

 

[Illuminatos]

unless you're a flashy player you won't get respect on here either that or putting up 20 and 10. most coli members don't understand the impact that draymond has on the game. it's not easy to see like a cross over or a layup.

 

[ManBearPig]

We have never seen anything like this team before though.

Imagine the 96 Bulls getting Karl Malone in the off season

Or the 2001 Lakers getting a prime T-Mac in the off season.

You don't think those teams could have won 4 in a row?

to me, this like David Robinson joining the Suns after losing to them in the post season in 93

or Shaq joining the Bulls instead of the Lakers in that 96 off season

 

[Goat poster]

to me, this like David Robinson joining the Suns after losing to them in the post season in 93

or Shaq joining the 96 Bulls

TRUTH.

Those are perfect examples.

The Bulls would have won atleast 5 in a row with Shaq.

 

[Malta]

Explain your setup

Why do you want a max to not count against the teams cap?

Give me a hypothetical roster

That's the only way you'd get the players union to sign off on a hardcap, is if the stars still get what they get and the middle tier players get what they're used to. You have to have a system where the middle guys are still getting overpaid, if a team owner wants to break the bank on a franchise level talent then that should be up to them. Limiting it to 1 per team means that a team like the Knicks or Lakers can't just put a $400 million roster out there every year.


I don't really need a hypothetical roster, next year the Thunder are going to have $110 million in salary with Westbrook making just under $30 million a year. You remove his salary from the team and that squad has inexplicably paid $80 million out without so much as a 2nd all-star on the team, if he were making $60 million on the open market the team would be even more horrific if they had to deal with a hardcap. His salary should be designated as a franchise player, with no cap on how much the team wants to pay him, but it should not count against their hardcap. Or at the very least it should be a percentage of the cap regardless of how much the team owner is paying him.

 

[tremonthustler1]

Explain your setup

Why do you want a max to not count against the teams cap?

Give me a hypothetical roster

You pay a player whatever but it doesn't hurt the team's cap situation. Player gets paid. Team can still surround player with other talent.

 

[Houston911]

That's the only way you'd get the players union to sign off on a hardcap, is if the stars still get what they get and the middle tier players get what they're used to. You have to have a system where the middle guys are still getting overpaid, if a team owner wants to break the bank on a franchise level talent then that should be up to them. Limiting it to 1 per team means that a team like the Knicks or Lakers can't just put a $400 million roster out there every year.


I don't really need a hypothetical roster, next year the Thunder are going to have $110 million in salary with Westbrook making just under $30 million a year. You remove his salary from the team and that squad has inexplicably paid $80 million out without so much as a 2nd all-star on the team, if he were making $60 million on the open market the team would be even more horrific if they had to deal with a hardcap. His salary should be designated as a franchise player, with no cap on how much the team wants to pay him, but it should not count against their hardcap. Or at the very least it should be a percentage of the cap regardless of how much the team owner is paying him.

Meh

I'm not with the whole "2nd star" thing. It's 30 teams and less than 30 stars

 

[Primetime]

Unless the Spurs get gift wrapped a couple star players to join Kawhi and Pop (and it's prob not realistic to get a PG13 and CP3)... or New Orleans gets a third star, shooters, impactful role players, competent coach and a competent gm... so basically unless the Spurs and Hornets just merge franchises, i don't see anything out West that's going to mess with GState, even if KD were to take half the season off for shyts and giggles.

They achieved the idealized Heatles situation.

 

[Malta]

Meh

I'm not with the whole "2nd star" thing. It's 30 teams and less than 30 stars

There's not 30 stars, but team construction could be better and you'd also run into a situation where multiple very good players might be able to beat 1 star + average/good players.

 

[NkrumahWasRight Is Wrong]

They should take away the cap altogether

 

[Houston911]

There's not 30 stars, but team construction could be better and you'd also run into a situation where multiple very good players might be able to beat 1 star + average/good players.

Yeah

You'd have teams trying to win by depth

If you give them the designated player who doesn't count against the cap that makes it impossible

If Cleveland's designated player is LeBron and Toronto's is DeRozan, Toronto is fukked

Teams that have the best players should have less money to spend on supporting players....if you want more balance

 

[Malta]

Yeah

You'd have teams trying to win by depth

If you give them the designated player who doesn't count against the cap that makes it impossible

If Cleveland's designated player is LeBron and Toronto's is DeRozan, Toronto is fukked

Teams that have the best players should have less money to spend on supporting players....if you want more balance

Yeah something like that, basically the teams without the All-NBA guys could spend more than those that do.

It would lead to some interesting stuff too, where teams try and snipe young players they believe could be franchise players.