What's new
By:

What do Utah, Portland, Indiana, Phoenix, Charlotte, New Orleans, OKC all have in common?

You forgot Sacramento, Orlando, Atlanta, Minnysota, Miwaukee, Cleveland after lebron, and Memphis after Gasol.
 
Colton has a good idea.

Bigger max deals.
Franchise tag (1 per team)
And go back to a shorter first round of the playoffs for more upsets.

That will increase parity.
 
green said:
Colton has a good idea.

Bigger max deals.
Franchise tag (1 per team)
And go back to a shorter first round of the playoffs for more upsets.

That will increase parity.
Click to expand...

Those upsets can happen now in the 2nd round.

LBJ has been to the finals 7 times in a row but only has won 3. GSW is an anomaly. Curry injury made him underpaid. The Salary cap increasing 40% after Thompson's and Green's deals meant they were underpaid too. How often is a team lucky enough to have all 3 of their best players on cheap contracts. Without that happening KD never goes to Oakland.
 
I really like the idea of not having an individual player max, only a hard cap for the full roster. How much is Kevin Durant or LeBron James worth at that point? I'm sure a team would offer those players 90% of their cap, because that's just how much of an impact they have on winning.

Superstar teams can spike ratings in the short term, but it also alienates all of the hard-core fans that relentlessly root for their favorite/local team. Why should any team in the NBA aside from Cleveland and GSW be genuinely trying to win a title right now? Everyone should be planning for 3-4 years down the road, when LeBron is too old and GS has broken apart. Unless MAJOR injuries strike, no other teams really have a chance.
 
Cappy_Smurf said:
Yep. They need to prevent high level FAs from leaving without compensation. I don't think it even needs to be a designated tag. Any player who made the all-star team or all NBA team should qualify. Maybe an even steeper price for a designated franchise player.

With the cap leveling out, it should solve a good part of the problem. Players talk about taking pay cuts, but once these teams start paying the repeater tax, we'll just see how much of a pay cut it really is. I think players and owners are going to have a very different definition of what qualifies as a pay cut.
Click to expand...

The best thing they could do is remove the stupid revenue sharing max profit limitation and also re-implement the luxury tax sharing pool (the new CBA changed the LT pool to a pool used for league purposes as decided by who the hell knows who, and created a new sharing fund from BRI). That would allow small market teams to load up cash for a few years and then spend like crazy at the right time.

Greg Miller said his family will never go into the LT under the current deal. I think that might change if he were receiving another $10 or $20 million from the LT for a few seasons.
 
green said:
Yeah, the NBA screwed up by allowing that huge cap jump.
Click to expand...

They (the league HQ) didn't have any choice. It wasn't a matter of allowing it. They saw it coming and tried to persuade the players' union to ease it in more gradually (while still keeping the total payout the same; i.e. all players would get a salary bump), but the players' union said no.
 
AlaskanAssassin said:
I really like the idea of not having an individual player max, only a hard cap for the full roster. How much is Kevin Durant or LeBron James worth at that point? I'm sure a team would offer those players 90% of their cap, because that's just how much of an impact they have on winning.
Click to expand...

Yes, I've said probably for 20 years that that's the number one thing the league can do to help small market teams. There's no way (or at least it's seriously hard) a team like Utah can compete if their best player (e.g. Hayward) is getting paid the same amount as players like LeBron and Durant.
 
franklin said:
Greg Miller said his family will never go into the LT under the current deal.
Click to expand...

He's not in charge any more, and for that matter that was before the Jazz got placed into a trust that requires all profits to be funneled back to the team. So I think there's actually a better-than-even chance that the Jazz got into the luxury tax sometime in the next couple of seasons.
 
Crocodile Dante said:
I like the idea of the franchise tag. If you sign my player i get you first round draft pick next year no matter what. If you dont own a pick next year it will be the following year etc. (if you have some one elses pick the previous team will get the lower of those picks)

Look what parity has done in the NFL. It makes every year fun because any team has a chance to win.
Click to expand...

I don't love it for this reason: Players like Hayward aren't looking to join the 6ers or Kings. It's the Lakers, Warriors, Celtics, Spurs, Heats of the world that will be poaching players. So if this rule was already in effect, and Gordon bolts to the Celtics, our compensation for losing our Franchise Player is the #28 pick in the draft?
 
colton said:
They (the league HQ) didn't have any choice. It wasn't a matter of allowing it. They saw it coming and tried to persuade the players' union to ease it in more gradually (while still keeping the total payout the same; i.e. all players would get a salary bump), but the players' union said no.
Click to expand...

I believe the players union wanted to start the increase a year early and the owners said no, in which case I'd probably blame the owners more for shooting themselves in the foot. Either way, I think there's blame to go around on each side.
 
franklin said:
The best thing they could do is remove the stupid revenue sharing max profit limitation and also re-implement the luxury tax sharing pool (the new CBA changed the LT pool to a pool used for league purposes as decided by who the hell knows who, and created a new sharing fund from BRI). That would allow small market teams to load up cash for a few years and then spend like crazy at the right time.

Greg Miller said his family will never go into the LT under the current deal. I think that might change if he were receiving another $10 or $20 million from the LT for a few seasons.
Click to expand...

Things have already changed since Greg said that, with the team going into a trust. Locke said the other day that they will for sure pay the tax when the time comes. If Hillward re-signs, we will know sooner than later.
 
Crocodile Dante said:
I like the idea of the franchise tag. If you sign my player i get you first round draft pick next year no matter what. If you dont own a pick next year it will be the following year etc. (if you have some one elses pick the previous team will get the lower of those picks)

Look what parity has done in the NFL. It makes every year fun because any team has a chance to win.
Click to expand...

As long as that team is from New England.
 
♪alt13 said:
Those upsets can happen now in the 2nd round.

LBJ has been to the finals 7 times in a row but only has won 3. GSW is an anomaly. Curry injury made him underpaid. The Salary cap increasing 40% after Thompson's and Green's deals meant they were underpaid too. How often is a team lucky enough to have all 3 of their best players on cheap contracts. Without that happening KD never goes to Oakland.
Click to expand...

Yeah but there is so much money that we are already seeing the other side, as in KD opting out to free up money. I guessed this would happen, that a player realizes he can survive on 100 mill over 5 years instead of 110 mill over 5 years if it helps bring in another, or retain the current all-stars.

If players knew that if they were "the man" on a team it would be the difference between a 100 mill deal vs a 20 mill salary deal it will drive star players apart to be on a team where they can be "the man". If Curry knew that since KD already had that 100 mill contract he could garner at best a 50 mill deal or something in GS, he would most likely leave to be "the man" somewhere else. As it is now, KD takes a few mill less, Curry opts to take a slightly lower salary than he could get, and they keep a devastating core together for years.
 
jazzman12 said:
I don't love it for this reason: Players like Hayward aren't looking to join the 6ers or Kings. It's the Lakers, Warriors, Celtics, Spurs, Heats of the world that will be poaching players. So if this rule was already in effect, and Gordon bolts to the Celtics, our compensation for losing our Franchise Player is the #28 pick in the draft?
Click to expand...

That could be modified. If the pick falls 26-30 (or if the team in question is one of the 4 conference finalists) then you get the next 5 picks, 21-25 get the next 3, 15-20 next 2, in the lottery get the next year's pick no restrictions. Also these picks can all be traded.
 
jazzman12 said:
I don't love it for this reason: Players like Hayward aren't looking to join the 6ers or Kings. It's the Lakers, Warriors, Celtics, Spurs, Heats of the world that will be poaching players. So if this rule was already in effect, and Gordon bolts to the Celtics, our compensation for losing our Franchise Player is the #28 pick in the draft?
Click to expand...
Better than no pick at all doe
 
fishonjazz said:
Better than no pick at all doe
Click to expand...

Yeah this has been frustrating over the years. How many times has this franchise let someone walk with nothing to show for it? It is like the desperate girlfriend dragging on her boyfriend's shirt tails as he leaves. Better to throw his **** out on the lawn.
 
The NBA needs to start my idea for the playoffs next season. Trams 7-10 play a best of 3 for the final 2 playoff spots.

It adds 8-12 playoff games($). Those games would be competitive. It gives young teams some experience in a playoff series. There would be interest from fans of the top teams because they play the winner. It gives the players that need it most a week of rest. It gives middling teams and their players national exposure.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Yeah but there is so much money that we are already seeing the other side, as in KD opting out to free up money. I guessed this would happen, that a player realizes he can survive on 100 mill over 5 years instead of 110 mill over 5 years if it helps bring in another, or retain the current all-stars.

If players knew that if they were "the man" on a team it would be the difference between a 100 mill deal vs a 20 mill salary deal it will drive star players apart to be on a team where they can be "the man". If Curry knew that since KD already had that 100 mill contract he could garner at best a 50 mill deal or something in GS, he would most likely leave to be "the man" somewhere else. As it is now, KD takes a few mill less, Curry opts to take a slightly lower salary than he could get, and they keep a devastating core together for years.
Click to expand...

Maybe but in a league like that James would win every year. Your only shot at beating him is to have a better team. Your"the man" is not as good as "the King".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top