CBA Talk

[LogGrad98]

I personally don’t smoke but the marijuana rule has been so dumb since it’s inception.

Exactly. Same in society. Yet another stupid AF issue that had far-reaching and highly damaging outcomes due to puritanical Christian zealotry.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

So not sure it was discussed... but listening to Nate Duncan talk about a few things. I would think our draft picks are now more valuable...Reasons:

- It appears you can now trade picks only 6 years out... not 7... This is a big deal as it removes a lot of potential inventory from the market between just taking that option off the table and the Stepien rule... might remove like 25% or more of the tradeable pick from the market.

- You can now extend rookie deals 5 years without it being the max.

- They limited the ways teams above the tax can add salary. Rookies and rookie extensions would be one of those ways.


Overall this is pretty good imo... Say you own no other teams picks... and own your own picks... now you can only offer a maximum of 3 firsts in a mega trade. So now it really will be like the OKC's, Utah's and NO's of the worlds in on the super trades.

 

[KqWIN]

The 140% extension rule will likely impact us. Maybe not with our own players, but making it more difficult to pry guys away during free agency. Less guys will hit free agency now.

I really wish the NBA would come up with something better than "you can now pay them more" in regards to teams being able to keep their own players. The side effect of this is that it now costs teams more to keep their players and thus more difficult to build a team around them. Less important for teams willing to go into the tax, but very punishing for teams like the Jazz who will torch draft capital to get away from the draft. I think the "homegrown" increase should not count against the cap. Then teams can pay their own players more without it being more punishing.

 

[NUMBERICA]

So not sure it was discussed... but listening to Nate Duncan talk about a few things. I would think our draft picks are now more valuable...Reasons:

- It appears you can now trade picks only 6 years out... not 7... This is a big deal as it removes a lot of potential inventory from the market between just taking that option off the table and the Stepien rule... might remove like 25% or more of the tradeable pick from the market.

- You can now extend rookie deals 5 years without it being the max.

- They limited the ways teams above the tax can add salary. Rookies and rookie extensions would be one of those ways.


Overall this is pretty good imo... Say you own no other teams picks... and own your own picks... now you can only offer a maximum of 3 firsts in a mega trade. So now it really will be like the OKC's, Utah's and NO's of the worlds in on the super trades.

I need to do more research but my understanding is that teams over the tax specifically cannot trade picks 7 years out.

In any event, I’m good with it.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I need to do more research but my understanding is that teams over the tax specifically cannot trade picks 7 years out.

In any event, I’m good with it.

I was half listening so may have missed that part.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I really wish the NBA would come up with something better than "you can now pay them more" in regards to teams being able to keep their own players. The side effect of this is that it now costs teams more to keep their players and thus more difficult to build a team around them. Less important for teams willing to go into the tax, but very punishing for teams like the Jazz who will torch draft capital to get away from the draft. I think the "homegrown" increase should not count against the cap. Then teams can pay their own players more without it being more punishing.

Giving teams more tools to extend their own players isn’t necessarily paying them more though. Those extensions may turn out to be bargains still. Just need as many tools as possible. If you have the tools to offer an extension that is fair and the player declines… then you can know whether or not you should move them. Avoid losing them for nothing.

I wish they would have gone farther with the percentage of salary increase to like 160%.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Overall I’d say the changes are fairly positive for us. Should limit some teams that are more capable of spending… should also allow us more tools to keep our best players. We will see when all the actual info comes out what it looks like.

 

[KqWIN]

Giving teams more tools to extend their own players isn’t necessarily paying them more though. Those extensions may turn out to be bargains still. Just need as many tools as possible. If you have the tools to offer an extension that is fair and the player declines… then you can know whether or not you should move them. Avoid losing them for nothing.

I wish they would have gone farther with the percentage of salary increase to like 160%.

I think you would always want the option to pay more, but there is a weird dynamic that if the money is available the player will want all of it. It can create a grey area situation that can works against the homegrown team. It's debatable as to whether or not the supermax has truly helped teams trying to retain their players while also building good teams around them. I think having the extra bonus not count against the cap makes it much better for the teams trying to resign their players + build a team around them and the player still gets the money. It would have been super helpful to the Jazz, for example, if that additional money only they could give to Gobert did not count against the cap.

If the "advantage" is purely going to be the ability to spend more money, it's always going to benefit the teams that can pay more money more. I do kinda wonder if the league wants it to be this way, however. The extra punitive luxury tax penalties, for example, were sold as a way to help small market teams but that absolutely worked in favor of the big spending teams.

 

[SoberasHotRod]

It feels like the overall consequence of the new CBA will be more money distributed to role players which in consequence means less money for stars.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I think you would always want the option to pay more, but there is a weird dynamic that if the money is available the player will want all of it. It can create a grey area situation that can works against the homegrown team. It's debatable as to whether or not the supermax has truly helped teams trying to retain their players while also building good teams around them. I think having the extra bonus not count against the cap makes it much better for the teams trying to resign their players + build a team around them and the player still gets the money. It would have been super helpful to the Jazz, for example, if that additional money only they could give to Gobert did not count against the cap.

If the "advantage" is purely going to be the ability to spend more money, it's always going to benefit the teams that can pay more money more. I do kinda wonder if the league wants it to be this way, however. The extra punitive luxury tax penalties, for example, were sold as a way to help small market teams but that absolutely worked in favor of the big spending teams.

The Supermax is another story and I actually agree with you. The additional amount of money shouldn't count against the cap.

I just think the more options you have available to you the better chance you have of retaining your most important talent. For a small or medium market that is huge. Just don't want a Gordon Hayward situation where a guy walks for nothing. There are other ways they could address it but they would prohibit player movement... so this route is easier.

Its more about the OG Anunoby's, Dejounte Murray's and maybe the Lauri's of the world. Not sure 140% helps those extension happen now... but it will be closer to getting it done and those would likely be bargains... gives the player and team security.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

It feels like the overall consequence of the new CBA will be more money distributed to role players which in consequence means less money for stars.

Kinda seems that way with the exception increases... also with the mega taxpayers losing exceptions maybe those role players go for the money with smaller market teams.

Will be interesting to see all the unintended consequences.

 

[KqWIN]

The Supermax is another story and I actually agree with you. The additional amount of money shouldn't count against the cap.

I just think the more options you have available to you the better chance you have of retaining your most important talent. For a small or medium market that is huge. Just don't want a Gordon Hayward situation where a guy walks for nothing. There are other ways they could address it but they would prohibit player movement... so this route is easier.

Its more about the OG Anunoby's, Dejounte Murray's and maybe the Lauri's of the world. Not sure 140% helps those extension happen now... but it will be closer to getting it done and those would likely be bargains... gives the player and team security.

So my dumb *** thought this 140% increase was the supermax.

For extensions....yeah I'm totally with you. I don't know even know why there is a cap on this. The fact that you have to wait to give a guy the contract he's earned until he hits FA is a dumb CBA mechanism.

 

[One Brow]

I wonder if teams will start playing a guy just for the first six minutes of a game just so they can count it as playing.

Sent from my SM-G986U using JazzFanz mobile app

That will give the fans of the game 6 minutes that they otherwise wouldn't get, which is the supposed goal of the 65-game rule.

 

[fishonjazz]

That will give the fans of the game 6 minutes that they otherwise wouldn't get, which is the supposed goal of the 65-game rule.

Would also really expose the current system of resting guys who could very easily play. I know its something we all know is already happening but it would look much much more blatant if teams started playing guys a couple minutes in a game just to give them a "game played" stat. might make fans get more vocal in complaining about the resting of players and maybe lead to something putting an end to it somehow.

 

[MT Steve]

I wonder if teams will start playing a guy just for the first six minutes of a game just so they can count it as playing.

Sent from my SM-G986U using JazzFanz mobile app

I actually don't think this will be an issue.

Players care a lot about their per-game stats, and playing only 6 minutes a game even a handful of times will tank those numbers.

 

[NUMBERICA]

I actually don't think this will be an issue.

Players care a lot about their per-game stats, and playing only 6 minutes a game even a handful of times will tank those numbers.

Boom.

 

[fishonjazz]

I actually don't think this will be an issue.

Players care a lot about their per-game stats, and playing only 6 minutes a game even a handful of times will tank those numbers.

Thats very good point. Would be funny to see Kawhi averaging 7 points point and 2 rebounds per game.

 

[TheStormofWar]

- It appears you can now trade picks only 6 years out... not 7... This is a big deal as it removes a lot of potential inventory from the market between just taking that option off the table and the Stepien rule... might remove like 25% or more of the tradeable pick from the market.

That would explain why I just saw Ainge with a bag of blow and gaggle of folks in suits and ladies/gentlemen of the night rolling past in a limo. That's a super-benefit for Utah in the short term.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I believe the MLE can be used as a trade exception now… interesting if true.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I believe the MLE can be used as a trade exception now… interesting if true.

Heard Zach Lowe mention it iirc