Supermax clearly does not work. Franchise tag is a better tool

[Tr1boy]

OR a form of it, in order to prevent a key player from each team to easily walk away and form a super team

Suggestion

- A team gets to place a franchise tag on one player (through the offseason).  This tag can change from season to season . The tag can only change from start of preseason until end of preseason. 

- A franchise tag player that is an RFA/UFA after season ends, that signs with another team...the team losing the RFA/UFA must get compensated 3 1st round picks or any player (as long as it is not a Franchise Tag player)  + 1st round pick

- Current 4 and 5 year max structure still remains. But if franchise tag player chooses to remain with current club, he can make additional 15 percent from current 5 year max
- Teams can choose to trade franchise tag players prior to the situation above

What this would mean if it existed prior to Durant signing with GSW

1.  GSW would not be the super team that was/it is.  OKC likely would pry Draymond Green or Klay Thompson +1st

2. Cavs would have received compensation for Lebron signing with the Lakers.  Likely choose 3 1st round picks, hampering Lakers chances to trade for vet at the trade deadline


Before you think this is unfair for individual players... like crybaby KD, who doesn't care about anyone but himself.  Yes this tag would work because it would increase competition around the league.  Unfortunately , it would also hurt the Celtics depth if this rule was in place prior to Hayward signing, but it would be better for the league ..... which ultimately is a better product and  be much more competitive

[footey]

I think the spirit of what you propose is fair game. I doubt it gets any traction in the next CBA contract negotiations.

 But the point remains that small market teams are at a huge disadvantage if players they draft can leave them as free agents without some form of meaningful compensation. It should be the goal of every league to have as much competitive balance as possible.

[tonydelk]

I love the franchise tag.  It gives more power to teams and compensation versus losing a FA for nothing.  If they get tagged then pay them way more then they would make on the open market.  That's fine to franchise a player but they will get a ton of dough if they do.  Now on the other hand that's fine you want to leave but we are getting something for you if you do.  Fair for both parties.  Let the tag be for a max of two straight years for the same player.  No more super teams unless you give up capital for it.

[Tr1boy]

I think the spirit of what you propose is fair game. I doubt it gets any traction in the next CBA contract negotiations.

 But the point remains that small market teams are at a huge disadvantage if players they draft can leave them as free agents without some form of meaningful compensation. It should be the goal of every league to have as much competitive balance as possible.

The current supermax rule was implemented by the league I believe

and if you ask the players union, I bet half if not more are not a big fan of the supermax because only one player can get it while the rest of the contracts suffer

This said, there could be some pushback (especially from guys like KD/Lebum) ...but ultimately for a better balanced league it would work better

[CelticsPoetry]

Is it necessary for a team to have a franchise tag on a player? What happens if a team doesnt have one. Would the Suns, for example put the tag on Booker? It could hurt players to some extent, because I think no one in their right mind would give 3 1sts for a Booker or Russell. Also, in your opinion, who on the Celtics would get such a tag?

[Tr1boy]

Is it necessary for a team to have a franchise tag on a player? What happens if a team doesnt have one. Would the Suns, for example put the tag on Booker? It could hurt players to some extent, because I think no one in their right mind would give 3 1sts for a Booker or Russell. Also, in your opinion, who on the Celtics would get such a tag?

I guess it would not be mandatory but a team would be foolish to not place it on someone. And yes phx would place that on Booker

That would be an interesting question but likely most would put that label on Irving

[nickagneta]

Never get approved by the players. In even suggesting something like this, the owners would cause a very long strike to take place. The players love the freedom they have and something like this that inhibits player movement, especially at the top of the food chain, won't be allowed in the CBA by the players at the top of the food chain, LeBron and CP3, who just so happen to negotiate on behalf of the players.

[Tr1boy]

Never get approved by the players. In even suggesting something like this, the owners would cause a very long strike to take place. The players love the freedom they have and something like this that inhibits player movement, especially at the top of the food chain, won't be allowed in the CBA by the players at the top of the food chain, LeBron and CP3, who just so happen to negotiate on behalf of the players.

I disagree. There would be a struggle but ultimately the league would have no issues going on a strike

After several months the lower level players would start bitcching and moaning. Sure Lebron , Cp3 can hold tight but not more than half of the league

League has given in on many things to the players. Even this dumb supermax that hasnt worked.  Making millions for a team/city you dont want to play for is not torture.

Limiting players movement is the goal to prevent super teams. It is for the better of the league and not one player

[nickagneta]

Never get approved by the players. In even suggesting something like this, the owners would cause a very long strike to take place. The players love the freedom they have and something like this that inhibits player movement, especially at the top of the food chain, won't be allowed in the CBA by the players at the top of the food chain, LeBron and CP3, who just so happen to negotiate on behalf of the players.

I disagree. There would be a struggle but ultimately the league would have no issues going on a strike

After several months the lower level players would start bitcching and moaning. Sure Lebron , Cp3 can hold tight but not more than half of the league

League has given in on many things to the players. Even this dumb supermax that hasnt worked.  Making millions for a team/city you dont want to play for is not torture.

Limiting players movement is the goal to prevent super teams. It is for the better of the league and not one player

Disagree all you want but it would never happen. The players will not allow major CBA changes that limit their ability to maximize their salary as they see fit and changes that limit where they can play.

The NBAPA is way too powerful a group to let the owners steamroll them into an agreement that is definitely not in the best interest of the players.

Disagree all you want, your proposal would never get approved and could lead to a lost year or more of basketball if the owners insisted on it, which of course they wouldn't.

I do think something that might make it into the next CBA that owners would love to have is adding agents and player representatives to the list of people able to be investigated and punished for tampering. Increasing tampering fines I think could also get voted in.

[Tr1boy]

Never get approved by the players. In even suggesting something like this, the owners would cause a very long strike to take place. The players love the freedom they have and something like this that inhibits player movement, especially at the top of the food chain, won't be allowed in the CBA by the players at the top of the food chain, LeBron and CP3, who just so happen to negotiate on behalf of the players.

I disagree. There would be a struggle but ultimately the league would have no issues going on a strike

After several months the lower level players would start bitcching and moaning. Sure Lebron , Cp3 can hold tight but not more than half of the league

League has given in on many things to the players. Even this dumb supermax that hasnt worked.  Making millions for a team/city you dont want to play for is not torture.

Limiting players movement is the goal to prevent super teams. It is for the better of the league and not one player

Disagree all you want but it would never happen. The players will not allow major CBA changes that limit their ability to maximize their salary as they see fit and changes that limit where they can play.

The NBAPA is way too powerful a group to let the owners steamroll them into an agreement that is definitely not in the best interest of the players.

Disagree all you want, your proposal would never get approved and could lead to a lost year or more of basketball if the owners insisted on it, which of course they wouldn't.

I do think something that might make it into the next CBA that owners would love to have is adding agents and player representatives to the list of people able to be investigated and punished for tampering. Increasing tampering fines I think could also get voted in.

NFL says hi

Even the NHL uses a form of this tag

I dont care if you dont care but how it is setup currently clearly is not working

Cap has suffered also

[Fafnir]

Hard pass on the franchise tag. Drafting teams get 4 years locked in and RFA to lock in another 3 years minimum if they truly want to keep a player.

The idea of three first round picks being required as compensation is funny though. Reminds me of how the Lakers got Magic.

[Fafnir]

Never get approved by the players. In even suggesting something like this, the owners would cause a very long strike to take place. The players love the freedom they have and something like this that inhibits player movement, especially at the top of the food chain, won't be allowed in the CBA by the players at the top of the food chain, LeBron and CP3, who just so happen to negotiate on behalf of the players.

This has been brought up the past two CBAs and has been rejected by the PA. IIRC the players immediate counter has been: "we'll consider it if you remove the salary cap/max salary".

AKA the middle finger to an idea that's a deal breaker for the union.

[nickagneta]

Never get approved by the players. In even suggesting something like this, the owners would cause a very long strike to take place. The players love the freedom they have and something like this that inhibits player movement, especially at the top of the food chain, won't be allowed in the CBA by the players at the top of the food chain, LeBron and CP3, who just so happen to negotiate on behalf of the players.

I disagree. There would be a struggle but ultimately the league would have no issues going on a strike

After several months the lower level players would start bitcching and moaning. Sure Lebron , Cp3 can hold tight but not more than half of the league

League has given in on many things to the players. Even this dumb supermax that hasnt worked.  Making millions for a team/city you dont want to play for is not torture.

Limiting players movement is the goal to prevent super teams. It is for the better of the league and not one player

Disagree all you want but it would never happen. The players will not allow major CBA changes that limit their ability to maximize their salary as they see fit and changes that limit where they can play.

The NBAPA is way too powerful a group to let the owners steamroll them into an agreement that is definitely not in the best interest of the players.

Disagree all you want, your proposal would never get approved and could lead to a lost year or more of basketball if the owners insisted on it, which of course they wouldn't.

I do think something that might make it into the next CBA that owners would love to have is adding agents and player representatives to the list of people able to be investigated and punished for tampering. Increasing tampering fines I think could also get voted in.

NFL says hi

Even the NHL uses a form of this tag

I dont care if you dont care but how it is setup currently clearly is not working

Cap has suffered also

You clearly are unaware of the financials of the game.

Team franchise values have been increasing for over a decade. The average team value increased 13% last year. Some teams have increased in value by over 40% in the last year.

The League is in the middle of an unreal $24 billion television contract.

Revenues for the league are over $8 billion up 8% in the last year.

The salary cap and luxury tax levels are the highest ever and increasing.

The average NBA player makes $6.3 million a year. That is the highest average sports salary in the sporting world. MLB is next at $4.3 million per year average. An average NBA player makes close to 50% more per year than the second highest paid average athlete from MLB. That number only rises when compared to other sports.

https://www.businessinsider.com/nfl-mlb-nba-nhl-average-sports-salaries-2016-11

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2019/02/06/nba-team-values-2019-knicks-on-top-at-4-billion/#17424467e667

Clearly, the NBA is working quite well for players and owners alike.

[nickagneta]

Never get approved by the players. In even suggesting something like this, the owners would cause a very long strike to take place. The players love the freedom they have and something like this that inhibits player movement, especially at the top of the food chain, won't be allowed in the CBA by the players at the top of the food chain, LeBron and CP3, who just so happen to negotiate on behalf of the players.

This has been brought up the past two CBAs and has been rejected by the PA. IIRC the players immediate counter has been: "we'll consider it if you remove the salary cap/max salary".

AKA the middle finger to an idea that's a deal breaker for the union.

And there you go...Thanks Faf. TP

[Fafnir]

The only thing holding back NBA financials is a couple of teams are located in pretty tiny TV markets, mostly from when the league only cared about how much arena money they got or the owner moved the team to his hometown (OKC).

On the aggregate the owners are swimming in money and that's BEFORE you consider their equity appreciation if they ever want to sell.