A wild idea that takes money out of trades and free agency

[litangel]

Do you ever get tired of so many moves being made because of money and not basketball? Of older players with too large contracts being albatrosses? Here is a radical idea that would take money completely out of the equation for teams, and somewhat for players. We'll call it Play for Pay.
Players no longer sign contracts for a certain amount of money. Each team pays the amount of money we now call the salary cap into a central pool. The money is then redistributed to the teams as follows: The team with the best regular season record gets 127% of a team share back. Each team below gets 2% less, with the team with the worst record getting 69%. This leaves 60% of a share left to reward playoff teams. (No bonus for winning play-in games) teams that win a first round series, but then lose get an additional 4%, teams that win the second round, then lose in the conference finals get 8%, the loser in the NBA finals gets 12%, and the winner 16%. If a team has the best regular season record and wins the finals, they can get 143% of a share.
The money is then distributed among the players as follows: You start with player minimums, which are set by the league (actually the players union) for players in their first two years according to draft position. Year 3 on, a player's minimum is 1/2 of his last year's salary or the league minimum, whichever is greater. The money left after minimums is distributed according to how well the players played that year. A team of 3 to 5 evaluators is hired by the players union, and they distribute the money for each team. The guidelines as to how players should be evaluated and paid will be written by the players union.
Basically, the players have control over all issues of how money gets distributed, the owners just put in their money, and try to build a great team.
FREE AGENCY -  All players become free agents after 5 years service (for that year only), again after 8 years, and every two years there after. They can sign with any team they wish or remain with their current team. Any players who has been with a team for 6 years and has not changed teams because of free agency in the past 3 years can refuse any trades.
The limit to free agency is that teams must reimburse those who took their free agents with draft choices. A hired independent service will rate the top 150 NBA players. Players from 101-150 will require a 2nd round draft choice as compensation. A top 5 player will require 2 1sts and 2 2nds. And there will a scale up between those two groups. The compensation always comes from the soonest draft available, and it must be able to be compensated in the next two years, if it cannot, then the team cannot sign that free agent. This is what limits a team from signing a bunch of stars in one year.
Trades will be able to made as usual, only they will be based on a team's needs, not the salary cap. There may be a little finagling, with teams trying to get draft choices to pick up a free agent.
So what are the results of this plan? Players get paid for how they perform each and every year. It will benefit a player financially by being with a team where they can use their talents the best. A great player on a poor team will make more than a 4th option on a great team. This will tend to create balance. Players who have loyalty to a team may able to spend their entire career with one team, they can put down roots. There will no penalties for keeping an aging star who has been the face of the franchise around, if they want to stay.
Players have more freedom to go where they want to go than before. If Beal and Tatum really want to play together, they can probably make that happen.
The only losers in this plan are the agents (everyone shed a tear) they will have a lot less to do. What do you think of this plan?

[CFAN38]

Do you ever get tired of so many moves being made because of money and not basketball? Of older players with too large contracts being albatrosses? Here is a radical idea that would take money completely out of the equation for teams, and somewhat for players. We'll call it Play for Pay.
Players no longer sign contracts for a certain amount of money. Each team pays the amount of money we now call the salary cap into a central pool. The money is then redistributed to the teams as follows: The team with the best regular season record gets 127% of a team share back. Each team below gets 2% less, with the team with the worst record getting 69%. This leaves 60% of a share left to reward playoff teams. (No bonus for winning play-in games) teams that win a first round series, but then lose get an additional 4%, teams that win the second round, then lose in the conference finals get 8%, the loser in the NBA finals gets 12%, and the winner 16%. If a team has the best regular season record and wins the finals, they can get 143% of a share.
The money is then distributed among the players as follows: You start with player minimums, which are set by the league (actually the players union) for players in their first two years according to draft position. Year 3 on, a player's minimum is 1/2 of his last year's salary or the league minimum, whichever is greater. The money left after minimums is distributed according to how well the players played that year. A team of 3 to 5 evaluators is hired by the players union, and they distribute the money for each team. The guidelines as to how players should be evaluated and paid will be written by the players union.
Basically, the players have control over all issues of how money gets distributed, the owners just put in their money, and try to build a great team.
FREE AGENCY -  All players become free agents after 5 years service (for that year only), again after 8 years, and every two years there after. They can sign with any team they wish or remain with their current team. Any players who has been with a team for 6 years and has not changed teams because of free agency in the past 3 years can refuse any trades.
The limit to free agency is that teams must reimburse those who took their free agents with draft choices. A hired independent service will rate the top 150 NBA players. Players from 101-150 will require a 2nd round draft choice as compensation. A top 5 player will require 2 1sts and 2 2nds. And there will a scale up between those two groups. The compensation always comes from the soonest draft available, and it must be able to be compensated in the next two years, if it cannot, then the team cannot sign that free agent. This is what limits a team from signing a bunch of stars in one year.
Trades will be able to made as usual, only they will be based on a team's needs, not the salary cap. There may be a little finagling, with teams trying to get draft choices to pick up a free agent.
So what are the results of this plan? Players get paid for how they perform each and every year. It will benefit a player financially by being with a team where they can use their talents the best. A great player on a poor team will make more than a 4th option on a great team. This will tend to create balance. Players who have loyalty to a team may able to spend their entire career with one team, they can put down roots. There will no penalties for keeping an aging star who has been the face of the franchise around, if they want to stay.
Players have more freedom to go where they want to go than before. If Beal and Tatum really want to play together, they can probably make that happen.
The only losers in this plan are the agents (everyone shed a tear) they will have a lot less to do. What do you think of this plan?

That's a lot to digest.

First thought would be that contract length should still be negotiated for each player and players salary should be a a negotiated percentage of the cap. Ex Max player can sign for 5 years at 30% of the cap. One interesting thing that would come from this would be incentivizing wining. Max players on bad teams would then make less then max players on good teams.

never going to happen but at interesting thought. 

[Kernewek]

How do you square the idea of free agency starting after year five with the average NBA career lasting for less than that?

[okpat]

This would incentivize players to form super teams as playoff success equates more money

[litangel]

This would incentivize players to form super teams as playoff success equates more money

But if you have 4 stars, even 3 on a super team, they will get less than one on a poor team. The super team  will have to split the money, and at best they only get barely twice what a last place team gets, and if they lose in the finals or earlier, then they will make a lot less than they would make as "the star" on another team. The only way you have a super team, is it must start with a couple good players who were drafted (because it is very difficult to get more than one star by FA every 2 years), and the players would need to be unselfish about money.

[slamtheking]

This would incentivize players to form super teams as playoff success equates more money

But if you have 4 stars, even 3 on a super team, they will get less than one on a poor team. The super team  will have to split the money, and at best they only get barely twice what a last place team gets, and if they lose in the finals or earlier, then they will make a lot less than they would make as "the star" on another team. The only way you have a super team, is it must start with a couple good players who were drafted (because it is very difficult to get more than one star by FA every 2 years), and the players would need to be unselfish about money.

disagree.  the stars would still form superteams and would find it much easier to do under this system