How would you change the CBA?

[bdm860]

Obviously there’s a lot involved in the Collective Bargaining Agreement (and I believe you could check out the whole thing here if you really wanted here http://www.nbpa.com/cba_articles.php), but usually what gets most attention (and what I think most of us are interested in) is the salary structure.  So here are my thoughts on that.
 
Does the NBA really need:
A salary cap AND a luxury tax AND the traded player exception (salaries need to match within 125% +$100k) .

Now I understand the need for all of these things individually, but to have all 3 is kind of pointless I think (and some just work better than others). What’s the point of having the luxury tax AND the salary cap?  I say forget the salary cap, and just have the luxury tax.  IMO the luxury tax has worked great in controlling spending by teams.  It’s too easy to get around the salary cap with regular trades, sign and trades, and Bird rights.  It seems like most owners don’t want to go over the luxury tax, or will only go over the cap for the right situation, but did the salary cap stop anybody from spending?  Scrap the cap!

So if we scrap the cap, and just go with the luxury tax, do we need the traded player exception?  The traded player exception is mainly there to keep teams from working around the salary cap and keep teams somewhat within the salary cap (right? Or am I missing something?). If we get rid of the cap and the trade restrictions, the NBA becomes a lot more like MLB, and you know some teams (like the Knicks) will just spend, spend, spend and be like the Yankees.  Personally, I’m in favor of this.  Trading is too complicated as it is right now, and it has created value in players who otherwise have NO value (Keith Van Horn, Theo Ratliff, etc.).  I would love to get away from this whole “expiring contract phenomenon.”  If a team wants to rebuild and trade an established star (like when the Wolves had KG) and a team is looking to compete now and wants to trade a player on a rookie contract (like when the C’s had Big Al) then these two teams should be able to make the trade straight up if they wanted.  What was really accomplished by the C’s having to include Theo Ratliff’s expiring contract?  I think the luxury tax is enough to keep spending in check.

My proposal:  get rid of the salary cap, get rid of the traded player exception, and instead establish a tiered luxury tax (like how income tax works).

Just throwing out numbers, say if the luxury tax is $50M, then a dollar for dollar tax to $75M, a dollar fifty for dollar tax from $75M to $100M, and a two dollar for dollar tax for $100M plus.  Right now it seems few owners are willing to pay the tax, so increasing the tax at higher amounts should help curb spending even more, while allowing teams more freedom in constructing their teams.

What do you guys think, or in what ways would you change the CBA to make the league better?

[Brickowski]

I would eliminate the salary cap entirely and all of the silly trade rules.  Instead, I would have a baseball style luxury tax.

Let dynasties be dynasties, so long as they compensate the small market teams for the privilege.

[QuinielaBox]

Don't get me started on the CBA. The new CBA needs to take into account the expected deflation of Basketball Related Revenue anticipated to occur over the next five years. That means a reduction in the player salaries. I would limit salary guarentees up to three years and give teams the ability to cut players that are not productive like the NFL. In fact, I want to the NBA go to NFL hard cap system to put a premium on scouting, coaching, and player performance. Players like Mark Blount, T-Mac, Nate Robinson, and Ricky Davis are being paid big bucks to sit on benches or just not show up. That is just plain wrong. Why should 30 dollars of my 150 dollar ticket go to pay for expensive deadwieght.

More later.

[wdleehi]

Follow the NFL style. 


That creates more roster flexiblety and allows team the chance to improve at a much faster rate.


2nd, add a true minor league such that teams can have young players they own that do not count against the NBA roster. 

[nickagneta]

I say:

Increase both the salary cap and luxury tax amounts by a small percentage.

Decrease the penalty on the luxury tax away from the dollar for dollar penalty.

Give salary cap relief for teams that lose players to season ending injuries.

Make all contracts of two years or less non-guaranteed.




That's just a start.

[Roy Hobbs]

Follow the NFL style. 


That creates more roster flexiblety and allows team the chance to improve at a much faster rate.


2nd, add a true minor league such that teams can have young players they own that do not count against the NBA roster. 

Yep and yep.  The only major tweaks I'd make to the NFL system are that 1) I'd find some way to make trades easier (i.e., accelerated cap hits can restrict movement), and 2) I'd keep the NBA rookie scale in effect.

Having a firm upper cap, but allowing non-guaranteed contracts and the ability of players to restructure their deals, would be ideal. 

[Brickowski]

Sure, ideal for the owners-- but not for the players.

[wdleehi]

Sure, ideal for the owners-- but not for the players.

Ideal for the fans.  I can care less about how many millions the owners or players earn.


I haven't seen too many starving NFL stars.

[bdm860]

Someone want to break the NFL style down for me real quick?  I have no idea how the NFL does it.

[Fan from VT]

Sure, ideal for the owners-- but not for the players.

Ideal for the fans.  I can care less about how many millions the owners or players earn.


I haven't seen too many starving NFL stars.

No, just crippled with dementia and little support system by the age of 50 from a multi billion dollar industry

[wdleehi]

Sure, ideal for the owners-- but not for the players.

Ideal for the fans.  I can care less about how many millions the owners or players earn.


I haven't seen too many starving NFL stars.

No, just crippled with dementia and little support system by the age of 50 from a multi billion dollar industry

Would it be any different under another CBA?

[Fan from VT]

Sure, ideal for the owners-- but not for the players.

Ideal for the fans.  I can care less about how many millions the owners or players earn.


I haven't seen too many starving NFL stars.

No, just crippled with dementia and little support system by the age of 50 from a multi billion dollar industry

Would it be any different under another CBA?

Certainly you can't argue players wouldn't be better off if they had fully guaranteed contracts that they could depend on and/or better healthcare insurance built into retirement plans from their CBA.

[wdleehi]

Sure, ideal for the owners-- but not for the players.

Ideal for the fans.  I can care less about how many millions the owners or players earn.


I haven't seen too many starving NFL stars.

No, just crippled with dementia and little support system by the age of 50 from a multi billion dollar industry

Would it be any different under another CBA?

Certainly you can't argue players wouldn't be better off if they had fully guaranteed contracts that they could depend on and/or better healthcare insurance built into retirement plans from their CBA.

Really?


Teams filled of bad contracts of players that can no longer play means that new players would not be able to earn more money. 


If a player is good, they will get their money through signing bonuses.  Even fringe players get small amount of bonuses.  Teams can not take that money back because of injury.

[Fan from VT]

Sure, ideal for the owners-- but not for the players.

Ideal for the fans.  I can care less about how many millions the owners or players earn.


I haven't seen too many starving NFL stars.

No, just crippled with dementia and little support system by the age of 50 from a multi billion dollar industry

Would it be any different under another CBA?

Certainly you can't argue players wouldn't be better off if they had fully guaranteed contracts that they could depend on and/or better healthcare insurance built into retirement plans from their CBA.

Really?


Teams filled of bad contracts of players that can no longer play means that new players would not be able to earn more money. 


If a player is good, they will get their money through signing bonuses.  Even fringe players get small amount of bonuses.  Teams can not take that money back because of injury.

I think it needs to go both ways. If a team can cut players without consequence for underperformance, a player should be able to opt out at any moment if they overperform a contract. It's insane to have it one sided.


I love the rookie scale, that should be applied to all sports; the fact that the NFL has the strictest cap of major sports yet the most ridiculous rookie salaries is bizarre.


The players are the commodity. I don't care about the owners at all. If the current players left I'd stop watching and I'd watch wherever league they ended up. It would behoove the league to take care of their players long term (at least while we have employer dependent healthcare...hopefully not for long). I think the NBA has the best system, though it could probably be improved. I like the idea of having luxury tax only and no trade restrictions other than financial considerations. I think sports are better when teams that build a strong core can stay competitive for a long time rather than the all-.500/hot streak for 6 weeks NFL.

[Roy Hobbs]

Sure, ideal for the owners-- but not for the players.

Ideal for the fans.  I can care less about how many millions the owners or players earn.


I haven't seen too many starving NFL stars.

No, just crippled with dementia and little support system by the age of 50 from a multi billion dollar industry

Would it be any different under another CBA?

Certainly you can't argue players wouldn't be better off if they had fully guaranteed contracts that they could depend on and/or better healthcare insurance built into retirement plans from their CBA.

Really?


Teams filled of bad contracts of players that can no longer play means that new players would not be able to earn more money. 


If a player is good, they will get their money through signing bonuses.  Even fringe players get small amount of bonuses.  Teams can not take that money back because of injury.

I think it needs to go both ways. If a team can cut players without consequence for underperformance, a player should be able to opt out at any moment if they overperform a contract. It's insane to have it one sided.


I love the rookie scale, that should be applied to all sports; the fact that the NFL has the strictest cap of major sports yet the most ridiculous rookie salaries is bizarre.


The players are the commodity. I don't care about the owners at all. If the current players left I'd stop watching and I'd watch wherever league they ended up. It would behoove the league to take care of their players long term (at least while we have employer dependent healthcare...hopefully not for long). I think the NBA has the best system, though it could probably be improved. I like the idea of having luxury tax only and no trade restrictions other than financial considerations. I think sports are better when teams that build a strong core can stay competitive for a long time rather than the all-.500/hot streak for 6 weeks NFL.

Non-guaranteed contracts aren't one-sided; the team has already paid the player a big signing bonus.  If you theoretically wanted to allow a player to opt out of contracts, then the team should be able to seek the guaranteed bonuses paid previously.