How to stop ring chasing by superstars

[Ogaju]

It really bothered me when Karl Malone and Gary Payton went ring chasing with the LA Lakers back in the day. It didnt work for them because of injuries, but if I remember correctly Karl Malone who had amassed considerable wealth took a substantial pay cut to sign with the Lakers. This allowed the Lakers to field a much stronger team than the salary cap would allow based on the quality of players and the amount they would command on the open market.

Fast forward to the Miami cHeat, if I am hearing correctly LeBron James who is the best player in the NBA is not on a Max deal with the cHeat. How does that make any sense. This is classic ring chasing ala Karl Malone and the Lakers.

If this is allowed to continue then superstars that make a load of money from endorsements and other business ventures can ring chase by taking lesser contracts so their teams can build more quality players with the amount saved from by their discounted contracts.

Imagine a scenario where player X gets a mammoth endorsement from company A so that he can give team Y a discount on his contract. Player X is  Max superstar so this discount allows him to sign with team Y that already has two max players. Player X takes a vastly reduces deal that allows him not only to join the other two max players on team Y but allows team Y to add very good role players to complete their roster.

Player X gets his ring, team Y becomes dominant for years, player X makes up for the discount by getting more andorsement money from Company A maybe even equity shares. Everyone wins because player X does not lose any money, team Y stays under the cap and wins multiple chips, Company A sells more products.

How to fix the problem.. If a free agent takes less money to join a team the team must be assigned the amount of money that reflects the free agent's true value on the open market.

That will put an end to the collusion.

[Finkelskyhook]

It's so rare that it works that I think it's a fringe issue.

[lightspeed5]

First off, Karl Malone and Gary Payton were not superstars in 2004.

" If a free agent takes less money to join a team the team must be assigned the amount of money that reflects the free agent's true value on the open market."

this makes no sense. There's no such thing a "true value." First off, the value of a player is the market value, the price someone is willing to pay.

its a free market. The choice for a player if he wants to take a pay cut should always be available. Its a winning mentality, that I respect and look forward to more players doing.

[Roy H.]

I don't think you can let the league decide how much stars "should" sign for.  I mean, let's go back to the summer of 2009.  Would the league have said that Rasheed was chasing a ring and taking a below-market deal for Rasheed Wallace?  Should they have voided the MLE contract? 

In terms of your "what if" scenario, I think most players are going to want their contract money *and* their endorsement money.  It will be the rare player who sacrifices $15 million per year to ring chase.

[clover]

Do we have any actual examples of players signing somewhere for less because sponsors have jumped in to bribe them to do so?

[Ogaju]

First off, Karl Malone and Gary Payton were not superstars in 2004.

" If a free agent takes less money to join a team the team must be assigned the amount of money that reflects the free agent's true value on the open market."

this makes no sense. There's no such thing a "true value." First off, the value of a player is the market value, the price someone is willing to pay.

its a free market. The choice for a player if he wants to take a pay cut should always be available. Its a winning mentality, that I respect and look forward to more players doing.

I disagree..Malone was a superstar you do not ever stop being a star. Stars get calls and preferential treatment from referees even when they are 'over the hill'. Malone did take a lot less money to join the Lakers, and it gave the Lakers an unfair advantage. This practice makes players pick winners.

Why dont you address LeBron taking less than MAX you think that does mot give the Heat an advantage when the best player on the planet is playing for less than Max?

[Ogaju]

I don't think you can let the league decide how much stars "should" sign for.  I mean, let's go back to the summer of 2009.  Would the league have said that Rasheed was chasing a ring and taking a below-market deal for Rasheed Wallace?  Should they have voided the MLE contract? 

In terms of your "what if" scenario, I think most players are going to want their contract money *and* their endorsement money.  It will be the rare player who sacrifices $15 million per year to ring chase.

It is too late to say the League should not decide how much a player should sign for because the league already does. It is called the salary cap, and not only is there a team cap there is a player cap. So the league is already in that business.

As far as free agents you dont void the contract you just assign the highest value the player commanded on the market. So if there is a team that offered Sheed more than Boston you still allow Sheed to sign with Boston but the higher offer he got from the other team would be his 'cap value'. No giving a certain team a sweet deal just to chase the ring. This violates the spirit of the salary cap.

[Q_FBE]

This can easily be corrected by the provisions of the free market. If a player changes teams through FA, his salary cap number is the greater of 80% of the MLE or the average of his salary the last five years of his old team.

In the Boston 2007 example, however, Paul Pierce was a max player with the Celtics. Wally Szerbiak and the Jeff Green pick along with throw ins were traded for Ray Allen. During the summer, Al Jefferson and company was traded for Kevin Garnett. So Ainge engineered this one on his own.

The Miami example involved the big three players having to take slight pay cuts to make it work but it still took them two years to strike gold. Their acquisition of Ray Allen should not have been legal under the hypothesized CBA change I mentioned above.

Los Angelos acquired Dwight Howard in a block buster, but Steve Nash took a precipitous paycut. I don't think it is working out for them because their lack of depth and Kobe's age.   

The Knicks are thriving on 3 point shooting. History works against three point shooting in  the NBA playoffs. The Celtics have the capability to shut that down and I expectthat they will get it done. Brooklyn for my money is a much better balance \d team than the Nets and are a team to watch.

[indeedproceed]

I don't think you can let the league decide how much stars "should" sign for.  I mean, let's go back to the summer of 2009.  Would the league have said that Rasheed was chasing a ring and taking a below-market deal for Rasheed Wallace?  Should they have voided the MLE contract? 

In terms of your "what if" scenario, I think most players are going to want their contract money *and* their endorsement money.  It will be the rare player who sacrifices $15 million per year to ring chase.

It is too late to say the League should not decide how much a player should sign for because the league already does. It is called the salary cap, and not only is there a team cap there is a player cap. So the league is already in that business.

As far as free agents you dont void the contract you just assign the highest value the player commanded on the market. So if there is a team that offered Sheed more than Boston you still allow Sheed to sign with Boston but the higher offer he got from the other team would be his 'cap value'. No giving a certain team a sweet deal just to chase the ring. This violates the spirit of the salary cap.

So basically, players aren't free agents, but are commodities bid on, auction-style, with every team having the right of first refusal, and the players only being able to decide between the highest bidders.

[CelticConcourse]

I don't think you can let the league decide how much stars "should" sign for.  I mean, let's go back to the summer of 2009.  Would the league have said that Rasheed was chasing a ring and taking a below-market deal for Rasheed Wallace?  Should they have voided the MLE contract? 

In terms of your "what if" scenario, I think most players are going to want their contract money *and* their endorsement money.  It will be the rare player who sacrifices $15 million per year to ring chase.

It is too late to say the League should not decide how much a player should sign for because the league already does. It is called the salary cap, and not only is there a team cap there is a player cap. So the league is already in that business.

As far as free agents you dont void the contract you just assign the highest value the player commanded on the market. So if there is a team that offered Sheed more than Boston you still allow Sheed to sign with Boston but the higher offer he got from the other team would be his 'cap value'. No giving a certain team a sweet deal just to chase the ring. This violates the spirit of the salary cap.

So basically, players aren't free agents, but are commodities bid on, auction-style, with every team having the right of first refusal, and the players only being able to decide between the highest bidders.

I've heard this idea tossed around before and I hate it... (The idea, not you mods or users) Free agents need freedom.

[Boris Badenov]

I don't think you can let the league decide how much stars "should" sign for.  I mean, let's go back to the summer of 2009.  Would the league have said that Rasheed was chasing a ring and taking a below-market deal for Rasheed Wallace?  Should they have voided the MLE contract? 

In terms of your "what if" scenario, I think most players are going to want their contract money *and* their endorsement money.  It will be the rare player who sacrifices $15 million per year to ring chase.

It is too late to say the League should not decide how much a player should sign for because the league already does. It is called the salary cap, and not only is there a team cap there is a player cap. So the league is already in that business.

As far as free agents you dont void the contract you just assign the highest value the player commanded on the market. So if there is a team that offered Sheed more than Boston you still allow Sheed to sign with Boston but the higher offer he got from the other team would be his 'cap value'. No giving a certain team a sweet deal just to chase the ring. This violates the spirit of the salary cap.

This creates odd incentives. Suppose a team like Cleveland knows it has no shot at getting Sheed. It offers the max, knowing that all this will do is punish the team Sheed eventually signs with.

[kgainez]

I love how Celtics fans tend to talk about this topic while forgetting Ray Allen and KG came to join Paul Pierce to win a ring.

And that they did. And that they continue to do.

[Boris Badenov]

I love how Celtics fans tend to talk about this topic while forgetting Ray Allen and KG came to join Paul Pierce to win a ring.

And that they did. And that they continue to do.

We traded for them on their existing contracts...they did not sign with us as FAs.

[indeedproceed]

I love how Celtics fans tend to talk about this topic while forgetting Ray Allen and KG came to join Paul Pierce to win a ring.

And that they did. And that they continue to do.

Not to dismiss it out of hand, Ray Allen didn't 'come here to win a ring', he was acquired for a lottery pick and young assets. KG was also traded for, but he was sold on us first. Unlike Lebron (who was also technically traded for, but in contrast to KG, Miami gave up no value for him), Bosh just signed willingly (don't think he was a S&T).

The situations are similar, but not so similar that they're analogus.

[CelticConcourse]

I don't think you can let the league decide how much stars "should" sign for.  I mean, let's go back to the summer of 2009.  Would the league have said that Rasheed was chasing a ring and taking a below-market deal for Rasheed Wallace?  Should they have voided the MLE contract? 

In terms of your "what if" scenario, I think most players are going to want their contract money *and* their endorsement money.  It will be the rare player who sacrifices $15 million per year to ring chase.

It is too late to say the League should not decide how much a player should sign for because the league already does. It is called the salary cap, and not only is there a team cap there is a player cap. So the league is already in that business.

As far as free agents you dont void the contract you just assign the highest value the player commanded on the market. So if there is a team that offered Sheed more than Boston you still allow Sheed to sign with Boston but the higher offer he got from the other team would be his 'cap value'. No giving a certain team a sweet deal just to chase the ring. This violates the spirit of the salary cap.

This creates odd incentives. Suppose a team like Cleveland knows it has no shot at getting Sheed. It offers the max, knowing that all this will do is punish the team Sheed eventually signs with.

And then Boston trolls around and lets Cleveland get Sheed at the max but I see the dilemma