Great article by Zach Lowe discussing the double standard of "sacrifice".

[yoursweatersux]

Well said. I really don't understand what the author is upset about in this article. The salary cap is forcing playing to make hard choices.... aka, it's working as intended.

Did you even read the article? It really doesn't sound like you did, considering the entire purpose of the article was to address this point.

I don't think you comprehended the point I was making.

The CBA was designed to increase parity and reduce the propensity for dynasties. It accomplishes this goal by forcing players to pick between "more money" vs. "more rings", and assuming that they will continue to opt for the "more money" option, hence breaking up super teams.

Seeing the situation playing out right now in Miami, that's exactly what's happening. The CBA is working as intended, so I don't understand why Zach Lowe is having a hissy fit over a team that was fortunate enough to go to 4 straight finals apparently breaking up.

Furthermore, it's not like the CBA makes it impossible to build a sustained contender - just look at the Spurs for god's sake. You just have to be smart about it.

[LooseCannon]

Right, but the owners want to be able to pay players the least amount of money for as long as possible. It's why they got rid of the old Chris Webber/Kenny Anderson rookie mega contracts.

Gotcha...

I try to keep an arms length from knowing too much about the salary cap structure in the NBA. Not that I wouldn't understand it, I just get frustrated because the players and owners never seem to be on the same page in terms of doing what is best for basketball. Very shortsighted.

Actually I am starting to question the marketability of the NBA since there are less and less so called "likable" players in the league due to overexposure from social media.


There might finally be incentive for owners to agree to a CBA that promotes real team building and sustained success.

The only page the owners have ever been on is maximizing their share of the pie.  If there is a need for sacrifice for the good of the league, the owners have always tried to get concessions from the players to get them to subsidize as much of that sacrifice as possible.  If there is no need for sacrifice for the good of the league, the owners have always tried to manufacture the perception of a need for sacrifice to get concessions from the players.

[LooseCannon]

The CBA was designed to increase parity and reduce the propensity for dynasties. It accomplishes this goal by forcing players to pick between "more money" vs. "more rings", and assuming that they will continue to opt for the "more money" option, hence breaking up super teams.

Seeing the situation playing out right now in Miami, that's exactly what's happening. The CBA is working as intended, so I don't understand why Zach Lowe is having a hissy fit over a team that was fortunate enough to go to 4 straight finals apparently breaking up.

Furthermore, it's not like the CBA makes it impossible to build a sustained contender - just look at the Spurs for god's sake. You just have to be smart about it.

Lowe isn't having a hissy fit over Miami possibly breaking up because their stars are forced to choose between more money and more rings, he's pointing out that Miami is risking breaking up their team because they asked James, Bosh, and Wade to opt out to save money when doing doesn't seem like it's going to affect the quality of the team the Heat can put on the floor, so it's pretty much just PR theater to make the players look like the bad guys while Mickey Arison laughs his way to the bank. 

I wouldn't characterize Lowe as having a hissy fit, but if he is, it's not about Miami breaking up, it's about the players being blamed as the cause if it happens, when it will be at least half (and probably more) the fault of ownership/management.

[D.o.s.]

The CBA was designed to increase parity and reduce the propensity for dynasties. It accomplishes this goal by forcing players to pick between "more money" vs. "more rings", and assuming that they will continue to opt for the "more money" option, hence breaking up super teams.

Seeing the situation playing out right now in Miami, that's exactly what's happening. The CBA is working as intended, so I don't understand why Zach Lowe is having a hissy fit over a team that was fortunate enough to go to 4 straight finals apparently breaking up.

Furthermore, it's not like the CBA makes it impossible to build a sustained contender - just look at the Spurs for god's sake. You just have to be smart about it.

Lowe isn't having a hissy fit over Miami possibly breaking up because their stars are forced to choose between more money and more rings, he's pointing out that Miami is risking breaking up their team because they asked James, Bosh, and Wade to opt out to save money when doing doesn't seem like it's going to affect the quality of the team the Heat can put on the floor, so it's pretty much just PR theater to make the players look like the bad guys while Mickey Arison laughs his way to the bank. 

I wouldn't characterize Lowe as having a hissy fit, but if he is, it's not about Miami breaking up, it's about the players being blamed as the cause if it happens, when it will be at least half (and probably more) the fault of ownership/management.

Exactly.

[Snakehead]

Well said. I really don't understand what the author is upset about in this article. The salary cap is forcing playing to make hard choices.... aka, it's working as intended.

Did you even read the article? It really doesn't sound like you did, considering the entire purpose of the article was to address this point.

I don't think you comprehended the point I was making.

The CBA was designed to increase parity and reduce the propensity for dynasties. It accomplishes this goal by forcing players to pick between "more money" vs. "more rings", and assuming that they will continue to opt for the "more money" option, hence breaking up super teams.

Seeing the situation playing out right now in Miami, that's exactly what's happening. The CBA is working as intended, so I don't understand why Zach Lowe is having a hissy fit over a team that was fortunate enough to go to 4 straight finals apparently breaking up.

Furthermore, it's not like the CBA makes it impossible to build a sustained contender - just look at the Spurs for god's sake. You just have to be smart about it.

I don't disagree with your points really from the owners point of view.

The issue in fairness is that the players are always taking a sacrifice, while the owner profits anyways (and if the team is better, probably by the case of more sacrifices, the owner profits more).

And like I said in this thread before, not sure I get why Spurs can be used as an example when their long term success has always been about their core players taking pay cuts and staying put.  I think the CBA definitely prevents this from happening as often but the Spurs are just an example of it happening for a long period of time and without the players forming in free agency.