Get rid of player max deals

[go11celtics]

I don't understand why there are player maximums? If a team wants to spend 40 million a year to bring in someone like KD, why can't they? It would cause players to actually decide whether they want to get paid or take a serious pay cut to play with other stars. In all honestly it is those top 10 players who are making their teams the money, so they should be rewarded for it. Seems like an easy fix to counter all these super teams.

Either that or get rid of 10 teams in the league, so each team gets better. If your team is in the bottom 4 for more than a few years, the team gets moved to a different city. That way teams will not tank and the level of competition will hopefully go up. In no other sport can you virtually guarantee the final 2-4 teams before the first game of season.

[Roy H.]

For the bulk of the Union membership, max contracts make sure that the middle class gets paid. A guy like Garrett Temple probably doesn't care much about competitive balance, or Lebron's right to get paid what he deserves.

[dreamgreen]

Max deals are a good idea IMO I could argue the % should be even less and have a hard cap. It's just weird this year because of the salary cap going up so much.

[go11celtics]

For the bulk of the Union membership, max contracts make sure that the middle class gets paid. A guy like Garrett Temple probably doesn't care much about competitive balance, or Lebron's right to get paid what he deserves.

That's true, but from the other side the owners I'm sure want competitive balance. I think I read somewhere that like 5 teams made money last year? How is that sustainable when the majority of teams can't put fans in the stands? I doubt they care who they pay, I mean they have to ship out the money regardless. Would be interesting to see that side fight for it.

[Roy H.]

For the bulk of the Union membership, max contracts make sure that the middle class gets paid. A guy like Garrett Temple probably doesn't care much about competitive balance, or Lebron's right to get paid what he deserves.

That's true, but from the other side the owners I'm sure want competitive balance. I think I read somewhere that like 5 teams made money last year? How is that sustainable when the majority of teams can't put fans in the stands? I doubt they care who they pay, I mean they have to ship out the money regardless. Would be interesting to see that side fight for it.

I would be extremely skeptical of any reports of the owners losing money.

[knuckleballer]

For the bulk of the Union membership, max contracts make sure that the middle class gets paid. A guy like Garrett Temple probably doesn't care much about competitive balance, or Lebron's right to get paid what he deserves.

This.

[mctyson]

For the bulk of the Union membership, max contracts make sure that the middle class gets paid. A guy like Garrett Temple probably doesn't care much about competitive balance, or Lebron's right to get paid what he deserves.

This.

But yet no one watches basketball to see Garret Temple play.

[knuckleballer]

For the bulk of the Union membership, max contracts make sure that the middle class gets paid. A guy like Garrett Temple probably doesn't care much about competitive balance, or Lebron's right to get paid what he deserves.

This.

But yet no one watches basketball to see Garret Temple play.

Tell that to 90%+ of the Players Union who benefit greatly.  It's good for most teams as well.

[go11celtics]

For the bulk of the Union membership, max contracts make sure that the middle class gets paid. A guy like Garrett Temple probably doesn't care much about competitive balance, or Lebron's right to get paid what he deserves.

This.

But yet no one watches basketball to see Garret Temple play.

Tell that to 90%+ of the Players Union who benefit greatly.  It's good for most teams as well.

Does baseball have a player cap? I didn't think they did. I'd be curious to know how the players feel about it. I think it's pretty clear despite its flaws, there are more surprises/upsets/Cinderellas compared to basketball.

[EvilEmpire]

For the bulk of the Union membership, max contracts make sure that the middle class gets paid. A guy like Garrett Temple probably doesn't care much about competitive balance, or Lebron's right to get paid what he deserves.

That's true, but from the other side the owners I'm sure want competitive balance. I think I read somewhere that like 5 teams made money last year? How is that sustainable when the majority of teams can't put fans in the stands? I doubt they care who they pay, I mean they have to ship out the money regardless. Would be interesting to see that side fight for it.

I would be extremely skeptical of any reports of the owners losing money.

Its hard to believe that any team is "actually" losing money. In 2011 the new CBA changed the players-owners split from 57% players - 43% owners to a 50/50 split.  Last years salary cap was 70 mil. So team expenses were more than 70  mil? I don't think the CBA accounts for ticket prices and concessions, not to meant the value of the team itself.

Last year the ave ticket price for a Celtics game was $66, Beer is $8, Soft Drink is $5 and hot dog is $5.5. So the owners are making a killing.

If the teams were actually losing money there would be another lockout.

http://basketball.realgm.com/nba/info/salary_cap

[mctyson]

For the bulk of the Union membership, max contracts make sure that the middle class gets paid. A guy like Garrett Temple probably doesn't care much about competitive balance, or Lebron's right to get paid what he deserves.

This.

But yet no one watches basketball to see Garret Temple play.

Tell that to 90%+ of the Players Union who benefit greatly.  It's good for most teams as well.

The MLB has a stronger union and there is no cap or max contracts there.  It has nothing to do with union politics or cap structure.  It has everything to do with the fact that in basketball, unlike any other sport arguably, one player means everything.

[knuckleballer]

For the bulk of the Union membership, max contracts make sure that the middle class gets paid. A guy like Garrett Temple probably doesn't care much about competitive balance, or Lebron's right to get paid what he deserves.

This.

But yet no one watches basketball to see Garret Temple play.

Tell that to 90%+ of the Players Union who benefit greatly.  It's good for most teams as well.

Does baseball have a player cap? I didn't think they did. I'd be curious to know how the players feel about it. I think it's pretty clear despite its flaws, there are more surprises/upsets/Cinderellas compared to basketball.

They have had a very restrictive luxury tax cap for a long time now.  It's made the league much more competitive.

[knuckleballer]

For the bulk of the Union membership, max contracts make sure that the middle class gets paid. A guy like Garrett Temple probably doesn't care much about competitive balance, or Lebron's right to get paid what he deserves.

This.

But yet no one watches basketball to see Garret Temple play.

Tell that to 90%+ of the Players Union who benefit greatly.  It's good for most teams as well.

The MLB has a stronger union and there is no cap or max contracts there.  It has nothing to do with union politics or cap structure.  It has everything to do with the fact that in basketball, unlike any other sport arguably, one player means everything.

Because in basketball one guy means everything, it helps the vast majority of players to have a max.  And in baseball, there is a very expensive luxury tax that has curbed the spending of the largest market teams. 

[jpotter33]

Scal actually had a good idea about each team having one "super max" contract it could give out that would equate to something like up to 40% of the cap or something. That would create more competitive balance around the league, because true "super max" players wouldn't be able to team up. They'd either have to take significant pay cuts to team up or go to differing teams to get their money.

[Granath]

For the bulk of the Union membership, max contracts make sure that the middle class gets paid. A guy like Garrett Temple probably doesn't care much about competitive balance, or Lebron's right to get paid what he deserves.

That's true, but from the other side the owners I'm sure want competitive balance. I think I read somewhere that like 5 teams made money last year? How is that sustainable when the majority of teams can't put fans in the stands? I doubt they care who they pay, I mean they have to ship out the money regardless. Would be interesting to see that side fight for it.

I would be extremely skeptical of any reports of the owners losing money.

Its hard to believe that any team is "actually" losing money. In 2011 the new CBA changed the players-owners split from 57% players - 43% owners to a 50/50 split.  Last years salary cap was 70 mil. So team expenses were more than 70  mil? I don't think the CBA accounts for ticket prices and concessions, not to meant the value of the team itself.

Last year the ave ticket price for a Celtics game was $66, Beer is $8, Soft Drink is $5 and hot dog is $5.5. So the owners are making a killing.

If the teams were actually losing money there would be another lockout.

http://basketball.realgm.com/nba/info/salary_cap

Exactly. Guys like Balmer don't put down $2 BILLION on a franchise to lose money.

Atlanta just sold for $850 million. That team was purchased 11 years ago for $250m (with the arena and the NHL Thrashers), meaning that the profit on that deal was in excess of $650 million dollars in just over 10 years. Now I guarantee they were making money every year as well even if the books were adjusted to not reflect that. So they over tripled their investment and rolled in cash along the way while they owned the team.

The owners are making money hand over fist. Don't shed a tear for them.