What About 1 Max Contract Per Team?

[JSD]

Unless it's a player signed with Bird's Rights. Is that the solution?

[PhoSita]

I'd be in favor of that, but is true parity what we really want?

[JSD]

I'd be in favor of that, but is true parity what we really want?

It would stop the current madness of super teams.

[max215]

I'd be in favor of that, but is true parity what we really want?

Tough to say, but it's better than playing for second.

[jambr380]

Seems like you could pretty easily avoid the issue by just signing players at 1 or 2 million below the 'max'.

[ManUp]

Can't stop players with a lack of competitive fire from joining up, they will just take pay cuts.

[oldtype]

You just need to do one of the following

1. Make the max really freaking high. Say 50% of the cap.

2. Create a "designated player rule" where each team is allowed to offer double the standard max outside of the salary cap to one player and one player only.

Option 1 makes it harder for superstars to move at all. Option 2 makes it basically impossible for you to have more than one.

[CelticD]

Seems like you could pretty easily avoid the issue by just signing players at 1 or 2 million below the 'max'.

and different players have different max.it wouldnt be fair to have 1 player maxed out after a rookie deal, cuz its not like it would cost as much per year as someone whos been in the league for 10+ years (ie lebron).

[guava_wrench]

You just need to do one of the following

1. Make the max really freaking high. Say 50% of the cap.

2. Create a "designated player rule" where each team is allowed to offer double the standard max outside of the salary cap to one player and one player only.

Option 1 makes it harder for superstars to move at all. Option 2 makes it basically impossible for you to have more than one.

No point in making the max that high. Just remove max contracts all together. If you remove the max, teams will end up well into luxury tax if they try to give everyone market value contracts.

[guava_wrench]

I'd be in favor of that, but is true parity what we really want?

Some fans only want parity when it applies to other teams. When it is their own team, loading up is fine and just.

[Kuberski33]

If it were economically feasible (and its not) I like the idea of contracting 6 teams and spreading the talent out more evenly.  Quality of play would improve too.

[meangreenmachine]

I think the only solution is a "super max" where each team is given one "super max" whose salary is uncapped and whose salary does not count towards the team cap. Instead of seeing superstars gravitate towards one another, you would see them gravitate away from one another, which will inevitably require more team ball in the future.

[beantownboy171]

Slightly raise the max salary to say... 35 million per.

Also add a draft pick stipulation (like the MLB) for players making an average salary greater than 25 million. There are several ways to go with this.

- Straightforward: Award the new teams next 1st rounder to the former team. This would exclude acquired 1st round draft picks (I.e. BKN picks owned by Boston)

- Choice Provision: Allow the former team to chose their preferred 1st rounder within a time frame, say within the next 5 years. This would exclude acquired 1st round draft picks (I.e. BKN picks owned by Boston)

- Reverse Protection: Bottom 20 protection within an unlimited timeframe. The next time a first round pick lands within the top 20 it is awarded to the former team. This would exclude acquired 1st round draft picks (I.e. BKN picks owned by Boston)
Just an idea i wanted to throw out there. Not sure if its a good one.

[fairweatherfan]

Star players immediately start taking the max -$1. 

It'd have to be a big gap between max deals and the next-highest amount you could sign for, which would likely create its own issues.  I'd say make the max a higher percentage of the total cap.  Wouldn't completely eliminate the problem, but it'd make it a lot tougher to assemble a decent cast around multiple max guys.

Honestly I think this situation is more of an artifact of the exploding cap, and GS managing to lock up Curry so cheaply years ago, than the max contracts.  If Curry signed for the max or we were under last year's cap number, this situation almost certainly doesn't happen.

[meangreenmachine]

If it were economically feasible (and its not) I like the idea of contracting 6 teams and spreading the talent out more evenly.  Quality of play would improve too.

Yeah, there are some garbage franchises out there that never should have been approved for expansion. The league would be a lot more interesting with only 20-24 teams with playoffs limited to the top 8 only.