Idea: Fixing the NBA Salary Cap

[nebist]

NBA Salary Cap Idea

Hard cap every team based on BRI numbers (so for example this year's cap would still be 94 mil but teams could not go over)

Whatever portion of cap is not spent is divided amongst players on that team based on minutes played (% of total minutes in season for that team = % of leftover cap $)...this is in lieu of the current salary floor....bottom line is every team would spend 94 mil on player salaries one way or another this year....no uneven playing field (other than weather, market, state tax stuff that can't be changed)

Contracts are signed as % of cap rather than $ figure with % raises (this is the vital change)

So a player would sign a contract for X years and X % of cap and that % would remain consistent throughout life of deal

Current team can offer FA 5th year
Other teams can only offer 4 years
Current team loses larger raises but 5th year means way more as deal will not be outdated by raising cap figures

No max % salary (only constrained by 15 roster spot holds....so technically LeBron could sign for 86% of cap but team would then have to fill out rest of roster with 1% minimum deals)
No split or half %

Cap Hold for FA = Same % as last contract
Empty Roster spot holds = 1% each
Minimum deal = 1%

Draft:
Pick 1 = 10%
Pick 2 = 9%
Pick 3 = 8%
Pick 4 = 7%
Pick 5 = 6%
Picks 6-10 = 5%
Picks 11-14 = 4%
Picks 15-25 =3%
Picks 26-30 = 2% (Guaranteed)
Picks 31-40 = 2% (Non-Guaranteed)
Picks 41-60 = 1%

No exceeding cap under any circumstances

Celtics Roster Estimates under this formula (rough % estimates based on when deals were signed)
1- Isaiah Thomas (8%)
2- Avery Bradley (8%)
3- Jae Crowder (7%)
4- Amir Johnson (15%)
5- Al Horford (30%)
6- Marcus Smart (5%)
7- Jaylen Brown (8%)
8- Kelly Olynyk (4%)
9- Jonas Jerebko (4%)
10- Terry Rozier (3%)
11- Jordan Mickey (2%)
12- R.J. Hunter (2%)
13- Demetrius Jackson (1%)
14- Ben Bentil (1%)
15- James Young (3%)
Total = 101% (this just worked out as being close)

For instance Durant to Warriors would be impossible under this formula.  When they signed their deals, the Warriors stars took up a much bigger percentage of the cap as it was before the spike. 
Curry - 20%
Klay- 25%
Durant - 30%
Green - 25%
Iguodala - 20%
Livingston - 7%
8 minimum roster spot holds - 8 %
Total - 135%
As you can see, the Warriors (even with Curry on a good deal) would not be able to come close to creating such a super team without stars taking MASSIVE paycuts.


Alright have at it.  What am I missing?  Like it?

[BitterJim]

Those numbers on rookie contracts are way too high (10% of your cap for a rookie?), and the minimum is too low (1%=$940k, which is way lower than the current vet minimum).  Plus cap holds only make sense in regards to Bird rights and going over the cap, so they wouldn't be necessary in a herd-capped system)

The main issue I see with a hard cap (especially with a rookie scale) is what you would do if a team is at (or near) to hard cap, and gets a top pick.  Are they allowed to go over the cap, or are they forced to trade someone to avoid going over?  Cutting a player wouldn't help, since their salary still counts against the cap (and if cutting the player didn't still count against the cap, it would essentially mean unguaranteed contracts, which the NBAPA would never agree to)

Any plan which changes the basic structure of the salary cap (or the draft, looking at you, Draft Wheel) is never going to happen without some proof of concept, and that's not reasonably available.  The best plan to "fix" these sort of situations is to remove max contracts, but that has its own issues as far as mid-tier players and stars taking pay cuts goes

[ederson]

I think there isn't anything to fix.

What happened this season with GS is an anomaly and there will always be an anomaly
A 35% cap rise + the best player in the league with a 9m contract + a top 5 player willing to change team

How often can that happen?

just to make it clear , i don't like what happened and i think it will hurt the league at least this season but i'm against such tight control.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

I'm presuming that at least one purpose of a cap is to guide teams toward parity, but that hasn't happened.

I agree with ederson that the current GS situation is an anomaly, thanks mainly to Curry being on a well-below-market deal, but the cap also didn't prevent the formation of the Miami Superfriends several years ago, when the cap was much lower. If some players are willing to take less to create a highly favorable superteam situation, that kinda defeats the purpose of a cap, right?

[ederson]

I don't miami as a thing to be avoided .... It wasn't the first team with 3 top players and it's not like they dominated the league.

The league is there in order to secure equal terms for all teams. For example a different cap that takes into consideration the taxes in every state imho is more important. Or the tanking thing ....

 

[nebist]

Every team in the league would pay 10% of the cap for the first pick in the draft, and that player would still be underpaid. 

[LooseCannon]

I'm presuming that at least one purpose of a cap is to guide teams toward parity, but that hasn't happened.

I agree with ederson that the current GS situation is an anomaly, thanks mainly to Curry being on a well-below-market deal, but the cap also didn't prevent the formation of the Miami Superfriends several years ago, when the cap was much lower. If some players are willing to take less to create a highly favorable superteam situation, that kinda defeats the purpose of a cap, right?

The purpose of the cap is to keep salaries down.  Players taking less than they are worth is exactly what the owners want.

[nebist]

I thought about instituting a vet min at more like 3%, but that might make some vets unemployable and replaceable by younger, cheaper labor. 

Also, yes, if you received a top pick and were capped out, you would need to either trade the pick or a player to a team with room.  It necessitates roster management and also promotes player movement. 

[nebist]

I'm presuming that at least one purpose of a cap is to guide teams toward parity, but that hasn't happened.

I agree with ederson that the current GS situation is an anomaly, thanks mainly to Curry being on a well-below-market deal, but the cap also didn't prevent the formation of the Miami Superfriends several years ago, when the cap was much lower. If some players are willing to take less to create a highly favorable superteam situation, that kinda defeats the purpose of a cap, right?

The purpose of the cap is to keep salaries down.  Players taking less than they are worth is exactly what the owners want.

Not really.  There is a 50/50 split in revenue either way.  Owners can't "save" money on player salaries. 

[LooseCannon]

I'm presuming that at least one purpose of a cap is to guide teams toward parity, but that hasn't happened.

I agree with ederson that the current GS situation is an anomaly, thanks mainly to Curry being on a well-below-market deal, but the cap also didn't prevent the formation of the Miami Superfriends several years ago, when the cap was much lower. If some players are willing to take less to create a highly favorable superteam situation, that kinda defeats the purpose of a cap, right?

The purpose of the cap is to keep salaries down.  Players taking less than they are worth is exactly what the owners want.

Not really.  There is a 50/50 split in revenue either way.  Owners can't "save" money on player salaries.

The cap is the mechanism for limiting players to a percentage of the revenue.  It's how the owners prevent themselves from handing out too many stupid contracts.

[fairweatherfan]

I think there isn't anything to fix.

What happened this season with GS is an anomaly and there will always be an anomaly
A 35% cap rise + the best player in the league with a 9m contract + a top 5 player willing to change team

How often can that happen?

just to make it clear , i don't like what happened and i think it will hurt the league at least this season but i'm against such tight control.

I think the league should propose some kind of smoothing mechanism for the cap jumping again, but it's such a rare occurrence that it wouldn't affect much by the time it was implemented.  And the version they proposed this time would've taken extra money for the owners rather than spreading the same amounts out longer term.

The league at least needs to be prepared for a situation where the cap drops substantially due to an economic crash, the bottom falling out of TV $ or similar.  Otherwise you risk the far worse situation where nearly every team is over the cap and most in the tax before FAs are even signed.

[ederson]

I think there isn't anything to fix.

What happened this season with GS is an anomaly and there will always be an anomaly
A 35% cap rise + the best player in the league with a 9m contract + a top 5 player willing to change team

How often can that happen?

just to make it clear , i don't like what happened and i think it will hurt the league at least this season but i'm against such tight control.

I think the league should propose some kind of smoothing mechanism for the cap jumping again, but it's such a rare occurrence that it wouldn't affect much by the time it was implemented.  And the version they proposed this time would've taken extra money for the owners rather than spreading the same amounts out longer term.

The league at least needs to be prepared for a situation where the cap drops substantially due to an economic crash, the bottom falling out of TV $ or similar.  Otherwise you risk the far worse situation where nearly every team is over the cap and most in the tax before FAs are even signed.

I couldn't agree more

[LooseCannon]

I think there isn't anything to fix.

What happened this season with GS is an anomaly and there will always be an anomaly
A 35% cap rise + the best player in the league with a 9m contract + a top 5 player willing to change team

How often can that happen?

just to make it clear , i don't like what happened and i think it will hurt the league at least this season but i'm against such tight control.

I think the league should propose some kind of smoothing mechanism for the cap jumping again, but it's such a rare occurrence that it wouldn't affect much by the time it was implemented.  And the version they proposed this time would've taken extra money for the owners rather than spreading the same amounts out longer term.

The league at least needs to be prepared for a situation where the cap drops substantially due to an economic crash, the bottom falling out of TV $ or similar.  Otherwise you risk the far worse situation where nearly every team is over the cap and most in the tax before FAs are even signed.

The players rejected cap smoothing and they were right to do so.  They should want ridiculous contracts being tossed around to set precedents for future negotiations.  If the owners really want cap smoothing, they should offer to increase the percentage of BRI that goes to the players.