New CBA deal almost done

[CFAN38]

I can't help but wonder why things like rookie salary scale, minimum contracts, mid-level exceptions, etc. aren't just tied to salary cap.  This just seems like something that should never have been a problem in the first place.

Let's make half the salaries in the league based on a % of the cap, and let's make the other half based on a flat number with uniform increases every year.

Could nobody really see this issue coming?

Or is there a good reason for this that I'm just failing to see?

way to logical to make all of this % based

[tazzmaniac]

Glad to hear they are working things out.

Rookie pay scale this was a no brainer

Duel NBA/NBDL contracts this makes a ton of sense and hopefully increases roster sizes, it would be nice to see the roster capped at 17 where two players have to be on the Dleague roster at a given time.


It isn't likely to happen but I would love to see a broader reaching change with the Cap to help retain players.

The way I would like to see the cap changed is for tenured players to count less against the cap. 5 years with one team 90% salary vs cap, 8 Years 75%, 12 year 50%.


I would also eliminate the cap on individual contract values but retain length caps. Create structured contact buyouts that only count 50% for the length of the deal on the cap (ie sign Durant to a 5 year 100mill deal, he gets hurt and bought out he gets payed but it counts at 50mill per for remaining duration.)

Would also add a 3rd round to the draft. 1st round guaranteed NBA contract. 2nd round NBA/NBDL floater contract at rate 75% of 30th pick 2 yr with team option 3rd year, 3rd round 1 year Dleague deal with team option for 2yr at floater salary

Draft: real simple teams are not top 3 eligible two years in a row, same odds for teams 1-7 and 8-14. Make the entire 1-14 a lottery   

What effect would the NBA/NBDL dual contracts have if it doesn't increase roster size? 

It sounds like they are going to try to increase the retention rate by increasing how much the player's team can offer them.  The players will like having the option to stay for more money.  They wouldn't go for your reduced cap space for tenured players because it would unnaturally restrict trades. 

I prefer the current draft lottery to your suggestion.  People may hate the bad teams tanking for the #1 pick but they're really going to hate mediocre teams tanking to miss the playoffs.  You'd also have teams tanking hard for the 7th spot under your proposal.  Owners already had an opportunity to change the draft lottery in response to Hinkie's process and they chose not too.  They don't mind bad teams tanking.  They just don't want it to be so public. 

[manl_lui]

Glad to hear they are working things out.

Rookie pay scale this was a no brainer

Duel NBA/NBDL contracts this makes a ton of sense and hopefully increases roster sizes, it would be nice to see the roster capped at 17 where two players have to be on the Dleague roster at a given time.


It isn't likely to happen but I would love to see a broader reaching change with the Cap to help retain players.

The way I would like to see the cap changed is for tenured players to count less against the cap. 5 years with one team 90% salary vs cap, 8 Years 75%, 12 year 50%.


I would also eliminate the cap on individual contract values but retain length caps. Create structured contact buyouts that only count 50% for the length of the deal on the cap (ie sign Durant to a 5 year 100mill deal, he gets hurt and bought out he gets payed but it counts at 50mill per for remaining duration.)

Would also add a 3rd round to the draft. 1st round guaranteed NBA contract. 2nd round NBA/NBDL floater contract at rate 75% of 30th pick 2 yr with team option 3rd year, 3rd round 1 year Dleague deal with team option for 2yr at floater salary

Draft: real simple teams are not top 3 eligible two years in a row, same odds for teams 1-7 and 8-14. Make the entire 1-14 a lottery   

What effect would the NBA/NBDL dual contracts have if it doesn't increase roster size? 

It sounds like they are going to try to increase the retention rate by increasing how much the player's team can offer them.  The players will like having the option to stay for more money.  They wouldn't go for your reduced cap space for tenured players because it would unnaturally restrict trades. 

I prefer the current draft lottery to your suggestion.  People may hate the bad teams tanking for the #1 pick but they're really going to hate mediocre teams tanking to miss the playoffs.  You'd also have teams tanking hard for the 7th spot under your proposal.  Owners already had an opportunity to change the draft lottery in response to Hinkie's process and they chose not too.  They don't mind bad teams tanking.  They just don't want it to be so public.

I'll say Silver is doing a fine job sinc ehe took over as commish. I think this is huge

[Moranis]

I got to say I am a little surprised by this. The league really needs to address the super team issue that is now a lot more serious issue than it was before the cap jump. 4-5 years ago the Heat were having all kinds of problems adding players to fill out their bench to go along with their Big 3. Now teams are starting to get big 4's and still having bench players making 15 million (iggy). It is bad for the league to have teams that can't compete.

I'm not worried about that. Golden State only had room for Durant because of the massive cap spike. It'll probably do that once more but afterwards, the cap will normalize and you won't get those situation unless the cap balloons very quickly again. The KD thing was an aberration, not that new normal.

As far as Big 3's go, that just doesn't bother me.

Plus Curry was signed for well below a max deal before the increase (which makes it look very small now).

Look at the Cavs, they are 20 million into tax range, there is only so long they can do that, and that is with Irving and Love signing before the new cap.

[JBcat]

I got to say I am a little surprised by this. The league really needs to address the super team issue that is now a lot more serious issue than it was before the cap jump. 4-5 years ago the Heat were having all kinds of problems adding players to fill out their bench to go along with their Big 3. Now teams are starting to get big 4's and still having bench players making 15 million (iggy). It is bad for the league to have teams that can't compete.

I'm not worried about that. Golden State only had room for Durant because of the massive cap spike. It'll probably do that once more but afterwards, the cap will normalize and you won't get those situation unless the cap balloons very quickly again. The KD thing was an aberration, not that new normal.

As far as Big 3's go, that just doesn't bother me.

I agree mostly with this. One thing that could be beneficial is like in baseball if a FA leaves that was given a qualifying offer (I think it's the average salary or something like that) the team that loses the FA is given a draft pick.  So the Thunder for example would at least get something back in return.

[Moranis]

I think they should just have NBA and NBADL contracts and should allow players with NBA contracts to play in the NBADL without it affecting the NBA cap or roster limitations.  I'd be fine limiting the NBA contracts per team to 20 with only 12 active contracts at a time.  Every day a player is on the NBA roster his salary is counted towards the cap (not just active, but inactive as well which would include injured players, guys that can't be sent down, etc.).  Some contracts could include clauses that say the player can't be forced to play in the NBADL so that would help with a veteran.  No one that is injured can be sent to NBADL until said player starts playing again unless said player was injured while on a NBADL roster (so you can't game the system on an injury). 

[LooseCannon]

Draft: real simple teams are not top 3 eligible two years in a row, same odds for teams 1-7 and 8-14. Make the entire 1-14 a lottery   

So, the Brooklyn Nets can't have a top three pick next season?

[MBunge]

I prefer the current draft lottery to your suggestion.  People may hate the bad teams tanking for the #1 pick but they're really going to hate mediocre teams tanking to miss the playoffs.  You'd also have teams tanking hard for the 7th spot under your proposal.  Owners already had an opportunity to change the draft lottery in response to Hinkie's process and they chose not too.  They don't mind bad teams tanking.  They just don't want it to be so public.

The problem is that it's going to be even more public when more teams decide to follow Philly's example.  Tanking in the past used to almost exclusively involve teams shutting things down after the all star break if they were hopelessly out of it.  Tanking an entire season was almost unheard of.  I'm not sure I can think of another example besides us tanking for Duncan.  And even when teams were tanking, they would never just strip themselves of any and all talent the way Philly did.

There are probably a half dozen teams that are in worse shape right now than Philly was when Hinkie took over.  Imagine if three of them decided to follow the same strategy.  Imagine what that would do to the league.

Mike

[tazzmaniac]

I prefer the current draft lottery to your suggestion.  People may hate the bad teams tanking for the #1 pick but they're really going to hate mediocre teams tanking to miss the playoffs.  You'd also have teams tanking hard for the 7th spot under your proposal.  Owners already had an opportunity to change the draft lottery in response to Hinkie's process and they chose not too.  They don't mind bad teams tanking.  They just don't want it to be so public.

The problem is that it's going to be even more public when more teams decide to follow Philly's example.  Tanking in the past used to almost exclusively involve teams shutting things down after the all star break if they were hopelessly out of it.  Tanking an entire season was almost unheard of.  I'm not sure I can think of another example besides us tanking for Duncan.  And even when teams were tanking, they would never just strip themselves of any and all talent the way Philly did.

There are probably a half dozen teams that are in worse shape right now than Philly was when Hinkie took over.  Imagine if three of them decided to follow the same strategy.  Imagine what that would do to the league.

Mike

I don't see a half dozen current teams in worse shape than the Sixers after the Bynum debacle.  Not sure I see even one.  The Sixers owner approved Hinkie's approach but eventually got cold feet and Hinkie was forced out.  At this point, I can't see any other owners willing to take all the bad PR from doing a multi-year tank. 

Now in 5 years if the Sixers have won a championship or two and their young stars are just coming into their prime that could change.  Maybe another team tries it but I can't see it becoming a common occurrence.  If some team does, they probably won't be so obvious about it next time.  You can lose a lot of games with a mediocre offense and terrible defense but not be perceived so poorly because people focus on offense.  The first season the Sixers tanked they were a top 12 defense with Noel and a bunch of d-leaguers.  That was quite impressive but they didn't get any credit for it because their offense was god awful.