How can Super Teams continue to build while others "can't afford stars"?

[green_bballers13]

Please excuse my ignorance of the new CBA and legal framework of the NBA....

How can Golden State afford 4 of the top 20 players in the NBA? How can Cleveland afford 3 of the top 30, and still pay guys like JR Smith and Tristan Thompson?

I've read over and over how the Celtics need to be smart with future contracts (despite having a ton of young guys on cheap deals). I've read about how Horford isn't worth the money he's getting paid. I've read about how certain trade rumors are unrealistic because of salaries. I've read that the 5th leading scorer in the NBA is going to price himself out of Boston....

Why do some believe that GS and Cleveland can continue to maintain talent for the next 5 years, but then have reservations about how the Celtics should spend money?

What within the CBA allows certain teams to afford many of the league's top players, while other teams aren't afforded that same opportunity?

[Ilikesports17]

The way the CBA is built you can pretty much always resign your own players.

Once you build a contender, as long as you are willing to pay a massive tax, you can generally keep that team together.

If you dont have a contender you can also keep your team together, but its not a contender... so...

Also, max contracts force the most elite players to be the best bargains. Which seems a bit backwards.

Cleveland signed Irving and James using organic cap space than went way over the cap to resign Thompson Love Smith etc. Their tax bill, Im sure is huge, but for true contention its probably worth it.

Golden State took advantage of massive cap escalations and signed KD to cap space. They will be able to retain all their players if they want to pay an astronomical tax. We could technically keep everybody, but a) that makes future additions really hard and b) why pay a massive tax for a team that cant win championships?

In two seasons Bradley Smart and Thomas will be free agents and we will have the option to pay them each 20+ mil a season to come back, but then Wyc will be footing and astronomical bill, the Celtics probably wont be competing, and they wont be able to make any major additions for the next 4 years.

[spikelovetheCelts]

Mike Dunleavy Jr has not report. He does not think the 4th team in the east is a contender. Yes, Atlanta is not goind to win this year. But this proves your point about Super Teams. Mike Dunleavy Jr only wants to go to SA or GSW so he has a shot. SAD

[green_bballers13]

So if Wyc has the interest in paying a massive tax, the Celtics could go out and sign virtually anyone they want?

Why not pass on signing Bradley/Smart, keep Thomas/Horford/Brown (and next two draft picks), sign Boogie as a free agent, and then go out and sign another stud player.

In this instance, they'd be spending about as much as CLE and GSW, right?

[Ilikesports17]

So if Wyc has the interest in paying a massive tax, the Celtics could go out and sign virtually anyone they want?

Why not pass on signing Bradley/Smart, keep Thomas/Horford/Brown (and next two draft picks), sign Boogie as a free agent, and then go out and sign another stud player.

In this instance, they'd be spending about as much as CLE and GSW, right?

What is your understanding of the salary cap and when teams can exceed it?

[BitterJim]

Please excuse my ignorance of the new CBA and legal framework of the NBA....

How can Golden State afford 4 of the top 20 players in the NBA? How can Cleveland afford 3 of the top 30, and still pay guys like JR Smith and Tristan Thompson?

They can afford their players because they are willing to pay the luxury tax.  Those teams are making a ton of money right now, so paying more money to keep them together makes good financial sense for ownership.  Once they got the players together, keeping them is extremely easy (teams can use Bird Rights to resign players over the cap), especially for a team like GSW with Curry making only $12 million this year

I've read over and over how the Celtics need to be smart with future contracts (despite having a ton of young guys on cheap deals). I've read about how Horford isn't worth the money he's getting paid. I've read about how certain trade rumors are unrealistic because of salaries. I've read that the 5th leading scorer in the NBA is going to price himself out of Boston....

Most of these things have to do with either cap space, actual NBA trade rules, or how much ownership would be willing to pay.  A lot of trade rumors are called unrealistic because, under the rules of the NBA they can't happen (rule of thumb, teams can bring in ~150% of the money they send out if they end up under the cap afterward, and 125% of what they send out if they end up over).  Other trade ideas are thrown out because the salary commitments for players (ex: Omer Asik or Tyson Chandler) extend past this season, which would cut into the team's cap room in the upcoming season and possibly prevent signing a FA.

As for future contracts for IT and others, it all comes down to the salary cap and how much owners will pay.  In theory, paying IT big money (especially if he didn't live up to the contract) could prevent us from signing stars in the future.  It could also lead to ownership letting other players go because they don't want to pay the luxury tax to keep a non-contender together

Why do some believe that GS and Cleveland can continue to maintain talent for the next 5 years, but then have reservations about how the Celtics should spend money?

This has to do with how much ownership is willing o pay.  It's one thing to go over the luxury tax when you have a contender, but it's another to do so for a team that you hope can make the ECF

What within the CBA allows certain teams to afford many of the league's top players, while other teams aren't afforded that same opportunity?

Every team IS afforded the same opportunity to afford top players - the issue is getting them to sign there instead of for a top team or for a nother non-top team

If you want to learn more about the CBA, saltlover Larry Coon's CBA FAQ site is really helpful (don't try to read the entire thing in one sitting, but it's really nice for just going through the list of questions and picking picking out the ones that really interest you).  He explains everything very well and in words that everyone can understand

[green_bballers13]

Ilikesports- I have virtually no understanding of the salary cap. I like sports as well, but I'm generally too busy in life to care too much about the nitty gritty. In this instance I was interested, as I never really understood the disparity in spending/talent in a salary capped league.

Golden State had a ton of talent, almost won 2 championships in a row, then signed a top 3 player in the league. If the Celtics can land a couple of studs with the Brooklyn picks, shouldn't they be in a position to go out and get one/two game changing players?

It's easy to say that they won't draft Curry/Thompson/Green, but even if they come close and land a couple borderline all stars, why wouldn't the Celtics try to replicate GSW's plan?

[BitterJim]

So if Wyc has the interest in paying a massive tax, the Celtics could go out and sign virtually anyone they want?

Why not pass on signing Bradley/Smart, keep Thomas/Horford/Brown (and next two draft picks), sign Boogie as a free agent, and then go out and sign another stud player.

In this instance, they'd be spending about as much as CLE and GSW, right?

No.  Teams can only sign free agents from another team if the have the cap space for it (or if they fit into one of the exceptions, like the minimum salary exception, the biannual, or the mid-level, but no star will ever sign using those exceptions)

If the team had already acquired the player (ie through trade), then they can go over the cap to resign them (assuming that their bird rights transferred in the trade), but you can't just sign a player if you don't have cap room for them

[hpantazo]

Mike Dunleavy Jr has not report. He does not think the 4th team in the east is a contender. Yes, Atlanta is not goind to win this year. But this proves your point about Super Teams. Mike Dunleavy Jr only wants to go to SA or GSW so he has a shot. SAD

Yeah things like that shouldn't happen. He's a player under contract, if he doesn't want to report he shouldn't be paid imo.

[green_bballers13]

So if Wyc has the interest in paying a massive tax, the Celtics could go out and sign virtually anyone they want?

Why not pass on signing Bradley/Smart, keep Thomas/Horford/Brown (and next two draft picks), sign Boogie as a free agent, and then go out and sign another stud player.

In this instance, they'd be spending about as much as CLE and GSW, right?

No.  Teams can only sign free agents from another team if the have the cap space for it (or if they fit into one of the exceptions, like the minimum salary exception, the biannual, or the mid-level, but no star will ever sign using those exceptions)

If the team had already acquired the player (ie through trade), then they can go over the cap to resign them (assuming that their bird rights transferred in the trade), but you can't just sign a player if you don't have cap room for them

Ok- so GSW effectively ran a tight ship, outside of their 3 all stars last year. They got rid of Bogut and passed on a Barnes resign, clearing space up for Durant?

My only real interest in this is to forecast a scenario where the Celtics are contenders. In essence, they could pay their real contributors, get rid of middle tier players on middle tier salaries, rely on young talented players on rookie deals, and give out 3/4 max contracts? Horford/IT could be two of them and they could get Boogie and one more nice piece with Brown and two more top 5 picks? If so, sign me up.

[BitterJim]

So if Wyc has the interest in paying a massive tax, the Celtics could go out and sign virtually anyone they want?

Why not pass on signing Bradley/Smart, keep Thomas/Horford/Brown (and next two draft picks), sign Boogie as a free agent, and then go out and sign another stud player.

In this instance, they'd be spending about as much as CLE and GSW, right?

No.  Teams can only sign free agents from another team if the have the cap space for it (or if they fit into one of the exceptions, like the minimum salary exception, the biannual, or the mid-level, but no star will ever sign using those exceptions)

If the team had already acquired the player (ie through trade), then they can go over the cap to resign them (assuming that their bird rights transferred in the trade), but you can't just sign a player if you don't have cap room for them

Ok- so GSW effectively ran a tight ship, outside of their 3 all stars last year. They got rid of Bogut and passed on a Barnes resign, clearing space up for Durant?

My only real interest in this is to forecast a scenario where the Celtics are contenders. In essence, they could pay their real contributors, get rid of middle tier players on middle tier salaries, rely on young talented players on rookie deals, and give out 3/4 max contracts? Horford/IT could be two of them and they could get Boogie and one more nice piece with Brown and two more top 5 picks? If so, sign me up.

Golden State managed to sign their players to reasonable contracts, which are now bargains, and had it timed perfectly with a huge increase on the cap that allowed them to sign Durant.  Cap jumps like that rarely happen, so counting on one of those to let you add a star to a good team is a bad way to go

Your situation for building is extremely unlikely to work out.  The best bet for adding a star like Boogie would be to trade for him while he's still under contract, so we get his bird rights, and then resigning him long term with those bird rights.  Getting rid of mid-level contracts and surrounding IT and Horford with low-level players is just going to p--- off IT and Horford and make Boston look just as bad as Sacramento to free agents.  Keep your players, and look to make deals that consolidate assets.  Don't throw out assets like AB or Crowder in the hopes that you'll maybe be an attractive destination for a player like Boogie a few years down the line

[jambr380]

Ok- so GSW effectively ran a tight ship, outside of their 3 all stars last year. They got rid of Bogut and passed on a Barnes resign, clearing space up for Durant?

Basically - any team that was not over the cap last year essentially had enough space for a max contract this past offseason due to the massive cap increase. GSW had a once in a lifetime opportunity and took advantage of it. This especially screwed teams like the Cs who had managed their books responsibly. Durant's choices would have been much more limited and the Cs would have looked a lot more appealing. We would not have signed Horford, but who cares, we would have had Durant.

As the cap settles out over the next couple of years and players sign contracts proportional to the new cap, teams will once again be right up against or over the cap. This is where a good GM like Danny will once again be a benefit.


EDIT: BitterJim just explained what I did. TP to him 

[saltlover]

Mike Dunleavy Jr has not report. He does not think the 4th team in the east is a contender. Yes, Atlanta is not goind to win this year. But this proves your point about Super Teams. Mike Dunleavy Jr only wants to go to SA or GSW so he has a shot. SAD

Yeah things like that shouldn't happen. He's a player under contract, if he doesn't want to report he shouldn't be paid imo.

Seriously, it's not even like he signed with the Cavs as a free agent.  He was traded there in July from Chicago.  In terms of competitiveness, Atlanta is still an upgrade from the Bulls.

[Moranis]

Ok- so GSW effectively ran a tight ship, outside of their 3 all stars last year. They got rid of Bogut and passed on a Barnes resign, clearing space up for Durant?

Basically - any team that was not over the cap last year essentially had enough space for a max contract this past offseason due to the massive cap increase. GSW had a once in a lifetime opportunity and took advantage of it. This especially screwed teams like the Cs who had managed their books responsibly. Durant's choices would have been much more limited and the Cs would have looked a lot more appealing. We would not have signed Horford, but who cares, we would have had Durant.

As the cap settles out over the next couple of years and players sign contracts proportional to the new cap, teams will once again be right up against or over the cap. This is where a good GM like Danny will once again be a benefit.


EDIT: BitterJim just explained what I did. TP to him 

GS doesn't have Bird rights on Durant though, so they could have some issues this summer. 

[green_bballers13]

I remember reading that people thought that Klay Thompson is basically untouchable? Is this true? If GS wants to keep Draymond, will they really be able to pay 4 players $100m-$120m per year?