Additional pay tied to wins. Good idea?

[Tr1boy]

Hearing Broussard and Whitlock talk about it today

The idea is players will make a base salary (example 20 million a season for Lebron). But a win means an additional 50k.    For another player who makes 10 million, means an additional 25k per win.   Like a tiering system dependent on how much your base salary is, how many awards won etc.

The league could become much more competitive and we could see less tanking

Thoughts?

[CELTICSofBOSTON]

I don't see how this ties into tanking??

Players don't tank.

[Fan from VT]

I don't know if we'd see less tanking. The players generally aren't tanking, it's owners/coach by playing time and roster construction.

So, what you'd then see, is players getting more frustrated at management, therefore wanting to join better teams, therefore more talent concentration / less competition (parity).

[jambr380]

I don't know if we'd see less tanking. The players generally aren't tanking, it's owners/coach by playing time and roster construction.

So, what you'd then see, is players getting more frustrated at management, therefore wanting to join better teams, therefore more talent concentration / less competition (parity).

Yeah, really. If people think we have a problem now with veterans joining good teams for a shot a title, it will likely get much worse. This whole concept doesn't make any sense.

Edit: I didn't see the 'tiering' system aspect of the post. Still, though - buddies in their prime will still gang up rather than staying with their teams. This is like the opposite of the super-max concept that is just starting up now.

[Tr1boy]

I don't know if we'd see less tanking. The players generally aren't tanking, it's owners/coach by playing time and roster construction.

So, what you'd then see, is players getting more frustrated at management, therefore wanting to join better teams, therefore more talent concentration / less competition (parity).

True. 

But sometimes you see players give up prematurely ... This could prevent this

Also stars are less likely to sit and rest

I dont think this would hurt the current system, only enhance it

[Granath]

These guys never understand the ramifications of the ideas they are proposing.

This would create a financial incentive for teams to lose and tank harder. Win 30 games and you fork over an extra few million in salary than if you win 20 games. So now you have a disparity between the goals of management and the goals of the individual players and you've created a financial incentive for teams to lose more games if they don't make the playoffs. This leads to further problems between management and players, something the NBA doesn't need any more of.

Moreover, this creates far more locker room drama like "you missed that last second shot and it cost me $25k!!!". That's the kind of thing that fractures locker rooms.

It's a silly idea. I imagine that teams could offer incentives to players for "X" number of wins. Players don't negotiate these types of incentives for a reason.