Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 142

Thread: NBA Hard Cap?

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,509
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    The players would have to give up guaranteed contracts for a hard cap.
    Not necessarily. I think there's a work around. You can just shorter contracts. More team and player options. And the NBA already has their version of non guaranteed contracts. They would become more common

    City of Champions

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,509
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    The NBA DOESN'T care about competition. They care about selling the product. But more than selling the product they are required to work out a CBA by the government, and the CBA includes a fixed money split, so the only way for that split to change is if the players association actually want to give the owners 25% of their money. There is NO way that happens.
    I think they care about competition, but they just care more about maximizing profits. Why can't they both be accomplished?

    Adding 2 teams. Keeping guaranteed contracts and a cap of $120 and floor of $90M is a win win for both sides. We're not losing any money spent on FA, actually there would be more. There would be more competition and the fan base would be grown with 2 additional teams

    City of Champions

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    17,689
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Hard cap is fine, I don't know that it would make a real competitive difference in the NBA.

    It can't happen without a new CBA.

    There is NO WAY the NBAPA allows the money split to go down on their side by 25%+ with a $100M hard cap. It would have to be around $130M to get the money split right to start.
    how do you figure? The cap is based on BRI... that wouldn't change... the difference is that the reallocation at the end of the year would probably raise salaries instead of lowering them. You aren't under the impression that these guys actually get paid what their reported salaries are... do you?

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,857
    Quote Originally Posted by Oakmont_4 View Post
    Is that even a question? I don't even understand the point of this comment...
    Is what a question? I'm agreeing with your post..

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    7,248
    Quote Originally Posted by Giannis94 View Post
    Then don't tell me the NBA cares about competition. They don't. Because if it did, you lower the cap and distribute the additional 30 mill per team evenly amongst the players. Otherwise the NBA is still just a 3-5 team league in which controversial officiating ultimately decides winners and losers.
    The NBA doesn't control the cap. It has to be negotiated with the player's union. Chris Paul and Lebron James control the union. Do you think they want a hard cap that limits their individual salaries, their ability to change teams, and their ability to bring in teammates to help them? Do you think the star players of two of the three superteams want to prevent superteams?

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    7,248
    Quote Originally Posted by Vinylman View Post
    how do you figure? The cap is based on BRI... that wouldn't change... the difference is that the reallocation at the end of the year would probably raise salaries instead of lowering them. You aren't under the impression that these guys actually get paid what their reported salaries are... do you?
    The problem with reallocation is that the guys who control the NBAPA are the guys who would lose the most money.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    14,344
    Quote Originally Posted by IndyRealist View Post
    The NBA doesn't control the cap. It has to be negotiated with the player's union. Chris Paul and Lebron James control the union. Do you think they want a hard cap that limits their individual salaries, their ability to change teams, and their ability to bring in teammates to help them? Do you think the star players of two of the three superteams want to prevent superteams?
    Lebron has been GM pretty much everywhere he went.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    17,689
    Quote Originally Posted by IndyRealist View Post
    The problem with reallocation is that the guys who control the NBAPA are the guys who would lose the most money.
    I understand that but it already happens as you have pointed out in the past.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    7,248
    Quote Originally Posted by Vinylman View Post
    I understand that but it already happens as you have pointed out in the past.
    Some reallocation happens, yes. But the guys who's salaries push payrolls over the cap are they guys who make the most money, and also happen to run the union. A hard cap with reallocation directly takes money from them and gives it to the rest of the players, because they're the guys who will have to take smaller contracts to make a hard cap work.

    Regardless, Lebron and Paul are not giving up their ability to form superteams, which is what a hard cap would be for.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,509
    Quote Originally Posted by IndyRealist View Post
    The NBA doesn't control the cap. It has to be negotiated with the player's union. Chris Paul and Lebron James control the union. Do you think they want a hard cap that limits their individual salaries, their ability to change teams, and their ability to bring in teammates to help them? Do you think the star players of two of the three superteams want to prevent superteams?
    A hard cap doesn't necessarily limit their individual salaries. They could potentially make more if they get rid of 'MAX' contracts

    I don't see how a hard cap eliminates or restricts their ability to change teams from what's current.

    I doubt they want to prevent super teams, but if it equals more money individually and for other players to not have a "max" they can earn, I would think that's a worthy concession here. It would make their product better on the court, which means more fans, more viewers, higher ratings, more money for everyone. It's a worthy sacrifice. And if they truly are the best players, they should still have better odds at winning anyways.

    City of Champions

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    7,248
    Quote Originally Posted by Oakmont_4 View Post
    A hard cap doesn't necessarily limit their individual salaries. They could potentially make more if they get rid of 'MAX' contracts

    I don't see how a hard cap eliminates or restricts their ability to change teams from what's current.

    I doubt they want to prevent super teams, but if it equals more money individually and for other players to not have a "max" they can earn, I would think that's a worthy concession here. It would make their product better on the court, which means more fans, more viewers, higher ratings, more money for everyone. It's a worthy sacrifice. And if they truly are the best players, they should still have better odds at winning anyways.
    A hard cap limits individual salaries by preventing teams from exceeding the cap to retain their player. So, for a current max player to make the same money, he would have to go to a team he doesn't necessarily want to go to. So to stay in the same situation, he has to take less.

    A hard cap limits the ability to change teams by preventing teams from bloating their salary over the cap and then using that salary to trade for the players they want. OKC could not have traded for Paul George and Melo if they didn't already have Oladipo and Kanter, for instance.

    Right now, players like Chris Paul and Lebron can have their cake and eat it too. They get paid a huge chunk of money and they still get to stack their teams. Those players control the NBAPA. It should not be difficult to see that it would be extremely difficult to get a hard cap in the next CBA.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    42,907
    Quote Originally Posted by Giannis94 View Post
    Then don't tell me the NBA cares about competition. They don't. Because if it did, you lower the cap and distribute the additional 30 mill per team evenly amongst the players. Otherwise the NBA is still just a 3-5 team league in which controversial officiating ultimately decides winners and losers.
    I would kill to have that 3 to 5 league back

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    42,907
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Hard cap is fine, I don't know that it would make a real competitive difference in the NBA.

    It can't happen without a new CBA.

    There is NO WAY the NBAPA allows the money split to go down on their side by 25%+ with a $100M hard cap. It would have to be around $130M to get the money split right to start.
    How about if you can waive players without counting them in the cap total.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    7,248
    Quote Originally Posted by Chronz View Post
    How about if you can waive players without counting them in the cap total.
    I don't think small market teams would go for that, and when the owners vote the big market teams are outnumbered.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,509
    Quote Originally Posted by IndyRealist View Post
    A hard cap limits individual salaries by preventing teams from exceeding the cap to retain their player. So, for a current max player to make the same money, he would have to go to a team he doesn't necessarily want to go to. So to stay in the same situation, he has to take less.
    Still not true. If the team wants them back they can move players to create the cap space. If the team doesn't deem them important enough to, I don't see how it's really different than now. But if LeBron wants $50M, It's likely that team will create the necessary cap space for him. If they don't, he can make $50M somewhere else. He'd only be losing money if he chose to. No different than now. KD took less because he wanted to go to GS
    A hard cap limits the ability to change teams by preventing teams from bloating their salary over the cap and then using that salary to trade for the players they want. OKC could not have traded for Paul George and Melo if they didn't already have Oladipo and Kanter, for instance.
    The hard cap isn't preventing anything in this scenario. The GM's management of his cap space is.

    Right now, players like Chris Paul and Lebron can have their cake and eat it too. They get paid a huge chunk of money and they still get to stack their teams. Those players control the NBAPA. It should not be difficult to see that it would be extremely difficult to get a hard cap in the next CBA.
    But they could be paid more, lots more, in a capped league. It's conceivable that if there was no max contract, LeBron would be making $50M a season.

    City of Champions

Page 3 of 10 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •