PDA

View Full Version : Does the NBA need to get rid of guaranteed contracts?



AIverson
06-05-2009, 09:55 AM
I think so.

I'd like the NBA to switch over to a hard salary cap and get rid of guaranteed contracts. I just feel teams should be able to go and get any free agent they want any year they want to. the NBA needs more parity. Low market teams should be able to have a shot at winning, too.

Saint Brian
06-05-2009, 09:59 AM
Absolutely. There is so much deadweight on NBA rosters.

Of course, GM's could stop giving out these ridiculously long, high-priced contracts.

IBleedPurple
06-05-2009, 10:22 AM
Absolutely. There is so much deadweight on NBA rosters.

Of course, GM's could stop giving out these ridiculously long, high-priced contracts.

x2

NIUHuskies
06-05-2009, 10:35 AM
I'd like the NBA to switch over to a hard salary cap and get rid of guaranteed contracts. I just feel teams should be able to go and get any free agent they want any year they want to. the NBA needs more parity. Low market teams should be able to have a shot at winning, too.

Why would the players ever agree to this? Why would owners with teams that know how to run their franchise agree to this?

Low market teams need to understand their position and run their team properly. It is tough to lure huge free agents to those cities so they need to build through the draft and make smart financial decisions.

Changing the cap rules won't bring parity to the NBA because the same teams that make stupid decisions will still make them.

Lo Porto
06-05-2009, 10:54 AM
They should meet in the middle. The last year of every contract should only be half guaranteed. For example, the Knicks should have been able to pay half of Marbury's $20 million this year and he would have been free to go but with $10 million in his pocket. Most contracts that are killing teams are the ones like Wally S, McGrady, Marbury, LaFrentz, and other massive contracts. If the players were able to get half and the owners were able to cut half, it would be fair for both sides. It would be better than football where the teams get all the benefits.

masalex1205
06-05-2009, 10:56 AM
Would love for this to happen, I read an article on ESPN by Hollinger or someone like that which suggested an merit-based system. Sounded pretty legit and you wouldn't have guys like Kenny Thomas and Nazr Muhammed making money while guys like Millsaps, Brandon Bass were making below what they were worth.

king4day
06-05-2009, 11:58 AM
The NFL has it set the right way. Just as long as they can release someone at any time, this forces the players to play hard every night.

There should be contracts with a certain amount of guaranteed money allowed, but for guys like Jerome James, you can get cut if you aren't living up to the contract.

MoBASS
06-05-2009, 12:54 PM
The NFL has it set the right way. Just as long as they can release someone at any time, this forces the players to play hard every night.

There should be contracts with a certain amount of guaranteed money allowed, but for guys like Jerome James, you can get cut if you aren't living up to the contract.

Clapsies! :clap:

HoosierDaddy
06-05-2009, 12:57 PM
21 of 32 nba teams lost money this year. SOmething needs to change

IndyRealist
06-05-2009, 01:00 PM
Players would never agree to uniform non-garuanteed contracts. You could have a lockout for the entire season, they still wouldn't do it. The CBA isn't made to protect players like Lebron and Kobe, in fact the rules limit them severely in the form of salary and term maxes. The CBA is designed to protect the Jerome James' and Jamaal Tinsleys of the league, because without their garuanteed basketball contracts, they've got nothing left.

Lo Porto
06-05-2009, 02:18 PM
Would love for this to happen, I read an article on ESPN by Hollinger or someone like that which suggested an merit-based system. Sounded pretty legit and you wouldn't have guys like Kenny Thomas and Nazr Muhammed making money while guys like Millsaps, Brandon Bass were making below what they were worth.

I don't like merit based contracts. Bonuses are cool, but not merit. If that happens, guys will shoot instead of pass and it turns into "getting mine".

If a GM signs a player to a 5 year deal, they should be happy with that deal for 4 years. Before year 5, they can terminate but pay half his salary. The NFL way shows no integrity. If your boss hired somebody in your office for a one year deal and cut them in two months with no severance, that's BS. A GM has to be accountable for signing a contract.

Hellcrooner
06-05-2009, 02:21 PM
The contracts have to be guaranted in any casy what could be done

is if you buy out a player you can detract half of his salary of your cap-

masalex1205
06-05-2009, 02:23 PM
I don't like merit based contracts. Bonuses are cool, but not merit. If that happens, guys will shoot instead of pass and it turns into "getting mine".

If a GM signs a player to a 5 year deal, they should be happy with that deal for 4 years. Before year 5, they can terminate but pay half his salary. The NFL way shows no integrity. If your boss hired somebody in your office for a one year deal and cut them in two months with no severance, that's BS. A GM has to be accountable for signing a contract.

I wish I could find the article about this because the issue of players just trying to jack up their stats was addressed. Pay wouldn't be based on stats alone but also heavily on whether the team wins or not. It;'s not perfect but I still think with some adjusting it could be a vast improvement over the current system.

Lo Porto
06-05-2009, 02:25 PM
It sounds like it might be cool, but how would a GM or the league prepare for that? If LeBron makes $20 a year because his stats and his team wins, what about the other players who all would have higher pay because they won 66 games? It seems too hard to explain and hard for the fans to watch. At some point, there has to be salaries and then bonuses on top of it.

DerekRE_3
06-05-2009, 02:35 PM
The contracts have to be guaranted in any casy what could be done

is if you buy out a player you can detract half of his salary of your cap-

They don't HAVE to be guaranteed. The only thing in the NFL that is guaranteed is your salary bonus.

Lo Porto
06-05-2009, 02:44 PM
The NFL is a great business, but there is no loyalty at all. It works because the sport is more about team than individuals due to the amount of players playing. Players wear helmets and don't get their mugs plastered all over TV. Basketball is different. Teams should hang on to the players longer because that identity defines the team more. Non-guaranteed contracts would make it more like a ranging business and the NBA needs more stability.

DerekRE_3
06-05-2009, 02:48 PM
The NFL is a great business, but there is no loyalty at all. It works because the sport is more about team than individuals due to the amount of players playing. Players wear helmets and don't get their mugs plastered all over TV. Basketball is different. Teams should hang on to the players longer because that identity defines the team more. Non-guaranteed contracts would make it more like a ranging business and the NBA needs more stability.

But at the same time teams aren't making money, and a lot of it has to do with not being able to get rid of bloated contracts

Lo Porto
06-05-2009, 03:01 PM
If every team could only pay half of a player's salary on the last year of the player's deal, then every team would have the option to save at least a few million a year. Every team has at least one player they wish they could "cut". This would solve all these issues. Most teams lose money, but they wouldn't if they could save half the money on guys like Marbury, Lafrentz, and even the lowly $4 million contracts like Hassell, Harpring, etc.

NastyRud
06-05-2009, 07:29 PM
I brought this up at the start of the season. Here's what some of the guys thought.

http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums/showthread.php?t=266886

JordansBulls
06-06-2009, 12:40 AM
I think so.

I'd like the NBA to switch over to a hard salary cap and get rid of guaranteed contracts. I just feel teams should be able to go and get any free agent they want any year they want to. the NBA needs more parity. Low market teams should be able to have a shot at winning, too.

I always felt they should have. Why should Arenas get paid 18.5 million last year and played 5 meaningless games?

majmarcus
06-06-2009, 12:58 AM
In a word "Yes"

MPScribbles
06-06-2009, 01:03 AM
I hate how in the NFL they will sign these guys for long deals and then cut them the instant they feel. But I also hate when a player tries to flex some leverage and get a better deal because they played better than their paycheck would suggest. Contracts are contracts- both parties agreed to those terms. Both parties should be bound to those terms. I'm glad the NBA has guaranteed contracts to hold teams accountable for their own bad decisions. A guy can't just decide to go be a free agent because he doesn't like the team he is on so the team shouldn't be able to force him into free agency because they feel like it is best for their team.

kbaxter34
06-06-2009, 07:35 AM
I always felt they should have. Why should Arenas get paid 18.5 million last year and played 5 meaningless games?

What does Arenas have to do with guaranteed contracts. It's not like the Wiazards would of cut him if his contract wasn't guaranteed. The Wizards knew he was hurt and still resigned him to a new 111mil contract. Are you suggesting that players that get hurt shouldn't get paid or should lose their job?