View Full Version : Should the new CBA allow limits on long-term contracts and ease buyouts?

02-26-2011, 06:09 PM
As a recent hoopshype article (http://blogs.hoopshype.com/blogs/tolnick/2011/02/) pointed out, 'toxic' (undeserved) contracts can hurt a team's ability to compete, regardless of whether it's a big-market or small-market franchise (see New York Knicks).
A new answer to the problem might be limiting the number of long-term deals that a team can execute. That could mean one long-term (five- or six-year) contract a year, one five-year contract every five years, one six-year contract every six years. Contracts at three years or less wouldn't be affected. This would prevent long-term super-teams (i.e. Miami), where multiple marquee players have the same long-term contracts, from forming.
Another part of that might be to let owners buy out so-called 'toxic' contracts in the last year without it counting against their cap space. For example, James Dolan could have bought out Stephon Marbury and Eddy Curry earlier and had cap space to make the team better; if Brandon Roy's knees go terribly wrong, the Blazers could buy him out in four years, instead of waiting five to lose the contract.
These suggestions seem to help both big- and small-market teams, which can still sign players they like, albeit not for as long. They won't allow teams to get stuck in as big of a rut. They don't effect players' pay per season - just the length of contracts. If the player is playing well, they can expect another large contract. What do y'all think?

02-26-2011, 06:10 PM
I dunno.