PDA

View Full Version : Should There Be A Franchise Tag In The NBA?



nickdymez
03-08-2011, 05:00 PM
Im torn, but i found an interesting read...


by Rivers McCown Mar 8, 2011 12:59 PM CST

With the relative value of having a superstar in the NBA, tthe departures of Carmelo Anthony, LeBron James, and Deron Williams from their original teams due to either free agency or impending free agency, and the upcoming Collective Bargaining Agreement To Save Owners From Themselves (TM), it's not really a surprise that whispers have begun regarding the creation of a franchise tag for the NBA. The Chronicle's Mike Monroe took it upon himself to explain the good side of this after the Rockets missed out on Anthony and Williams near the trade deadline.

Encapsulated in the [Anthony] deal was further evidence the NBA's business model is broken, just as commissioner David Stern insists when he tries to rationalize the need for major concessions from the players in talks aimed at getting a new collective bargaining agreement in time to avoid a lockout before next season.

...

can the Peter Holts and Clay Bennetts of the league hope to survive financially in smaller markets like San Antonio and Oklahoma City?

Yes, poor poor San Antonio. I hope they can still compete in a game dominated by all these big markets. I mean, they've only won 47 or more games in every non-lockout season since 1989-90 sans one, the one where David Robinson was hurt and that gave them the license to draft Tim Duncan. How are they going to make it in this bold new world?



The franchise tag, much like it is in the NFL, is a protection measure not against competitive balance, but against stupidity. The Cleveland Cavaliers had seven years with James to create a winner. Who is the second-best player the Cavaliers acquired in that span? Anderson Varejao? Larry Hughes? Mo Williams? The Cavaliers drafted Carlos Boozer in the second round the same year they drafted James and stupidly let him go in one of the dumbest moves in NBA history. Does this sound like a team that really deserves a franchise player?

How about the Nuggets? They had the same amount of time to build a winner around Carmelo Anthony. While they definitely gave him a much more solid supporting cast with players like Marcus Camby, Andre Miller, and Kenyon Martin, they were also unable to find that second real star that Anthony was looking for. It was widely reported that Anthony wanted to play for the Knicks, but do you think he would have spent any time praying for that if the Knicks hadn't signed Amare Stoudemire in the offseason? Probably not. Amare was out there for both Denver and Cleveland to pick up for years, but everyone focused on his injuries rather than his skills.

Great players want to play with other great players. I know, this is stunning. It turns out that playing with other greats can help you reach the ultimate goal of many players: an NBA championship. Perhaps instead of worrying about ways to shackle great players to bad teams, the management of teams such as the Cavs or Nuggets should focus on trying to win basketball games.

P.S. I doubt this article had much of a chance of running in the Chronicle when the Magic decided to trade Tracy McGrady to the Rockets.

jrm2054
03-08-2011, 05:21 PM
idk im 50 50 on this.

Meatmypet
03-08-2011, 05:22 PM
Nope. And the players wouldn't allow this.

abe_froman
03-08-2011, 05:23 PM
no,but i wouldnt be surprised if it was implemented

Hawkeye15
03-08-2011, 06:07 PM
I would be for it quite honestly, but the players union will never allow it.

MiamiWadeCounty
03-08-2011, 06:28 PM
Not feeling it.

oak2455
03-08-2011, 06:37 PM
Not feeling it.

I'm sure your not neither am I:D

theQuietOne
03-08-2011, 06:48 PM
eh don't see it setting well with the players union.

Ripper Gein
03-08-2011, 06:51 PM
Im from THE GREATEST CITY IN THE WORLD LOS ANGELES and a Lakers fan and waiting for Dwight Howard so NO!!

gerber
03-08-2011, 06:54 PM
**** the union and players.

IT NEEDS TO HAPPEN, for the greater good of the sport.

Confusious
03-08-2011, 07:01 PM
I think it should happen.

But it likely will not.

Allstar21
03-08-2011, 07:12 PM
no slave tag plz

danniboi168
03-08-2011, 07:16 PM
nope

BigBlueCrew
03-08-2011, 07:18 PM
No

DMasta718
03-08-2011, 07:20 PM
Nope. I doubt its going to happen too.

Reversed86Curse
03-08-2011, 07:20 PM
I'm for it. Anything that starts to put the players back in their place

ackar
03-08-2011, 07:31 PM
NO, if the reason is to stop player movement. It still do not stop the owners giving out dumb contracts that cripple their teams. How bad drafts and injuries it does not stop those. How a team just laying an egg?
The franchise tag will fix nothing and it still will not players from demanding a trade.

tigers.6
03-08-2011, 07:35 PM
Yea they should be able to tag players. The NBA is turning into a joke. it's being ran by pre madonna players who think they are in control.

Chi StateOfMind
03-08-2011, 07:41 PM
I think it should happen.

But it likely will not.

this

JWO35
03-08-2011, 07:44 PM
No, it sucks in the NFL...it will be even worse in the NBA

bmd1101
03-08-2011, 08:10 PM
Im torn, but i found an interesting read...

Not sure if I would want it, but I think it will be implemented in place of the MLE.

JuggernautJ
03-08-2011, 08:23 PM
I don't think this should happen but I think it will

ThunderZubb
03-08-2011, 08:47 PM
Obviously the ones that are saying no are the ones who are fans of big market teams who are against the franchise tag who are fans of the Lakers, Knicks, Bulls. There should be a franchise tag because whatever the NFL is doing it's working so I am for the Franchise tag.

abe_froman
03-08-2011, 08:51 PM
Obviously the ones that are saying no are the ones who are fans of big market teams who are against the franchise tag who are fans of the Lakers, Knicks, Bulls. There should be a franchise tag because whatever the NFL is doing it's working so I am for the Franchise tag.

how is it working?

also your neglecting that both sports are played differently.there is no apply all answer,it annoys me when people think there are."it works in this one situation therefor it must work in every."

it probably wo9nt change things,address problems of disparity

DMasta718
03-08-2011, 09:51 PM
Obviously the ones that are saying no are the ones who are fans of big market teams who are against the franchise tag who are fans of the Lakers, Knicks, Bulls. There should be a franchise tag because whatever the NFL is doing it's working so I am for the Franchise tag.

Just because it works in the NFL doesnt mean it will work in the NBA.

blastmasta26
03-08-2011, 09:58 PM
I understand that parity is being compromised with star players leaving their teams, but I don't like the franchise tag idea. I know that I may seem biased as a Knick fan, but I honestly do not like it from an objective standpoint. Players would never be able to leave.

There are other ways to restrict stars from teaming up, maybe have hard caps and/or limit the amount of max contracts a team can have. Just some ideas, I don't think a franchise tag is necessary and hopefully it isn't implemented.

bklynny67
03-08-2011, 10:11 PM
Im from THE GREATEST CITY IN THE WORLD LOS ANGELES and a Lakers fan and waiting for Dwight Howard so NO!!

lol :facepalm:

IceMan360
03-08-2011, 10:34 PM
I understand that parity is being compromised with star players leaving their teams, but I don't like the franchise tag idea. I know that I may seem biased as a Knick fan, but I honestly do not like it from an objective standpoint. Players would never be able to leave.

There are other ways to restrict stars from teaming up, maybe have hard caps and/or limit the amount of max contracts a team can have. Just some ideas, I don't think a franchise tag is necessary and hopefully it isn't implemented.


Props to you homie this is a great idea, i think teams should only be limited to two maxs contracts.

Pierzynski4Prez
03-08-2011, 10:38 PM
Anyone from NY, LA, MIA=Yep
Most Everyone else=nope

Kakaroach
03-08-2011, 10:41 PM
I like the idea of only 2 max contracts per team. That is actually sounding better by the minute.

nickster16301
03-08-2011, 10:47 PM
I like the idea of only 2 max contracts per team. That is actually sounding better by the minute.

no u need franchise tags...u do this and teams will just sign players for a couple bucks less than the max...i think it would work even better than the nfl...cause it makes it that these players cant just abanden these cities that were so dependent on them...and it also makes it that other teams dont just sell off their whole team so they can sign 3 max guys

IceMan360
03-09-2011, 01:26 PM
no u need franchise tags...u do this and teams will just sign players for a couple bucks less than the max...i think it would work even better than the nfl...cause it makes it that these players cant just abanden these cities that were so dependent on them...and it also makes it that other teams dont just sell off their whole team so they can sign 3 max guys


I see what ur saying bro but by forceing a player to stay isnt gonna help anything, just cause more problems for the player and the team. For example lets say there was a franchise tag, we all knew that lebron wanted to go to miami you think if the cav's had "franchise him" he would of changed his mind about leaving or be happy about being force to stay in cleveland? see my point

Hellcrooner
03-09-2011, 01:55 PM
NO

Too many "slavery" rules already.

bulldog312
03-09-2011, 02:04 PM
Obviously the ones that are saying no are the ones who are fans of big market teams who are against the franchise tag who are fans of the Lakers, Knicks, Bulls. There should be a franchise tag because whatever the NFL is doing it's working so I am for the Franchise tag.

I don't know what team everyone is a fan of, but I do know that 2 of the people who said yes before you were Bulls fan, so your logic is kind of failing there.

And the NBA and NFL are completely different scenarios.

Raph12
03-09-2011, 02:08 PM
No, unless they do a redraft...

Ripper Gein
03-09-2011, 02:27 PM
lol :facepalm:

Your right its New YorHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHa sorry i couldnt keep a Straight typing finger LOS ANGELES!!!!

michael811
03-09-2011, 02:49 PM
A franchise tag would just lead to more star players throwing fits and demanding to be traded

nycericanguy
03-09-2011, 03:12 PM
no u need franchise tags...u do this and teams will just sign players for a couple bucks less than the max...i think it would work even better than the nfl...cause it makes it that these players cant just abanden these cities that were so dependent on them...and it also makes it that other teams dont just sell off their whole team so they can sign 3 max guys

not really, this 2 max per team thing is something I've actually thought about.

You could have a Tiered contract system where after 2 maxes the 2nd tier contract you can give out is something like $10-12m per.

but as a knick fan, no i dont want a Franchise Tag =)

Unless its retroactive and forces MIA to lose one of their players.

ThunderZubb
03-09-2011, 03:22 PM
Just because it works in the NFL doesnt mean it will work in the NBA.


tell me why wouldnt it work in the Nba. You didnt state no reason why wouldn't work in the Nba Obviously your a New York Knicks fans so obviously your against it. I stated before and I will state again that people who are fans of Lakers, bulls, knicks, heat are against it the Franchise tag. NFL is one of the most successfully league in the World and obvioulsy you have no legimate reason why wouldnt it work in the Nba.

Shmontaine
03-09-2011, 03:23 PM
enough with this 'slavery' nonsense... do not compare pro athletes who get paid millions of dollars a year to a slave - who weren't considered citizens and their lives were expendable and a low cost.... it's an insult to the last 150 years of human rights...

as for players *****ing and griping, they would still want that big contract after the tagged year, so i see them playing through it..

ThunderZubb
03-09-2011, 03:28 PM
I don't understand people who stay it won't work in the Nba it won't work in the Nba. That's a bunch of ******** that it wouldn't work in the Nba. They should try it and if it doesnt work out than in the next Cba agreement than take out the Franchise Tag. Until this league trys it out you never know.

Ebbs
03-09-2011, 03:33 PM
The NBA needs this. It's not even an option anymore. The NBA will die and might as well only have 6-8 teams if they don't get one.

desertlakeshow
03-09-2011, 03:35 PM
If it were used on me and I did not want to be on the team I would not play as a protest until I was traded.

You saying yes, imagine you not being able to go and work where you want.

Parity ruins all sports that it inflicts. The NFL is unwatchable because of it.

ThunderZubb
03-09-2011, 03:51 PM
If it were used on me and I did not want to be on the team I would not play as a protest until I was traded.

You saying yes, imagine you not being able to go and work where you want.

Parity ruins all sports that it inflicts. The NFL is unwatchable because of it.

Than these athletes who aren't happy about it and wanna protect so they can work a 9 to 5 job. Thats see how long they would last working that job not making millions and millions of dollars. See if they can afford there 3 million dollars mansion, there luxury vehicles, luxury vacations. These people are so lucky that they shouldnt complain about ********. There's millions of millions of people who like to be in there shoes so I don't feel sorry for these athletes.

Shmontaine
03-09-2011, 03:53 PM
If it were used on me and I did not want to be on the team I would not play as a protest until I was traded.

You saying yes, imagine you not being able to go and work where you want.

Parity ruins all sports that it inflicts. The NFL is unwatchable because of it.

Please man... millions of people go to work at a place that they don't want to, Hawaii isn't big enough... I'm imagining it right now... this is the stupidest reasoning for objecting to the tag...

If this rule was implemented, i'm sure they would put a play to pay cause in there somewhere, similar to NFL... you don't have to play, and you don't have to make money either... Lucky you, having the option to just not work and earn money....

you don't like Parity?? you don't like fair fights then i guess...

Shmontaine
03-09-2011, 03:57 PM
Than these athletes who aren't happy about it and wanna protect so they can work a 9 to 5 job. Thats see how long they would last working that job not making millions and millions of dollars. See if they can afford there 3 million dollars mansion, there luxury vehicles, luxury vacations. These people are so lucky that they shouldnt complain about ********. There's millions of millions of people who like to be in there shoes so I don't feel sorry for these athletes.

^^ this...

'OMG being a pro athlete is almost like being a slave'... except for everything about it...

Hellcrooner
03-09-2011, 04:12 PM
I don't understand people who stay it won't work in the Nba it won't work in the Nba. That's a bunch of ******** that it wouldn't work in the Nba. They should try it and if it doesnt work out than in the next Cba agreement than take out the Franchise Tag. Until this league trys it out you never know.

ok then try free market for a while and see what happens.

Kevj77
03-09-2011, 04:24 PM
I understand that parity is being compromised with star players leaving their teams, but I don't like the franchise tag idea. I know that I may seem biased as a Knick fan, but I honestly do not like it from an objective standpoint. Players would never be able to leave.

There are other ways to restrict stars from teaming up, maybe have hard caps and/or limit the amount of max contracts a team can have. Just some ideas, I don't think a franchise tag is necessary and hopefully it isn't implemented.That is a much better idea. Not to mention it has a better chance of getting approved. The franchise tag in the NBA is a stupid idea. Stopping a player from becoming a free agent when he has put in 7 years for one team like Lebron did isn't right. He earned the right to test free agency or why have it.

Like the article said the Cavs and Nuggets had seven years to build around their star players. The Nuggets gave away good players like Camby because they couldn't afford the payroll. The Cavs let Boozer walk. You can't fix stupid, but a hard cap could fix the payroll problem. Of course a hard cap would have to be much higher then the soft cap. It would probably have to be set around the luxury tax level.

Shmontaine
03-09-2011, 04:39 PM
what would really save the league a lot of money is getting rid of guaranteed contracts... Play to get paid (or at least be available to play)

Wilson
03-09-2011, 04:47 PM
I agree with the article. I think a bigger problem than players leaving teams is teams who are willing to give players like Amir Johnson $30,000,000 (there are plenty more examples, that's just the main one in my head right now).

BigCityofDreams
03-09-2011, 04:49 PM
no slave tag plz

This.

It feels like the ppl pushing for the tag are trying to go back in time. Oh well if we had a tag Lebron wouldn't have left CLE or Bosh wouldn't have left TOR.

Ok for 1 yr you have them for 1 more yr and then they leave anyway.

Hellcrooner
03-09-2011, 04:52 PM
I agree with the article. I think a bigger problem than players leaving teams is teams who are willing to give players like Amir Johnson $30,000,000 (there are plenty more examples, that's just the main one in my head right now).

that could probably be helped by using Salary slots


roster of 15 players


1 Max Salary say 15 million

2 12 million

3 9 million

4 6 million

5 4 million

6 and 7 3 million

8 , 9, 10 a, 5 millon

11-15 1 million.


No team can go over that, no bird years and no ****.
You can only have 1 max salary 1 12 million salarys and etc.

So if players want to pull a heat one of the plaeyrs will have to accept less money than the most paid and the third man takes WAY less money than teh main man

Shmontaine
03-09-2011, 04:56 PM
I agree with the article. I think a bigger problem than players leaving teams is teams who are willing to give players like Amir Johnson $30,000,000 (there are plenty more examples, that's just the main one in my head right now).

do you see any contenders doing this??? i don't... i think this is a direct result of stars leaving their teams.. teams are forced to overpay for medium talent just to get/keep them, otherwise they would go the way of Udonis Haslem of the heat, and just take less money to play on a contender.

BigCityofDreams
03-09-2011, 04:56 PM
Yea they should be able to tag players. The NBA is turning into a joke. it's being ran by pre madonna players who think they are in control.

The players have always ran the league nothing has changed.

Wilson
03-09-2011, 04:57 PM
that could probably be helped by using Salary slots


roster of 15 players


1 Max Salary say 15 million

2 12 million

3 9 million

4 6 million

5 4 million

6 and 7 3 million

8 , 9, 10 a, 5 millon

11-15 1 million.


No team can go over that, no bird years and no ****.
You can only have 1 max salary 1 12 million salarys and etc.

So if players want to pull a heat one of the plaeyrs will have to accept less money than the most paid and the third man takes WAY less money than teh main man

That's not a bad idea, although it would be a shame if we had to force hands like that. Hopefully the owners/GMs just learn some common sense.

BigCityofDreams
03-09-2011, 04:58 PM
Obviously the ones that are saying no are the ones who are fans of big market teams who are against the franchise tag who are fans of the Lakers, Knicks, Bulls. There should be a franchise tag because whatever the NFL is doing it's working so I am for the Franchise tag.

Just because the NFL has a tag doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.

Shmontaine
03-09-2011, 04:58 PM
The players have always ran the league nothing has changed.

did MJ run the league?? no... was he unhappy with management for over 10 years?? yes...

the league changed in the lat 90's when the salary cap went through the roof... it hasn't always been like this

nyKnicks126
03-09-2011, 05:02 PM
I don't think franchise tags are fair to the players. They don't get the option of playing for a team they want to play for.. and it doesn't give other teams options to go after players because of franchise tags.. I still like the RFA option were as a RFA the current team can match other teams offer for that player. UFA is great for the NBA..

Wilson
03-09-2011, 05:17 PM
do you see any contenders doing this??? i don't... i think this is a direct result of stars leaving their teams.. teams are forced to overpay for medium talent just to get/keep them, otherwise they would go the way of Udonis Haslem of the heat, and just take less money to play on a contender.

That makes no sense, why was it so important for the Raptors to sign Amir Johnson. So he signs somewhere else, what are you losing? For the Raptors right now, not a lot.

Yeah Bosh left them, but perhaps if they'd done anything with that team while he was there he wouldn't have left.

Contenders definitely throw out appalling contracts, remember Phoenix signing Marcus Banks? A lot of people said that the Lakers were dumb for throwing a big contract at Ron Artest (I disagree, but you see my point). Again, I'm sure there are plenty more but I just haven't researched it yet.

BigCityofDreams
03-09-2011, 05:20 PM
tell me why wouldnt it work in the Nba. You didnt state no reason why wouldn't work in the Nba Obviously your a New York Knicks fans so obviously your against it. I stated before and I will state again that people who are fans of Lakers, bulls, knicks, heat are against it the Franchise tag. NFL is one of the most successfully league in the World and obvioulsy you have no legimate reason why wouldnt it work in the Nba.

The NFL is the most successful league but it isn't because of a franchise tag. No sport is going to reach the height of the NFL. I get the sense that's what the NBA wants to do in the new CBA.

BigCityofDreams
03-09-2011, 05:22 PM
That is a much better idea. Not to mention it has a better chance of getting approved. The franchise tag in the NBA is a stupid idea. Stopping a player from becoming a free agent when he has put in 7 years for one team like Lebron did isn't right. He earned the right to test free agency or why have it.

Like the article said the Cavs and Nuggets had seven years to build around their star players. The Nuggets gave away good players like Camby because they couldn't afford the payroll. The Cavs let Boozer walk. You can't fix stupid, but a hard cap could fix the payroll problem. Of course a hard cap would have to be much higher then the soft cap. It would probably have to be set around the luxury tax level.

I've seen that comment made more than once on here. It seems like that's the way it's going to be.

BigCityofDreams
03-09-2011, 05:28 PM
did MJ run the league?? no... was he unhappy with management for over 10 years?? yes...

the league changed in the lat 90's when the salary cap went through the roof... it hasn't always been like this

Didn't Magic get Paul Westhead fired? Yes

Didn't Kareem force he was out of Milwaukee and end up on the Lakers? Yes

Didn't Barkley demand a trade out of Philadelphia? Yes

Face it the players always had power in the NBA. Ppl aren't getting bent out of shape about it now but forget it happened back then.

Shmontaine
03-09-2011, 05:32 PM
That makes no sense, why was it so important for the Raptors to sign Amir Johnson. So he signs somewhere else, what are you losing? For the Raptors right now, not a lot.

Yeah Bosh left them, but perhaps if they'd done anything with that team while he was there he wouldn't have left.

Contenders definitely throw out appalling contracts, remember Phoenix signing Marcus Banks? A lot of people said that the Lakers were dumb for throwing a big contract at Ron Artest (I disagree, but you see my point). Again, I'm sure there are plenty more but I just haven't researched it yet.

sorry, i meant they have to overpay for the medium talent just to get/keep said medium talent... not sign medium talent to keep superstars...

teams know that they aren't getting superstars on their team, so they go out and sign guys like charlie vilenuava and ben gordon to awful contracts just to get them to consider joining the team... it's flawed, but teams can sell superstars to other players, if there are no stars, money is the only thing to get players to join...

sorry for the misunderstanding...

ThunderZubb
03-09-2011, 05:40 PM
Just because the NFL has a tag doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.


Explain how come its not the right thing to do or why wouldn't it work in the Nba. All you people who are against don't have a explaination about how come it won't work. All you guys are saying it won't work or it's a slave thing to do. Your telling me someone who's making millions and millions dollars are slaves. Give me a break that they are slaves. If I am making millions and millions are slaves. what about the people making minimum wage what should they be called Scum or Dirt that's what I am getting the impression from some of you people who are fans of the Knicks, Lakers, Bulls, Heat. Get real obvioulsy you guys don't want franchise tags because we know that chris paul will be joining the knicks in 2012 so you knicks fans are against it. Laker fans are against it because Dwight Howard will be joiing them in 2012 so obviously laker fans are aginst it

Wilson
03-09-2011, 05:50 PM
sorry, i meant they have to overpay for the medium talent just to get/keep said medium talent... not sign medium talent to keep superstars...

teams know that they aren't getting superstars on their team, so they go out and sign guys like charlie vilenuava and ben gordon to awful contracts just to get them to consider joining the team... it's flawed, but teams can sell superstars to other players, if there are no stars, money is the only thing to get players to join...

sorry for the misunderstanding...

I think you misunderstood me :p

I think you can get superstars to play in small markets by surrounding them with quality role players. Look at Oklahoma and San Antonio.

You can't say that small market teams can't get good players because Denver, Toronto and Cleveland did. Meanwhile Kobe Bryant wanted out of Los Angeles - hardly a small market - because the players around him were clowns (Smush Parker :laugh:).

If GMs and owners want to keep their players they need to be smarter and not just throw money at the first guy that becomes available. And if they do lose their star, then throwing $30,000,000 at an average (or below average) player does nothing except lose them more money. They'd be much better off just taking some time and thinking things over because one signing isn't going to rebuild their franchise.

NBA GMs, there's nothing wrong with waiting for the right deal to come a long and building around that! Basketball players aren't going extinct, you don't have to throw your bank account at one as soon as you see him!

allSUAVE
03-09-2011, 06:10 PM
Not happening

barreleffact
03-09-2011, 06:31 PM
**** the union and players.

IT NEEDS TO HAPPEN, for the greater good of the sport.

this is the most competitive the league has appeared to be in recent memory. for what reason is there to make a franchise tag? to water down the league? the heat came together and proved nothing so far, LA in 04 had as much talent and lost, talent alone wont win rings. And these players are doing great things by transitioning to better teams capable of winning rings instead of getting beaten by better franchises that actually do what it takes to win instead of only cutting salary. eff the players? eff the owners for making stupid decisions!

Atticus Finch
03-09-2011, 06:52 PM
Explain how come its not the right thing to do or why wouldn't it work in the Nba. All you people who are against don't have a explaination about how come it won't work. All you guys are saying it won't work or it's a slave thing to do. Your telling me someone who's making millions and millions dollars are slaves. Give me a break that they are slaves. If I am making millions and millions are slaves. what about the people making minimum wage what should they be called Scum or Dirt that's what I am getting the impression from some of you people who are fans of the Knicks, Lakers, Bulls, Heat. Get real obvioulsy you guys don't want franchise tags because we know that chris paul will be joining the knicks in 2012 so you knicks fans are against it. Laker fans are against it because Dwight Howard will be joiing them in 2012 so obviously laker fans are aginst it

You made the initial statement that it would work because it works in the NFL, so it's your job to prove it, not the other way around. Prove why you think it would work and maybe someone will actually argue exactly why it wouldn't.

As for the teams you mentioned, the Lakers haven't signed anyone worth noting anyone since Shaq, which was about 15 years ago now. The Knicks just signed Amare, but who was the last big name FA to sign in New York? Allan Houston? Bulls just signed Boozer but again, who was the last major FA they acquired? By the way, both the Knicks and the Bulls are in the bottom half of the league when it comes to team salary. 2 out of the top 5 team salaries in the league come from small markets (Orlando and Utah).

For the record, I'm a Lakers fan and have been my whole life, and I hate the franchise tag because this is exactly how the NBA has been for decades now, I don't see the need to jump to knee jerk reactions like a franchise tag. Plus I'm pretty sure in the last year I watched a back to back MVP plus a top 5 PF sign in a middle sized Miami market. I just watched Durant and Perkins sign extensions with Oklahoma, Joe Johnson sign a max deal with ATL after Horford signed his extension. Clearly NBA stars are not leaving in droves like we're being lead to believe.

IceMan360
03-09-2011, 07:41 PM
that could probably be helped by using Salary slots


roster of 15 players


1 Max Salary say 15 million

2 12 million

3 9 million

4 6 million

5 4 million

6 and 7 3 million

8 , 9, 10 a, 5 millon

11-15 1 million.


No team can go over that, no bird years and no ****.
You can only have 1 max salary 1 12 million salarys and etc.

So if players want to pull a heat one of the plaeyrs will have to accept less money than the most paid and the third man takes WAY less money than teh main man

:clap:

great post

quietstorm80
03-09-2011, 07:44 PM
I agree with the article. The Cavs and the Nuggets both had plenty of time to build around Lebron and Melo. Do you think Lebron would be in Miami if they pulled the trade for STAT last year?

How many good players did the Jazz let walk in free agency??

NYMetros
03-09-2011, 07:48 PM
I'd be in favor of a franchise tag. I'm sure Cleveland wishes they had one a few years ago, lol.

mike_noodles
03-09-2011, 07:51 PM
The NBA is the worst run league in North America, from the fixing of events, to the joke of a salary cap to the laughable super teams. I don't know how they fix it, but they need to do something fast.

Da Knicks
03-09-2011, 08:00 PM
No to the slave tag!!!!!!

AddiX
03-09-2011, 08:00 PM
Franchising won't work in the NBA. NFL has a huge roster that is constantly turning over, they absolutely need a franchise tag, what the NBA needs is the revenue sharing of the NFL.

Kevj77
03-09-2011, 08:15 PM
You made the initial statement that it would work because it works in the NFL, so it's your job to prove it, not the other way around. Prove why you think it would work and maybe someone will actually argue exactly why it wouldn't.

As for the teams you mentioned, the Lakers haven't signed anyone worth noting anyone since Shaq, which was about 15 years ago now. The Knicks just signed Amare, but who was the last big name FA to sign in New York? Allan Houston? Bulls just signed Boozer but again, who was the last major FA they acquired? By the way, both the Knicks and the Bulls are in the bottom half of the league when it comes to team salary. 2 out of the top 5 team salaries in the league come from small markets (Orlando and Utah).

For the record, I'm a Lakers fan and have been my whole life, and I hate the franchise tag because this is exactly how the NBA has been for decades now, I don't see the need to jump to knee jerk reactions like a franchise tag. Plus I'm pretty sure in the last year I watched a back to back MVP plus a top 5 PF sign in a middle sized Miami market. I just watched Durant and Perkins sign extensions with Oklahoma, Joe Johnson sign a max deal with ATL after Horford signed his extension. Clearly NBA stars are not leaving in droves like we're being lead to believe.Nice post. People complain about only the Bulls, Heat, Celtics, Knicks and Lakers having a chance. It's true they have high payrolls or will eventually. However look at how these teams have been built. The Knicks and Heat got under the cap to sign free agents, then the Knicks traded for Melo. The Lakers already had Kobe and traded for Gasol. The Bulls drafted well and used their cap space on Boozer. Celtics traded for the big three. What is wrong with using cap space, you have to get under the cap first. Teams shouldn't be punished for drafting well or making intelligent trades and extending those players. OKC once it extends Westbrook with Durant and Perkins already extended will be paying out the *** too. Should we break up OKC?

None of these teams bought anything. They all played within the rules. The only arguement is that they can afford to add one MLE type player each year even when over the cap.

bmd1101
03-09-2011, 09:10 PM
If it were used on me and I did not want to be on the team I would not play as a protest until I was traded.

You saying yes, imagine you not being able to go and work where you want.

Parity ruins all sports that it inflicts. The NFL is unwatchable because of it.

The NFL is unwatchable? The rest of the country disagrees with you according to the ratings.... and the franchise tag would be more effective in the NBA then the NFL. 1 player on a football team gettin tagged doesnt change much, in the NBA though it would be a different story. Much smaller teams, where that 1 tag would have a much larger impact, the players would just have to get used to it. Obviously if a tag were put in, it would somewhat change how contracts work, more an NFL type contract with less guarentees.

BigCityofDreams
03-09-2011, 10:04 PM
Explain how come its not the right thing to do or why wouldn't it work in the Nba. All you people who are against don't have a explaination about how come it won't work. All you guys are saying it won't work or it's a slave thing to do. Your telling me someone who's making millions and millions dollars are slaves. Give me a break that they are slaves. If I am making millions and millions are slaves. what about the people making minimum wage what should they be called Scum or Dirt that's what I am getting the impression from some of you people who are fans of the Knicks, Lakers, Bulls, Heat. Get real obvioulsy you guys don't want franchise tags because we know that chris paul will be joining the knicks in 2012 so you knicks fans are against it. Laker fans are against it because Dwight Howard will be joiing them in 2012 so obviously laker fans are aginst it

It's not the right thing to do because you're forcing players against their will to stay in a situation they have no desire to be in. The NBA does everything in their power to make sure a team can keep their player. They have bird rights, RFA, a rookie wage scale, and the ability to pay their player more than any other team. But since Lebron and Bosh left their teams everyone wants a franchise tag. Hey Lebron didn't handle the whole thing well I will admit that but you can't change what happened.

John Walls Era
03-09-2011, 10:20 PM
Yes. So what if it gives organizations more power? They're the ones paying the players.

Franchise Tag has to benefit the player a lot though. If a team applies the tag, then that player is going to be getting the salary of the highest paid player in the league. If a tag is used a 2nd time on the same player, then its the highest paid salary in the league x 20% increase. If a 3rd time then its the highest paid salary in the league x 30% (see the pattern?). No limit to how many times a tag can be used on one player.

Sounds crazy.... but are you telling me players won't like this? This way, owners can't continue to keep a player when prices get crazy, but it also allows them to keep the player for an extra 2-3 years.

Draco
03-09-2011, 10:22 PM
and a fourth time the tag is applied he gets controlling interest of the organization he plays for.

BigCityofDreams
03-09-2011, 10:25 PM
and a fourth time the tag is applied he gets controlling interest of the organization he plays for.

Sounds fair enough

bmd1101
03-09-2011, 10:38 PM
Nice post. People complain about only the Bulls, Heat, Celtics, Knicks and Lakers having a chance. It's true they have high payrolls or will eventually. However look at how these teams have been built. The Knicks and Heat got under the cap to sign free agents, then the Knicks traded for Melo.

Another aspect your not thinking about, the Knicks, Nets, Miami ect all took huge risks clearing payroll off like they did. It was uncharted waters and you can't expect that should be the model of the nba, its to volitile for a business. Look how pathetic the nets were at the start of the season, and still are even with Dwill and still no new contract.

bulldog312
03-09-2011, 10:50 PM
I've seen that comment made more than once on here. It seems like that's the way it's going to be.

I just don't see how a hard cap is going to help. The Heat were formed while staying under the soft cap (which is much lower than what the hard cap would be). If there was a hard cap, it would have actually been easier for the Heat and they could have added more role players.

And it will probably just lead to teams giving out more bad contracts, because they will actually have more money to spend in free agency. Plus you will have more teams fighting to sign players so that will drive up the price (right now those over the soft cap can't try to sign anyone asking for more than the MLE).

Throw in the fact that you will eventually end up with teams forced to sell off their own players because they don't have cap room (similar to the Blackhawks this year in the NHL), and I just think a hard cap is a terrible, terrible idea.

As for the franchise tag, I would vote no, but I've opened up to it. It wouldn't be horrible. They just have to make sure that those players get a lot of money. Something like 1.25x the max salary they are eligible for. So if a player get's franchised several years in a row, their salary is going to escalate extremely quickly (I'm not doing the math here, so that might not be a good number, but I think my point is clear).

BigCityofDreams
03-09-2011, 11:09 PM
I just don't see how a hard cap is going to help. The Heat were formed while staying under the soft cap (which is much lower than what the hard cap would be). If there was a hard cap, it would have actually been easier for the Heat and they could have added more role players.

And it will probably just lead to teams giving out more bad contracts, because they will actually have more money to spend in free agency. Plus you will have more teams fighting to sign players so that will drive up the price (right now those over the soft cap can't try to sign anyone asking for more than the MLE).

Throw in the fact that you will eventually end up with teams forced to sell off their own players because they don't have cap room (similar to the Blackhawks this year in the NHL), and I just think a hard cap is a terrible, terrible idea.

As for the franchise tag, I would vote no, but I've opened up to it. It wouldn't be horrible. They just have to make sure that those players get a lot of money. Something like 1.25x the max salary they are eligible for. So if a player get's franchised several years in a row, their salary is going to escalate extremely quickly (I'm not doing the math here, so that might not be a good number, but I think my point is clear).

I'm not against a hard cap as much ad I'm against the franchise tag. I'm not completely in favor of a hard cap but I guess I can live with it.

You made a good point about the tag but I'm against it because I feel the team is holding players against their will. If you give your all to a franchise for 7-8 yrs and you want to move on but can't because they tag you.

unleashthebeast
03-09-2011, 11:13 PM
maybe u can change it a lil bit... like maybe have one that u can use only once every 3 years, to prevent basically enslaving someone... id rather not have one at all though

bulldog312
03-10-2011, 03:30 PM
maybe u can change it a lil bit... like maybe have one that u can use only once every 3 years, to prevent basically enslaving someone... id rather not have one at all though

That's why I suggested increasing the max salary quite a bit. I gave the example above of making it 1.25x the max salary (or 1.25x their current salary, whichever is higher). So I'll do the math to show how this would have worked out for Melo. I believe he is making about $17 million, so here would be his salary for the next 4 years if he were to be franchised each season:

$21.25 M
$26.6 M
$33.3 M
$41.5 M

So you can see, it would get very, very expensive to franchise players (After doing the math 1.25 might be a little too high, but it works as an example). You aren't going to be able to force them to stay forever. And while Melo might not prefer to play in Denver, I'd have to think he would be happy getting all of that money if they chose to keep him.

And I think the biggest thing is that even if it isn't used much, the idea of it being there would change things for the better. Teams couldn't plan to gut their team for cap space in order to sign stars because they wouldn't know exactly when they are going to be free agents. And if a star lets it be known he wants to leave, this gives the current team he is on some leverage in negotiations, because they aren't being forced to deal him. They could use the franchise tag to buy them an extra 2-3 years to move him at their price.