PDA

View Full Version : Hard Cap



mlisica19
04-30-2011, 02:03 AM
Grizzlies became the 4th team in history of the NBA to be an 8th seed and upset a 1st seed. Does anyone see how this is horrible for the league?

Congrats Memphis on your stunning and surprising victory against one of the best teams in the NBA all season. :clap:

Yet what is the point of watching the first round? Your given a horrendous chance on ever seeing a good series, and an even worse percentage on seeing a Cinderella team. Is it not exciting to see upsets? Is it not exciting to see close action packed games where it goes down to the wire...

In the last 30 years of NBA playoffs... only 8 different teams have ever won the Championship! 8!!!!! It gets boring, at least for me, to watch the same team win it or be in the same situation every year of every decade. :cry:... I would not be surprised to once again see a Boston vs Laker final. The top 4 teams of this years playoffs are currently LA, Chi, Bos, Mia. 4 teams that all have won many many rings in the last 3 decades.

Basically what im concluding too is that the NBA is in dire need of a hard cap system. It will make every team in the league have a fair chance at acquiring the best players but most importantly it will give every team a balance of talent and make the organization focus more on the coaching, managing and fundamentals of the team rather than stacking up on talent. This soft cap is also horrible as the richer teams can get away with acquiring anybody they basically want.

I heard a rumor the hard cap is coming into place... great. what do you think... Does having superstars stacked on 5 teams / of 30 really do the league any good?

I also heard that the cap was only going to be 48 million. Yet that makes no sense to me... the hard cap is based somewhat on the leagues profits and the NBA does better than the NHL and they have over 50. 48 million is so small, Miami already beats that with 2 players.

Something where 80% of the teams in the NBA can mantain 2 superstars and keep their role players.

ChiSox219
04-30-2011, 02:44 AM
5. Jazz
6. Rockets
10. Bucks
13. Raptors
15. Warriors

16 teams make the playoffs, the teams I listed ranked by total salary did not make the playoffs.

17. Heat
20. Nuggets
22. Pacers
25. Thunder
26. Bulls

All playoff teams, 3 title contenders

flclfanman
04-30-2011, 03:02 AM
^
True, but lets post the complete picture

http://hoopshype.com/salaries.htm

The last two champions? top 4 payrolls. Big Markets will fight to stop hardcaps since it'll gouge rosters and paychecks.

Hellcrooner
04-30-2011, 03:06 AM
you put hard cap you give EVEN MORE power to BIG markets.

Why?

Ok so celvelandnolonger can pay me 20 million a year, instead they can only pay me 6 million a year because odf the hard cap.

waht do i do do i take those 6 million and the 6 millions Cavs market can bring me in Sponsors?

O do i sign for 3 million in NY/ L.A/CHI and get the 30 mmillion i can get ins sponsors there.?

difficutl to choose Uh
?


Reality is as it is, Bears Eat River fish, and you cant do a damm thing because bears will alawaysbe bigger and stronger than fish.

SugeKnight
04-30-2011, 03:09 AM
.

Hellcrooner
04-30-2011, 03:12 AM
btw there usedto be one.
Youpeople are moaning bout Stars leaving the team that drafted them?

Do you know why they are called " BIRD " Rights?

yes thats it boston wasnt going to be able to retain his own player who also wanted to resign, thats when all the going over teh cap and pay a tax started.

Crackadalic
04-30-2011, 03:13 AM
There will be no hard cap when its all said and done.

itsripcity32
04-30-2011, 03:30 AM
Your first three paragraphs don't even make sense. And you write a whole bunch afterwards just *****ing. Just don't watch the NBA then.

SteBO
04-30-2011, 08:51 AM
I honestly don't believe there will be a hard cap when this is all over. This may just follow the same path as the NFL labor talks.

king4day
04-30-2011, 08:54 AM
I last read that an official mentioned it's unlikely a hard cap happens, but I do agree with the OP.
A hard cap is necessary even if it means a couple of strike lost years to fix these problems.

If you play in Cleveland and are a superstar, sponsors will still hook you up.
You can play for the Clippers in a big market but players still prefer the Lakers. Same with the Nets soon. Melo wanted no part of that despite them soon going to Brooklyn which will be a cash cow for sponsorship.

Since it's no longer about winning in general and just about going where the stars shine brightest (very few exceptions), they need to do something for the 20+ other teams that go into the season knowing right off the bat that there's no chance of winning a ring.

The NBA is nothing like any other sport. You have superstars in the other big 3, but a team can stop them. In the NBA, you don't have to add much talent to a team that already has a superstar to make them elite and unbeatable.

I'm OK with a 55-60mil hard cap. If players want to take massive paycuts like the big three in Miami did, then so be it. But at least it gives everyone a more equal chance.

SteBO
04-30-2011, 08:58 AM
I last read that an official mentioned it's unlikely a hard cap happens, but I do agree with the OP.
A hard cap is necessary even if it means a couple of strike lost years to fix these problems.

If you play in Cleveland and are a superstar, sponsors will still hook you up.
You can play for the Clippers in a big market but players still prefer the Lakers. Same with the Nets soon. Melo wanted no part of that despite them soon going to Brooklyn which will be a cash cow for sponsorship.

Since it's no longer about winning in general and just about going where the stars shine brightest (very few exceptions), they need to do something for the 20+ other teams that go into the season knowing right off the bat that there's no chance of winning a ring.

The NBA is nothing like any other sport. You have superstars in the other big 3, but a team can stop them. In the NBA, you don't have to add much talent to a team that already has a superstar to make them elite and unbeatable.

I'm OK with a 55-60mil hard cap. If players want to take massive paycuts like the big three in Miami did, then so be it. But at least it gives everyone a more equal chance.
As I said, I don't a hard cap will happen, but I do agree with you, king4day. With the cap the NBA has in place currently, it gaves the players to not only get the max money allowable(pending team payroll), but to go to one of the bigger markets, leaving cities like CLE, NJ, MIL, IND, etc... in the dust with no chance at stars, and ultimately winning. Am I following you right here?

mlisica19
04-30-2011, 11:34 AM
How much money do you honestly think these stars make from sponsors being in a big city rather than a small city?

I think I once heard ESPN radio, Michael Kay, say that its honestly not a big difference at all. LeBron was still getting as many big sponsors as he does now, the difference is that the 3 forming the TRIO created slightly more media attention... also it created a whole lot more hatred toward him.

The NBA is a big enough league that all of its super stars, no matter where they are located, find BIG SPONSORS. Simple as that. LeBron left Cleveland because he wanted to be with superstars to have an easier chance at winning the Championship. Other wise he would have stayed with his consistently top seeded Cavs teams.

mlisica19
04-30-2011, 11:43 AM
The Big cities do have one incentive... their are big cities. They are the nicest most populated cities in the world. That is an incentive in itself to play usually for the most legendary teams around. Your bound to find more (small) sponsors but its usually negligible.

Yet like I just said, if James decided to stay with the Cavs the big companies would not hesitate to sign him for sponsorship.


And who cares what these big stars want anyway, the league should install the hard cap. All 30 teams have a chance to have at least one superstar to compete rather than see 5 of the teams struggle all year. This forces teams to focus more on the strategy of a team rather than just stacking talent.

BigCityofDreams
04-30-2011, 11:46 AM
Grizzlies became the 4th team in history of the NBA to be an 8th seed and upset a 1st seed. Does anyone see how this is horrible for the league?

Congrats Memphis on your stunning and surprising victory against one of the best teams in the NBA all season. :clap:

Yet what is the point of watching the first round? Your given a horrendous chance on ever seeing a good series, and an even worse percentage on seeing a Cinderella team. Is it not exciting to see upsets? Is it not exciting to see close action packed games where it goes down to the wire...

In the last 30 years of NBA playoffs... only 8 different teams have ever won the Championship! 8!!!!! It gets boring, at least for me, to watch the same team win it or be in the same situation every year of every decade. :cry:... I would not be surprised to once again see a Boston vs Laker final. The top 4 teams of this years playoffs are currently LA, Chi, Bos, Mia. 4 teams that all have won many many rings in the last 3 decades.

Basically what im concluding too is that the NBA is in dire need of a hard cap system. It will make every team in the league have a fair chance at acquiring the best players but most importantly it will give every team a balance of talent and make the organization focus more on the coaching, managing and fundamentals of the team rather than stacking up on talent. This soft cap is also horrible as the richer teams can get away with acquiring anybody they basically want.

I heard a rumor the hard cap is coming into place... great. what do you think... Does having superstars stacked on 5 teams / of 30 really do the league any good?

I also heard that the cap was only going to be 48 million. Yet that makes no sense to me... the hard cap is based somewhat on the leagues profits and the NBA does better than the NHL and they have over 50. 48 million is so small, Miami already beats that with 2 players.

Something where 80% of the teams in the NBA can mantain 2 superstars and keep their role players.

The league hasn't been this popular since Jordan left.

BigCityofDreams
04-30-2011, 11:51 AM
btw there usedto be one.
Youpeople are moaning bout Stars leaving the team that drafted them?

Do you know why they are called " BIRD " Rights?

yes thats it boston wasnt going to be able to retain his own player who also wanted to resign, thats when all the going over teh cap and pay a tax started.

They have bird rights, restricted FA, and other options in order to keep stars on teams but that's not good enough so now they want a hard cap and a franchise tag. Folks if ppl want to leave a team they have every right too. Here's a though do a better job at building a team.

mlisica19
04-30-2011, 11:51 AM
Your first three paragraphs don't even make sense. And you write a whole bunch afterwards just *****ing. Just don't watch the NBA then.

Hey Sherlock... My first three paragraphs dont make sense? READ IT AGAIN

1) The MEMPHIS grizzlies became the fourth team in NBA history to ever make that big of an upset. FACT... 4th 8th seeded team in NBA to beat a 1st seeded team.

2) Congratulations Memphis on your stunning win. How does this not make sense...

3) How is it fun to watch the NBA when this happens? You basically have a 90% chance on choosing the 1st team in winning. I do not watch the NBA a whole lot but I am into sports entertainment and trying to make a league better. For the fans, its simply not as much fun when you hardly ever see an upset or a chance at an upset. Yet in the NBA theres a huge difference between the great teams and the good teams... Its also not fair for those small cities, whats the point on having these small city teams? They cant attract the best coaches, they cant attract the best players. Not because of what city their in, but because all the best players are going to one of 5 teams and not many superstars want to be placed on a team that has to face these guys. Not because of corporate sponsors.

SO READ IT AGAIN

BigCityofDreams
04-30-2011, 11:55 AM
I last read that an official mentioned it's unlikely a hard cap happens, but I do agree with the OP.
A hard cap is necessary even if it means a couple of strike lost years to fix these problems.

If you play in Cleveland and are a superstar, sponsors will still hook you up.
You can play for the Clippers in a big market but players still prefer the Lakers. Same with the Nets soon. Melo wanted no part of that despite them soon going to Brooklyn which will be a cash cow for sponsorship.

Since it's no longer about winning in general and just about going where the stars shine brightest (very few exceptions), they need to do something for the 20+ other teams that go into the season knowing right off the bat that there's no chance of winning a ring.

The NBA is nothing like any other sport. You have superstars in the other big 3, but a team can stop them. In the NBA, you don't have to add much talent to a team that already has a superstar to make them elite and unbeatable.

I'm OK with a 55-60mil hard cap. If players want to take massive paycuts like the big three in Miami did, then so be it. But at least it gives everyone a more equal chance.

And if they did that the league would become irrelevant than the NHL(no disrespect to hockey fans).

Sixerlover
04-30-2011, 12:45 PM
A hard cap isn't needed. A hard cap would only cause more problems. The "Hard Cap" argument is an argument used by people who don't really understand the effects of it.

itsripcity32
04-30-2011, 03:12 PM
Hey Sherlock... My first three paragraphs dont make sense? READ IT AGAIN

1) The MEMPHIS grizzlies became the fourth team in NBA history to ever make that big of an upset. FACT... 4th 8th seeded team in NBA to beat a 1st seeded team.

2) Congratulations Memphis on your stunning win. How does this not make sense...

3) How is it fun to watch the NBA when this happens? You basically have a 90% chance on choosing the 1st team in winning. I do not watch the NBA a whole lot but I am into sports entertainment and trying to make a league better. For the fans, its simply not as much fun when you hardly ever see an upset or a chance at an upset. Yet in the NBA theres a huge difference between the great teams and the good teams... Its also not fair for those small cities, whats the point on having these small city teams? They cant attract the best coaches, they cant attract the best players. Not because of what city their in, but because all the best players are going to one of 5 teams and not many superstars want to be placed on a team that has to face these guys. Not because of corporate sponsors.



SO READ IT AGAIN

hey smartass, how is memphis beating the spurs "horrible for the league"
if it's not fair then dont ****ing watch it. sheesh. who are you? mlk of the nba? trying to help the fans and make the league better?
it's probably your sad attempt at rhetorical questions that make your first 3 paragraphs incomprehensible.

you ask what the point is in watching the first round? so you can watch upsets duh? were there no upsets?

SO AGAIN STOP WATCHING THE NBA

llemon
04-30-2011, 08:24 PM
Heat have one NBA Title

Celts have won one NBA Title in the last 25 years

Bulls haven't won a Title since 1998.

A team that plays in possibly the biggest NBA market, and has shown no resistance as far as spending money hasn't won an NBA Title since 1973, and hasn't won a playoff game in 10 years.

Kevj77
04-30-2011, 08:44 PM
I don't really think a hard cap will make a difference. The NBA is dominated by dynasties or mini-dynasties more than any other sport. It's because the NBA is a star driven league.

marques724
05-01-2011, 10:17 AM
A hard cap isn't needed. A hard cap would only cause more problems. The "Hard Cap" argument is an argument used by people who don't really understand the effects of it.

Totally agree with this

BigCityofDreams
05-01-2011, 11:31 AM
I don't really think a hard cap will make a difference. The NBA is dominated by dynasties or mini-dynasties more than any other sport. It's because the NBA is a star driven league.

Exactly ppl are trying to put create parody in a league that has always been dominated by top teams. Besides everyone claims to likr the underdog but in reality they love the teams with stars.

llemon
05-01-2011, 11:46 AM
Exactly ppl are trying to put create parody in a league that has always been dominated by top teams. Besides everyone claims to likr the underdog but in reality they love the teams with stars.

Sorry, but I have spent a lifetime of rooting for the underdogs. That how I became a Nets' fan.

BigCityofDreams
05-01-2011, 11:55 AM
Sorry, but I have spent a lifetime of rooting for the underdogs. That how I became a Nets' fan.

Well then you're one of the few.