PDA

View Full Version : "Is Contraction the Answer"



R21A
08-23-2011, 02:12 PM
Good read on the possibility of contraction http://swsh.us/qVDabB (http://swsh.us/qVDabB)

llemon
08-23-2011, 02:17 PM
It should be considered as an option

Shmontaine
08-23-2011, 02:40 PM
i don't think the bottom 25% of players or owners would like it one bit... it would make the league more exciting with a lot of stacked teams, though... doubt it happens because of the former...

Tony_Starks
08-23-2011, 02:47 PM
It would be a short term fix but in the end incompetent owners would probably screw things up again before long. As long as you have some owners that really care about the game and are committed to winning and some that just treat the team like an investment and could care less then competitiveness is always going to be a problem. I don't know how you change that....

gwrighter
08-23-2011, 02:50 PM
nah contraction wouldn't be a good idea. The league just needs to try & distribute star power a little bit more evenly than it is now distributed in order to raise interest lvl in other markets.

Dade County
08-23-2011, 03:27 PM
nah contraction wouldn't be a good idea. The league just needs to try & distribute star power a little bit more evenly than it is now distributed in order to raise interest lvl in other markets.


How would they do that?

You mean like, tell players you are too good, so you have to play here. I am not trying to sound like a ***... But i think thats the only way that some fans will be truly happy. They would like to be given a super star:facepalm:

I really don't see how the bottom of the NBA will come out of this CBA with a smile on their faces. Some NBA Stars just don't want to go live in certain cities, thats all their is to it.

Shmontaine
08-23-2011, 03:30 PM
It would be a short term fix but in the end incompetent owners would probably screw things up again before long. As long as you have some owners that really care about the game and are committed to winning and some that just treat the team like an investment and could care less then competitiveness is always going to be a problem. I don't know how you change that....

aren't the two the same.. a winning team sees higher returns on the investment for the owners..

wasn't 'teams trying to be competitive' the basis for this whole mess?? the teams are forced to overpay for mid-level talent in order to maintain any level of competitiveness. the whole problem is that the big market teams will always have an easier sell than the small market teams... and that, i don't know how to change...

llemon
08-23-2011, 03:39 PM
aren't the two the same.. a winning team sees higher returns on the investment for the owners..

wasn't 'teams trying to be competitive' the basis for this whole mess?? the teams are forced to overpay for mid-level talent in order to maintain any level of competitiveness. the whole problem is that the big market teams will always have an easier sell than the small market teams... and that, i don't know how to change...

Killing the MLE would be a start.

Tony_Starks
08-23-2011, 03:52 PM
aren't the two the same.. a winning team sees higher returns on the investment for the owners..

wasn't 'teams trying to be competitive' the basis for this whole mess?? the teams are forced to overpay for mid-level talent in order to maintain any level of competitiveness. the whole problem is that the big market teams will always have an easier sell than the small market teams... and that, i don't know how to change...


No the basis is half of these guys don't know how to build a team anymore, they try to quick fix by overspending on a FA, they find out he's not as good as they thought he was, and now they're crying because they're stuck with the contract. That has nothing to do with the system. Plenty of GMs are doing it right without breaking the bank. There definitely needs to be changes made such as length of contracts, ability to trade players, harsher lux tax, etc... but the system isn't broken these guys need to do their jobs better.

CeeDub15
08-23-2011, 04:04 PM
I dont like the idea of contraction. Never have.

llemon
08-23-2011, 04:09 PM
I dont like the idea of contraction. Never have.

I have no trouble with the idea of the NBA contracting.

theheatles
08-23-2011, 04:11 PM
revenue sharing is the answer

albertc86
08-23-2011, 04:52 PM
You guys are taking contraction too far.

The NBA could drop the bottom two or three revenue producing teams and it would fix a lot of the problems in the league. I think we can all agree that there are players in the NBA who have no business being in the league. We can also agree that there is very little parity in the NBA. The league is watered down because there are too many teams. Contraction would solve these issues.

The NBA could disperse the talent from those unfortunate teams into the rest of the league. However, it would be unfair for the contenders to absorb these players so there would need to be a system in place to prevent this.

I know I'm not the only one that enjoys watching NBA games pre-2000 and seeing better, more complete products on the floor. It was a better team oriented sport because the league wasn't as watered down as it is now.

RZZZA
08-23-2011, 05:09 PM
revenue sharing is the answer

I agree, maybe that would work better.


do whatever the NFL is doing because the parity there is much better

smith&wesson
08-23-2011, 05:16 PM
well lets see. should boston and LA win another 80 % of the ships over the next 30 years again ??? hmmmm... nothing against those two cities but when you have soo many teams who havent even been to the finals it seems a little off that 2 teams have won the majority of all the ships since the nba started. somthing needs to change.

Stack_NJNets
08-23-2011, 05:21 PM
Killing the MLE would be a start.

This

bmd1101
08-23-2011, 06:30 PM
I doubt contraction is an option tbh, a scare tactic. In order to contract these teams, they have to deal with the individual leases for the teams arena's. I promise you, they will make the NBA pay through the nose to the point it will make the yearly loses look like pocket change not to mention the $$ they would have to pay the owners of these teams and players under contract. Since it's all about the $$ right?

Cal827
08-23-2011, 06:32 PM
revenue sharing is the answer

This.

llemon
08-23-2011, 06:40 PM
I doubt contraction is an option tbh, a scare tactic. In order to contract these teams, they have to deal with the individual leases for the teams arena's. I promise you, they will make the NBA pay through the nose to the point it will make the yearly loses look like pocket change not to mention the $$ they would have to pay the owners of these teams and players under contract. Since it's all about the $$ right?

The players would be distributed through a draft to the other NBA teams.

The arenas would be suing teams that no longer exist.

Contraction is certainly an option.

bmd1101
08-23-2011, 06:52 PM
The players would be distributed through a draft to the other NBA teams.

The arenas would be suing teams that no longer exist.

Contraction is certainly an option.

Um no, the players in a lockout like this aren't just going to let their contracts disappear and they can't be mystically voided either. Cities/Arena owners/anyone feeling slighted would sue the **** out of the NBA, the NBA owners of contracted teams would be also receiving money well above market value for their teams. I don't think you realize the kind of money we are talking here. David Stern is far too greedy to let that money walk away. MSG being squeezed, the small market teams worried about losing their franchises, i'd say tension against Stern will be mounting. ^^ Players are in a good position to ride this trend.

llemon
08-23-2011, 07:13 PM
Um no, the players in a lockout like this aren't just going to let their contracts disappear and they can't be mystically voided either. Cities/Arena owners/anyone feeling slighted would sue the **** out of the NBA, the NBA owners of contracted teams would be also receiving money well above market value for their teams. I don't think you realize the kind of money we are talking here. David Stern is far too greedy to let that money walk away.

Who said anything about voiding contracts? There would be a dipersal draft.

The owners of the Hornets got above market value when the NBA took over the team?

The ABA contracted many teams. You think the arenas got paid off when the teams contracted. The Spirits of St. Louis is one of the most profitable professsional teams today, and they don't exist.

And NONE of this has anything to do with Stern, other than him trying to keep his job.

JWO35
08-23-2011, 07:24 PM
Contraction is highly unlikely, and I think it would make the NBA worse down the road(like someone said it would be a quick fix)

My proposal would imply 4 things
1) Hard Cap: Having 2 max contracts will basically be impossible if you plan on putting out a NBA Caliber Team with the other 13 players
2) No MLE: Self explanatory...its crap(plus if there's a hard cap, the MLE most likely will go)
3) Revenue Sharing: No Teams would complain about losing money if they evenly divide the money amongt all teams(big markets won't like it)
4) Re allow HS Players into the NBA: The Talent gap is so wide in the NBA, allowing HS players would mean slightly more talent entering per year

Tony_Starks
08-23-2011, 07:59 PM
I doubt contraction would make a difference. They're still bent out of shape over the Miami deal and want to prevent that from happening again but they can't.

At this point I seriously doubt we have a season unless the owners start bickering among themselves (which they may already be doing for all we know). Because the owners won't budge, and there's no way in hell the players are giving back all that money.....

llemon
08-23-2011, 08:23 PM
I doubt contraction would make a difference. They're still bent out of shape over the Miami deal and want to prevent that from happening again but they can't.

At this point I seriously doubt we have a season unless the owners start bickering among themselves (which they may already be doing for all we know). Because the owners won't budge, and there's no way in hell the players are giving back all that money.....

I think it would make a difference.

The dispersal draft would have the teams with the worst records drafting first, which would even out the talent, at least somewhat.

But still, more changes would need to be made.

KnicksorBust
08-23-2011, 09:31 PM
Contraction is such a cop out for teams that are just being poorly run. Small market teams like OKC, Portland, etc. can have success they just need to draft properly and use their cap space wisely.

iggypop123
08-23-2011, 09:54 PM
the owners want to make money, so losing franchises wouldnt be an option. this is gonna ugly. one of the owners proposals really hits players hard. on SI they have an article today. the new propposal would make odom's yearly average from 9 million to 2.5.

llemon
08-23-2011, 10:27 PM
Contraction is such a cop out for teams that are just being poorly run. Small market teams like OKC, Portland, etc. can have success they just need to draft properly and use their cap space wisely.

Agree, up to a point. Owners are now looking for guaranteed profits, no matter how badly they run their franchise.

Honestly, this should be a 24 team league.

carnage101
08-23-2011, 10:31 PM
i think so there is to much parody in the nba already

llemon
08-23-2011, 10:37 PM
i think so there is to much parody in the nba already

And who is producing this 'parody'?

gwrighter
08-24-2011, 01:58 AM
How would they do that?

You mean like, tell players you are too good, so you have to play here. I am not trying to sound like a ***... But i think thats the only way that some fans will be truly happy. They would like to be given a super star:facepalm:

I really don't see how the bottom of the NBA will come out of this CBA with a smile on their faces. Some NBA Stars just don't want to go live in certain cities, thats all their is to it.

Make it impossible for super teams to be assembled & championship worthy. Ever since Boston Big 3 has joined up every nouveau star in the league wants to play with their buddies. Back in the day Magic, Bird & MJ never thought of teaming up to win ships, It was always a battle. the top teams are getting too talented. how is anybody in the East supposed to beat MIA now? well....in order to compete, new teams need a big 3 comparable to Heat. & so the equilibrium has reached a lvl that is unsustainable. too much talent is needed to win right now, lower the amount of talent required to win a championship & the league as a whole will be better off for it.

Chill_Will_24
08-24-2011, 02:13 AM
Who would be contracted? My team sucks and has been hemorrhaging money for years. Yet they are owned by a billionaire and have a state of the art arena set to be open next year. The Wolves are also bad but are young and promising and will be on the right track. Maybe CHA or SAC

Tony_Starks
08-24-2011, 02:31 AM
Make it impossible for super teams to be assembled & championship worthy. Ever since Boston Big 3 has joined up every nouveau star in the league wants to play with their buddies. Back in the day Magic, Bird & MJ never thought of teaming up to win ships, It was always a battle. the top teams are getting too talented. how is anybody in the East supposed to beat MIA now? well....in order to compete, new teams need a big 3 comparable to Heat. & so the equilibrium has reached a lvl that is unsustainable. too much talent is needed to win right now, lower the amount of talent required to win a championship & the league as a whole will be better off for it.


The whole MIA "superteam" thing is just a big excuse. As far as teams in the east competing its not Miami's fault Orlando refused to get Howard a backup, or even attempt to develop the young big they got in the draft last year knowing their lack of size. Or stubbornly have continued to rely on Nelson when he traditionally disappears in the playoffs. Or that Boston traded Perkins and Nate knowing Shaq and JO were literally on their last legs and their bench would be weak as a result. Mid season at that so the new players don't even have a chance to adjust.

I just don't see anyway around having to manage your team properly, whatever rules they come up with.

gwrighter
08-24-2011, 01:37 PM
The whole MIA "superteam" thing is just a big excuse. As far as teams in the east competing its not Miami's fault Orlando refused to get Howard a backup, or even attempt to develop the young big they got in the draft last year knowing their lack of size. Or stubbornly have continued to rely on Nelson when he traditionally disappears in the playoffs. Or that Boston traded Perkins and Nate knowing Shaq and JO were literally on their last legs and their bench would be weak as a result. Mid season at that so the new players don't even have a chance to adjust.

I just don't see anyway around having to manage your team properly, whatever rules they come up with.

Managing your team is important obviously. But we have moved passed good mgmt into blatant collusion. All of these players discussing with each other which teams they want to play on while still under contract, then using that info to hold their teams hostage. Melo, Bosh, LBJ all did this. Denver was smart enough to trade Melo, Raps & Clev lost out.

MIA has two franchise players (LBJ Wade), Bosh is a Lamar Odom type, stuck in the middle. NYK has two Franchise players (STAT, Melo) with talks of CP3 to NY & Howard to LAL this is getting redic. Stars are leaving their small markets to win under the bright lights of the larger markets. the gap between bad & good teams will continue to grow. we need to foster competitiveness between these players. obvs good mgmt plays into all of this, but rules need to be in place that will even the playing field.

The reason why we have these exceptions is for example because old superteams like the Celts wanted to keep Larry Bird. in the old system the NBA made money by supporting superteams, now its the reverse, there are too many NBA teams for the superteam structure to work. Local fans lose interest in their respective teams & revenues drop amongst small markets & only gain slightly in the larger markets. more ppl are sitting at home watching the heat than heading out to Bobcats stadium to see a game vs. the Lakers.

More competitiveness puts ***** in the seats because people have hope that their team will persevere. the player turnover rate is too long, contracts are too long, "rebuilding" takes too long. the system is in need of a major overhaul.

Fnom11
08-24-2011, 01:43 PM
It's an option that is certainly viable.

You cut the bad teams and the teams that already reside in states that have another team(California has 4.....). Makes teams better by acquiring better talent and ups the amount of the money spread between the leagues teams that aren't making enough.

Or the GMs could stop being ******** and offer sub-par players( Joe Johnson) max contracts during their declining years. Whichever one makes more sense

Tony_Starks
08-24-2011, 02:25 PM
Managing your team is important obviously. But we have moved passed good mgmt into blatant collusion. All of these players discussing with each other which teams they want to play on while still under contract, then using that info to hold their teams hostage. Melo, Bosh, LBJ all did this. Denver was smart enough to trade Melo, Raps & Clev lost out.

MIA has two franchise players (LBJ Wade), Bosh is a Lamar Odom type, stuck in the middle. NYK has two Franchise players (STAT, Melo) with talks of CP3 to NY & Howard to LAL this is getting redic. Stars are leaving their small markets to win under the bright lights of the larger markets. the gap between bad & good teams will continue to grow. we need to foster competitiveness between these players. obvs good mgmt plays into all of this, but rules need to be in place that will even the playing field.

The reason why we have these exceptions is for example because old superteams like the Celts wanted to keep Larry Bird. in the old system the NBA made money by supporting superteams, now its the reverse, there are too many NBA teams for the superteam structure to work. Local fans lose interest in their respective teams & revenues drop amongst small markets & only gain slightly in the larger markets. more ppl are sitting at home watching the heat than heading out to Bobcats stadium to see a game vs. the Lakers.

More competitiveness puts ***** in the seats because people have hope that their team will persevere. the player turnover rate is too long, contracts are too long, "rebuilding" takes too long. the system is in need of a major overhaul.


I understand what you're saying but I don't see how a hard cap or slashing contracts changes any of that. First off collusion is impossible to prove. Most of these guys are friends and there always going to talk about playing with each other. No stopping that. Even if you put in a strict cap whats to stop Dwight and CP3 to say "hey we'll just go to LA/NY and take less money?" They'll make it all up in endorsements anyway and still play where they want.

Also you talk about player turnover but with shorter contracts, or non gauranteed contracts which is what they last proposed, turnover will be higher. What would stop a player from not liking whats going on with his team and saying "screw this at the end of the year Im out?"

I just don't see anyway you can say hey you guys need to spread out so the league can be more balanced. The players have a right to go wherever they want. Plus people forget that MIA/NY went through over a two year process of cleaning house to be in position to make those deals happen. It's not like the players just fell in their lap. Every team in the league had the same opportunity to take the gamble that they did.....

gwrighter
08-24-2011, 03:53 PM
I understand what you're saying but I don't see how a hard cap or slashing contracts changes any of that. First off collusion is impossible to prove. Most of these guys are friends and there always going to talk about playing with each other. No stopping that. Even if you put in a strict cap whats to stop Dwight and CP3 to say "hey we'll just go to LA/NY and take less money?" They'll make it all up in endorsements anyway and still play where they want.

Also you talk about player turnover but with shorter contracts, or non gauranteed contracts which is what they last proposed, turnover will be higher. What would stop a player from not liking whats going on with his team and saying "screw this at the end of the year Im out?"

I just don't see anyway you can say hey you guys need to spread out so the league can be more balanced. The players have a right to go wherever they want. Plus people forget that MIA/NY went through over a two year process of cleaning house to be in position to make those deals happen. It's not like the players just fell in their lap. Every team in the league had the same opportunity to take the gamble that they did.....

I agree collusion is very hard to prove. you can't stop these guys from talking about what they want to do of course. But as soon as teams start making moves that are indicative of some sort of inside knowledge then some have to wonder. Why is Miami clearing enough space for two Big name FA's? hmm Bosh & Wade share the same agent? Bosh checking out at the end of the 2010 season? all of this is speculative in nature but you see what i'm getting at.

Dwight & CP3 could do that if they want but i believe everybody has a price. & if they were to get injured & only have lets say a 5 mil per year contract they would be screwed financially. I think they would take the safe route n go for a max deal in different cities. but you can't predict those things, i think that scenario will be an oddity reserved for ring chasers, not potentially top 50 players in their prime.

I think contracts should still remain guaranteed but just be shorter in length. so if Arenas blows his knee you only have to pay him max money for 2 years, not 4 or 5. n then maybe he can be placed on a non-active list & have his cap charge reduced by 1/3 or 1/4 for the remainder of the season as to make room for potential trades or FA's. but he won't be able to be re-activated until you have enough cap space to take on his full salary.

& yea its not that you can tell star players not to play with each other but you can by starters take away Bird rights. that will stop Teams like MIA from signing 2 max FA's & then re-sign their own player at max as well without crippling the teams ability to sign role players.

IMO 2 franchise players should be the ultimate maximum of star power on 1 team. therefore the majority of players on the court 3/5 are not franchise talent but simply role players. I think a hardcap would bring more parity to the league in this way. However, It's hard to implement without forcing a team like MIA to give up 1 of their star players.