PDA

View Full Version : Why No Hard Cap?



joshhorvath
07-18-2012, 12:02 AM
Essentially, if there was a hard cap (See NHL) players wouldn't be getting ridiculous contracts, the owners don't care for this so called 'Hard' Luxury Tax, just pay some extra money and your set.

With the Hard Cap, it wouldve made it a even playing field across the NBA and the Big 3 ( Now turned Big 6/7) with some recent additions would've never happened.

So why did the NBA go luxury tax over a Hard Salary Cap? Pros and cons for both.

Slug3
07-18-2012, 12:12 AM
It's almost too late now for a hard cap.

Also why tag the Heat. They don't even have the highest cap.

DerekRE_3
07-18-2012, 12:14 AM
If the owners stayed firm on a hard cap there might still be a lockout. Though honestly that could be a good thing.

waveycrockett
07-18-2012, 12:16 AM
Hard Cap is for wussies

Sactown
07-18-2012, 12:17 AM
I think contracts will start to adjust when the teams actually start getting hit with these huge taxes

JerseyPalahniuk
07-18-2012, 12:19 AM
the luxury tax prevents something like this:

http://www.aceonsports.com/2006/10/new-york-knicks-by-numbers.html

Not trying to point out the Knicks but the Lakers (highest starting 5 salaries with $79) and Nets (assuming 2nd highest unless another team has higher than $72) this season will still have a MUCH lower salary than what unfortunately happened to them

waveycrockett
07-18-2012, 12:23 AM
Honestly Nets in the future will be the only team who can handle the punitive luxury tax in the future. You already see Lakers and Knicks avoiding it.

bucketss
07-18-2012, 01:10 AM
lol at big 6/7

NYMetros
07-18-2012, 01:13 AM
We'd probably have to miss an entire season like the NHL did for something like that to happen. Not sure the owners want to do that. They're probably making pretty good money as is so don't see a need for a drastic change.

EDUTEXANS
07-18-2012, 01:15 AM
but it would be a nice and fair idea

Hellcrooner
07-18-2012, 01:27 AM
Waht would happen?

Owners would get more money.
Players would get less money.

Superteams would STILL happen, they would simply need to sacrify more money , or not so much since max contracts would be rarely offer anyway.

The answear you are looking for is the exact OPOSITE.
Free Market.
Lebron wouldnt have left Cleveland if

1 his owner could ahve payed him double that he is earning now.
2 His owner wouldnt ahve had any limitations to get him Help.

Aust
07-18-2012, 04:24 AM
Waht would happen?

Owners would get more money.
Players would get less money.

:catfight:

bholly
07-18-2012, 04:35 AM
Hard cap prevents teams from holding onto their players, which would be very bad. There's a reason they're called Bird rights.

The effects of the new CBA were never going to happen straight away, and if you thought they were then you weren't listening close enough or thinking hard enough. The new tax provisions don't even come into play until next year, and will still be being rolled out for another year or two after that. Salaries are already automatically smaller, and will become more so as the new aspects are rolled out.

And if you really think owners don't care about the luxury tax and will just pay it, then you haven't been paying attention to the biggest story of the last three days, in which one of the richest owners in the biggest market of them all let their prized player leave precisely because of the tax.

Sssmush
07-18-2012, 05:40 AM
honestly I don't mind if the owners have their fun, sign their new toys, give out big contracts, max out or whatever. Have fun. It's still the first year, and the new max deals are only 4 years, and there is some extra revenue sharing, so it's fairly safe. Have fun. (of course next year, in the second wave of signings, you could have some teams that are jacked in years 2 and 3 of the current wave of contracts).

yeah I don't mind if teams are having fun, just don't create some crazy lockout, try your darndest to cancel the ENTIRE season, and then tell all these stories about how every team is losing 10s of millions and everything must be re-negotiated etc. Ironically only the big teams in the big markets seem to remember anything at all that was said during the lockout. Everybody else just finds this new set of rules and they are frantically bumping into the maximum limits of what they can give players already.

Sssmush
07-18-2012, 05:46 AM
Sure.

How about hard cap for the team owners, and the players get free agency and no "franchise player tag" rule.

Max contracts for draft picks is 3 years.

Salary cap is a hard cap at 47% to 49% of total revenue. Revenue sharing from big markets remains as is, and there is no "luxury tax" or cap penalties.

If total salaries dip below 47%, all teams contribute to a pool and the extra funds are distributed, or given to the players union for the benefit program or something.

DitchDat
07-18-2012, 05:54 AM
I think in the next few years a lot will be sorted out. The tax is just too high now.

IndyRealist
07-18-2012, 09:37 AM
If you had a hard cap of say, $65M, people would still throw around $20M/yr contracts. Concensus is that you need a superstar to win in the NBA.

Sssmush
07-18-2012, 04:13 PM
If you had a hard cap of say, $65M, people would still throw around $20M/yr contracts. Concensus is that you need a superstar to win in the NBA.

I think you mean a big shoe contract

utl768
07-18-2012, 04:36 PM
Waht would happen?

Owners would get more money.
Players would get less money.

Superteams would STILL happen, they would simply need to sacrify more money , or not so much since max contracts would be rarely offer anyway.

The answear you are looking for is the exact OPOSITE.
Free Market.
Lebron wouldnt have left Cleveland if

1 his owner could ahve payed him double that he is earning now.
2 His owner wouldnt ahve had any limitations to get him Help.

if that plan was in place lebron woulda been offered 80 million a year by the knicks and half of cablevision

WadeKobe
07-18-2012, 05:10 PM
I've said it before.... a hard cap in the NBA would never work because

(1) The league needs Boston and LA to be good. If they aren't the whole league will suffer
(2) The smaller markets won't gain enough in fan-support to make up the deficit just by being competitive


A hard-cap would reward the teams who won't be able to pull their weight anyways and hurt the teams who have been pulling everyone's weight. Like it or not, the NBA is not the NFL, and it doesn't have the type of fan support the NFL has. A hard cap won't work, bc the NBA needs LA and Boston to carry it.

We don't need a hard cap, we need to get rid of 8 teams. Period. I've been saying this for 4 years. It hasn't changed.