PDA

View Full Version : Time to get rid of max contracts



Heediot
07-01-2017, 09:15 AM
Just copied and pasted my opinion from the Jrue thread.

There are more regrettable contracts in the league vs. value ones, so it's tiring hearing of people complaining and clamoring for every team to make perfect transactions (I'm a little guilty of this as well, hypocrisy and irony lol). Everything is relative, there has to be bad teams for there to be good teams. if there were 30 pops coaching, at least 10 would have to be considered bad.

With the cba and salary floor, there will always be guys over-paid and bad contracts. With analytics and data so big now, maybe getting rid of max contracts isn't a bad thing and let the team's number crunchers conjure up value according to what a player should be worth. If Durant is worth 60 mil, let the guy have it and we'll see about super teams ability to being formed/stay together. Back in the 90's when there was no max contracts, analytics was minimal.

Teams can take back control with star players instead of these bs trades of late. the PG-Cousins and even Butler trades were laughable. It makes the Kevin Love trade back then look like a a big heist for Minny.

Thoughts?

thomass
07-01-2017, 09:17 AM
Agree or enforce a hard cap. It's getting pretty ridiculous now.

kjthunderman
07-01-2017, 09:23 AM
i agree with thomass. I'd enforce a hard cap first!

FOXHOUND
07-01-2017, 09:25 AM
The only issue is that the NBPA would never vote for it. The NBPA's job is to maximize the benefits of all members, not just the best 10-20 players in the league. That extra money has to come from somewhere and it would be coming from the role players up. The top players make their extra money from endorsements, they do a good job of taking care of everyone. The NBPA is the best run players union, by far.

Same issue with a hard cap, takes money out of the players pockets. The luxury tax and new repeater tax is supposed to operate this way - take the money out of the owners pockets, if they so choose - so we'll see how that does.

warfelg
07-01-2017, 09:28 AM
Make the soft cap the floor and the hard cap the tax line. No max contracts.

A friend of mine had an interesting take:
Max contracts only available to multiple time all stars.
Super Max only available to multiple time all-NBA
And introduce a super-super Max only available to multiple time MVPs.

Heediot
07-01-2017, 09:31 AM
The only issue is that the NBPA would never vote for it. The NBPA's job is to maximize the benefits of all members, not just the best 10-20 players in the league. That extra money has to come from somewhere and it would be coming from the role players up. The top players make their extra money from endorsements, they do a good job of taking care of everyone. The NBPA is the best run players union, by far.

Same issue with a hard cap, takes money out of the players pockets. The luxury tax and new repeater tax is supposed to operate this way - take the money out of the owners pockets, if they so choose - so we'll see how that does.

Some nice points there fox. But for me I have no sympathy for equality when the league minimum is where it's at. Just two 2 years at minimum nba wage is like a lifetime for most on earth throughout their lives lol. 2 years of service at minimum should take care of these guys for like a couple of decades.

warfelg
07-01-2017, 09:37 AM
The only issue is that the NBPA would never vote for it. The NBPA's job is to maximize the benefits of all members, not just the best 10-20 players in the league. That extra money has to come from somewhere and it would be coming from the role players up. The top players make their extra money from endorsements, they do a good job of taking care of everyone. The NBPA is the best run players union, by far.

Same issue with a hard cap, takes money out of the players pockets. The luxury tax and new repeater tax is supposed to operate this way - take the money out of the owners pockets, if they so choose - so we'll see how that does.

Sadly it's going to take what happened to the NHL to get this to change. There needs to be a year long lockout where they don't get their salary and the fringe players rise up and speak out.

Like....the top 15-20 players are set even without their salary from playing. It's the other 99% who don't have lucrative enough off court deals to be able to miss an entire year. Once they start missing checks from playing they will start pushing the top level players to just take a deal and get back on the court.

Scoots
07-01-2017, 09:50 AM
Make the soft cap the floor and the hard cap the tax line. No max contracts.

A friend of mine had an interesting take:
Max contracts only available to multiple time all stars.
Super Max only available to multiple time all-NBA
And introduce a super-super Max only available to multiple time MVPs.

The problem with that is that some players are going to get screwed based on where they play. If you are good enough to be a multi-time all star in the east but play in the west you might never sniff an all-star game.

Fan voting sucks. (Duh)

Player voting sucks. (Ben Simmons, Mo Williams, and Danuel House got player votes for all-star last year)

Press voting sucks. (Isaiah Thomas for all-defense team)

Scoots
07-01-2017, 09:52 AM
The hard cap would be fine, it would have to be far higher than the tax line at the moment, but chances are it will soon be irrelevant since the best owner/GM/coach would still somehow end up with the best and most talent and win.

The max contract is actually good for everybody except the best players. The problem with it is bad GMs throw it around too much because every agent thinks their guy is worth the max.

Scoots
07-01-2017, 09:55 AM
Make the soft cap the floor and the hard cap the tax line.

That would be interesting ... it would have really screwed the Sixers a few years there. This year the floor would be $99M ... teams would be scrambling to spend that much. Between them the Nets and Sixers would have to find someone to throw $50M dollars at ... doesn't sound good for a team trying to build "the right way"

warfelg
07-01-2017, 10:00 AM
That would be interesting ... it would have really screwed the Sixers a few years there. This year the floor would be $99M ... teams would be scrambling to spend that much. Between them the Nets and Sixers would have to find someone to throw $50M dollars at ... doesn't sound good for a team trying to build "the right way"

I would keep the salary floor rule in place. If you don't spend it the money gets divided between everyone still on the roster.

And it wouldn't really hurt them all that much. Would someone like, say, Galinari be pissed about a 2 year $100 mil deal? Nets would easily do something like that.

FOXHOUND
07-01-2017, 10:03 AM
Some nice points there fox. But for me I have no sympathy for equality when the league minimum is where it's at. Just two 2 years at minimum nba wage is like a lifetime for most on earth throughout their lives lol. 2 years of service at minimum should take care of these guys for like a couple of decades.

Haha, oh I totally get that. The NBA is really good at taking care of their own though. I'm more on the stance of thinking it's not realistic rather than it's not a good idea. I'm not sure it would change anything though because you still have bad Presidents/GMs making bad deals. Contracts like Noah and Mozgov may have been even bigger lol.

NYY 26 to 7
07-01-2017, 10:04 AM
I 100% agree with this. Hard cap with no max and teams will really start to make value based decisions.

FOXHOUND
07-01-2017, 10:07 AM
Sadly it's going to take what happened to the NHL to get this to change. There needs to be a year long lockout where they don't get their salary and the fringe players rise up and speak out.

Like....the top 15-20 players are set even without their salary from playing. It's the other 99% who don't have lucrative enough off court deals to be able to miss an entire year. Once they start missing checks from playing they will start pushing the top level players to just take a deal and get back on the court.

But this would take money out of those players pockets. The NBA eats too good, I know there was a lockout recently but I think that BRI shift and overall CBA fixed the NBA for good. The players wised up to the fact that a healthier league = healthier paychecks and everyone is benefiting.

What could be interesting is if ESPN has created a TV deal bubble with their ridiculous price. If the NBA's TV deals aren't sustainable going forward then there might be some serious issues when they are up.

hugepatsfan
07-01-2017, 10:16 AM
League doesn't want that level of parity. You'd have all the stars split out because someone would make them a "too good to refuse" offer to be their top guy rather than #2 somewhere else. The 30 best players on 30 teams isn't a good product because the team with #1 still ***** on like 90% of the league except now the top tier teams are all lesser quality.

warfelg
07-01-2017, 10:22 AM
But this would take money out of those players pockets. The NBA eats too good, I know there was a lockout recently but I think that BRI shift and overall CBA fixed the NBA for good. The players wised up to the fact that a healthier league = healthier paychecks and everyone is benefiting.

What could be interesting is if ESPN has created a TV deal bubble with their ridiculous price. If the NBA's TV deals aren't sustainable going forward then there might be some serious issues when they are up.

It's about the only way owners can get back any power though IMO. NBPA is too strong. They make the most of any major sport, they are about the only one with fully guaranteed contracts.

It's going to take the majority of owners not paying the tax to want to push to level the playing field, and on the other side it's going to take those 99% players not getting paid.

If that happens, they might come to an agreement that includes a hard cap or a program where doing anything like this is basically impossible between lack of max contracts and an even more penal tax system.

warfelg
07-01-2017, 10:24 AM
League doesn't want that level of parity. You'd have all the stars split out because someone would make them a "too good to refuse" offer to be their top guy rather than #2 somewhere else. The 30 best players on 30 teams isn't a good product because the team with #1 still ***** on like 90% of the league except now the top tier teams are all lesser quality.

:shrug:

That's what the NFL wants and they seem to be doing more than fine. NHL isn't as big but that's what they wanted and are going better than they've done in a long time.

hugepatsfan
07-01-2017, 10:36 AM
:shrug:

That's what the NFL wants and they seem to be doing more than fine. NHL isn't as big but that's what they wanted and are going better than they've done in a long time.

Depth can win out in those leagues so having less top of the roster talent can be compensated for to make a competitive game.

Top players are more important in the NBA so you can't overcome a gap at the top with depth the way you can in NFL or NHL.

FOXHOUND
07-01-2017, 10:40 AM
It's about the only way owners can get back any power though IMO. NBPA is too strong. They make the most of any major sport, they are about the only one with fully guaranteed contracts.

It's going to take the majority of owners not paying the tax to want to push to level the playing field, and on the other side it's going to take those 99% players not getting paid.

If that happens, they might come to an agreement that includes a hard cap or a program where doing anything like this is basically impossible between lack of max contracts and an even more penal tax system.

Do the owners really mind, though? They've got the 51% of BRI, they're making their money. Not many teams are going to tax. I think a good amount of owners are fine with being just competitive while making some money as opposed to losing money and it being so hard to win a championship if you don't have a top 3 player. That's unfortunate, but I don't think there's any way around it.

Vinylman
07-01-2017, 11:29 AM
That would be interesting ... it would have really screwed the Sixers a few years there. This year the floor would be $99M ... teams would be scrambling to spend that much. Between them the Nets and Sixers would have to find someone to throw $50M dollars at ... doesn't sound good for a team trying to build "the right way"
No it wouldnt have... they don't need to spend it... it just gets allocated back to the other players

Additionally, if the change things they can manage that through signing bonuses, etc...

This issue is easily remedied... unfortunately it will take continued lack of parity, reduced tv revenue (which will happen), and player insurrection which will lead to a lockout

Scoots
07-01-2017, 03:06 PM
I would keep the salary floor rule in place. If you don't spend it the money gets divided between everyone still on the roster.

And it wouldn't really hurt them all that much. Would someone like, say, Galinari be pissed about a 2 year $100 mil deal? Nets would easily do something like that.

I left out the "no max contracts" part since those are not going away :)

Scoots
07-01-2017, 03:08 PM
:shrug:

That's what the NFL wants and they seem to be doing more than fine. NHL isn't as big but that's what they wanted and are going better than they've done in a long time.

The NFL plays a different game than the NBA. Amrican Football is the most team oriented of the major american sports so the biggest star makes the smallest difference.

Scoots
07-01-2017, 03:09 PM
No it wouldnt have... they don't need to spend it... it just gets allocated back to the other players

Additionally, if the change things they can manage that through signing bonuses, etc...

This issue is easily remedied... unfortunately it will take continued lack of parity, reduced tv revenue (which will happen), and player insurrection which will lead to a lockout

Why would there be a player insurrection? They like max contracts and the soft cap and there is no way they are going to get more of the money than they are getting now.

warfelg
07-01-2017, 03:15 PM
Why would there be a player insurrection? They like max contracts and the soft cap and there is no way they are going to get more of the money than they are getting now.

Talk about perfect timing:
881228913350815744

lol

Scoots
07-01-2017, 03:24 PM
Talk about perfect timing:
881228913350815744

lol

"They", as in the players union, like max contracts ... LeBron, of course, does not. :)

warfelg
07-01-2017, 03:26 PM
"They", as in the players union, like max contracts ... LeBron, of course, does not. :)

Considering he's the VP of the players association I would bet he would say the union thinks max contracts on a whole are bad.

Vinylman
07-01-2017, 04:11 PM
Why would there be a player insurrection? They like max contracts and the soft cap and there is no way they are going to get more of the money than they are getting now.

Oh ... it will happen when the revenue declines

Watch what happens if the cap actually goes down next summer

Scoots
07-01-2017, 05:18 PM
Considering he's the VP of the players association I would bet he would say the union thinks max contracts on a whole are bad.

On a whole? No. Superstars LOVE the idea of no max contracts because they are the only ones who would be paid for ... but their vote doesn't count any different that any other player.

Scoots
07-01-2017, 05:20 PM
Oh ... it will happen when the revenue declines

Watch what happens if the cap actually goes down next summer

Then the owners will get to take home less money than they are not. The owners are far more likely to complain next than the players ... but maybe that's what you meant when you said there would be a lockout (since owners lock out and players strike).

steelcityroller
07-01-2017, 10:23 PM
League doesn't want that level of parity. You'd have all the stars split out because someone would make them a "too good to refuse" offer to be their top guy rather than #2 somewhere else. The 30 best players on 30 teams isn't a good product because the team with #1 still ***** on like 90% of the league except now the top tier teams are all lesser quality.

Totally agree. You can even see it in how they market games. Its Lebron and the Cavs vs Curry and the Warriors etc. They want super teams and stars more likely to end up in bigger markets.


:shrug:

That's what the NFL wants and they seem to be doing more than fine. NHL isn't as big but that's what they wanted and are going better than they've done in a long time.

One player makes a difference far more in the NBA than in the NFL and NHL.

Sssmush
07-02-2017, 02:55 PM
free market wins

Sssmush
07-02-2017, 02:55 PM
no cap either and no draft

Sssmush
07-02-2017, 02:57 PM
no age limit, and stadium style pay per view with switchable camera views

Women's bikini beach basketball summer 3 on 3 league

eDush
07-02-2017, 09:13 PM
If they going to give up max contract, they also need to eliminate salary caps and luxury taxes as well. It needs to be deregulated when it comes to players salaries like in baseball otherwise keep it structured as it is :nod:

warfelg
07-02-2017, 09:17 PM
If they going to give up max contract, they also need to eliminate salary caps and luxury taxes as well. It needs to be deregulated when it comes to players salaries like in baseball otherwise keep it structured as it is :nod:

Baseball has a luxury tax....

PAOboston
07-02-2017, 09:53 PM
Keep max contracts. Get rid of salary cap.


Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

warfelg
07-02-2017, 09:57 PM
Keep max contracts. Get rid of salary cap.


Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

What good does that do?

Get rid of max contracts and keep the cap.

papipapsmanny
07-02-2017, 10:03 PM
The only issue is that the NBPA would never vote for it. The NBPA's job is to maximize the benefits of all members, not just the best 10-20 players in the league. That extra money has to come from somewhere and it would be coming from the role players up. The top players make their extra money from endorsements, they do a good job of taking care of everyone. The NBPA is the best run players union, by far.

Same issue with a hard cap, takes money out of the players pockets. The luxury tax and new repeater tax is supposed to operate this way - take the money out of the owners pockets, if they so choose - so we'll see how that does.

The bolded statement is absolutely false. Id venture to say the MLBPA may be the most powerful overall union in existence. Way better at getting what they want than the NBAPA. The NFL union is a joke compared to the two though.

Max contracts are dumb, predetermined values make no sense. There should be no max contracts, and a hard cap.... fixes so many isses

KobeOwnSU
07-02-2017, 10:06 PM
What good does that do?

Get rid of max contracts and keep the cap.
This. It will make teams adjust how much they pay lower end and role guys. It would also spread some stars through the league I think.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

JordansBulls
07-02-2017, 10:09 PM
Only guys who have actually contributed to the league should get these type of salaries. A guy like JJ Reddick getting 20+ million in a season is a crime.

Firefistus
07-03-2017, 01:05 PM
I think they should get rid of max contracts now whether there's a cap or not, but only to the team he's currently on. That way if you think you're going to lose your all-star, you can offer him the rest of the cap, if he wants it, to stay. It would also push teams to signing those extension contracts earlier.

Scoots
07-03-2017, 03:00 PM
As long as we are talking about fantasy changes lets get rid of guaranteed contracts.