Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 38
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    762
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    The cap can't always go up, and the knowledge of that was part of the thinking when the CBA was written. Some teams will lose some options, some will gain some options. Good teams will cope with it.

    I don't think they CAN make an exception and distribute more money when they don't have it coming in.

    The next round of TV contracts may well be smaller than the current one, and as the entertainment landscape gets ever more spread out the revenue any single property can get will likewise shrink relative to the past. It's all part of the structure of the CBA already.
    I understand all of that but this a one off situation where you potentially lose 15% of the revenue in the blink of an eye because of a certain market.

    It's not like the cap is static or dropped a little or even smoothed up a little.

    Worse case scenario, it'll be over a $17 million difference than what franchises were told would be projected.

    I think the league very easily could make an exception in this rare instance to move the tax line, make penalties less or withhold the tax all together.

    There's potentially a way where an unprecedented amount of teams could be in the tax if this unfolds how it could.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    12,747
    Quote Originally Posted by NBA all the way View Post
    I understand all of that but this a one off situation where you potentially lose 15% of the revenue in the blink of an eye because of a certain market.

    It's not like the cap is static or dropped a little or even smoothed up a little.

    Worse case scenario, it'll be over a $17 million difference than what franchises were told would be projected.

    I think the league very easily could make an exception in this rare instance to move the tax line, make penalties less or withhold the tax all together.

    There's potentially a way where an unprecedented amount of teams could be in the tax if this unfolds how it could.
    I doubt the NBA does anything.

    Most teams should prepare for both scenarios year in and year out anyways.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    29,170
    Quote Originally Posted by NBA all the way View Post
    I understand all of that but this a one off situation where you potentially lose 15% of the revenue in the blink of an eye because of a certain market.

    It's not like the cap is static or dropped a little or even smoothed up a little.

    Worse case scenario, it'll be over a $17 million difference than what franchises were told would be projected.

    I think the league very easily could make an exception in this rare instance to move the tax line, make penalties less or withhold the tax all together.

    There's potentially a way where an unprecedented amount of teams could be in the tax if this unfolds how it could.
    It's the same thing. A few years ago the cap dropped from projections and teams coped with it. It's happened before, it will happen again.

    I don't think we can assume money from China will come back at or back to the level it was if this doesn't go exactly the way they want.

    Two years ago there were a huge number of teams in the tax. It doesn't really bother me

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    762
    Quote Originally Posted by mike_noodles View Post
    I doubt the NBA does anything.

    Most teams should prepare for both scenarios year in and year out anyways.
    I'm not sure that makes sense. Why would teams prepare for something that has never happened?

    https://www.basketball-reference.com...p-history.html

    The cap was put in place in the 1984-85 season and it has increased every year since, minus twice it decreased. The first decrease was 5% and the 2nd time was a little less than 2% decrease. Why would teams ever brace for a 15% decrease in salary cap? It's unprecedented.

    Even when there was a historic 35% increase, teams knew well in advance it was going to happen.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    762
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    It's the same thing. A few years ago the cap dropped from projections and teams coped with it. It's happened before, it will happen again.

    I don't think we can assume money from China will come back at or back to the level it was if this doesn't go exactly the way they want.

    Two years ago there were a huge number of teams in the tax. It doesn't really bother me
    What are you talking about? What do you consider huge? There has never been more than 7 teams (many seasons ago) in the tax and it's typically only 4 or 5... That's not a large number.

    https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2019/04/...ing-teams.html

    With this outta the blue change in cap of over $17 million, not a couple-few million that happened recently. The NBA could be looking at 20+ teams paying the tax for the 2020-21 season, that is unheard of.

    Teams would be getting punished for overspending who did everything right up to that point, just a loss of revenue changed the entire landscape of the league and when deals are fully guaranteed and almost no one has cap room to off load bad deals, you're punishing lots of clubs who were not just being frivolous spenders which is who the tax is typically reserved for.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    1,816
    So the players might lose revenue because a GM made a comment on Twitter???

    I donít know how they can justify that considering it wasnít player driven.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    762
    Quote Originally Posted by PAOboston View Post
    So the players might lose revenue because a GM made a comment on Twitter???

    I donít know how they can justify that considering it wasnít player driven.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    The entire league would lose revenue.

    It's all tied to BRI which is revenue from ticket sales, media rights deals, merchandise sales and sponsorships, among other sources.

    When you lose the entire China market, it hurts your businesses income.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    29,170
    Quote Originally Posted by PAOboston View Post
    So the players might lose revenue because a GM made a comment on Twitter???

    I donít know how they can justify that considering it wasnít player driven.
    Because the players agreed to the CBA where player pay is based on revenue.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    55,999
    Quote Originally Posted by NBA all the way View Post
    What are you talking about? What do you consider huge? There has never been more than 7 teams (many seasons ago) in the tax and it's typically only 4 or 5... That's not a large number.

    https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2019/04/...ing-teams.html

    With this outta the blue change in cap of over $17 million, not a couple-few million that happened recently. The NBA could be looking at 20+ teams paying the tax for the 2020-21 season, that is unheard of.

    Teams would be getting punished for overspending who did everything right up to that point, just a loss of revenue changed the entire landscape of the league and when deals are fully guaranteed and almost no one has cap room to off load bad deals, you're punishing lots of clubs who were not just being frivolous spenders which is who the tax is typically reserved for.
    I know we're about 3 years removed from it but again to highlight how greedy the current leadership is in the NBPA:

    5 years ago they rejected cap smoothing with the idea that 'owners are stealing what is yours'. But what did they also get? Those old vets got the ability to get a Supermax at an older age, with a higher percent of the cap, and it linedup with about the time of when they were FA's.

    Instead if they looked at the cap smoothing as a good thing, there would have been a 'bankrolled surplus' that could have helped slow the hit.

    But frankly the players don't really care here. FA next year sucks and it's rank-and-file type players that are FA's next year; so they don't care and won't make a big deal if the cap goes down because they get paid the same amount no matter what. LBJ will still get his $40mil whether the cap is $120mil or $5mil.

    IMO there's two type of solutions:
    #1 - No matter what a max is percent of the cap and can change yearly based on what the cap number is, so if revenue changes, players salary reflects that; so that if the cap randomly changes, teams that do thing the right way don't get screwed.
    #2 - Kill the max salary so there isn't as big of a percent of players making the same thing.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    762
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    I know we're about 3 years removed from it but again to highlight how greedy the current leadership is in the NBPA:

    5 years ago they rejected cap smoothing with the idea that 'owners are stealing what is yours'. But what did they also get? Those old vets got the ability to get a Supermax at an older age, with a higher percent of the cap, and it linedup with about the time of when they were FA's.

    Instead if they looked at the cap smoothing as a good thing, there would have been a 'bankrolled surplus' that could have helped slow the hit.

    But frankly the players don't really care here. FA next year sucks and it's rank-and-file type players that are FA's next year; so they don't care and won't make a big deal if the cap goes down because they get paid the same amount no matter what. LBJ will still get his $40mil whether the cap is $120mil or $5mil.

    IMO there's two type of solutions:
    #1 - No matter what a max is percent of the cap and can change yearly based on what the cap number is, so if revenue changes, players salary reflects that; so that if the cap randomly changes, teams that do thing the right way don't get screwed.
    #2 - Kill the max salary so there isn't as big of a percent of players making the same thing.
    Yeah, that massive expansion in cap is why you had the Deng, Mozgov, Biyombo, Parsons, Middleton, Mahinmi, Noah and Turner types making roughly the same as the Irving, Kawhi, Kemba and PG13 types.

    But hopefully it's all just posturing as far as this cap drop.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    29,170
    Quote Originally Posted by NBA all the way View Post
    Yeah, that massive expansion in cap is why you had the Deng, Mozgov, Biyombo, Parsons, Middleton, Mahinmi, Noah and Turner types making roughly the same as the Irving, Kawhi, Kemba and PG13 types.

    But hopefully it's all just posturing as far as this cap drop.
    It IS posturing, but unless the NBA and ALL of their people fall in line it will happen. China won't allow the possibility that some media shown in country says something negative about China. And at this point I think it's nearly impossible they get everyone to agree ... I don't think the NBA can even ask at this point for PR reasons.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    762
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    It IS posturing, but unless the NBA and ALL of their people fall in line it will happen. China won't allow the possibility that some media shown in country says something negative about China. And at this point I think it's nearly impossible they get everyone to agree ... I don't think the NBA can even ask at this point for PR reasons.
    And you're probably right. Silver seems to want to mend it, to salvage that means of revenue but may be too far gone, like you said.

    So, the next step should maybe by the NBA to say "hey that $116 estimate we gave you isn't going to be accurate now, due to unforeseen circumstances." Or if they don't want to do that, maybe just say "hey, our revised cap estimate for next season is anywhere as low as $98.6 million to the original $116 million, prepare accordingly".

    I think the next step would be to try and make up some of that potentially 15% lost revenue in other means. Is that trying to get a share or percentage of it being legal to bet on sports included into the BRI? I know it's been discussed but doubt it can happen that fast.

    Is it trying to bring in new markets(countries) for tv deals/marketing/sponsorships or expanding existing markets? We know none will be able to replace China.

    But i think both, either or something else could take that 15% cap drop a little less of a percentage, so the drop off isn't as drastic, every little bit counts.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    799
    Quote Originally Posted by dhopisthename View Post
    what? this only has to do with china potentially cutting all ties to the NBA
    Thats fine, if you want to cut costs, get rid the small market scrub teams while your cutting the cap.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    29,170
    Quote Originally Posted by NBA all the way View Post
    And you're probably right. Silver seems to want to mend it, to salvage that means of revenue but may be too far gone, like you said.

    So, the next step should maybe by the NBA to say "hey that $116 estimate we gave you isn't going to be accurate now, due to unforeseen circumstances." Or if they don't want to do that, maybe just say "hey, our revised cap estimate for next season is anywhere as low as $98.6 million to the original $116 million, prepare accordingly".

    I think the next step would be to try and make up some of that potentially 15% lost revenue in other means. Is that trying to get a share or percentage of it being legal to bet on sports included into the BRI? I know it's been discussed but doubt it can happen that fast.

    Is it trying to bring in new markets(countries) for tv deals/marketing/sponsorships or expanding existing markets? We know none will be able to replace China.

    But i think both, either or something else could take that 15% cap drop a little less of a percentage, so the drop off isn't as drastic, every little bit counts.
    They are trying all of that anyhow and have been for years. The NBA wants more money always. That doesn't mean the NBA owners are going to pull %15 out of their pockets to make the players happy. The cap is based on the known revenue ... if revenue goes down the cap projection goes down. It's happened before and they didn't make it up, it's not going to happen this time.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    107,135
    this plus the ben simmons contract is why it was so smart for the sixers to max harris and give horford that contract.... we wouldnt have been able to make a play for free agents this year because of signing ben and now with the cap going down its looking even better on the decisions we made

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •