Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    116,582

    Does the NBA need to fix its salary structure?

    I mean it seems bad for everyone tbh but good for all the players lol... its honestly awful that there really isnt a middle ground.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    62,727

    Does the NBA need to fix its salary structure?

    Adso-****ing-lutely.

    Soft cap with a tax, apron, S&T hard cap is shown to not work. Too many exemptions. Too few teams able to operate under the cap. Too few ways for a team over the soft cap to replace a player that leaves.

    NBA frankly, needs to figure out two things that I believe the NFL/NHL gets right:
    - Talent division across the league is better.
    - A teams stay on the treadmill of mediocrity a shorter time.

    I know my plan for the way to operate the cap is out there but some other thoughts:
    - Get rid of exemptions, ditch the max. Move the “space” cap to be split of where the apron and soft cap is currently. This would allow more teams to have space in FA. Then go a touch higher than the apron and hard cap it there. So if a team is over the space cap, they can either retain their own or sign minimum guys. Under the space cap you can offer contracts up to it.

    - Additionally players get put into “Class A”, “Class B”, “Class C” FA’s. If a team outside the top 5 were to sign another teams Class A FA; they lose their first round pick (this requires the draft to be after FA); the team that lost the player gets a pick immediately after the lottery. EX: Gallinari is labeled a Class A FA this year; Atlanta signs him. They lost pick 6, OKC gets a pick at 16. Class B causes a team to lose their 2nd round pick, the team that lost the player gets a pick at the top of the 2nd. Class C, nothing happens.

    - As pointed to above, flip the FA and Draft order. Part of the financial issues is the NBA puts the draft first and teams do stupid spending because they think they drafted well. Plus this would fix the stupid draft night hat debacle.

    - Allow a team to completely wipe the cap hit of a waived player by paying a tax of 40% of the salary waived. Example here: Hornets are waiving and stretching Batum’s $27million. Over 3 years it impacts their cap by $9million. With this plan, the Hornets could pay Batum $27mil, the Hornets pay a tax of $10.8million. All the tax money from this funnels back into the cap the following year.

    - Change the injured player provisions. When a player is known out for the year, allow the teams to replace up to their salary for that year without tax. So this year the Warriors would get a $35mil salary tax exemption. They can sign someone or multiple someone’s for that amount for one year without a tax (or hard cap) impact. They can trade someone into that space without tax or hard cap impact. So if they wanted to trade #2 for Jrue Holiday after the Klay injury they wouldn’t have to worry about the tax.

    - Do away with a teams financial incentive to wait to extend a RFA by making their hold the max amount or without a max, top ten at position average. This takes away the ability to wait to extend a player to open up artificial cap space.

    - Allow teams and players to rip up and redo extensions/contracts at any time. Tie players to percent of cap regardless rather then dollar amounts on the max.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by warfelg; 11-25-2020 at 08:18 AM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    2,813
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    Adso-****ing-lutely.

    Soft cap with a tax, apron, S&T hard cap is shown to not work. Too many exemptions. Too few teams able to operate under the cap. Too few ways for a team over the soft cap to replace a player that leaves.

    NBA frankly, needs to figure out two things that I believe the NFL/NHL gets right:
    - Talent division across the league is better.
    - A teams stay on the treadmill of mediocrity a shorter time.

    I know my plan for the way to operate the cap is out there but some other thoughts:
    - Get rid of exemptions, ditch the max. Move the “space” cap to be split of where the apron and soft cap is currently. This would allow more teams to have space in FA. Then go a touch higher than the apron and hard cap it there. So if a team is over the space cap, they can either retain their own or sign minimum guys. Under the space cap you can offer contracts up to it.

    - Additionally players get put into “Class A”, “Class B”, “Class C” FA’s. If a team outside the top 5 were to sign another teams Class A FA; they lose their first round pick (this requires the draft to be after FA); the team that lost the player gets a pick immediately after the lottery. EX: Gallinari is labeled a Class A FA this year; Atlanta signs him. They lost pick 6, OKC gets a pick at 16. Class B causes a team to lose their 2nd round pick, the team that lost the player gets a pick at the top of the 2nd. Class C, nothing happens.

    - As pointed to above, flip the FA and Draft order. Part of the financial issues is the NBA puts the draft first and teams do stupid spending because they think they drafted well. Plus this would fix the stupid draft night hat debacle.

    - Allow a team to completely wipe the cap hit of a waived player by paying a tax of 40% of the salary waived. Example here: Hornets are waiving and stretching Batum’s $27million. Over 3 years it impacts their cap by $9million. With this plan, the Hornets could pay Batum $27mil, the Hornets pay a tax of $10.8million. All the tax money from this funnels back into the cap the following year.

    - Change the injured player provisions. When a player is known out for the year, allow the teams to replace up to their salary for that year without tax. So this year the Warriors would get a $35mil salary tax exemption. They can sign someone or multiple someone’s for that amount for one year without a tax (or hard cap) impact. They can trade someone into that space without tax or hard cap impact. So if they wanted to trade #2 for Jrue Holiday after the Klay injury they wouldn’t have to worry about the tax.

    - Do away with a teams financial incentive to wait to extend a RFA by making their hold the max amount or without a max, top ten at position average. This takes away the ability to wait to extend a player to open up artificial cap space.

    - Allow teams and players to rip up and redo extensions/contracts at any time. Tie players to percent of cap regardless rather then dollar amounts on the max.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    You wrote a CBA yourself LOL Somewhere in your world view is their the provision that keeps the young stars incentivized to stay with the team that drafted them for that 2nd contract e.g. Donovan Mitchell, Bam, Tatum et al? That 5th year max guaranteed is what is keeping players in the town that drafted them for at least 7 or 8 years which I think makes for a better league IMO.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    62,727
    Quote Originally Posted by zookman65 View Post
    You wrote a CBA yourself LOL Somewhere in your world view is their the provision that keeps the young stars incentivized to stay with the team that drafted them for that 2nd contract e.g. Donovan Mitchell, Bam, Tatum et al? That 5th year max guaranteed is what is keeping players in the town that drafted them for at least 7 or 8 years which I think makes for a better league IMO.
    Yea. The ability to negotiate new contracts early and the lack of a benefit for teams to wait. When doing away with max contracts you allow the market to dictate value.

    Want to keep that guy or get him to take a discounted contract? Build a better team.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    4,893
    If things really have to change, just make it a hard cap with the only exception as a 500k minimum salary for players under 3 years of tenure, 1M for 5 years, and 2M for reaching 7 years.

    If you want to severely overpay your superstars you basically have to fill the rest of the rosters with players that are willing to take so-called "small pay" to win a ring. Otherwise go somewhere else which creates parity and makes it harder to stack teams.

    Or just leave it as is but reduce the amount of exceptions for those teams with two or more max salary players and hit the luxury tax territory. There's simply too much reward for those teams that basically can acquire multiple max superstars.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    12,483
    Quote Originally Posted by warfelg View Post
    Adso-****ing-lutely.

    Soft cap with a tax, apron, S&T hard cap is shown to not work. Too many exemptions. Too few teams able to operate under the cap. Too few ways for a team over the soft cap to replace a player that leaves.

    NBA frankly, needs to figure out two things that I believe the NFL/NHL gets right:
    - Talent division across the league is better.
    - A teams stay on the treadmill of mediocrity a shorter time.

    I know my plan for the way to operate the cap is out there but some other thoughts:
    - Get rid of exemptions, ditch the max. Move the “space” cap to be split of where the apron and soft cap is currently. This would allow more teams to have space in FA. Then go a touch higher than the apron and hard cap it there. So if a team is over the space cap, they can either retain their own or sign minimum guys. Under the space cap you can offer contracts up to it.

    - Additionally players get put into “Class A”, “Class B”, “Class C” FA’s. If a team outside the top 5 were to sign another teams Class A FA; they lose their first round pick (this requires the draft to be after FA); the team that lost the player gets a pick immediately after the lottery. EX: Gallinari is labeled a Class A FA this year; Atlanta signs him. They lost pick 6, OKC gets a pick at 16. Class B causes a team to lose their 2nd round pick, the team that lost the player gets a pick at the top of the 2nd. Class C, nothing happens.

    - As pointed to above, flip the FA and Draft order. Part of the financial issues is the NBA puts the draft first and teams do stupid spending because they think they drafted well. Plus this would fix the stupid draft night hat debacle.

    - Allow a team to completely wipe the cap hit of a waived player by paying a tax of 40% of the salary waived. Example here: Hornets are waiving and stretching Batum’s $27million. Over 3 years it impacts their cap by $9million. With this plan, the Hornets could pay Batum $27mil, the Hornets pay a tax of $10.8million. All the tax money from this funnels back into the cap the following year.

    - Change the injured player provisions. When a player is known out for the year, allow the teams to replace up to their salary for that year without tax. So this year the Warriors would get a $35mil salary tax exemption. They can sign someone or multiple someone’s for that amount for one year without a tax (or hard cap) impact. They can trade someone into that space without tax or hard cap impact. So if they wanted to trade #2 for Jrue Holiday after the Klay injury they wouldn’t have to worry about the tax.

    - Do away with a teams financial incentive to wait to extend a RFA by making their hold the max amount or without a max, top ten at position average. This takes away the ability to wait to extend a player to open up artificial cap space.

    - Allow teams and players to rip up and redo extensions/contracts at any time. Tie players to percent of cap regardless rather then dollar amounts on the max.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    The waived player exemption is a creative idea, but I don't think it actually works. Basically hurts small markets and helps big markets as they'll be the only ones who can afford to buy guys out. I don't hate it, but I'm not sure it works super well.

    The class A, B and C FA thing is interesting too. It baseball did that in the past sort of and their were some awkward hiccups. What if a team signs 2 class A guys. Now you have to rank them and one team gets screwed. Just as one example, in baseball when they did this, the Yankees signed Mark texiera and CC sabbathia in one offseason. The mlb ranked Tex as the higher of the FAs, so the Angels got the Yankees first rounder the next year instead of the Brewers for CC. That pick was used on Mike Trout. (obviously nothing says Milwuakee takes Trout, but those situations would absolutely pop up). What if say Danilo and Bogdan were both Class A guys and the hakws signed both. Now does someone only get a 2nd for their guy? Or does the pick push back a year where 1 team may get pick 6 and the other gets pick 19?

    You also see if with the current qualifying offer in baseball, but you run the risk of hurting the value of certain FAs, which are the bottom rung Class A guys. Danilo is a good example. He's not a franchise changer, so it's possible most teams pick 6-20 or so may not even be interested if they have to give up a pick. The top guys, like Giannis is he hits FA will have no problem, but those borderline guys market might dry up quite a bit.

    I like the ideas and think the nba needs to do something. FA is basically about signing guys in a certain order, then using exceptions, then trading for the rights to some 34 Lithuanian SF who's never intended on coming to the nba to free up space and all that crap. It's so convuluted and just dumb. And most teams only having exception space just encourages vet role players to sign with the best teams.

    The void between the best teams and worst teams is so huge. When I was looking over the rosters of bad teams this year to see what type of role players teams like Charlotte, Detroit, Cleveland ect have, it's a wasteland. Bad teams just compile picks and young (usually not very good but have upside) players and then take on bad vet contracts for guys who are washed or hurt to get more picks. And that's bad for the league.

    But the biggest issue is basketball is such a top talent driven sport. There's not multiple ways to win really. You pretty much need a top 5 player and either at least 1 more top 10 guy or a collection of multiple top 30ish guys. Occasionally you have teams come along who win without a top 5 guy, but it's not common. Detroit back in the day was the exam pm, you can argue certain versions of the later Spurs teams were close to that (when Duncan wasn't quite the same guy) and teams like Miami have recently gotten to the finals.

    But the point is, while the cap crap should change, parity in the other sports is less about their financial structure and more about roster sizes and sport structures. In the nba playoffs, you can legit play most of your minutes with 7-8 guys and honestly, it's usually 6-7 that really play the bulk of the minutes. Hockey needs 3 full lines, so you're looking at 20+ guys. Football, even if you don't include special teams, is 25-30 guys playing a ton of snaps. If you include special teams, it's 40 guys who see the field usually. And baseball, even if you shorten the rotation and bullpen for the playoffs and go with 1 lineup and no platoons, you're looking at 18 pretty high impact guys. Basketball just has too much impact from the star players. If you don't have one of those guys, which is super hard to do, you're going to be stuck on the treadmill almost no matter what.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    5,296
    The simple answer is yes. But I don’t think that necessarily means it needs a complete overhaul. I think changes could be made within the current structure to make it really optimal

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    62,727
    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    The waived player exemption is a creative idea, but I don't think it actually works. Basically hurts small markets and helps big markets as they'll be the only ones who can afford to buy guys out. I don't hate it, but I'm not sure it works super well.
    You bring up a ton of good points, and I'll admit not all my thoughts are fully fleshed out, but your post got me thinking.

    As for this point: yes I get it's not an option for every team out there to be able to do something like this. But more often than not the 'waive and stretch' is more about tax/cap impact than it is about cash in hand impact. There does need to be a way for a team to better recover from a contract that put them in a poor financial position. Maybe there can be some strings tied to it like no tax if the player is injury waived that the NBA doctors approve of.

    The other part of this though as to why it would work better....it gets teams to not hand out these stupid big contracts if they know there's a financial penalty for ending it early.

    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    The class A, B and C FA thing is interesting too. It baseball did that in the past sort of and their were some awkward hiccups. What if a team signs 2 class A guys. Now you have to rank them and one team gets screwed. Just as one example, in baseball when they did this, the Yankees signed Mark texiera and CC sabbathia in one offseason. The mlb ranked Tex as the higher of the FAs, so the Angels got the Yankees first rounder the next year instead of the Brewers for CC. That pick was used on Mike Trout. (obviously nothing says Milwuakee takes Trout, but those situations would absolutely pop up). What if say Danilo and Bogdan were both Class A guys and the hakws signed both. Now does someone only get a 2nd for their guy? Or does the pick push back a year where 1 team may get pick 6 and the other gets pick 19?
    This is certainly the one I've been thinking about the most. Maybe you do it for the next year like NFL compensatory picks. So let's say the Hawks traded their 2020 pick, but have their 2021. Then the pick for signing Bogdan happens in 2021 regardless of the Stipend Rule. If they don't own it it gets pushed out to lising the next pick, but the team that lost the player would get the pick in the next draft. I think pushing it out is better because it also prevents teams from doing the 'wink wink' with players where they don't sign ASAP, wait for after the draft, team can't give up a pick, and the team just shrugs it off.

    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    You also see if with the current qualifying offer in baseball, but you run the risk of hurting the value of certain FAs, which are the bottom rung Class A guys. Danilo is a good example. He's not a franchise changer, so it's possible most teams pick 6-20 or so may not even be interested if they have to give up a pick. The top guys, like Giannis is he hits FA will have no problem, but those borderline guys market might dry up quite a bit.
    Couple options here:
    You can do the class sliding based on the FA class strength.
    You can do it by a preset base requirements (IE Class A is 8 year vet with 2 All-Star or 1 All-NBA apperance)
    You can do it the NFL way by aggregate contracts out and player performance.

    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    I like the ideas and think the nba needs to do something. FA is basically about signing guys in a certain order, then using exceptions, then trading for the rights to some 34 Lithuanian SF who's never intended on coming to the nba to free up space and all that crap. It's so convuluted and just dumb. And most teams only having exception space just encourages vet role players to sign with the best teams.
    This is the biggest thing that gets me. A team has a chance to get under the cap (OKC) but does their moves in order to operate over the cap because there's actually more benefits to it. That shouldn't happen. A team like the Warriors/Nets/Sixers/Heat (all teams near the apron) shouldn't be able to sign a guy to a contract with ~$10 mil a year. Yes I agree with your later statement that the NBA is about top players, not full teams, but when a team with two top players can get another really good player at a competitive rate, something is broken.

    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    The void between the best teams and worst teams is so huge. When I was looking over the rosters of bad teams this year to see what type of role players teams like Charlotte, Detroit, Cleveland ect have, it's a wasteland. Bad teams just compile picks and young (usually not very good but have upside) players and then take on bad vet contracts for guys who are washed or hurt to get more picks. And that's bad for the league.
    So what I'm looking at is finding a way that there's very little feasible path to signing or trading for two top 10-25 players. AD and Bron on the same team shouldn't happen. Curry and KD on the same team shouldn't happen. Like if you are a top 5 player, your next best player should be in the 45-60 range. So teams have a choice....have a top 5 guy like Lebron, and have to pair him with say a Fred Van Vleet, Tobias Harris, Zach Lavine, OR do you go two guys in the 25-45 range with Pascal Siakam and Bradley Beal?

    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    But the biggest issue is basketball is such a top talent driven sport. There's not multiple ways to win really. You pretty much need a top 5 player and either at least 1 more top 10 guy or a collection of multiple top 30ish guys. Occasionally you have teams come along who win without a top 5 guy, but it's not common. Detroit back in the day was the exam pm, you can argue certain versions of the later Spurs teams were close to that (when Duncan wasn't quite the same guy) and teams like Miami have recently gotten to the finals.
    No disagreement here...so lets make it more difficult to have that second top 10 guy and other top 30 guys.

    Quote Originally Posted by crewfan13 View Post
    But the point is, while the cap crap should change, parity in the other sports is less about their financial structure and more about roster sizes and sport structures. In the nba playoffs, you can legit play most of your minutes with 7-8 guys and honestly, it's usually 6-7 that really play the bulk of the minutes. Hockey needs 3 full lines, so you're looking at 20+ guys. Football, even if you don't include special teams, is 25-30 guys playing a ton of snaps. If you include special teams, it's 40 guys who see the field usually. And baseball, even if you shorten the rotation and bullpen for the playoffs and go with 1 lineup and no platoons, you're looking at 18 pretty high impact guys. Basketball just has too much impact from the star players. If you don't have one of those guys, which is super hard to do, you're going to be stuck on the treadmill almost no matter what.
    Agan no disagreement here. NBA is the easiest to tilt the field so to speak than any other sport. But if you look at the NFL, teams can make quick turn arounds with a solid draft and good FA class. Baseball can make relative quick turn arounds. NHL regularly has 8 seeds with the cup.

    In the NBA you just know certain teams are always going to be good and certain teams are always going to be bad. There's almost no way to overcome it.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    35,268
    Hard cap, no max salaries, no maximum length contracts, no minimum contracts, 20 players rosters, no exceptions, only 25% of contracts guaranteed.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,796
    I do feel like expansion would help with this issue. Enforce the cap, spread salaries out across a few more teams. Make it harder to construct these big threes and superteams.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    35,268
    Quote Originally Posted by mrblisterdundee View Post
    I do feel like expansion would help with this issue. Enforce the cap, spread salaries out across a few more teams. Make it harder to construct these big threes and superteams.
    Not only that, but increasing the number of teams gets more coaches and more players into development and more possible places where good owners/GMs/Coaches can create a new winning team.

    Getting rid of max salaries also makes the super team less likely.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,205
    The NBA absolutely needs to change their salary structure. The fact that Lebron is only going to be the 6th highest paid player is a problem. Max contracts shouldn't be a thing because it forces the best players to take less and the NBA salary system at large is too convoluted and flawed. The easiest solution is to implement a hard cap with the current luxury tax line as that hard cap. No max salaries and a league minimum salary being a percentage of the cap. No team can exceed the hard cap, and RFA should also be abolished. I think they should add a year to rookie contracts, making them five years, but they should be free agents after if they don't sign an extension. Players should be able to sign extensions only when they have two years or less on their current deal.

    Would make for a more balanced salary structure and ensure the best players receive the most money.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    12,483
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Not only that, but increasing the number of teams gets more coaches and more players into development and more possible places where good owners/GMs/Coaches can create a new winning team.

    Getting rid of max salaries also makes the super team less likely.
    Getting rid of max salaries helps for sure. Anthiny Davis having to decide between $30 mill from LA or like $50 mil from a potentially smaller market team with cap is a much different story.

    Without getting rid of max salaries, expansion hurts more than it helps. Guys like Kemba and Hayward and so on already get max deals. Then you look at guys like Bogdanovic and Gallinari and what they got this offseason. That's #3 or 4 type options getting about $20 mill a year. Start adding more teams with cap space and you're looking at teams having to decide between giving really marginal players huge sums of money or literally playing with scrubs.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    22,982
    yes unquestionably. I am not sure how it should happen, but the Nba really needs to figure out how small market teams can honestly compete for championships without having to get super lucky the draft, how to get rid of the top 5 -10guys playing together, how to go from a topped out 5 seed to a champion without tanking, and how to disincentivize tanking. I know that people make fun of teams like the Hornets for signing guys like hayward, but honestly its those cheap owners that are keeping the NBA from being 10 teams trying and 20 teams tanking which would be a PR and scheduling nightmare.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    12,483
    Problem is the top payers make too much of an impact. Look at lebron when he was with the cavs. He made deep runs fairly consistently with garbage teammates.

    If you could dump every player in the nba into a pool and had all of the scouts and GMs got to ranked players from 1-60 for this season only, then you lined them up so the best player and the 60th best player are together, and 2 and 59 are together and so on, what pick do you want? You're going to want to be in the top 5. Outside of someone significantly outperforming their rank, I think 1 of the top 5 teams wins almost every year.

    And that's what kind of makes this so hard. It's basically we want a bunch of the guys in the teens (of overall talent) to be able to bunch up and play together but we don't want any top 10 players to bunch up.

    We don't want the warriors with Durant. We don't want lebron, Wade and bosh. We don't want lebron and AD. Those teams are too super. We basically want to tell the top 5 guys they can only get like one other 25-40 overall type and some role players. But we still need the pierce, Allen and garnett type super teams to exist so the LeBron's and durant's still dont dominate.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •