The future for the NBA?

[Vast]

Re: The future for the NBA?

While specific events and instances of a hard cap negatively affecting the league certainly exist, I'd say on the whole, a hard cap is a good thing. You can't look at these things as just what happened in Miami; a huge number of things conspired over the preceding several years to make that possible, and the implications of a hard cap aren't just preventing a team from accumulating superstars - it affects (positively, in my opinion) the financial structure of the entire business and every move that every team makes.

Generally speaking, hard caps improve the finances and overall health of a sports league. Just an opinion, but one with at least some anecdotal evidence behind it...

The thought of a team that drafts well not being able to keep the championship caliber pieces they have acquired, sounds terrible for the fans and for business.

[slimm44]

Re: The future for the NBA?

Why not institute an arbitration system based upon performance. That way, if Player X is playing well beyond what his contract pays him, take your case to arbitration to try to get market value. Also, the team should have that right. If Player X has a contract year and performs well, they deserve a fat contract. However, if they don't perform up to it, take them to arbitration to bring what they make down to market value. Seems like it would increase performance on the court and avoid the Jerome James-like contracts from killing teams. I believe MLB has an arbitration system, but I'm not sure if the teams can use it. I think it's only the players.

[USF11]

Re: The future for the NBA?

Why not institute an arbitration system based upon performance. That way, if Player X is playing well beyond what his contract pays him, take your case to arbitration to try to get market value. Also, the team should have that right. If Player X has a contract year and performs well, they deserve a fat contract. However, if they don't perform up to it, take them to arbitration to bring what they make down to market value. Seems like it would increase performance on the court and avoid the Jerome James-like contracts from killing teams. I believe MLB has an arbitration system, but I'm not sure if the teams can use it. I think it's only the players.

In the NHL you would just move that player that sucks to the minors and remove him from your cap while still paying him.

[pietasterp]

Re: The future for the NBA?

The thought of a team that drafts well not being able to keep the championship caliber pieces they have acquired, sounds terrible for the fans and for business.

Well, that's not the only thing a cap would do, though - theoretically, it shifts the cost curves down across-the-board, for all teams, so you would be able to work within that system to largely keep your team intact. And if other teams couldn't go nuts and offer your guys boffo salaries either, as would be the case since they're capped as well, you would be able to keep that team together. It just puts a premium on shrewd personnel management as opposed to big spending. The NFL has a hard cap, and the Patriots seemed to be able to keep their core together for many years running.

Of course, teams will face the crunch every year of whether or not they can keep their title teams together, but that's the same as any other sport (even the uncapped or soft-capped sports) - it's a fact of life in sports that when you have success, people start trying to pick-off your pieces. I don't think the cap would make that aspect that much worse, and given all the potential good it could do, it's a trade-off I would be willing to see.

[Vast]

Re: The future for the NBA?

Well, that's not the only thing a cap would do, though - theoretically, it shifts the cost curves down across-the-board, for all teams, so you would be able to work within that system to largely keep your team intact. And if other teams couldn't go nuts and offer your guys boffo salaries either, as would be the case since they're capped as well, you would be able to keep that team together. It just puts a premium on shrewd personnel management as opposed to big spending. The NFL has a hard cap, and the Patriots seemed to be able to keep their core together for many years running.

Of course, teams will face the crunch every year of whether or not they can keep their title teams together, but that's the same as any other sport (even the uncapped or soft-capped sports) - it's a fact of life in sports that when you have success, people start trying to pick-off your pieces. I don't think the cap would make that aspect that much worse, and given all the potential good it could do, it's a trade-off I would be willing to see.

For that to work, NBA salaries would have to decrease across the board. I already feel the Vet minimum is a little low.
Guaranteed contracts would also have to be removed. I'm not sure how i would feel about it, although i would've loved to have been able to cancel a fair share of contracts with the Knicks during the Isiah era. (Jerome James, Stephon Marbury, Eddy Curry, Jared Jeffries, Alan Houston's last year etc.)

What would you set the hard cap at? I would think you'd have to raise the salary cap if it's going to be a threshold you cannot cross.

[Cebby]

Re: The future for the NBA?

The NFL has a hard cap, and the Patriots seemed to be able to keep their core together for many years running.

Really?

The Pats have had to shed a ton of players.

They kept a few key players but have let some very good players go.

All Pro Asante Samuel, All Pro Ty Law, Super Bowl MVP Deion Branch, Pro Bowl safety Lawyer Milloy, 800 yard receiver David Givens (leaving the Pats with Jabar Gaffney as the #1 receiver in a playoff game), Damien Woody (their Pro Bowl guard during the first two Super Bowls), and several other starters.

[pietasterp]

Re: The future for the NBA?

For that to work, NBA salaries would have to decrease across the board. I already feel the Vet minimum is a little low.
Guaranteed contracts would also have to be removed. I'm not sure how i would feel about it, although i would've loved to have been able to cancel a fair share of contracts with the Knicks during the Isiah era. (Jerome James, Stephon Marbury, Eddy Curry, Jared Jeffries, Alan Houston's last year etc.)

What would you set the hard cap at? I would think you'd have to raise the salary cap if it's going to be a threshold you cannot cross.

All good points, Vast, and all things I believe the league is trying to accomplish with the next CBA. I doubt they'll all happen (unless they're willing to lose a season like the NHL, which I actually think they should do to get the financial house in order), but I do think salaries will go down across the board, and I think guaranteed contracts are in the crosshairs of the owners.

My best guess, based on absolutely no data or solid facts whatsoever, is that a hard cap will be imposed (with a very limited set of exceptions, i.e. franchise tags), and "guaranteed" contracts will only be guaranteed up to 50% (or some arbitrary percentage <100%). There's no way they get to the NFL-level of non-guaranteed contracts, but that's definitely where the league wants to go.

As far as what I would set the cap at? I have no idea...something south of where it is right now. I know that the owners' numbers are goosed one way (and the players' association numbers are always cooked the opposite way), but I don't think there's anything fundamentally wrong with the way they calculate the cap right now - as a percentage of the league's year-end revenues. They just need to make it "hard" (or "hard"-er) and limit amount of exceptions.

Of course, these are just a few of the issues at stake right now...and while I don't think the NBA is so suicidal as to wipe out a season, I do think the owners are hunkering down for a long and protracted battle royale in a year. If I were an NBA player, I'd maybe think twice about those gold-plated rims and 3rd beach house this year and instead consider socking some cash away in a secure low-yield bond...

[da ThRONe]

Re: The future for the NBA?

Really?

The Pats have had to shed a ton of players.

They kept a few key players but have let some very good players go.

All Pro Asante Samuel, All Pro Ty Law, Super Bowl MVP Deion Branch, Pro Bowl safety Lawyer Milloy, 800 yard receiver David Givens (leaving the Pats with Jabar Gaffney as the #1 receiver in a playoff game), Damien Woody (their Pro Bowl guard during the first two Super Bowls), and several other starters.

Add Willis McGinest and Richard Seymour to that list.

[pietasterp]

Re: The future for the NBA?

Really?

The Pats have had to shed a ton of players.

They kept a few key players but have let some very good players go.

All Pro Asante Samuel, All Pro Ty Law, Super Bowl MVP Deion Branch, Pro Bowl safety Lawyer Milloy, 800 yard receiver David Givens (leaving the Pats with Jabar Gaffney as the #1 receiver in a playoff game), Damien Woody (their Pro Bowl guard during the first two Super Bowls), and several other starters.

Yet they remain successful year-after-year...

Again, you're parsing small parts of my arguments and missing the overall point: you can remain competitive in a hard-capped environment if you are savvy in your personnel decisions.

[phenom1990]

Re: The future for the NBA?

Different sports function differently. The NFL is structured differently from the NBA, so please don't use the NFL example. There are 7 rounds to the draft, 250 players or so. NBA Draft, 2 rounds and 60 players. For a team 5 players on the court, for the NFL 11 players on the field. One of 11 is easier to replace outside of quarterback than 1 out of 5.

[Cebby]

Re: The future for the NBA?

Yet they remain successful year-after-year...

Again, you're parsing small parts of my arguments and missing the overall point: you can remain competitive in a hard-capped environment if you are savvy in your personnel decisions.

It's possible to remain competitive but only four teams throughout the decade remained consistently good, Indianapolis, Philly, New England, and Pittsburgh.

They had four of the top five quarterbacks of the decade.

If the NBA instituted a higher salary cap (say the luxury tax line) it wouldn't be a huge deal. In the NFL, even the highest paid players only make about a sixth of the salary cap when guys like Kobe are making about 45% of the cap. The NFL also has signing bonuses and uneven contracts where players get paid fluctuating amounts which is pretty rare in the NBA which are almost all escalating contracts.

Hard capping the NBA would just lead to the Heat winning uncontested instead of having to fight.

[Rocky]

Re: The future for the NBA?

It's possible to remain competitive but only four teams throughout the decade remained consistently good, Indianapolis, Philly, New England, and Pittsburgh.

They had four of the top five quarterbacks of the decade.

If the NBA instituted a higher salary cap (say the luxury tax line) it wouldn't be a huge deal. In the NFL, even the highest paid players only make about a sixth of the salary cap when guys like Kobe are making about 45% of the cap. The NFL also has signing bonuses and uneven contracts where players get paid fluctuating amounts which is pretty rare in the NBA which are almost all escalating contracts.

Hard capping the NBA would just lead to the Heat winning uncontested instead of having to fight.

You're making contradictory points. In one sentence, you say championship level teams have to be blown up. The next sentence, you say nothing would change at all and the championship teams would still be championship teams.

In either case, it would balance the competitive power of the league. Sure, teams would lose good players...and those other teams would gain those players. Plus you could build a good money making team cheaper (which is what owners want out of this). The star players should be making more, the roleplayers should be making ALOT less. Or you can try the even approach like the Pistons.

The Heat wouldn't dominate because they wouldn't have the ability to offer James or Bosh the max and still sign minimum level players. Both Bosh and James would have to take considerably less money to play there.

[Jonesy]

Re: The future for the NBA?

What about something like a hard cap except for resigning players you had drafted once their rookie contract expires?

That way you don't have to blow up your team once your good players get to their 4th year and it should (in theory) limit the number of teams being able to sign 3 superstars, ridiculous contracts for marginal players etc

[Taur3asi3]

Re: The future for the NBA?

Nothing is going to stop GMs and owners from giving mediocre players absurd contracts. You can put in all the rules and safe guards you want but they'll work around it and still manage to sign Kenny Thomas and Amir Johnson to the mind boggling deals they received.

[JohnDoe8865]

Re: The future for the NBA?

For everyone saying that a hard cap wouldn't stop Miami, you are right. It wouldn't affect current teams in 2010-2011. But it would make it so that another "Miami" could never happen again unless every one of a trio took a HUGE paycut.

I'd be in favor of an exception for re-signing your own draft picks to a certain extent. But after their 2nd contract, I wouldn't allow a 3rd contract to go over the hard cap. I could see the point of designating one "franchise" player per team as well, and you could go, maybe 20% over the cap to re-sign your own "franchise player".

Other than that, hard cap all the way. The pay structure is ridiculous right now and you can bet the owners and going to push hard for the hard cap. We'll see whether it happens or not. Nobody wants to see a league of the haves vs the have nots.