SharpesTriumph
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 4, 2018
- Messages
- 12,729
- Likes
- 11,459
- Points
- 113
No doubt haha. Just have always felt it was ridiculous how much athletes make. Know that sounds hypocritical to the point that I as a fan I like to watch said athletes in their sport haha, but still.
If an NBA players makes 10 million or 300 million its all pretty ridiculous for playing a game of entertainment. But where else should the money go? People want to spend it and hand it over to the NBA, either owners or players get it. Nobody is being forced to pay for medication/food/shelter/etc with these dollars. The owners are making plenty as well. Remember max contracts have stayed flat at 25/30%/35 % of the cap for now over a decade depending on age and criteria a player hits. The increase in player salaries is only because the cap is going way up.
I care more that the salary cap is structured to so its fair to all NBA teams, and doesn't let rich owners or glamor markets dominate the sport. That a specific player is earning x dollars never really bothered me. I think this 2nd apron rules might help. We also have seen many smaller markets win titles and mega markets struggle for decades so overall I'd say the rules are pretty good.
Wouldn't be shocked if we just end up with a simpler hard cap in a few years. If they did a hard cap, but had very basic "Bird rights" actually only allow a team to exceed the hard cap for a player with the same team in his 5th year it would be fine. That was the original intent of the rule, that a team like the Celtics with Bird wouldn't lose a core they'd had for years. It wasn't supposed to be some Warriors/Nets/Suns/etc thing where they could spend hundreds of millions more than other teams.