How next summer's agreement will reshape the NBA

[Denny Crane]

http://sportstwo.com/threads/172010-How-next-summer-s-agreement-will-reshape-the-NBA

 

[THE HCP]

There's OTHER forums besides ours?????

 

[Denny Crane]

What do you think of a hard cap, HCP?

 

[andalusian]

There's OTHER forums besides ours?????

Well stated.

Repped.

 

[THE HCP]

What do you think of a hard cap, HCP?

I think it might level the playing field, but would hurt us the most out of any other team right?

 

[Denny Crane]

I think it might level the playing field, but would hurt us the most out of any other team right?

I think it hurts the Lakers big time. They're $34M over the cap, and $22M over the LT threshold. And they're the champs.

 

[44Thrilla]

I like it, but they can't put a hard cap in place and immediately enforce it. They have to have some sort of grace period.

 

[Denny Crane]

They could put it in place right away, but let teams over the cap stay over the cap until they make personnel moves. So in the Lakers' example, they couldn't trade Lamar Odom ($8.2M) for another $8.2M player. There'd be no need to have the 125% rule anymore.

 

[jlprk]

The promise of a new collective bargaining agreement hovers over each NBA city this season. Owners of small-market franchises look up and see the next CBA as a portent of hope that will enable them to turn a profit and compete for the championship.

Who's this guy truebluefan? He really wrote that?

What an egghead. He ought to start a messageboard.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Rather than a hard cap, why not keep the current soft cap and have non guaranteed contracts. If a player gets injured 1 or 2 years into a 5-year deal, they can get cut. If they sign a fat contract and then retire on the job, then they can get cut with no salary. The problem with the hard cap is what to do with injured players making $12,000,000.00 per season that take up too much cap space until their deal is through.

 

[barfo]

I thought the only interesting part of that article was the last paragraph:

Throughout the league there are dozens of "nobody" employees who are worried about their futures. These include scouts, training staff and numbers crunchers -- the people who do the real day-to-day work for NBA franchises -- and many of them have been told they won't be paid during a lockout; some won't even receive health benefits.

How shortsighted is this? The clueless franchises are going to lose their best people, while the smart teams who think in the long term are going to fill out their staffs simply by investing relatively little money in hiring the go-getters and Type-A personalities whose attention to detail makes the behind-the-scenes difference between winning and losing. The untold story of the anticipated lockout is that the smart teams will grow smarter, and the hopeless will settle more deeply into their relaxed states of incompetence.

Now if Paul can pick up some more talent during the lockout, that sounds good to me.

As for the lockout itself, I am predicting it won't happen or will be much shorter than everyone predicts. The players have zero leverage. Hold out for a year, and most of them are giving up something like 20% of their lifetime earnings. The average player supposedly plays 5 years, and the lockout year will be his third year. So he'll be giving up 33% of his remaining lifetime earnings, and not playing ball, while his body ages and his talent begins to diminish. Seems like a loser bet to me.

barfo

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

As for the lockout itself, I am predicting it won't happen or will be much shorter than everyone predicts. The players have zero leverage. Hold out for a year, and most of them are giving up something like 20% of their lifetime earnings. The average player supposedly plays 5 years, and the lockout year will be his third year. So he'll be giving up 33% of his remaining lifetime earnings, and not playing ball, while his body ages and his talent begins to diminish. Seems like a loser bet to me.barfo

I don't think the players look at it that way. I think they take a much more greedy approach in the here & now. I also don't think the LaBron James's of this world care a bit about the 14th or 15th player on the roster (which will go away under a hard cap). They care about themselves first.

If the owners insist on either a hard cap or non guaranteed salaries, and thereby costing the top players the most, we'll see a lockout/strike. But it has to come if the NBA is going to survive.

 

[THE HCP]

Throughout the league there are dozens of "nobody" employees who are worried about their futures. These include scouts, training staff and numbers crunchers -- the people who do the real day-to-day work for NBA franchises -- and many of them have been told they won't be paid during a lockout; some won't even receive health benefits.


^ or freelance people on the TV crew!

 

[barfo]

I don't think the players look at it that way. I think they take a much more greedy approach in the here & now. I also don't think the LaBron James's of this world care a bit about the 14th or 15th player on the roster (which will go away under a hard cap). They care about themselves first.

Yes, but there is only one LeBron of this world. Does he get more votes in the union than the 15th guy on the roster? Maybe he does, I have no idea.

barfo

 

[STOMP]

As for the lockout itself, I am predicting it won't happen or will be much shorter than everyone predicts. The players have zero leverage. Hold out for a year, and most of them are giving up something like 20% of their lifetime earnings. The average player supposedly plays 5 years, and the lockout year will be his third year. So he'll be giving up 33% of his remaining lifetime earnings, and not playing ball, while his body ages and his talent begins to diminish. Seems like a loser bet to me.

don't you think the owners have considerable motivation to avoid a lockout as well? There is only one Paul Allen... many will be impacted by having zero revenue coming in while being on the hook for expensive agreements with their respective arenas. I doubt we see a hard cap or the end of guaranteed deals. Now is the time for posturing/tough talk, but both sides have considerable interest in seeing the show go on so I expect caving.

Btw... a hard cap would hardly level the playing field between small and big markets. Top talents garner endorsement dollars that can rival and even dwarf their playing contract and playing in a larger market balloons those dollars. Thats the main reason players so often migrate from smaller markets that drafted them to the bigger market and not vice versa

STOMP

 

[barfo]

don't you think the owners have considerable motivation to avoid a lockout as well? There is only one Paul Allen... many will be impacted by having zero revenue coming in while being on the hook for expensive agreements with their respective arenas. I doubt we see a hard cap or the end of guaranteed deals. Now is the time for posturing/tough talk, but both sides have considerable interest in seeing the show go on so I expect caving.

Btw... a hard cap would hardly level the playing field between small and big markets. Top talents garner endorsement dollars that can rival and even dwarf their playing contract and playing in a larger market balloons those dollars. Thats the main reason players so often migrate from smaller markets that drafted them to the bigger market and not vice versa

STOMP

Motivation, sure, but the owners are much better equipped, emotionally and financially, to take the long view than the players. But I agree with you that we won't see hard caps or any of the more draconian measures. Both sides will give - but the playing field is set up so that the very best the players can hope for is the current agreement. The owners merely have to demand fewer concessions in order to compromise.

barfo

 

[Natebishop3]

Throughout the league there are dozens of "nobody" employees who are worried about their futures. These include scouts, training staff and numbers crunchers -- the people who do the real day-to-day work for NBA franchises -- and many of them have been told they won't be paid during a lockout; some won't even receive health benefits.


^ or freelance people on the TV crew!

You've got the PGA.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Yes, but there is only one LeBron of this world. Does he get more votes in the union than the 15th guy on the roster? Maybe he does, I have no idea.

barfo

What I meant was that the top tier players have the leverage because people come to see them play. They are the NBA. It is also thru them most the outside revenue streams exist for all the players. Therefore, they have the influence. The other players know this and therefore listen more closely to what they have to say.

 

[GriLtCheeZ]

don't you think the owners have considerable motivation to avoid a lockout as well? There is only one Paul Allen... many will be impacted by having zero revenue coming in while being on the hook for expensive agreements with their respective arenas. I doubt we see a hard cap or the end of guaranteed deals. Now is the time for posturing/tough talk, but both sides have considerable interest in seeing the show go on so I expect caving.

Btw... a hard cap would hardly level the playing field between small and big markets. Top talents garner endorsement dollars that can rival and even dwarf their playing contract and playing in a larger market balloons those dollars. Thats the main reason players so often migrate from smaller markets that drafted them to the bigger market and not vice versa

STOMP

Agreed. Everyone is talking like a hard cap is a given. It's like a political campaign where one side (or news network) is preparing everybody for the inevitable victory of their guy, before the election.

 

[THE HCP]

You've got the PGA.

Not in the winter son!

 

[Wizard Mentor]

A Hard Cap wouldn't level the field, but it would be the closest realistic attempt. Of course I'm not sure how realistic a hard cap is - it hasn't been in the past.

As long as some cities are much colder, rainier, higher taxed, less endorsement opportunities, or have a much diminished "night life", the field will not be leveled. It's all good, though. I like rooting for the underdog!

 

[chris_in_pdx]

A Hard Cap wouldn't level the field, but it would be the closest realistic attempt. Of course I'm not sure how realistic a hard cap is - it hasn't been in the past.

As long as some cities are much colder, rainier, higher taxed, less endorsement opportunities, or have a much diminished "night life", the field will not be leveled. It's all good, though. I like rooting for the underdog!

Look at the NFL as an example of how a hard cap makes a league competitive. No secret why they are the most popular and most profitable league in the country. Good management, good scouting, and good coaching = success no matter what market you are in, big or small.

 

[THE HCP]

Look at the NFL as an example of how a hard cap makes a league competitive. No secret why they are the most popular and most profitable league in the country. Good management, good scouting, and good coaching = success no matter what market you are in, big or small.

Always curious if only having to fill the stadium 10 times a year helps with that?

 

[Denny Crane]

Not in the winter son!

There's always the LPGA. Seems right up your alley.

Transgender golfer sues LPGA in bid to join tour

 

[Natebishop3]

Look at the NFL as an example of how a hard cap makes a league competitive. No secret why they are the most popular and most profitable league in the country. Good management, good scouting, and good coaching = success no matter what market you are in, big or small.

Well, if there's a hard cap, there would have to be non-guaranteed contracts to go with it. The NFL would suck ass if they had the hard cap and guaranteed contracts.