There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player?

Moderators: Yuri Vaultin, Mr. E, bwgood77, DayofMourning, Dirk Nowitzki, KF10, GimmeDat, Knickstape1214, BombsquadSammy, Tarik Black, Slava, CoreyGallagher, magnumt, ken6199, Rhettmatic

User avatar
Knicksfan20
RealGM
Posts: 14,954
And1: 2,528
Joined: Aug 19, 2006
       

There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#1 » by Knicksfan20 » Fri Feb 17, 2017 9:58 am

With the exception if you drafted say 2 players worth max contract. (Like Steph Curry and Klay Thompson) Would be able to sign both players under a max contract. But say Durant would not be able to stay or be signed since he wasn't drafted by them.

Tired of these super teams to be honest. Everybody jumping ship to go ring chase while they are in their prime still. Takes away from the excitement of the game, and is the same 3-4 teams every year out of 30 that has a legitimate shot at the title. Once every 10 years you will have some team get lucky, but the league as it is now, is pretty unbalanced and has been for far too long.


I think if each team were only allowed to have 1 Max contract on their team, it would make things a bit more even.

I just think if there was more balance, both the regular season and the playoffs would be more entertaining (the first 2 rounds at least) and we wouldn't be seeing so many teams tanking and giving up midway through the season.
L.A. Clippers
C:Clint Capela/Channing Frye/J.Hill/Seraphin
PF:Luol Deng/Frye/Beasley/J.Hill/jarrell martin
SF:Andrew Wiggins/SuperCool Beas/JJ
SG:Justin Holiday/Crawford/J.Jones
PG:Kyrie Irving/Sessions/Crawford/Toney Douglas
IR:Rudy Gay
Simmons25
Pro Prospect
Posts: 788
And1: 726
Joined: Sep 27, 2016
 

Re: There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#2 » by Simmons25 » Fri Feb 17, 2017 10:01 am

What's a Max contract?

If Lebron is on $30,963,450 does that mean that if he takes $1 less he isn't on a max contract anymore
RaptorsLife
RealGM
Posts: 22,881
And1: 21,048
Joined: Feb 16, 2015
   

Re: There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#3 » by RaptorsLife » Fri Feb 17, 2017 10:02 am

It's fine the way it is. The best teams with best players deserve to good to the finals.

Don't penalize teams who know how to function a salary cap and reward teams like Portland who blow there money on role players
Let's go Raptors
Clonetothebone
Ballboy
Posts: 44
And1: 93
Joined: Apr 15, 2014

Re: There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#4 » by Clonetothebone » Fri Feb 17, 2017 10:05 am

something similar to the NFL should be in place, even the MLB has gotten better in recent years.

I think a hard cap would be a good start. I would let teams use bird rights to keep their own players as the exception to it by a certain amount (10-15 extra million).

There's probably some problems with it but I wish the NBA had a hard salary cap.
User avatar
CP300 lbs
Junior
Posts: 355
And1: 258
Joined: Nov 19, 2015

Re: There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#5 » by CP300 lbs » Fri Feb 17, 2017 10:27 am

RaptorsLife wrote:It's fine the way it is. The best teams with best players deserve to good to the finals.

Don't penalize teams who know how to function a salary cap and reward teams like Portland who blow there money on role players

Truer words have never been spoken.
lambchop
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,463
And1: 1,049
Joined: May 14, 2014

Re: There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#6 » by lambchop » Fri Feb 17, 2017 10:42 am

Wouldn't change much. At some point guys want rings and team up.
Alex DeLarge
Junior
Posts: 304
And1: 156
Joined: Dec 26, 2015

Re: There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#7 » by Alex DeLarge » Fri Feb 17, 2017 12:22 pm

Boooring.

I can only assume that the people arguing for more parity weren't watching NBA during the mid-90s.

Last year's playoffs were amazing because they featured 4 teams stacked with great players (sorry Toronto). No scrubs on the court means amazing product. No-one is forcing you to watch the Nets, Lakers and Knicks during the regular season.
MrPerfect1
Veteran
Posts: 2,898
And1: 704
Joined: Jul 02, 2013

Re: There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#8 » by MrPerfect1 » Fri Feb 17, 2017 1:06 pm

Alex DeLarge wrote:Boooring.

I can only assume that the people arguing for more parity weren't watching NBA during the mid-90s.

Last year's playoffs were amazing because they featured 4 teams stacked with great players (sorry Toronto). No scrubs on the court means amazing product. No-one is forcing you to watch the Nets, Lakers and Knicks during the regular season.


Last year's playoffs were actually awful. 90% of the playoffs were a complete snooze.

-In the 1st 2 Rounds there were a total of 6 Series (50% of all Series) that were either Sweeps or Went 5 Game and only 3 7 game series, all between teams that were non titles contenders so nobody really even cared.

-The playoffs set records for the amount of games that were blowouts. Tons and Tons of Games were over by Halftime.

-The only actually Good Series that mattered in the Entire Playoffs was OKC vs GS. That is a pretty sorry state of the league when only 1/15 is Good. An argument could possibly be made for OKC vs SA, but you never hear anybody in the last 6 months talking baout how memorable that Round 2 OKC vs SA matchup was. One reason for that is probably because it only went 6 Games instead of 7 and because 1/2 the Games in the Series were blowouts.

-You might be asking how CLE vs GS wasn't a good series. It wasn't good because it was basically a Series of Blowouts.

Here are the Victory Margins by Game from the Finals in Order starting with Game 1:

15, 33, 30, 11, 15, 14, 4. That Series had only 1 good game out of 7. There is no way a series can be considered good that only has 1 close game.
RaptorsLife
RealGM
Posts: 22,881
And1: 21,048
Joined: Feb 16, 2015
   

Re: There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#9 » by RaptorsLife » Fri Feb 17, 2017 1:24 pm

MrPerfect1 wrote:
Alex DeLarge wrote:Boooring.

I can only assume that the people arguing for more parity weren't watching NBA during the mid-90s.

Last year's playoffs were amazing because they featured 4 teams stacked with great players (sorry Toronto). No scrubs on the court means amazing product. No-one is forcing you to watch the Nets, Lakers and Knicks during the regular season.


Last year's playoffs were actually awful. 90% of the playoffs were a complete snooze.

-In the 1st 2 Rounds there were a total of 6 Series (50% of all Series) that were either Sweeps or Went 5 Game and only 3 7 game series, all between teams that were non titles contenders so nobody really even cared.

-The playoffs set records for the amount of games that were blowouts. Tons and Tons of Games were over by Halftime.

-The only actually Good Series that mattered in the Entire Playoffs was OKC vs GS. That is a pretty sorry state of the league when only 1/15 is Good. An argument could possibly be made for OKC vs SA, but you never hear anybody in the last 6 months talking baout how memorable that Round 2 OKC vs SA matchup was. One reason for that is probably because it only went 6 Games instead of 7 and because 1/2 the Games in the Series were blowouts.

-You might be asking how CLE vs GS wasn't a good series. It wasn't good because it was basically a Series of Blowouts.

Here are the Victory Margins by Game from the Finals in Order starting with Game 1:

15, 33, 30, 11, 15, 14, 4. That Series had only 1 good game out of 7. There is no way a series can be considered good that only has 1 close game.

OKC vs Warriors best series with the most stars not a coincidence
Let's go Raptors
Alex DeLarge
Junior
Posts: 304
And1: 156
Joined: Dec 26, 2015

Re: There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#10 » by Alex DeLarge » Fri Feb 17, 2017 1:25 pm

MrPerfect1 wrote:
Alex DeLarge wrote:Boooring.

I can only assume that the people arguing for more parity weren't watching NBA during the mid-90s.

Last year's playoffs were amazing because they featured 4 teams stacked with great players (sorry Toronto). No scrubs on the court means amazing product. No-one is forcing you to watch the Nets, Lakers and Knicks during the regular season.


Last year's playoffs were actually awful. 90% of the playoffs were a complete snooze.

-In the 1st 2 Rounds there were a total of 6 Series (50% of all Series) that were either Sweeps or Went 5 Game and only 3 7 game series, all between teams that were non titles contenders so nobody really even cared.

-The playoffs set records for the amount of games that were blowouts. Tons and Tons of Games were over by Halftime.

-The only actually Good Series that mattered in the Entire Playoffs was OKC vs GS. That is a pretty sorry state of the league when only 1/15 is Good. An argument could possibly be made for OKC vs SA, but you never hear anybody in the last 6 months talking baout how memorable that Round 2 OKC vs SA matchup was. One reason for that is probably because it only went 6 Games instead of 7 and because 1/2 the Games in the Series were blowouts.

-You might be asking how CLE vs GS wasn't a good series. It wasn't good because it was basically a Series of Blowouts.

Here are the Victory Margins by Game from the Finals in Order starting with Game 1:

15, 33, 30, 11, 15, 14, 4. That Series had only 1 good game out of 7. There is no way a series can be considered good that only has 1 close game.


-The Finals produced some of the most memorable moments in NBA history.

-OKC-GS was one of the greatest series ever.

-The SA-OKC series featured a lot of great basketball. The fact that it 'only' went 6 games is irrelevant.

The league has always been better when there are juggernauts that everyone is striving to beat. Parity is just another word for a league with 25-30 mediocre teams.
mtron929
Analyst
Posts: 3,419
And1: 2,449
Joined: Jan 01, 2014

Re: There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#11 » by mtron929 » Fri Feb 17, 2017 1:28 pm

Alex DeLarge wrote:
MrPerfect1 wrote:
Alex DeLarge wrote:Boooring.

I can only assume that the people arguing for more parity weren't watching NBA during the mid-90s.

Last year's playoffs were amazing because they featured 4 teams stacked with great players (sorry Toronto). No scrubs on the court means amazing product. No-one is forcing you to watch the Nets, Lakers and Knicks during the regular season.


Last year's playoffs were actually awful. 90% of the playoffs were a complete snooze.

-In the 1st 2 Rounds there were a total of 6 Series (50% of all Series) that were either Sweeps or Went 5 Game and only 3 7 game series, all between teams that were non titles contenders so nobody really even cared.

-The playoffs set records for the amount of games that were blowouts. Tons and Tons of Games were over by Halftime.

-The only actually Good Series that mattered in the Entire Playoffs was OKC vs GS. That is a pretty sorry state of the league when only 1/15 is Good. An argument could possibly be made for OKC vs SA, but you never hear anybody in the last 6 months talking baout how memorable that Round 2 OKC vs SA matchup was. One reason for that is probably because it only went 6 Games instead of 7 and because 1/2 the Games in the Series were blowouts.

-You might be asking how CLE vs GS wasn't a good series. It wasn't good because it was basically a Series of Blowouts.

Here are the Victory Margins by Game from the Finals in Order starting with Game 1:

15, 33, 30, 11, 15, 14, 4. That Series had only 1 good game out of 7. There is no way a series can be considered good that only has 1 close game.


-The Finals produced some of the most memorable moments in NBA history.

-OKC-GS was one of the greatest series ever.

-The SA-OKC series featured a lot of great basketball. The fact that it 'only' went 6 games is irrelevant.

The league has always been better when there are juggernauts that everyone is striving to beat. Parity is just another word for a league with 25-30 mediocre teams.


There were 15 7 game series. You state that 3 of them were great, and I agree with your choices. But then 12 of them were mediocre/uninteresting, which is 80% of the playoffs.
CarMalone
Rookie
Posts: 1,008
And1: 786
Joined: Jul 12, 2010
   

Re: There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#12 » by CarMalone » Fri Feb 17, 2017 1:42 pm

Simmons25 wrote:What's a Max contract?

If Lebron is on $30,963,450 does that mean that if he takes $1 less he isn't on a max contract anymore

Exactly. An easy work around would be to sign for $1 less than the maximum.
The most impartial fan.
ProfessorJM
Junior
Posts: 483
And1: 245
Joined: Nov 03, 2016
     

Re: There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#13 » by ProfessorJM » Fri Feb 17, 2017 1:57 pm

One concept to consider is not having an individual max contract for any player, but still keep the cap system as it is today. So now teams would have to really allocate their resources well, and the elite stars would command much more than 30M, forcing tougher personnel decisions and better cap management. I don't think you could have 4 elite players on one team if this system existed unless you were really lucky in having players collectively sacrificing as a group, etc.
Bolivar
Rookie
Posts: 1,037
And1: 1,959
Joined: Aug 28, 2014
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Re: There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#14 » by Bolivar » Fri Feb 17, 2017 2:01 pm

Teams like the current Warriors would just be even more dominant because they either drafted well (luck or skill) or happened to get some guy who became way better than supposed to (Curry).
MrPerfect1
Veteran
Posts: 2,898
And1: 704
Joined: Jul 02, 2013

Re: There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#15 » by MrPerfect1 » Fri Feb 17, 2017 2:24 pm

Alex DeLarge wrote:
MrPerfect1 wrote:
Alex DeLarge wrote:Boooring.

I can only assume that the people arguing for more parity weren't watching NBA during the mid-90s.

Last year's playoffs were amazing because they featured 4 teams stacked with great players (sorry Toronto). No scrubs on the court means amazing product. No-one is forcing you to watch the Nets, Lakers and Knicks during the regular season.


Last year's playoffs were actually awful. 90% of the playoffs were a complete snooze.

-In the 1st 2 Rounds there were a total of 6 Series (50% of all Series) that were either Sweeps or Went 5 Game and only 3 7 game series, all between teams that were non titles contenders so nobody really even cared.

-The playoffs set records for the amount of games that were blowouts. Tons and Tons of Games were over by Halftime.

-The only actually Good Series that mattered in the Entire Playoffs was OKC vs GS. That is a pretty sorry state of the league when only 1/15 is Good. An argument could possibly be made for OKC vs SA, but you never hear anybody in the last 6 months talking baout how memorable that Round 2 OKC vs SA matchup was. One reason for that is probably because it only went 6 Games instead of 7 and because 1/2 the Games in the Series were blowouts.

-You might be asking how CLE vs GS wasn't a good series. It wasn't good because it was basically a Series of Blowouts.

Here are the Victory Margins by Game from the Finals in Order starting with Game 1:

15, 33, 30, 11, 15, 14, 4. That Series had only 1 good game out of 7. There is no way a series can be considered good that only has 1 close game.


-The Finals produced some of the most memorable moments in NBA history.

-OKC-GS was one of the greatest series ever.

-The SA-OKC series featured a lot of great basketball. The fact that it 'only' went 6 games is irrelevant.

The league has always been better when there are juggernauts that everyone is striving to beat. Parity is just another word for a league with 25-30 mediocre teams.


OKC vs GS was a very good series but not 1 of the Top 10 ever in the playoffs.

OKC vs SAS was a blah series. No Best out of 7 series can be considered very good when only 3 of the games are interesting.

The Finals had very few memorable moments, and basically all of those came During Game 7 since Games 1-6 all sucked.
MrPerfect1
Veteran
Posts: 2,898
And1: 704
Joined: Jul 02, 2013

Re: There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#16 » by MrPerfect1 » Fri Feb 17, 2017 2:29 pm

Alex DeLarge wrote:
MrPerfect1 wrote:
Alex DeLarge wrote:
The league has always been better when there are juggernauts that everyone is striving to beat. Parity is just another word for a league with 25-30 mediocre teams.


30 Mediocre teams would make for far more interesting games and playoffs than the current system. There is a reason I'd bet the vast majority of games from the NCAA Tourny destroy the ratings of almost all NBA playoff series. The NBA has far superior talent, but most the matchups are awful whereas upsets and close games are much more common in the NCAA Tourny.
The_Hater
RealGM
Posts: 54,094
And1: 9,378
Joined: May 23, 2001
     

Re: There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#17 » by The_Hater » Fri Feb 17, 2017 2:32 pm

This basically penalizes teams for being smarter than everyone else in terms of drafting and team building.

Getting around the 1 max contract rule would be pretty easy. Steph, we're going to start your contract at $1 less than the max.

Plus there's no incentive for the league to create parity. Super teams create interest and increase TV ratings. They mean money.
I don't want to say we're dysfunctional. But we need to be more functional.
User avatar
Froob
RealGM
Posts: 24,160
And1: 21,403
Joined: Nov 04, 2010
Location: Not Penny's boat
     

Re: There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#18 » by Froob » Fri Feb 17, 2017 2:35 pm

The fix is simple, no need to change to lotto or anything just need to put in hard cap with no max contract. The average joe player in the NBAPA wouldn't go for it though.
Image

Tommy Heinsohn wrote:The game is not over until they look you in the face and start crying.


Celtics_History_Lesson wrote:Olynyk is a magical salary cap being


http://www.yeezus2020.com/
Alex DeLarge
Junior
Posts: 304
And1: 156
Joined: Dec 26, 2015

Re: There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#19 » by Alex DeLarge » Fri Feb 17, 2017 2:35 pm

MrPerfect1 wrote:
Alex DeLarge wrote:
MrPerfect1 wrote:


30 Mediocre teams would make for far more interesting games and playoffs than the current system. There is a reason I'd bet the vast majority of games from the NCAA Tourny destroy the ratings of almost all NBA playoff series. The NBA has far superior talent, but most the matchups are awful whereas upsets and close games are much more common in the NCAA Tourny.


Close games don't necessarily mean good basketball. On that note, the college game is flat-out unwatchable.

Name me a time in the past when relative parity has been good for the league?
The_Hater
RealGM
Posts: 54,094
And1: 9,378
Joined: May 23, 2001
     

Re: There needs to be more balance in the NBA. What if each team could only sign 1 max player? 

Post#20 » by The_Hater » Fri Feb 17, 2017 2:43 pm

Alex DeLarge wrote:
MrPerfect1 wrote:
Alex DeLarge wrote:


30 Mediocre teams would make for far more interesting games and playoffs than the current system. There is a reason I'd bet the vast majority of games from the NCAA Tourny destroy the ratings of almost all NBA playoff series. The NBA has far superior talent, but most the matchups are awful whereas upsets and close games are much more common in the NCAA Tourny.


Close games don't necessarily mean good basketball. On that note, the college game is flat-out unwatchable.

Name me a time in the past when relative parity has been good for the league?


The NCAA seems to want to make their game as unwatchable as possible with the rules they keep adding. The tournament is popular because of the 1 and done format and because non fans will join office pools, not because it's good basketball.
I don't want to say we're dysfunctional. But we need to be more functional.

Return to The General Board