RealGM

Again, i apologize in advance if this has been talked about previously. With the huge increase in salary cap in the next three years, how will it effect the Pacers? We're a small market team that lives and dies with revenue sharing. Bird has said we were not going to even consider going past the current cap, thus losing out on free agents, such as Lance Stephenson. Will the Pacers be able to play with the big boys under the new rules or are we going to sink with other small market teams?

Here is the reported new salary cap figures via NBC Sports and Draft Express- http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/ ... -going-up/

nvm just found it lol

viewtopic.php?f=17&t=1377534#start_here

We have long been over the cap. What we haven't done is go into the luxury tax level.

Wizop wrote:We have long been over the cap. What we haven't done is go into the luxury tax level.

You're right. I mis-worded it. The point remains though, right? When the cap jumps up to $89 million, the luxury tax numbers will go way up as well, and thus Pacers being able to spend much more without risk of losing any revenue sharing money. Am i correct or reading this wrong all together?

Grang33r wrote:

Wizop wrote:We have long been over the cap. What we haven't done is go into the luxury tax level.

You're right. I mis-worded it. The point remains though, right? When the cap jumps up to $89 million, the luxury tax numbers will go way up as well, and thus Pacers being able to spend much more without risk of losing any revenue sharing money. Am i correct or reading this wrong all together?

Kind of, but as years go on we would be in a similar situation since players will get higher salaries (though equal percentages of cap). Having PG's max salary based on much lower cap does help a bit though.

I think it'll still be two max players at most. Now it is possible that three or even four players would sign with a team at the old max numbers but I expect the top players will expect the new max number. If I could waive a magic wand, I'd increase the roster size so that the extra money went to pay more players. You'd think a union could get that through as there would be more players voting to get something instead of nothing, but the union seems to be dominated by the stars or maybe the problem is that all of the players think they will be stars when they get their chance. 18 man rosters (5 in the d-league) would take 150 players out of the college game and end the need for an age restriction in the draft.

Wizop wrote:I think it'll still be two max players at most. Now it is possible that three or even four players would sign with a team at the old max numbers but I expect the top players will expect the new max number. If I could waive a magic wand, I'd increase the roster size so that the extra money went to pay more players. You'd think a union could get that through as there would be more players voting to get something instead of nothing, but the union seems to be dominated by the stars or maybe the problem is that all of the players think they will be stars when they get their chance. 18 man rosters (5 in the d-league) would take 150 players out of the college game and end the need for an age restriction in the draft.

Well, there's simply little to no way that current voting union members would vote to ADD roster spots at the current cap number, as it would only dilute and give themselves LESS Money. Without a corresponding rise to the salary cap, I can't imagine the players union would want, or allow, expansion of roster size.


Now, as for the 2016 rise in cap to some crazy number (rumored at $91m)? The thing that helps Indy is that (depending on what we do this summer) we have almost all contracts expiring in that summer except for Paul George (a guy that seems to be VERY popular with other stars around the league), George Hill (super utility guy), CJ Miles, Solo Hill, and Damo Rudez. Add in this year's and next year's 1st round picks, and we could be looking at as little as $39m committed in salary going into that free agency. That'd be roughly $50m to play with. Now, even IF the max contracts jump sky high, theoretically, we'd be able to add 2 TOP NOTCH kind of players, or a WHOLE BUNCH of really, really, good players to PG13 and George Hill.

That's where we're helped. After that first summer? We're kind of back even with everyone else.

Scoot McGroot wrote:Well, there's simply little to no way that current voting union members would vote to ADD roster spots at the current cap number, as it would only dilute and give themselves LESS Money. Without a corresponding rise to the salary cap, I can't imagine the players union would want, or allow, expansion of roster size.

If they could construct a system where D-Leauge level guys could sign for the minimum for a year and not count towards salary cap at all I could see it. Gives more money/incentive to D-League players and allows teams to have them under control for a year and in the system in case. And would also likely get a lot more vets like Rasaul Butler who are fine playing in the D-League to work back in. It'd never be household names, but could make the D-League more interesting.

I agree that it's highly unlikely they add any sort of roster spots though.

In many industries a union would be happy to get more members and more dues but I agree not here.

Scoot McGroot wrote:
Kind of, but as years go on we would be in a similar situation since players will get higher salaries (though equal percentages of cap). Having PG's max salary based on much lower cap does help a bit though.

Yeah that's true. Good point.

Grang33r wrote:Again, i apologize in advance if this has been talked about previously. With the huge increase in salary cap in the next three years, how will it effect the Pacers? We're a small market team that lives and dies with revenue sharing. Bird has said we were not going to even consider going past the current cap, thus losing out on free agents, such as Lance Stephenson. Will the Pacers be able to play with the big boys under the new rules or are we going to sink with other small market teams?

Here is the reported new salary cap figures via NBC Sports and Draft Express- http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/ ... -going-up/

He probably meant the Tax line not the cap. We've beem over the cap nearly every year.

^^ yeah, my bad. I meant over the tax and with higher salary, i assumed the tax would increase and thus give us a better advantage in building our team. But, i guess i didnt think all players' values would increase and thus not making much of a change per team.